Primary+Documents+-+Ch.+9


 * Primary Documents - Ch. 9**


 * Thomas Jefferson, from First Inaugural Address (1801)** (Anthony)

1. Did Jefferson speak of continuity or change? Jefferson spoke of change, but more specifically change by means of improvements to a government he believed to be the "world's best hope." These changes consisted of improvements such as a well-disciplined militia, attempt to advocate peace with other nations instead of war, power of civil authority over military authority, frugality in the government, and the preservation and acceptance of different religions. Although he emphasizes positive change throughout most of his inaugural address, he also speaks of continuity in highlighting the success of the nation's government that have already occurred; he refers to the government as one that has "so far kept us free." 2. How did he define the president's powers and relationship with the legislative branch? He defines the relationship between the executive and legislative branches by ask the legislative branch for "indulgence for my own errors," meaning that he wants his power to be checked and his incorrect actions to be made correct by the legislative branch. 3. How did he define the federal government's power and responsibilities? He states that it is the Federal government's obligation to preserve the principles on which our nation was founded: justice for everyone, peace with foreign nations, states' rights, etc. He also indicates that the President's power is to be checked by the other branches. 4. Did he speak of or imply a belief in American exceptionalism? Yes, he implies a sense of American exceptionalism by stating that the American government was the "world's best hope," in addition to being the strongest government on earth. In Jefferson's opinion, it was the only one in which every man can have an active and effective role in his own government. 5. Were the sentiments expressed in this address in agreement with his earlier opinions (see Chapters 5 and 8)? Overall, Jefferson's statements in this address reflect his political opinions in earlier times. For example, he advocated the addition of the Bill of Rights to the Constitution, and his inaugural address puts an emphasis on the rights of individual American citizens and their state governments.


 * Meriwether Lewis and William Clark, Journals of Exploration (1804-1805)** (Magaziner)

1. Lewis and Clark wanted recognition, good relations, and assistance from the Mandan and the other local Native American tribes. What did these tribes want from the explorers in return?

What Lewis and Clarks wanted from their voyage out west was simple; they were to "inform the natives of the government's acquisition, establish friendly relations with them, and record their languages and ways; they were to make topographical and horticultural studies; and if possible, they were to find a viable trade route through the new territory. However, what the tribes wanted from Meriwether Lewis and William Clark was much simpler, the tribes wanted peace and protection. "the chief spoke: said he believed what we had told them, and that peace would be general, which not only have him satisfaction but all his people: they could now hunt without fear, and their women could work in the fields without looking every moment for the enemy; and put of their moccasins at night." The Indians get what they wanted, when one of the tribes' men was killed by an enemy tribe, Lewis and Clark take action. "One chief- The Big Man, a Cheyenne- said they now saw that what we had told them was the truth: that when we expected the enemies of their nation were coming to attack them, or had spilled their blood, we were ready to protect them, and kill those who would not listen to our good talk."

2. What customs--social, political, and/or military--did the explorers find to be noteworthy?

The explorers found many of the Native American (Indian) customs to be noteworthy. First, some Indian tribes attacked other Indian tribes for interacting with Lewis and Clark and the rest of the explorers. As a result, Lewis and Clark decided to try and assist the tribes. "One man was killed and two wounded... We thought it well to show disposition to aid and assist them against their enemies, particularly those who came in opposition to our councils." Next, the explorers explain that in the Native American culture smoking or giving tobacco to an individual is held to be a sign of trust or generosity. For example, when three Pawnee Indians come to say their tribe seeks trade relations, the chiefs give them tobacco for their efforts. Next, the explorers note the ability of the Indians to bear the cold whether. "Customs and habits of those people, have endured them to bear more cold them I thought it possible for man to ensure. In addition, the explorers note the way in which the Indians save their food to prepare for attacks and the summer. "Their corn and beans, &c., they keep for the summer and as a reserve in case of an attack..." Last, the explorers explain that in the Indian culture a man has the right to give his wife's favors to anyone he pleases and if she commits adultery he could kill her.

3. What do these notes reveal about both the subjects and the writers?

These notes reveal huge differences between both the Indians and explorers. The Indians lived a much more rural life, in which woman had no rights and finding food is hard. The explorers lived more rural lives, in which woman had some rights and food was much more easily obtained and pain tolerance was not nearly as high.

4. What do the entries reveal about intertribal relations in the area?

The entries reveal that intertribal relations in the area were hostile. The explorers note that "The Big Bellies and Wetersoons are at war with the Snake Indians and Sioux... The Mandans are at war with.. The Sioux." Peace among tribes was common and the explorers also note that enemy tribes would often attack small packs of hunters looking for food, killing their man and stealing their horses. "Five men of the Mandan nation, out hunting in a S.W. direction about eight leagues, were surprised by a large party of Sioux and Pawnees. One man was killed and two wounded with arrows, and 9 horses take; 4 of the Wetersoon nation were missing, and they expected to be attack by the Siouc, &c."

5. Why do you think such relations and conflicts were important to the explorers and their government?

Such hostile relations among different Indian tribes were important to the explorers and their government because it gave the explorers a situation to mediate. The explorer’s mediation among tribes lead certain tribes to depend upon the explorers, and resulted in cooperation from the Indians. Also, the Indian tribes wanted peace with the explorers rather then another enemy so the Indians were peaceful to the explorers rather then hostile.


 * Tecumseh, Appeal to the Choctaws and Chickasaws (1811)** (Morris)

1. Why does Tecumseh say the Native Americans must unite? What was the benefit of unity? Tecumseh believed the Americans were too strong to be defeated by a single tribe, "The whites are already nearly a match for us all united, and too strong for any one tribe alone to resist". He believed however, that through the cooperation of all the tribes, or a great number of tribes, the Americans could be resisted. 2. How did he use history to encourage the Choctaws and Chickasaws to join in resistance? Tecumseh names a number of formerly great tribes, the Narragansetts, the Pequod, the Mohawks, and the Pocanokets, that once ruled vast amounts of land but now are completely wiped out. He then says if remaining tribes do not unite this fate will repeat itself to them also. 3. How does race figure into his argument? Tecumseh uses race as a uniting tool to the Native Americans. He encourages the Chickasaws and Choctaws to unite with him, or else, he threatens, "The annihilation of our race is at hand". Also he tells the Chickasaws and Choctaws it is their duty as brothers to help us defeat this foe. 4. How does Tecumseh use both praise and insults to encourage the southern tribes into action? Tecumseh uses praise by saying the Chickasaws and Choctaws have a reputation of being brave fighters, but challenges them to prove that reputation against the Americans. Also Tecumseh insults the tribes by saying if they were ignorant enough or crazy enough to believe their rights and land will not be taken by the Americans, they deserve pity and should tremble at their ignorance.


 * James Madison, from Presidential Message to Congress (1 June 1812)** (Parks)

1. What were Madison's indictments against Great Britain? Madison's indictments against Great Britain are primarily based on violations of American jurisdiction. England was doing three main things: impressing american sailors into the British Navy, they harassed ships as they went in and out of American ports, and did not recognize America's neutral trade policy.

2. What appear to have been the most grievous injuries to the United States? Why? The most grievous injury was England's superior attitude. England treated America as if it was still property of the British Empire. All the violations of American sovereignty stemmed from this attitude.

3. Was there any echo of the Revolution's rhetoric or ideology in this message? James Madison writing contained Revolutionary rhetoric, but with new applications. The focus was no longer on independence. America was proud of its new independence and needed to show its power before the situation became a crisis. Madison uses words like "patriotic" and "free" to inspire congress to make their decision.

4. Was Madison asking for war? Madison asked congress for war, but in a tactful way. He leaves the decision to God's will and congress' opinions. He never directly asks for war but constantly implies that it is necessary.


 * Abigail Adams, from Letter to Mercy Otis Warren (December 1812)** (Saidman)

1. Why did Adams believe the war to be a just one? Abigail Adams believed that the war was just because it infringed on the rights of individual Americans. As Adams says in her letter, "we have our firesides, our comfortable habitations, our cities our churches, and our country to defend, our rights, privileges and independence to preserve...for these are we not justly contending?" 2. Would she have qualified as a War Hawk? Abigail Adams could not have qualified for a War Hawk even though she supports the war strongly. War Hawks were Democratic-Republicans from the Old Northwest and South. Adams although critical of Massachusetts in her letter, is still a Northeasterner and she is also a Federalist. 3. What did she think about the actions of Massachusetts? Adams did not approve of the actions of Massachusetts. Adams believed that Massachusetts was holding down the arm of Government, when it was raised for her defense. As Adams writes in the letter, "She [Massachusetts] has had much to complain of, as it respected a refusal of naval protection; yet that cannot justify her in paralyzing the arm of Government, when raised for her defense and that of the nation." 4. What does this letter reveal about nationalism versus sectionalism in the country? This letter reveals that Americans were split between nationalism and sectionalism as well. Taking the opposite side of her party, Adams explains how Massachusetts acted inappropriately and should have held herself back instead of interfering nationally.


 * from** **//Report and Resolutions of the Hartford Convention//** **(1815)** (Seeberger)

1. Why do you suppose both moderate and extremist Federalists praised this report?

Both moderate and extremist Federalists praised the report because it addressed issues important to both the moderates and the extremists. These issues included the creation of new states in the west, declarations of war and commercial relations with foreign nations and the embargo of American shipping. The states in the west tended to favor the Democratic-Republican party, and so both, the moderate and the extremist Federalists favored the policy of non-admission of new states, that would undermine the Federalists in the nation as a whole. The Hartfort Convention consisted of Federalist New England States, states whose economies were based on foreign trade, and so the embargo policy and the war with Great Britain, the biggest market for American merchants, explicitly hurt New England economy, and thus the Federalists.

2. What were the delegates grievances?

The grievances the delegates addressed during the convention were that in the United States, the appointment of offices would not be based on merit, the unconstitutional deprivement of judiciary authority and rights, the destruction of the balance of powers by creation of new states in the west, the easy admission as citizens of immigrants, the in the country existing hostility against Great Britain, subservient to public prejudice and the abuse of party powers by the Democratic-Republicans and the ruinous, for New England, commercial relations being used as instrument of war. They also feared, because the war was not at the best level for America, that the Federal government would, against the constitution, start conscribing people for the army.

3. How did these complaints illuminate the shifting dynamics of the nation?

4. What were the proposed solutions? Did these include radical amendment of the //Constitution//?

The solutions the Federalist supposed included, in order to strenghten the States to protect the people and the Constitution from the Federal Government's abuses of power, a series of amendments: They stated that the Representatives and direct taxes would have to be apportioned in the State, only respective to the free people, thus abolishing the 3/5- compromise, that no state should be admitted to the Union without a two thirds majority in both houses, it denied the right of congress to lay an embargo on any American ship for more than 60 days, that Congress was not athorized to interdict commerce with any foreign nations without a two thirds majority in both houses, that Congress was not to declare war on a nation without the two thirds majority in both houses, that no naturalized immigrant could hold any civil office, and finally that no person could be elected twice, nor could the president come from the same state two terms in succession.

Theses included radical amendment of the constitution, because it redefined the rights of the presidencies and redefined the powers of Congress.

5. Did any of the solutions suggest the empowerment of state government against the national government?

The Convention suggested that laws should be passed to empower the states to protect its citizens agains unconstitutional actions of the Federal Government, such as forcible drafts, conscriptions or impressments, all these not being athorized by the Constitiution. It also included a part of the tax income of the states to be included into a future defense of the state, thereby creating an own defensive obligation of the state. It also stated that the states would establish militia to form voluntary corps at "request of the governor of either of the other states", and thus putting the decision of deploying troops into the hands of the states, not in that of the Federal Government.


 * The** **//Pennsylvania Gazette//****, from Newspaper Accounts of the War of 1812 (August-September 1814) (Villamor) **

1. Was there any partisanship apparent in the reporting of these events?

Yes. When it was reported that the enemy was approaching, one account briefly mentioned that fighting the British, the enemy of the nation, will unite the Americans from arguments of party and opinion. Also, after Washington was captured, another account addressed officers to provide accommodations for the armies so that the they might perform their best in a battle unlike what had happened to the army in Washington.

2. How did government officials and civilian residents of Washington prepare for the attack?

The civilians were ordered to fled the city and public offices sent off books and furniture. General Winder burnt a bridge which crossed the Potomac and encamped near the area.

3. What reasons were given to explain why American forces could not hold the nation's capital against the British? Which do you believe to have been most significant ? Why?

The American forces were too small in number and badly supported to fight off the all picked men of the British forces. I think the lack of support for the American troops proved to be the most significant because it expressed the country's lack of unity.

4. How long did it take for the British to occupy the city, and what did they do in the process?

It took the British from August 17 to August 24 to capture Washington. They arrived on the 17th at the Bay then proceeded up the Potomac and marched to the Washington City.


 * from The Treaty of Ghent (December 1814)** (Curtis)

1. Was there anything in this treaty to suggest that "Mr. Madison's War" had been a "second war of independence"?

The Treaty of Ghent in no way implied that the war of 1812 was a “second revolution.” It referred to the United States and to Great Britain as two separate entities and included nothing regarding freedom from the rule of Great Britain.

2. Were the issues that started the war (See Madison's war message) resolved in the Treaty of Ghent?

The issues that started the war were not resolved in the Treaty of Ghent. The Treaty of Ghent simply restored the boundaries of both countries to where they were previous to the war and insisted on peace between the two countries and also the Indians.

3. What did the treaty do?

The Treaty of Ghent simply restored the boundaries of both countries to where they were previous to the war and insisted on peace between the two countries and also the Indians. It also included an article that stated that both countries would “use their best endeavors to accomplish so desirable an object.

4. Did he treaty change the relationship between the United States and Britain?

The Treaty of Ghent did not change the relationship between America and Britain. It included nothing regarding an increase of trade or any cooperatice actions whatsoever.

5. Was this a successful treaty ending a successful war?

While the Treaty of Ghent did not explicitly resolve the issues that started the war, it was successful in the sense that it ensured neither country was still eager for war. The war could also be considered successful due to the fact that it proved that America could defend itself and defeat a major world power such as Britain.