The author of this primary source is Hezekiah Niles, a Republican Party supporter, editor and proprietor of a noteworthy newspaper in Baltimore, Niles’ Weekly Register. The editor lived through the tumultuous period of the early 1800s in America. His views are largely based on personal analysis of the events of his time that he observed and wrote about. As the editor of a newspaper termed as “influential” it is likely his views reached many people at the time. Despite his political affiliation, the author can be said to be a credible source. His position as an editor of a significant paper perhaps meant he had an in-depth knowledge of the politics of the time. However, his view should only be regarded as personal. Also, regarding his political affiliation, the subject of his writing and perhaps his views can be understood to reflect those of the official policies of the Republican Party.
The purpose of this document is to defend the war by the ruling Republicans against Great Britain in American territories and show how the Federalists were impeding the success of this war. Considering that the document was published in an important newspaper, its main target was the readers. A large proportion of these readers probably were republican supporters. In addition, such information could also have been targeted at antagonists of the war- Federalists and their supporters-perhaps to give them a different view of the war. The author could have wanted to justify the declaration of war by the Republicans and win the backing and sympathy of the American public. He tries to portray the war policies of the ruling regime as a necessary act of self-defense to protect “life, liberty, and property.” He states that this was in response to the British blockade of American ports and the invasion of American territories by British troops.
From the document, it is learned that the Republicans supported the war while the Federalists and their supporters did not. Republicans like Niles argue the war was necessary to counter British aggressions. Being the governing party, the Republican regime was obligated to protect the welfare of its people against a vengeful and overambitious enemy-Great Britain. The Republicans declared war against Great Britain to bring to an end the British blockade of American ports and prevent British troops from occupying American territories. The Republicans were not pleased with the stands taken by the Federalists in the war. They claimed Federalists were not providing the kind of support expected of them. They believe the federalists had the moral duty to support their government and country. Instead, their actions were placing the American government at greater risk of losing the war.
The author of the primary source claims the Federalists and their supporters had withheld funds needed by the government treasury to fund the war. This had resulted in the government failing to secure loans, pay, and recruit more soldiers. He specifically blames Federalists supporters such as the merchants of New England who despite being endowed with monetary capital “refused [to extend] aid to the [government] and used their trade and power to further “depress the national credit.” ”Another allegation is that the Federalist in Congress had also been voting in favor of secession. The author warns that such a divisive stance was hurting the government’s efforts in the war and was largely to blame for the prolonging of the war. The author’s view of the Federalists is further evident in his concluding remarks whereby he accuses them of being agents of Great Britain working to destabilize and undermine the Republican government. The author reiterates these actions of Federalists are to blame for the protracted war and are poised to eventually destroy the country.
Being a Republican himself, it is possible that Niles’s outlook of the war may have been carefully aligned to those of the Republican Party and therefore biased against the Federalists. By taking a partisan and narrow approach to the war, the author failed to bring out the real enemy-Great Britain-the government was fighting and the real cause of the war. A possible assumption about the document is that Niles’s views represent those of the Republican Party. However, this has not been categorically stated. Could he simply, through his “influential “paper, be a mere Republican Party mouthpiece? The Author levels many unsubstantiated accusations against the Federalists although he acknowledges it is their right, just as is theirs, to take whichever stands in such a matter.
However, just like in any hot political matter, such potential bias is expected. In this regard, it does not significantly limit the source. To overcome such biased views and perspectives, the author could have also pointed out other factors impeding the government’s success in the war instead of laying the blame squarely on the Federalists. This might have led to a broad understanding of the war. It might also have been objective to get the Federalist’s view of the war for purposes of balanced analysis. However, to appreciate the above, the bipartisan nature of American politics needs to be taken into account in examining the opposing views of each party.
References
- James A. Henretta, Rebecca Edwards, and Robert O. Self, introduction to “A Republican Defends the War,” by Hezekiah Niles, in America’s History ,7th ed. By James A. Henretta, Rebecca Edwards, and Robert O.Self (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2011).