Chapter XXIII: Part 23

The president made two other visits of a similar kind, during his first term, viz: one in the summer of the following year, and the other in the summer of 1819. The former was to the Chesapeake bay and the country lying on its shores. The other was to the Southern and South-western states of the Union. In the course of a few weeks he visited Charleston, Savannah, and Augusta, as also the Cherokee nation, Nashville, Louisville, and other places. The same national objects commanded his attention as during his other tours, and the same spirit of courtesy and deference was manifested towards him.

_Admission of Missouri._--In another place, (p. 538,) we have had occasion to notice the periods at which the several states, formed since the adoption of the Federal Constitution, have been admitted into the Union, and Missouri among them; but, as in respect to this state, there were new and peculiar considerations involved, it is deemed important to speak of them in this place more at large.--The proposition to admit Missouri into the Union, was considered at the same time with Maine; but, although congress passed the act of admission for both at once, it was _conditional_ in regard to Missouri. A clause in the constitution of this state, requiring the legislature to enact a law "to prevent free negroes and mulattoes from coming to and settling in the state," was obnoxious to a majority of the members of congress. After a long debate in that body, it was decided that Missouri should be admitted, on the condition that no laws should be passed, by which any free citizens of the United States should be prevented from enjoying the rights to which they were entitled by the constitution of the United States.

There had previously been a long and exciting debate in congress, on the subject of the restriction of slavery in the bill admitting Missouri. The bill for admitting that territory, contained a provision prohibiting slavery within the new state; but, having passed the house of representatives, it was arrested in the senate. Strong sectional parties, in reference to this subject, appeared, not only in congress, but throughout the country. It was deemed imminently a time of danger to the general interests of the nation and the Union itself. The dissolution of the general government seemed to be threatened. That the pernicious system of involuntary servitude should be further extended, seemed to be abhorrent to the minds of most of the wise and good. On the other hand, the rights of the slave-holding states were thought by themselves, at least, to be invaded. Accordingly, members of congress from the non-slave-holding states, strenuously advocated the restriction; while members from the slave-holding portion of the country as strenuously opposed it.

The long and earnest debates on the subject, were concluded, only by the parties accepting a _compromise_, in consequence of which, slavery was to be tolerated in Missouri, but forbidden in all that part of Louisiana as ceded by France, lying north of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, except so much as was embraced within the limits of the state. The vote in the house of representatives was several times given for excluding slavery; but the senate disagreed, and would not yield to the house. When the house yielded, at length, to the opinion of the senate, it was by a majority of _four_ only, in favor of the bill, omitting the clause of exclusion, and containing that of the interdiction of slavery elsewhere, as already defined. The compromise happily averted whatever danger there might have been to the union of the states.

When Missouri, by a solemn act of her legislature, had accepted the fundamental condition imposed by congress, that she would not authorize the passage of any laws excluding citizens of other states from enjoying the privileges to which they were entitled by the constitution of the United States, she was declared a member of the Union. This occurred August 10th, 1821.

_Provision for indigent Officers and Soldiers._--In 1818, a law was passed by congress, granting pensions to the surviving officers and soldiers of the Revolutionary war, which included all who had served nine months in the continental army at any period of the war, provided it was at one term of enlistment. Another act of congress, following at the expiration of two years, modified, and in some degree restricted this law, by confining the pension to those who were in destitute circumstances. Still, under this condition, the number who received the bounty, or rather the justice of their country, was very large, not less than thirteen thousand having experienced the grateful relief. Through the inability of the government, soon after the war, these soldiers who had so largely contributed to the liberties of their country, had never been duly compensated. They now received a welcome, though late remuneration.

_Rëelection of Mr. Monroe._--In March, 1821, Mr. Monroe entered upon his second term of office, having been rëelected president by nearly an unanimous vote. Mr. Tompkins was also continued in the vice-presidency. The following table exhibits the vote of the several electoral colleges:

Key: A. James Monroe, of Virginia.
B. John Q. Adams, of Massa'tts.
C. D. D. Tompkins, of New York.
D. Rich'd. Stockton, of New Jersey.
E. Robt. G. Harper, of Maryland.
F. Richard Rush, of Pennsylv'a.
G. Daniel Rodney, of Delaware.

---------+-----------------+----------+------------------------
No. of | |PRESIDENT.| VICE-PRESIDENT.
Electors | STATES. |----------+------------------------
from each| | A. | B. | C. | D. | E. | F. | G.
State. | | | | | | | |
---------+-----------------+----+-----+----+----+----+----+----
8 | New Hampshire, | 7 | 1 | 7 | | | 1 |
15 | Massachusetts, | 15 | | 7 | 8 | | |
4 | Rhode Island, | 4 | | 4 | | | |
9 | Connecticut, | 9 | | 9 | | | |
8 | Vermont, | 8 | | 8 | | | |
29 | New York, | 29 | | 29 | | | |
8 | New Jersey, | 8 | | 8 | | | |
25 | Pennsylvania, | 24 | | 24 | | | |
4 | Delaware, | 4 | | | | | | 4
11 | Maryland, | 11 | | 10 | | 1 | |
25 | Virginia, | 25 | | 25 | | | |
15 | North Carolina, | 15 | | 15 | | | |
11 | South Carolina, | 11 | | 11 | | | |
8 | Georgia, | 8 | | 8 | | | |
12 | Kentucky, | 12 | | 12 | | | |
8 | Tennessee, | 7 | | 7 | | | |
8 | Ohio, | 8 | | 8 | | | |
3 | Lousiana, | 3 | | 3 | | | |
3 | Indiana, | 3 | | 3 | | | |
3 | Mississippi, | 2 | | 2 | | | |
3 | Illinois, | 3 | | 3 | | | |
3 | Alabama, | 3 | | 3 | | | |
9 | Maine, | 9 | | 9 | | | |
3 | Missouri, | 3 | | 3 | | | |
---------+-----------------+----+-----+----+----+----+----+----
235 | Whole No. of | | | | | | |
| electors, |231 | 1 |218 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 4
| Majority, 118 | | | | | | |

No president, since Washington, has received so decided an expression of the public will. His popularity seemed to be the result of his moderation in politics, his candid temper, and his wise and useful measures. His administration throughout was the era of good feeling.

_Seminole War._--Within the southern limits of the United States, but mostly in Florida, lived a tribe, or confederacy of Indians, named _Seminoles_. They consisted, originally, of fugitives from the northern tribes, resident within the limits of the United States. To these fugitives, additions were made from the Creek Indians, numbers of whom were dissatisfied with the provisions of the treaty of 1814, and negroes, who had absconded from their masters. The resentments enkindled in the breasts of these miserable people, are believed to have been fanned by foreign emissaries, of whom the most noted were two Englishmen, Alexander Arbuthnot and Robert C. Ambrister. The consequence was, that outrages were committed upon the inhabitants of the states on our southern borders, the progress of which it became necessary to arrest.

General Gaines, the United States' officer in that quarter, made a demand to deliver up the authors of these outrages, but the Indians refused to comply. In consequence of this refusal, the Indians, who were still on the lands ceded to the United States by the Creeks, in 1814, were placed at the disposal of General Gaines, to remove them or not, as he should see fit.

The general availed himself of his discretionary power to take an Indian village called Fowl Town, near the Florida line. In this undertaking, one man and one woman were killed, and two women made prisoners. It was executed by a detachment under Major Twiggs. A few days after, a second detachment, who were on a visit to the town to obtain property, were fired upon, and a skirmish ensued, in which there was a loss of several on both sides. Shortly after, a large party of Seminole Indians formed an ambuscade upon the Appalachicola river, attacked one of the American boats, ascending near the shore, and killed, wounded, and took the greater part of the detachment, consisting of forty men, commanded by Lieutenant R. W. Scott, of the seventh infantry. There were also on board, killed or taken, seven women, the wives of soldiers. Six of the detachment only escaped, four of whom were wounded.[76]

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.

_Proposed Mission to the Congress at Panama._--The president having been invited to send commissioners to the congress of Panama, which had for its object the cementing of the friendly relations of all the independent states of America, saw fit to accept the invitation. Having nominated Richard C. Anderson and John Sergeant, as ministers on the part of the United States, and William B. Rochester, of New York, as secretary, he presented these names to the senate for confirmation. This step awakened a spirit of animosity against the president, and a long and angry debate ensued; but the nominations were eventually confirmed, and the necessary appropriations voted. Measures were soon taken to carry this policy into effect, and directions were sent to Mr. Anderson, who was then in Columbia, to attend the congress, which was to be convened in the beginning of summer. But he was cut down by a malignant fever before he could reach the place. Mr. Sergeant was prevented from going, on account of the lateness of the period at which his appointment was made.

This failure of representation at the congress, on the part of the United States, was, by many, deemed auspicious, as the relations and interests of the country might otherwise have been compromitted; but others thought differently, and believed that a conference of the kind might issue in the adoption of a friendly and enlightened policy between the parties.

_Internal Improvements._--In 1826, a proposition was made in congress to expend a sum of money for repairing and extending the Cumberland road. An act had been passed long before, during Mr. Jefferson's second presidential term, for making a road from Cumberland, in the state of Maryland, or near that place, and on the north bank of the Potomac river, to the river Ohio. Hence the name of the road. After having been commenced, money was appropriated, at different periods, to finish and repair the road. It was considered of great national advantage and convenience, inasmuch as it furnished a commodious way from the Atlantic slope to the Ohio river and to the great valley of the Mississippi.

To the proposition above alluded to for an additional sum of money, opposition was made at the present time. The amount asked was eighty thousand dollars, for repairs and also for its continuance farther west; for it was considered as proper to extend it to a remoter point, as to have made it to the Ohio river. The sum was named in a general appropriation bill. Many were opposed, on account of their doubts respecting the authority of congress to expend money for such objects. Others, however, who were reluctant to vote money for internal improvements on general principles, were in favor of the appropriation in this instance, as it would be of great public utility, and as the road, in order to be used with facility, must be repaired.

"The vote, at this time, for an appropriation to repair the Cumberland road, indicated the views of members of congress on the subject of internal improvements; for it was long discussed, and several members went fully into the constitutionality of this and several measures. In the senate, the votes were twenty-three in favor and fifteen against the appropriation. And, in the house of representatives, they were ninety-two to sixty-three. And, at the same session, congress authorized the executive to subscribe, on the part of the government, for shares in the Dismal Swamp canal, so called, within the state of Virginia, to the amount of sixty thousand dollars; which was a direct recognition of the power of congress to construct works for the public convenience. An act was also passed for a survey in Florida, with a view to construct a canal across the peninsula, from the Atlantic to the Gulf of Mexico."[77]

_The Fiftieth Anniversary of American Independence._--This was a day long to be remembered in the annals of the nation. The exultation of feeling throughout the country, that we had reached in safety the fiftieth anniversary of our independence, was great. The day was every where celebrated with more than the usual demonstrations of joy. But the most striking feature of the occasion, was the simultaneous deaths of two ex-presidents of the United States, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. The coincidence in their departure from life was certainly remarkable, more especially as having occurred at that particular juncture. It would seem to have been a providential dispensation, designed to answer some important purpose; perhaps to awaken the great principles of political freedom and equal rights, to the maintenance of which the lives of both were consecrated. They had both--and equally, perhaps--acted a most conspicuous part on the theatre of the world, and especially in the affairs of American independence. "Both had been presidents, both had lived to great age, both were early patriots, and both were distinguished and ever honored by their immediate agency in the act of independence. It cannot but seem striking and extraordinary, that these two should live to see the fiftieth year from the date of that act; that they should complete that year, and that then, on the day which had fast linked for ever their own fame with their country's glory, the heavens should open to receive them both at once. As their lives themselves were the gifts of Providence, who is not willing to recognize in their happy termination, as well as in their long continuance, proofs that our country and its benefactors are objects of his care?"

Although they belonged to different schools in politics, and were separated, for a time, by the party distinctions which prevailed soon after the constitution went into operation, yet they seemed to have coalesced very much in views and feelings in the latter portion of their lives. Friendly letters, of great interest, passed between them, which were given to the public at the time. But the coincidences or parallel circumstances attending these distinguished men are not yet exhausted. "They belonged to the same profession, and had pursued its studies and its practice, for unequal lengths of time indeed, but with diligence and effect. Both were learned and able lawyers. They were natives and inhabitants respectively of those two of the colonies, which, at the Revolution, were the largest and most powerful, and which, naturally, had a lead in the political affairs of the times. When the colonies became, in some degree, united, by the assembling of the general congress, they were brought to act together in its deliberations, not indeed at the same time, but both at early periods. Each had already manifested his attachment to the cause of the country, as well as his ability to maintain it, by pointed addresses, public speeches, extensive correspondence, and whatever other mode could be adopted for the purpose of exposing the encroachments of the British parliament, and animating the people to manly resistance. Both were not only decided, but early friends of independence. While others yet doubted, they were resolved; where others hesitated, they pressed forward. They were both members of the committee for preparing the Declaration of Independence; they constituted the sub-committee, appointed by the other members to make the draft. They left their seats in congress, being called to other public employments, at periods not remote from each other, although one of them returned to it, afterwards, for a short time. Neither of them was of the assembly of great men which formed the present constitution, and neither was at any time member of congress under its provisions. Both have been public ministers abroad, both vice-presidents, and both presidents." These coincidences were surprisingly completed, as already mentioned, by their simultaneous deaths, and that on the anniversary of liberty.

_Introduction of the "American System."_--The phrase "American System" was given to the policy advocated by many, of protecting, by impost duties, the manufactures of the country against foreign competition. It began to be employed during the administration of Mr. Adams. Additional duties were sought by the friends of manufactures on woolen goods, and a bill for that purpose passed both houses of congress, in the months of April and May, 1827. The measure, however, seemed not to be satisfactory to the country at large. "The president was in favor of affording protection to domestic manufactures generally, and of woolens particularly, which, at this time, was the leading question in political economy, so far as the federal government was believed to have authority to interfere. But he was also friendly to extensive enterprises in commerce and navigation, and expressed no opinion in support of the ultra doctrines of the manufacturers."

_Election of General Jackson._--The administration of Mr. Adams encountered strong and determined opposition. The circumstance of his rival, General Jackson, having had a larger popular vote than himself, and having, in congress, only a small majority, when elected to office, seemed, in the view of the democratic party, quite sufficient to justify a more than usual distrust of his administration, from its beginning. Mr. Adams was watched with singular vigilance, and every advantage taken to render his acts unpopular. It was early charged against him, that a corrupt bargain had been made with Mr. Clay, his secretary of state. The Panama mission was represented as a measure weak and injudicious. And, moreover, it was charged that his administration was wasteful and extravagant.

Of the falsity and injustice of these charges, it is now unnecessary to speak. They were a part of an organized system of opposition, and designed to prevent the rëelection of Mr. Adams, and secure that of General Jackson. In this design, the friends of the latter succeeded, the vote of the electors for president affording a victory to his supporters, as gratifying as the defeat of the friends of the former was mortifying.

Key: A. And'w. Jackson, of Tennessee.
B. John Q. Adams, of Massa'tts.
C. John C. Calhoun, of S. Carolina.
D. Richard Rush, of Pennsylv'a.
E. William Smith, of S. Carolina.

---------+-----------------+----------+-----------------
No. of | |PRESIDENT.| VICE-PRESIDENT.
Electors | STATES. |----------+-----------------
from each| | A. | B. | C. | D. | E.
State. | | | | | |
---------+-----------------+----+-----+-----+-----+-----
9 | Maine, | 1 | 8 | 1 | 8 |
8 | New Hampshire, | | 8 | | 8 |
15 | Massachusetts, | | 15 | | 15 |
4 | Rhode Island, | | 4 | | 4 |
8 | Connecticut, | | 8 | | 8 |
7 | Vermont, | | 7 | | 7 |
36 | New York, | 20 | 16 | 20 | 16 |
8 | New Jersey, | | 8 | | 8 |
28 | Pennsylvania, | 28 | | 28 | |
3 | Delaware, | | 3 | | 3 |
11 | Maryland, | 5 | 6 | 5 | 6 |
24 | Virginia, | 24 | | 24 | |
15 | North Carolina, | 15 | | 15 | |
11 | South Carolina, | 11 | | 11 | |
9 | Georgia, | 9 | | 2 | | 7
14 | Kentucky, | 14 | | 14 | |
11 | Tennessee, | 11 | | 11 | |
16 | Ohio, | 16 | | 16 | |
5 | Lousiana, | 5 | | 5 | |
3 | Mississippi, | 3 | | 3 | |
5 | Indiana, | 5 | | 5 | |
3 | Illinois, | 3 | | 3 | |
5 | Alabama, | 5 | | 5 | |
3 | Missouri, | 3 | | 3 | |
---------+-----------------+----+-----+-----+-----+-----
261 | Whole No. of | | | | |
| electors, |178 | 83 | 171 | 83 | 7
| Majority, 131 | | | | |

FOOTNOTE:

[77] Bradford's History of the Federal Government.

XII. ANDREW JACKSON, PRESIDENT.

INAUGURATED AT WASHINGTON, MARCH 4, 1829,

JOHN C. CALHOUN AND MARTIN VAN BUREN, _Vice-Presidents_.

HEADS OF THE DEPARTMENTS.

Martin Van Buren, New York, March 6, 1829,}
Edward Livingston, Louisiana, January 12, 1832,} Secretaries
Louis M'Lane, Delaware, May 29, 1833,} of State.
John Forsyth, Georgia, June 27, 1834,}

Samuel D. Ingham, Pennsylvania, March 6, 1829,}
Louis M'Lane, Delaware, January 13, 1832,}
William J. Duane, Pennsylvania, May 29, 1833,}
Roger B. Taney, Maryland, (appointed in } Secretaries
the recess: } of Treasury.
negatived by }
the Senate,) }
Levi Woodbury, New Hampshire, January 27, 1834,}

John H. Eaton, Tennessee, March 9, 1829,} Secretaries
Lewis Cass, Ohio, December 30, 1831,} of War.

John Branch, North Carolina, March 9, 1829,} Secretaries
Levi Woodbury, New Hampshire, December 27, 1831,} of the Navy.
Mahlon Dickerson, New Jersey, June 30, 1834,}

William T. Barry, Kentucky, March 9, 1829,} Postmasters
Amos Kendall, Kentucky, March 15, 1836,} General.

John M. Berrien, Georgia, March 9, 1829,} Attorneys
Roger B. Taney, Maryland, December 27, 1831,} General.
Benjamin F. Butler, New York, June 24, 1834,}

SPEAKERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Andrew Stevenson, Virginia, Twenty-first Congress, 1829.
Andrew Stevenson, Virginia, Twenty-second do. 1831.
Andrew Stevenson, Virginia, Twenty-third do. 1833.
John Bell, Tennessee, Twenty-fourth do. 1834.
James K. Polk, Tennessee, Twenty-fifth do. 1835.

In his inaugural address, General Jackson exhibited, in comprehensive terms, his views in regard to the administration of the government. He spoke of the limitations and extent of executive power--the peace and friendship to be cultivated with foreign powers--the respect due to the rights of the separate states--the solicitude to be exercised in the management of the public revenue--the equal fostering care of the general government in respect to agriculture, commerce, and manufactures--the necessity of _reform_, and the correction of certain abuses--the attention to be given to internal improvement and the diffusion of knowledge--the policy to be observed towards the Indian tribes within our borders--and other similar topics.

He expressed, also, the diffidence he felt on assuming the high and responsible station to which he had been elevated, and the reverence with which he regarded the examples of public virtue left us by his illustrious predecessors; hoping at the same time to receive instruction and aid from the cöordinate branches of the government, and the indulgence and support of his fellow-citizens in general. It was a brief and terse address, and manifested the characteristic decision and fearlessness of the man.

A sketch of the more prominent measures and events of General Jackson's administration will require us to notice the following topics, viz:

Condition of the Country, Rëelection of Andrew Jackson,
Georgia and the Cherokees, Removal of Deposites,
Public Lands, Death of Lafayette,
National Bank, Deposite Act,
Internal Improvements, Seminole War,
Indian Hostilities, Treasury Circular,
Discontents in South Carolina, Election of Mr. Van Buren,
Character of Jackson's Administration.

_Condition of the Country._--A high degree of prosperity was enjoyed in the United States at this era. The administration of General Jackson's predecessor had been crowned with signal success. Circumstances, however, connected with the election of Mr. Adams were seized upon as a ground of attack; and, in the eye of many, all that he afterwards did, as the executive of the nation, was unnaturally colored or distorted. But the results showed that his administration had been conducted with wisdom, integrity, and vigor. During the whole course of it, uninterrupted peace had been enjoyed; our commercial relations had been gradually extended; and, in many instances, the claims of American citizens upon foreign governments had been prosecuted with success. At home, the marks of an able administration were exhibited, in the increased activity imparted to the legitimate powers of the federal government for the development of the resources of the country, and the increase of its wealth and respectability.

_Georgia and the Cherokees._--The president, in his message on the 8th of December, 1829, had presented, at considerable length, his views in regard to the disposal of the Indian tribes within the limits of the United States. He recommended their removal beyond the boundary of the different states, but without compulsion, to such territory west of the Mississippi, as congress might set apart for their use. In this, he wished to avoid the difficulties arising from the treaties between the United States and these Indians, and the opposing claims of the states within whose limits the Indians resided. This was one of the most embarrassing subjects which demanded the attention of the new administration. It was especially applicable to the relation which the Cherokees, a powerful tribe within the limits of Georgia, sustained to the general government.

Treaties had been made with this tribe, from time to time, ever since the adoption of the federal constitution. In these treaties, the protection of the United States was promised them, and the territory they inhabited was acknowledged to be theirs. But the government had also acknowledged the limits of Georgia, and had agreed to extinguish the Indian title whenever it could be peaceably effected.

Georgia, in her anxiety to secure the Indian territory, had passed laws from time to time, with reference to that object, claiming exclusive civil and criminal jurisdiction over the Indians. In this state of things, the new administration came in, and the views of the president coinciding with those of the state of Georgia, a change was made in her mode of procedure. She was allowed, with the approbation of the general government, to extend her laws over the Cherokees, and to consider the treaties of the United States with them, guaranteeing their territory, as unconstitutional and void.

In conformity to the president's proposal of removing the Indians, as already alluded to, a bill was submitted to both houses of congress, in February, 1830, authorizing the president to set apart such portion as he should deem necessary of the public territory west of the Mississippi, to be divided into districts, for the permanent residence of the emigrating Indians. The bill underwent a thorough and spirited debate, and was finally passed by both houses, by a small majority.

The laws of Georgia had come into direct conflict with those of the United States, but this bill seemed to release the president from the duty of enforcing the acts of the latter, and observing the faith of treaties, as it was also in agreement with his determination not to regard either, in reference to a sovereign state. Encouraged by the acts of the government and the views of the president, Georgia proceeded to assert entire sovereignty over the Indians within its limits, issued writs of the state courts against the residents in the Indian territories, and tried the Cherokees before the tribunals of the state. At length, even the missionaries of the American board, residing and laboring among them, were arrested, tried, condemned and imprisoned, for refusing to obtain a permit from the government of Georgia to reside within the territory, or to take an oath of allegiance to the state. And, to consummate their high-handed proceedings, the decision of the supreme judicial tribunal of the United States, pronouncing the acts of the Georgia legislature null and void, being unconstitutional, was resisted by the state. What might have ensued from this condition of affairs, had the general government undertaken to enforce the decision of the supreme court of the nation, as it would have been its imperious duty, it is needless to say. The missionaries relieved Georgia from the dreaded calamity, by informing the governor that they had instructed their counsel to prosecute the case no further. Soon after this, the missionaries were set at liberty.

Notwithstanding all the stringent measures of Georgia, the Cherokees were determined to remain in the land of their fathers. But at length, in 1835, a few of their chiefs were induced to sign a treaty for the sale of their lands and a removal west of the Mississippi. Although this treaty was opposed by a majority of the Cherokees, and the terms afterwards decided upon at Washington rejected, yet, as the state of Georgia was determined in its hostility, and they could expect no protection, according to the new doctrine, from the general government, they finally decided upon a removal; but it was not until the close of the year 1838, that the task of emigration was completed.

_Public Lands._--Questions pertaining to the public lands were earnestly debated at this period. These lands form an immense domain, and lie on both sides of the Mississippi, though much the larger portion lies on the west of that river. Applying the Georgia doctrine, in reference to the sovereignty of the state over all land within its limits, some of the new states, formed out of the public domain, set up a claim to the property in the soil of all lands not owned by individuals, as an element of sovereignty. The mode of disposing of these lands, was complained of in other states, and attempts were made to throw doubt on the validity of the title of the general government to that portion within the limits of states.