No outbreak of War of 1812?

[Roger II]

Going off Wikipedia:

So let's say the Orders in Council get repealed slightly earlier or Madison procrastinates on the DoW and the they get to the US in time? Does this prevent the outbreak of war or just delay it? Does that change if the outbreak is delayed by a more conciliatory British policy until Napoleon's defeat?

 

[JosephK]

Interesting questions and ones I’ve thought about off and on since I anticipate having to answer them if my series of novels makes it that far (from the 1787 PoD). I suppose one of the other questions that would need to be answered is just how significant a role domestic political pressures played.

Edit to add: Donald Hickey (The War of 1812: A Forgotten Conflict, p.42-43) suggests that it was not just the slow communication, but rather the lack of a definite and well-publicized change in policy toward the United States (as opposed to the “ad hoc” approach they took toward concessions).

 

[zaffre]

Going off Wikipedia:
View attachment 40566
So let's say the Orders in Council get repealed slightly earlier or Madison procrastinates on the DoW and the they get to the US in time? Does this prevent the outbreak of war or just delay it? Does that change if the outbreak is delayed by a more conciliatory British policy until Napoleon's defeat?

Having recently dived into all things Madison, yeah, I think getting rid of the Orders in Council does get rid of war. Macon's Bill Number 2 awkwardly nudged the US along a downward path to conflict, but given any real straw to clutch at - and repeal of the Orders in Council and Perceval being out of the picture is substantially more than a straw - Madison is going to gratefully accept it as a reason to not fight a conflict we are brutally unprepared for. Henry Clay et al. in Congress might be more gung ho but, as you allude to, Napoleon is on the downswing and once it becomes clear that (a) the UK will not be otherwise occupied (b) impressment is going away as an issue pretty damn soon, war is not going to be in the cards. It passes just like the last dozen war crises before it.

Forgettable as the War of 1812 is, this has loads of consequences - no career for Jackson, no rebuilding of the US military from the ground up with new officers that will lead it for the next 50 years - but looked at from a broader perspective, I think it is about as close as you can get to the essence of an 'avoidable' war.

 

[Redolegna]

Napoleon is on the downswing

That much is probably not obvious to all until at least several months into the invasion which is otherwise near simultaneous with the outbreak of war.

On the rest, @Ciclavex?

 

[Ciclavex]

Having recently dived into all things Madison, yeah, I think getting rid of the Orders in Council does get rid of war. Macon's Bill Number 2 awkwardly nudged the US along a downward path to conflict, but given any real straw to clutch at - and repeal of the Orders in Council and Perceval being out of the picture is substantially more than a straw - Madison is going to gratefully accept it as a reason to not fight a conflict we are brutally unprepared for. Henry Clay et al. in Congress might be more gung ho but, as you allude to, Napoleon is on the downswing and once it becomes clear that (a) the UK will not be otherwise occupied (b) impressment is going away as an issue pretty damn soon, war is not going to be in the cards. It passes just like the last dozen war crises before it.

Forgettable as the War of 1812 is, this has loads of consequences - no career for Jackson, no rebuilding of the US military from the ground up with new officers that will lead it for the next 50 years - but looked at from a broader perspective, I think it is about as close as you can get to the essence of an 'avoidable' war.

I think it's true that the war could likely have been averted in this way, but there likely would have been further war scares afterward if no war starts then, and those war scares could escalate just as this one did. There was enormous support for a war with the U.K. in Congress and excuses were plentiful; averting the War of 1812 doesn't necessarily avert war in the period altogether, though as the Napoleonic Wars draw toward their conclusion, it does become increasingly less likely.

But, broadly, there were interests - including Madison himself - who would probably have clutched the cancellation of the Orders-in-Council as a reason to avoid war in this instance and then maybe they continue to find reasons to avoid war up until the "opportunity" to attack the U.K. while it's distracted is practically for all intents and purposes gone.

 

[Roger II]

I think it's true that the war could likely have been averted in this way, but there likely would have been further war scares afterward if no war starts then, and those war scares could escalate just as this one did. There was enormous support for a war with the U.K. in Congress and excuses were plentiful; averting the War of 1812 doesn't necessarily avert war in the period altogether, though as the Napoleonic Wars draw toward their conclusion, it does become increasingly less likely.

But, broadly, there were interests - including Madison himself - who would probably have clutched the cancellation of the Orders-in-Council as a reason to avoid war in this instance and then maybe they continue to find reasons to avoid war up until the "opportunity" to attack the U.K. while it's distracted is practically for all intents and purposes gone.

Right-I also wonder how long-term tensions over Canada/British-French trade disputes/backing of natives would have panned out given averting the War here and/or generally averting tensions escalating until after the Napoleonic Wars end.