Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

SOUTHERN RECORDER. VOL. I. M1LLEDGEVILLE, TUESDAY, APRIL 11, 1320. No. 9. PUBLISHED WEEKLY, (on Tuesdays) BY S. GRAJYTLAJYD if R. M. ORATE, at three dollars, in advance, or four dollars at the expiration OF THE YEAR. Advertisements connpicuously inser ted at the customary rates. GENERAL JACKSOJY'S memorial. The Memorial of Andrew Jackson, Major General of the Army of the U. States, and commander of the Southern Divi sion. To the honorable Senate of the United States: On the 18th December, 1818, your honorable body resolved, “ That the message of the President, and documents relative to the Seminole war, be referred to a select committee, who shall have authority, if necessary, to send for per sons and papers ; that said committee in quire relative to the advance of the U- nited States’ troops into West Florida ; whether the officers in command at Pen sacola and St. Marks were amenable to, and under the control of Spain; and, par ticularly, what circumstances existed to authorize or justify the commanding general in taking possession cf those posts.” In conformity with this resolution a select committee of live persons, of your honorable body, was appointed, who, on the 24th February, 1819, made a report. The committee had ample time for a correct examination of the subject sub mitted to their consideration, and the means by which to have been fully sa tisfied of the innocence of your respon dent ; yet in their report has he been ac cused of crimes against the laws and con stitution of his country. Upon a review of that document, your respondent is free to declare, that both the narrative of facts, and the arguments deduced from tuein, are unsound and erroneous. The incorrect impressions with which the committee seem to have labored, have, in the opinion of your memorialist, given to this subject a distorted aspect, and thrown around it a deceptive coloring. With striking a deadly blow at the li berty of his country, and with acts of wanton usurpation, which, for their e- nonnity, would vie with the most ab- nolute despots—with the directory of France, during their short career of madness and folly—has your respondent Keen charged. These accusations have fir their object the rendering your res pondent obnoxious to his fellow-citizens Still, he will not so far forget the duty he owes himself, and the respect due the Senate and the American people, as to indulge recrimination. It is not the mean by which truth can be arrived at, or the cause of justice and impartiality promoted. But, to vindicate himself from reproach, to ward off unmerited im putations, an-l to stand in opposition to a report of a committee of your body, which casts the severest censure, is a right secured to him, because it is the right of every citizen. With all the respect, therefore,, which is due to an august branch ofthe govern ment, but with that frankness and since rity which conscious innocence demands to assume, does he present himself. It is a duty which he owes to himself, to his office, to his family ; nay, to his coun try, for which he has encountered pri vations, and whose interest has always been dear, and paramount to all other considerations. In doing this he will not depart from that respect which is proper to be observed ; nor will he he sitate to believe, but that the Senate, on an impartial examination of the facts, will come to conclusions different from what their committee have arrived at. The manner in which the inquiry was conducted by the committee is believed to have been novel: a mass of testimony tending seriously to affect the reputation of an individual, was collected ; and, al though it was proposed, yet was an op portunity denied him, of appearing be fore them, to offer any statement or ex planation in his power, in relation to those subjects upon which doubts nnd difficul ties might arise. He was deprived, by this refusal, ofthe privilege of confront' big his accusers, and of interrogating and cross-examining witnesses, summoned for his conviction. Such testimony only the committee chose to select, was heard and when published to the world declar *d a language different from what the witnesses intended. _ By refusing the accused an opportu Bity to confront and cross-examine wit oesses. how easily may he indulged in rancorous invective, and occasions sought to vent malignant and implacable resent Brents ! Your respondent does not pre tend to assert that any thing of the kind occurred during the present investigation, hut has barely adverted to it, as forming a portion of the evil consequences which Blight arise from so informal a method inquiry. To adopt such a course is prostrate the rules of judicial proceed ln S 9 . to violate every maxim of justice and to trample down all the sacred gua rantees of the constitution. He has been taught to believe that, agreeably to th provision ofour magna cliarta, every in dividual was secured in his life, liberty, property, and reputation, and that he could not be tried before any constituted authority ol the nation without being heard in his defence—permitted to intro duce exculpatory evidence—to cross- examine and confront his accusers. This is one of the choicest fruits of our re publican institutions, and is an essential preservative of liberty : it should be guarded with vestal vigilance, and for no purpose whatever subjected to violation by any branch or department of the go vernment. In its maintenance there is safety ; but danger in departure. The committee, whilst adverting to the origin of the Seminole war, have omit ted to enumerate the Spanish and Indian aggressions on our rights, as a justifica tion of the measures which were adopted in its prosecution. They have rather employed palliatives for the outrages of the enemy, and given an aggravated as pect to the measures which were adopt ed for the peace and security of our fron tiers. Add to this the manner in which the testimony was collected—the mis conception of facts, and incorrect argu ments contained in the report—the time at which it was published, and tlie style in which it was composed, and your res pondent cannot forego the belief that it evinces a hostility to the Executive, and to the military officers under his com mand. It is a subject of no small surprise, that this spirit of opposition should have dif fused itself after the luminous arrange ment of facts, with the conclusive rea soning and inferences arising from the laws of nations, and the United States, by Mr. Secretary Adams ; as well as the ample and satisfactory discussion in the House of Representatives, the great in quest of the nation. Moreover, Con gress had made provision for a vigorous prosecution of the Seminole war, in the spring of 1818, in conformity to the sug gestion of tile President, in his message the month of March, when he detail ed to them every information in relation that subject. The citizens ofGeor- ia and Alabama had made repeated calls on the general government for protec tion ; and, with a full knowledge of all the circumstances touching die causes and progress of that war, Congress au thorized the caliing out an additional bri gade of militia, and made liberal appro priations for the payment ofthe Georgia oops, then in service. The President, too, who is commander in chief of the army and navy of the United Stati‘3, nnd who should be the proper judge to de termine whether his orders be Faithfully xecuted, had made the acts of his offi cers his own, not only by the express uthority which lie had conferred, but by subsequent adoption also. With a large majority of tlie people of the United States, the defensive mea sures adopted by the government, as al so the reasons by which they had been governed, were entirely satisfactory, in consequence of its being distinctly per ceived that no other course could have been pursued which would have secured the indispensable purposes for which the Seminole war had been prosecuted. That those measures should be denoun ced as a violation of the laws and consti tution, by those very persons who origi nallv gave them their suffrages, is ccr- ainly calculated to excite the astonish ment of every impartial observer. Under such circumssances, it was to have been anticipated that all controver sy, relative to the agency of your res pondent in giving rise to the war, would have been completely put to rest. It was confidently expected, that he would have escaped the crimination of your committee—reproaches which, if sanc tioned by your honorable body, are lit tle inferior to cashiering: besides, no instance is to he found on record where a similar course was adopted in relation to any of the Indian wars in which the United States have been engaged. After all the above circumstances had transpired, and it was supposed that the subject of the Seminole war had been fi nally disposed of, in the House of Re presentatives, your committee took it up with avidity, prosecuted it with an assi duity that was unexampled, and animad verted upon the conduct of the Execu tive, and his official agents, in a man ner which is believed to he nltogeher strange and novel. By reiterations of mal-conduct, they seem to have evinced a disposition to stamp umm the whole and those cormeoted with it, and the perpetuity of her republican in stitutions. The venerable fabric of out liberties, which lias been consecrated b\ the blood of our heroes and the wisdom of our sages, will be imminently endan gered, if not entirely buried in ruins. That the charges preferred should have been published to the world, at a time to preclude nil investigation, is a circumstance but little calculated to im part consolation, or to quiet tlie alarms of reputation assailed. No other senti ment can be indulged, than that it was intended, by counteracting the decision ofthe Mouse of Representatives previ ously made, to produce an unfavorable impression on the public mind, before any thing could be offered as an antidote to the impressions it was intended to dis seminate. Twelve months have almost elapsed since the publication of the re port ; nil investigation has been neces sarily postponed, and hence has addition al, unmerited injury been sustained.— The effect has been to excite prejudice, and thereby prevent that impartial exa mination which is so essential to correct determination. Calumny has been aid ed, suspicion left, free to act, and tlie means of exciting public odium amply afforded. Resting on the eternal prin ciples of truth and justice, and claiming for himself the high prerogative secured by the constitution, this respondent asks to appear in his own vindication, nnd to submit the grounds of his defence, and the “ motives" by which he has been ac tuated. The first consideration which presents itself, is the authority under which your committee acted. Three propositions only are contained in the resolution of your honorable body ; upon the second of which no report has been made, nor has your committee stated “ what cir cumstances ex*-ted to authorize or jus tify the commanding general in taking possession of the Spanish posts.” In stead of confining themselves within tlie pale of their powers, they have travell ed over the whole ground occupied by the House of Representatives, in search of nrzy subjects of enquiry, not before touched on or embraced within their powers. So far as the committee have embrac ed, within their investigation, the origi nal causes of the war ; the. withdrawal of the regular troops from the frontiers ol'Georgia ; the employment of volun teers and friendly Indians ; the execu tion of Arbuthnni and Amhrister; theor- r to take possession of St. Augustine, transaction, infamy and disgrace Should the time ever arrive when a majority of any of the superior tribunals of the nation, influenced by party feel ings, shall proceed to criminate a public officer, or effect his removal, in order to create a vacancy, or to gratify the ambi tion of a favorite partizan, then may pri vate resentment, and the most angry passions, acquire an unbounded and dan gerous control over their proceedings. Every sentiment ofjustice and humanity will be completely stifled, as well as ail regard for the constitution and laws.— and the reasons and motives of your res potidenl in the conduct and management iff ilia war, it is believed to be an act of supererogation, and a departure from sound practice. This objection i» not made by your respondent upon the ground that r : considers his conduct vul nerable, or from a wish to elude enqui ry ; but is barely mentioned as presump tion of the strong di»p>- ilion of your committee to affix censure upon his mo tives and actions. Upon a careful examination ofthe dis erttionary orders which were directed to your respondent from the Department of War, there can be no question but that they authorized and justified every measure which was adopted during the Seminole war, and should at once have acquitted him of all censure and respon sibility. He was ordered to engage in offensive operations; to bring the war with the Seminolcs to a speedy and suc cessful termination, with exemplary pun ishment for hostilities so unprovoked]; and to establish a peace on such condi tions as would make it honorable and pet- manent. He was, in effect, charged w ith the management of the war, and vested with the powers necessary to give it ef fect. No orders could have been more ample ns to the selection of means, as well as to their application The massacre of Mrs. Garret k chil dren, and the butchery of lieut. Scott nd comrades, your respondent is in formed, were the events which induced the government to order him to take command ofthe operating army, and to prosecute the war with vigor and effect Thev had determined to abandon the cautious and defensive policy hitherto a dopted, and to pursue a new system of operations against the enemy. The or ders directed to your respondent and ge neral Gaines, Subsequent to those tragi cal events, were entirely different from former ones ; inasmuch as they were pe remptory as to carrying on operations in Florida against the Seminole Indians. The first order to your respondent had no reference to those issued to Gen. Gaines, save that of the same date with his own, which was directed to him at Amelia Island, requiring hi# co-operation in the attack upon the Seminolcs. la no part of it was a reference to any previ ous order to your respondent, or to any other person, pointing out the most ad visabie means to he adop . d, or limiting him in their choice or application. And even had the orders of Gun. Gaines been obligatory, as the case which they con templated never occurred, they must en tirely have lost their force and effect. limitation us to the means to be employ ed, leaves, it is conceived, an entire dis cretion with the officer, as to their cha racter and application—it then becomes a general power. It is also believed to he true, that the limits of such an order cannot he transcended without an entire desertion ofthe object contemplated.— flic orders of your respondent com pletely superseded those directed to ge neral Gaines ; and if so, he must stand acquitted of the high charge of having been guilty of their violation. Yet, if any doubt could exist upon this subject, the subsequent approval of the measures and motives of your respondent, by the Executive of the United States, com pletely settles all controversy. In the first page of the report, an ef fort is made to induce a belief that the treaty of Fort Jackson was negociated by your respondent, and that the hostili ties of the Seminoles proceeded from its unjust and tyrannical demands. Upon this branch of the subject, your respon dent begs leave to remark, that the ge neral government had some, time previ ously settled the, terms of capitulation, nnd your respondent, not as a commis sioner or negociator, but as the conquer or of the country, received their sub mission upon those terms—terms which demanded the surrender of their prophets, as zccll as the instigators of the war. Those Indians, after being routed at Hoithlewallee, in April, 1814, fled to Fcnsac.ola, where they were protected, clothed, fed, and supplied with muniti ons of war, by the Spanish authorities. They never were parties to the treaty at Fort Jackson ; and, however they might have been dissatisfied with its con ditions. as demanded by the government, their dissatisfaction and hostility were excited Spanish agents and British emissaries, resident among them ; one of whom was the infamous Woodbine, who was then engaged in enlisting them in his sen ice, hv the distribution of pre sents, and in disciplining them for war. These facts might have been ascertain ed by a reference to the correspondence between your respondent and the gov ernor of l'ensacola, which were oil tile in the 'I ar Department. Upon tlie subject of occupying tlie Spanish posts, your respondent thinks proper to observe, that he deemed it ec- entially necessary to the execution of hi# orders. It would have been impos sible to have obtained a speedy and effec tual termination of the war. so longas'the commandants of those fortresses furnish ed the enemy with supplies and muniti ons of war, nnd aided, abetted, and en couraged them in their savage hostilities igainst our frontier settlements They had both become the rendezvous for embodying hostile Negroes and In dians, and for giving them comfort and protection. According to the acknow ledgement# of her own commanding offi cers, tlie authority of Spain over Flori da bad ceased, nnd was to be considered is derelict to all intents and purposes.— Your respondent did not believe himself under any obligation to respect an autho rity that did not exist ; a sovereignty that was not asserted or exercised : rea son nor law could require him to respect rights that were suffered to be usurped for the purpose of promoting a most cru el and sanguinary war against the citi zens of the United States. These posts had been alternately substituted for the fort on the Appalachicola, and thither the Negroes and Indians had retreated tor shelter and protection, after their de feats at Micka-uky. They constituted the laboratories of the war; and there were their materials collected and orga nized for active service. They were, iu reality, Indian forts and store-houses attempted to be protected by tlie Span ish flag ; and had they been in the ex clusive possession of our savage ene mies, they could not have derived great er advantages, been more benelitted, nor wc more seriously injured. Against such an enemy, what measures were to be adopted under orders that re quired a speedy and effectual termination ofthe war ; and which were to give per manent peace and security to our South ern frontier ? They were not to be met and fought in the open plain, where a decisive blow might be given, and the contest ended ; but were to be sought for in the fortresses of Spain, nnd in the Swamps of a wilderness, where they might contend at leisure, and recede from the contest the moment it became hazardous. Partial remedies to prevent such evils had already been adopted by the American government. During the war oE 1812, Spain had suffered Great Britain to violate her neutrality in Flo rida, to the injury and annoyance of the United States. In 1814, Pensacola was entered by United States troops, and a lesson, it was hoped, enforced, that how ever this government was disposed to cultivate peace, she could not preserve it by permitting Spain, regardless of ex istiiig treaties, to outrage her dearest The patriot will have ample cause to An order to perform a particular service tremble for the honor of his country lor to effect a specific object, without any government forgave the injury. Peace was at length restored to the U. States ; yet still Spain, regardless of her obliga tions, permitted British agents to reside within the bosom cf Florida, nnd to ex cite the Indians nnd Negroes to pillage and to bloodshed. Remonstrance was again employed, but in vain. Inability w as still the pretext, and the same tragi cal scenes witnessed in 1814, were now repeated. Tlie savages who had cause lessly made war, and who were shed ding tlie blood ofour border settlers, be ing thus openly received nnd comforted by the Spanish authorities, were such acts of hostility, were so flagrant a vio lation of the good understanding existing between the United States and Spain, as in the opinion of your respondent, whol ly to merge the neutral character. And your respondent considers, that lie would have been guilty of a dereliction of duty had he drawn up his troops by way of cordon, and remained on the Georgia frontier, receiving the reports of Indian obberies and massacres, only that he might transmit them to the Secretary of War ; for he could have done no more. Both of those fortresses were clearly identified as “ associates’’ in the war, and were both equally under the control ofthe Negroes and Indians. Arnbristcr had appeared before Saint Marks with 4 or 500 under his command ; and an c- qual number had been seen about Pen sacola, the most of whom were equipp ed tor war by Governor Mazot. In both instances the strength of the enemy was amply sufficient for a forcible occu pation ofthe posts. Moreover, the go vernor of Pensacola had refused the pas sage of provisions up the Escambia,des tined for our starving troops at Fort Crawford. An United States’schooner, called the Amelia, had been detained at that place, until the town was taken, wIicb were obtained from her provisi ons for the troops. Another provision vessel, ordered into the Perdido, had been captured by boats sent from the Ba- rancas, and placed under the guns ofthe fort, but fortunately made her escape under cover of the darkness of the night. In this state of things, had your res pondent been compelled to suspend ope rations, and to wait for additional orders from the War Department, the object of anticipating the enemy would have been entirely defeated. He would have been compelled to retrograde to the interior, for the want of supplies, leaving many points of the frontier exposed to the ruthless barbarities of exasperated sava ges. The militia force would have be come inactive and discontented ; their time would have expired before any thing effectual could have been dono ; and the campaign thus rendered com pletely abortive. If St. Marks was ne cessary to the defence of the frontier of Georgia, Pensacola was much more so for the peace arid security of Alabama, In consequence, too, of its being located on the seaboard, it afforded much great er facilities to our enemies, for it com manded the navigation of the Escambia, up which had, necessarily, to pass all tlie supplies for our forts erected on its tri butary streams. The occupation of this post was not determined upon, until the •eception of Governor Bibb’s letter, at ‘he Escambia, detailing many outrages, uid communicating the intelligence that Holmes and his warriors were then in Pensacola ; as, also, the receipt of Gov ernor Mazot’s protest, complaining of a violation of his neutrality, and ordering your respondent to retire from West- Florida, accompanied with a threat to co erce him, if he did not comply. Lieut. Sands had been despatched from Saint Murks, with orders to hold his artillery in readiness to meet future contingen cies, should they occur ; but he never was directed to convey it to a given point, until after your respondent reached the Choctaw-hatcliy Nor were those proceedings consider ed acts of war, as represented by the committee. By adverting to the cor respondence with the commandant of Saint Marks, the Governor of Pensaco la, and the Secretary of War, it may be distinctly seen that your respondent en tered the territory of Spain as a friend to chastise an enemy of both nations, and to enforce those obligations and du ties which the Spanish authorities had pleaded inability to perforin ; that all his operations were bottomed on the broad principle of self-defence, autho rized by the law of nature and of nations. They were not directed against the go vernment of Spain, but against the for tresses which had become the strong holds, the rendezvous of Negroeg and Indians, and whose neutrality was pros trated to the basest purposes. They were seized because they were Indian posts to all intents and purposes. Spain has disavowed the conduct of her oflici al agents ; and the American govern ment has declared that a war was not in tended with that nation. Although the Spanish authorities were the savage#, and that the Indian chief: and British emitsaric# were procedin contrary to their wiibea, and in violation of their law* ; hence were theie fort re* ses occupied, a# the only measure which could give a speedy and permanent peace-' to our bleeding frontiers. The Spanish government did not consider it an net oi war, nor did Mr. Pizarro or Don Onis complain of it as a measure of that .de scription. The two governments have acknowledged themselves at peace, and have since kept up a regular and friend ly intercourse with each other in the shape of ncgociation. Neither were the garrisons made pri soners of war, or treated like conquered enemies, as it is stated by your commit tee. The contrary will be made clear ly apparent, by an examination of tlifc conditions upon which the Spanish post# were occupied ; to which your respon dent begs leave to refer. Your commit tee acknowledge that the Spanish autho rities in Florida were guilty of acts of war against the United States ; but that her neutral character was not wholly merged in that ofthe enemy, in conse quence of her employing moral and not physical force. If giving the Negroes and Indians encouragement in their out rages, by the ptirnha.se of their plunder; furnishing them with aid nnd protection, supplies and munitions of war, did not wholly merge the neutrality of the Span ish authorities, and make them associate# in the war, your respondent confesses that he is at a loss for a definition of terms. Agreeable to this idea, it would he impro per to consider the population of a nation with whom we were at war, as enemies, save those who were in the field ; for it is only the latter who resort, to “ physi cal force.” This distinction is entirely new, and is in contradiction to many of the most clear and long established prin* ciples of good sense and national law. It is stated by your committee that nil authority at Pensacole was put down by the sword, and that a new government was established, M the powers of which, both civil and military, were vested in military officers.” Every one would bd induced to understand, from this, that the terms of capitulation were arbitrarily nnd tyrannically imposed upon governor Mazot; when, in fact, they were propo-' sed by himself, and the civil and military government was dissolved at hiwown in stance. The temporary governor, colo nel King, was an officer of the United States army ; but civil officers were ap pointed to the different departments, from amongst the citizens ; and Mr. M’- Kenzie, a citizen of Mobile, was placed at the head of the magistracy. All that was contemplated, was to organise some kind of civil anthority, for the protection of the lives, liberty and property of the itizens during the temporary occupancy ofthe fortress. The same government to which the people had been accustom ed was retained. It became absolutely necessary to establish the revenue laws ofthe United States, in order to check the smuggling which had been carried on succo sjfally in this quarter for many years ; as well as to admit the American merchant to an equal participation in trade, which would have been denied, under the partial operations of the Span ish commercial code. The executions of the Indian chiefs, and British outlaws, are justifiable on the ground of precedent, and the laws of nations. One. of the former was a pro phet, who had employed his supersti tious influence, and the promises of hi# transatlantic friends, to stimulate his delu ded brethren to deeds of rapine and mas sacre. The other commanded in person the party who perpetrated the cold blooded butchery of lieutenant Scott, and his unfortunate companions. Both had been engaged in most of the robberies and murders committed, and were active instigators ofthe savage war which raged on our defenceless frontier. Acting as chiefs ofthe Negroes and In dians, Arbuthnot and Ambrister, by nu merous acts of atrocity, had become iden tified with those monsters—associates in the war. They were the principal au thors ofthe hostilities ofthe ferocious sa vages, who observed none of the rules of civilized warfare ; who never gave quar ter, and only took prisoners for the pur pose of torturing! They were, without authority, principals in an unlawful wac. Their inode of carrying it on was charac terised by plunder, massacre, destruc tion and revenge ; and was in open vio lation of the laws of war and of nations. Great Britain would not interfere to pre vent those miscreants from instigating the fugitive Negroes and the Indians from burning, and pillaging, and scalping the inhabitants of Georgia and Alabama ; but she disowned them, and left them to their fate. The Spanish authorities would not, or could not, interfere, nnd the In dians regarded them as friends and as sociates. Both acted as chiefs of the motley banditti, giving them counsel, and exciting them to war ; and one of them rights. She was called upon to maintain 1 guilty of many open and undisguised acts (actually led those black and red edmba- hcr neutrality according to the injunc-l of hostility, yet the sovereignty of Spain’ tants to battle They both officiated as lions ofthe law of nations, and the provi-j over Florida was altogether ideal. Her! Indian agents, in writing to Spanish go- sions ofthe treaty of 1795. She plead-1 commandants had repeatedly acknow- vernors and British ministers, statin; od inability to comply, and the American I ledged that they were unable'to restrain. their grievances, and soliciting agsjslansq