Battle Of New Orleans: Its Real Meaning - free ebook by Reau E. (Reau Estes) Folk

BATTLE OF NEW ORLEANS ITS REAL MEANING

Exposure of Untruth Being Taught Young America Concerning the Second Most Important Military Event in the Life of the Republic. By Reau E. Folk , Chairman Tennessee Commission of Research as to the True Value of the Victory at New Orleans....

16 minute read

Read Chapter

DEDICATION

This Volume Is Dedicated To: The State of Tennessee, which authorized the Investigation; The Ladies’ Hermitage Association, charged with primary duty of preserving the home of Andrew Jackson, whose military genius, courage, and patriotism saved the nation in the second War of Independence; The Descendants of the Soldiers who fought at New Orleans, whose memory should always be cherished; and The noble band of School Teachers everywhere, whose high impulse is to impart the truth. REAU E. FOLK. Na

33 minute read

Read Chapter

COMMISSION REPORT

Below is given report to the Governor of Tennessee by the author of this volume as chairman of the authorized Tennessee Committee of Research. Attached are letters of concurrence from two of his associate members. The remaining member is out of the country. Documents have been sent to him, but at the time of this printing sufficient time has not elapsed to hear from him. In a later edition his comments will be given. NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE To His Excellency, The Honorable Hill McAllister, Governor

7 minute read

Read Chapter

Louisiana Domain.

The Louisiana spoken of in this volume refers to the great Louisiana Domain purchased by President Jefferson from France in 1803. That original Domain now comprehends all or most of sixteen states, as follows: Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington and Wyoming....

14 minute read

Read Chapter

CHAPTER I. An Interview Containing an Outline.

It was the 8th of January. I sat down for lunch at a small table in a Nashville hotel. Presently the head waiter conducted to a seat opposite me a young man, seemingly about 22 years of age. He was a handsome, wholesome looking young man, and had an air of self-reliance. He impressed me at first sight as being a typical young American; at any rate he was decidedly attractive to the narrator, whose grey head could but reveal his advanced years. While awaiting the lunches, a casual remark about th

8 minute read

Read Chapter

CHAPTER II. Containing a High Commission and an Indictment.

There is no nobler calling than that of the school teachers of America, who are ministering to the instruction and development of the future citizens and leaders of the Republic. These teachers are bound to be deeply concerned when they find that through school histories furnished them, they have been imparting a falsehood about an important event in United States history—the Battle of New Orleans, fought January 8, 1815. These school histories minimize the value of the battle, describing it as

3 minute read

Read Chapter

CHAPTER III. What School Histories Teach.

Here are the extracts from the Tennessee authorized school Histories: School History of Tennessee: S. E. Scates, page 225: “Though the battle resulted in great victory for the Americans, it was sad indeed that so many brave men lost their lives at New Orleans quite uselessly. At Ghent, Belgium, a treaty of peace for the war of 1812 had been signed Christmas Eve, 1814. Because messages travelled so slowly, by sailing vessels, news of peace did not reach New Orleans until after the fighting had ta

3 minute read

Read Chapter

CHAPTER IV. Falsehood Shown by the Records.

The unanimity of view presented by these extracts from Tennessee adopted histories, gives justification for the assumption that the same view obtains throughout the United States. In partial extenuation of school historians and of Textbook Commissions, it may be said that they have followed the lead of most generally recognized historians. But any trusting follower of the pack leaders could have ascertained, without much trouble, that the battle of New Orleans was NOT fought after peace. It occu

3 minute read

Read Chapter

CHAPTER V. Background—Louisiana.

The great domain, christened Louisiana, was taken over by La Salle in 1682, in the name of France. It remained under French dominion until 1763, when, as a result of French-English wars, France retired from the New World. It seemed inevitable that Louisiana, great unexplored trans-river territory, would fall into English hands. But France ceded Louisiana to Spain, then still a world power. In 1800 Napoleon Bonaparte caused Spain to re-cede Louisiana to France. In 1803 Bonaparte sold Louisiana to

4 minute read

Read Chapter

CHAPTER VI. Background—Impressment.

The impressment policy of the English Government applied to the new American country, was very galling. Under that policy American ships were stopped on the high seas, and seamen taken from them under guise of being British deserters. Many good Americans were forced into British service. The young victim country protested. In 1801 the impressment practice fell off and seemingly was abandoned. (See Elson’s History of the U. S., pages 246 to 252, Vol. 2.) A quotation is given from Elson, page 247,

2 minute read

Read Chapter

CHAPTER VII. Negotiations at Ghent.

A separate chapter is devoted to the joint conference at Ghent because therein is shown the subtle, diplomatically concealed, purpose of the then English Government. The record of the proceedings of the conference, in order to be fully understood, should be read in the light of the afterwards revealed fact that, at the same time these negotiations were being conducted, the expedition against Louisiana was secretly planned and dispatched. Things that are puzzling in the making often become clear

7 minute read

Read Chapter

CHAPTER VIII. Negotiations at Ghent—Continued.

We will now return to the parleys at Ghent. The British continued to insist on the Uti Possidetis as a basis of a Peace Treaty, but proposed that it be “subject to such modifications as mutual convenience may be found to require.” In a letter to the British Commissioners, dated October 18th, Lord Bathurst, quoted by Updyke (page 288), cited several points on which mutual accommodations might be had; but Louisiana was not one of the points. For if it had been there would have seemingly been no us

9 minute read

Read Chapter

CHAPTER IX. Washington, the First of 1815.

One of the most thrilling incidents in our history is the reception by the country of the news of the Battle of New Orleans. It was theatrically acclaimed, with almost delirious joy, sharply contrasting with the condition of deep discouragement and gloom it suddenly dissipated. Seldom has a victory had more dramatic setting. It is well for us who enjoy the rich blessings of the present, occasionally to read of the trials and tribulations through which our forebears struggled, that they might han

5 minute read

Read Chapter

CHAPTER X. But What If the Issue of the Battle Had Been Different?

As stated in the last chapter , the Peace Treaty was speedily and joyfully ratified. But what if the issue of the battle had been different? The chronology of the Treaty may here be given: Signed at Ghent, on the 24th day of December, 1814, by the Peace Commissioners representing the two countries; Ratified for England by the Prince Regent on December 31st, 1814. Reached Washington the night of February 14th, 1815; Sent by President Madison to the Senate February 15th; Ratification advised by th

1 minute read

Read Chapter

CHAPTER XI. Testimony From General Jackson Himself.

In presenting this case against the school historians, which he feels has already been made, to the satisfaction of any impartial reader, the writer has refrained from using much confirmatory material in order to be as brief as possible. But in the history of Andrew Jackson, written by A. C. Buell, and published in 1904, there occurs illuminating data highly apropos in this connection. It may be remarked that Buell is not a favorite of some historians. Buell was distinctly not pro-English. In ch

6 minute read

Read Chapter

CHAPTER XII. Captain Garland’s Testimony On the Spot.

Captain Henry Garland was one of Jackson’s young officers at New Orleans. In view of the brilliance and stirring eloquence of a speech made by him, which I am about to give, from the same chapter heretofore quoted from Buell, it will be interesting to give a digest of Buell’s description of him: He was born at Nantes, France, his father a merchant of Norfolk, Virginia, residing there as Commercial Agent for American importing houses. He received his education in French schools. Coming to America

6 minute read

Read Chapter

CHAPTER XIII. Recapitulation.

The writer, in these pages, has shown by what must be conceded on all sides, irrefragable evidence that school histories are in error in saying the Battle of New Orleans was fought after peace, and was therefore a needless battle. The writer has also shown by evidence he considers conclusive, that England held as invalid the title of the United States to Louisiana, acquired by sale from Bonaparte to the United States in 1803; that England deliberately planned the conquest of Louisiana (with the

3 minute read

Read Chapter

WORDING OF THE TREATY OF GHENT.

In addition to the references cited on pages 18 and 30 as to the full text of the Treaty of Ghent reference may be given to volume compiled by Hunter Miller entitled: “Treaties and Other International Acts of the United States of America.” (See volume 2, pages 574-584.)...

16 minute read

Read Chapter

ENGLISH CRITICISM OF U. S. TITLE TO LOUISIANA.

The third and fourth paragraphs of the note of the British Commissioners to the American Commissioners at Ghent October 8, 1814, read as follows: In adverting for this purpose to the acquisition of Louisiana, the undersigned must observe that the instrument by which the consent of His Catholic Majesty is alleged to have been given to the cession of it has never been made public. His Catholic Majesty was no party to the treaty by which the cession was made, and if any sanction has been subsequent

1 minute read

Read Chapter

THE UTI POSSIDETIS PROPOSAL.

The note of the British Commissioners, October 21, 1814, contained the following paragraph: In regard to other boundaries, the American plenipotentiaries, in their note of August 24, appeared in some measure to object to the propositions then made by the undersigned, as not being on the basis of uti possidetis. The undersigned are willing to treat on that basis, subject to such modifications as mutual convenience may be found to require; and they trust that the American plenipotentiaries will sh

58 minute read

Read Chapter

TIME OF EFFECTIVENESS OF TREATY.

On November 10, 1814, the American Commissioners submitted a projet of a treaty containing in article one the statement that “All hostilities, both by sea and land, shall immediately cease,” and in article fifteen the statement that “This treaty, when the same shall have been ratified on both sides, and the respective ratifications mutually exchanged, shall be binding upon both parties, and the ratifications shall be exchanged at ______ in the space of ______ months from this day, or sooner if p

1 minute read

Read Chapter

PASSAMAQUODDY ISLANDS.

(Author’s note: There was towards the end of the negotiations at Ghent much and voluminous correspondence, mainly on the part of the British, concerning the question involved in the Passamaquoddy Islands situation; it was magnified, admittedly, out of proportion to the subject involved, especially in view of the fact that the final disposition of these fisheries was relegated to a civil commission to meet after peace. The British, while conceding the relative insignificance of the islands, maint

35 minute read

Read Chapter

AS TO WORDING IN MUTUAL RESTORATION CLAUSE.

The American projet of November 10 contained also the proposition that all territory, places, and possessions “taken by either party from the other during the war, or which may be taken after the signing of this treaty, shall be restored.” The projet returned on November 26 by the British Commissioners was altered to read all territory, places, and possessions, “belonging to either party and taken by the other during the war, or which may be taken after the signing of this treaty, shall be resto

1 minute read

Read Chapter