indeed, his arm, alone, as he asserts, protected from outrage, the city, he could not rightly have founded upon the feat, the prostration of the civil powers. We deny not, that in war, the law must, at times, necessarily, be silent. But, "the necessity," in the language supplied to General Jackson himself, "must be apparent, from the circumstances of the case, or it forms no justification." We will not say, that, upon the approach of the enemy, the first moment of anxiety and alarm might not have extenuated, a temporary suspension of civil authority: \But we will say, that, to this hour, no satisfactory evidence has been adduced of treasonable intentions, or of insubordination, which justified the proclamation of martial law. It is said, that the enemy received information from agents, in the city of New Orleans, of every thing necessary to promote his interest; but, suppose it true, it is certain, that this information was communicated, freely, after the proclamation, and that, therefore, the proclamation was, in its most important ostensible object, the prevention of intercourse with the enemy, useless. But it was not useless in its real object, that object which the General has, on every occasion, sought, the investiture in himself of all power, military and civil. Admitting the unlawfulness of his conduct, upon this occasion, he extenuates it, by the plea, most abhorrent, to public and private morals, that the end justifies the means. "If," said he, "a successful defence could be made, I felt assured that my country, in the objects attained, would lose sight of, and forget the means that had been employed." Vile as is the plea of political necessity, this is still more odious. It is the plea of a bold, bad man, between whom and the gratification of his will, there is no barrier. The defence of necessity is, not that evil means may produce a good end, but, that there are no other means to attain such end.

116. To the safety of New Orleans, the proclamation has never been proven indispensable. There was not only no party devoted to the enemy, but, there was satisfactory evidence of an enthusiastic devotion to the cause of the country, in the Legislature, and in every class of the citizens. Yet, under pretence of loose and unfounded apprehension, the Legislators were expelled from their hall, their functions suspended, and they, with the whole people, subjected to the wantonness of military law. This unlawful and illimitable authority, was not only assumed, immediately, upon entry of the General into the city; but was exercised, in the most rigorous manner-the liberty of the press was trampled

upon--a member of the Legislature, a citizen of the State and of the United States, was arrested and cast into prison, and the Judge, who issued a habeas corpus to inquire into the cause, was rudely seized and banished. Not only was this odious power, hastily, assumed, but it was long retained and reluctantly abandoned. The flagrant enormities we have recited, were committed, not only after the enemy had abandoned the country, but after information had been received, and credited too by the General, of the restoration of peace -continued long, long after every honest pretence of its necessity had ceased.

117. But we cannot dismiss this portion of our subject, without exposing the means which arbitrary power will use for its gratification; and the readiness of its present possessor to resort to the grossest perversion of the law to sustain him-. self. Mr. Louaillier, a member of the Legislature, distinguished for his patriotism, had published some remarks, in a newspaper, which questioned the propriety of the continuance of the stern measures of the General, after the enemy had withdrawn and peace was made. "He was guilty of no offence cognizable by the civil courts." But the second section of the articles of war had a power of expansion which, could be made to cover, with equal propriety, the deliberations of the Hartford Convention and the lucubrations of a Louisianian Legislator.

We give the section, and again ask the reader not to suppose that we are abusing his credulity. We assure him, that the following is a literal extract, from the Life of General Jackson, written at his own dictation, by his friend and dependent, Major Eaton.

"Louaillier was detained under guard and brought before a court martial, of which General Gaines was President, charged under the second section of the rules and articles of war, as one "owing allegiance to the United States of America, and found lurking as a spy about the encampment:" for the reason, however, that the inflammatory and mutinous publication which had occasioned his arrest, could not be shown to have been conveyed to the enemy, he was acquitted -the quo animo being, from this circumstance, in the proof, not sufficiently apparent. That none might be uninformed of the law, the following official notice had been circulated through the public journals."

*Eaton's Life of Jackson.

Here follows the military order, containing the second section, in these words:

"And be it further enacted, that in time of war, all persons not citizens of, or owing allegiance to the United States of America, who shall be found lurking as spies in or about the fortifications or encampments of the armies of the United States, or any of them, shall suffer death, according to the law and usage of nations, by sentence of a general Court Martial."

Now, having read the section, does the reader believe that the accused was acquitted, because proof that, an address published in a newspaper, had not been communicated to the cnemy? Does he not see, that, if the act charged amounted to the offence proscribed, which is impossible, that, the person charged was not amenable under it; and that, conse quently, no Court Martial, not alike weak and wicked, could convict?

The section contemplates persons not citizens or persons not owing allegiance to the United States. This is a specific class of persons, which, only, could produce spies. A citizen, or one owing allegiance to the United States, who is not a soldier, is not amenable under the articles of war; or if he be, must be prosecuted for giving intelligence to the enemy, under the 57th article of the first section. And yet a Major General of the United States, dared to accuse and try a citi zen, under a section of the law, so totally foreign to the matter, which he believed, or did not believe, to be applicable to the case. If he believed it, then, was there the most reprehensible ignorance of that which he was bound to know; if he did not believe it, he attempted to sustain illegal power by the perversion of the law.

118. When tidings of these proceedings were received at Washington, the conduct of the General was thus rebuked, by Alexander J. Dallas,* acting Secretary of War, by command of the President. 66 Representations have been recently made to the President, respecting certain acts of military opposition to the civil magistrate, that require immediate attention-not only in vindication of the just authority of the laws, but to rescue your own conduct from an unmerited reproach.

"There have been transmitted, to the President, copies of the letter of Mr. Reed, your Aid-de-Camp, to the Editor of

Mr. Dallas' letter, dated April 15, 1815.

the Louisiana Courier, dated the 21st of February-of your General Order, dated the 28th of February, commanding certain French subjects to retire from New Orleans-of a publication in the Louisiana Courier of the 3d of March, under the signature of a Citizen of Louisiana of French origin, animadverting upon the General Order-the order of the 5th of March, enforcing the order of the 28th of February-of your letter of the 16th of February, announcing the unofficial in-telligence of peace, and of the third General Order of the 8th of March, suspending the execution of the Order of the 28th of February, except so far as relates to the Chevalier de Toussard.

"These documents have been accompanied with a statement, that, on the 5th of March, the writer of the publication of the 3d of March, Mr. Louaillier, a member of the Legislature of the State, was arrested by your order, on account of the publication, and confined in the barracks; that, on the same day, Mr. Hall, the District Judge, issued a writ of Habeas Corpus in the case of Louaillier, but before the writ was served, the Judge himself was arrested by your order, for issuing it, and conducted under a strong guard to the barracks: that, on the 8th of March, Mr. Dick, the attorney of the United States, having obtained from Mr. Lewis, as State Judge, a writ of Habeas Corpus, in the case of Judge Hall, which was served upon you, he was arrested by your orders, and lodged in the barracks-that Judge Hall was released, on the 12th of March, but escorted to a place out of the City of New Orleans, with orders not to return until information of peace was officially received and officially announced; and that Mr. Dick was released, on the same day, and permitted to remain in town, but with orders to report himself, from day to day, until discharged.

"From these representations, it would appear, that, the judicial power of the United States has been resisted; the liberty of the Press has been suspended, and the Consul and subjects of a friendly Government have been exposed to great inconvenience by the exercise of military force and command. The President views the subject in its present aspect with surprise and solicitude; but in the absence of all information from yourself, relative to your conduct, and the motives of your conduct, he abstains from any decision or even expression of an opinion upon the case, in hopes that such explanations may be afforded, as will reconcile his sense of public duty with a continuance of the confileme,

which he reposes in your judgment, discretion and patriot

ism."

"The President requests me to take this opportunity of requesting, that a conciliatory deportment may be observed towards the State authority and citizens of New Orleans. He is persuaded that Louisiana justly estimates the value of the talents and valor which have been displayed for her defence and safety, and that there will be no disposition in any part of the nation to review with severity the efforts of a commander acting in a crisis of unparalleled difficulty upon the impulse of the purest patriotism.”

No terms of censure could be more explicit upon the conduct of the General, as known from the "representations," and those representations were true to the letter. From this censure of his Government General Jackson has never been relieved, although he may have expiated a portion of his sins at New Orleans, by submission to the sentence of the Court which was passed upon him for contempt of the writ of Habeas Corpus.

119. From all the circumstances, then, attending the violation of the law, and assumptions of authority, we have additional proof, of the tendency of General Jackson to appropriate power to himself, by fair means, or foul. Such, too, appears to have been the general opinion of his character. He was supposed, rough in his manners, and overbearing in his conduct; and he said of himself, "many conceive me to be a most ferocious animal, insensible to moral duty and regardless of the laws, both of God and Man."* How far this opinion of the many, was consistent with truth, may, perhaps, be correctly apprehended from the next eventful epoch, in the life of the military chieftain.

120. The treaty made at Fort Jackson, with the Creeks, was a hard one. It exacted large sacrifices of territory, its phraseology was the most imperious and ungrateful which could be used towards a spirited people, and it was executed by only one-third of the nation. Is it, therefore, extraordinary that the usual effect of over rigour should result in this case, and that the suffering party should seek to escape from its burdens? Under the name of Seminoles, (a Creek tribe) many Indians, including the vanquished of the late war, congregated in Florida, with considerable numbers of fugitive negroes. Even the late tremendous exhibition of the power

*Eaton's Life of Jackson.