“His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and independent states, that he treats with them as such, and for himself, his heirs, and successors, relinquishes all claims to the government, propriety, and territorial rights of the same and every part thereof.”
– Article 1 of the Treaty of Paris (1783), which ended the American Revolution
Anecdote about the diplomacy of John Adams, during and after the American Revolution
In 1785, John Adams became the first American ambassador to meet with a British king. That monarch was King George the Third, who then remained somewhat unpopular in the American colonies. As was customary for ambassadors in this time, Adams approached the king and bowed three times. As Wikipedia puts it, Adams then “promised to do all that he could to restore friendship and cordiality between people separated by an ocean and [who] ‘have the same language, a similar religion and kindred blood.’ The king agreed and added that ‘while he had been the last to consent’ to American independence, he wished Adams to know that he had always done what he thought right and proper. He inquired, ‘There is an opinion, among some people, that you are not the most attached of all your countrymen, to the manners of France.’ Adams replied, ‘That opinion sir, is not mistaken, I must avow to your Majesty, I have no attachments but to my own country.’ George responded, ‘An honest man will never have any other.’” (Source: Their page on the “Diplomacy of John Adams”) John Adams had signed the peace treaty with Britain that ended the Revolutionary War. Later on, his son John Quincy Adams would sign the peace treaty with Britain that ended the War of 1812. Both tried to sort out some of the issues left over from the American Revolution – whether before, during, or after the War of 1812.
Naval engagement in our Quasi-War with France, 1799
The British were right to fight Napoleon, but they provoked America via impressment
I might briefly note here, in fairness to the British, that they were indeed right to fight against the threat posed by Napoleon’s France. That is, Napoleon was an avid expansionist, who posed something of a threat to the peace of Europe. For a while, Napoleon even threatened the United States, during the “Quasi-War” on the high seas – although he later reconciled with then-president John Adams despite this, when it became necessary for him to do so. Adams was indeed suspicious of the French, but nonetheless wanted to maintain the necessary peace with them. This was because fighting against the French would have been quite futile in his own time – and would be equally unwise today, I might add. Nonetheless, the British provocations against the United States … left the Americans little choice but to fight back against the British incursions. Specifically, the British were then forcing American sailors to join the Royal Navy – a policy known as “impressment.” This was a clear violation of Britain’s prior recognition of American independence (as quoted above). Indeed, it was clearly an act of war, which could not responsibly be ignored. But Jefferson nonetheless ignored these British provocations, and even tried to maintain American neutrality. Thus, he instituted an embargo against both the British and the French. But this instead hurt the American economy. Thus, Jefferson left this thorny problem for his successor James Madison to solve.
Chesapeake-Leopard affair, 1807 – an incident on the high seas that brought us into the war
Why the British wanted impressment, and wanted to limit America’s westward expansion
The solution was the “War of 1812,” sometimes known in the United States as the “Second American War of Independence.” This title may actually be accurate, since it involved some further threats to the sovereignty of the United States. For the British, it started out as just a way of getting some foreign conscripts from America. But, for the Americans … it was already a battle for survival. Thus, they uncomfortably allied with Napoleon’s France to defend their sovereignty once again. It’s true that the British actually stopped their impressment policies shortly after defeating Napoleon at Waterloo. It’s possible that this was indeed because the American conscripts were no longer needed by that point. Some British historians have claimed this – for example, in this documentary by PBS. Nonetheless, the British were holding their former colonies in utter contempt by this point, and could hardly have been trusted to find a sudden “respect” for American rights. At the very least, they wanted to hinder American expansion into the western frontier of North America. I’m not sure that they would have returned any of their territory to us, if the war had afforded them more success in acquiring it – for example, if they had won the Battle of New Orleans. Indeed, the British had even tried to create an Indian buffer state, in what is now the American Midwest. This was only narrowly averted by a well-timed letter from the Duke of Wellington, who wanted to reconcile with the Americans. This helped John Quincy Adams to negotiate the Treaty of Ghent with Britain in 1815. Future boundary disputes with British Canada might have gone a little differently, if the war had been a true triumph for the British.
The Duke of Wellington, who famously advocated a reconciliation with the Americans
During the War of 1812, both America and Canada ended up being invaded by the other
Many Canadians also viewed (and still view) the war … as a battle for their survival. They point to some invasions from the Americans as evidence of this. However, the Canadians were hardly the only ones to be invaded in this war. The British actually made it as far west (and south) as New Orleans (as mentioned above), even after the peace treaty had officially been signed. Although, in fairness, I should note that the news of this treaty had not yet reached either side in this area. Nonetheless, it is inevitable that two countries parked alongside each other, like America and Canada, would eventually have a couple of wars with each other at some point in their history. Technically, Canada was not yet a country during either of these conflicts. However, a distinctive Canadian identity was already being formed in this then-British province. This would later be brought to maturity, during Canada’s 1867 “Confederation” period. This gave Canada some degree of independence from Britain. What’s truly remarkable, though, about this Canadian-American relationship … is that there have been only two such wars on our now-long border. Moreover, it has since become one of the least guarded borders in the world. This is a testament to the degree of reconciliation between our two great peoples. Our relationship has obviously not been perfect, but there has never since been an actual shooting war between us.
American surrender of Detroit, August 1812 – part of an Anglo-Canadian invasion
The British were still considering a war with America, even as late as our Civil War
However, we did come close to such a shooting war, during the later American Civil War. Partly owing to the infamous Trent incident at sea, the British actually considered supporting the Confederacy in that war. This was partly owing to their appetite for Southern cotton, as I describe here. It was only the Emancipation Proclamation, and some crucial diplomacy by the Abraham Lincoln administration, that kept the British from intervening on the Confederate side of this war. These somewhat-ticklish negotiations affected the relationship between America and Britain, as well as the more local relationship between America and the Canadian colonies of Britain. In so many ways, I’m glad that these disputes were resolved peacefully. More about the later border negotiations between America and Canada, which were also resolved peacefully, in this post. But this war scare does show that the British still lacked respect for American rights, even as late as our Civil War. It’s even possible that the aforementioned Canadian boundary disputes were playing some role here. Whatever the cause, a final reconciliation was ultimately affected despite this. Perhaps partially because of the War of 1812, the British developed a more genuine respect for American rights. The British Empire soon reached its zenith under Queen Victoria, only to decline somewhat after the twentieth-century Suez Crisis. Meanwhile, the Americans went from being a vulnerable backwater … to a great world superpower (as I describe here). The Americans and the British, along with Commonwealth nations like Canada, would fight alongside each other in both world wars – and in some other wars since then. Thus, the English-speaking peoples now tend to be more or less on the same side today. In many ways, this is as it should be.
Trent affair (during our Civil War), 1861 – which almost caused yet another war with Britain
Conclusion: We were right to fight Britain in 1812, and equally right to reconcile later on
Our Founding Fathers, as you may know, fought two great conflicts against their mother country. Thus, one might have expected our Founding Fathers to become “ashamed” of their British heritage. But, ironically, our Founding Fathers actually remained proud of their British heritage, even after 1776. Specifically, they were influenced by British history, British laws, and British philosophers (as I show here). Even then, our Founding Fathers still thought of themselves as “culturally British.” I thus believe that they would have welcomed a genuine reconciliation with Britain in their own time. But the British did their best to make themselves unpopular here during the American Revolution. They also did their best to offend their former colonies during the War of 1812, by drafting these American sailors into the Royal Navy. Again, this was clearly an act of war, which could not responsibly be ignored. This is why I continue to believe that it was best for us to resist the British during both of these great conflicts. I also believe that it was best for us to eventually reconcile with them, as described above. Each nation has since become the most important ally of the other, as I show here. Two separate nations making peace was indeed the right choice. By contrast, staying as disparate provinces of the over-extended British Empire (to put it bluntly) would have been the wrong choice. It might give me some temporary unpopularity with my Canadian friends to say this, but we were indeed right to resist the British during the War of 1812. And, again, we have been equally right to become close friends since then, and bury the hatchet. Our past conflicts now haunt only historians – whether British, Canadian, American, or anything else. And, with some rare trade and diplomatic crises, we continue to be close friends to this day.
Footnote to this blog post:
Three days after the American bicentennial in 1976, President Gerald Ford welcomed Queen Elizabeth the Second to the United States of America. The queen responded to the president’s welcome as follows: “Our countries have a great deal in common. The early British settlers created here a society that owes much to its origins across the ocean. For nearly 170 years there was a formal constitutional link between us. Your Declaration of Independence broke that link, but it did not for long break our friendship.” (Source: Transcript)
She continued: “John Adams, America's first Ambassador, said to my ancestor, King George the Third, that it was his desire to help with the restoration of ‘the old good nature and the old good humor between our peoples.’ That restoration has long been made, and the links of language, tradition, and personal contact have maintained it.” (Source: Transcript) Later in that same speech, she added: “Mr. President, the British and American people are as close today as two peoples have ever been. We see you as our strong and trusted friend, and we believe that you, in turn, will find us as ready as ever to bear our full share in defending the values in which we both believe.” (Source: Transcript)
This, to me, shows the reconciliation which the British and the Americans have since enjoyed – and which, again, they should now continue to enjoy.
If you liked this post, you might also like:
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment