CAST YOUR VOTE – The War of 1812

Rights and Freedoms / Honor and Reputation / Money and Wealth / Power and Land
To think about …
Neutral Rights
Impressment
America’s response – economic pressure
The War Hawks

What do Americans value the most?

Are any of these terms worth fighting for? If so, which?

As the 19th century began, Great Britain was locked in a long and bitter conflict withFrance and Napoleon Bonaparte. Both sides of the conflict wanted to cut off supplies from reaching the enemy, so each attempted to block the United States from trading with the other. In 1807, Britain passed the Orders in Council, which required neutral countries to obtain a license from its authorities before trading with France or French colonies. Americans were upset that their neutral rights of trade were being infringed by the British.

The British Royal Navy also outraged Americans by its practice of impressment, or removing sailors from U.S. merchant vessels and forcing them to serve on behalf of the British. According to the British, Royal Navy was searching for deserters, who, the British claimed, had taken employment on American ships. American anger exploded in June of 1807, when a British ship attacked the USS Chesapeake and impressed several members of the crew. Americans were incensed that their sailors (and their flag) would be attacked – off the coast of Virginia, in American waters!

Instead of waging war on the British, President Jefferson and Congress issued the Embargo Act, forbidding American trade with all European countries. The intent of the law was to hurt economy of the British and French.

In 1809, the U.S. Congress repealedthe unpopular Embargo Act, which by restricting trade had hurt Americans more than either Britain or France. Its replacement, the Non-Intercourse Act, specifically prohibited trade with Britain and France. While less limiting than the Embargo Act, the Non-Intercourse Act proved to be ineffective at stopping the problems with the British.

The US altered its policy a year later, with recently elected President James Madison in office. The Non-Intercourse Act was replaced by Macon’s Bill No.2, stating that if either power dropped trade restrictions against the United States, Congress would in turn resume non-intercourse with the opposing power. After Napoleon hinted he would stop restrictions, PresidentMadison revived the Non-Intercourse Act and blocked all trade with Britain that November.

Tired of Jefferson and Madison's policy of economic intimidation, American voters made a major change in Congress in 1810. Many young Republicans from the West and south were elected to replace Federalists, especially in the House of Representatives. Having grown up on tales of heroism during the American Revolution, these second-generation Republicans were eager to prove their manhood in a "second war of independence”. Led by Henry Clay andJohn C. Calhoun, these Congressmen (called “War Hawks” by the Federalists) had begun to agitate for war, based on their anger over British violations of maritime rights as well as Britain's encouragement ofNative American hostility against American expansion in the West.

Indian trouble in the West
Looking for land
England gives in
War declared

The possibility of clearing western lands of Indians by removing the Indians' strongest ally--the British – was another great incentive of the War Hawks. With the British influence out of the West, Americans have a much easier time expanding into Indian controlled territory. In late 1811, General William Henry Harrison provoked a fight with an Indian alliance at Tippecanoe Creek in Indiana. The alliance, led by the famous Shawnee chief Tecumseh, intended to stop American settlement in the Northwest. Since British guns were found on the battlefield, many Americans concluded that Britain was responsible for the incident By 1812 the westerners were convinced that their problems could best be solved by forcing the British out of North America, including Canada.

Many westerners and southerners also had their eye on expansion to the South, viewing war as an opportunity to add both Canada and Spanish-held Florida to the United States. The fact that Spain and England were allies against Napoleon presented the southern war hawks with an excuse for invading Florida. By this time, also, the balance of political power had shifted south and westward; ambitious Republican party leaders had no choice but to align themselves with the War Hawks, and 1812 was a Presidential election year.

By 1812, the "War Hawks" in Congress were putting more and more pressure on President Madison – but little did they know that Madison's use of economic pressure on England was working. The prohibiting of trade with England and its colonies, combined with a poor grain harvest in England and with a growing need of American materials to supply the British troops fighting the French in Spain, the British needed to act. On June 16, 1812, the British Foreign Minister announced that the blockade (the Orders in Council) would be relaxed on American shipping.

Since communication was limited in 1812, the American government did not know of the British opening of trade. President Madison had sent a message to Congress on June 1 listing all the complaints against England and asking for a declaration of war. Dividing along sectional lines the House had voted for war on June 4, but the Senate approved only on June 18 and then by only six votes. On June 18, 1812, the president signed a declaration of war against Britain.

The declaration of war was the opening moment of the War of 1812, a major foreign challenge to the young nation during the New Republic. Should the nation have gone to war with the British? What would you have done if you were asked to support the war? Let’s find out ….

Using the great “Cast Your Vote” website from the National Park Service, you will listen to eight different perspectives on going to war with the British in 1812. For each, you will find out if they are for or against going to war and also describe the rationale of each individual. After you are done, you will cast your vote and explain your own rationale. Record your vote and rationale in the area below as well!

My vote My rationale (also typed online):


EXPLORE PERSPECTIVES – The War of 1812

http://www.nps.gov/fomc/castyourvote/explore.cfm

Francis Scott Key
Maryland Lawyer
Pro-War or Anti-War
Rationale: / Josette Dugas
New Orleans Resident
Pro-War or Anti-War
Rationale: / George Roberts
U.S. Navy Sailor
Pro-War or Anti-War
Rationale:
Margaret Elliot
Frontier Resident
Pro-War or Anti-War
Rationale: / Cast Your Vote 1812
Using the video clips, identify if the character is pro-war or anti-war by circling the corresponding term, and briefly describe the reasons stated by the character. Once you are finished, determine if you would support going to war with the British, and support your decision with a well written rationale. / James Madison
U.S. President
Pro-War or Anti-War
Rationale:
Henry Clay
Kentucky Congressman
Pro-War or Anti-War
Rationale: / John Bradford
Boston Merchant
Pro-War or Anti-War
Rationale: / John Randolph
Virginia Senator
Pro-War or Anti-War
Rationale:

STOP HERE … WE WILL FILL IN THE REST N CLASS!


The War of 1812

The Events

War at Sea

Invasion of Washington

Battle of Baltimore

The Hartford Convention

The Treaty of Ghent

The Battle of New Orleans

The War of 1812 - SO WHAT?