Was Federalist Criticism of Madison Unjust?

Faults of the Federalists:  (continued)

7.  The Erskine Arrangement Revisited

To recap:  The Federalists accused Jefferson and Madison of being influenced by the French.  This accusation was disturbing.  The atrocities of the French Revolution were a recent memory.  Carey pointed out that when David Erskine, the British minister to the United States, negotiated with President Madison, they reached an agreement.  The Federalists praised Madison and wined and dined him in Washington. Unfortunately Erskine ignored instructions from his superiors.  The British recalled him, and rejected his agreement with Madison.

The Federalists turned on Madison.  After the British rejected the Erskine Arrangement, “[the Federalists] were unanimous in their abuse of [Madison] for this very arrangement.” [1]

Carey used documents to counter their arguments.  He reprinted the correspondence between David Erskine, the British envoy, and Robert Smith, Secretary of State.

On April 17, 1809, Erskine wrote to Smith offering the United States “on an equal footing with all other belligerents” and “honourable reparation” for the British attack on the Chesapeake.  Erskine also mentioned the Non-intercourse Act stating the “…terms of satisfaction and reparation…in the same spirit of conciliasion.”  Smith responded that Madison accepted the letter, and would consider the offer when its promises were fulfilled. [2]

One day later, April 18, 1809, Erskine replied to Smith.   The British would send an envoy extraordinary to negotiate a treaty.  If the United States would renew trade with Britain, the British would “withdraw their Orders in Council” of January and November 1807.  That day, Smith replied if the British sent a special envoy to negotiate a treaty, and withdraw its Orders in Council, the United States would end the Non-intercourse Act.  It would resume trade with Great Britain.[3]

The next day, April 19, 1809, Erskine wrote “I am authorized to declare, that his majesty’s orders in council of January and November 1807, have been withdrawn…on the 10^th day of June next.”  Smith replied that President Madison would begin trade with Britain on June 10, 1809.[4]

Carey included James Madison’s proclamation, issued that day.  It announced that with British withdrawal of the Orders in Council, the United States, in the thirty-third year of its independence, would resume trade with Great Britain on June 10, 1809.[5]

Next, Carey summarized the eulogies of the Federalists, reprinting quotations from politicians and newspaper editors:

“For bringing about this state of things, I yield my hearty approbation to the president of the United States; and I believe that when none of us could see the end of our troubles, the President was secretly conducting us to the late happy results.”[6]

                                                           Barent Gardenier
New York Federalist in the House of Representatives

“The government of Great Britain is accused of treachery, and it is said she never will make a treaty or behave honourably and fairly towards this county…The reconciliation with England is a bitter pill to many of our democrats.”[7]

                                                         Federal Republican                                        

Once the British had rejected the Erskine Arrangement the Federalists claimed that Madison’s cabinet knew all along that Erskine had not followed his instructions “taking advantage of his ignorance and inexperience.” The Federalists did not mention the British had violated a contract.  Instead they “turned the tide of public indignation against Mr. Madison.”[8]

If Erskine had no instructions, or went beyond them, Carey argued, the provisions of the arrangement were beneficial to England.  Commerce with Britain was restored.  The British made reparations for the Chesapeake incident.  They repealed their Orders in Council.  Commerce with France was prohibited.

Carey  reprinted some of the scathing criticisms from the Federalist newspapers following the British rejection of Erskine’s Arrangement:

“For our part, we have had but one opinion from the commencement of this mysterious affair—and we have made bold to express it.  It is, that Mr. Erskine acted contrary to his instructions—and that the secretary Smith knew what these instructions were.”

                                                          Federal Republican

Carey argued the Non-intercourse Act put Britain on an equal footing with France.  That is why Erskine was willing to negotiate.

“[Non-intercourse] is cowardly; for it is a base attempt to bring on a war with Great Britain—It is FRENCH in every feature. —It is intended as a measure of hostility against Great Britain.[10]

                                                          Boston Repertory

Next:  Who Acted with More Virtue, the Democratic-Republicans or the Federalists?   

Look for it Monday, April  29, 2013