Tweet
I have been reading "Six Frigates" by Ian Toll, an excellent, WAB-recommended book. I am somewhat familiar with the circumstances leading to the war of 1812 with Great Britain, as well as the Quasi-war with France, and the attacks on Tripoli by the infant U.S. Navy. One thing I was not aware of were the pernicious edicts by Boney that made U.S. merchant shipping as wary of France as they were of the Royal Navy around 1809 to 1811.
1n 1809, France viewed U.S. trade with suspicion, supposing it favored Great Britain, and supported their war effort. Napoleon issued the Rambouillet decree, authorizing siezure of U.S. merchant shipping in French controlled ports. From almost any point of view, this is more egregious that British searches for RN deserters, and there were thousands of them serving on U.S. ships.
If America had crafted a trade agreement with only Great Britain, and shut France out entirely, what would have been the result? My guess is that Great Britain's relationship with the U.S. would have altered tremendously. Trade between the U.S. and Great Britain would have expanded enormously, with much-needed raw materials, foodstuffs, and especially timber, flowing East, while the Royal Navy could have provided adequate protection for North Atlantic merchant shipping as well as hard currency and consumer goods to the U.S. More importantly, the feelings of mistrust and the general harassment would probably have ceased, averting the war of 1812.
In hindsight, we know that Napolean was defeated, but at the time, it would have been a gamble, with the possibility of Buonaparte astride Continental Europe, and both Great Britain and the U.S. partially strangled in terms of trade.
Thoughts? Why did the U.S. attempt an equal neutrality with both France and GB, and suffer the ire of both, rather than picking one or the other? Since the French fleet was bottled up at the time, and British cruisers regularly plied New England, the obvious choice would be to side with GB.
1n 1809, France viewed U.S. trade with suspicion, supposing it favored Great Britain, and supported their war effort. Napoleon issued the Rambouillet decree, authorizing siezure of U.S. merchant shipping in French controlled ports. From almost any point of view, this is more egregious that British searches for RN deserters, and there were thousands of them serving on U.S. ships.
If America had crafted a trade agreement with only Great Britain, and shut France out entirely, what would have been the result? My guess is that Great Britain's relationship with the U.S. would have altered tremendously. Trade between the U.S. and Great Britain would have expanded enormously, with much-needed raw materials, foodstuffs, and especially timber, flowing East, while the Royal Navy could have provided adequate protection for North Atlantic merchant shipping as well as hard currency and consumer goods to the U.S. More importantly, the feelings of mistrust and the general harassment would probably have ceased, averting the war of 1812.
In hindsight, we know that Napolean was defeated, but at the time, it would have been a gamble, with the possibility of Buonaparte astride Continental Europe, and both Great Britain and the U.S. partially strangled in terms of trade.
Thoughts? Why did the U.S. attempt an equal neutrality with both France and GB, and suffer the ire of both, rather than picking one or the other? Since the French fleet was bottled up at the time, and British cruisers regularly plied New England, the obvious choice would be to side with GB.
Comment