About Southern recorder. (Milledgeville, Ga.) 1820-1872 | View Entire Issue (April 18, 1820)
Ill-1 SOUTHERN RECORDER. VOL. I. MILLEDGEVILLE, TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1820. No. 10. PUBLISHED WEEKLY, (on TUESDAYS) HY S. GIMMTLA.YD if It. M. ORME, XT THREE DOLLARS, IN ADVANCE, OR four dollars at the expiration or the year. tff" Advertisements conspicuously inscr- todat the customary rates. GENERJlL JACKSON'S MEMORIAL. [concluded.] As it was not known at this time whe- Jther the Governor of Tennessee was at Knoxville, or in the Cherokee nation, your respondent made his appeal to his old and tried comrades in arms, desiring them to follow him to the field, in de fence of their invaded country. In af fording the desired relief, no time was to be lost. Delay was replete with danger; and defeat and disaster would have been the result, had the dilatory process of drafting been resorted to. The same day on which the appeal was made, the Governor of Tennessee was written to, and apprised of the attempt to obtain vo lunteers, and that 1000 drafted militia would be required, should the appeal not be promptly and successfully answer ed. In reply, the Governor gave his entire approbation to the measure, and co-operated in raising an additional com pany of mounted volunteers, which was commanded by Capt. Dunlap, and which joined the army at Fort Gadsden. All the volunteers were raised and organized under the laws of Tennessee, the officers of whom were elected by {themselves, and not appointed by your re- tpondent, as asserted by your committee. Although earnestly solicited to appoint them, he peremptorily refused. To the officers who had served him in the late Creek and British war, he stated, not only in his appeal, but also upon their meeting at Nashville, that they were to organize themselves in the manner they might think proper; that the grade of the officers was to be determined by them- •elves; and that those raising companies were to command them. The only n- gency of your respondent in the whole transaction, was the appintment of Col. Hayne, inspector General of the South ard Division, to superintend their orga nization, and lead them to Fort Scott, where he took the command. Every measure touching the raising and orgn niziog this volunteer corps, was regular ly communicated to the Secretary of War, and received his unqualitied ap probation. The committee admit, that the laws of Congress authorise the President to call «n the Governors of the different states for such portions of militia as he inay deem requisite; but deny that there is any law in existence vesting him with authority to accept the services of vo lunteers. Here they have endeavored to make an impression on the nation that volunteers are not militia ; and that the* circumstance of volunteering their servi ces in preference to being drafted, es sentially and radically changes their cha racter. There is certainly no position more unsound ; as is clearly evinced by the fact, that most of the calls of the general government have been met in this way, by the patriotic and gallant yeomanry of our country : until now it has never been complained of. When a requisition is made by the President on any state in the Union for a quota of militia, it is sufficient if they are forth coming; and it is believed that he has no authority, under the laws or •onstitution of the United States, to en quire into the mode in w hich they have been raised and organized. This is a question to be determined exclusively between the governor of a state and its own citizens. It is one of the attributes of state sovereignty, guaranteed by the federal constitution, and with which the Executive and Congress cannot inter fere. If an officer of the United States’ army should be guilty of an infringement of this state prerogativ e, the complaint of its Governor or Legislature should be considered as the only basis to authorize an enquiry into his official conduct. It is stated, by your committee, that it Was not found necessary to furnish the President with a list of the names of the militia officers ; “and not until the pay rolls were made out and payment de manded, were the persons known to the Department of War.” A majority of Jour committee were within reach of all the information necessary to the correc tion of this error. Col. Hayne’s commu nications to the Secretary of War were on tile in that office; from which they might have been informed of the num ber and grade of the officers, as well as ot every particular relative to the orga nization of the volunteers ; together with the express and decided approbation oi that department of the government. Ap pended to the report are the pay rolls filed in the office of the Paymaster Ge Herat, Why they omitted to examine the muster roll is the Oar Office, from Which the fay roll was transcribed, your Respondent is at a loss to determine.— Upon an examination of the pay rolls, they should have known that, agreeably t* the rules and articles <jf war, they must have been made out from the mus ter rolls, which designate by name the number and grade of the officers muster ed into service. The muster roll, to gether with the letters of Col. Hay ne. would have satisfied the committee that the volunteers had been organized a- greeably to the laws of Tennessee ; and that it was a procedure over which the geucral government could exercise no control. By the rules & articles of war, ‘troops of all descriptions shall he mustered once in two months for payment; nor shall any payment be made upon muster rolls, not signed by the Inspector-General, or his assistant; or, in the absence of these, by some officer of the army of the United States, especially assigned to this duty by the general or other officer com manding the department in which the troops so mustered shall he.’ Again, “ the officers and soldiers of any troops, whether militia or others, being mustered and in the pay of the U. States, shall, at all times, and in all pla ces, when joined or acting in conjunc tion with the regular forces of the Unit ed Slates, be governed- by the rules and articles of •sear, and shall be subject to be tried by courts martial, in like manner with the officers and soldiers of the re gular forces, save only that such courts martial shall be composed entirely of mi litia officers.” From these extracts it must appear evident, that no payment can be made, but upon muster rolls, signed by the In spector General, &c. and that, from the time they are made out and received at the War Office, the militia are consider ed in the service of the ITnitcd States.— Neither Congress nor the l’resident have any authority to enquire how their offi cers have been appointed : whether they have been received as volunteers, or raised by the more tedious and vexa tious method of drafting. Were the idea of your committee correct upon this sub ject, the people of the different states would he deprived ofthe invaluable pri vilege of selecting between these two modes of complying with calls made up on them for the defence of our common country. The general government hail the services ot those troops, which is all that can he required ; and they have long since been mustered out of service, and paid from the public, treasury. The committee confess that the Se cretary of War approbated the manner in wl ieh the Tennessee volunteers were raised and organized; but say, that “it is hut justice to the department to state, that it was not until the ofiiccrs that had assisted in thus officering and organizing this corps were examined by the com mittee, that they were apprized of the illegality of the measure.” Surely the Secretary of War must have examined the communications of C'ol. Ilayne and your respondent, stating every particu lar touching (he mode agreeably to which they were raised and organized, as also the muster rolls, giving the grade and number of the officers by name; allot* which were transmitted, and acknow ledged to have been received, at an ear ly period, at that office. He certainly could not have compromitted himself so far as to give his approbation to a mea sure before he v.as made acquainted with its nature and tendency. Troops ofthe same description of the Tennessee volunteers, were received & employed by the government on cur northern frontier and southern borders, during the late struggle with England, and in the war with the Creek nation of Indians. They fought the battles ofTul- ledcga, Emuckfaw, the Horse Shoe, and New-Orleans, & protected Mobile from British visitation. Volunteers, similarly raised and organized, were commanded by Governors Shelby, Harrison, Ed wards, and General Porter of New-York, during the same period. The field offi cers of the Georgia militia were appoint ed in the same manner, on the west bank of the Oakmulgee ; and one of the pre sent Senators from Tennessee actually appointed the officers of his own regi ment, which he raised without any au thority, and which he commanded on an expedition against the Seminole Indians in 1012. The most of those troops were paid off by the United States, received the approbation of the general govern ment, and the applause of the nation. It is stated in the report of the commit tee to the Senate, that the “ whole strength of this miserable, undisciplined banditti of deluded Indians, and fugitive slaves, when combined, did not exceed 1000 men. Opposed to whom, previous to General Jacksoti's taking command, 4 - under Gen. Gaines, were a force of 1,800 regulars and militia, besides the 1,500 friendly Indians, illegally subsidized by the last mentioned General; what then, in this case, becomes ofthe plea of ne cessity ?” It is plainly to be inferred, then, that this motley horde of Negroes and Indians were too inconsiderable to justify raising the volunteer force, which was employed in reducing them to a state of submission. It is well known to .all those acquaint ed with the character of Indians, and their peculiar modo ef warfare, that it is almost impossible to form a correct esti mate of their aggregate force, until the termination of the war. In this case Ge neral Gaines had computed them at 2000; and Arbutlinnt, who officiated as a mili tary chief of the savages, had represent ed them, in a communication to the Brit ish minister, Mr. Bugot, to be 3,500 strong. This calculation was by no means extravagant, when it is considered that from 8 to 1200 had been concentrated at a single point, when Lieut. Scott &i par ty were attacked, and that they were daily increasing in number. Whatever might have been their whole effective strength, nt any period ofthe war,it could have been augmented by auxiliary bands in Floridn, and it was certainly the duty of the commanding general to call out such an additional force, as should insure success in every emergency. Further more, the greatest portion of the Geor gia militia then in the field, could be re tained in service only for about 3 months. And it was expected that they would ap ply for discharges so soon as their time expired. Your respondent considered the lives of our citizens as too precious to he risked in a contest with Indians, where there was an odds of two to one, unless dire necessity demanded the ex posure. The consequence of an oppo site policy was, that the decisive and ra pid movement ofouroverwhelining num bers distracted and dispersed the enemy, compelled them to seek refuge in the Spanish fortresses, woods and swamps ; and they never were afforded nn oppor tunity to display their whole force by concentration. The war was speedily and effectually terminated, and much blood and treasure saved to the nation. With regard to the Indian and militia force, under the command ofGen. Gaines previous to the time your respondent assumed the command of the army, he has to remark, that, until a few days an terior to his arrival at Fort Scott, not a single Indian warrior had joined the standard of the United States ; nor had the first requisition ofGeorgia militia c- ver united with the command of General Gaines ; the latter had returned home, in consequence of which, it became ab solutely necessary on the part of Gen’l. Gaines to make a second call on the Go vernor af that state, for the double pur pose of defending the frontier and occu pying Amelia Island. A few of the friendly Indians joined your respondent before he reached Fort Scott, and a considerable number at that place, making in the aggregate about four or five hundred. The balance of the force under his command, was not, at that time, mere than nine hundred ef fectives ; and lie confidently affirms, that when he took up the line of March from Fort Gadsden, on the 27th of March, 1810, his whole command fit for duty consisted only of300 privates ofthe re gulars, about 800 Georgia militia, and major Lovet’s detachment of friendly Creeks. MMntosh and his warriors were organized at Fort Mitchell, after the ar rival ofyour respondent at Fort Haw kins, and never united with him until the 1st of April, about six miles in the rear of Mickasuky. All these facts uei accessible to your committee, had they been disposed to examine the letters of your respondent, on file in the Depart ment of War. To this department all his communications were made; and there they should have applied for cor rect information, if it had been wanted. The next subject which has exposed your respondent to hitter reproach from the committee, is the order which was directed to Gen. Gaines, to occupy St. Augustine. A letter from Major Twiggs had conveyed the intelligence that our savage enemies had been fed and furnish ed from that garrison ; and it was ren dered highly probable, that, aided, abet ted, and encouraged by the commandant, they were recruiting and embodying at that place with a view of renewing hos tilities. A strong presumption was cre ated that this, like the other Spanish posts, had become a depot and rallying point of Negroes and Indians, to which they had retreated for refuge and pro tection, after being driven from Negro Fort, St. Marks, and Pensacola. The order given to Gen. Gaines was entirely conditional and prospective; and, hail the tacts reported been established, as directed, there would have existed the same incontrovertible reason for the occupancy of St. Augustine, as of the other Spuuisli fortresses. The orders of your respondent had undergone no modification; and the measure would have been indispensably necessary to their execution, us well as to the peace and security of our frontiers. Besides, he had transmitted to the H ar Depart ment regular information of his proceed ings in Florida with the reasons and mo lives by which lie had been governed, from the 25th of March to the 7t!i of Au gust, without a sentence of dissatisfacti on ever having been expressed by the government Your committee also report, that, “ long before that period, the command ing general had, by his letter to the Se- single new act of hostility had been com mitted.” It is true, after the defeat of the Negroes and Indians, at Mickasuky, the destruction .of Suwany, and the asy lum of St. Marks had been arrested out of their occupation, that your respondent persuaded himself the war was ended. But, subsequent information proved t this opinion to be erroneous. The letter of Governor Bibb, appended to the report to the Senate, as well as the deposition of Charles Baron, details sundry outrag es committed subsequent to the date of your respondent’s letter to the Secreta ry of War; and it is also known that six men ucre also murdered in the interior, which it is believed was communicated by Gen. Gaines to the War Department. The communications of Gen. Gaines nnd Major Fanning, annexed to the report, also give a very different aspect to this quesiion, and to which your respondent begs leave to refer your honorable body. In the animadversions upon the mo tives ofyour respondent, he cannot with hold the opinion, that there has been ex hibited an unusual share of asperity, as also a want of charity and forbearance which was not to have been anticipated from members of so august ami enlight ened a body as the Senate ofthe United States, deliberating upon a subject which they have represented to he of great na tional magnitude. Leaving the motives of the committee on this occasion to their own private review and examination, your respondent will barely observe, that they have imperfectly recognized the maxim, that innocence is always pre sumed until the contrary appear by proof. Why they should have enquired into the motives of your respondent at all, he is at a loss to determine, as it was a matter entirely beyond their control and juris diction. The only subject of investiga tion was the legality of his official acts, as designated in the resolution of the Se nate, ofthe 13th of December. Your respondent lias no objection to this course, except as a pernicious pre cedent, and a violation of authority. He has no secrets, and will never shrink from a rigid and impartial examination into his official conduct. Had the com mittee adverted to the order to take pos session of St. Augustine, as well as the communications of your respondent to the Secretary of War, upon the subject of his military operations, they must have been satisfied that his motives were to promote the public good—to obey lii orders, by carrying on a v igorous and ef ficient war against the savage enemies of the United Stales ; by which the blood mid treasure of the nation was to be eco nomised ; to establish a peace that would be honorable and permanent, and to give repose and security to our exposed and defenceless borders. In this instance, as well as in some o- thers, the report ofthe committee is con tradicted by the evidence of its own do cuments. The depositions of Col. But ler, (and Maj. Eaton, a member of the committee,) conclusively prove that your respondent had no agency in spe culating in Florida lands, which is in di rect opposition to the inference drawn by your committee. No member of that committee can, for a moment, seriously and candidly harbour the opinion that your respondent would lead a gallant ar my into the field—jeopardize the lives of valuable citizens—risk the ruin of health and reputation, and “ violate the constitution" of his country, for the pur pose of speculating with security in Spanish lands. The “ motives of his own, unconnected w ith his military func tions,” were a desire to end speedily a savage war, and to save the blood and treasure of the country ; and not, as charged, to adventure his health and re putation, and the lives ofhrave men, in quest of titles to Florida lands. The im putation is unwarranted and unjust, and lias its refutation in the very testimony which the committee have published. The dignity of his office, which, at every exposure, he has sought to maintain, ne ver has been prostituted to the purposes of speculation in any way, and it never shall. Strange, then, that honorable tnen should make so foul an accusation without proof; nay, without even cir cumstances to support it. Your respondent would beg leave, in this place, to remark upon the deposi tions annexed to the report. He ven tures the opinion, that such documents never before have been published to the world as evidence upon which to predi cate a report. Eaton’s and Mitchell’s are the only depositions presented in le gal form. To those two gentlemen, re gular interrogatories were proposed, to which they deliberately responded and affixed their signatures, as required by law. Doctor Bronaugh’s deposition is signed, but not given under oath ; colo- nel Butler’s, colonel Gibson’s, and capt. Call's, are neither sworn to nor signed. The depositions of the four last gentle men were published without their know ledge. although they had received a pro mise from the members of the commit tee, who took down the testimony, that it should be copied nnd again submitted cretary of War, declared the Seminole! to them for consideration and signature, war at an end ; and after which, natal Until the depositions arc fully escutn ined, and signed, by the witnesses, they cannot be considered good and complete evidence. This is n rule, which, it is believed, is uniformly adhered to in all judicial tribunals ; it never should be departed from on any occasion ; ns it is essentially necessary to nn impartial ad ministration ofjustice. Every opportu nity should be given the witnesses to make a fair and full disclosure of the facts ; to consider the force and effect of their expressions, as well as the import of every sentence. By nn opposite pro cedure irreparable injustice may be done, ntid the rights of a public agent sa crificed by those who should afford him security and protection. There are several minor points touch ed upon by the committee, to which your respondent considers it unnecessa ry to give a particular reply ; as they are of inconsiderable importance, mid could not be noticed without swelling this memorial to an unwieldly size. He llatters himself they have been satisfac torily answered in the discussion of the other subjects, out of which they have incidentally arisen. They will all, how ever, be more amply and minutely ex plained, by an examination of documents heretofore communicated to Congress, relative to the Seminole war ; to others on tile in the War Office, and to those accompanying this memorial ; to all of which your respondent respectfully re fers your honorable body. To concludo : your respondent has devoted his best services to the cause of his country, and to the perpetuation of her liberties. Her constitution and laws are objects ofliis sincere veneration; and every anxiety of liis heart has been enlisted to promote the glory and happi ness of his country. How far he lias been instrumental, under the guidance of Providence, in cffectiug those desirable objects, he submits to the decision ofhis enlightened fellow-citizens. He does not pretend to be exempt from the er rors common to human nature. Sur rounded as be was, by every privation and embarrassment—in all the hurry and hustle of war, it was next to impos sible to attend particularly to every mi nor consideration. But, upon the grerft errors charged— n breach ofhis orders—a departure from the constitution, ami a violation of the rights of humanity—he openly maintains his innocence, and denies that the char ges are correctly made. He calls upon the Senate by the high claims they prefer to magnanimity, to protect his reputation from the unmerited censure cast by their committee. He asks for justice and noth ing more ; to extend it, is due to your respondent, to the Senate, and to the nation. ANDREW JACKSON, Major Cm. Conununiting iuutlicTii Division. OUll RELATIONS WITH SPAIN. Documents accompanying Inc. laic Message of the President to Congress. Extracts of a letter from Mr. Cumphell to the Secretary of State, dated St. Peters burg, 20th October, (1st November) IKK), containing details of a Conversation with Count Nesselrode. “Your despatch, No. 3, of June 3(1,1 had the honor to receive* few days ago.” “ After some general conversation, he* enquired, (as I presumed he would do, and waited for him to introdure the subject,) if I had any certain account of what Spain was doing, or had done, respecting the trea ty lately concluded by her Minister at Wash ington with our government. I had shortly before received from Mr. Gallatin a letter confirming the account which had already reached me through the newspapers, that the King had refused to ratify the treaty un til be should obtain some previous explana tions, relating, as stated by Mr. Gallatin, to two points : 1st, the declaration Mr. Forsyth was instructed, on exchanging the ratifica tions, to put in, that the grant to the Duke d’Alagon for lands in the reded territory, which, though intended to he, was not by the terms of the treaty made null, should be considered as null—and, 2d an engagement, required by Spain on the part of our govern ment, not to recognize the independence of any ofthe Spanish colonies—and that, to demand these explanations, a Minister Ex traordinary was to be sent to Washington, though Mr. Forsyth had offered, as instruct ed, to give full explanations on any point connected with the treaty. I therefore in formed the Count, l had received authentic information, though not from my govern' ment, that the King bait refused his assent to the treaty until he should obtain expla nations on certain points, for which purpose, he proposed sending a Minister Extraordin ary to Washington. I took this occasion to remark further, that, by official information from my goveanment, I felt myself author ised to state, that. Mr. Onis, the Spanish Minister, was fully empowered to conclude the tri aty, and might have yielded more than he did Without exceeding his authori ty—and that the points on which it was now proposed to ask explanations had been fully discussed before the treaty was signed, and their extent and meaning explicitly under stood by both parties—of which the Spanish court was fully informed—and our Minister there was instructed to give, ample expla nations, which he offered to do, on any points relating to the treaty that might he supposed to require them. I added, that the treaty was undoubtedly, under ail cir cumstances, highly favorable to Spain, and that, I was satisfied, a strong desire on the part of my government to preserve peace ed respecting the terms of the treaty by Mr. Poletica, with whom I understood you had freely communicated on the subject. Ha said Mr. Poletica had advised him that, from the explanations received from you respect ing it, the treaty was by him considered fa vorable to Spain. I then referred to tho grant to the Duke d’Alagon, briefly stated the nature of it, as made known to me, and observed, that should the views of the King, as now avowed, in relation to it, supposing the principal point on which explanation was required, be acquiesced in, the chief object of entering into the treaty would be thereby frustrated—that, by one of its pro visions, the United States government a- greed to pay, on account of Spain,.to their own citizens, for spoliations committed by her subjects, or in her ports, contrary to Treaty, five millions of dollars, out ofthe proceeds of llie sales of lands in the ceded territory ; but, should this grant, said to in clude a very large portion of those lands, be confirmed, the sum assigned for that pur pose would fail, and of course, this provis ion ot the Treaty could not he complied with. He appeard to feel the full force ofthe re mark, giving his assent to the conclusion drawn, and proceeded to observe, it was to be regretted thnt Spain did not understand her own interest better than she seemed to do —that it was difficult to conceive, in her pre sent situation, what could induce her to take the course she had done, refuse 1 to ratify a treaty favorable to herself, and concluded by her Minister vested with full powers for the purpose. • He then remarked on the great importance of preserving peace, as far ns practicable, among civilized nations of tho world, enquired wliat Spain could now do in regard to the business by sending a Minister to Washington, and what course our go vernment will be likely to adopt on the oc casion. I repli d, that, as to Spain, I could form no opinion of the motives by which she wsb governed. I did not perceive what she could do, unless Rhe receded from her objections to the treaty—and, as to my «wn govern ment, though I was satisfied of its strong desire to preserve peace, I could not pretend to say what course it might conceive itself called on to take on the present occasion, though I presumed no decisive measures would he adopted to change essentially the relations between the tw# countries until Congress should convene, early in Decem ber—and the course then pursued would probably depend upon what Spain should iu the mean time do. He llien enquired how soon I expected to hear from my government after it had been advised ofthe refusal on the part of Spain to ratify the treay—and, being told that I could not state the precise time, with any degree of certainty, but that it would undoubtedly lie as soon as despatches could reach (his from Washington, lie expressed, with some earnestness, Ins wish that I should make known to him, at an early a day as might he convenient, such information ns I might re ceive from my government on this subject.” Count Nesselrode. Erlraet of a letter from Mr. Forsyth to the Sc* cretary of Slate, dated Madrid, Jan. 3, 1820. “ A few days after the date of my last, number lu, 1 had a visit from Count Bnlga- ry, the Kusiau Charge d’Affairs ; he came to see me in consequence of a conversation he had just had with the Duke of San Fernan do, respecting my official letter of the 18th of Oct. and the subsequent correspondence in relation to it. 11c stated to me, that tho Duke regretted the necessity of sending back the letter, but that, it was so Itarsli m its terms, lie could not place it before the King; to this was added a great many assurances of personal kindness and good will, not ne cessary to be repeated. I replied, that it was very mortifying to me, to lie obliged to send the letter in the first instance, and not less so, to insist on its beiug received—that the Duke hud put it out of my power to act o- therwise than I had done—hut that there was no difficulty in avoiding the unpleasant consequences likely to ensue. The Duke had nothing to do but to give me such as surances in regard to the grants, a* would render it superfluous for me to say any thing about them. Iiis answer was at once curi ous und dissatisfactory. He said that the Duke could not give me any assurances, such was the predominating influence of the gran tees with the king. He was sincerely dis posed to settle all the differences with the U. States, and huped, in a short time, to have power to effect it; had authorized Count Bulgary to say to the Russian government that Gen. Vivts was going immediately to the United States, and would haveconipe- tent powers; and that every thing would bo amicably arranged. I made the Russian Charge d’Affaircs sensible that one part of this statement contradicted the other. Gen. Vivos could not receive powers competent to Hie purpose of amicable settlement, if the Secretary of State's despatch was unable, from the influence of the grautees, to say a- ny tiling about the l.irge donations. This was a subject upon which the American go vernment would listen to no terms; that friendly arrange meat was out ofthe question, and Gen. Vives’s visit to the U. States use less, unless the Spanish government was pre pared to abandon their pretensions in favor of the grantees. On the subject of the mis sion of Gi rt. Vives, I desired the Count to remind the Duke, that I knew nothing of it. The general and loose declarations made months before, that the king would autho rize some person to ask explanations at Washington, was all that the Spanish gov ernment had chosen to communicate to me. The Count assured me of the personal anxi ety of the Minister to arrange every thing satisfactorily between the two countries; tliwt his hopes were strong of being able to effect it; that this business of the returned note was embarrassing, and if I went away in consequence of its not being received, that, what he believed to be the wish of the United States and of his government, and almost al) other powers, might be frustrated. alone induced them to agree to its provis-1 Matters were in a bad state at present, and ions—that I prmui*»d he had been inform- itbi* would m«ke them worse. Tt> tbra, I
