The Second War with England, Vol. 1 of 2Headley, Joel Tyler
History
The Second War with England, Vol. 1 of 2
Headley, Joel Tyler
United States -- History -- War of 1812
The embarrassments in which this fierce hostile spirit placed the
administration, rendering it timid and cautious, was increased by the
form it took. The levelling and radical notions of the French
revolution, followed as they were by such atrocities, disgusted the
federalists, while the democrats, though they denounced the violence,
sympathized with the people, and saw in the commotion the working of
their own principles amid the oppressed masses of France. They not
only loved France, as their old ally, but they sympathized with her in
her efforts to hurl back the banded oppressors who sought to
reestablish a hated throne in her midst. So while the former party
stood charged with hating republics and wishing the domination of
England, the latter was accused of seeking an alliance with the
usurper Napoleon.
Many of the reasons given by the Federalists for their opposition,
furnish another exhibition of the blinding power of party spirit. As
to the simple question between England and America, it would seem that
no sane man could doubt, that sufficient provocation had been given to
justify us in a resort to arms. The impressment of six or seven
thousand seamen, most of them American citizens, the destruction of
nearly a thousand merchantmen, and the insults every where heaped upon
our flag, were wrongs which could not be justified. They therefore
endeavored to cover them up, by saying that the Democrats were
assisting Bonaparte, whom they regarded as a monster in human form,
and whose success would be the downfall of all liberty. The wrongs we
suffered were thus lost sight of, in the greater wrong of crippling
England in her desperate struggle with this modern Attila. Rather than
endanger the success of that conflict, they would suffer for a time
from the effect of her odious measures. They felt that England, in her
conduct, was not governed by hostile feelings towards this
country--that the evils she inflicted on us, were only incidental to
the war she was waging against a tyrant. Placed in imminent peril, as
the champion of freedom, she was compelled to resort to extraordinary
measures, which though they injured us, were intended only to crush a
common enemy. Hence the absurd interrogatory so incessantly urged by
wise statesmen: "Why do you not declare war against France as well as
England?"--as if the neglect to protect the interests and honor of the
country in one quarter, rendered it obligatory on the government to
neglect them in all quarters. The law which would redress one wrong,
is none the less right, because he who administers it refuses to apply
it to a second wrong. The injustice is in the person, not in the deed.
Besides, when a nation is insulted and outraged by two powers, it has
a perfect right to choose which it will first assault and chastise.
And yet the false doctrine was constantly promulgated, that we had no
right to declare war with England, without including France, because
she was equally criminal.
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