Madison's+Abandonment

toc =Questions= Write a paragraph or so that states your question, explains why you chose that question, and what other questions you considered but decided against. Why did Madison break isolation? What forced Madison into doing so when he did? Did Madison have any other option(s)? We chose this question(s) because it covers just about everything we needed to know to find out why Madison left isolation and not just pieces of it but to glue the pieces together to make sure they stick. __**Primary Document:**__ ( Picture of...)

=Gathering and Evaluating Evidence= Start by explaining where you began and what that turned up. Share the struggles you faced in this stage. As we began we did not know much about the "War of 1812." As we went through the historical process, we found that Then share with us the documents used. Describe how you considered source, context, corroboration, etc. What questions and answers came and went in this stage? [|Link To Document 1] The War Hawks As it became clear that peaceable coercion would not ease the hostilities, Madison faced increasing pressure from War Hawks within Congress. Led by South Carolina’s John C. Calhoun and Kentucky’s Henry Clay, the War Hawks resented the post-embargo recession that had plagued southern and western regions from 1808 to 1810, and advocated war rather than disgraceful terms of peace. They also hoped that, through war, the U.S. would win some western and southwestern territories, annex Canada in order to eliminate the British and Native American threat along the frontier, and open up new lands to settlement. The War Hawks feared that the British were recruiting Native Americans along the Canadian border to fight American settlers. Heightening these fears, a Shawnee chief,Tecumseh, and his brother “The Prophet” attempted to unite a number of tribes in Ohio and Indiana under an anti-white government. In response, future president William Henry Harrison, then governor of the Indiana Territory, crushed the Shawnees in the 1811 Battle of Tippecanoe, though his own forces also suffered heavy losses. Almost 30 years later, Harrison would run for president on his popularity as an Indian fighter, using the campaign slogan, “Tippecanoe and Tyler too!” (John Tyler ran as his vice president.) Although the Battle of Tippecanoe represented an American victory over the Shawnees, it did not end the threat of Anglo-Indian alliance—Tecumseh and the Shawnees later allied with British troops during the War of 1812. The SAT II U.S. History rarely asks specific questions about war facts, such as the names of battles and generals. It is more important to know what caused the war and how it ended. In June 1812, convinced of the inevitability of war against Britain, Madison sent a message to Congress enumerating British violations of U.S. neutrality rights, including the presence of British ships in American waters and the impressment of American sailors. In a conciliatory measure, Britain repealed the Orders in Council, its aggressive naval policy, but it was too late. Congress had already passed a declaration of war, and the War Hawks pushed for full engagement. The American forces, however, were outmatched by British forces, in part because the Republicans had drastically cut military expenditures and programs, leaving the U.S. forces seriously underfunded and under-trained. Nonetheless, the war ended in stalemate, mainly because the British were also occupied with events in Europe. The signing of the Treaty of Ghent in December 1814 ended the war and restored the status quo. The treaty did not mention free trade or sailor’s rights. Two weeks after the signing of Treaty of Ghent, but before news of the treaty had reached America, American troops won a decisive victory in the Battle of New Orleans. General Andrew Jackson’s troops defended the city, killing more than 2,000 British troops while losing only thirteen men. The timing of the Battle of New Orleans inspired the popular misconception that the U.S. had won the war and had forced the British to surrender and sign the treaty. Even without officially “winning” the war, the U.S. did succeed in protecting itself against one of the world’s premier powers, for which reason the War of 1812 has been called the “second war of independence. [|Link To Document 2] When Britain and France went to war in 1793, the U.S. was caught in the middle. The 1778 treaty of alliance with France was still in effect, yet most of the new country's trade was with Britain. War with Britain seemed imminent in 1794, as the British seized hundreds of American ships that were trading with French colonies. Madison believed that Britain was weak and the United States was strong, and that a trade war with Britain, although risking a real war by the British government, probably would succeed, and would allow Americans to assert their independence fully. Great Britain, he charged, "has bound us in commercial manacles, and very nearly defeated the object of our independence. As Varg explains, Madison discounted the much more powerful British army and navy for "her interests can be wounded almost mortally, while ours are invulnerable." The British West Indies, Madison maintained, could not live without American foodstuffs, but Americans could easily do without British manufactures. This faith led him to the conclusion "that it is in our power, in a very short time, to supply all the tonnage necessary for our own commerce".[52] However, George Washington avoided a trade war and instead secured friendly trade relations with Britain through the Jay Treaty of 1794. Madison threw his energies into fighting the Treaty—his mobilization of grassroots support helped form the First Party System. He failed in both the Senate and House, and the Jay Treaty led to ten years of prosperous trade with Britain (and anger on the part of France leading to the Quasi-War). All across the United States, voters divided for and against the Treaty and other key issues, and thus became either Federalists or Jeffersonian Republicans. ====*By 1809 the Federalist party was no longer competitive outside a few strongholds. Some former members (such as John Quincy Adams, Madison's ambassador to Russia) had joined Madison's Republican party.[72] Though one party appeared to dominate, it had begun to split into rival factions, which would later form the basis of the modern party system. In particular, with hostilities against Britain appearing increasingly likely, factions in favor of and against war with Britain formed in Congress.[73] The predominant faction, the "War Hawks," were led by House Speaker Henry Clay. When war finally did break out, the war effort was led by the War Hawks in Congress under Clay at least as much as it was by Madison; this accorded with the president's preference for checks and balances.==== ====Napoleon had won a decisive victory at the Battle of Austerlitz in 1805, and as a consequence Europe remained mostly at peace for the next few years. Congress repealed Jefferson's embargo shortly before Madison became president.[74] America's new"non intercourse" policy was to trade with all countries including France and Britain if restrictions on shipping were removed.[75]Madison's diplomatic efforts in April 1809, although initially promising, to get the British to withdraw the Orders in Council were rejected by British Foreign Secretary George Canning.[76] By August 1809, diplomatic relations with Britain deteriorated as minister David Erskine was withdrawn and replaced by "hatchet man" Francis James Jackson; Madison however, resisted calls for war.[77] In his Political Observations from April 20, 1795 Madison had stated:==== ====Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.[78]==== ====After Jackson accused Madison of duplicity with Erskine, Madison had Jackson barred from the State Department and sent packing to Boston.[79] Madison during his first state of the Union address in November 1809, asked Congress for advice and alternatives concerning British-American trade crisis and to prepare for war. By Spring 1810, Madison was specifically asking Congress for more appropriations to increase the Army and Navy in preparation for war with Britain.[80] Together with the effects of European peace, the United States economy began to recover early in Madison's presidency. By the time Madison was standing for reelection, the Peninsular War in Spain had spread, while at the same time Napoleon invaded Russia, and the entire European continent was once again embroiled in war.==== [[@http://books.google.com/books?id=N4ER-N1xqjQC&pg=PT558&lpg=PT558&dq=When+Britain+and+France+went+to+war+in+1793,+the+U.S.+was+caught+in+the+middle.+The+1778+treaty+of+alliance+with+France+was+still+in+effect,+yet+most+of+the+new+country%27s+trade+was+with+Britain.+War+with+Britain+seemed+imminent+in+1794,+as+the+British+seized+hundreds+of+American+ships+that+were+trading+with+French+colonies.+Madison+believed+that+Britain+was+weak+and+the+United+States+was+strong,+and+that+a+trade+war+with+Britain,+although+risking+a+real+war+by+the+British+government,+probably+would+succeed,+and+would+allow+Americans+to+assert+their+independence+fully.+Great+Britain,+he+charged,+%22has+bound+us+in+commercial+manacles,+and+very+nearly+defeated+the+object+of+our+independence.&source=bl&ots=KPxmYa5VHV&sig=YoZY4c-N1oxmLuIcUAG7k2zjORM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vZ0LU7SHGumQyAGfzIDACA&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=When%20Britain%20and%20France%20went%20to%20war%20in%201793%2C%20the%20U.S.%20was%20caught%20in%20the%20middle.%20The%201778%20treaty%20of%20alliance%20with%20France%20was%20still%20in%20effect%2C%20yet%20most%20of%20the%20new%20country%27s%20trade%20was%20with%20Britain.%20War%20with%20Britain%20seemed%20imminent%20in%201794%2C%20as%20the%20British%20seized%20hundreds%20of%20American%20ships%20that%20were%20trading%20with%20French%20colonies.%20Madison%20believed%20that%20Britain%20was%20weak%20and%20the%20United%20States%20was%20strong%2C%20and%20that%20a%20trade%20war%20with%20Britain%2C%20although%20risking%20a%20real%20war%20by%20the%20British%20government%2C%20probably%20would%20succeed%2C%20and%20would%20allow%20Americans%20to%20assert%20their%20independence%20fully.%20Great%20Britain%2C%20he%20charged%2C%20%22has%20bound%20us%20in%20commercial%20manacles%2C%20and%20very%20nearly%20defeated%20the%20object%20of%20our%20independence.&f=false|Link to Document 3]] Questions: Why did Madison break isolation? What forced Madison into doing so when he did? Did Madison have any other option(s)? Answers: 1) Madison broke isolation because he felt Britain was weak. Madison felt like the country could overrule Britain because Madison thought the British were weak. But come to find out Britain were not as weak as he thought. Therefore leading into “The War of 1812”. 2) Madison offered France and Great Britain a deal if you agree to stop your attacks on American ships, the United States will stop trading with your enemy. Napoleon agreed to Madison’s offer. At the same time, Napoleon gave his navy secret orders to continue to take possession of American ships headed for British docks. Madison, who desperately wanted to believe Napoleon’s broken promise, cut off all trade with Great Britain. Meanwhile, the British continued taking ships and impressing American sailors. Madison saw only one way to force Great Britain to respect American rights. He began to think about releasing George Washington’s policy of isolationism and going to war with Great Britain.
 * DOCUMENT 1:**
 * He tried a new approach to protecting Americans at sea. He offered France and Great Britain a deal: if you agree to cease [cease: to stop doing something] your attacks on American ships, the United States will stop trading with your enemy. Napoleon promptly agreed to Madison’s offer. At the same time, Napoleon gave his navy secret orders to continue seizing American ships headed for British ports. Madison, who desperately wanted to believe Napoleon’s false promise, cut off all trade with Great Britain Meanwhile, the British continued seizing ships and impressing American sailors. Madison saw only one way to force Great Britain to respect American rights. He began to think about abandoning George Washington’s policy of isolationism and going to war with Great Britain. New Englanders and Federalists generally opposed going to war. Merchants in New England knew that war would mean a blockade [blockade: a closing off of an area to keep people or supplies from going in or out] of their ports by the British navy. They preferred to take their chances with the troubles at sea . Many people in the South and to the west, however, supported going to war. Like all Americans, they resented Great Britain’s policy of impressing U.S. sailors. They also accused the British of stirring up trouble among Indians in the states and territories to the northwest. Trouble with the Indians was growing as settlers moved into the Ohio and Mississippi valleys and pushed Indians off their lands. Two Shawnee Indians—a chief named Tecumseh and his brother, the Prophet—tried to fight back by uniting Indians along the Mississippi River into one great Indian nation. On November 7, 1811, Shawnee warriors fought against a militia force led by Indiana governor William Henry Harrison in the Battle of Tippecanoe Creek. Harrison defeated the Indian forces. After the battle, however, Harrison’s men discovered that the Indians were armed with British guns. The Shawnee leader Tecumseh united American Indians in an attempt to halt the advance of white settlers onto Indian lands. Library of Congress Americans were outraged. Several young congressmen from the South and West, including Henry Clay of Kentucky and John C. Calhoun of South Carolina, were so eager for war with Great Britain that they were nicknamed “War Hawks.” They argued that to make the northwestern frontier safe for settlers, the United States needed to drive the British out of Canada. Once that was done, Canada could be added to the United States. Losses at sea, national pride, and a desire to make the frontier safe for settlement all contributed to the reasons for war. Still, Madison hesitated. Was the nation strong enough to launch the arrows of war? Or should he hold tightly to the olive branch of peace.
 * American Isolationism: 1776-1900. Up to the time of the American Revolution the English colonists in North America, remote though they were from England, had no concept of isolation. They regarded involvement in Great Britain's wars with European states and colonies as an inevitable dispensation of fate, never to be questioned. It took Tom Paine, a liberal English isolationist and recent immigrant to the colonies, to awaken them to the idea that one of the advantages of independence was separation from Britain's wars and quarrels with other peoples. "Any submission to or dependence upon Great Britain," Paine reminded his American readers in Common Sense (1776), "tends directly to involve this country in European wars and quarrels and sets us at variance with nations who would otherwise seek our friendship and against whom we have neither anger nor complaint."American diplomacy at the outset of the Revolution was so set against alliances that the Continental Congress resisted any commitment to France binding the two nations not to make a separate peace. Nevertheless, the need for military assistance overcame the revulsion to an alliance, without which the War of Independence would not have succeeded. The Franco-American alliance of 1778 entangled the United States in France's commitments with other alh'es (notably Spain, Convention of Aranjuez, 1779) during both the peace negotiations of 1782 and the wars of the French Revolution, and this experience disillusioned American statesmen after independence had been achieved.President George Washington in his classic Farewell Address (1796), drafted by Alexander Hamilton, counseled his fellow countrymen to steer clear of foreign entanglements: "The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. . . . Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities."President Thomas Jefferson echoed this advice in his inaugural address of 1801: ". . . peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." President James Monroe re-echoed the policy of Washington and Jefferson in his famous message to Congress of December 2, 1823, known since 1852 as the Monroe Doctrine. Recalling the two separate spheres of polity laid down for the New World and the Old World, he declared: "In the wars of the European powers, in matters relating to themselves, we have never taken part, nor does it comport with our policy, so to do. It is only when our rights are invaded, or seriously menaced that we resent injuries, or make preparations for our defense."The United States had considered its neutral rights invaded by France in 1796-1798 and had prepared for defense to the extent of a quasi war with that former ally; but it is noteworthy that in that emergency both Congress and President John Adams rejected any idea of an alliance with France's enemy Great Britain. In the years 1806-1812 the United States had considered its sovereign rights invaded by British maritime measures and the practice of impressing seamen, and had gone to war finally in the hope of conquering Canada, and also Florida which belonged to Britain's ally Spain. But the student of diplomatic isolation must note that President James Madison's government rejected any idea of an alliance with Britain's deadly enemy France under Emperor Napoleon I.The isolationist foreign policy of the United States was remarkably successful throughout the 19th century and well into the 20th. Its success can be explained by the following geopolitical circumstances and factors: (1) the country occupied a detached and distant position; (2) Europe's distresses were America's advantage, leaving the Continental powers little energy for adventures in North America; and (3) Canada was in effect a hostage for good relations with Great Britain, the only power that was in a position to make war on the United States. Isolation was successful, in short, because of the foolproof geopolitical situation of the United States. That it was fool-proof is attested by the fact that it was able to indulge in a great civil war without any permanent harm to its foreign policy.
 * DOCUMENT 2:**
 * The War of 1812**
 * DOCUMENT 3:**

We used close reading, corroborating, sourcing, and contextualizing by.... __**Sourcing- **__ First Document: Mr. Furgione Purpose: The purpose was to inform readers about the War of 1812. Second Documents: Spark Life Audience: Those who need to expand there knowledge about the War of 1812. Third Document: Mobile Reference __** Contextualizing: **__ Time: About the War of 1812 Place of the documents creation: Enlisted above after the documents in blue. ( The link ) =__**Interpretation**__= __**What did you find?**__ We found that... All of the secondary sources we found were similar. There was very few differences. Although, we found out that America declared the war and eventually the war was complete. Many factors contributed to the war. Causing a very large amount of violence and disturbance. The war hawks wanted war and the federalist did not. British seized American ships was a factor that contributed the war. Napoleon cheated out on a deal that he made with America. Him cheating out on that deal sent America into the "great" decision of war. They considered the British liars and fools. Why would anyone want to fight with America? That was not made clear until the very end, when they spoke and declared war. The British wanted to look superior to everyone, so countries would want to use them for help and the British would have allies and countries that would have their back in time of need. My point of view from the British's side is that they wanted to prove that a government of a different kind... Not like America's, was just as worthy as America's. They eventually proved themselves and the countries around them that they made a foolish act and should have stuck to their word. __**How do you feel about your conclusion?**__ I feel that my conclusion would make sense in the eye's of the British and America. British wanted to be superior. America had one thing in mind.... The people. __**Was your conclusion surprising?**__ At first I thought my conclusion made no sense at all... But that was because I was thinking about what would make sense before I did the historic process. After I did the historic process it all made sense. I can not judge what happened.. I can just view what happened through my own eyes. Madison broke isolation because he felt Britain was weak. Madison felt like the country could overrule Britain because Madison thought the British were weak. But come to find out Britain were not as weak as he thought. Therefore leading into “The War of 1812”. This is a close conclusion to why Jefferson broke isolation. This conclusion was so much different from what we expected we expected Jefferson to be cowardly pushed into the decision but yet now we believe it was a choice out of cockiness and selfishness.
 * Sourcing: consider the author, purpose, and audience
 * Contextualizing: consider the time and place of the document's creation
 * Close reading: carefully reading and considering the language and meaning of tone and word selection
 * Corroborating: considering how each document agrees and disagrees with other documents, and determine why.
 * __Corroborating:__** The documents agree, although they do have some differences. Some go further into what lead up to the war and others give a brief description. The the one that seemed to go the furthest into description about the causes of the war was **Document 1.**