Back.
Historians are divided over their interpretations of the war. Why did diplomacy fail and war break out? What forces and leaders were responsible? Was war really necessary? Could it have been avoided?
This is the orthodox view of history. The British violation of US neutral rights (free ships, free goods) on the high seas were the direct cause of the conflict. Impressment of sailors, interruption of trade, and paper blockades (resulting in the seizure of cargos and the capture of ships). The impressment of sailors was a matter of pride and a direct violation of US sovereignty. The British were acting as if the American flag did not matter and the American Nation could pose them no threat.
A revisionist interpretation. The war was precipitated and driven by the national territorial desires for Canada in the north and Florida in the south. Taking those lands from the Spanish and the British would not only provide new territories to settle, but the natives to the west would lose British supply lines and military advisors, allowing westward expansion.
Focuses on the policymakers and the failures of diplomacy.
Between 1803 and 1812 the British and French were at war. Americans profited by acting as a neutral carrier of goods, immune to attack by either side, and replacing British and French merchants, who risked attack by enemy forces, along old traditional french and British trade routes. French-US relations had been improving while Anglo-US relations had been eroding.
The British were seriously hurt by the loss of their trade routes and were incensed by the American practice of supplying the French with goods and carrying goods between the French colonies and mainland. They accused the Americans of being allies of the French and exploiters of British distress. They felt that the Americans were a threat to British rule of the seas.
The French were benefiting from the American trade practices and would only benefit further from an Anglo-US war.
The Rule of 1756
The British revived "the rule of 1756," which stated that trade routes not open in times of peace may not be opened in times of war. This was aimed directly at stopping the US from shipping supplies between French colonies and the French mainland during this period of war. The implementation of this rule gave the British the right to capture American ships that were transporting French goods or travelling to French ports,
Broken Voyage/Continuous Voyage
The US response was to present the idea of the Broken Voyage. They would pick up French goods in French colonies, unload them at American ports, then reload them as American cargoes headed for France, following long-standing American-french trade routes.
The British argued that since it was still one cargo, it was still a continuous voyage between French ports (1805). Unless American merchants could prove that this was not a French cargo, any cargo headed for France would be seized. The British started an offensive against US merchants.
A four century old tradition of the British Navy was to seize British ships and impress their crews into service whenever necessary. When the British began seizing US merchants, they would do a search, confiscate cargos, and impress any English-speaking members of the crew. They insisted that they could not tell the difference between American and British crewmembers. Anyone speaking English was assumed to be a British subject. Over 6,000 US citizens were impressed by 1812.
The problem was that the British were right in many ways. British seamen who deserted would often flee to the Americas and start working for American merchants. By 1812, 20,000 English deserters were on American ships. So the British had some justification in impressing sailors on US ships. It only cost about $1.00 to get naturalization papers in the US. The British did not find this process acceptable.
The British followed a "doctrine of onallianable allegiance", which stated that once English, always English. The US refused to recognize this doctrine, insisting that everyone had the right to refuse their old nationality (The rights of expatriation).
This was a prestige issue for the US. If the British could impress US citizens into service whenever they wished, the US could expect to get little to no respect from anyone.
James Monroe and William Pinckney negotiated with Britain to solve the maritime problems.
The British demanded that the US give up the policy of "free ships, free goods" in exchange for British recognition of the "Broken Voyage." This was not even sent to congress for approval by the president, simply refused. It did not even touch upon the impressment issue, and had serious prestige problems.
The British and French started "paper blockades," declaring enemy ports "blockaded", prohibiting all trade with English/French ports, giving permission to their navy to seize all ships attempting to break the blockade.
Any ship who submitted to British search would be treated as British by the French.
British started a virtual blockade of American ports.
HMS Leopard shelled the USS Chesapeake, which escaped and made it to Norfolk. Became a rallying point.
Four British sailors had jumped ship and boarded the Chesapeake. Three of them were US-born citizens.
This was the United State's first attempt at economic sanctions, targeted against Britain. It didn't go exactly as its authors hoped, but it was a useful experiment for later generations to take a look at. The lesson: don't embargo yourself.
The United States would export nothing, no ships would leave, and all ports would be closed to foreign ships. It banned both imports and exports. It was the next generation of the Non-Importation Act of 1806, which had never been effectively implemented, and was now effectively combined with the embargo act. All American trade activities came to a halt.
The whole experiment hurt the American economy badly, more than it could have ever hurt the British Economy. It generated hostilities within the American Republic: The merchants states of the north were being economically crushed by their own federal government.
The Canadians actually benefitted by picking up the losrt American trade.
The French were elated: the British and Americans were at each others throats, both getting hurt by the conflict.
This Act was finally repealed in with the Nonintercourse Act of 1809.
A second attempt, this time the US prohibited all trade with Britain and France, allowing the resumption of all other trade.
British representative Erskine negotiated and agreement with Monroe, in which Britain would remove the Paper Blockade and the US would repeal the nonintercourse act against Britain.
Madison excitedly lifted the Nonintercourse Act against Britain, only to find out that Erskine had violated his instructions, failing to gain concessions from the US (including the rights of Seizure), and the British Parliament had not ratified the agreement.
It was announced that if either power (Britain or France) would renounce its paper blockade, then the US would impose a nonintercourse act with their enemy.
Napoleon jumped at this chance in a rather underhanded way. Foreign Minister Cadore wrote a letter (August 5, 1810), which Madison mistakenly took at face value, declaring a non-importation act against Britain (NOVE 1, 1810) if they did not remove their own paper blockade against the US. Napoleon had never had any intention of cancelling his blockade against the US, and the letter did not require him to do so. It was a wonderful peace of legal verbalese that led the Americans to think something was happening when it was only they that were taking any action at all.
A skirmish between US troops led by General Harrison and the Canadian and British supported Native American buffer state. Harrison won a spectacular victory.
Western expansionist militants had been elected to congress. They wanted war against Britain. It was called the War Congress of 1812.
Stating the basic issues: British Impressment, Unlawful seizure, paper blockades, and the British renewal of the Indian wars.
The War actually could still have been avoided but for slow communications. On June 2nd, the House of Representatives voted for war. On June 16th, the British announced that they would suspend the orders in council, but word does not travel to the US quickly enough. On June 17th, the US senate voted for war. On June 18th, war was officially declared against Britain.
Five famous, experienced American Diplomats met with several young, inexperienced British representatives. The British demands were so rediculous as to be ignored by the US representatives. During these negotiations, the British captured and Burned Washington DC (Nove. 1813), and the Victory was achieved at Lake Champaign.
Finally, on Christmas eve, a treaty was signed. Recognition of the status quo ante bellum. A new mixed arbitral commision was again to try to settle the Border disputes.
In England, Napoleon had escaped and renewed his wars. England did not want to be fighting on two continents, and rushed to make peace with the States.
The experience of the war taught the US a lot. Reorganization of the government and armed forces resulted. It generated increased Nationalism as the US, rather than as individual states. The US economy was forced to become more self-sufficient and less dependent upon foreign trade.
Now able to stand alone, separate from Europe, concentrating on domestic growth and westward territorial expansion.
Back.
Next.
Back.to the Main Diplomatic History Page.
This page hosted by 
Get your own Free Home Page