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.
[Illustration: Landing of Lafayette at Castle Garden.]
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.
[Illustration: Lafayette laying the Corner-stone.]
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."
[Illustration: Lafayette at the tomb of Washington.]
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.
[Illustration: J. Q. ADAMS.]
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.
[Illustration: Removal of the Creek Indians.]
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?"