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!