Newspaper Page Text
frontier in blood; we dare not touch y ou;
Standing under the shelter of our constitution,
Hour punishment would be a stab to the liberties
Ms our country.
B, In regard to gen. Jackson's order to gen.
Hhii>cs to occupy St. Augustine, it isonlyneces-
Wff to say, that it was issued in conformity to
Jpc same principle which governed the general
in all his movements in Florida, viz. That where
the Spaniards identified themselves with the In
dians, by arming or sheltering them, they were
to be treated as enemies in our own defence; one
I>l the most sacred necessities imposed on man.
In page 1 1, the committee ask,“ifthesc things
ire admitted in the South, will not they lie con
lidered as authorized in the North?” I answer,
| It is needless to remark on that part of the rc
>ort which regards the execution of Arhuthnot
and Ambrister. The committee admit, “that
having left their country and united their fate with
sav ages with whom the United States arc at war,
they forfeited their claim to the protection of their
own government,and subjected themselves to the
■same treatment, which ought, according to the
Principles and practice of the American govern-
Eincnt, to be extended towards those with whom
Ithey
n>unishment,(and were in the catalogue ofdeprav
lity, c an we find a blacker crime than the excite
ment of savages to butcher women and children?)
.and the civil powers of our country had no juris-
Idic tion over their acts, it remains only to state,
I that gen. Jackson had the right and the power to
rcxccute the law of nature and nations upon them.
If the two great points are admitted, the guiit
of the prisoners and the power of the general,
what object have wc in c avilling at the mode of
their trial? An error in the formal part of the
proceedings would not have proved the innocence
of the accused, ;yud of course could not vitiate the
w hole transaction. If the conduct of these men
had been such as was imputed to them, their
death was richly merited; and if it is even admit
ted, that gen. Jackson, in punishing such mon
sters, erred in formalities, the establishment of
their guilt and the application of the corrective,
not only consummated his duty, but repaired all
the unsubstantial defects which might have given
impunity to crime.
To conclude—these remarks arc presented to
the w orld, from a deep conviction, that the report
of the committee not only does the greatest injus
tice to general Jackson, but in its character and
tendency is destructive of our dearest rights.
Every citizen of the republic is wanting in duty
to his country who does not solemnly piotcst a
gainstso novel and unconstitutional a proceeding
If inquisitorial investigations can be instituted into
the character of individuals, at the will of the le
gislative branch of our government, why did the
great framers of our constitution give us a judi
ciary and executive? If the senate can assume
the judicial and executive functions, why may not
the president usurp the legislative power? If
sm h a precedent is acquiesced in by the honor
able body from one of whose committee it ema
nated, it is greatly feared, that such an usurpation
w ill be infinitely more dangerous than the open
efforts of ambition, even w hen supported by tiie
licentiousness ol standing armies.
Washington , March 5, 1819.
P. S. It has been intimated that some gentle
men of the committee have expressed their re
gret, that all the facts on the subject of their en
quiry had not been obtained before they made
their report. No excuse is left them for not pro
curing all the facts; for general Jackson staled
to one of the select committee, that he was will
ing to appear before them as a witness and expose
to them all the documents in his possession. It
should be recollected that the general himself fur
nished the copy of his order to gen. Gaines re
specting the seizure of St. Augustine.
From the National Intelligencer of March 20.
Messrs. Calks & Seaton—Shortly after the
report was made in the senate on the subject of
the Seminolie war, formal notice was given in
your paper, that strictures (ample and free in
their character) would be made on that report.
Those strictures have appeared; and, by an edi
torial paragraph subjoined, it would seem that
the editors of the Intelligencer had viewed the
conduct of the committee and of the senate, on
that occasion, as of such a nature as to justify in
them a departure from the rules that have here
tofore been observed in conducting their press—
It is believed that this is the first instance in which,
through the medium of that paper, the congress
of the United States have been arraigned for their
conduct; or that a committee of either branch
have been charged, by an officer of the army,
w ith deliberate falsehood and malice for a dis
charge of their duty. Os this, however, no com
plaint is made, as it respects the editors.
But, as the strictures have been made to as
sume, by those artificial means, an importance
they would not have merited when intrinsically
considered, it is therefore hoped that the editors
will feel no hesitation in publishing the following
observations. Your’s, See.
A. Lacock.
TO TIIE PUBLIC.
||Hgring recently seen, in the National lute lli-
utT's of an erroneous < haraetev, upon
a select column:, e of me -e
‘• ‘ ‘ I * S ni 11 1 ‘
1 : tli.''. . i ii,
M< 1M -’ < . . . - 1
* 1 * - v ,
’ men* were the real, as they were the ostensible,
authors of those strictures, they would have been
treated with silent pity and commiseration, and
i their production would have remained forever
; unnoticed by me. But charity for these men,
and tiie peculiar circumstances of the case, forbid
this conclusion: Wc must look to a higher source
for their author. Those young men were aids
to gen. Jackson, or belonged to his military fa
; mily. Some of the documents annexed to the
strictures, were, it seems, furnished from his own
private bureau, for they could not be obtained in
k the war office. The personal invectives indulged
in, in the strictures, correspond entirely with his
previous observations in the public taverns and
ball rooms of Washington;—for it is a fact noto
j l ions, and cannot he denied, that on these occa
sions he was vociferous in his imprecations, and
violent in his threats of personal vengeance,
even to cutting off the ears of some of the mem
bers of the select committee, and this while
the subject was before the senate; and some
members of the house of representatives who
dared to animadvert upon his conduct, or even
to doubt his infallibility, were menaced in nearly
a similar manner. Under these circumstances,
there seems to be no unfairness in considering
; that gen. Jackson is the real author ofthose strict
j ures, or at least that he approved of, and assented
|to the publication;! and that those gentlemen
(with more gallantry than prudence) were in
duced to step forward and take upon themselves
a responsibility that the general himself felt un
willing to encounter. And it is for him to de
cide how far it was just and proper for age and
experience to take advantage of the exuberant
ardor of youthful feelings and attachments, and
by tliis means induce the officers in question to
hazard their reputation and future prospects in
the army by acts of inconsiderate rashness. As
citizens of the United States, they were entitled
to equal privileges with all others. As military
officers, they were held strictly subordinate to
the civil power. An act of congress declares,
that every officer shall be cashiered, or otherwise
punished hv court martial, who shall even speak
contemptuous or disrespectful words of the con
gress of the United States or of the legislatures
or governors of any of the states in the union.
And, by rules and regulations established in the
army of the United States, the officers are for
bidden, under like penalties, from publishing in
newspapers, or otherwise, observations disrespect
ful of each other.
And it is believed that this is the first instance
in which a military officer, whose conduct was
the subject ol investigation before the congress
ot the United States, has ventured to charge that
body with a violation of the constitution, and with
exercising inquisitorial power, j Or that a com
mittee of either branch of the national legislature
has been charged with the “most wanton and
studied disregard to truth,” and the most “foul’*
and “dishonest motives.” But how far it is either
lor the honor or interest of the nation thus to sub
mit to military dragooning and newspaper chas
tisement, by military officers w ho, it is believed,
visited the seat of government for that purpose;
and how far a committee of the senate of the
United States should be subject to this kind of
discipline, for the conscientious discharge of offi
cial duties, imposed by the unanimous voice of
that body, is for the proper authorities to deter
mine.
I shall now state faithfully the proceedings had
in the senate and before the committee, on this
subject, pledging myself, and appealing to others,
for the correctness of every fact stated.
On the 18th Nov. 1818, the president’s mes
sage to both houses ol congress was received. In
this message the president refers to the Scmino
lie war, and promises to present to congress the
documents respecting it.
On the 4th Dec. 1818, this volume of docu
ments was received in manuscript and sent to the
printer. On this clay (and not on the 18th, as
stated erroneously in the strictures) the resolu
tion was offered in the senate, for raising the com-’
mittec on this subject; it was considered on the
7th, and postponed from time to time, until the
18th Dec. when it was modified and enlarged, on
motion of Mr. Eaton, and unanimously adopte®!
This delay was occasioned by the senate’s not hav
ing previously received the documents from the
printer. ‘
There had, however, been made, in the senate,
a call on the president, for further information on
the subject, and this resolution, offered on the
15th Dec. was agreed to on the 17th, and the call
w as complied with on the 28th Dec. by message,
and another volume of documents furnished.
These documents were not received from the
printer, until the Ist or 2d of February, 1819.
But a copy of them had been received by each
member of the senate, through the medium of
the house of representatives, to whom they were
first sent, on the 27th or 28th of January, and,
on the day they were received, the committee
were called together. At this meeting all the
members being present, Mr. King made a mo
tion that the committee should ask the senate to
discharge them from the further consideration of
the subject. The question on the motion was
put, and, four members voting in the negative, it
was of course lost.
* Those officers were examined by the committee;
they discovered (hut more especially one of them) tal
ents, and much energy of character, that, if tempered
with prudence, cannot fail to make them useful mem
bers of society; and a tenderness for them, bordering on
parental regard, hasinducedmeto withhold their names
from the public, knowing that “public rebuke hardens
the heart, and believing that, when they have number
ed my \ ears, they will look back ou the unguarded fol
lies of youth with sorrow and remorse,
flf the reader entertains any doubt as to the author
strictures, they will be removed on reading
11rv, in which it v ill be seen,
And, at this time, the committee ordered under
the authority of the resolution of the senate, that
the aids of gen. Jackson, and such other persons
as the chairman might think necessary, should
be summoned before the committee for exami
nation.
This order was complied with, witnesses were
summoned, and the examination proceeded from
day to day, as the witnesses appeared, subject on
ly to the delay and interruption that arose from
the indispensable necessity the members of the
committee were under, of attending to their other
official duties.
Thus the enquiry was prosecuted, until the
committee were told by tne chairman, that he
knew of no other evidence that it was in his power
to obtain. And at this time, as on former occa
sions, particular enquiry was made of the mem
bers of the committee generally, and of Mr. Ea
ton particularly, whether it was known that fur
ther testimony could be obtained, or whether they
wished that other witnesses should be summoned,
and the answers to these enquiries were in the
negative.
The testimony being thus considered as closed,
the nature of the report tube made to the senate
w r as then discussed, and all the points involved by
the conduct of gen. Jackson, on which there could
be any doubt, were distinctly stated in writing,
and separate questions taken on each of them.
On the first point, of raising and organizing the
volunteers, the unanimous voice of the commit
tee was, that it was illegal. The second point,
the right to pursue the enemy into Florida, was
decided unanimously in the affirmative. And on
several other points the committee were divided,
three disapproving the conduct of the command
ing general, and two justifying or excusing it.
The decision of the committee being thus had,
the chairman was ordered to prepare a report,
in conformity to the principles established by the
committee. About this time, however, another
circumstance took place, which necessarily oc
casioned some delay in obtaining evi
dence.
Mr. Eaton informed the chairman of the com
mittee, that he had heard gen. Jackson say, at his
lodgings, that, after he had left the Floridas, he
had issued an order to gen. Gaines, to take pos
session of St. Augustine, and that this order had
been countermanded by the department of war.
The chairman having ascertained this to be
the fact, by a letter dated February 8, called on
the department for this correspondence, which
was furnished on the evening of the 12th of the
same month.
These documents never before having been
called for, were not previously transmitted; nor
was this design of taking St. Augustine, (after
the close of the war,) known to the committee
until this disclosure; and it was thought necessa
ry that the documents should accomfiany , and be
taken notice of in the report. If further evidence
be necessary, to convince the most incredulous
“that no improper or unnecessary delay was ob
served in making the report,” it will be furnish
ed by the following facte: The senate of the Uni
ted States is connected, by the constitution, with
the executive, in the exercise of the treaty ma
king power.
On the 9th or 10th of Feb. the chairmen of the
committee w r as confidentially informed, that the
treaty wlth Spain would probably be brought to
a favorable result, in a short time; afid a sugges
tion was made, that a report on the subject of
the occupation of Florida might, by possibility,
affect the negotiation, if made previews fto the
signing of the treaty. l *
These facts and suggestions were imrnediaudy
communicated to a majority of the meja|e>s of
the committee, and more especially to Mj.Jllng,
whose experience in diplomatic
him a full opportunity of forming a correct judg
ment on the subject.
This gentleman, with two other members of
the committee, besides the chairman, agreed that
the report should be kept back a few days, until
the treaty was received. On Monday, the 22dof
Feb. this treaty was sent to the senate; on the 24th,
it was ratified, and on the same day the report
wjjs made. And this accounts for the only delay
Lflt was not occasioned by the difficulty of ob-
TH|ng the evidence proper to an understanding
case, and which it was impossible for the
■mmnittee sooner to obtain.
That it appears that the charge, in the stric
tures, that the report was kgpt Back to injure
general totally withtfUt fdwidJtion—
and it is equally untrue that “his'frwnZs”§ on
the committee had no opportunity nmkinga
defence. The same time was hem to
make a defence, that was given to tht
to w rite the report. They were present when
the decision of the committee w as made, and the
chairman received his instructions. A coun
ter statement might have been prepared and
offered in the manner pursued by colonel John
son, in the house of representatives; or, if this
course should have been thought ineligible or
irregular, when the report was made to the
senate, it might have been called up at any time,
j and a resolution offered, approbating or excus
| ingthe conduct of general Jackin, and this res
olution might have been prefaced by reasons at
large, in opposition to the reasons offered by the
committee, and thus the minority on the com
mittee would have had a full opportunity of lay
ing before the public the result of their deliber
ate opinions on the subject. Neither is it true
j “that the-Chairman declined annexing the cus
! tomary re&lutions to the report.” But, on the
j contrary, the tact is known to every member of
■ the committee, that, when the chairman present
ied the report, the question was put by him,
1 whether resolutions should be annexed; and the*
| committee decided unanimously in the negative :
But it appears by the strictures, that the char 1
i
j §The word “friends*’ is used as a quotation from lC 1
■pictures. It is cjHauvthat general had not an
man of the committee has been almost the sole
actor on this occasion, and has had the entire
control of the committee and of the senate.
The author of the strictures, in thus giving im
portance to the individual concerned, has unin
tentionally done him too much honor, the accept
ance of which, at the expense of the senate, he
begs leave to decline, desirous, as it relates to
himself, of being only considered w hat the sen
ate had constituted him—the chairman of the se
lect committee. As their organ, he was subject
to their control, and acted in conformity to their
instructions; as, in like manner, the committee
was controlled by the senate, and bound to observe
the instructions received from that body.
And it was a source of no small gratification to
the committee to find that their conduct in the
investigation was approved by the senate, and that
it was so approved, is manifest from the follow
ing facts:
On the 17th February, 1819, Mr. Forsyth, a
member of the select committe, resigned his seat
in the senate, and of course was no longer a mem
ber of the committee; and, on the same day, a
resolution was offered in the senate proposing that
another member should be added to the commit
tee in the place of Mr. Forsyth. On this ques
tion a discussion took place, and it was express
ly and repeatedly stated, that the remaining mem
bers of the committee were equally divided; that
unless the vacancy was filled, no report could be
made to the senate. The nature of the report to
be made, and the additional evidence procured,
w as also fully disclosed.
The members of the committee opposed to
the report, particularly Mr. King, stated to the
senate that his object was that the committee
should be discharged; and, that the senate’s re
fusing to add another member to the committee
would be equivalent to discharging the commit
tee; and, with this understanding, to try the prin
ciple, and take the sense of the senate in discharg
ing the committee, Mr. Eaton moved the post
ponement of the resolution before the senate to
a dajHeyond the session, and on this question
the yeas and nays were called, 16 members vot
ing in favor of the postponement, and 21 against
it l|
Thus it appears that the select committee of
the senate w as appointed by the unanimous voice
of that body; that they were with same unanimity
vested with powers to send for persons and pa
pers, and specially instructed to make the inves
tigation; and that after the investigation had been
made, the facts disclosed, and the substance of
the report then prepared, were made known to
the senate.
That body, by a strong majority, refused to
release them, and held them to a discharge of
their duty: so that it is not the committee alone,
but the senate of the United States, that should
be considered, as they really are, responsible for
this transaction, not, fortunately, to a military
chieftain or subalterns in the army , but to the
American people.
It is not the fact , 9s stated by the author of the
strictures, that general Jackson was charged in
the report, w ith acting from mercenary motives
and views of speculation in Florida lands. No
such charge was made; neither can such a charge
be fairly inferred from any part of the report.
The words selected by the writer, and which
are tortured into such a charge, arc these:—“The
tendency of these measures of the commanding
general seems to have been to involve the nation
in a war w ithout her consent, and for reasons of
his own unconnected with his military functions.’*
In these observations there is no charge of the
nature complained of, either expessed impli
ed, nor was any such designed; and it must hcH
been extreme sensibility on this subject that could
have induced the author to have drawn such an
inference. The plain and obvious meaning of
these w r ords are, that general Jackson, as a mili
tary officer, had no right to judge of was
the cause of war with a neutral, and his attempt
ing to reason and act on this subject was aiMiswr
pation of the civil powers of the
of course, unconnected with his militajwJ^kc-
But, since so much anxiety has been.
ed on this branch of the subject, and so much
pains taken to refute a charge never made on
gen. Jackson, but by tie author of the strictures,
it may not be amiss tr state, that, had the com
mittee been dispose* te receive and give credit
to such hearsay evilence as that on which Ar
buthnot w r as hung, diere might have been more
necessity for the e’aborate defence set up on this
point.
And thus it nust be seen, notwithstanding
w hat is said in tie strictures, that the committee
were disposed 0 deal, not only with fairness, but
with tendernefc, towards general Jackson. He
was heard byhis staff'; his bosom friends, and
the memberfof his own family, were selected as
the witnesse; and, when a call was made in writ
ing on the ecretary of war, for information, it
was sent tr general Jackson, and the inquiries
made by fie committee were answered by him;
and he g*~‘S at large into the reasons that induc
ed him o occupy Pensacola. This letter of
generaJJackson’s was received and considered
by the-ommittee, and will be found among the
docurents accompanying their report. Thus,
it mut appear, to every unprejudiced mind, that
geneal Jackson had not only an opportunity of
beig neard before the committee, and of fur
nislng all the documents in his possession, but
thd die committee were anxious, as well on his
amount as on account of the character of thena
t>n, to obtain evidence in justification of his con
uct.
It now becomes necessary to take some notice
ofthe deposition of col. Butler annexed to the
smetures. This gentleman was examined be
fore the committee, and his testimony w r as taken
down by Mr. Burrill, a member, and afterwards
read to