Information to Users

INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy subm itted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. Bell & Howell Information and Learning 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arijor, Ml 48106-1346 USA UMI 800-521-0600 This dissortstloB has been j ( miczoflhned exactly as received 6 7*2538 I SKEEN, Carl Edward, 1937- I JOHN ARMSTRONG AND THE ROLE OF THE SECRETARY OF WAR IN THE WAR OF 1812. The Ohio State University, Fh.D., 1966 History, modem University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan :) Copyright by Carl Edvard Skeen j 1967 I NOTE TO USERS Page(s) not included in the original manuscript are unavailable from the author or university. The manuscript was microfilmed as received. 301 This reproduction is the best copy available. UMI JOHN ARMSTRONG AND THE ROLE OF THE SECRETARY OF WAR IN THE WAR OF 1812 DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Carl Edward Skeen, B.S. Ed., M.A. ******* The Ohio State University 1966 Approved by A w i s e r Department of History VITA July 28, 1937 Born - Williams Mountain, West Virginia 1959 .... B.S. Ed., Ohio University, Athens, Ohio 1960 .... M.Ao, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Cfaio 1963-1966. Graduate Assistant, Teaching Assistant, Depart ment of History, The Ohio State University, Columbus, (Alio PUBLICATIONS "Jefferson and the West, 1798-1808." Number 7. Papers on the War of 1812 in the Old Northwest. Anthony Wayne Parkway Board. Columbus, Ohio, 1960 FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: History Colonial History. Dr. Harry L. Coles Early National History. Dr. Harry L. Coles Latin American History. Dr. John J. TePaske Middle Eastern History. Dr. Sydney N. Fisher Modern English History. Dr. Philip P. Poirier 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page VITA .......................................................... ii INTRODUCTION .................................................. 1 Notes for Introduction................... 6 CHAPTER I. AEMSTROSG'S EARLY CAREER TO HIS APPOINTMENT AS SECRETARY OF «AR ................................. 8 Notes for Chapter 1 ............................ 35 II. ADMINISTRATIF AND ORGANIZATION OF THE WAR DEPARTMENT . ................................. 41 Notes for Chapter I I .......................... 73 III. POLITICS AND ARMSTRFG'S CONCEPT OF HIS OFFICE . 81 Notes for Chapter III.......................... 113 / IV. WAR DEPARTMENT AND THE WAR IN THE NORTHWEST. 119 Notes for Chapter IV.. ...................... 163 V. WAR IN THE NORTH— 1813........................ 171 Notes for Chapter V ............................ 212 VI. WAR IN THE NFTH— 1814......................... 218 Notes for Chapter V I .......................... 242 VII. THE WAR DEPARTMENT AND THE SO U T H ................... 245 Notes for Chapter VII .......................... 271 VIII, THE FALL OF WASHINGTON ....................... 275 Notes for Chapter VIII ................... 302 CONCLUS I F .................................................... 307 BIBLIOGRAPHY....................... 314 ill INTRODUCTION The public career of John Armstrong (1758-1843) spanned the critical years from the Revolutionary War through the War of 1812. In the Revolutionary War he rose to the rank of major, served as an aide-de-camp to General Gates, and participated in the victory over General Burgoyne at Saratoga. Near the end of the war, while the army was in camp at Newburgh, New York, Armstrong wrote two anonymous letters which for a time threatened to disrupt the orderly transition of the soldiers back to civilian life. He called upon them not to disband until paid, and only through the intervention of General Washington was the issue resolved without incident. The Newburgh letters gained for their author the reputation of an intriguer, and Armstrong continued throughout his life to exercise his caustic pen to attack political enemies and engage in polemical diatribes against those who raised his ire. Although widely mistrusted he became in turn a representative to the Congress under the Articles of Confed eration, United States Senator from New York, minister to France during the exciting years of Napoleon's glory (1804-1810), and finally Secretary of War during the War of 1812. Because of the burning of Washington by the British in 1814, for which Armstrong was blamed, and because of other failures during the war, he was forced to resign shortly before the war ended. He never again held a public office although he lived until 1843. 1 This study devotes the primary emphasis to Armstrong's role as Secretary of War. This was his most inçortant service, but it has been a rather neglected aspect in the studies of the War of 1812. As Secretary of War, Armstrong not only had the vast and important task of organizing the armies and providing their supplies, he also devised the plans of campaign, transmitted them to the commanders, and in one case went to the front to superintend the execution of his plans. His conduct, of course, had a tremendous bearing on the manner in which the war was waged as well as upon its outcome. Historians writing on the War of 1812 in recent years have emphasized causes,^ and military histories of the war have, quite naturally, focused their attention on the more dramatic events on the 2 battlefield. Except for the general administrative study of Leonard 3 D. White, which has a few chapters devoted to the War Department during the years 1801-1829, no recent study has been made of the administration of the office. There is no specific study which deals with the development of the War Department during this war — the first fought under the Constitution. This study, however, will cover only the administration of John Armstrong whose tenure was from February, 1813, to September, 1814. This period, although preceded by Hull's surrender of Detroit, and followed by Jackson's victory at New Orleans, nevertheless, encompasses nearly all of the important events of the war. Armstrong's performance as Secretary of War, as noted above, has never been thoroughly studied. The most extensive coverage of his activities is in the multi-volume work of Henry Adams on the 4 administrations of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. His treatment of Armstrong is generally sympathetic, in part, one suspects, because of his bias against the Virginia Presidents, and Armstrong was at odds with the Virginians most of his career. Although they appointed him to positions of trust and responsibility, his relations with them were strained at best, and at worst, amounted to open hostility, usually with the initiative being on Armstrong's part. Madison's most recent biographer, Irving Brant,^ on the other hand, largely condemns Armstrong's conduct of the office. Brant dis plays, however, an obvious bias in favor of his subject, and makes little attempt to assess objectively Armstrong's role. Other historians likewise have followed generally one of these two views of Armstrong, with the majority adhering to an unfavorable view of his conduct. He remains today, what he was in his own lifetime, a very controversial figure. There is, therefore, a need for a balanced appraisal of Armstrong, as well as further study of his administration as Secretary of War. It is hoped this study will contribute to ful filling this need. Armstrong is today an obscure figure, but he was by no means an obscure personage in his own day. Not only did he occupy important positions in the Government, he was counted by some, particularly by his chief rival, James Monroe, as a potential presi dential candidate for 1816. He was from the important state of New York, and had his experience in the War Department been more fortunate. he might have become the focal point of anti-Virginia sentiment which characterized an important segment of the Republican party, Armstrong’s experience was not fortunate, however, and thus he can, at best, be counted as only an important minor figure of his era. There is no study dealing specifically with the career of John Arm strong,^ In part this may be attributed to the lack of a collection 8 of private letters, which presumably were destroyed by fire, and the private letters which remain are widely scattered and relatively rare. This study consequently is based chiefly on the official correspondence of the War Department, which is quite voluminous, and is deposited in the National Archives, This is admittedly not completely satisfactory, for the cold, formal, official documents do not often reveal the motivation nor the process by which the policy was made. The few extant private letters of Armstrong indicate that the loss of his correspondence is particularly unfortunate. Not only do they reveal a colorful, aggressive, opinionated individual, but are also quite illuminating with respect to the reasons for his policies. The purpose of this study is to evaluate Armstrong's policies, and the events of the war will be noted only with respect to these policies.

Load more