Jennifer Mackay
December 7, 2006
Dr. Thomas Devine
Precis on America on the Brink: How the political struggle
over the War of 1812 Almost Destroyed the Young Republic
by Richard Buel Jr.
Buel’s main contribution to the
literature of this period is his bold assault against the Federalists. He maintains that their Pro-British inclinations
combined with their protracted struggle to maintain political strength during
the early 19th century led to conduct bordering on treason. His avowed intent is to describe their
behavior rather than attempt to explain it.
While the Federalists remain his primary antagonists, he credits foreign
affairs as the catalyst that brought America to the edge of the
precipice culminating in the Hartford Convention.
Much of
Buel’s book is devoted to describing the sequence of events leading to the war
of 1812. Consequently, he begins Chapter
One by describing the political and diplomatic background both of the
antagonism between Republicans and Federalists and the strains between America and France. Significantly, he explains the context of the
Federalist victories of 1798 in contrast to the waning powers of the
Federalists in 1800. He also discusses
the importance of the Quasi-War with the French and its odd effect upon public
sentiment. Buel goes on to recount the
Federalist attempts to strengthen their influence within New
England by allying with Congregationalists and enforcing
stipulations in the Massachusetts State Constitution.
Buel’s next
chapter presents in detail the political situation in the Federalist stronghold
of Massachusetts
and the eruption of fiercely partisan politics as the War of 1812 approached. The principal problem that arose took the
form of the nationally supported embargo.
Buel maintains that the Republicans saw the embargo as the way to avoid
conflict with either France
or England
but also as a means for asserting their indignation at the way that American
ships were being treated. Federalists in
New England roundly protested the
Embargo. Buel does little to explain the
Federalists’ motivation, but instead catalogues the rhetoric they employed. He also explains the “Political Theater” that
occurred between the ailing Governor Sullivan, the two Senators Pickering and
John Quincy Adams, and various arms of State legislatures. This recounting underscore another of Buel’s
main assertions, namely, that state and local government constituted a more
immediate presence in the early nineteenth century than did the federal
government. Likewise, Massachusetts
proved an example to nearby New England states
as several of the more prominent Federalist towns held “town meetings” that
also denounced the Embargo.
Chapter
Three begins to categorize some of the more egregious examples of deliberate
Federalist attempts to undermine the embargo.
It particularly rests on the example of Josiah Quincy, an eloquent,
influential orator and a subtle politician.
He precipitated a disportionate amount of debate in the Congress by employing
any means necessary to destroy Republican accord. Significantly, Quincy orchestrated a maneuver to split
Republicans over the embargo. By
dividing the majority, he set in motion the repeal of the embargo in favor of
non-importation.
While
Federalists succeeded in ridding themselves of the embargo, they were hardly
satisfied with the terms of non-importation.
Instead, they still viewed the inability to trade freely with Britain
as an impediment to their aims. As the
political climate in Europe transformed and as foreign policy representatives
to America came and went, the course of non-importation was repealed or
implemented and especially in the case of the Erskine affair. Particularly noteworthy is the role that the
cross-Atlantic communications played.
Repeatedly Buel emphasizes that international events unfolded
differently in light of the slow speed of communication between Europe and the United States.
Chapter
Five begins with the provocative act of naval engagement between the USS
President and HMS Lille Belt. This event
paired with crumbling relations between Britain
and the United States led Madison toward the path of
war in order to protect American interests.
Ironically, Buel points out that the United States’ main goal, the
revocation of the Orders-in-Council, occurred shortly before the declaration of
war. But for the inability of the
foreign minister to interpret the climate in Britain
and, again, the difficulty of communication across the Atlantic,
war might have been averted.
In the
course of Chapter Six Buel commences his assault on the Federalists’ attempts
to resist and even weaken the American military struggle during the War of
1812. Here, Buel asserts that
Federalists undermined the war effort in many ways. Their direct opposition in Congress has
already been noted. They also continued
their barrage against the war effort through the many newspapers and
publications printed in Massachusetts and
throughout New England. Additionally, they failed to provide militias
and the necessary elements of force to defend the harbors. Financially the Federalists supported their
own interests instead of those of a united effort by the American people and
were consequently enriched by the protraction of the war.
Chapter
Seven demonstrates how important foreign affairs were to the heightening of
tensions within the United
States.
The surprising defeat of Napoleon eased for a time the conflict between
Republicans and Federalists as it deflected some of the British attention away
from the American engagement. This did
not last, however, and continued British prosecution of the war on American
soil embittered Federalists. Federalists
responded by appealing to a broad “convention,” a populist gathering consisting
largely of New England delegates that would set out to challenge the current
process of the federal government and stop the war.
Chapter
Eight is aptly titled “Denouement.” It
begins by revealing that Massachusetts Governor Strong actually dispatched an
emissary to the British forces in Canada
inquiring about prospects of joining in the British efforts and seceding from
the Union.
However, in the next instance Buel undercuts the importance of this
correspondence. He proposes that while
the calling of the Hartford Convention was the “precipice” of the crisis of the
War of 1812, the actual prostration of the Convention turned out to be
irrelevant. This was due largely to the
successful outcome of the battle of New
Orleans in the Americans’ favor and to the signing of
the Treaty of Ghent. The end of the War
of 1812 essentially ended the antagonism of the Republicans by the Federalists,
but Buel asserts that it also signaled the end of Federalism as a significant
force in politics. Federalism no longer
producing a threat to the union, the only remaining specter in the nation was
the issue of slavery. Thereafter, the southern
states replaced Massachusetts and New England in Congress as the region in which opposition
centered.