History of the United States of America, Volume 5 (of 9) : $b During the first administration of James MadisonAdams, Henry
History
History of the United States of America, Volume 5 (of 9) : $b During the first administration of James Madison
Adams, Henry
United States -- History -- 1801-1809; United States -- History -- 1809-1817
The next morning, January 19, Parliament met, and American affairs
were instantly made the subject of attack on ministers. In the Lords,
Grenville declared that “the insulting and sophistical answer” returned
by Canning to the American offer, persuaded him “that the intention
of the King’s government is to drive things to extremity with
America.” Lord Hawkesbury the Home Secretary, who had succeeded his
father as Earl of Liverpool, replied in the old tone that ministers
felt no disposition to irritate America, but that national dignity
and importance were not to be sacrificed “at the very moment when
America seemed so blind to her own interest, and betrayed so decided a
partiality in favor of France.”[42] In the Commons, Whitbread and the
other leaders of opposition echoed the attack, but Canning did not echo
the reply.
“The same infatuation,” said Whitbread,[43] “seems now to prevail
that existed in the time of the late American war. There were the
same taunts, the same sarcasms, and the same assertions that America
cannot do without us.” Only a few weeks earlier or later, Canning
would have met such criticisms in his loftiest tone, and with more
reason than in 1807 or in 1808. In his desk were Erskine’s latest
despatches, announcing impending war in every accent of defiance
and in many varieties of italics and capital letters; fresh in his
memory was his own official pledge that “no step which could even
mistakenly be construed into concession should be taken” while a doubt
existed whether America had wholly abandoned her attempt at commercial
restriction. Yet instead of maintaining England’s authority at the
moment when for the first time it was threatened by the United States,
Canning became apologetic and yielding. Repeating the commonplaces of
the newspapers that America had sided with France, and even going so
far as to assert, what he best knew to be an error, that the Orders
in Council had not been the cause of the embargo, and “it was now a
notorious fact that no such ground had been laid for the embargo;”
after declaring the exclusion of British war-vessels from American
harbors to have been the chief obstacle to the compromise offered by
America,--treading, with what seemed a very uncertain foot, among
these slippery and ill-balanced stepping-stones, he reached the
point where he meant to rest. The “Chesapeake” Proclamation, which
excluded British war-ships from American harbors, being his chief
grievance, any settlement which removed that grievance would be so far
satisfactory; and for this reason the measures proposed in Campbell’s
Report, though clothed in hostile language, might, if made known to the
British government in amicable terms, have led to the acceptance of
the compromise proposed, since they excluded French as well as English
ships of war from American ports.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account