« ПретходнаНастави »
tify the arbitrary exercise of power. That part of the constitution which delegates the power of the sword to the general government, is guarded with peculiar caution, and manifested in the sages who formed, and the people who adopted it, a great jealousy of military power. The militia are to be trained and officered by state authorities, and to be called into the service of the United States only in three specified cases. Congress alone can make war, and raise and support armies, and even that body can make no appropriation of money for that purpose for a longer term than two years; so that the necessity and expediency of war, and of raising and supporting armies, may pass in review before the immediate representatives of the people on every change of that body.
When the Tennessee volunteers were called into service, there was no law to authorize raising such a corps.
The persons assigned to their command, having no legitimate commissions from the general government constituting them officers of such troops, could have no lawful authority to command them, or hold courts martial for the trial of capital offenses. The trial, condemnation, and execution of the two Englishmen found in the Floridas, for the charges alledged against them, was without authority either from the constitution and laws of the United States, or the principles of national law. The execution of the two Indian chiefs was unauthorized by any principles ever adopted by the United States towards that people. The military occupation of the Floridas was an unequivocal act of war upon Spain, without the shadow of authority either from congress or the executive, contrary to his express orders, and a measure which involved the United States in serious difficulties with that nation. On receiving intelligence of this event, the Spanish government demanded, that the act should be expli. citly disavowed; that every thing should be restored to the state it was in before General Jackson entered the Floridas; that satisfaction should be made for all losses sustained, and the commanding general punished; and declared a suspension of all diplomatic intercourse until these demands were complied with.
Mr. Adams' defense. Mr. Adams, the American secretary of state, in a letter to Mr. Erving, the substance of which was to be communicated to the Spanish ministry, entered into an elaborate justification of the proceedings of his government. By the treaty of 1795, Spain had expressly stipulated to restrain, by force if necessary, the Indians within the limits of
her territories from committing acts of hostility against the citizens of the United States. Mr. Adams produced a series of undisputed facts, which clearly proved that the Spanish authorities in Florida, so far from regarding this stipulation, had instigated and encourage the Indians and negroes within their limits to the most, barbarous acts of murder and rapine; had furnished them with the means of annoyance, and protected foreign miscreants in aiding the cavages in their work of destruction. This, Mr. Adams claimed, was a full justification to the Spanish government, for every measure which the American had adopted in relation to the Floridas, and would warrant any further reprisals which the safety of the citizens of the United States might require: and concluded with demanding satisfaction for the heavy expenses incurred in prosecuting the Seminole war, and the exemplary punishment of the Spanish officers under whose authority these events had taken place.
Arbuthnot and Ambrister being foreign emissaries, and principal instigators of the massacres done by the savages, their being put to death by an American officer, Mr. Adams contended, furnished no ground of complaint on the part of Spain, though done within her jurisdiction.
They being British subjects, their case was taken up and discussed in the British parliament; and the view there taken of it was, that as they had voluntarily left their own country, and joined the enemies of another, if taken, they were liable to be treated in the same manner as those with whom they were associated; and their military execution furnished no cause of complaint by the British, against the American government.
Proceedings of congress relating to the Seminole war. Soon after the commencement of the session of congress in December, 1818, the president communicated to both houses all the papers relating to the Seminole war. In the senate, they were referred to a committee of five, Burrell, Lacock, Eppes, King of New York, and Eaton. The three first concurred in a report censuring in severe and unqualified terms the conduct of General Jackson throughout. The two latter justified him. The report was made to the senate near the close of the session, and no vote taken upon the subject. In the house of representatives, the papers were referred to the committee on military affairs, consisting of seven members, four of whom concurred in a report of a similar character with that made to the senate. The other three presented a statement approving the general's con
duct, and concluding with a declaration, that he deserved the thanks of the country. The subject afforded matter of discussion in the house for a considerable period of the session; and on the final vote, the report of the committee was disagreed to, and the general's conduct approved by a majority of 100 to 70.
The approbation of the president and senate has since been manifested, in his appointment to the offices of go.. vernor of the Floridas, and minister of Mexico; of the legislature of Tennessee, in appointing him to the senate of the United States; and of his fellow-citizens, in the electoral votes of 1824, which placed him highest on the list of candidates for the chief magistracy of the nation.
View of the state of Europe-Comparison between the European and Ame
rican principles of civil government-Progress of American principles in Europe-State of France after the battle of Waterloo_Disposition of Bonaparte, and his brothers-Meeting of a congress of European powers at Vienna, to adjust their claims to territory-Treaty of the holy alliance The professions and views of the parties to it-The occasion of its being formed-The meeting of the allied sovereigns at Troppau, at LaybachTheir proceedings--Revolutions in Naples and Piedmont suppressed by Austrian forces-Meeting of the holy alliance at Verona-Their proceedings in relation to Spain, South America, and Greece-Conduct of England-Revolution in Spain suppressed by the French.
American principles compared with European. The family of civilized nations have so many interests in common, and the affairs of one are so often blended with those of another, that in order to a correct understanding of the history of any particular state, the most important cotemporaneous transactions of others must be kept in view.
The battle of Waterloo, the occupation of Paris by the allied powers, and their arrangements consequent thereon, put an end to a war of twenty-four years, the most extensive and sanguinary, as well as the most important in its consequences, that Europe ever witnessed. During this whole period, the correct principles of political economy, which had been established by the American revolution, and transplanted to Europe at the close of the war of indepen. dence, had been making a gradual advance in the minds of the people of that continent; and had taken such hold of their affections, as to render it impossible they should ever be eradicated. Scarcely had the European armies returned from the American contest, and been suffered to mingle with the people, than popular risings in favor of the princi. ples of political liberty began to appear. These assumed a more or less formidable aspect, in proportion to the degree of information, and the means of resistance possessed by the people. They produced a uniform determination on the part of the ruling powers, to suppress them, not only each one in his own dominions, but by a combined and general effort
The governing principles which sprang up in Europe in the dark ages, and prevailed under the denomination of the feudal system, were :
That the prince was the proprietor of all the territory of his kingdom: that the people held all their lands under
That they were his vassals, and owed him a perpetual and unalienable allegiance;
That the ultimate disposition of their persons and property was subject to his will ;
That either with or without the authority of the pope, the monarch was the head of the church, and in that capacity had right to prescribe creeds and forms of worship for his subjects, and compel a conformity by such pains, penalties, and disabilities, as he should think proper;
That he possessed these high prerogatives, not by the consent of the people, but by a certain, hereditary, indefeasible, and divine right, subject to no control, and accountable to none for the manner in which he exercised his authority;
That every privilege and franchise enjoyed by the subject, was from the free grace and bounty of the sovereign.
As a necessary appendage of this system, the press, and all other sources of information, were subject to the control of the government, who were careful that no instruction in. consistent with these principles, should ever be communi. cated to the people.
The act which separated the American colonies from their parent state, placed an enlightened and intelligent community of three millions, in a situation to establish a govern. ment for themselves, no individuals, class, or description of men, having any exclusive rights, privileges, or claims of superiority over their fellows. A situation so novel, and so happily adapted to the liberation of the people from the manacles of European despotism, was wisely improved by the framers of the American systems of government. They laid aside at once every thing savoring of the monarchal notions of the eastern continent; and adopted the simple principle of perfect equality of rights among all the citizens. Their leading features were :
That all legitimate civil government emanated from the people, and was designed for their good.
That those selected to administer the government, had no powers but what were delegated to them by the people, under the constitution from which they derived their autho