USA > Massachusetts > The history of Massachusetts, the commonwealth period. 1775-1820 v. III > Part 36
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47
More serious matters, however, soon engaged the attention of the people of Massachusetts. The president and his cabi- net had long been suspected, and even accused, of a leaning towards France, and of a wish to promote the views of that nation, and to provoke Great Britain. Spoliations on com- merce, in which the Eastern States were largely interested, had been frequently made by French, as well as by English, vessels ; but, when the injustice of this treatment was remon- strated against, and indemnity was urged, the government of France attempted to justify its course by alleging that Eng- land was the first aggressor, and had been equally, if not more, unjust in its conduct towards the United States.1
At this critical juncture, while the passions of all classes were highly inflamed, about a month after the passage of the Nov.11. English orders in council, and a few days subsequent to the Dec. 17. issue of Bonaparte's Milan decree, an embargo was laid by the Dec. 22. president, without period or limitation. This feature of the bill, which was contrary to all precedents, was the particular ground of alarm to Massachusetts ; and it was feared there would be great difficulty in obtaining a vote of Congress for a repeal.2 Many of the citizens of this state were vehement
1 Bradford, iii. 94. Bonaparte's Berlin decree was issued November 21, 1806, declaring the British Islands in a state of blockade, and prohibiting all commerce and intercourse with them; and the effects of this decree were felt in America, as well as in Europe. Carey's Olive Branch, 115 ; Hildreth's U. S., 2d series, ii. 647, 648.
2 Bradford, iii. 97, and Hist. Fed. Gov't. 157; Statesman's Manual, i. 253-256; Carey's Olive Branch, 115 -120; Pickering's Review, 33, 34; Tucker's Life of Jefferson, ii. 248-250 ;
Hildreth's U. S., 2d series, ii. 32-37. The previous proclamation of the, English government, for a blockade, of the coast from the Elbe to Brest. was issued May 16, 1806; and, at a still carlier date, or in the winter of 1805-6, in consequence of British ag- gressions, memorials from Boston. Salem, Newburyport, and other towns in Massachusetts, and from New York Philadelphia, Baltimore, and other cities, were forwarded to Congress protesting against these aggressions and demanding redress. Am. State Papers, 1801-1806, and 1806-1808
-
353
EFFECTS OF THE EMBARGO UPON MASSACHUSETTS.
in their denunciations ; and, though the friends of the admin- CHAP. istration spoke warmly of the measure, and defended it with VIII. enthusiasm, those who considered the president as unfriendly 1807. to commerce were confirmed in their opinions of his charac- ter, and condemned him as a " traitor."1 Nor can it be doubt- ed that the business of Massachusetts was seriously checked. Agriculture was discouraged, and the fisheries were abandoned. A large number of vessels were thrown out of employ, and hauled up and dismantled. Ship building was suspended ; and the gloomiest forebodings pervaded the community.2 That John Quincy Adams, one of the senators from Massa- chusetts, should have voted for this measure, and that John Adams, his father, should have given it his sanction, occasioned no little surprise to many.3 Mr. Pickering, the other senator
Carey's Olive Branch, 88, 89, 115. The orders in council of November 11, 1807, are said to have reached the United States December 18, four days before the embargo was laid. J. Q. Adams to H. G. Otis, p. 9. The em- bargo laws, with accompanying docu- ments, were published at Boston, in 1809, in a pamphlet of 174 pages, by Cushing and Belcher. On the orders in council, see Niles's Register, i. 155 -163, 177-189, 194-198.
"There is," says Carey, Olive Branch, 130, " no measure of the gen- eral government, from its first organ- ization to the present hour, more strongly marked with wisdom, with Foresight, and with attention to duty, han this recommendation. There is, nevertheless, no measure that has generated more factions or senseless lamor, more envenomed prejudice, nore unblushing misrepresentation." On the embargo laws, comp. An Ad- Iress to the People of New England, y Algernon Sidney, [Gideon Gran- er,] Washington, 1808; An Address o the Congress of the United States n the Utility and Justice of Restric- ons upon Foreign Commerce, Phil- delphia, 1809 ; Blake's Examination VOL. III. 23
of the Constitutionality of the Em- bargo Laws, Worcester, 1808; Bar- ing's Inquiry on the Orders in Coun- cil, 2d Am. ed., N. Y., 1808.
2 Address to the Congress of the U. S., 15, Philad. 1809; Report of Com. of Mass. Leg. 1809 ; Dallas on the Embargo, Philad. 1809; Pick- ering to Sullivan, 5; Tucker's Life of Jefferson, ii. 265, 266. The registered tonnage of the United States in 1807, employed in the foreign trade, was 848,306 tons; and of this Massachu- setts alone owned 310,309 tons, or more than one third. Pickering's Review, 34. Is it surprising in this view, that the citizens of Massachu- setts should have complained of the impolicy of the embargo ?
Pickering's Review, 29-44; Brad- ford, iii. 98; Hildreth's U. S., 2d series, iii. 37, 78. "The president," said Mr. Adams, " has recommended this measure on his high responsibil- ity. I would not consider. "I would not deliberate. I would act. Doubt- less, the president possesses such fur- ther information as will justify the measure." Pickering to Sullivan, 11, and Review, 34. Comp. also the In- admissible Principles of the King of
-
354
POLICY OF THIS MEASURE.
CHAP. from Massachusetts, opposed the act as improper and impolitic, VIII. and addressed a letter to Governor Sullivan, intended also for 1807. the legislature and the people, embodying his views upon the subject.1 To this Mr. John Quincy Adams replied, in a letter to Mr. Otis, in favor of the embargo.2 But the public were dissatisfied with his reasoning, and withdrew their confidence from the friends of the act.3
Let it not be supposed, however, that the embargo was entirely unwarranted. For some time, the posture of affairs with England had been such as to threaten a rupture ; and, to prevent this evil, negotiations had been pending with the Eng- lish government upon the subject of neutral rights, which had been violated by the seizure of American vessels trading to any country with which Great Britain was at war, and by forcibly impressing American seamen under the pretence that they were British subjects.4 The envoys to whom this nego-
England's Proclamation of Oct. 16, 1807, by the late President Adams, Boston, 1809.
1 Corresp. between Pickering and Sullivan, 1808 ; Pickering's Review, 35; Bradford, iii. 99; Carey's Olive Branch, 132; Hildreth's U. S., 2d series, iii. 76. Mr. Pickering was hanged in effigy in the Northern Lib- erties of Philadelphia, on a gallows fifty feet high, for opposing the em- bargo. Pickering's Review, 5.
2 John Q. Adams to H. G. Otis ; Bradford, iii. 99, note ; Hildreth's U. S., 2d series, iii. 77.
3 It was asserted, by some, that the embargo was the result of a combi- nation between' the Southern and Western States, to ruin the Eastern ; but of this there is no adequate proof. Comp. Carey's Olive Branch, 131.
4 War in Disguise; Answer to War in Disguise, N. York, 1806; Peace or War, N. York, 1807 ; Cases and Que- ries, N. York, 1809; Exam. of the British Doctrine on Neutral Trade, &c. ; Bradford's Hist. Fed. Gov't. 146; Carey's Olive Branch, 106. " It
soon appeared from the despatches received from Messrs. Monroe and Pinckney, after they had entered upon the negotiation, that there was little probability of making a satisfactory adjustment of the great questions of impressment, indemnity for spolia- tions, or the West India trade. An- ticipating a change of ministry after Mr. Fox's death, and with his hopes of a successful negotiation greatly moderated, the president thought it prudent to give more explicit instruc- tions to the American envoys. They were, therefore, informed of his views, on the subjects of impressments, neu- tral commerce, blockades, East and West India trade, and indemnifica- tion ; and they were instructed not to enter into any treaty which did not provide some security against the impressment of American seamen." Tucker's Life of Jefferson, ii. 223, 224. The copy of the treaty was received from Mr. Erskine, who had been appointed under the Grenville administration to succeed, or rather to take the place of, Mr. Merry, as min-
355
POLICY OF THE REJECTION OF THE OFFERED TREATY.
tiation was intrusted succeeded in effecting a treaty, signed by CHAP. the American and British ministers, which was forwarded to VIII. the president ; but, from its alleged defects, he declined submit- 1806. ting it to the Senate. It contained no agreement on the part Dec. 31. 1807. Jan. 1. of the British relinquishing in full their right of taking their seamen wherever they might find them; and an article was appended to it, after it had been signed, by which the English government might require of the United States, in case of an invasion of England by the French, which was threatened, a variation in the stipulations of the treaty in favor of England.1
The policy of the president in thus assuming, in connection with Madison, to reject so important a measure without con- sulting the Senate, as it involved an unusual exertion of authority, became a subject at once of newspaper attack and defence ; and though he pleaded in his vindication his "sensi- bility to the sovereignty of the nation," 2 there were not want- ing those who viewed his conduct in a less favorable light, and who regarded him as playing into the hands of the French .. For, certainly, as Monroe very sensibly replied, as the question of impressment had been placed on the best temporary basis that the conflicting prejudices of the two nations would admit,
lister from Great Britain to the United States, and who reached Washington in the preceding November.
1 Real Causes of the Failure of the Negotiation, &c. ; Tucker's Life of Jefferson, ii. 224; Bradford's Hist. . Fed. Gov't. 146; Statesman's Manu- il, i. 251; Hildreth's U. S., 2d series, i. 653-656. Pinckney and Monroe were the agents of the United States ; und Lords Auckland and Howick, fterwards Earl Grey, were the agents of England. This treaty, which con- isted of twenty-six articles, was con- luded for the term of ten years. It onfirmed the permanent and unex- ired articles in the treaty of 1794, and n the subjects of the East India trade, ghts of neutrals and belligerents, ap- ointment of consuls, surrender of
criminals, equalization of duties, and regulation of privateers, the two in- struments were substantially the same. The new features were, that Great Britain consented that the United States should have a circuitous trade with the colonies of her enemies, dur- ing existing hostilities ; the limit of maritime jurisdiction was extended to five miles from the coast; provision was made in favor of shipwrecked persons ; advantages in navigation or trade granted by either party to any nation were to extend to the other ; and all laws passed and measures taken against the African slave trade were to be communicated to the other.
2 Comp. Hildreth's U. S., 2d series, iii. 27.
356
POLICY OF THE REJECTION OF THE OFFERED TREATY.
CHAP. nothing could justify the refusal to ratify but a fixed determi- VIII. nation, in case the matter was not otherwise arranged, to press
1807. its decision by an appeal to arms.1 Hatred of England, it was said, was all that held his party together. Take away this, and it would speedily dissolve. But these censures, it would seem, were pushed too far and stated too strongly. If his own statements may be credited, it is quite certain that Jeffer- son was not opposed to a peace with England ; nor is it necessary to question his honesty to account for his conduct on this occasion.2 Without doubt, it would have been the most prudent course to have submitted the treaty to the Sen- ate ; but, if he was convinced in his own mind that it was injurious and dishonorable, he had a right to withhold it. Its adoption might have averted the consequences which followed ; but those consequences, as they were not sought by, so neither could they justly be charged to, him.3
Yet the confidence of the friends of the president remained unshaken ; and, even in New England, his partisans increased. But an outrage soon followed which tended for a season to check their zeal, and open their eyes to a sense of their dan- gers. This was the attack upon the Chesapeake, near the Jun. 23. capes of Virginia, by the English ship Leopard.4 An indig-
1 Comp. Tucker's Life of Jefferson, ii. 226, 227; Hildreth's U. S., 2d se- ries, ii. 663; iii. 27, 64. Monroe, it is said, was not "altogether free from suspicion that the treaty with Great Britain, so unceremoniously rejected without being even submitted to the Senate, had fallen a vietim to appre- hensions lest the eclat of so successful a negotiation, baeked, perhaps, by federal votes, might earry its author over Madison's head into the pres- idential ehair." Comp., however, on this point, Tucker's Life of Jefferson, ii. 208.
2 In his private correspondence with Monroe, Jefferson declared himself in favor of a permanent peace with Eng-
land. "No two countries upon earth," said he, "have so many points of common interest and friendship; and their rulers must be great bunglers indeed, if, with such dispositions, they break them asunder. The only rivalry that can ever arise is on the ocean We ask for peace and justice from al nations; and we will remain strictly neutral in faet, though leaning in be lief to the opinion that an English aseendeney on the ocean is far safe for us than that of France." States man's Manual, i. 249.
3 Bradford's Hist. Fed. Gov't. 147 148.
4 Am. State Papers, 1806-1808 An Essay on the Rights and Dutie
-
357
PRESSURE OF THE EMBARGO.
nation meeting was held in Virginia, on hearing of this affair ; CHAP. and a proclamation was issued by the president, complaining VIII. of the insolence of the British cruisers, and ordering all ships 1807. July 2. of war belonging to that nation to quit immediately the waters of the United States. A court of inquiry was also instituted to investigate the conduct of the commander of the Chesa- peake ; and a vessel was despatched to England, with instruc- tions to the American minister to demand reparation, and to suspend all other negotiations until the same should be ob- tained.1
It was at this stage of affairs that the embargo was passed. But so soon as the pressure of this act, and of the additional and supplementary acts, which were " as satellites to the pri- mary planet," began to be felt, the people, who from the outset had submitted reluctantly, complained bitterly of their impolicy.2 That the real object of the embargo was to oper- ate rather on Great Britain than on France was evident from the ground taken by its supporters ; and the arrival of the.
of Nations, &c., by an American, Bos- ton, 1807, and App. to ditto, Boston, 1808; Calm Inquiry, by a Yankee Farmer, Boston, 1807; the Voice of Truth, N. York, 1807; Carey's Olive Branch, 108-115; Hildreth's U. S., 2d series, ii. 674-681; Tucker's Life of Jefferson, ii. 235 ; Niles's Weekly Register, i. 49-52, 73-78, 89-92.
1 Am. State Papers, 1806-1808, 281 et seq. ; N. Eng. Palladium for April 5, 8, 15, 1808; Tucker's Life of Jefferson, ii. 228, 229, 236 ; States- man's Manual, i. 253; Hildreth's U. S., 2d series, ii. 682 ; iii. 37, 38. A meeting "to strengthen the adminis- tration," &c., was held in Boston, July 10, over which Elbridge Gerry presided ; and a second meeting was held July 16, at which John Q. Ad- ams, H. G. Otis, Christopher Gore, T. H. Perkins, John Warren, and other distinguished citizens were pres- ent. Austin's Life of Gerry, ii. 310-
312; Carey's Olive Branch, 113; Hil- . dreth's U. S., 2d series, iii. 25. " The indignation excited by this invasion of national rights," says Tucker, Life of Jefferson, ii. 237, " which was heightened, no doubt, by the feeble resistance made by the Chesapeake, pervaded every part of the commu- nity; and, in city, town, and country, there were meetings expressing their keen resentment, tendering their sup- port to the government in all measures of retribution, and, in the mean time, discontinuing every sort of intercourse with British ships of war. On this question, all parties cordially coop- erated, without distinction; and the country, as Mr. Jefferson properly observed, had never been in such a state since the battle of Lexington."
2 For other acts enforcing the embargo, see Blake's Examination, 11; Hildreth's U. S., 2d series, iii. 59.
1808. Jan. 8.
ยท
1
358
RESISTANCE OF AN ATTEMPT FOR ITS REPEAL.
CHAP. British orders in council, and of Bonaparte's Milan decree, VIII. served still further to increase the excitement.1 To have
1808. Jan. 8.
Feb. 18.
sided with France, under these circumstances, would evidently have been ruinous to the commerce of the country ; to have sided with England might have preserved its most valuable portion. That the latter was the more prudent course was the view taken by nearly all who were engaged in commercial pursuits ; but the Southern States, whose interests were agri- cultural chiefly, were of a different opinion, and even imagined that a total destruction of commerce would not be a positive evil - an opinion in which Jefferson seems to have concurred.2 Hence a suggestion of Livermore, of Massachusetts, on the floor of the House, that, "since the United States were driven by inevitable necessity to choose between the belligerents, a regard as well for commercial interests as for the independ- ence of nations ought to induce them to side with Great Britain," was received with astonishment, as if it had been treasonable, and the opposition was denounced as factious and disorganizing.3
1 Comp. Tucker's Life of Jefferson, ii. 268. "It must be recollected," says he, " that the measure was de- fended by its advocates, not as the most profitable, but only as preferable to war; since submission to the inso- lent abuses of power by the belliger- ents, the only other alternative, was defended by no one. It was there- fore thought better to bear the evils of the embargo for a time, serious as they were, than to resort to war. There was a chance that those nations would abandon' their lawless pre- tensions when they found they were hurtful to themselves as well as to their enemies. There was also a chance of peace; and it was distinctly foreseen that, beyond a limited time, war would be the preferable, as well as the certain expedient. It is yet believed by some that, if persevered in a little longer, the first of these
expectations would have been real- ized."
2 Notes on Virginia. See also Thoughts on the Conduct of the Ad- ministration, by a Friend to Peace, Boston, 1808, and Hildreth's U. S., 2d series, iii. 50. " Were I to in- dulge my own theory, I should wish the states to practise neither com- merce nor navigation, but to stand, with respect to Europe, precisely on the footing of China. We should thus avoid wars, and all our citizens would be husbandmen."
3 Hildreth's U. S., 2d series, iii. 54. " Never," says Carey, Olive Branch, 135, " was I more deceived than I am at this moment, if every candid, un- biased reader do not agree with me, that the opposition to the operation of the embargo was factious, disor- ganizing, and impolitic in the extreme; and that those who rendered the law
359
SIXTH PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
In the midst of this excitement, the fifth presidential cam- CHAP. paign was approaching ; and, as it had been understood VIII. between Jefferson and Madison that the former was to decline 1808. in favor of the latter, a caucus of the members of the legisla- ture of Virginia was called, at which one hundred and thirty- Jan. 23. four votes were cast for Madison, and forty-seven for Monroe.1 The result of the congressional caucus, held the same night, was equally decisive in favor of Madison, who received eighty- three votes, to three for Monroe, and three for Clinton.2 In Massachusetts, no change was made in the government. Mr. Sullivan was reelected and qualified as governor of the state, May 31. and Levi Lincoln as lieutenant governor.3 Yet the federal- ists, after a severe struggle, succeeded in obtaining a small majority in both branches of the legislature ; and a series of resolutions was passed questioning the constitutionality of the June 2 and 7. embargo, and condemning it as an experiment both novel and dangerous, doubtful in its effects abroad, and full of mischief at home.4 Displeasure was likewise evinced at the course of -
nugatory and unavailing have a high crime to answer for to their injured country." John Q. Adams subse- quently moved an inquiry in the Senate, how soon the embargo might be repealed ; but the motion was re- jected. Before Congress adjourned, however, a law was passed, author- izing the president to suspend the embargo act, in the event of a peace between the belligerents of Europe, or " if such changes in their meas- ures affecting neutral commerce took place " as might "render that of the United States sufficiently safe ; " and "this law was passed," says Tucker, Life of Jefferson, ii. 265, " because some hope was then entertained that a peace between France and England would be effected by the intervention of Austria. An intimation had been given by Napoleon that France would not require England to renounce her maritime principles, nor would France
renounce hers, but the question might be passed over in silence."
1 Tucker's Life of Jefferson, ii. 260; Statesman's Manual, i. 259; Hildreth's U. S., 2d series, iii. 64. In speaking of Jefferson's vindication of himself, in his letter to Monroe, Mr. Tucker observes, Life of Jeffer- son, ii. 262, " he is careful not to say that he had no preference ; for it can scarcely be doubted that he thought Mr. Madison had prior claims to those of Mr. Monroe, if upon no other ground, at least upon that of sen- iority."
2 Tucker's Life of Jefferson, ii. 260, note ; Statesman's Manual, i. 260; Hildreth's U. S., 2d series, iii. 63.
3 Boston Palladium, June 3, 1808.
4 Boston Palladium for June 10, 1808 ; Hildreth's U. S., 2d series, iii. 76-78. These resolutions, offered by Mr. Wheaton, of Norton, were sub- stantially as follows : " Resolved,
360
MR. LLOYD CHOSEN SENATOR IN THE PLACE OF MR. ADAMS.
CHAP. Mr. Adams ; and, as his senatorial term was soon to expire, VIII. James Lloyd, an eminent merchant of Boston, was chosen in 1808. June 2. 1809. his place. Mr. Adams, upon this, was so much chagrined that he resigned his seat - assigning as his reason that he could Feb. not, after such a vote, consistently hold it longer. But the more vehement of the federal party doubted his sincerity, and exclaimed, with upraised hands, that "treachery was heredi- tary in the family." 1
That the citizens of Massachusetts have a natural, necessary, and imme- diate interest in the preservation and prosperity of commerce, navigation, and the fisheries; to the successful extension of which, under the late administration, they are, with the blessing of Providence, principally in- debted for the rapid improvement in agriculture and the arts, and for the unexampled increase of their domestic resources ; - That to secure protec- tion and encouragement to these most important and unalienable interests, was a primary motive for the acces- sion of this commonwealth to the constitution of the United States ; - That we therefore view with anxiety and alarm the operation of an em- bargo of an unprecedented extent and unlimited duration, by which not only foreign commerce is annihilated, but the most grievous restraints and em- barrassments imposed upon the inter- course between different states, and even between different parts of the same state; - That although a tem- porary embargo may be, on some oc- casions, expedient as a measure of precaution, and the right to impose it may be admitted as incident to the powers of the national government to regulate commerce, yet the power to create a permanent embargo upon foreign and inland commerce, which a majority of Congress cannot repeal against the consent of the president, was not, it is believed, contemplated by the framers of the constitution ; and the adoption of this measure, with a view to coerce foreign nations, is, in our estimation, a novel and dangerous
experiment, which discourages indus- try by destroying its reward, disturbs the natural relations of the citizens, is equally repugnant to the national honor and interest, and while its ef- fects in counteracting the oppressive policy of any other nation is at least doubtful, is pregnant with disastrous consequences to our own ; - That, while the true policy of the United States points to the cultivation of peace and amity with all nations, yet, if these blessings be unattainable by means consistent with national honor, the people of this commonwealth will be ever ready to sustain all privations, and to make every exertion requisite to support the dignity and enforce the reasonable pretensions of the nation ; and it being certain that no degree of forbearance and moderation will exempt neutral nations at all times from insult and aggression, and that the claims of military ambition can be satiated only by universal dominion, it is the duty of government to pre- pare for events which it may be im- possible to avert; - That the spirit and resources of the country are fully adequate to the protection of its mar- itime and territorial rights, and ought to be directed and employed in such preparations as the experience of ages demonstrates to be alone safe and effectual ; - We cannot, therefore, but deprecate a system of measures which, instead of providing for the defence of our ports and frontier by usual and obvious means, has impaired our naval force, and left us exposed to every invader."
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.