Upper Canada Preserved — War of 1812 6-Book Bundle. Richard Feltoe
from Portugal and Spain in 1808.
Spending huge fortunes to subsidize its wavering European allies in a succession of military coalitions, initially against France’s Revolutionary governments and latterly against Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte’s goal to create a European empire.
As if this was not enough, Britain’s domestic economy was also in a state of crisis, the combined effect of a multi-year economic depression and a succession of agricultural crop failures. This had resulted in rampant price inflation and widespread food shortages throughout the nation’s increasingly urbanized population, which in turn created widespread social unrest. Compounding this already volatile situation, Britain’s industrial sector was in the midst of an ideological (and sometimes actual) conflict between its factory owners, who saw the future being dominated by the introduction of increased levels of mechanization into their industries, and their workforce, who saw their economic security, traditional working lifestyle, and their individuality being forcibly stripped away by the soulless “factory” system. Inevitably, without compromise and cooperation, both sides eventually resorted to extremes of action. The owners by invoking the “law” to call out the judges and local militias to arrest or actively (violently) suppress the protesting workers. The workers by forming raiding parties to sabotage and destroy the hated machines under the collective disguise of being the “Luddite army” or “Luddites,” led by the fictitious General Ludd. As a result, the British government was already fully occupied in its own affairs at home and in Europe, and took little time to take notice of new, serious problems developing in its relationship with the United States.
The westward expansionist policies of the U.S. government had allowed white settlement into the previously off-limits treaty lands held by the Native tribes of the Ohio, Michigan, and Kentucky regions. These treaty-breaking incursions had inevitably been met with hostile resistance from the Natives, resulting in the sending in of U.S. military units to suppress the “savages.” The only problem being that these same Native tribes were regularly winning these encounters! Since it was unthinkable that any “modern” army could be defeated by these “primitive” tribesmen, there had to be another reason. And as far as Mr. Grundy, the congressional representative for Tennessee and member of the Foreign Relations Committee, was concerned, the answer — and solution — was obvious.
It cannot be believed by any man who will reflect that the savage tribes, uninfluenced by other powers, would think of making war on the United States. They understand too well their own weakness, and our strength. They have already felt the weight of our arms; they know they hold the very soil on which they live as tenants at sufferance. How, then, Sir are we to account for their late conduct? In one way only; some powerful nation [Great Britain] must have intrigued with them and turned their peaceful disposition towards us into hostilities … I therefore infer that if British gold has not been employed, their baubles and trinkets and the promise of support and a place of refuge if necessary have had their effect…. This war, if carried on successfully, will have its advantages. We shall drive the British from our Continent — they will no longer have an opportunity of intriguing with our Indian neighbours … that nation will lose her Canadian trade, and, by having no resting place in this country her means of annoying us will be diminished.
(November 1811)[1]
For other American politicians and hardline nationalists, this viewpoint simply stated what they too had believed for some time. That the continued existence of a British colonial influence on the continent of North America was a stain on American pride that cried out for immediate correction. Their ultimate goal was to establish a single unified country, stretching from the frozen northern wastes to the tropical beaches of the Gulf of Mexico. Less often mentioned, however, were a number of financial considerations that also held considerable influence in the drive to expel the British from North America.
Under Napoleon Bonaparte, France’s armies had occupied or gained control over most of the European landmass, while the British literally “ruled” the waves, thanks to the might of its Royal Navy. Because neither side could then decisively defeat the other militarily, both combatants chose to use economic warfare as an alternate weapon. The French made the first move by imposing their authority and intimidating the small Baltic states to cut off the vital timber resources of that region to the British navy. In response, Great Britain began to develop the St. Lawrence River corridor as a new and reliable source of timber from the seemingly infinite stocks of Canada’s wilderness. This, in turn, represented an economic threat to the established mercantile interests on the American east coast. Within that circle it was argued that rather than seeing a competitor flourish, bringing those valuable economic resources and raw materials under direct American control would be a desirable and profitable outcome.
Matters intensified further when Napoleon Bonaparte tried to extend his economic war on Great Britain by issuing imperial decrees at Milan (1806) and Berlin (1807). By the terms of these declarations, Great Britain was banned from trading directly with any of France’s allies and subjugate countries in Europe. In retaliation, Great Britain’s Royal Navy effectively swept the French merchant marine from the seas before establishing a total naval blockade of French-controlled European ports. To circumvent these actions, both sides began to use intermediary and neutral shipping — a profit-making situation the Americans were quick to exploit.
Having gained control of most of the trans-Atlantic shipping trade and reaping huge profits from both sides of the European conflict, the Americans found their effective monopoly threatened by the subsequent actions of both Britain and France to tighten the economic “noose” on their enemy. Inevitably, the domestic pressure to maintain their new economic advantage, coupled with a political determination not to bow to any foreign decrees, led the American government into direct confrontation with both countries. However, while the actions of both combatants had severe economic impacts on the United States, the American newspapers repeatedly highlighted those incidents that involved British interests, leading to strident demands for retribution by the more extreme members of the American government.
In an offshoot to this situation, the huge growth in American mercantile traffic created an increased demand for experienced sailors to crew the ships. American merchant navy pay rates rose dramatically, leading to an increase in the numbers of men deserting from the brutality of the Royal Navy to the relatively lenient American trading vessels. Determined to recover these deserters, and rejecting the concept of any British citizen having the right to ever relinquish or change his nationality, the Royal Navy strained maritime legalities to breaking point by stopping and boarding American vessels to search for and seize what they deemed to be British nationals. The intimidation finally reached its climax when the HMS Leopard fired broadsides into the USS Chesapeake (June 22, 1807) to compel her to heave-to and submit to being boarded for the purpose of being searched.
War was now a distinct possibility, and the fact that legitimate American complaints (of U.S. citizens being “pressed” into British service) were being met with blunt indifference from the British government did nothing to ease tensions. President Thomas Jefferson, faced with the difficult choice of declaring war or submitting to the demands of both France and Great Britain, chose instead to enact a series of draconian and economically catastrophic Embargo Acts that effectively quarantined the United States from all trade and business dealings with Europe. Faced with the outright ruin of their lucrative shipping industry and wholesale unemployment across all sectors of the economy, the New England region soon became the centre of a massive system of coordinated smuggling with its neighbouring Canadian maritime colonies. American customs officials were threatened and even attacked by their own citizens, as were the troops sent to enforce the new regulations. This unexpected turn of events temporarily ended the call for war, as American anger was turned inward on their own government. Although the hated Embargo Acts were replaced in 1809 with the Non-Intercourse Act (forbidding American trade with Great Britain or France until either country revoked their own decrees), it did little to mollify the anger and concerns of the east coast merchants and shipping owners.
Meanwhile, the unremitting westward expan-sion by white settlers prompted the affected Native nations to unite in a common political and military confederacy under the leadership of a charismatic Shawnee chief, Tecumseh