100% found this document useful (13 votes)

149 views59 pages

Instant Download Readings From Programming With C++ 1st Edition Kyla Mcmullen - Ebook PDF PDF All Chapters

eBook

Uploaded by

karyafayzh

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

100% found this document useful (13 votes)

149 views59 pages

Instant Download Readings From Programming With C++ 1st Edition Kyla Mcmullen - Ebook PDF PDF All Chapters

eBook

Uploaded by

karyafayzh

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 59

Full download ebook at ebooksecure.

com

Readings from Programming with C++ 1st Edition

Kyla Mcmullen - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/readings-from-programming-
with-c-ebook-pdf-2/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWLOAD EBOOK

Download more ebook from https://ebooksecure.com

More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Readings from Programming with C++ 1st Edition Kyla

Mcmullen - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/readings-from-programming-with-
c-ebook-pdf/

Programming With STM32: Getting Started With the Nucleo

Board and C/C++ - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/programming-with-stm32-getting-
started-with-the-nucleo-board-and-c-c-ebook-pdf/

(eBook PDF) Programming, Problem Solving and

Abstraction with C

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-programming-problem-
solving-and-abstraction-with-c/

Programming in C 1st Edition - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/programming-in-c-ebook-pdf/
(eBook PDF) C++ Programming: From Problem Analysis to
Program Design 7th

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-c-programming-from-
problem-analysis-to-program-design-7th/

(Original PDF) C++ Programming From Problem Analysis to

Program Design 8th

http://ebooksecure.com/product/original-pdf-c-programming-from-
problem-analysis-to-program-design-8th/

C++ Programming: From Problem Analysis to Program

Design 8th Edition Edition D.S. Malik - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/c-programming-from-problem-
analysis-to-program-design-ebook-pdf/

Programming and Problem Solving with Python 1st Edition

- eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/programming-and-problem-solving-
with-python-ebook-pdf/

(eBook PDF) Starting Out with C++ from Control

Structures to Objects 9th Edition

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-starting-out-with-c-
from-control-structures-to-objects-9th-edition/
Programming with

C++ KYLA McMULLEN

Elizabeth matthews
June Jamrich Parsons

Australia • Brazil • Canada • Mexico • Singapore • United Kingdom • United States

Important Notice: Media content referenced within the product description or the product
text may not be available in the eBook version.

Associate Product Manager: Tran Pham For product information and technology assistance, contact us at
Cengage Customer & Sales Support, 1-800-354-9706
Product Assistant: Tom Benedetto
or support.cengage.com.
Learning Designer: Mary Convertino

Senior Content Manager: Maria Garguilo For permission to use material from this text or product, submit all requests
online at www.cengage.com/permissions.
Digital Delivery Lead: David O’Connor

Technical Editor: John Freitas Library of Congress Control Number: 2020922802

Developmental Editor: Lisa Ruffolo ISBN: 978-0-357-63775-3

Vice President, Marketing – Science, Technology,

Cengage
& Math: Jason Sakos
200 Pier 4 Boulevard
Senior Director, Marketing: Michele McTighe Boston, MA 02210
USA
Marketing Manager: Cassie L. Cloutier

Marketing Development Manager: Cengage is a leading provider of customized learning solutions with
Samantha Best employees residing in nearly 40 different countries and sales in more than
125 countries around the world. Find your local representative at
Product Specialist: Mackenzie Paine
www.cengage.com.
IP Analyst: Ashley Maynard
To learn more about Cengage platforms and services, register or access
IP Project Manager: Cassidie Parker your online learning solution, or purchase materials for your course, visit
www.cengage.com.
Production Service: SPi Global
Notice to the Reader
Designer: Erin Griffin Publisher does not warrant or guarantee any of the products described

Cover Image Source: echo3005/ShutterStock.com herein or perform any independent analysis in connection with any of the
product information contained herein. Publisher does not assume, and
expressly disclaims, any obligation to obtain and include information other
than that provided to it by the manufacturer. The reader is expressly warned
to consider and adopt all safety precautions that might be indicated by the
activities described herein and to avoid all potential hazards. By following
the instructions contained herein, the reader willingly assumes all risks in
connection with such instructions. The publisher makes no representations or
warranties of any kind, including but not limited to, the warranties of fitness
for particular purpose or merchantability, nor are any such representations
implied with respect to the material set forth herein, and the publisher takes
no responsibility with respect to such material. The publisher shall not be
liable for any special, consequential, or exemplary damages resulting, in
whole or part, from the readers’ use of, or reliance upon, this material.

Printed in Mexico
Print Number: 01 Print Year: 2020

prefacexiii Module 17
Polymorphism 309
Module 1
Computational Thinking 1 Module 18
Templates 319
Module 2
Programming Tools 15 Module 19
Linked List Data Structures 333
Module 3
Literals, Variables, and Constants 35 Module 20
Stacks and Queues 353
Module 4
Numeric Data Types and Expressions 49 Module 21
Trees and Graphs 371
Module 5
Character and String Data Types 63 Module 22
Algorithm Complexity and Big-O Notation 395
Module 6
Decision Control Structures 83 Module 23
Search Algorithms 411
Module 7
Repetition Control Structures 103 Module 24
Sorting Algorithms 427
Module 8
Arrays 125 Module 25
Processor Architecture 455
Module 9
Functions 145 Module 26
Data Representation 469
Module 10
Recursion 165 Module 27
Programming Paradigms 491
Module 11
Exceptions 185 Module 28
User Interfaces 507
Module 12
File Operations 205 Module 29
Software Development Methodologies 525
Module 13
Classes and Objects 231 Module 30
Pseudocode, Flowcharts, and Decision Tables 541
Module 14
Methods 245 Module 31
Unified Modeling Language 557
Module 15
Encapsulation 271
GLOSSARY 569
Module 16 Index 583
Inheritance 291

prefacexiii Build Tools 22

The Toolset 22
Module 1 Compilers 23
COMPUTATIONAL THINKING 1 Preprocessors and Linkers 24
Virtual Machines 25
Algorithms2 Interpreters 26
Algorithm Basics 2 Debugging Tools 27
Programming Algorithms 2 Programming Errors 27
“Good” Algorithms 3 Syntax Errors 28
Selecting and Creating Algorithms 4 Runtime Errors 29
Decomposition4 Semantic Errors 29
Decomposition Basics 4 Debugging Utilities 30
Structural Decomposition 5 IDEs and SDKs 32
Functional Decomposition 6 Integrated Development Environments 32
Object-Oriented Decomposition 7 Software Development Kits 32
Dependencies and Cohesion 7
Summary 33
Pattern Identification 8
Key Terms 34
Pattern Identification Basics 8
Repetitive Patterns 8
Module 3
Classification Patterns 9
Abstraction9 LITERALS, VARIABLES, AND
Abstraction Basics 9 CONSTANTS35
Classes and Objects 10
Literals36
Black Boxes 11
Numeric Literals 36
Levels of Abstraction 12
Character and String Literals 37
Summary12 Tricky Literals 38
Key Terms 13 Variables and Constants 38
Variables 38
Module 2 Constants 40
PROGRAMMING TOOLS 15 The Memory Connection 41
Assignment Statements 41
Programming Languages 16 Declaring Variables 41
Hello World! 16 Initializing Variables 42
Programming Language Basics 16 Assigning Variables 43
Syntax and Semantics 17
Input and Output 44
Core Elements 19
Your Toolbox 19 Input to a Variable 44
Output from a Variable 46
Coding Tools 20
Program Editors 20 Summary 46
Basic Structure 21 Key Terms 47

Module 4 Module 6
Numeric Data Types and Decision Control
Expressions 49 Structures 83
Primitive Data Types 50 If-Then Control Structures 84
Data Types 50 Control Structures 84
Primitive Data Types 50 Decision Logic 85
Composite Data Types 51 If-Then Structures 85
Numeric Data Types 52 Relational Operators 87
Integer Data Types 52 The Equal Operator 87
Floating-Point Data Types 53 Using Relational Operators 88
Mathematical Expressions 54 Boolean Expressions and Data Types 89
Arithmetic Operators 54 Multiple Conditions 91
Order of Operations 56 If-Then-Else Structures 91
Compound Operators 56 Nested-If Structures 93
Numeric Data Type Conversion 58 Else If Structures 96
Convert Integers and Floating-Point Numbers 58 Fall Through 97
Rounding Quirks 59 Conditional Logical Operators 100
Formatting Output 60 The AND Operator 100
Formatted Output 60 The OR Operator 101
Formatting Parameters 60 Summary 102
Summary 62 Key Terms 102
Key Terms 62

Module 7
Module 5 Repetition Control
CHARACTER AND STRING DATA TYPES 63 Structures 103
Character Data Types 64 Count-Controlled Loops 104
Working with Character Data 64 Loop Basics 104
Character Memory Allocation 65 Control Statements 105
Digits 66 For-Loops 105
Character Output Format 67 User-Controlled Loops 108
Character Manipulation 68
Counters and Accumulators 109
String Data Types 69 Loops That Count 109
Working with String Data 69 Loops That Accumulate 111
Escape Characters 70
String Indexes 71
Nested Loops 112
Loops Within Loops 112
String Functions 72
Inner and Outer Loops 113
String Manipulation 72
String Length 72 Pre-Test Loops 116
Change Case 73 While-Loops 116
Find the Location of a Character 74 Infinite Loops 117
Retrieve a Substring 75 Breaking Out of Loops 118
Concatenation and Typecasting 76 Post-Test Loops 120
Concatenated Output 76 Do-Loops 120
Concatenated Variables 77 Test Conditions and Terminating
Coercion and Typecasting 78 Conditions 123
Summary 80 Summary 124
Key Terms 81 Key Terms 124

Module 8 Pass by Reference 161

Namespaces 162
Arrays 125
Summary 163
Array Basics 126
Key Terms 163
Magic Rectangles 126
Array Characteristics 127
Array Use Cases 128 Module 10
One-Dimensional Arrays 128 Recursion 165
Initialize Numeric Arrays 128
Key Components of Recursion 165
Initialize String Arrays 130
The Recursive Mindset 165
Array Input and Output 130 Recursion Basics 167
Output an Array Element 130 When to Use Recursion 171
Index Errors 131
Using Recursion to Solve Complex
Traverse an Array 132
Problems 171
Input Array Elements 133
Designing Recursive Structures 171
Array Operations 135 Linear Recursion 174
Change an Array Element 135 Branching Recursion 175
Find an Array Element 135
Managing Memory during Recursion 179
Sum Array Elements 137
Memory Management 179
Two-Dimensional Arrays 137 Stable Recursion 182
Two-Dimensional Array Basics 137
Summary 183
Initialize a Two-Dimensional Array 138
Output a Two-Dimensional Array 139 Key Terms 183
Sum Array Columns and Rows 141
Summary 143 Module 11
Key Terms 144 Exceptions 185
Defining Exceptions 185
Module 9 Errors in Code 185
Functions 145 Exception Types 187

Function Basics 146 Dealing with Exceptions 189

Function Classifications 146 Handling Others’ Exceptions 189
Programmer-Defined Functions 146 Try and Catch Blocks 189
Flow of Execution 147 Using Exceptions 198
Function Advantages 147 Throwing Exceptions 198
Void Functions 148 When to Bail 202
Void Function Basics 148 Summary 203
Function Pseudocode 149
Key Terms 203
Functions with Parameters 150
Function Parameters 150
Module 12
Function Arguments 150
The Handoff 152 File Operations 205
Return Values 153 File Input and Output 206
Return Values 153 The Purpose of Files 206
Return Type 156 Anatomy of a File 210
Function Signature 157 File Usage 212
Scope 157 Processing a File 214
Scope Basics 157 Accessing Files 214
Pass by Value 160 Streaming and Buffering 214

Reading from a File 216 Method Cascading and Method Chaining 263
Opening a File for Reading 216 Calling Multiple Methods on the Same Object 263
Reading from a File 218 Using Constructors 266
Closing a File 222 Specifying How to Construct an Object 266
Closing Files after Use 222 Constructing an Object from Another Object 268
Trying to Close a File 222 Summary 269
Creating and Writing New Files 222
Key Terms 269
Creating a File 222
Opening a File for Writing 223 Module 15
Writing to and Appending a File 224
Anticipating Exceptions 228 Encapsulation 271
Summary 229 Components of Class Structure 271
Key Terms 230 Data Hiding 271
Designing Objects 273
Self-Reference Scope 276
Module 13 Accessor and Mutator Context 277
Classes and Objects 231 Viewing Data from an Object 277
Classes in Object-Oriented Programming 232 Changing Data in an Object 278
Representing the Real World with Code 232 Using Constructors 280
Using Classes 232 Parameters and Arguments 280
Class Components 233 Default Parameters and Constructor
Using Objects 236 Overloading 281
Creating Objects 236 Encapsulation Enforcement
Objects as Variables 238 with Access Modifiers 283
Object-Oriented Features and Principles 238 Access Modifiers 283
Using Static Elements in a Class 239 Public Variables and Methods 283
Private Variables and Methods 284
Static Member Variables 239
Static Methods 240 Interfaces and Headers 286
Static Classes 241 Interfaces 286
Characteristics of Objects Programming an Interface 287
in Object-Oriented Programs 242 Summary 290
Object Identity 242 Key Terms 290
Object State 242
Object Behavior 243 Module 16
Summary 244 Inheritance 291
Key Terms 244 Using Inheritance 291
Creating Classes from Other Classes 291
Module 14 Family Trees in OOP 292
Methods 245 Levels of Access 295
Necessary Components for Inheritance 296
Using Methods 245
Defining a Parent Class 296
Why Use Methods? 245 Defining a Child Class 297
Anatomy of a Method 251
Creating a Child Class That Inherits
Using Methods 251
from a Parent Class 298
Changing the Default Behavior
Inheritance Syntax 298
of an Object 255 Customizing Behavior 301
Using Objects as Regular Variables 255
Overloading Methods 258 Summary 307
Setting One Object to Equal Another 262 Key Terms 307

Module 17 The Find Method 346

The Insert Method 347
Polymorphism 309
Summary 350
The Purpose of Polymorphism 309
Key Terms 351
Flexibility While Coding 309
Dynamic Binding Under the Hood 314
Polymorphism Basics 314 Module 20
Classes Within Classes 314 Stacks and Queues 353
Objects as Other Objects 315 Stacks 353
Virtual Functions 316 Stack Basics 353
Anticipating Customization 316 Stack Use Cases 355
Abstract Classes 317 Built-in Stacks 356
Summary 318 Code a Stack 357

Key Terms 318

Queues 362
Queue Basics 362
Module 18 Queue Use Cases 363
Code a Queue 364
Templates 319
Summary 369
Template Basics 319
Key Terms 369
Data Abstraction 319
Template Structure and Use 322
Module 21
Tricky Templating 328
Advanced Templating 328
Trees and Graphs 371
Templated Objects as Arguments 330 Nonlinear Data Structures 371
Templates as a Problem-Solving Linear versus Nonlinear Structures 371
Approach 331 Nonlinear Building Blocks 373
Designing a Template 331 Tree Structures 373
When to Use Templates 331 Tree Basics 373
Summary 331 Tree Properties 376
Trees as Recursive Structures 376
Key Terms 332
Solving Problems Using Trees 379
Module 19 Tree Applications 379
Linked List Data Data Storage in Trees 380
Graph Structures 387
Structures 333
Graph Basics 387
Linked List Structures 334 Directed and Undirected Graphs 388
Data Structure Selection 334 Solving Problems with Graphs 388
Data Structure Implementation 335 Graph Applications 388
Linked List Basics 336 Computing Paths 389
Types of Linked Lists 337
Summary 394
Singly Linked Lists 337
Doubly Linked Lists 338 Key Terms 394
Circular Linked Lists 339
Linked List Characteristics 339 Module 22
Code a Linked List 342 Algorithm Complexity
The Node Class 342 and Big-O Notation 395
The LinkedList Class 343
The Append Method 343 Big-O Notation 396
Linked List Traversal 345 Algorithm Complexity 396

Asymptotic Analysis 397 Quicksort 438

Asymptotic Notation 398 Defining the Quicksort Algorithm 438
Time Complexity 398 Quicksort Properties 446
Big-O Metrics 398 Merge Sort 447
Constant Time 399 Defining the Merge Sort Algorithm 447
Linear Time 399 Merge Sort Properties 453
Quadratic Time 400
Summary 454
Logarithmic Time 401
Key Terms 454
Space Complexity 403
Memory Space 403 Module 25
Constant Space Complexity 404
Linear Space Complexity 404 Processor Architecture 455
Complexity Calculations 405 Processor Organization 456
Line-by-Line Time Complexity 405 Integrated Circuits 456
Combine and Simplify 406 Moore’s Law 458
A Mystery Algorithm 407 CPUs 458
Low-Level Instruction Sets 459
Summary 409
Microprocessor Instruction Sets 459
Key Terms 409 RISC and CISC 460
Machine Language 460
Module 23 Assembly Language 461

Search Algorithms 411 Microprocessor Operations 462

Processing an Instruction 462
Using Search Algorithms 412 The Instruction Cycle 462
Search Basics 412 High-Level Programming Languages 464
Performing a Linear Search 413 Evolution 464
Looking for a Needle in a Haystack 413 Teaching Languages 465
Evaluating Search Time 416 The C Family 465
Web Programming Languages 466
Performing a Binary Search 416 Characteristics 466
Shrinking the Search Space 416 Advantages and Disadvantages 467
Implementing Binary Search 418
Summary 467
Using Regular Expressions
Key Terms 468
in Search Algorithms 423
Specifying a Search Pattern 423 Module 26
Regular Expression Search Operators 423
Data Representation 469
Summary 426
Bits and Bytes 470
Key Terms 426
Digital Data 470
Bits 471
Module 24 Bytes 472
Sorting Algorithms 427 Binary 474
Binary Numbers 474
Qualities of Sorting Algorithms 428 Binary to Decimal 475
Ordering Items 428 Decimal to Binary 476
Time Complexity in Sorting Algorithms 428 Binary Addition 477
Sorting Properties 430 Negative Numbers 478
Bubble Sort 431 Hexadecimal 480
Defining the Bubble Sort Algorithm 431 Colors 480
Bubble Sort Properties 437 Hexadecimal Numbers 481

Binary-Hex-Binary Conversions 481 Speech Synthesis 516

Hex-Decimal Conversion 482 Designing Programs for Voice User Interfaces 517
Information Density 483 Virtual Environment Interfaces 517
ASCII and Unicode 483 Virtual Environments 517
ASCII 483 Virtual Environment Interface Components 518
Extended ASCII 484 Programming the Virtual Interface 519
Unicode 485 Accessibility and Inclusion 520
Memory Allocation 486 Accessibility Guidelines 520
Memory and Storage 486 Inclusive Design 521
Storage Devices 487 Summary 524
Memory 487
Key Terms 524
Summary 489
Key Terms 489
Module 29
Software Development
Module 27
Methodologies 525
Programming Paradigms 491
Software Development 526
Imperative and Declarative Paradigms 492
The Software Development Life Cycle 526
Think Outside the Box 492
Efficiency, Quality, and Security 527
The Procedural Paradigm 493 The Waterfall Model 528
Procedural Basics 493
Structured Analysis and Design 528
Characteristics of Procedural Programs 494
Waterfall Advantages and Disadvantages 529
Procedural Paradigm Applications 496
The Agile Model 530
The Object-Oriented Paradigm 497
Incremental Development 530
Objects, Classes, and Methods 497
Agile Methodologies 530
Characteristics of Object-Oriented Programs 499
Agile Advantages and Disadvantages 531
Object-Oriented Applications 501
Coding Principles 532
Declarative Paradigms 501
Efficient Coding 532
Declarative Basics 501
Modularized Code 533
Characteristics of the Declarative
Clean Coding 534
Paradigm 504
Secure Coding 534
Applications for Declarative Paradigms 504
Success Factors 536
Summary 505 Testing 536
Key Terms 505 Levels of Testing 536
Unit Testing 537
Module 28 Integration Testing 538
System Testing 539
User Interfaces 507 Acceptance Testing 539
User Interface Basics 508 Regression Testing 539
UI and UX 508 Summary 540
UI Components 508
Key Terms 540
Selecting a UI 510
Command-Line User Interfaces 510
Module 30
Command-Line Basics 510
Command-Line Program Design 510 Pseudocode, Flowcharts,
Graphical User Interfaces 512 and Decision Tables 541
GUI Basics 512 Pseudocode 542
GUI Program Design 514
From Algorithms to Pseudocode 542
Voice User Interfaces 515 Pseudocode Basics 544
Voice Interface Basics 515 Pseudocode Guidelines 545
Speech Recognition 515 Writing Pseudocode 547

Flowcharts 548 UML Diagram Parts 558

Flowchart Basics 548 Class Diagram Basics 558
Drawing Flowcharts 548 Use Case Diagram Basics 559
Flowchart Tools 549 Sequence Diagrams 561
Decision Tables 551 Using UML to Structure Programs 562
Decision Table Basics 551 UML Associations 562
List the Conditions 551 Translating UML to Code 564
List All Possible Alternatives 552 Summary 568
Specify Results and Rules 552
Interpret Rules 553 Key Terms 568
Optimize the Rules 554
Check for Completeness and Accuracy 555
GLOSSARY 569
Summary 555
index 583
Key Terms 556

Module 31
Unified Modeling Language 557
Purpose of Unified Modeling
Language (UML) 557
Communicating Ideas to Other Programmers 557

Welcome to Readings from Programming with C11.

This text includes the stand-alone lessons and read-
C11 Version
ings from MindTap for Programming with C11 and is We recommend downloading the latest version of
intended to be used in conjunction with the MindTap C11 before beginning this text. C1114 was used to
Reader for a complete learning experience. test all C11 code presented in the module figures.

MindTap Overview MindTap Features

Programming with C 11 presents conceptual, lan- In addition to the readings included within this text,
guage-agnostic narrative with language-specific assets, the MindTap includes the following:
ungraded C11 coding Snippets, language-agnostic test Course Orientation: Custom videos and readings pre-
banks, and additional instructor resources. The goal of pare students for the material and coding experiences
this digital product is to develop content around the they will encounter in their course.
concepts that are essential for understanding Com-
Videos: Animated videos demonstrate new program-
puter Science from a language-agnostic perspective.
ming terms and concepts in an easy-to-understand for-
Learners will gain a foundational understanding of
mat, increasing student confidence and learning.
procedural programming, computer science concepts,
and object-oriented programming. Instructors have Coding Snippets: These short, ungraded coding activities
identified the need for language-agnostic, conceptual are embedded within the MindTap Reader and provide
content that can be paired with hands-on practice in students an opportunity to practice new programming
a specific language. This 31-module text is designed to concepts “in-the-moment.” Additional language-specific
provide that conceptual content paired with language- “bridge content” helps transition the student from con-
specific examples and hands-on learning activities in ceptual understanding to application of C11 code.
C11. Language-specific Examples: Figures within the nar-
rative illustrate the application of general concepts in
C11 code.
Course Objectives:
• Develop a foundational knowledge of
coding principles, vocabulary, and core Instructor & Student Resources
concepts. Additional instructor and student resources for
• Use new foundational knowledge to this product are available online. Instructor assets
learn C11 programming skills. include an Instructor’s Manual, Teaching Online
• Practice emerging coding skills in a low- Guide, PowerPoint® slides, and a test bank powered
risk environment. by Cognero®. Student assets include source code
• Apply learned concepts and skills to files and coding Snippets ReadMe. Sign up or sign in
assignments/activities that mimic real- at www.cengage.com to search for and access this
world experiences and environments. product and its online resources.

Dr. Kyla McMullen is a tenure-track faculty member published research in the areas of procedural genera-
in the University of Florida’s Computer & Information tion, video game enjoyment factors, and freshwater
Sciences & Engineering Department, specializing in algae identification with HCI.
Human-Centered Computing. Her research interests June Jamrich Parsons is an educator, digital book
are in the perception, applications, and development pioneer, and co-author of Texty and McGuffey Award-
of 3D audio technologies. Dr. McMullen has authored winning textbooks. She co-developed the first com-
over 30 manuscripts in this line of research and is the mercially successful multimedia, interactive digital
primary investigator for over 2 million dollars’ worth textbook; one that set the bar for platforms now
of sponsored research projects. being developed by educational publishers. Her
Dr. Elizabeth A. Matthews is an Assistant Professor of career includes extensive classroom teaching, prod-
Computer Science at Washington and Lee University. uct design for eCourseware, textbook authoring for
She has taught computer science since 2013 and has Course Technology and Cengage, Creative Strategist
been an active researcher in human–computer inter- for MediaTechnics Corporation, and Director of Con-
action and human-centered computing. Matthews has tent for Veative Virtual Reality Labs.

The unique approach for this book required a seasoned friends who help me to remain sane, remind me of who
team. Our thanks to Maria Garguilo who ushered the I am, and never let me forget whose I am.
manuscripts through every iteration and kept tight Elizabeth Matthews: I want to thank my parents,
rein on the schedule; to Mary E. Convertino who sup- Drs. Geoff and Robin Matthews, for their support and
plied her expertise in learning design; to Lisa R
uffolo understanding in my journey. I would also like to thank
for her excellent developmental edit; to Courtney my advisor, Dr. Juan Gilbert, for seeing my dream to
Cozzy who coordinated the project; to Kristin McNary the end. Finally, I would like to thank my cats, Oreo
for her leadership in Cengage’s computing materials; and Laptop, who made sure that writing this book was
to Rajiv Malkan (Lone Star College) for his instruc- interrupted as often as possible.
tional input; to Wade Schofield (Liberty University) June Jamrich Parsons: Computer programming can
for his reviewing expertise; and to John Freitas for his be a truly satisfying experience. The reward when a
meticulous code review. It was a pleasure to be part program runs flawlessly has to bring a smile even
of this professional and talented team. We hope that to the most seasoned programmers. Working with
instructors and students will appreciate our efforts three programming languages for this project at the
to provide this unique approach to computer science same time was certainly challenging but provided
and programming. insights that can help students understand com-
Kyla McMullen: Above all things, I would like to thank putational thinking. I’ve thoroughly enjoyed work-
God for giving me the gifts and talents that were uti- ing with the team to create these versatile learning
lized to write this book. I would like to thank my amaz- resources and would like to dedicate my efforts to
ing husband Ade Kumuyi for always being my rock, my mom, who has been a steadfast cheerleader for
sounding board, and biggest cheerleader. I thank my me throughout my career. To the instructors and stu-
parents, Rita and James McMullen for all of their sacri- dents who use this book, my hope is that you enjoy
fices to raise me. Last but not least, I thank my spirited programming as much as I do.

1
COMPUTATIONAL
THINKING
LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
1.1 ALGORITHMS 1.2.3 Differentiate the concepts of algorithms and
decomposition.
1.1.1 Define the term “algorithm” as a series of steps for
solving a problem or carrying out a task. 1.2.4 Identify examples of structural decomposition.
1.1.2 State that algorithms are the underlying logic for 1.2.5 Identify examples of functional decomposition.
computer programs. 1.2.6 Identify examples of object-oriented decomposition.
1.1.3 Define the term “computer program.” 1.2.7 Provide examples of decomposition in technology
1.1.4 Provide examples of algorithms used in everyday applications.
technology applications. 1.2.8 Explain how dependencies and cohesion relate to
1.1.5 Confirm that there can be more than one algorithm decomposition.
for a task or problem and that some algorithms 1.3 PATTERN IDENTIFICATION
may be more efficient than others.
1.3.1 Define the term “pattern identification” as a technique
1.1.6 Explain why computer scientists are interested in for recognizing similarities or characteristics among
algorithm efficiency. the elements of a task or problem.
1.1.7 List the characteristics of an effective algorithm. 1.3.2 Identify examples of fill-in-the-blank patterns.
1.1.8 Write an algorithm for accomplishing a simple, 1.3.3 Identify examples of repetitive patterns.
everyday technology application.
1.3.4 Identify examples of classification patterns.
1.1.9 Write an alternate algorithm for an everyday
technology task. 1.3.5 Provide examples of pattern identification in the real
world and in technology applications.
1.1.10 Select the more efficient of the two algorithms you
have written. 1.4 ABSTRACTION
1.2 DECOMPOSITION 1.4.1 Define the term “abstraction” as a technique for
generalization and for simplifying levels of complexity.
1.2.1 Define the term “decomposition” as a technique for
dividing a complex problem or solution into smaller 1.4.2 Explain why abstraction is an important computer
parts. science concept.
1.2.2 Explain why decomposition is an important tool for 1.4.3 Provide an example illustrating how abstraction can
computer scientists. help identify variables.

1.4.4 Provide examples of technology applications that 1.4.6 Explain how the black box concept is an
have abstracted or hidden details. implementation of abstraction.
1.4.5 Provide an example illustrating the use of a class as 1.4.7 Identify appropriate levels of abstraction.
an abstraction of a set of objects.

1.1 ALGORITHMS
Algorithm Basics (1.1.1, 1.1.4)
A password might not be enough to protect your online accounts. Two-factor authentication adds an extra layer
of protection. A common form of two-factor authentication sends a personal identification number (PIN) to your
cell phone. To log in, you perform the series of steps shown in Figure 1-1.

Connect to the site’s login page.

Enter your user ID.
Enter your password.
Wait for a text message containing a PIN
to arrive on your smartphone.
On the site’s the login page, enter the PIN.

Figure 1-1 Steps for two-factor authentication

The procedure for two-factor authentication is an example of an algorithm. In a general sense, an algorithm
is a series of steps for solving a problem or carrying out a task.
Algorithms exist for everyday tasks and tasks that involve technology. Here are some examples:

• A recipe for baking brownies

• The steps for changing a tire
• The instructions for pairing a smart watch with your phone
• The payment process at an online store
• The procedure for posting a tweet

Programming Algorithms (1.1.2, 1.1.3, 1.1.5)

Algorithms are also an important tool for programmers. A programming algorithm is a set of steps that speci-
fies the underlying logic and structure for the statements in a computer program. You can think of programming
algorithms as the blueprints for computer programs.
A computer program is a set of instructions, written in a programming language such as C++, Python, or
Java, that performs a specific task when executed by a digital device. A computer program is an implementation
of an algorithm.

Q Programming algorithms tell the computer what to do. Can you tell which of these algorithms
is a programming algorithm?
Algorithm 1: Algorithm 2:
Connect to the website’s login page. Prompt the user to enter a user ID.
Enter your user ID. Prompt the user to enter a password.
Enter your password. Make sure that the user ID and password match.
Wait for a text message containing a PIN to If the user ID and password match:
arrive on your smartphone. Generate a random PIN.
On the website’s login page, enter the PIN. Send the PIN to user’s phone.
Prompt the user to enter the PIN.
If the PIN is correct:
Allow access.

A Algorithm 1 is not a programming algorithm because it outlines instructions for the user.
Algorithm 2 is a programming algorithm because it specifies what the computer is supposed
to do. When you formulate a programming algorithm, the instructions should be for the
computer, not the user.

There can be more than one programming algorithm for solving a problem or performing a task, but some
algorithms are more efficient than others.

Q Here are two algorithms for summing the numbers from 1 to 10. Which algorithm is more
efficient?
Algorithm 1: Algorithm 2:
Add 1 1 2 to get a total. Get the last number in the series (10).
Repeat these steps nine times: Divide 10 by 2 to get a result.
Get the next number. Add 10 1 1 to get a sum.
Add this number to the total. Multiply the result by the sum.

A Both algorithms contain four instructions, but Algorithm 2 is more efficient. You can use it to
amaze your friends by quickly calculating the total in only four steps. Algorithm 1 is also four
lines long, but two of the instructions are repeated nine times. Counting the first step, that’s
19 steps to complete this task!

“Good” Algorithms (1.1.6, 1.1.7)

Computer scientists are interested in designing what they call “good” algorithms. A good algorithm tends
to produce a computer program that operates efficiently, quickly, and reliably. Good algorithms have these
characteristics:
Input: The algorithm applies to a set of specified inputs.
Output: The algorithm produces one or more outputs.
Finite: The algorithm terminates after a finite number of steps.
Precise: Each step of the algorithm is clear and unambiguous.
Effective: The algorithm successfully produces the correct output.

When formulating an algorithm, you can easily check to make sure it satisfies all the criteria for a good algo-
rithm. You can see how these criteria apply to an algorithm in Figure 1-2.

Is there input? Yes.

Get the last number in the series (10).

Divide 10 by 2 to get a RESULT. Are the steps precise and
Add 10 + 1 to get a SUM. unambiguous? Yes.
Multiply the RESULT by the SUM to
Does the algorithm terminate? Does the algorithm produce
produce a total.
Yes, after the fourth step. the correct output?
Yes, it is 55.
Is there output? Yes.

Figure 1-2 Is this a good algorithm?

Selecting and Creating Algorithms (1.1.8, 1.1.9, 1.1.10)

Before coding, programmers consider various algorithms that might apply to a problem. You can come up with
an algorithm in three ways:
Use a standard algorithm. Programmers have created effective algorithms for many computing
tasks, such as sorting, searching, manipulating text, encrypting data, and finding the shortest path.
When you are familiar with these standard algorithms, you can easily incorporate them in programs.
Perform the task manually. When you can’t find a standard algorithm, you can formulate an
algorithm by stepping through a process manually, recording those steps, and then analyzing their
effectiveness.
Apply computational thinking techniques. Computational thinking is a set of techniques designed
to formulate problems and their solutions. You can use computational thinking techniques such as
decomposition, pattern identification, and abstraction to devise efficient algorithms. Let’s take a look
at these techniques in more detail.

1.2 DECOMPOSITION
Decomposition Basics (1.2.1)
A mobile banking app contains many components. It has to provide a secure login procedure, allow users to
manage preferences, display account balances, push out alerts, read checks for deposit, and perform other tasks
shown in Figure 1-3.
The algorithm for such an extensive app would be difficult to formulate without dividing it into smaller parts,
a process called decomposition. When devising an algorithm for a complex problem or task, decomposition can
help you deal with smaller, more manageable pieces of the puzzle.

Fraud alerts

Change user
Secure login
preferences

Account balance Deposits

iStock.com/vector.S
Pay bills Withdrawals

Transfer money

Figure 1-3 A mobile banking app handles many

interacting tasks

Structural Decomposition (1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.7)

The first step in decomposition is to identify structural units that perform distinct tasks. Figure 1-4 illustrates
how you might divide a mobile banking app into structural units, called modules.

Mobile banking

Passcode/challenge Account Payments and

Secure login
question changes management transfers

Two-factor
Balances Bill pay
authentication

Fingerprint Mobile check

Alerts
sign-in deposits

Direct Money
deposits transfers

Figure 1-4 Structural decomposition diagram

Structural decomposition is a process that identifies a hierarchy of structural units. At the lowest levels
of the hierarchy are modules, indicated in yellow in Figure 1-4, that have a manageable scope for creating
algorithms.

Copyright 2022 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
“For the present,” wrote the secretary to Rodgers,[326] “it is
desirable that with the force under your command you remain in such
position as to enable you most conveniently to receive further more
extensive and more particular orders, which will be conveyed to you
through New York. But as it is understood that there are one or more
British cruisers on the coast in the vicinity of Sandy Hook, you are at
your discretion free to strike them, returning immediately after into
port. You are free to capture or destroy them.”
These orders reached New York June 21. Rodgers in his fine
frigate the “President,” with the “Hornet,” 18, was eager to sail. The
hope of capturing the “Belvidera,” which had long been an
intolerable annoyance to New York commerce, was strong both in
the Navy Department and in the navy; but the chance of obtaining
prize money from the British West India convoy, just then passing
eastward only a few days’ sail from the coast, added greatly to the
commodore’s impatience.[327] Decatur’s squadron arrived off Sandy
Hook June 19. June 21, within an hour after receiving the secretary’s
orders of June 18, the whole fleet, including two forty-four and one
thirty-eight-gun frigates, with the “Hornet” and the “Argus,” stood
out to sea.
The secretary might have spared himself the trouble of giving
further orders, for many a week passed before Rodgers and Decatur
bethought themselves of his injunction to return immediately into
port after striking the “Belvidera.” They struck the “Belvidera” within
forty-eight hours, and lost her; partly on account of the bursting of
one of the “President’s” main-deck guns, which blew up the
forecastle deck, killing or wounding sixteen men, including
Commodore Rodgers himself, whose leg was broken; partly, and
according to the British account chiefly, on account of stopping to
fire at all, when Rodgers should have run alongside, and in that case
could not have failed to capture his enemy. Whatever was the
reason, the “Belvidera” escaped; and Rodgers and Decatur, instead
of returning immediately into port as they had been ordered, turned
in pursuit of the British West India convoy, and hung doggedly to the
chase without catching sight of their game, until after three weeks’
pursuit they found themselves within a day’s sail of the British
Channel and the convoy safe in British waters.
This beginning of the naval war was discouraging. The American
ships should not have sailed in a squadron, and only their good luck
saved them from disaster. Rodgers and Decatur showed no regard to
the wishes of the Government, although had they met with
misfortune, the navy would have lost its last hope. Yet if the two
commodores had obeyed the secretary’s commands their cruise
would probably have been in the highest degree disastrous. The
Government’s true intentions have been a matter of much dispute;
but beyond a doubt the President and a majority of his advisers
inclined to keep the navy within reach at first,—to use them for the
protection of commerce, to drive away the British blockaders; and
aware that the British naval force would soon be greatly increased,
and that the American navy must be blockaded in port, the
Government expected in the end to use the frigates as harbor
defences rather than send them to certain destruction.
With these ideas in his mind Secretary Hamilton, in his orders of
June 18, told Rodgers and Decatur that “more extensive” orders
should be sent to them on their return to New York. A day or two
afterward Secretary Gallatin complained to the President that these
orders had not been sent.
“I believe the weekly arrivals from foreign ports,” said Gallatin,
[328] “will for the coming four weeks average from one to one-and-a-
half million dollars a week. To protect these and our coasting vessels,
while the British have still an inferior force on our coasts, appears to
me of primary importance. I think that orders to that effect, ordering
them to cruise accordingly, ought to have been sent yesterday, and
that at all events not one day longer ought to be lost.”
June 22 the orders were sent according to Gallatin’s wish. They
directed Rodgers with his part of the squadron to cruise from the
Chesapeake eastwardly, and Decatur with his ships to cruise from
New York southwardly, so as to cross and support each other and
protect with their united force the merchantmen and coasters
entering New York harbor, the Delaware, and the Chesapeake.
Rodgers and Decatur were then beginning their private cruise across
the ocean, and never received these orders until the commerce they
were to protect either reached port in safety or fell into British
hands.
Probably this miscarriage was fortunate, for not long after
Rodgers and Decatur passed the Banks the British Vice-Admiral
Sawyer sent from Halifax a squadron to prevent the American navy
from doing what Secretary Hamilton had just ordered to be done.
July 5 Captain Broke, with his own frigate the “Shannon,” 38, the
“Belvidera,” 36, the “Africa,” 64, and “Æolus,” 32, put to sea from
Halifax and was joined, July 9, off Nantucket by the “Guerriere,” 38.
Against such a force Rodgers and Decatur, even if together, would
have risked total destruction, while a success would have cost more
than it was worth. The Americans had nothing to gain and
everything to lose by fighting in line-of-battle.
As Broke’s squadron swept along the coast it seized whatever it
met, and July 16 caught one of President Jefferson’s 16-gun brigs,
the “Nautilus.” The next day it came on a richer prize. The American
navy seemed ready to outstrip the army in the race for disaster. The
“Constitution,” the best frigate in the United States service, sailed
into the midst of Broke’s five ships. Captain Isaac Hull, in command
of the “Constitution,” had been detained at Annapolis shipping a new
crew, until July 5,[329]—the day when Broke’s squadron left Halifax;
—then the ship got under way and stood down Chesapeake Bay on
her voyage to New York. The wind was ahead and very light. Not till
July 10 did the ship anchor off Cape Henry lighthouse,[330] and not
till sunrise of July 12 did she stand to the eastward and northward.
Light head-winds and a strong current delayed her progress till July
17, when at two o’clock in the afternoon, off Barnegat on the New
Jersey coast, the lookout at the masthead discovered four sails to
the northward, and two hours later a fifth sail to the northeast. Hull
took them for Rodgers’s squadron. The wind was light, and Hull
being to windward determined to speak the nearest vessel, the last
to come in sight. The afternoon passed without bringing the ships
together, and at ten in the evening, finding that the nearest ship
could not answer the night signal, Hull decided to lose no time in
escaping.
Then followed one of the most exciting and sustained chases
recorded in naval history. At daybreak the next morning one British
frigate was astern within five or six miles, two more were to
leeward, and the rest of the fleet some ten miles astern, all making
chase. Hull put out his boats to tow the “Constitution;” Broke
summoned the boats of his squadron to tow the “Shannon.” Hull
then bent all his spare rope to the cables, dropped a small anchor
half a mile ahead, in twenty-six fathom water, and warped his ship
along. Broke quickly imitated the device, and slowly gained on the
chase. The “Guerriere” crept so near Hull’s lee-beam as to open fire,
but her shot fell short. Fortunately the wind, though slight, favored
Hull. All night the British and American crews toiled on, and when
morning came the “Belvidera,” proving to be the best sailer, got in
advance of her consorts, working two kedge-anchors, until at two
o’clock in the afternoon she tried in her turn to reach the
“Constitution” with her bow guns, but in vain. Hull expected capture,
but the “Belvidera” could not approach nearer without bringing her
boats under the “Constitution’s” stern guns; and the wearied crews
toiled on, towing and kedging, the ships barely out of gunshot, till
another morning came. The breeze, though still light, then allowed
Hull to take in his boats, the “Belvidera” being two and a half miles
in his wake, the “Shannon” three and a half miles on his lee, and the
three other frigates well to leeward. The wind freshened, and the
“Constitution” drew ahead, until toward seven o’clock in the evening
of July 19 a heavy rain-squall struck the ship, and by taking skilful
advantage of it Hull left the “Belvidera” and “Shannon” far astern;
yet until eight o’clock the next morning they were still in sight
keeping up the chase.
Perhaps nothing during the war tested American seamanship
more thoroughly than these three days of combined skill and
endurance in the face of an irresistible enemy. The result showed
that Hull and the “Constitution” had nothing to fear in these
respects. There remained the question whether the superiority
extended to his guns; and such was the contempt of British naval
officers for American ships, that with this experience before their
eyes they still believed one of their 38-gun frigates to be more than
a match for an American forty-four, although the American, besides
the heavier armament, had proved his capacity to out-sail and out-
manœuvre the Englishman. Both parties became more eager than
ever for the test. For once, even the Federalists of New England felt
their blood stir; for their own President and their own votes had
called these frigates into existence, and a victory won by the
“Constitution,” which had been built by their hands, was in their eyes
a greater victory over their political opponents than over the British.
With no halfhearted spirit, the sea-going Bostonians showered well-
weighed praises on Hull when his ship entered Boston harbor, July
26, after its narrow escape; and when he sailed again, New England
waited with keen interest to learn his fate.
Hull could not expect to keep command of the “Constitution.”
Bainbridge was much his senior, and had the right to a preference in
active service. Bainbridge then held and was ordered to retain
command of the “Constellation,” fitting out at the Washington Navy
Yard; but Secretary Hamilton, July 28, ordered him to take command
also of the “Constitution” on her arrival in port. Doubtless Hull
expected this change, and probably the expectation induced him to
risk a dangerous experiment; for without bringing his ship to the
Charlestown Navy Yard, but remaining in the outer harbor, after
obtaining such supplies as he needed, August 2, he set sail without
orders, and stood to the eastward. Having reached Cape Race
without meeting an enemy he turned southward, until on the night
of August 18 he spoke a privateer, which told him of a British frigate
near at hand. Following the privateersman’s directions the
“Constitution” the next day, August 19, at two o’clock in the
afternoon, latitude 41° 42´, longitude 55° 48´, sighted the
“Guerriere.”
The meeting was welcome on both sides. Only three days before,
Captain Dacres had entered on the log of a merchantman a
challenge to any American frigate to meet him off Sandy Hook. Not
only had the “Guerriere” for a long time been extremely offensive to
every seafaring American, but the mistake which caused the “Little
Belt” to suffer so seriously for the misfortune of being taken for the
“Guerriere” had caused a corresponding feeling of anger in the
officers of the British frigate. The meeting of August 19 had the
character of a preconcerted duel.
The wind was blowing fresh from the northwest, with the sea
running high. Dacres backed his main-top-sail and waited. Hull
shortened sail and ran down before the wind. For about an hour the
two ships wore and wore again, trying to get advantage of position;
until at last, a few minutes before six o’clock, they came together
side by side, within pistol-shot, the wind almost astern, and running
before it they pounded each other with all their strength. As rapidly
as the guns could be worked, the “Constitution” poured in broadside
after broadside, double-shotted with round and grape,—and, without
exaggeration, the echo of these guns startled the world. “In less
than thirty minutes from the time we got alongside of the enemy,”
reported Hull,[331] “she was left without a spar standing, and the
hull cut to pieces in such a manner as to make it difficult to keep her
above water.”
That Dacres should have been defeated was not surprising; that
he should have expected to win was an example of British arrogance
that explained and excused the war. The length of the “Constitution”
was 173 feet; that of the “Guerriere” was 156 feet; the extreme
breadth of the “Constitution” was 44 feet; that of the “Guerriere”
was 40 feet, or within a few inches in both cases. The “Constitution”
carried thirty-two long 24-pounders, the “Guerriere” thirty long 18-
pounders and two long 12-pounders; the “Constitution” carried
twenty 32-pound carronades, the “Guerriere” sixteen. In every
respect, and in proportion of ten to seven, the “Constitution” was
the better ship; her crew was more numerous in proportion of ten to
six. Dacres knew this very nearly as well as it was known to Hull, yet
he sought a duel. What he did not know was that in a still greater
proportion the American officers and crew were better and more
intelligent seamen than the British, and that their passionate wish to
repay old scores gave them extraordinary energy. So much greater
was the moral superiority than the physical, that while the
“Guerriere’s” force counted as seven against ten, her losses counted
as though her force were only two against ten.
Dacres’ error cost him dear, for among the “Guerriere’s” crew of
two hundred and seventy-two, seventy-nine were killed or wounded;
and the ship was injured beyond saving before Dacres realized his
mistake, although he needed only thirty minutes of close fighting for
the purpose. He never fully understood the causes of his defeat, and
never excused it by pleading, as he might have done, the great
superiority of his enemy.[332]
Hull took his prisoners on board the “Constitution],” and after
blowing up the “Guerriere” sailed for Boston, where he arrived on
the morning of August 30. The Sunday silence of the Puritan city
broke into excitement as the news passed through the quiet streets
that the “Constitution” was below, in the outer harbor, with Dacres
and his crew prisoners on board. No experience of history ever went
to the heart of New England more directly than this victory, so
peculiarly its own; but the delight was not confined to New England,
and extreme though it seemed it was still not extravagant, for
however small the affair might appear on the general scale of the
world’s battles, it raised the United States in one half hour to the
rank of a first-class Power in the world.
Hull’s victory was not only dramatic in itself, but was also
supremely fortunate in the moment it occurred. The “Boston Patriot”
of September 2, which announced the capture of the “Guerriere,”
announced in the next column that Rodgers and Decatur, with their
squadron, entered Boston harbor within four-and-twenty hours after
Hull’s arrival, returning empty-handed after more than two months
of futile cruising; while in still another column the same newspaper
announced “the melancholy intelligence of the surrender of General
Hull and his whole army to the British General Brock.” Isaac Hull was
nephew to the unhappy General, and perhaps the shattered hulk of
the “Guerriere,” which the nephew left at the bottom of the Atlantic
Ocean, eight hundred miles east of Boston, was worth for the
moment the whole province which the uncle had lost, eight hundred
miles to the westward; it was at least the only equivalent the people
could find, and they made the most of it. With the shock of new life,
they awoke to the consciousness that after all the peace teachings
of Pennsylvania and Virginia, the sneers of Federalists and
foreigners; after the disgrace of the “Chesapeake” and the surrender
of Detroit,—Americans could still fight. The public had been taught,
and had actually learned, to doubt its own physical courage; and the
reaction of delight in satisfying itself that it still possessed the
commonest and most brutal of human qualities was the natural
result of a system that ignored the possibility of war.
Hull’s famous victory taught the pleasures of war to a new
generation, which had hitherto been sedulously educated to think
only of its cost. The first taste of blood maddens; and hardly had the
“Constitution” reached port and told her story than the public
became eager for more. The old Jeffersonian jealousy of the navy
vanished in the flash of Hull’s first broadside. Nothing would satisfy
the craving of the popular appetite but more battles, more British
frigates, and more daring victories. Even the cautious Madison was
dragged by public excitement upon the element he most heartily
disliked.
The whole navy, was once more, September 1, safe in port,
except only the “Essex,” a frigate rated at thirty-two but carrying
forty-four guns, commanded by Captain David Porter. She left New
York, July 3, with orders,[333] dated June 24, to join Rodgers, or
failing this to cruise southwardly as far as St. Augustine. June 11 she
met a convoy of seven transports conveying a battalion of the First
Regiment, or Royal Scots, from the West Indies to reinforce Prevost
and Brock in Canada. Porter cut out one transport. With the aid of
another frigate he could have captured the whole, to the great
advantage of Dearborn’s military movements; but the British
commander managed his convoy so well that the battalion escaped,
and enabled Prevost to strengthen the force at Niagara which
threatened and defeated Van Rensselaer. August 13 the British 20-
gun sloop-of-war “Alert” came in sight, bore down within short
pistol-shot, and opened fire on the “Essex.” Absurd as the idea
seemed, the British captain behaved as though he hoped to capture
the American frigate, and not until Porter nearly sunk him with a
broadside did the Englishman strike his colors. After taking a number
of other prizes, but without further fighting, September 7 Porter
brought his ship back to the Delaware River.
The return of the “Essex” to port, September 7, brought all the
national vessels once more under the direct control of the
Department. Nearly every ship in the service was then at Boston.
The three forty-fours—the “Constitution,” “United States,” and
“President”—were all there; two of the thirty-eights—the “Congress”
and “Chesapeake”—were there, and the “Constellation” was at
Washington. The “Adams,” 28, was also at Washington; but the
“Hornet,” 18, and “Argus,” 16, were with Rodgers and Decatur at
Boston. The “Syren,” 16, was at New Orleans; the “Essex,” 32, and
the “Wasp,” 18, were in the Delaware.
Carried away by Hull’s victory, the Government could no longer
hesitate to give its naval officers the liberty of action they asked, and
which in spite of orders they had shown the intention to take. A new
arrangement was made. The vessels were to be divided into three
squadrons, each consisting of one forty-four, one light frigate, and
one sloop-of-war. Rodgers in the “President” was to command one
squadron, Bainbridge in the “Constitution” was to command another,
and Decatur in the “United States” was to take the third.[334] Their
sailing orders, dated October 2,[335] simply directed the three
commodores to proceed to sea: “You are to do your utmost to annoy
the enemy, to afford protection to our commerce, pursuing that
course which to your best judgment may under all circumstances
appear the best calculated to enable you to accomplish these objects
as far as may be in your power, returning into port as speedily as
circumstances will permit consistently with the great object in view.”
Before continuing the story of the frigates, the fate of the little
“Wasp” needs to be told. Her career was brief. The “Wasp,” a sloop-
of-war rated at eighteen guns, was one of President Jefferson’s
additions to the navy to supply the loss of the “Philadelphia;” she
was ship-rigged, and armed with two long 12-pounders and sixteen
32-pound carronades. She carried a crew of one hundred and thirty-
seven men, commanded by Captain Jacob Jones, a native of
Delaware, lieutenant in the “Philadelphia” when lost in the war with
Tripoli. The “Wasp” was attached to Rodgers’s squadron, and
received orders from the commodore to join him at sea. She sailed
from the Delaware October 13, and when about six hundred miles
east of Norfolk, October 17, she fell in with the British 18-gun brig
“Frolic,” convoying fourteen merchantmen to England. The two
vessels were equal in force, for the “Frolic’s” broadside threw a
weight of two hundred and seventy-four pounds, while that of the
“Wasp” threw some few pounds less; the “Frolic” measured, by
British report,[336] one hundred feet in length, the “Wasp” one
hundred and six; their breadth on deck was the same; and although
the “Wasp’s” crew exceeded that of her enemy, being one hundred
and thirty-five men against one hundred and ten, the British vessel
had all the men she needed, and suffered little from this inferiority.
The action began at half-past eleven in the morning, the two sloops
running parallel, about sixty yards apart, in a very heavy sea, which
caused both to pitch and roll so that marksmanship had the most
decisive share in victory. The muzzles of the guns went under water,
and clouds of spray dashed over the crews, while the two vessels
ran side by side for the first fifteen minutes. The British fire cut the
“Wasp’s” rigging, while the American guns played havoc with the
“Frolic’s” hull and lower masts. The vessels approached each other
so closely that the rammers of the guns struck the enemy’s side, and
at last they fell foul,—the “Wasp” almost squarely across the
“Frolic’s” bow. In the heavy sea boarding was difficult; but as soon
as the “Wasp’s” crew could clamber down the “Frolic’s” bowsprit,
they found on the deck the British captain and lieutenant, both
severely wounded, and one brave sailor at the wheel. Not twenty of
the British crew were left unhurt, and these had gone below to
escape the American musketry. The “Wasp” had only ten men killed
and wounded. The battle lasted forty-three minutes.
If the American people had acquired a taste for blood, the battle
of the “Wasp” and “Frolic” gratified it, for the British sloop was
desperately defended, and the battle, won by the better
marksmanship of the Americans, was unusually bloody. Captain
Jones lost the full satisfaction of his victory, for a few hours
afterward the “Poictiers,” a British seventy-four, came upon the two
disabled combatants and carried both into Bermuda; but the
American people would have been glad to part with their whole navy
on such terms, and the fight between the “Wasp” and the “Frolic”
roused popular enthusiasm to a point where no honors seemed to
satisfy their gratitude to Captain Jones and his crew.
The “Wasp’s” brilliant career closed within a week from the day
she left the Delaware. A week afterward another of these ship-duels
occurred, which made a still deeper impression. Rodgers and
Decatur sailed from Boston October 8, with the “President,” the
“United States,” “Congress,” and “Argus,” leaving the “Constitution,”
“Chesapeake,” and “Hornet” in port. Rodgers in the “President,” with
the “Congress,” cruised far and wide, but could find no enemy to
fight, and after making prize of a few merchantmen returned to
Boston, December 31. The “Argus” also made some valuable prizes,
but was chased by a British squadron, and only by excellent
management escaped capture, returning Jan. 3, 1813, to New York.
Decatur in the “United States,” separating from the squadron
October 12, sailed eastward to the neighborhood of the Azores,
until, October 25, he sighted a sail to windward. The stranger made
chase. The wind was fresh from south-southeast, with a heavy sea.
Decatur stood toward his enemy, who presently came about, abreast
of the “United States” but beyond gunshot, and both ships being
then on the same tack approached each other until the action began
at long range. The British ship was the 38-gun frigate “Macedonian”
commanded by Captain Carden, and about the same force as the
“Guerriere.” At first the “United States” used only her long 24-
pounders, of which she carried fifteen on her broadside, while the
“Macedonian” worked a broadside of fourteen long 18-pounders. So
unequal a contest could not continue. Not only was the American
metal heavier, but the American fire was quicker and better directed
than that of the Englishman; so that Carden, after a few minutes of
this experience, bore down to close. His manœuvre made matters
worse. The carronades of the “United States” came into play; the
“Macedonian’s” mizzen-mast fell, her fore and main top-mast were
shot away, and her main-yard; almost all her rigging was cut to
pieces, and most of the guns on her engaged side were dismounted.
She dropped gradually to leeward, and Decatur, tacking and coming
up under his enemy’s stern, hailed, and received her surrender.
The British ship had no right to expect a victory, for the disparity
of force was even greater than between the “Constitution” and
“Guerriere;” but in this case the British court-martial subsequently
censured Captain Carden for mistakes. The battle lasted longer than
that with the “Guerriere,” and Decatur apologized for the extra hour
because the sea was high and his enemy had the weather-gauge
and kept at a distance; but the apology was not needed. Decatur
proved his skill by sparing his ship and crew. His own loss was
eleven men killed and wounded; the “Macedonian’s” loss was nine
times as great. The “United States” suffered little in her hull, and her
spars and rigging suffered no greater injury than could be quickly
repaired; while the “Macedonian” received a hundred shot in her
hull, and aloft nothing remained standing but her fore and main
masts and her fore-yard.
Decatur saved the “Macedonian,” and brought her back to New
London,—the only British frigate ever brought as a prize into an
American port. The two ships arrived December 4, and from New
London the “Macedonian” was taken to New York and received in
formal triumph. Captain Jones of the “Wasp” took command of her
in reward for his capture of the “Frolic.”
Before the year closed, the “Constitution” had time for another
cruise. Hull at his own request received command of the Navy Yard
at Charlestown, and also took charge of the naval defences in New
York harbor, but did not again serve at sea during the war. The
“Constitution” was given to Captain Bainbridge, one of the oldest
officers in the service. A native of New Jersey, Bainbridge
commanded the “Philadelphia” when lost in the Tripolitan war, and
was held for eighteen months a prisoner in Tripoli. In 1812, when he
took command of the “Constitution,” though a year older than Hull
and five years older than Decatur, he had not yet reached his fortieth
year, while Rodgers, born in 1771, had but lately passed it. The
difference in age between these four naval officers and the four chief
generals—Dearborn, Wilkinson, Wade Hampton, and William Hull—
was surprising; for the average age of the naval commanders
amounted barely to thirty-seven years, while that of the four
generals reached fifty-eight. This difference alone accounted for
much of the difference in their fortune, and perhaps political
influence accounted for the rest.
Bainbridge showed no inferiority to the other officers of the
service, and no one grumbled at the retirement of Hull. The
“Constitution” sailed from Boston, October 25, with the “Hornet.”
The “Essex,” then in the Delaware, was ordered to join the squadron
at certain specified ports in the south Atlantic, and sailed October
28, expecting a very long cruise. December 13 Bainbridge arrived at
San Salvador, on the coast of Brazil, where he left the “Hornet” to
blockade the “Bonne Citoyenne,” a British 18-gun sloop-of-war
bound to England with specie. Cruising southward, within sight of
the Brazilian coast, in latitude 13° 6´ south, Bainbridge sighted the
British frigate “Java,” a ship of the same tonnage as the “Guerriere,”
throwing a slightly heavier broadside and carrying a large crew of
four hundred and twenty-six men, if the American account was
correct. Bainbridge tacked and made sail off shore, to draw the
stranger away from a neutral coast; the British frigate followed him,
until at half-past one o’clock in the afternoon Bainbridge shortened
sail, tacked again, and stood for his enemy. Soon after two o’clock
the action began, the two ships being on the same tack, the “Java”
to windward and the better sailer, and both fighting their long-range
guns. The British frigate insisted upon keeping at a distance, obliging
Bainbridge after half an hour to risk the danger of being raked; and
at twenty minutes before three o’clock the “Constitution” closed
within pistol-shot.[337] At ten minutes before three the ships were
foul, the “Java’s” jibboom in the “Constitution’s” mizzen rigging; and
from that point the battle became slaughter. In fifteen minutes the
“Java’s” bowsprit, fore-mast, and main top-mast were cut away, and
a few minutes after four o’clock she ceased firing. Her captain,
Lambert, was mortally wounded; the first lieutenant was wounded;
forty-eight of her officers and crew were dead or dying; one hundred
and two were wounded; little more than a hulk filled with wreck and
with dead or wounded men floated on the water.
The “Constitution” had but twelve men killed and twenty-two
wounded, and repaired damages in an hour. Owing perhaps to the
death of Captain Lambert the reports of the battle were more
contradictory than usual, but no one disputed that although the
“Java” was to windward and outsailed the American frigate, and
although her broadside counted as nearly nine against her enemy’s
ten,—for the “Constitution” on this cruise carried two guns less than
in her fight with the “Guerriere,”—yet the “Java” inflicted no more
damage than she ought to have done had she been only one fourth
the size of the American frigate, although she was defended more
desperately than either the “Guerriere” or the “Macedonian.”
With this battle the year ended. Bainbridge was obliged to blow
up his prize, and after landing and paroling his prisoners at San
Salvador sailed for Boston, where he arrived in safety, February 27,
1813. During the six months the war had lasted the little United
States navy captured three British frigates, besides the 20-gun
“Alert” and the 18-gun “Frolic;” privateers by scores had ravaged
British commerce, while the immense British force on the ocean had
succeeded only in capturing the little “Nautilus,” the 12-gun brig
“Vixen,” and the “Wasp.” The commerce of America had indeed
suffered almost total destruction; but the dispute was to be decided
not so much by the loss which England could inflict upon America, as
by that which America could inflict upon England.
CHAPTER XVIII.
In such a war the people of the United States had only
themselves to fear; but their dangers were all the more formidable.
Had the war deeply disturbed the conditions of society, or brought
general and immediate distress, government and Union might easily
have fallen to pieces; but in the midst of military disaster and in
plain sight of the Government’s incompetence, the general public
neither felt nor had reason to fear much change in the routine of
life. Commerce had long accustomed itself to embargoes,
confiscations, and blockades, and ample supplies of foreign goods
continued to arrive. The people made no serious exertions; among a
population exceeding seven millions, not ten thousand men entered
the military service. The militia, liable to calls to the limit of one
hundred thousand, served for the most part only a few weeks in the
autumn, went home in whole regiments when they pleased,[338] and
in the East refused to go out at all. The scarcity of men was so great
that even among the sea-goingclass, for whose rights the war was
waged, only with the utmost difficulty and long delays, in spite of
bounties and glory, could sailors be found to man half-a-dozen
frigates for a three-months cruise, although the number of privateers
was never great.
The nation as a whole saw nothing of actual warfare. While
scarcely a city in Europe had escaped capture, and hardly a province
of that continent was so remote as not to be familiar with invading
armies or to have suffered in proportion to its resources, no
American city saw or greatly feared an enemy. The rich farms of
New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Virginia produced their
usual harvests, and except on exposed parts of the coast the
farmers never feared that their crops might be wasted by
manœuvring armies, or their cattle, pigs, and poultry be disturbed
by marauders. The country was vast, and quiet reigned throughout
the whole United States. Except at the little point of Niagara,
occupied by a few hundred scattered farmers, and on the extreme
outskirts of Ohio and Indiana, the occupations and industries of life
followed in the main their daily course.
The country refused to take the war seriously. A rich nation with
seven million inhabitants should have easily put one hundred
thousand men into the field, and should have found no difficulty in
supporting them; but no inducement that the Government dared
offer prevailed upon the people to risk life and property on a
sufficient scale in 1812. The ranks of the army were to be filled in
one of two ways,—either by enlistment in the regular service for five
years, with pay at five dollars a month, sixteen dollars bounty, and
on discharge three months pay and one hundred and sixty acres of
land; or by volunteer organizations to the limit of fifty thousand men
in all, officered under State laws, to serve for one year, with the pay
of regular troops but without bounty, clothed, and in case of cavalry
corps mounted, at their own expense. In a society where the day-
laborers’ wages were nowhere less than nine dollars a month,[339]
these inducements were not enough to supply the place of
enthusiasm. The patriotic citizen who wished to serve his country
without too much sacrifice, chose a third course,—he volunteered
under the Act of Congress which authorized the President to call one
hundred thousand State militia into service for six months; and upon
this State militia Dearborn, Hull, Van Rensselaer, and Smyth were
obliged chiefly to depend.
If the war fever burned hotly in any part of the country Kentucky
was the spot. There the whole male population was eager to prove
its earnestness. When Henry Clay returned to Lexington after the
declaration of war, he wrote to Monroe[340] that he was almost
alarmed at the ardor his State displayed; about four hundred men
had been recruited for the regular army, and although no one had
volunteered for twelve months, the quota of six-months militia was
more than supplied by volunteers.
“Such is the structure of our society, however,” continued Clay,
“that I doubt whether many can be engaged for a longer term than
six months. For that term any force whatever which our population
can afford may be obtained. Engaged in agricultural pursuits, you are
well aware that from about this time, when the crop is either secured
in the barn or laid by in the field until the commencement of the
spring, there is leisure for any kind of enterprise.”
Clay feared only that these six-months militia corps, which had
armed and equipped themselves for instant service, might not be
called out. His friends were destined not to be disappointed, for
early in August pressing letters arrived from Hull’s army at Detroit
begging reinforcements, and the governor of Kentucky at once
summoned two thousand volunteers to rendezvous, August 20, at
Newport, opposite Cincinnati. This reinforcement could not reach
Detroit before the middle of September, and the difficulties already
developed in Hull’s path showed that the war could not be finished
in a single campaign of six months; but the Kentuckians were not on
that account willing to lengthen their term of service even to one
year.
The danger revealed by Hull’s position threw a double obstacle in
the way of public energy, for where it did not check, it promised to
mislead enthusiasm, and in either case it shook, if it did not destroy,
confidence in the national government. The leaders of the war party
saw their fears taking shape. Henry Clay wrote without reserve to
Monroe,[341]—
“Should Hull’s army be cut off, the effect on the public mind would
be, especially in this quarter, in the highest degree injurious. ‘Why did
he proceed with so inconsiderable a force?’ was the general inquiry
made of me. I maintained that it was sufficient. Should he meet with
a disaster, the predictions of those who pronounced his army
incompetent to its object will be fulfilled; and the Secretary of War, in
whom already there unfortunately exists no sort of confidence, cannot
possibly shield Mr. Madison from the odium which will attend such an
event.”
Clay was right in thinking that Eustis could not shield Madison;
but from the moment that Eustis could no longer serve that purpose,
Clay had no choice but to shield the President himself. When the
threatened disaster took place, victims like Eustis, Hull, Van
Rensselaer, Smyth, were sacrificed; but the sacrifice merely prepared
new material for other and perhaps worse disasters of the same
kind. In Kentucky this result was most strongly marked, for in their
irritation at the weakness of the national Government the
Kentuckians took the war into their own hands, appointed William
Henry Harrison to the command of their armies, and attempted to
conquer Canada by a campaign that should not be directed from
Washington. August 25 Clay described the feelings of his State by a
comparison suggesting the greatest military misfortunes known in
history:[342]
“If you will carry your recollections back to the age of the
Crusaders and of some of the most distinguished leaders of those
expeditions, you will have a picture of the enthusiasm existing in this
country for the expedition to Canada and for Harrison as commander.”

A week later, September 21, Clay gave another account, even

less assuring, of the manner in which the popular energy was
exhausting itself:—
“The capitulation of Detroit has produced no despair; it has, on the
contrary, awakened new energies and aroused the whole people of
this State. Kentucky has at this moment from eight to ten thousand
men in the field; it is not practicable to ascertain the precise number.
Except our quota of the hundred thousand militia the residue is chiefly
of a miscellaneous character, who have turned out without pay or
supplies of any kind, carrying with them their own arms and their own
subsistence. Parties are daily passing to the theatre of action; last
night seventy lay on my farm; and they go on, from a solitary
individual, to companies of ten, fifty, one hundred, etc. The only fear I
have is that the savages will, as their custom is, elude them, and
upon their return fall upon our frontiers. They have already shocked
us with some of the most horrid murders. Within twenty-four miles of
Louisville, on the headwaters of Silver Creek, twenty-two were
massacred a few days ago.”

The adventures of these volunteers made part of the next

campaign. Enthusiastic as Kentucky was, few or none of the eight or
ten thousand men under arms offered to serve for twelve months.
Excessively expensive, wasteful, insubordinate, and unsteady, no
general dared to depend on them. No one could be more conscious
of the evils of the system than the Government; but the Government
was helpless to invent a remedy.
“Proofs multiply daily,” wrote Madison to Monroe, September 21,
[343] “of the difficulty of obtaining regulars, and of the fluctuating
resource in the militia. High bounties and short enlistments, however
objectionable, will alone fill the ranks, and then too in a moderate
number.”

To dislike of prolonged service even the most ardent Western

supporters of the war added distrust of the Executive. The war
Republicans of the West and South were hardly less vigorous than
the Federalists of Massachusetts and Connecticut in their criticisms
of the Government at Washington. John Graham, chief clerk of the
State Department, who went to Kentucky in September, wrote to
Monroe[344] that “great as is the popularity of the President, it is
barely able to resist the torrent of public opinion against the
Secretary of War, who, so far as I can judge, is universally
considered by the people of this country as incompetent to his
present situation.” Clay’s opinion has already been shown; but the
angriest of all the war leaders on hearing of Hull’s surrender was
Senator Crawford of Georgia.
“Such is my want of confidence in the leaders of our forces,” he
wrote to Monroe,[345] “and their directors, Eustis and Hamilton in the
Cabinet, that I am fearful a continuance of the war, unless it should
be for several years, will only add to the number of our defeats. The
only difficulty I had in declaring war arose from the incompetency of
the men to whom the principal management of it was to be confided.
A Secretary of War who, instead of forming general and
comprehensive arrangements for the organization of his troops and
for the successful prosecution of the campaign, consumes his time in
reading advertisements of petty retailing merchants to find where he
may purchase one hundred shoes or two hundred hats; and a
Secretary of the Navy who, in instructing his naval officers, should
make the supply of the heads of departments with pineapples and
other tropical fruits through the exertions of these officers,—cannot
fail to bring disgrace upon themselves, their immediate employers,
and the nation. If Mr. Madison finds it impossible to bring his feelings
to consent to the dismission of unfaithful or incompetent officers, he
must be content with defeat and disgrace in all his efforts during the
war. So far as he may suffer from this course he deserves no
commiseration, but his accountability to the nation will be great
indeed!”
Harsh as these comments, were, the Secretary of State found no
difficulty in listening to them; indeed, no member of the party was
more severe than Monroe. He visited Jefferson, and apparently
Jefferson agreed with his criticisms:[346]—
“We conferred on the then state of the Departments of War and
Navy, and agreed that whatever might be the merit of the gentlemen
in them, which was admitted in certain respects, a change in both was
indispensable.”
Indeed, Monroe did what no northern Democrat liked to do,—he
found fault with Dearborn.
“Our military operations,” he told Jefferson, “had been
unsuccessful. One army had been surrendered under circumstances
which impeached the integrity of the commander; and to the north, in
the whole extent of the country, so important and delicately
circumstanced as it was, the management had been most wretched.
The command at the important post of Niagara had been suffered to
fall into State hands, and to be perverted to local and selfish
purposes. Van Rensselaer, a weak and incompetent man with high
pretensions, took it. It was late in the year before General Dearborn
left Boston and repaired to Albany, and had given no impulse to the
recruiting business in the Eastern States by passing through them and
making appeals to the patriotism of the people; and when he took the
command at Albany it was in a manner to discourage all hope of
active operations during the favorable season. The commander ought
to lead every important movement. If intended to attack Montreal,
that being the grand attack, his station was there. If a smaller blow
only could be given, the feint against Montreal should have been
committed to another, while he commanded in person where real
service was to be performed. It was soon seen that nothing would be
done against Lower Canada; General Dearborn doubtless saw it on his
first arrival at Albany, if he did not anticipate it before he left Boston.
Niagara was the object next in importance, and had he taken the
command there he might and probably would, by superseding little
people and conducting our military operations, have prevented the
riotous and contentious scenes exhibited there, saved the country and
the Government from the disgraceful defeat of Van Rensselaer, and
the more disgraceful and gasconading discomfiture of Smyth. The
experience of the campaign had excited a doubt with many, if not
with all, whether our military operations would prosper under General
Dearborn; ... he was advanced in years, infirm, and had given no
proof of activity or military talent during the year.”
The Secretary of State required nothing less than the retirement
of the two of his colleagues in the Cabinet, and of the general in
chief command of the army. The Secretary of the Treasury, though
less censorious than Clay, Crawford, or Monroe, shared their
opinions. He spoke of Eustis’s incompetence as a matter universally
admitted, and wrote to Jefferson that though the three disasters of
Hull, Van Rensselaer, and Smyth could not with justice be ascribed to
the Secretary of War, “yet his incapacity and the total want of
confidence in him were felt through every ramification of the public
service.”[347] Jefferson abstained from criticising the chief
incompetents, but set no bounds to his vindictiveness against the
unfortunate generals. “Hull will of course be shot for cowardice and
treachery,” he wrote to Madison;[348] “and will not Van Rensselaer
be broke for incapacity?”
The incapacity of Eustis, Hamilton, Dearborn, Hull, Van
Rensselaer, and Smyth pointed directly to the responsible source of
appointment,—the President himself; but in face of a general
election Republicans could not afford to criticise their President, and
only in private could they assail his Cabinet. The Federalists,
factious, weak, and unpopular as they were, expressed the secret
opinion of the whole country, and could be answered by no facts or
arguments except military success, which Madison was admittedly
incompetent to win; but perhaps the failure of his Cabinet, of his
generals, and of his troops gave the Federalists less advantage than
they drew from the failures of diplomacy in which his genius lay.
With reasons such as few nations ever waited to collect for an
appeal to arms, Madison had been so unfortunate in making the
issue that on his own showing no sufficient cause of war seemed to
exist. His management was so extraordinary that at the moment
when Hull surrendered Detroit, Great Britain was able to pose before
the world in the attitude of victim to a conspiracy between Napoleon
and the United States to destroy the liberties of Europe. Such
inversion of the truth passed ordinary bounds, and so real was
Madison’s diplomatic mismanagement that it paralyzed one half the
energies of the American people.
Largely if not chiefly owing to these mistakes, the New England
Federalists were able to convince themselves that Jefferson and
Madison were sold to France. From the moment war was declared,
the charge became a source of serious danger. Only one more step
was needed to throw the clerical party of New England into open
revolution. If the majority meant to close their long career by a
catastrophe which should leave the Union a wreck, they had but to
try the effects of coercion.
For a time the followers and friends of the Essex Junto had some
reason to hope that matters would quickly come to this pass, for the
declaration of war caused on both sides an outbreak of temper. In
Massachusetts, Governor Strong issued, June 26, a
proclamation[349] for a public Fast in consequence of the war just
declared “against the nation from which we are descended, and
which for many generations has been the bulwark of the religion we
profess;” and although such a description of England would in
previous times have scandalized the clergy, it was received with
general assent. The returning members of Congress who had voted
for war met a reception in some cases offensive and insulting, to the
point of actual assault. Two of the Massachusetts members, Seaver
and Widgery, were publicly insulted and hissed on Change in Boston;
while another, Charles Turner, member for the Plymouth district, and
Chief-Justice of the Court of Sessions for that county, was seized by
a crowd on the evening of August 3, on the main street of Plymouth,
and kicked through the town.[350] By energetic use of a social
machinery still almost irresistible, the Federalists and the clergy
checked or prevented every effort to assist the war, either by money
or enlistments. The Supreme Court of Massachusetts, with Chief-
Justice Parsons at its head, advised[351] Governor Strong that not to
Congress or to the President, but to the governor, belonged the right
to decide when the Constitutional exigency existed which should call
the State militia into the service of the United States; and Governor
Strong decided that neither foreign invasion nor domestic
insurrection existed, and that therefore he could not satisfy the
President’s request for the quota of the United States militia to
defend the coast. When, later in the season, the governor called out
three companies for the defence of Eastport and Castine, in Maine,
the chief-justice privately remonstrated, holding that this act yielded
the main point at issue between the State and National government.
[352]

General Dearborn’s annoyance at the difficulties thrown in the

way of enlistments was well-founded. By one favorite device, the
creation of fictitious debts, the person enlisting caused himself to be
arrested and bailed. The courts held that while the suit was pending
the man was the property of his bail, and could not be obliged to
resume his military duties.[353] Many such difficulties were created
by the activity of individuals; but organized efforts were made with
still more effect in counteracting the wishes of government. The
Federalist members of Congress issued an Address to their
constituents protesting against the action of Congress in suppressing
discussion; and this address declared the war to be unnecessary and
inexpedient. Immediately after the declaration, the House of
Representatives of Massachusetts issued another Address to the
People of the State,[354] declaring the war to be a wanton sacrifice
of their best interests, and asking their exertions to thwart it.
“To secure a full effect to your object, it will be necessary that you
should meet and consult together for the common good in your towns
and counties. It is in dark and trying times that this Constitutional
privilege becomes invaluable. Express your sentiments without fear,
and let the sound of your disapprobation of this war be loud and
deep. Let it be distinctly understood that in support of it your
conformity to the requisitions of law will be the result of principle and
not of choice. If your sons must be torn from you by conscription,
consign them to the care of God; but let there be no volunteers
except for defensive war.”
The people at once acted upon the recommendation to hold
town-meetings and county conventions. Among the earliest was a
meeting in Essex County, July 21, Timothy Pickering presiding, which
adopted a declaration drawn by him, closing with his favorite
proposal of a State Convention, to which the meeting chose
delegates. This step—a revival of the old disunion project of 1804—
was received with general favor, and defeated only by the
courageous opposition of Samuel Dexter, who, breaking away from
his party associates, attacked the scheme so vigorously in Boston
town-meeting, August 6 and 7, that though Harrison Gray Otis and
other Federalists leaders gave it their public support, and though the
motion itself was carried, the plan was abandoned.[355]
Thenceforward, while towns and counties continued to adopt
addresses, memorials, and resolutions, they avoided committing
themselves to expressions or acts for which the time was not ripe. A
typical memorial among many that were showered upon the
President was adopted by a convention of electors of the county of
Rockingham in New Hampshire, August 5, and was the better worth
attention because drawn by Daniel Webster, who made there his first
appearance as a party leader:—
“We shrink from the separation of the States as an event fraught
with incalculable evils; and it is among our strongest objections to the
present course of measures that they have in our opinion a very
dangerous and alarming bearing on such an event. If a separation of
the States ever should take place, it will be on some occasion when
one portion of the country undertakes to control, to regulate, and to
sacrifice the interest of another; when a small and heated majority in
the government, taking counsel of their passions and not of their
reason, contemptuously disregarding the interests and perhaps
stopping the mouths of a large and respectable minority, shall by
hasty, rash, and ruinous measures threaten to destroy essential rights
and lay waste the most important interests. It shall be our most
fervent supplication to Heaven to avert both the event and the
occasion; and the Government may be assured that the tie that binds
us to the Union will never be broken by us.”

The conduct of England strengthened the Federalists. After the

repeal of the Orders in Council became known, Monroe, July 27,
authorized Jonathan Russell in London to arrange an armistice,
provided the British government would consent to an informal
arrangement in regard to impressments and blockades. Hardly had
these instructions been sent to England, when from Albany came
news that Sir George Prevost had proposed an armistice and General
Dearborn had accepted it. This act compelled the President either to
stop the war and disorganize his party, or to disapprove Dearborn’s
armistice without prejudice to the armistice which Russell was to
negotiate in London, and also without censure to General Dearborn.
To Dearborn the President, as the story has shown, sent immediate
orders for the renewal of hostilities; while Monroe, in fresh
instructions to Jonathan Russell,[356] explained the disavowal. The
explanations given by Monroe were little likely to satisfy Federalists
that the Government honestly wished for peace. Monroe alleged that
the repeal of the Orders in Council did not satisfy the United States,
because the repeal still asserted the principle underlying the orders,
which the United States could not admit; but he further maintained
that any armistice, made before obtaining redress on the subject of
impressments, might be taken as a relinquishment of the claim to
redress, and was therefore inadmissible.
However sound in principle these objections were, they seemed
to declare perpetual war; for until England should be reduced to the
position of Denmark or Prussia, she would not abandon in express
terms either the right of impressment or that of blockade. The
probable effect of a successful war waged on these grounds would
give Canada and the Floridas to the United States as the
consequence of aiding Napoleon to destroy European and English
liberties. The Federalist clergy had little difficulty in convincing their
congregations by such evidence that Madison was bound under
secret engagements with Napoleon; and while Madison planted
himself in the Napoleonic position of forcing war on a yielding
people, the British officials in Canada stood on the defensive,
avoided irritation, and encouraged trade and commerce. American
merchant-vessels carried British passes; and most of them, to the
anger of Napoleon, were freighted with supplies for the British army
in Portugal and Spain. The attitude of England would have been
magnificent in its repose had its dignity not been ruffled by the
conduct of Hull, Decatur, and Bainbridge, and by the privateers.
While the New England Federalists, taking the attitude of patriots
who strove only to avert impending ruin, made their profit of every
new national disaster, and repressed as well as they could the
indiscretions of their friends, the war party was not so well
disciplined. Democracies in history always suffered from the
necessity of uniting with much of the purest and best in human
nature a mass of ignorance and brutality lying at the bottom of all
societies. Although America was safe for the time from Old World
ruin, no political or military error went so far to disgust respectable
people with the war and its support, as an uprising of brutality which
occurred in Baltimore. Within some twenty years this newest of
American cities had gathered nearly fifty thousand inhabitants,
among whom were many of the roughest characters in America, fit
only for privateersmen or pirates, and familiar with both careers. On
the other hand, the State of Maryland like the State of Delaware
contained many conservatives, who showed their strength every four
years by depriving the Republican candidate for the Presidency of
some portion of the State’s electoral vote. Under their patronage a
newspaper called “The Federal Republican” was published in
Baltimore, edited by Jacob Wagner, who had been chief clerk of the
State Department under Secretary Pickering, and was retained in
that office by Secretary Madison until 1807, when he resigned the
place and made use of his knowledge to attack Madison in the press.
As an editor, Jacob Wagner belonged to the extreme wing of his
party, and scrupled at nothing in the way of an assertion or a
slander. His opposition to the war was bitter and unceasing, while
the city of Baltimore shared in the feeling common in the South and
West, that, after the declaration, opposition to the war amounted to
treason and should not be tolerated. June 22, immediately after the
declaration, a well-organized mob deliberately took possession of
Wagner’s printing office and destroyed it, pulling down even the
walls, while the citizens looked on and the mayor confined his
exercise of authority to deprecations.
Wagner removed to the District of Columbia, and began to
publish his paper in Georgetown, where the Government could be
made directly responsible in case of further violence; but his
associate, A. C. Hanson, and several of the Baltimore Federalists,
were not disposed to tolerate the dictation of a mob; and after
discussing the matter a month, some of them determined on an
attempt as fool-hardy as it was courageous.[357] Monday, July 27,
the “Federal Republican” was circulated among its subscribers in
Baltimore, purporting to be printed at 45 Charles Street, though
really printed at Georgetown; while about twenty persons, under the
general direction of Henry Lee,—a Virginian distinguished in the
Revolutionary War, and in 1791 governor of his State,—fortified
themselves in the house and waited attack. The same evening a
mob gathered and broke open the door. The garrison fired, and
killed or wounded some of the assailants. The attacking party
brought up a cannon, and a serious battle was about to begin, when
the mayor with a small squadron of cavalry intervened, and
persuaded Hanson and his friends to submit to the civil authority
and go to jail to answer for the blood they had shed. General Lee,
General Lingan,—also a Revolutionary officer,—Hanson, and the
other occupants of the house were marched to the jail through an
angry and violent mob. The city was in commotion, the authorities
were helpless, the militia when called upon did not appear; and that
night the mob, consisting chiefly of low Irish and Germans, entered
the jail and took out the prisoners. Some managed to escape in the
confusion; the rest were savagely beaten. Eight more or less
unconscious victims lay all night and till noon the next day piled on
the prison steps, and the crowd, which would not permit their
removal, amused itself by cutting and burning the sufferers to
ascertain whether they were dead. When at last the rioters
permitted them to be removed, General Lingan was in fact dead,
General Lee was crippled, and the others were more or less severely
injured.
At that moment, and even long after the heat of temper
subsided,[358] party feeling tended to favor the rioters rather than
the Federalists, who had, as was said, “given aid and comfort to the
enemy;” but when the political effects of the massacre showed
themselves, the war party became aware that a blunder had been
committed more serious than any ordinary crime. The Baltimore
massacre recalled the excesses of the French Revolution, still fresh
in men’s minds; and although Democrats in Pennsylvania and
Republicans in Virginia might feel themselves too strong for disorder,
in the North and East the murder of Lingan shook the foundation of
society. Massachusetts and Connecticut looked to their arms. If their
political opinions were to be repressed by such means, they had
need to be unanimous on their own side. The town of Boston,
August 6, declared in strongly worded resolutions[359] that the riot
was “the first fruit of the unnatural and dreadful alliance into which
we have entered in fact, if not in form,” and ordered the magistrates
and citizens to be ready at a moment’s warning, armed and
equipped, to suppress any kind of disorder. Under this excitement,
the Federalists at Rockingham, August 5, talked of disunion, and the
rabble of Plymouth mobbed Turner on the night of August 3. If the
majority alone was to utter opinions, the Republican party north of
Pennsylvania might yet be forced to practise the virtue of silence.
Not all the political and military disasters of the year harmed the
Government and the war more seriously than they were injured by
the Baltimore mob.
Under the influence of such passions the Presidential election
approached. Except beyond the mountains the war party was
everywhere a social minority, and perhaps such strength as Madison
retained in the East consisted partly in the popular impression that
he was not a favorite with the authors of the war. The true
sentiment of the people, if capable of expression, was one of fretful
discontent; and the sense of diffused popular restlessness alone
explained the obstinacy of De Witt Clinton in refusing to desist from
his candidacy, and still more the first prominent appearance of
Martin Van Buren as manager of the intrigue for defeating Madison.

Appraisal Report
83% (6)
Appraisal Report
24 pages
November 2015
100% (3)
November 2015
100 pages
Ielts
No ratings yet
Ielts
1 page
JLG-860SJ - en
No ratings yet
JLG-860SJ - en
142 pages
TLE7 - 8-ICT-PROGRAMMING FOR ROBOTICS Q1 M1 W1 - noAK
No ratings yet
TLE7 - 8-ICT-PROGRAMMING FOR ROBOTICS Q1 M1 W1 - noAK
16 pages
Corolla Diesel PDF
No ratings yet
Corolla Diesel PDF
2 pages
A 10-Bit 50-MS Per S SAR ADC With A Monotonic Capacitor Switching Procedure
No ratings yet
A 10-Bit 50-MS Per S SAR ADC With A Monotonic Capacitor Switching Procedure
10 pages
Incredible India Quiz Prelims: Avant-Garde Essence 2018
No ratings yet
Incredible India Quiz Prelims: Avant-Garde Essence 2018
86 pages
My Time Table 2024-25
No ratings yet
My Time Table 2024-25
1 page
3rd Quarter ACR
No ratings yet
3rd Quarter ACR
4 pages
Ikea2 Bam B2 SC 6501 - 01 PDF
No ratings yet
Ikea2 Bam B2 SC 6501 - 01 PDF
1 page
Mock CLAT 47 Question Paper - FINAL5969333
No ratings yet
Mock CLAT 47 Question Paper - FINAL5969333
31 pages
Week 7 Milestone Worksheet Completed
No ratings yet
Week 7 Milestone Worksheet Completed
16 pages
What Is The Definition of - Medium - in Art
No ratings yet
What Is The Definition of - Medium - in Art
9 pages
MOS-II Lecture 01 - Stress Analysis
No ratings yet
MOS-II Lecture 01 - Stress Analysis
25 pages
History of Kenya
No ratings yet
History of Kenya
2 pages
Search:: A Really Simple Database
No ratings yet
Search:: A Really Simple Database
30 pages
11月13日文献（陈洁）a Neural Circuit for Bergamot Essential Oil‐Induced Anxiolytic Effects
No ratings yet
11月13日文献（陈洁）a Neural Circuit for Bergamot Essential Oil‐Induced Anxiolytic Effects
13 pages
Magnetostriction and Applications of Ultrasonic Waves: 15Z204 - Materials Science
No ratings yet
Magnetostriction and Applications of Ultrasonic Waves: 15Z204 - Materials Science
17 pages
A19 CC5051NP CW1
No ratings yet
A19 CC5051NP CW1
39 pages
Mikro DM38
No ratings yet
Mikro DM38
2 pages
(YEAR 3) Math Worksheet
No ratings yet
(YEAR 3) Math Worksheet
7 pages
RRL
No ratings yet
RRL
2 pages
Chemistry Homework 8-1
No ratings yet
Chemistry Homework 8-1
7 pages
Aqautec Ocean Parts Manual
No ratings yet
Aqautec Ocean Parts Manual
4 pages
Chapter-4 Bullet
No ratings yet
Chapter-4 Bullet
5 pages
Version 1.00 Edit 5 June 2015 Download The Latest & Color Version of This Manual at
No ratings yet
Version 1.00 Edit 5 June 2015 Download The Latest & Color Version of This Manual at
8 pages
AB-063 - 4 - EN Aluminium in Cement
No ratings yet
AB-063 - 4 - EN Aluminium in Cement
8 pages
Tritaal/teentaal-Single Speed - (Thah)
No ratings yet
Tritaal/teentaal-Single Speed - (Thah)
7 pages
Emergency Cart Checklist
No ratings yet
Emergency Cart Checklist
1 page
Principles: Life and Work
From Everand
Principles: Life and Work
Ray Dalio
4/5 (648)
The Glass Castle: A Memoir
From Everand
The Glass Castle: A Memoir
Jeannette Walls
4.5/5 (1856)
The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are
From Everand
The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are
Brené Brown
4/5 (1175)
The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer
From Everand
The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer
Siddhartha Mukherjee
4.5/5 (298)
The Perks of Being a Wallflower
From Everand
The Perks of Being a Wallflower
Stephen Chbosky
4.5/5 (4103)
Angela's Ashes: A Memoir
From Everand
Angela's Ashes: A Memoir
Frank McCourt
4.5/5 (943)
Steve Jobs
From Everand
Steve Jobs
Walter Isaacson
4.5/5 (1139)
Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike
From Everand
Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike
Phil Knight
4.5/5 (629)
The Outsider: A Novel
From Everand
The Outsider: A Novel
Stephen King
4/5 (2886)
The Light Between Oceans: A Novel
From Everand
The Light Between Oceans: A Novel
M.L. Stedman
4.5/5 (815)
Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore
From Everand
Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore
Jay Sekulow
3.5/5 (144)
Sing, Unburied, Sing: A Novel
From Everand
Sing, Unburied, Sing: A Novel
Jesmyn Ward
4/5 (1267)
Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln
From Everand
Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln
Doris Kearns Goodwin
4.5/5 (244)
Her Body and Other Parties: Stories
From Everand
Her Body and Other Parties: Stories
Carmen Maria Machado
4/5 (903)
Fear: Trump in the White House
From Everand
Fear: Trump in the White House
Bob Woodward
3.5/5 (836)
The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America
From Everand
The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America
George Packer
4/5 (45)
Little Women
From Everand
Little Women
Louisa May Alcott
4.5/5 (2369)
The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century
From Everand
The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century
Thomas L. Friedman
3.5/5 (2289)
The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)
From Everand
The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)
Sarah M. Broom
4/5 (100)
A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story
From Everand
A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story
Dave Eggers
3.5/5 (233)
John Adams
From Everand
John Adams
David McCullough
4.5/5 (2546)
Manhattan Beach: A Novel
From Everand
Manhattan Beach: A Novel
Jennifer Egan
3.5/5 (919)

Instant Download Readings From Programming With C++ 1st Edition Kyla Mcmullen - Ebook PDF PDF All Chapters

Uploaded by

Instant Download Readings From Programming With C++ 1st Edition Kyla Mcmullen - Ebook PDF PDF All Chapters

Uploaded by

Full download ebook at ebooksecure.

Readings from Programming with C++ 1st Edition

Download more ebook from https://ebooksecure.com

Readings from Programming with C++ 1st Edition Kyla

Programming With STM32: Getting Started With the Nucleo

(eBook PDF) Programming, Problem Solving and

Programming in C 1st Edition - eBook PDF

(Original PDF) C++ Programming From Problem Analysis to

C++ Programming: From Problem Analysis to Program

Programming and Problem Solving with Python 1st Edition

(eBook PDF) Starting Out with C++ from Control

C++ KYLA McMULLEN

Australia • Brazil • Canada • Mexico • Singapore • United Kingdom • United States

Technical Editor: John Freitas Library of Congress Control Number: 2020922802

Developmental Editor: Lisa Ruffolo ISBN: 978-0-357-63775-3

Vice President, Marketing – Science, Technology,

prefacexiii Build Tools 22

Module 8 Pass by Reference 161

Function Basics 146 Dealing with Exceptions 189

Module 17 The Find Method 346

Key Terms 318

Asymptotic Analysis 397 Quicksort 438

Search Algorithms 411 Microprocessor Operations 462

Binary-Hex-Binary Conversions 481 Speech Synthesis 516

Flowcharts 548 UML Diagram Parts 558

Welcome to Readings from Programming with C11.

MindTap Overview MindTap Features

Connect to the site’s login page.

Figure 1-1 Steps for two-factor authentication

• A recipe for baking brownies

Programming Algorithms (1.1.2, 1.1.3, 1.1.5)

“Good” Algorithms (1.1.6, 1.1.7)

Is there input? Yes.

Get the last number in the series (10).

Figure 1-2 Is this a good algorithm?

Selecting and Creating Algorithms (1.1.8, 1.1.9, 1.1.10)

Account balance Deposits

Figure 1-3 A mobile banking app handles many

Structural Decomposition (1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.7)

Passcode/challenge Account Payments and

Fingerprint Mobile check

Figure 1-4 Structural decomposition diagram

A week later, September 21, Clay gave another account, even

The adventures of these volunteers made part of the next

To dislike of prolonged service even the most ardent Western

General Dearborn’s annoyance at the difficulties thrown in the

The conduct of England strengthened the Federalists. After the

You might also like

prefacexiii Build Tools 22