Part 53

This event led to increased hostilities. Fort Scott, in which General Gaines with about six hundred regular soldiers was confined for a time, was openly attacked by a large force of the enemy. General Andrew Jackson was directed, December 26, to take the field. In connection with this, he was authorized, if he deemed the force of General Gaines to be insufficient to carry on the war, "to call on the executives of the neighboring states for such an additional militia force as he might deem requisite." General Jackson varied from the order addressed to him, by sending out a circular to the patriots of West Tennessee, inviting them, to the number of one thousand, to take up arms with him against the Indians. The General's call was promptly responded to, and the thousand volunteers were, in due time, gathered to his standard.

In this affair, General Jackson was widely censured for departing from the letter and spirit of his instructions; although the apology offered, was the delay that would have been caused, had the governor of Tennessee, who was either at Knoxville or in the Cherokee nation, been first called upon. The account of his proceedings, which he sent to the secretary of war, seems to have met with favor by the public authorities at Washington. The troops thus raised, were joined by a number of friendly Creeks under General M'Intosh. Meanwhile, it appears from the instructions of the president to General Gaines, that the war was to be prosecuted in Florida, only in the event of the Indians fleeing into that country, and, in that case, the Spanish authority was to be respected wherever it was maintained. Jackson, however, did not conform to these instructions, and particularly in regard to the interdiction not to attack a Spanish fort, should any Indians take shelter under one, which was also a matter of instruction. He justified his non-compliance, in this case, on the ground that, orders issued to one officer, could not be construed as orders to his successor, without a special reference to the first--that his orders were general and discretionary, and that the circumstances contemplated by the orders to General Gaines, never existed. The Indians were found sheltered _within_ a fort, and not merely under the protection of its guns on the outside.

On the plan of warfare, which the American general deemed it justifiable to act, he not only entered Florida in pursuit of the Indians as they fled thither, but he forcibly seized the Spanish garrison, St. Marks. While at St. Marks, information was imparted to General Jackson, that the governor of Pensacola was favoring the Indians; upon which, although the executive had given instruction not to attack a Spanish fort, he took up his march for the fort at Pensacola, before which, after twenty days, he appeared prepared to subdue it, at whatever expense it might cost. The fortress was invested on the 25th of May, and, after a bombardment and cannonading for two days, the garrison surrendered prisoners of war. The officers of the government, civil and military, were transported to Havana, and a new government established for the province. These matters being settled, General Jackson announced to the secretary of war that the Seminole war was terminated, and returned to his house at Nashville.

The conduct of the general, in transcending his orders, was made a subject of inquiry in the house of representatives, and a report made disapproving of some parts of it as arbitrary, unjustifiable, and dangerous in principle; and the report was ably supported by Mr. Clay, of Kentucky, and Mr. Johnson, of Virginia, and others, but opposed by many other members. The inquiry disclosed several highly arbitrary acts. Mr. Monroe caused the instructions given on this occasion to be laid before Congress; and he also gave orders immediately for the restoration of the forts and places to the Spanish authorities.

General Jackson was, also, charged with undue severity, in the execution of Arbuthnot and Ambrister, the Englishmen before alluded to, whom he took in the territory. The former he caused to be hung, and the other to be shot. The punishment was summary, and without law; but the executive found cause to excuse these acts on the consideration of the peculiar exigency of the case. The great popularity of the military commander was supposed to have furnished a reason for no further proceedings or inquiries into this affair.

_Revision of the Tariff_.--A law was passed by congress, on the subject of the tariff, in May, 1824, embracing the revision and alteration of the tariff which had heretofore existed. Except a slight protection to coarse cotton cloths, nothing had been done to encourage the manufactures of the country. The attention of the people had been, for a long time, turned towards the subject, and congress had debated it at different periods, but very little had been effected. Such was the state of things from 1816 to 1824. On the part of many citizens, great zeal had been manifested in favor of manufactures among us. Numbers, especially in the Northern and Eastern states, owing to the impediments which existed in the prosecution of commerce and navigation, by the restrictive measures of the government, as well as by the war, had engaged in the business of manufacturing. By their energy, perseverance, and economy, they had attained to a measure of success; but still, some public enactments were wanting to give due encouragement to the general interests of manufactures. The well-known favorable opinion of the president, as also the growing interest felt by the people on the subject, produced their effect in calling to it the attention of the national legislature, to some practical purpose.

At the period above named, congress imposed higher duties on several articles of import, chiefly of the description of those then manufactured in the United States. On several articles, a duty of five per cent. was laid, in addition to that before imposed, though the act met a very powerful opposition. The debate on the bill occupied the house of representatives more than ten weeks, and the bill was passed by a majority of only five. It was opposed by those who were concerned in commerce, on the ground that it would prove detrimental to their particular interests. It was opposed by those who were concerned in agriculture, from the consideration that an undue profit was secured by it to the manufacturers. On the part of some, it was a ground of opposition that it would greatly diminish imports, and thus lessen the public revenue. A portion of the national legislature, who were professedly in favor of encouraging manufactures, believed that they were already sufficiently protected. This opposition was principally by members from the Southern states, where no manufactures were established, and who believed that additional duties on imports would operate unequally in different parts of the union.

But notwithstanding the strong opposition to the measure, the bill of the house passed the senate with several alterations, by a vote of twenty-five to twenty-one. The measure, when put to the test of experiment, proved effectual in affording the desired protection to the articles which it embraced; but the same legislation was wanted in regard to others, perhaps equally important to the comfort, defence, and independence of the country.

_Visit of Lafayette._--The arrival of the Marquis de Lafayette into the United States, signalized the year 1824. It was an event of great interest to the people of the country. As the friend, benefactor, and ally of the Americans during the Revolution, he was remembered with lively gratitude after his return to his native land, and his subsequent history had been traced by many among us with deep concern, as well as admiration. Nearly half a century had elapsed, since he came as a youthful, devoted adventurer to our shores, in the cause of freedom, and age was now stealing over him with its usual effects on the human frame. Before the close of life, he wished once more to revisit the scenes of his early conflicts; and, having intimated his intention of coming to this country, the people were prepared to give him a welcome and enthusiastic reception.

He landed at New York, on the 16th of August, accompanied by his son, and M. L. Vasseur, his secretary. His entrance into the city was more than a Roman triumphal procession. Splendid as it was, it was more remarkable as the tribute of the concentrated heart of America, in its great commercial capital. He was met by one universal burst of grateful enthusiasm.

In the course of about a year, he visited each of the twenty-four states, and most of the principal cities of the land, and was every where received with the like spirit of enthusiasm and gratitude.

He was present on the occasion of laying the corner-stone of the Bunker hill monument, and assisted, as was most befitting he should, in laying its corner-stone. His presence added greatly to the interest of the occasion, and long will it be remembered with what enthusiasm his presence was greeted.

"When the time arrived which he had fixed as the termination of his visit, it was thought most fitting that his departure from the country should take place from the capital. A frigate was prepared at that place, and named, in compliment to him, the Brandywine, to transport him to his native country. The few weeks spent, upon the invitation of the president, as the guest of the nation, in the national palace, were appropriated to taking leave of those venerable men who had shared with him, both in establishing the independence of the country, and in receiving all the appropriate honors which the people could bestow. He had previously visited and taken leave of the venerable Adams; he now in succession took leave of the other ex-presidents, the illustrious author of the declaration of independence; the able supporter and advocate of the federal constitution; and the soldier of the Revolution, who had shed his blood in the same cause with Lafayette."

His departure, which was from the seat of government, on the 7th of September, 1825, was affecting in the highest degree, but it needs not here to be described. Suffice it to say, that in passing down the Potomac, he landed to pay a farewell visit to the tomb of Washington; then, proceeding on his way, he made a safe and prosperous voyage to France.

_General Review of Mr. Monroe's Administration, his Character, &c._--As has been already remarked, under the administration of Mr. Monroe, there existed a propitious state of things. The wisdom and practical foresight of Mr. Monroe were manifested in the measures of his administration. Profound peace continued through the whole of it, the amicable relations of the country with other nations having been carefully cherished. Of the national debt, not less than sixty millions were paid. The Floridas were not only peaceably acquired, but the western boundaries of our country were so settled as to give it the width of a continent. He effected the repeal of the internal taxes, reduced the military establishment to the smallest compass consistent with safety, and brought the army under an efficient organization. The asperity of party spirit yielding in a great degree, he was enabled to carry most of those measures which he deemed necessary to the public welfare. Progress was made in the suppression of the slave-trade, the civilization of the Indians advanced, and the independence of the South American nations recognized.

As to the character of President Monroe, there seems to be scarcely a dissenting opinion. His feelings, manners, and principles, appeared to be adapted eminently for conciliation. Nearly all united under him and with him in carrying out the public enactments. "He was not so great a philosopher as Jefferson, nor so learned as Madison; but he possessed a more practical knowledge, or was more desirous of pursuing that which was useful, than of adopting new theories, or of supporting his own speculative views in opposition to public opinion. He faithfully strove to defend and promote the great interests of the republic; but sought not for impracticable good in ways discovered only to his contemplative imagination." Fisher Ames' lively, but perhaps too severe, remark concerning Mr. Jefferson, that "he strains his optics to look beyond its (the world's) circumference, and contemplates invisibility till he thinks nothing else is real," has no application to Mr. Monroe, though the latter was of the same school of politics. To continue the quotation first presented, "He (Mr. Monroe) had as much regard for humanity, and was as sincere a lover of his kind, as Mr. Jefferson; but he followed more truly the beaten path of common sense, and adhered more cautiously to the plain maxims sanctioned by experience, and shown by past history to be essential to the welfare of society."

_Election of John Quincy Adams._--It being understood that, according to the example of his predecessors, Mr. Monroe would retire at the expiration of his second term, the subject of his successor was early introduced to the nation. Several candidates were put in nomination, and the claims of each were duly urged by their respective friends and supporters. The following was the electoral vote, according to the official count before the two houses of congress:

Key: A. Andrew Jackson, of Tennessee. B. John Q. Adams, of Massachusetts. C. Wm. H. Crawford, of Georgia. D. Henry Clay, of Kentucky. E. John C. Calhoun, of S. Carolina. F. Nathan Sanford, of New York. G. Nathaniel Macon, of N. Carolina. H. Andrew Jackson, of Tennessee. I. Martin Van Buren, of New York. J. Henry Clay, of Kentucky.

+-----------------+---------------+----------------------- No. of | | PRESIDENT. | VICE-PRESIDENT. Electors | STATES. |---------------+----------------------- from each| |A. |B. |C. |D. |E. |F. |G. |H. |I. |J. State. | | | | | | | | | | | ---------+-----------------+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+--- 8 | New Hampshire, | | 8 | | | 7 | | | 1 | | 15 | Massachusetts, | |15 | | |15 | | | | | 4 | Rhode Island, | | 4 | | | 3 | | | | | 8 | Connecticut, | | 8 | | | | | | 8 | | 7 | Vermont, | | 7 | | | 7 | | | | | 36 | New York, | 1 |26 | 5 | 4 |29 | 7 | | | | 8 | New Jersey, | 8 | | | | 8 | | | | | 28 | Pennsylvania, |28 | | | |28 | | | | | 3 | Delaware, | | 1 | 2 | | 1 | | | | | 2 11 | Maryland, | 7 | 3 | 1 | |10 | | | 1 | | 24 | Virginia, | | |24 | | | |24 | | | 15 | North Carolina, |15 | | | |15 | | | | | 11 | South Carolina, |11 | | | |11 | | | | | 9 | Georgia, | | | 9 | | | | | | 9 | 14 | Kentucky, | | | |14 | 7 | 7 | | | | 11 | Tennessee, |11 | | | |11 | | | | | 16 | Ohio, | | | |16 | |16 | | | | 5 | Lousiana, | 3 | 2 | | | 5 | | | | | 5 | Indiana, | 5 | | | | 5 | | | | | 3 | Mississippi | 3 | | | | 3 | | | | | 3 | Illinois, | 2 | 1 | | | 3 | | | | | 5 | Alabama, | 5 | | | | 5 | | | | | 9 | Maine, | | 9 | | | 9 | | | | | 3 | Missouri, | | | | 3 | | | | 3 | | ---------+-----------------+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+--- 261 | Whole No. of | | | | | | | | | | | electors, |99 |84 |41 |37 |182|30 |24 |13 | 9 | 2 | Majority, 131 | | | | | | | | | |

FOOTNOTE:

[76] General Gaines' official letter.

XI. JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, PRESIDENT.

INAUGURATED AT WASHINGTON, MARCH 4, 1825.

JOHN C. CALHOUN, VICE-PRESIDENT.

HEADS OF THE DEPARTMENTS.

Henry Clay, Kentucky, March 7, 1825, } Secretary } of State.

Richard Rush, Pennsylvania, March 7, 1825, } Secretary } of Treasury.

James Barbour, Virginia, March 7, 1825, } Secretaries Peter B. Porter, New York, May 26, 1828, } of War.

Samuel L. Southard, New Jersey, (_continued in_ } Secretary _office_), } of the Navy.

John M'Lean, Ohio, (_continued in_ } Postmaster _office_), } General.

William Wirt, Virginia, (_continued in_ } Attorney _office_), } General.

SPEAKERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

John W. Taylor, New York, Nineteenth Congress, 1825. Andrew Stevenson, Virginia, Twentieth do. 1827.

The policy and views of Mr. Adams were, in the main, conformed to those of his immediate predecessor. As secretary of state under Mr. Monroe, it is believed that no important measures were adopted without the advice or consent of Mr. Adams. He would, of course, have been apt to continue in the same general line of conduct. His qualifications were of the highest order; he well understood the interests of his country, and was skilled in every art of diplomacy and government.

On one point, perhaps, he differed in theory from Mr. Monroe. He expressed less regard for state rights, or allowed more power to the general government, according to his construction of the constitution, than Mr. Monroe did. The latter considered the United States' government strictly _federal_; the former viewed it rather as a consolidated or national one. In their public measures, however, this difference of opinion did not often lead to the exercise of greater power by one than the other. The constitution was the guide of both; but one might approve an act of congress for internal improvements, from which the other would probably have withheld his assent, from scruples as to the constitutional authority of the federal government for such enterprises.

The administration of Mr. Adams was, however, destined to be confronted by a very formidable opposition. This was from the beginning, on the part of numbers--they were determined to dislike his measures, whether right or wrong, as they differed with him in matters of opinion, and were dissatisfied with some circumstances attending his election. It was alleged that the latter was brought about by corruption. This state of things constituted a second era of political asperity in the history of our government, which has not subsided to this day. But the constitution has happily survived the shock, though, at the present time, it begins to be assailed by the more dangerous spirit of sectional divisions. Another portion of Mr. Adams' political opponents, more honest or honorable than the rest, were willing to judge him by his acts. "It is but justice to add, that the charge of a bargain between Mr. Adams and Mr. Clay has not been satisfactorily supported. On the contrary, it seems now to be generally admitted that no alliance had been formed between these gentlemen, previous to the election which issued in Mr. Adams' accession."

The following are the principal topics upon which we propose to dwell in noticing the administration of Mr. Adams, viz:

Controversy respecting the Creeks, Fiftieth Anniversary of Proposed Mission to Panama, Independence, Internal Improvements, "American System," Election of General Jackson.

_Controversy respecting the removal of the Creeks._--At the commencement of Mr. Adams' term of office, a controversy arose between the general government and the state of Georgia, respecting the territory occupied by the Creek Indians. There had long been a dispute between these people and the Georgia state government, which claimed the lands on which the Creeks resided. The claim was professedly founded on a compact into which the United States entered with Georgia, in 1802, of extinguishing, at the national expense, the Indian title to these lands, and of removing the natives, "as soon as it could be done peaceably, and on reasonable terms." The consideration, on the part of Georgia, was the relinquishment of her claim to the Mississippi territory. Georgia was impatient to have the compact fulfilled--the Indians, having grown more attached to their homes, refused to alienate their territory. Between the vehemence of Georgia and the resistance of the Creeks, the general government had a difficult task to perform. As it had been invariably desirous of observing good faith with the Indian tribes, and had treated them with much lenity and kindness, it was fully disposed to do justice to the Creeks, while it was equally desirous to satisfy Georgia. Before the government could extinguish the Indian claim in the manner before agreed upon, i. e. "peaceably, and on reasonable terms," the governor of Georgia insisted on the removal of the tribe, and threatened to take possession of the territory by force. It was in contemplation, however, on the part of the federal executive, to resort to force to prevent these proceedings on the part of Georgia. The danger of a collision, at one time, appeared to be imminent. The national executive, nevertheless, by his prompt and vigilant measures, passed through the crisis with safety, and effected successfully the object in view.

A treaty, which had been made with a party of the Indians just before Mr. Adams entered upon his office, by which all the Creek lands in Georgia and Alabama were ceded to the United States, and which had been sanctioned by the senate on the last day of the session, was virtually set aside. Upon a more dispassionate consideration, it had appeared not to have been executed in good faith, and accordingly a new treaty was concluded at Washington, through great effort on the part of the public authorities. This was entered into with the chiefs of the Creek tribe, in March, 1826. It stipulated for the payment of a large sum to the tribe, and to guaranty the lands not expressly ceded by them. Congress sanctioned the treaty and its stipulations, though the members from Georgia expressed their dissent on record. The conduct of Mr. Adams, in this difficult and perplexing affair, was approved very generally in congress, and throughout the country.