Post on 19-May-2015
description
The Second War for Independence and the
Upsurge of Nationalism
Cruz, AlexandriaJackson, ErinLakin, David
Howard, NaShandra
Ch. 12
War of 1812
• One of America’s worst– Ill-trained army– No national unity– Many soldiers
retreated instead of fighting
• 3-Pronged Attack– Incorrect strategy– Should have focused on
Montreal• British General Brock
– Captured Fort Michilimackinac
– Access to Great Lakes and Indian Allies
Attempt at Canada
• Ships– More armor/weapons than army
• Oliver Hazard Perry– Captured British fleet on Lake Erie– “We have met the enemy and they are
ours.”
American Navy
• British defeat by General Harrison (Battle of Thames)
• Napoleon exiled– America thus loses France as an ally
• Thomas Macdonough– Defeats British at Plattsburg (saved NY
from conquest)– Profoundly affects peace negotiations
War and Diplomacy
• Burned the White House• Attack on Ft. McHenry (failure)• Attack on New Orleans (failure)• Blockade on American coast.
– Severely damaged economy
British Revenge
• Russia needed Britain as an ally– brought peacemakers together
• Britain preoccupied with redrafting Napoleon’s empire at the Congress of Vienna.
• Thus, the Treaty was signed as an armistice– War of 1812 was essentially a draw
Treaty of Ghent
• New England Benefits from War of 1812– Illicit trade– Strong federalist opposition
• Radicals suggested succession
Federalist Grievances
• Demands– Financial assistance– Proposed amendments
• 2/3 vote before embargo, state admittance, or war
– Abolish 3/5 clause– Single-term presidency– No two successive presidents from the
same state
The Harford Convention
• Bad timing– Envoys arrive in sync with New Orleans
victory and Treaty of Ghent– Complaints comparatively petty
• End of Federalist party– 1816 – last presidential candidate
(defeated)
The Harford Convention
• Second War for American independence– New respect from other nations
• Sectionalism diminished• War-heroes to Presidents• Stimulated manufacturing industries• Europe – exhausted peace
Post-War of 1812
• Heightened thanks to War of 1812• Distinctive literature/art
– American scenes and themes– Home-produced textbooks/magazines
• Revived Bank of US• Rebuilt national capital• Expanded military
Nationalism
• 3 Parts– Strong banking system– Protective tariff– Network of roads and canals
• Designed to protect developing home industries
• Better transportation needed– Sectional and constitutional issues
“The American System”
• Considerable tranquility and prosperity
• Though, a misnomer:– Issues – tariff, bank, internal
improvements, sale of public lands– Caused major sectionalism– Conflict over slavery beginning
Era of Good Feelings
• Overspeculation of frontier lands– Bank of United States largely involved
• The West hard hit by the financial paralysis– Bank of US foreclosed mortgages– Bank of US now seen negatively
• Created severe expansion of the poorer class– Setup for Jacksonian democracy
Panic of 1819
• States admitted alternately (free/slave)• Incentive to Expand
– Cheap land– Soil exhaustion in tobacco states– Removal of Indians– Improved transportation
(roads/highways/steamboats)• West still weak in population and
influence– Allied with other sections– Demanded cheap
acreage/transportation/money
Western Expansion
• Tallmadge Amendment– Missouri wanted to become a slave state– Prevented additional slaves/made
emancipation easier.• Sparked anger from Southerners
– Had managed to retain equality with North
– Amendment set precedent for the rest of Louisiana
Balance of Slavery
• Missouri admitted as slave state/Maine recognized as an individual state
• All future slavery prohibited north of 36° 30’
• Lasted 34 years– Essentially did not resolve the problem
– only avoided it
Missouri Compromise
• More federal power at the expense of the states– McCulloch v. Maryland– Cohens v. Virginia (right of Supreme
Court to review decisions of the state supreme courts)
– Gibbons v. Ogden• “loose construction” of the
Constitution– Derived from the consent of the people– Should be adapted to various crises
John Marshall
• Judicial barriers against attacks on property rights– Fletcher v. Peck
• Right of Supreme Court to invalidate state laws conflicting with the Constitution
– Dartmouth College v. Woodward• Daniel Webster
– Similar to Marshall. Expounded upon his ideas• Lasting Effects
– Enforced federal Union/stable environment for business
– Checked excesses of state legislatures
John Marshall (cont.)
• Treaty of 1818 with Britain– Shared Newfoundland fisheries with
Canada– N. Louisiana border at 49th parallel– 10-year joint occupation of Oregon
Country• Andrew Jackson
– Took advantage of revolution in Florida– Furiously overtook the Spanish
• Florida Purchase Treaty of 1819– Spain cedes Florida and claims to
Oregon & Texas
Oregon and Florida
• European powers smother Democracy– Americans feared republicanism would suffer
• Russia– Decrees Russian jurisdiction down to 51°– Threatens to cut off America from Pacific
• Great Britain– Did not interfere with Spanish America– George Canning proposes joint declaration
renouncing any interest in Latin American territory• Declared unnecessary and hindering
Foreign Affairs
• Warning to European powers– Noncolonization
• Against Russia’s encroachment in the NW– Nonintervention
• Drew the line against monarch systems (especially against fledgling Latin America republics)
– Worked vice versa
The Monroe Doctrine (1823)
• Monarchs outraged, but hands tied– Wasn’t because of Doctrine – rather, the
power of the British navy• Little impact on Latin America
– In truth, more concerned about home country than neighbors
• No contemporary significance• Doctrine simply a declaration. Only
as powerful as the ability to enforce it
Reactions
DBQThe War of 1812 was one of America’s worst fought wars, displaying
an unimpressive military. Trace the changes and continuities in the American opinion of foreign nations before and after the War of 1812.
[Thomas Jefferson’s Defense of the Embargo Act of 1807]Thomas Jefferson to Elijah BrownWashington, D.C., September 1808. http://www.gilderlehrman.org/search/display_results.php?
id=GLC00115.01
[Letter to James Monroe from James Madison]Washington, D.C., 31 March 1807 http://www.gilderlehrman.org/search/display_results.php?
id=GLC01096.01
[Re: Treaty of Ghent, Napoleonic Wars, and Threat of Barbary]John Quincy Adams to William EustisEaling, England, 31 August 1815 http://www.gilderlehrman.org/search/display_results.php?
id=GLC03626
Excerpts:[Thomas Jefferson’s Defense of the Embargo Act of 1807]
Of the several interests composing those of the United States, that of manufactures would
of course prefer to war, a state of non-intercourse, so favorable to their rapid growth and
prosperity. Agriculture, although sensibly feeling the loss of market for its produce, would find
many aggravations in a state of war. Commerce and navigation, or that portion which is foreign,
in the inactivity to which they are reduced by the present state of things, certainly experience
their full share in the general inconvenience: but whether war would to them be a preferable
alternative, is a question their patriotism would never hastily propose. It is not to be regretted,
however, that overlooking the real sources of their sufferings, the British and French Edicts,
which constitute the actual blockade of our foreign commerce and navigation, they have, with
too little reflection, imputed them to laws which have saved them from greater, and have
preserved for our own use our vessels, property and seamen, instead of adding them to the
strength of those with whom we might eventually have to contend.
[Letter to James Monroe from James Madison]
Considered as a retaliation on the United States for permitting the injury done to Great Britain thro' their
commerce, by the French decree, the order over and above the objections stated to Mr. Erskine subjects the British
government to a change of the most striking inconsistency in first admitting that the decree gave a right to retaliate
in the want only of a failure of the United States to control its operation as well as that such a failure along would
justify a final refusal of the Treaty signed by its commissioners and then actually proceeding to retaliate before it was
possible for the decision of the United States to be known or ever made. If it be said, as is stated, that captures had
commenced under the decree, the fact would be of little avail. Such occurrency could not have escaped anticipation,
nor can the amount of them, under the present superiority of British power at sea, afford the slightest plea for the
extensive and premature retaliation comprised in the order. A government valuing its honor and its character ought
to have dreaded less the injury to its interest from the pillage committed by a few ? on neutral commerce, than the
reproach or even the suspicion that a pretext was eagerly seized for unloosing a spirit, impatient under the restraint
of neutral rights, and panting for the spoils of neutral trade. The British government ? not sufficiently reflect on the
advantage which such appearance gave to her adversary, in the appeal they are both making to the judgment the
interests and the sympathy of the world. If Great Britain wishes to be regarded as the champion of law, of right, and
of order among nations, her example must support her pretensions. It must be a contrast to injustice and to
obnoxious innovation. She must not turn the indignation of mankind from the violence of which she complains on
one element to scenes more hostile to established principly on the element on which she bears sway. In a word she
ought to recollect that the good opinion and good will of other nations and particularly of the United States is worth
far more to her than all the wealth which her Navy covering as it does every sea, can plunder from their innocent
commerce.
[Re: Treaty of Ghent, Napoleonic Wars, and Threat of Barbary]
The Newspapers give us accounts from France almost every day, and some or our Countrymen are
coming from that Country, almost every week - As the allied Sovereigns came to an agreement
together, in the distributions at Vienna, I see no reason for doubting that they will agree equally well
upon the distributions of the present day - Now probably as then the principal difficulty will be to
make up the Russian portion - But as to France the case is plain enough, though there has been some
mincing in stating it. France is a conquest and as a conquest will be treated. I am sorely disappointed
at the "gratuitous compliment," to the Dey of Algiers - Will it always be our destiny to end with
shame, what we begin with glory? - Never was there such an opportunity for putting down those
Pirates, as we have had - The work was half-done, and instead of completing it we restore to the
reptile the very sting we had extracted from him - And what will the Peace be worth, when he has got
back his ships and men? - A snare to the unwary!