Слике страница
PDF
ePub

river, he made his way to the lodge of the chief called the Big Warrior. He explained his object, delivered his war talk, presented a bundle of sticks, gave him a piece of wampurn and a hatchet, all of which the Big Warrior took; when Tecumseh, reading the intentions and spirit of the Big Warrior, looked him in the eye, and pointing his finger toward his face, said: "Your blood is white-you have taken my talk, and the sticks, and the wampum, and the hatchet, but you do not mean to fight. I know the reason: you do not believe that the Great Spirit has sent me. You shall know. I leave Tuckhabatchee directly, and shall go straight to Detroit. When I arrive there, I will stamp on the ground with my foot, and shake down every house in Tuckhabatchee.' So saying, he turned and left the Big Warrior in utter astonishment, at both his manner and threat, and pursued his journey. The Indians were struck no less with his conduct, than was the Big Warrior, and began to dread the arrival of the day, when the threatened calamity would befall them. They met often, and talked over this matter, and watched the day carefully, to know the time when Tecumseh would reach Detroit. The morning they had fixed upon, as the period for his arrival, at last came. A mighty rumbling was heard. The Indians all ran out of their houses. The earth began to shake, when at last, sure enough, every house in Tuckhabatchee was shaken down. The exclamation was in every mouth, Te. cumseh has got to Detroit.' The effect was electrical. The message he had delivered to the Big Warrior was believed, and many of the Indians took their rifles and prepared for war."

The reader will not be surprised to learn, that an earthquake produced all this; but he will be, doubtless, that it should happen on the very day in which Tecumseh arrived at Detroit, and in exact fulfilment of his threat. It was the famous earthquake of NewMadrid, on the Mississippi.

CHAPTER XV.

Franklin's opinion of the peace of 1783-The United States a commercial rival of Great Britain-England attempts to cripple their growth by renewing an obsolete rule of 1756-Impressment of seamen-Americans sensitive upon the subject-Its manner of execution-The doctrine that a ship on the high seas is inviolable," denied by England-Certificates of nativity or " protections" given-Are disregarded -Our relations with France not the most friendly-Embargo-Non-intercourseAttack upon the Chesapeake-War, June 18, 1812-Intelligence of it received diffe. rently in different places-American army did not exceed five thousand men-Unprepared for war-Canada also unprepared-General Hull-Governor of Michigan— Afterward commander-in-chief of the Northwestern Army-Repairs to Ohio in April, 1812-Leaves Ohio for Detroit, June 1, 1812-Reaches the Miami of the lakes in the latter part of June-July 1st., sends a vessel to Detroit with invalids, baggage, etc.July 2nd., 1812, hears of the Declaration of War-Intelligence thereof received in Canada before-Vessel captured-General Hull reaches Detroit, July 5th, 1812July 6th, receives orders to commence offensive operations-July 12th, he crosses the Niagara--Issues a proclamation to the Inhabitants of Canada--Its effect-Malden-Attacks and defeats an advanced guard-A panic produced in the British garrison-Recrosses the river and evacuates Canada, August 8th, 1812-Mackinaw taken by the British, July 17, 1812-Intelligence thereof received by General Hull, July 26th-Captain Brush arrives on the River Raisin with supplies-Major Van Horne sent to his relief-The latter defeated-Colonel Miller sent afterwardBattle of Brownstown, August 9th, 1812, in which Colonel Miller defeats the British and Indians-Armistice between General Sir George Provost and General Dearborn, August 8th, 1812-General Brock reaches Malden with reinforcements, August 14th, 1812-Goes to Sandwich, opposite Detroit, on the following day-Demands the surrender of Detroit-Letter to General Hull-General Hull's answer-British cross the Niagara-Approach Detroit-Detroit surrenders-Its effect.

SOON after the peace of 1783, a person in conversation with Dr. Franklin observed, that he was glad "the war of Independence was over." "You mean, sir," said the doctor, "the war of the Revolution-the war of independence is yet to come." Those to whom the events of the late contest with England are familiar, can appreciate the above remark; strangers, however, to its origin and events, must read and reflect a little before they can appreciate its value.

An attempt on the part of England, without right, to exercise power over the United Colonies, first broke the ties of dependence, and severed the British empire; her illiberal policy toward the United States, weakened, afterward, the influence of affinity which true wisdom would have taught her to cherish, and rendered a people, attached to "their fatherland" by a thousand ties, alien for ever.

England, until the late war, never renounced entirely her views of subjugation. Force having been resorted to in vain, recourse was now had to policy. For several years subsequent to the peace of 1783, our affairs were unpromising. The confederation was too feeble to keep the States in unison. England saw the difficulty, and, influenced by her wishes, hoped, ere long, to see us divided and conquered. The seeds of dissension were sown, but gathered up by patriots before they had taken root; the elements of civil disorder were let loose, but hushed by a master-spirit to repose. England, having thus lost an opportunity to tamper with individual States, to foment difficulties, and govern by division, now changed her policy, and sought to repress the growth of our Republic, by throwing obstacles in her way.

The expansive power of freedom exalted, in a short time, the United States into a commercial rival of England; and the French Revolution made her, as such rival, formidable. England, to arrest American competition, revived a rule of 1756, considered by the whole of Europe a violation of the law of nations-a rule which prevented a neutral from enjoying any commerce which could not, at the same time, be open to the belligerent. In other words, an order "to permit no neutrals." Her proceedings in council of the 8th of January, 1793, became a source of great vexation; and her orders of the 6th of November, authorizing her cruizers to capture "all vessels on the high seas, laden with the produce of any of the colonies of France, or carrying provisions or supplies to or from said colonies," swept the greater part of our commerce from the ocean. The American merchants, without distinction of party, gave vent to their feelings in the strongest terms; the act was regarded as wicked as well as treacherous. The war of the Revolution had not been forgotten; that with the savages still raged, and the western posts were pertinaciously retained. Commercial restrictions, therefore, of the kind we have mentioned, in the then state of the public mind, were not calculated to engender harmony. Washington, however, was at the helm; he desired to stand aloof from European politics, and the influence of his name and character preserved us from the vortex to which we were tending. Jay's treaty, in 1794, sanctioned with reluctance, prolonged the truce, and averted, for a while, an appeal to arms.

The same abuses, however, were still continued; remonstrance after remonstrance was sent forth; and neither Washington, with all his fame, nor the elder Adams, with all his skill, could produce a change in her principles or her policy.

The violation of our commercial and maritime rights, was also accompanied by another subject of complaint, more vexatious than either; one on which the Americans have justly been sensitive. I allude now to the impressment of American seamen.

As England is "the only modern nation within the pale of civilization, at least of those who recognize the general maritime law, who does not consider the flag as protecting the person who sails under it, and as we

are the only people who, during peace, have been dragged from our ships on the high seas, by Christian nations, and condemned to servitude;" and as the question is still unsettled, after a bloody war between kindred people, of three years' continuance; and liable again to be renewed, whenever circumstances shall render the practice of it of any use to the former-it demands some further consideration.

England, in theory, has always pretended, that a person born within the realm became, of course, an English citizen, and could not expatriate himself, and become a citizen of another country; that she had a right, notwithstanding his naturalization elsewhere, to claim the services. of such a person, under any and every vicissitude. Her practice, however, has been otherwise. No nation in the world, during the last fifty years, has employed so many foreign seamen as England. By an act of Parliament, a person, by serving two years in the English navy, becomes ipso facto, naturalized, and acquires all the rights of an English subject. It will, therefore, be seen, that her principles and her practice are at variance. This frequently happens, not only to nations but to individuals, who, disregarding entirely the rules of right, adopt, as their basis of action, the rules of might, as has too often been the case with this "mistress of the seas."

The practice of impressment grew up from a small beginning; and, by improvident acquiescence on our part, without conceiving it possible, that it ever would assume so horrible a shape, became, and was in fact, an insult to the whole civilized world. The manner in which it was exercised even augmented its atrocity; and the climax of humiliation to which Americans were subjected, a century hence will scarcely be credited.

A lieutenant in the British navy, and sometimes even a midshipman, on boarding an American vessel, caused its crew to be mustered on deck, and selected such as suited his purpose. The good sailor was, of course, an Englishman, and therefore impressed; and the poor sailor an American. Voyages were thus frequently broken up, and the safety of American vessels thus endangered, for want of mariners to conduct them to their destined port.

At first, England claimed a right to search our merchantmen, for deserters from the public service of Britain; she next claimed a right to impress English seamen engaged on board our ships; and finally, that every person who could not prove on the spot, to the satisfaction of the boarding officer, that he was an American, should be carried into bondage; and, against his will, should be compelled to fight the battles of England, and to become the executioner of his friends and brethren, or to fall himself by their hands.

The insidious conduct of England, in relation to impressment, may, therefore, be compared with the approach of the serpent to our first mother, described by Milton.

England also asserted a right to search "neutral vessels for enemies'

goods." The doctrine laid down in the law of nations, "that a ship on the high seas is as inviolable as the territories of the nation at peace;" admitted by the whole of Europe as correct international law, and denied only by England, whose power on that element happened to predominate, was thus disregarded; and a principle adopted, which no other nation ever did, or ever can recognize, without a sacrifice of her independence. England might as well have claimed her subjects from our territories, as from our ships. Whatever may have been her right, to prevent the subjects of Great Britiain from quitting the land of their birth, or of punishing them for so doing, when their services were required at home, she certainly had no right to pursue them into our territory, or demand them from us, unless by virtue of express stipulations.

When she was pressed for a reason to justify her conduct, the only one she deigned to give was, that "she was contending for her own exist. ence," and must have men to man her thousand ships. During Washington's administration, as early as 1794, the British government was officially told: "That they might as well rob the American vessels of their goods, as drag the American seamen from their ships in the manner practiced by them." The subject became, at length, a theme of reprobation and remonstrance by every patriotic statesman in our country. Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Marshall, Jay, Pickering, King, and a host of others, all concurred. Our Government, instead of resisting the practice by force of arms, gave certificates of nativity, in common parlance known as "protections." And the American seaman was thus compelled to stoop to the humiliation, of carrying about on the high seas his papers;-as if a piece of paper would protect a seaman, when his country's flag had lost its efficacy. These, however, were shortly unavailing. They were torn in pieces by the petty officers to whom they were presented for examination, and their fragments scattered to the winds: England thus asserting, and maintaining the right, of dragging from underneath our flag, "every one who could not prove upon the spot, that he was not a British subject." Seven thousand American citizens were thus, it was said, at one time retained in the British service against their will. The number may have been exaggerated, and probably was; but if it was seven hundred, the principle is the same, and demanded relief or vengeance. Although war had not been declared, the feelings of the American people, from day to day, became more and more hostile.

Our relations, in the meantime, with France, were not of the friendliest kind. Her deportment was eccentric, lawless, and unstable. She was "a comet, threatening all nations." Our true wisdom was, therefore, to keep out of her way. On the ocean she was but little to be dreaded, and in no condition to execute her threats. England issued her Orders in Council: Napoleon, his Berlin and Milan Decrees, and the ocean soon presented the humiliating spectacle of "a traveller robbed, and the robbers quarrelling about the spoil." This, however, was called "re

« ПретходнаНастави »