American trade with other parts of Europe only on condition of touching
at English ports and paying duties. Napoleon retaliated with decrees
which {318} were practically futile while England was victorious on the
ocean, but which nevertheless threw additional difficulties in the way
of the commerce of a country like the United States, which possessed
such exceptional facilities for its development from its position as a
neutral nation, and its great maritime and mercantile enterprise. The
British measures meant the ruin of an American commerce which had
become very profitable, and the Washington government attempted to
retaliate by declaring an embargo in their own ports, which had only
the result of still further embarrassing American trade. In place of
this injudicious measure a system of non-intercourse with both England
and France was substituted as long as either should continue its
restrictive measures against the United States. The Democratic
governing party practically fell under the influence of France, and
believed, or at least professed to believe, that Napoleon had abandoned
his repressive system, when, as a matter of fact, as the English
ministry declared, it still existed to all intents and purposes. The
Democratic leaders, anxious to keep in power, fanned the flame against
England, whose naval superiority enabled her to inflict an injury on
American commercial interests, which France was entirely powerless to
do. The Democrats looked to the South and West for their principal
support in holding power. In these sections the interests were
exclusively agricultural, while in New England, where the
Federalists--the peace party--were in the majority--and the war was
very unpopular--the commercial and maritime {319} element largely
prevailed. In the West there had been for years an intense feeling
against England on account of the fact that after the definitive treaty
of peace in 1783, the English Government continued to occupy the
Western posts and dependent territory for thirteen years, nominally on
the ground of the harsh treatment meted out to the loyalists in
violation of its terms, and of the non-payment of debts due to English
creditors, but probably also with the view of keeping control of the
fur trade. The feeling prevailed among the western frontiersmen that
the English secretly instigated Indian attacks on the new settlements,
a belief proved by recent investigations to be groundless. Even after
the victories of Mayne in 1794, and of Harrison in 1811, when the
Indian power was effectively broken, this bitter sentiment still
existed in the West against English and Canadians, and had much
influence with the politicians who favoured the war.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account