Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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