| August 27 |  |
Editor says, was the War of 1812 Thomas Jefferson's fault or was it inevitable? Please note that the opinions expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of the author(s).
| Share this Article on: |  Facebook |  Twitter |
In 1806, the compromised reality of the American Revolution was thrown into sharp contrast - whilst President James Monroe's High Representative William Pinkney conducted negotiations in London to renew the Jay Treaty, his predecessor, the "philantropic cock" Thomas Jefferson was across the English Channel enjoying Parisian Society with his common law mixed race wife, Sally Hemings.
Philanthropic Cock by Ed, Scott Palter, Raymond Speer and Eric LippsUnderstanding that the infant republic needed at least two decades of peace in order to survive, George Washington had risked his reputation as a patriot by approving the original ten-year treaty with Great Britain. Now, more important than a simple renewal was the need to resolve differences over the issue of impressment of American sailors from US ships and neutral trading rights. Because in acquiesing to American independence, it was now clear that Great Britain's cynical ploy was to give away the cake whilst keeping the cream.
Agreement seemed possible if not likely, because the British Prime Minister Lord Grenville and his "Ministry of All the Talents" believed that the US Navy was partly manned by British deserters who were desperately needed to fight Napoleon. Accordingly, Grenville ordered Lord Holland and Lord Auckland to cut a deal with Pinkney. Trouble was, that whilst President James Monroe approved the treaty, the US Senate rejected it, and the result was the War of 1812.
The political crisis created by the Senates rejection might of course been avoided had Thomas Jefferson served a second term, because he would never have approved the treaty in the first place. However he had claimed to be exhausted by the complexities of the Louisiana Purchase and the misbehavior of Aaron Burr.
In reality, Jefferson was hugely frustrated with the development of the American revolution which had become a more of a worldly struggle for survival than the building of the egalitarian society that he had dreamt of. In fact, the American Revolution had stopped, and there was little to interest a mental giant in business as usual.
Of course Jefferson's frustration had begun at the very outset. Not only had his bold anti-slavery statement been disgracefully removed from the Declaration of Independence, he had resigned from Washington's government to spend more time with Hemings, and later faced the scandal of this affair in the mainstream press during his political comeback.
But in a larger sense, Jefferson wanted the American Revolution to have the transformative energy of its French equivalent. Having served as a diplomat in Paris, he had experienced the freedom of living with Hemings in a way not possible in the States. Soon after Monroe's inauguration, Jefferson and Hemings sold up Montecello, freed his slaves and left America forever.
Without knowing it, Jefferson had started the African-American Revolution which ironically, was a transformative process more attuned to his own thinking.
Entry posted by Todayinah Editor
© Today in Alternate History, 2004-.Story Tags
Permalinks: Post, Day. Browse Thread: Alternate Nations Source: Wikipedia Labels: Thomas Jefferson, America, James Monroe, William Pickney, Sally Hemings. Editor says, From Wikipedia ~ "the negotiations were begun on 27 August 1806, and the treaty was signed on 31 December 1806. Monroe and Pinkney knew they had fallen short of their goals; indeed, when President Jefferson received the treaty in March of 1807, he did not even bother submitting it to the United States Senate for ratification. This failure to resolve differences over the issue of impressment and neutral trading rights contributed to the coming of the War of 1812".
~ I'm not sure that there were enough blacks in the US at that time to get anything like an "African-American Revolution" going.
Comment from Peter Hebert on Facebook: War of 1812 was the result of Madison refusing to renew the charter for a central bank. Rothschild in the City of London was pissed. After the war, the U.S. had a change of mind. And, you thought it was over sailors gone AWOL I bet.
~ At the time of the Revolution, there were a half-million blacks in the U.S.--out of a total population of less than three million.
Numbers, however, would have been less important than their absolute powerlessness at the time, to say nothing of white social attitudes. It's unlikely that Jefferson would have dared take Hemings as his wife, and doubtful such a marriage would even have been legal at the time in the U.S. (mixed-race marriages remained illegal well into the twentieth century in many U.S. states).
~ I'm sorry, but that title sounds wrong on so many levels... :D
~ Jefferson's views on blacks were pretty much what most whites had at the time. In some states but not Virginia a person of colour could be reclassified White or be declared white enough by a court of law to be allowed to marry a white person. But I doubt Jefferson would have declared for his concubine due to the politics of the time. Whether Sally Hemmings could be called a Placeee, or Slave Wife or Concubine is debatable. We certainly know of a number of men of Jefferson's station who had such relationships. Certainly it would influence race relations somewhat though not by much. We need only look to the experiences of a Colenal Johnson, who is attributed to be the slayer of Tecumseh, who kept a mulatto concubine and had two daughters by her. His efforts on their behalf cost him the Vice presidency. His white relatives actually went to court and had it declared that he had no legal children so they could claim his assets after he died. No dought if Jefferson were to declare himself for his concubine, he would have suffered a similar fate.
~ As for America's relations with Britain, British arrogance set things the way they went. War was ineviatable. Perhaps without Jefferson America might have maintained or built up its navy to be really formidable and dangerous to Britain's commerce to really really hurt them. Jefferson's peace policies of fleet reduction and economic Boycott was a disaster. A few more warships with captains willing to push them to their limits against the arrogant John Bull might have got results. If Chesapeak had pulverised Leapard, Britain might get the message.
~ Absent Jefferson why does the Senate not approve the treaty. The coastal states did not want war. They were doing too well on European trade. The predominant warhawks in OTL were Westerners [land lust for Canada and Florida, conflicts with British supplied Indians] plus ardent Jeffersonians. If Monroe is running the party the the coastal loyalists vote for the treaty.
© Today in Alternate History, 2013-. All characters appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
