The Chesapeake Leopard Incident

The Chesapeake was correct in their decision to refuse the British captain's request; there was no evidence that what the British were saying was true. To give up four sailors just because the British said to would betray the idea of American independence from Britain. The idea of this situation being closer to shore would not have helped; that would have merely meant that more innocent civilians by the shore would have been injured by the scuffle. Although it was a serious incident, it should not have caused America to declare war, though it should have implicated that the Americans should prepare for anything possible.
Had the Chesapeake been more militarily prepared, they would have not been so easily defeated; however, it was itself a warship, meaning shouldn't it have been prepared enough? Would this have been applied to all American warships, or only this incident? Economically, we should not have to spend an excess amount on the military, but in those days, with the revolution having been only 20 years prior, being stable would have helped. The British kidnapping american sailors is not exactly cause for an entire war, though they should be retrieved; the  un-abandonment of British forts would be even more reason to be prepared, not attack.
The British do have a right to demand their sailors back, but only if the sailors are on the actual boat. There was no certain way of knowing whether or not the fugitive sailors were on a boat, and taking four random sailors is unethical. The American captains and the Navy cannot be held responsible for these fugitives; they are fugitives after all, meaning they sneaked onto the ships without consent. If anything, the fugitives are the ones to be blamed for their unwillingness to stay with their ship. It is not worth a war. The justice is the actual fugitives being  returned, not just random sailors picked at hand to replace them.