The Chesapeake Leopard Incident

The Chesapeake Leopard Incident

       From 1775-1783 the Americans fought in unison for their independence from Britain. The United States was born when it's independence was officially granted by the Treaty of Paris, which was signed on September 3rd, 1783. However, in 1807, twenty-four years later, The Chesapeake Leopard Incident took place. In short: the HMS Leopard ( a British warship ), fired 3 broadsides at the USS Chesapeake ( a US warship ) because they claimed that four of their men had ran off to the American ship. Consequently, eighteen Americans were wounded and three were killed. 

      The Chesapeake definitely made the right choice in having been determined o fight because, first of all, the British had absolutely no business right off the coast of Virginia. If the Americans had been free of British rule for nearly twenty-five years, with what intentions would Britain send a WARship to the United States? They should not have given up four sailors because, even if it had been to avoid any fight with Britain, it had not been the Americans' fault that BRITISH sailors decided to abandon the BRISTISH warship. It would have made a great difference had the incident occurred farther our at sea because then it would not be easily implied that the British had malicious intentions; however, having it occurred only 10 miles off the coast of Virginia, implies that the British only wanted one thing: war. This incident could and could not have been a significant cause for war. Yes, it could have been a reasonable cause for war simply because Britain implied that they wanted war by bringing a warship so close to the US. However, by going to war with Britain yet again, the US would be putting it's newly-gained independence at stake. If the Chesapeake ship had been more militarily prepare then maybe they should have been the first to fire broadsides an hopefully prevent the 18 casualties and 3 deaths. If the US had been more economically stable and ha decided to declare war with Britain then money would be less of an issue and they would not have been left with a debt ( or as great of a debt ). 

      If the British had been impressing or kidnapping American sailors up and down the eastern sea board since the end of the revolution then that would be a justifiable enough cause for the US to have declared war. If Britain was convinced to fight the US for FOUR sailors, then it would be reasonable for the US to fight for copious sailors. It would make a huge difference if the British had still not abandoned the forts they occupied on the Mississippi Rover since the French and Indian War, which ended in 1763! Having gained independence from the British 25 years earlier, it was far beyond the time in which the British should have abandoned the US. The British DID NOT have the right to demand the return of their sailors if they had abandoned ships and joined the American navy, this is true for 3 reasons. 1) the British were not in an area to have any rights (since the Treaty of Paris defined borders and the United State's independance. 2) life aboard British ships was so miserable that it became known as a floating hell. 3) if the sailors CHOSE to run off to an American ship, then it had been their own decision. If the sailors decided to return to the British ships then it should be their own decision whether or not they wanted to actually go back with Britain. Since it was up to the fugitives as to what they did on any ship they were aboard, then the American navy captain should not be held responsible for harboring fugitives. Overall, this incident was not worth going to war for. However, it was worth some fighting simply because the British had absolutely no reason to send a warship to the US.