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 | | | | |
[Illustration]
FOOTNOTE:
[77] Bradford's History of the Federal Government.
XII. ANDREW JACKSON, PRESIDENT.
[Illustration: JACKSON.]
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.
A resolution of Mr. Foot, of Connecticut, on this subject, gave rise
to animated discussion in the senate, on the 29th of December, 1829.
In the course of the debate, Mr. Hayne, of South Carolina, introduced
the subject of state rights, and contended that the several states
within which the public lands were situated, should have the entire
control and jurisdiction over them. Mr. Webster, of Massachusetts,
replied to Mr. Hayne in one of the most eloquent and effective
speeches ever delivered in congress, and contended that on subjects
fully committed to the government by the constitution, its powers were
absolute, exclusive, and unlimited; that no state, nor even a number
of states, might justly interfere in such cases; and that the public
lands not expressly ceded to a particular state, were solely and
absolutely at the disposal of the United States' government. This
speech destroyed, for a time, the hopes of the advocates of the novel
doctrine of nullification; yet the views of Mr. Hayne, respecting
state rights and powers, continued to be entertained by a large
portion of the people of the Southern states. No particular law
resulted from this able and prolonged discussion.
_National Bank._--In anticipation of a request for the renewal of the
charter of the United States' bank, the president, in his message to
congress, had expressed opinions adverse to that measure. But the
standing committees of the senate and house, to which that portion of
his message referred, made reports in opposition to the president's
views. The friends of the administration formed a majority in both
committees, and it was readily perceived how little harmony of action
there was likely to be, on that subject, between the president and the
party which had brought him into power.
About four years anterior to the expiration of the existing charter,
that is, in December, 1832, a memorial was presented to congress from
the president and directors of the United States' bank, for a renewal
of its charter. This memorial was referred to a select committee,
which, on the 13th of March following, reported in its favor,
recommending only some limitations to the power of issuing notes and
holding real property; also, the payment of a bonus of one million
five hundred thousand dollars. After long debates, and various
amendments, a bill for this purpose was carried in the senate by a
vote of twenty-eight to twenty, and in the house by a vote of one
hundred and seven to eighty-five; but, being on the 4th of July sent
to the president, it was returned to the senate on the 10th of July
with an absolute veto, which, not being opposed by two-thirds, decided
the fate of the bank.
_Internal Improvements._--The policy of the government from an early
period, though not from the beginning, had favored works of internal
improvement, so that it seemed to be settled as a feature of each
successive administration, from Mr. Jefferson to the present period.
From General Jackson's own votes, while he was a member of the senate,
it might reasonably be inferred that the same policy would be
coincident with his views as president. But such was found not to be
the fact. The question of internal improvements by the general
government, was earnestly discussed at the first session of the
twenty-first congress, and a bill was passed in the house, by a vote
of one hundred and two to thirty-five, in the senate by twenty-four to
eighteen, authorizing a subscription to the stock of the Maysville and
Lexington road company, in Kentucky. The bill thus passed by so large
a majority, was sent to the president for his approval. After
retaining it eight days, he returned it to the house, on the 27th of
May, 1830, with his objections.
The reading of this veto message produced much excitement in congress.
Many of the friends of the president from Pennsylvania and from the
Western states, had confidently looked for his approbation of the
bill. Their surprise and disappointment were equally great. The
question being taken upon the passage of the bill, notwithstanding the
objections of the president, the vote stood, yeas ninety-six, nays
ninety-four. Two-thirds of the house not agreeing to pass the bill,
it was rejected, though a majority of the house refused to sustain the
objections of the president.
_Indian Hostilities._--The year 1832 was distinguished by a series of
Indian hostilities, commonly known as "Black Hawk's War," from the
name of the celebrated Indian chief, who was the leader of the Sac and
Fox Indians in these hostilities. These tribes, together with the
Winnebagoes, had, for a considerable time, manifested a restless
disposition, and appeared evidently disposed to commence hostilities,
as opportunity might offer. They had joined the British in the war of
1812, and inflicted much injury on the Americans. Encouraged by the
friendship of the British, as well as incited by their own warlike
propensities, the Sacs and Foxes claimed the right of occupying a part
of the country upon Rock river, even after it had been sold to the
citizens of the United States, and the latter had made settlements
upon it. In attempting to assert this right, frequent collisions
ensued; and, as no persuasions on the part of the agents of the
government could induce them to be quiet, and confine themselves to
their own country on the west of the Mississippi, measures were taken
to compel them to desist from their aggressions. As early as 1831, a
considerable detachment of the army, and also of the militia of
Illinois, was called into the field; upon which, the Indians agreed to
confine themselves within their own proper limits.
In a short time, however, this arrangement was violated by a party of
these Indians, in an outrage committed upon a band of friendly
Menomonies, in the very vicinity of Fort Crawford. Twenty-five persons
were wantonly killed and many wounded, while encamped in the village
of Prairie du Chien, under the protection of our flag. It was felt by
the government, that this aggression could not be passed over without
the infliction of a due chastisement; as all was at stake, in regard
to the friendly Indians and the frontier settlements in that quarter.
Accordingly, the department ordered General Atkinson, on the 7th of
March, 1832, to ascend the Mississippi with the disposable regular
troops at Jefferson barracks, and to strengthen the frontiers; orders
were also given for the rëoccupation of Chicago.
In the prosecution of his instructions, General Atkinson proceeded to
the Indian country, where, after various skirmishes, and several more
serious engagements, the Sacs and Foxes, under the direction of Black
Hawk, fled beyond the Mississippi. On the 28th and 29th of July,
General Atkinson crossed with his army to the north side of the
Wisconsin, at Helena, in pursuit of the enemy. After a most difficult
and forced march, over steep mountains and through deep ravines, on
the 5th day of March, the enemy was announced by one of the scouts. A
suitable disposition was made of the American forces, with a view to
prevent the escape of any of the foe, and the firing commenced, as the
different portions of the army came in contact with him. The battle
lasted upwards of three hours. About fifty of his women and children
were taken prisoners, and many were killed in the battle. When the
Indians were driven to the bank of the Mississippi, some hundreds of
the men, women, and children plunged into the river, and hoped, by
diving, to escape the bullets. Very few, however, escaped--the
American sharp-shooter is nearly infallible in his aim.
Black Hawk, in the midst of the battle, escaped, and went up the
river. The savages, after this defeat, became convinced of the
impossibility of contending, with success, against the American arms.
No further serious resistance was offered on their part, and the war
soon closed by the capture of Black Hawk, who was delivered up to the
American commander, by two Winnebagoes, on the 27th of August. He was
well treated and much noticed in the United States.
_Discontent in South Carolina._--The year 1832 was distinguished also
by discontents in the Southern portion of the country, particularly in
South Carolina, arising from the tariff of 1828. That tariff had been
slightly modified by an act of congress, in the summer of 1832. But
the small and partial reduction of duties thus secured, did not
diminish, but rather served to increase the opposition to the American
System, then so called. By this system was meant the policy of high
duties on imports, for the protection of domestic manufactures.
In South Carolina, it was resolved, a few months after the passage of
the law of July, 1832, by the legislature, that the present law, and
that of 1828, were infractions of the constitution, or exceeded the
power given to the federal government by that compact, and were,
therefore, null and void; and that the execution of those acts, within
the state, was to be prevented, even by force, if necessary. And the
requisite measures were taken to enforce this resolution.