Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

tions given by Mr. Van Buren, and failed under those of another-a crime never to be forgiven by the opponents of Gen. Jackson.

Mr. Clayton said the minister had been sent with instructions to fawn, and beg as a boon, at the footstool of a foreign power, what we were entitled to as a right; to abandon as untenable “pretensions” that had always been insisted on as a matter of justice; and to consider our government in error for having " too long resisted the rights of Great Britain." He (Mr. C.) would this day, by his vote, say to England, we would never crouch for favors, and to all our ministers, now and forever, that we would condemn every attempt to carry our family divisions beyond our own household.

Mr. Clay based his opposition on the same ground, and went into an examination of the "pretensions," as they had been called by Mr. Van Buren, and which our government had been said to have unjustly put forward, and pertinaciously maintained. He was opposed to the nomination also, because the nominee had, as he believed, introduced the odious system of proscription into the general government; the system practiced in the gentleman's own state by the party of which he was the reputed head. It was a detestable system, drawn from the worst periods of the Roman republic: and if the offices and honors of the American people were to be put up to a scramble to be decided by every presidential election, our government would finally end in a despotism as inexorable as that at Constantinople.

Mr. Marcy replied. It was the habit, he said, of some gentlemen to speak with reproach of the politics of New York. The state was large, and had great and diversified interests. It had men of enterprise and talents who aspired to distinction. It was natural, therefore, that her politics should excite more interest at home, and attract more attention abroad, than those of some other states. It might be that the politicians of the United States were not so fastidious as some gentlemen were, as to disclosing their principles of action. They boldly preached what they practiced. When they were contending for victory, they avowed their intention of enjoying the fruits of it. If they were defeated, they expected to retire from office. If they were successful, they claimed, as a matter of right, the advantages of success. They saw nothing wrong in the rule, that to the victor belong the spoils of the enemy.

Mr. M. also replied to the main objection of gentlemen. The late administration-probably in the hope of getting better terms—had refused those offered by Great Britain, until, finding that better terms, claimed as a right, could not be sustained, they concluded to take those first offered; which were then refused ; and the colonial trade was lost. As negotiation had been refused to our government, it was necessary to offer some excuse for attempting it again. The administration had been changed, as was publicly known, from the hands of those who had refused the offered terms, into the hands of those who thought they ought to have been accepted; and he saw nothing wrong in instructing Mr. M'Lane to use this fact in removing any obstacle to negotiation.

Mr. Brown thought Mr. Van Buren's success in the management of our diplomatic affairs bore honorable testimony to his abilities as a statesman. He had, while secretary of state, accomplished more in less time than any of his predecessors. A comparison of the present administration with that which preceded it, would redound greatly to the credit of the existing administration.

Mr. Clay said it had been alleged, that the cause of the opposition to the nomination was the mortification felt at the success of the administration in recovering the colonial trade, and in its general success in the management of our foreign affairs. He thought time would show that what had been done had placed the colonial trade in a more disadvantageous condition than it was in before. He compared the diplomatic achievements of the two administrations. The successful negotiations credited to the present had been commenced, and were in favorable progress, under the preceding administration, and one of them had proceed

, ed so far as to want little more than the signature of the parties to the treaty. The conclusion of the French treaty under this administration, the world knew, would not have been obtained, but for the revolution of July. He then enumerated the diplomatic acts of the preceding administration. Mr. C. remarked, in relation to the responsibility of a secretary of state, that he was equally responsible with the president by whom the instructions were sanctioned.

Other senators participated in the debate: Messrs. Foot, Webster, Ewing, Poindexter, Miller, Hayne, Frelinghuysen and Moore, in opposition to the appointment; and Messrs. Forsyth and Smith in its favor. The four southern senators, Miller and Hayne, of South Carolina, Poindexter, of Mississippi, and Moore, of Alabama, were friends of Mr. Cal. houn; and their opposition appeared to have proceeded from Mr. Van Buren's supposed agency in causing the dissolution of the cabinet, and from their dislike to him as a politician. They had been ardent supporters of the administration of Gen. Jackson.

If party expediency was in any measure consulted in the rejection of Mr. Van Buren, his opponents committed an error. The effect of their hostility was rather to increase than to diminish his popularity.

The case of the Cherokees was rapidly approaching a crisis. An act had been passed by the legislature of Georgia, in December, 1830, annulling the government and laws of the Indians, and enforcing the laws of the state within the territory. This act also made it a misdemeanor for white men to reside within the limits of the Cherokee nation after the 1st of March, 1831, without license from the governor or his agent, and without having taken an oath to support the constitution and laws of the state. Under this act, the Rev. Mr. Worcester, a missionary, and five others, were arrested soon after the law went into operation. A writ of habeas corpus was issued, directed to the Georgia commissioner having them in custody, requiring him to show cause for their capture and detention; who returned upon the writ that the prisoners had been arrested under the act of the state, he having been duly appointed commissioner.

The discharge of the defendants was demanded by their counsel, on the ground that the act under which they had been apprehended, was contrary to the constitution of the United States, and to the constitution of the state of Georgia. The judge gave an elaborate opinion, maintaining the constitutionality of the laws and the legality of the arrest. But as Worcester and one of the others were missionaries, and one of them was a postmaster; as they were there by the consent of the general government for the purpose of civilizing and Christianizing the Indians; and as they were government agents for the disbursement of public moneys for that purpose, he discharged them under the provision of the state law which excepted all agents of the general government from its provisions. The other four persons were bound over to answer for the misdemeanor charged against them.

Mr. Worcester was soon after removed from the office of postmaster at New Echota, with the view, as was supposed, to make way for his arrest. This supposition was soon verified. Letters were addressed, (May 16,) by Gov. Gilmer, to Rev. Messrs. Worcester and Thompson, informing them that the general government did not recognize the missionaries as its agents, and advising them to remove from the territory without delay, or comply with the law of the state by taking the constitutional oath, in order to avoid the punishment imposed by the law for disobedience.

A number of persons were arrested, among whom were Dr. Butler, and Rev. Messrs. Worcester and Thompson, Presbyterian missionaries, and one or more Methodist preachers. Several of them were most cruelly treated by the guard, having been conveyed in chains, and one of them, Dr. Butler, having a chain about his neck, and fastened to the horse on which the soldier rode who conveyed him. Ten of them were indicted, convicted, and sentenced to four years imprisonment. Only Dr. Butler and Mr Worcester were imprisoned; the others having been pardoned by the governor on their giving assurance that they would not again violate the laws. Mr. Worcester applied to the supreme court of the United States for relief.

The conviction of the missionaries took place in September, 1831. On the 1st of March, 1832, the case of Worcester against the state of Georgia was decided by the supreme court; and the laws of that state under which possession had been taken of the Cherokee country, and persons had been punished for residing therein, were declared to be contrary to the constitution, treaties, and laws of the United States, and ought to be reversed and annulled. Mr. Worcester was therefore ordered, by a special mandate from this court to the superior court of Georgia, to be discharged.

The opinion of the court was delivered by Chief Justice Marshall. A separate opinion, concurring with that of the court, was delivered by Justice M'Lean. Both opinions were elaborate, and of great length. Justice Baldwin dissented. We give a synopsis of the opinion of the court, as published in the National Intelligencer of March 5th.

The mandate of the supreme court was disregarded, and the missionaries kept in prison, without any hope of liberation before another session of the supreme court, January, 1833, when the court would probably enjoin the marshal of the district of Georgia to summon the posse comitatus, and the president of the United States to place the army and navy at the service of the civil authority, if necessary, to carry the decree into effect.

In the mean time, the survey of the Cherokee lands, and the disposal of them by lottery, proceeded. The missionaries, indisposed to protract the controversy, informed the authorities of Georgia that they had ordered the discontinuance of their suit; and the state being no longer threatened with coercion, and the question of the continuance of the confinement of the missionaries being left to the magnanimity of the state, they were discharged, by order of the governor, on the 14th of January, 1833.

The Indians continued to be disturbed in the possession of their lands, and the executive persisted in refusing them protection. An offer was made them by the general government for their lands east of the Mississippi. A council was held in May to consider the subject; but the proposition was declined. The peculiar conduct of the government in this matter did not escape the potice of the Cherokees. Their treaties had been uniformly recognized by the government. Georgia herself had recognized their validity; and the supreme court had so decided. The government still offered to pay them for their lands, which they considered as tantamount to a recognition of their right to them; but in case they refused to treat, allowed Georgia, in the face of solemn treaties, to

a

grant the lands to her own citizens without compensation to the aboriginal owners.

Various expedients were adopted to effect their removal. Agents were sent among them to enrol all who could be persuaded to emigrate on the conditions proposed by the government; and a new attempt was made to enter into a treaty, to which the Cherokees were indisposed.

The president was anxious to effect a settlement of this unpleasant controversy. This anxiety was supposed to bave been increased by the dilemma in which he had placed himself. He had just aided in suppressing an attempt by South Carolina to nullify an act of congress. He had issued the proclamation, in which he had declared the authority of the supreme court to decide questions involving the constitutionality of laws; and he had recommended the passage of a law for the enforcement of the collection of the revenues in that state ; while he refused to employ the force at his command to protect the Cherokees in the enjoy. ment of rights guarantied to them by treaties which this same judicial tribunal had pronounced binding upon the general government. Mr. Calhoun had noticed this predicament of the president in the discussion upon the “ force bill,” as it was called. He said : “ The president had laid it down tbat the tribunal of the supreme court was, in the last resort, the only arbiter of the difference in the construction of the constitutionality of the laws. On this point there seems to have been a great change in the opinion of the executive within the last twelve months. The president had not held this opinion in reference to the resistance of the state of Georgia. A narrow river only divides the territory of Georgia from that of South Carolina; yet, on the one side, the power of the supreme court, as the arbiter, in the last resort, is to be sustained, while, on the other side, the will of the executive is to be supreme.”

The course of the president on the Carolina question, raised for a time the hopes of the Cherokees. Their paper remarked : “The supreme court of the United States have decided the question of our case favorably, and the president in his proclamation to the people of South Carolina having promptly declared the supremacy of the constitution and laws of the United States over state authority, there was every reason to believe that he would ultimately enforce the treaties and intercourse act for our protection."

The protracted Indian difficulties were at length terminated by a treaty concluded with their head men and chiefs, the 29th of December, 1835, by Wm. Carroll and John F. Schermerhorn, on behalf of the United States. The sum stipulated to be paid for their lands, was $5,000,000; to which a supplementary article adds $600,000 to defray the expense of removal and to cover all claims for spoliations, and $100,000 more to the national fund.

« AnteriorContinuar »