The Congressional Globe, Volume 13, Part 2: Twenty-Eighth Congress, First Session Page: 62
viii, 784 p. ; 25 cm.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL ©LOBE.
Jan. 1844
28th Cong 1st Sess.
Fine on General Jackson—Mr. Weller.
H. of Reps.
In his letter of the 30th, he expresses his "inde-
scribable chagrin that he is not at the head of a wil-
ling and wnited people."
On the 8th September, the Governor says:
' Tnere is, in this city, a much greater spirit of disaffec-
tion than I had anticipated; and amongst the faithful Loui-
sianians there is a spirit of despondency which palsies all my
preparations • * * • * i am very confident of
the lax police in this city, and indeed through the State, with
respfect tr> the visit ofstrangers. I think with you} that our
country is filled with spies and traitors."
Here was the Governor of the State, (whose in-
telligence and patriotism have - never been ques-
tioned,.) placed m a position where he must know
the feelings and sentiments of the people by whom
lie was surrounded, warning General Jackson of
the disaffection which existed in that city. The
people, who sincerely desired the success of our
cause, looked with the most intense anxiety for his
arrival in New Orleans. All felt that in his energy,
his indomitable courage, and military sagacity, the
citizens might rest assured that the steps necessary
to its defence would be taken. The letter of Col.
Nicholas shows that the necessity for a declaration
of martial law had been discussed and settled upon
previous to the arrival of the commander. On the
2d December, with the impressions made upon his
mind by these letters from the Governor, and with a
raw and undisciplined army, he reached New Or-
leans. At this time, he was in feeble health, with
a constitution much shattered by exposure in his
Southern campaign. He soon found that the state-
ments of Governor Claiborne were unquestionably
true. Placed at the head of such an army, in a
strange city, surrounded by a large body of people
whose language he could neither speak nor under-
stand, he proceeded, with great caution, in his ef-
forts to break down their prejudices, and produce a
unity of action amongst the people. Placards, how-
ever, inviting the people to a servile insurrection,
were posted, by secret enemies to our cause,
throughout the city. Inflammatory handbills, cal-
culated to array the French and Spaniards against
the Americans, were industriously circulated. Ap-
plications were daily made to the French consul,
Ly men known to be naturalized citizens, for ex-
empts from military service. Some of those men
held high offices under the State Government. He
advised freely with the public men of that city,
(including Judge Hall, who subsequently becomes
his vindictive persecutor,) all of whom urged
the necessity of a declaration of martial-law.
So far as history shows, not a man friendly
to the American cause was opposed to its dec-
laration. It was under these circumstances, with
an undisciplined army, surrounded by spies and se-
cret enemies—some of whom were in the State Le-
gislature—with a considerable proportion of the
population, to say the least, unfriendly to our cause,
that he declared martial law, and made the city of
New Orleans his military camp. To have refused,
with these facts staring him in the face, to take the
responsibility of such an act, would have exhibited
a want of that high moral courage so necessary to
give energy and force to a military commander. To
have sat down and cooly examined the Constitu-
tion, to see whether that instrument authorized the
act, when the. lives and property, yea, the honor of
the people were at stake, would be sporting with
the highest interests committed to the care of man.
To have hesitated, when the very existence of that
instrument itself was placed in jeopardy, would
have shown that he was unfit for the position in
which he was placed. Cut, for this act of necessity
—dictated by patriotism and emanating from a fixed
deteimmation to sa\e, at all hazards, that city from
the ravages of a brutal soldiery, whose watchword
was "beauty and booty11—he has been denounced by
Whig orators here and elsewhere as a tyrant—a
usurper, vv ho seizes upon Ihe imperial purple, and
tramples upon that Constitution which he had
sworn to maintain and support! Sir, I confess the
application of these epithets to that distinguished
hero has sometimes well-nigh extorted from me lan-
guage neither calculated to elevate this House, nor
myself, in the estimation of the American people.
Having shown, as I trust I have, by historical
facts, undisputed and indisputable, the necessity for
the declaration of martial lav/, the only question is
as to the propriety of its continuance to the 13th
March. To settle this, let us also appeal to the
facts. After the defeat on the 8th January, the enemy
was still hovering on our the const, within striking
distance, smarting under the severe repulse he had
received at Orleans. They proceeded (as the letter
pf the British admiral to his Government shows) to
organize for more effective operations. On the 14th
February, they succeeded in taking Fort Bow-
yer, near Mobile. On the 6th March, a rumor
reached New Orleans that peace had been conclu-
ded. The letter from the department here, which
was designed to convey this news to General Jack-
son, was in truth an order to raise two additional
regiments! The general being satisfied that this
order was a mistake, from the fact that the messen-
ger carried with him an open letter from the post-
master general to his deputies, on the way, request-
ing them to expedite his journey as he carried ti-
dings of peace, he immediately addressed a note to
General Lambert, the British commander, proposing
a cessation of hostilities. General Lambert, in the
absence of any official information, declined the prop-
osition■ So the matter stood until the 13th March,
when General Jackson was officially informed that
peace was re-established, and on that day he re-
voked his order of the 15th December, declaring
martial law. If the declaration was right in the first
instance, then it seems to me clearly established that
prudence required its continuance to the 13th March.
He dared not relax his discipline until officially noti-
fied that the war was ended.
Let us now go back and examine the facts con-
nected with this particular' case. On the 3d March,
a publication was made by Louallier (a Frenchman)
in the "Courrier," denouncing General Jackson, and
calling on the French population to resist the orders
which he had deemed it necessary to give for the
safety of his camp. On the 5th March, Louallier
was arrested and imprisoned by order of General
Jackson. On the same day, (although the date was
afterwards changed to the 6th Mnrch by the judge,)
Judge Hall issued a writ of habeas corpus, with a
full knowledge, of course, that his power as a judge
was suspended by the declaration of martial law—that
law which covers the camp of the commander, where-
ever he may go. J udge Hall was also arrested and
placed in custody. On the 8th March, Mr. Dix,
the attorney general, obtained from a State judge a
writ of habeas corpus for the body of Hall. He too
was arrested. On the 12th March, Judge Hall was
released and escorted to a place out of the city, with
orders not to return to the camp until information of
peace was officially received. On the 13th, news
came, and Hall was discharged. The revocation of
that day re-established the supremacy of the civil
tribunals, and the judge returned to the city
thirsting for vengeance. On the 22d March,
he issued a rule against the general to show
cause why an attachment should not issue for a
contempt of court. Upon the 30th, the attachment
issued, and on the succeeding day he was brought
before the court. He tendered to the court his writ-
ten answer, which he prayed might be taken as his
response; that paper, he assured the court, contained
nothing' disrespectful, and was no more than a plain
statement of his defence. This British expounder
of the Constitution and the law of contempts refused
to receive or read his answer. No one acquainted
with judicial proceedings ever before heard of a
court refusing to permit a defendant to purge him-
self of the contempt by a written answer. Interro-
gatories, ingeniously drawn up by the attorney to
sntrap him, and so arranged as to prevent any ex-
planation of his conduct or motives, were propound-
ed to him. Upon the advice of his counsellor, Mr.
Livingston, (whose reputation as a jurist is well
known in this country,) he refused to answer them.
The judge then proceeded to assess a fine of$1,000
against lum. For what offence the fine was as-
sessed does not appear on this record, If it is al-
leged that he was fined for declaring martial law,
and suspending the civil authorities, my answer
then is, that Judge Hall himself advised it; that the
general was not responsible to his tribunal if he was
wrong; that, in no event, can such an act be con-
strued into a contempt of coiu thy ihe most latitu-
dinous constructionist of judicial powers. If he
was fined for the arrest of Loualher or Hall, then my
answer is, this, too, w?s no contempt of court; if
wrong, it was a crime for which he should have been
indicted, and would, under your Constitution, have
had a right to a trial by jury. If for refusing to
answer the interrogatories propounded to him, then
my answer is, that the court had no right to pro-
pound the questions, and he was not bound to an-
swer them. No court can, in proceedings for con-
tempt, compel a defendant to answer; he may or may
not, at his own discretion. So that it is, to my mind,
impossible to take any view of this case winch will
sustain the judge in the imposition of this fine.
If the declaration of martial law was right in the
first instance, then General Jackson was justifiable
in refusing to obey the writ of habeas corpus issued;
because that interfered directly with the discipline
of his camp, and would have enabled a corrupt
court to defeat the very object which the declaration
was designed to accomplish. To permU mutineers
to run at large in his camp, stirring^ up disaffection,
would have broken down that discipline so ne-
cessary to the very existence of the army. The
right to declare martial law, without the power to
execute it, would amount to nothing. Whilst the
city of New Orleans was his military camp, no civil
tribunal could interfere with the orders of the com-
mander.
It is not my purpose to speak of the brilliant affair
of the 23d December, or the glorious victory of the
8th January. These transactions have been inter-
woven with the tales of our childhood, and are
familiar to all. The illustrious commander has re-
ceived the highest honors of the Republic. But who
are his persecutors' After the victory of New Orleans,
when all classes of people were pouring forth their
gratitude to that man who, in the hands of Provi-
dence, had been the saviour of their city, who rose
up and sought to cover his name with disgrace, un-
der the pretext of vindicating the law? Who stood
forth as the champion of a violated Constitution?
Who denounced the gallant hero, to whose energy
and firmness they were indebted for the victory, as a
tyrant and usurper? An American? A native of
our own soil, whose fathers framed that matchless
instrument which binds these States together, and
under which we have so long and so happily lived?
No, sir; no. It was Judge Hall—a man in whose
veins not one drop of American blood ran—an En-
glishman in birth and feeling—a native of the same
country from whence came the army which General
Jackson had so signally defeated.
Mr. Barnard rose and requested the gentleman
from Ohio to state his authority for calling Judge
Hall an Englishman.
Mr. Weller said this is my authority: The de-
claration had been made from that day to this, and
never contradicted. Those who knew him in New
Orleans, so affirm. Besides, the gentleman from
that city, who spoke on yesterday, [Mr. Slideli.,]
whose veracity no one will question, so informed the
House, and he had every opportunity of knowing
the facts. Col. Nicholas, of that city, so says in the
letter I have before me.
Mr. Barnard said if the gentleman from Ohio
would permit him, he would state that an old and
respectable inhabitant of this city, with whom he
(Mr. B.) was acquainted, knew Judge Hall when he
was in college in Pennsylania at about the age of 16
years, and knew also that his family then resided in
Philadelphia. That gentlemen, he was also inform-
ed, was acquainted with Judge Hall at the time of
his death.
Mr. Weller. This may all be true, sir, and yet
it does not disprove my allegation. It is the first
time the fact has ever been disputed; and however
much confidence I may have in the learned gentle-
man from New York, I must still rely upon the in*
formation of those who have been placed in a situa-
tion to know the facts. I cannot take the unsup-
ported, uncorroborated statements of that gentlemen
to disprove that which has hitherto been an admitted
fact. Is it not also remarkable, very remarkable, that
all of those gentlemen whose names appear on the
record as the prosecutors of General Jackson ara
foreigners by birth? Neither Hall, Louallier, Mar
tin, Morel, or Dix, were natives of the United States!
Was there no American, then, to vindicate the majes
ty of the law? to punish the violator of the Constitu
tion? No, sir, no: a British judge becomes the keeper
of that sacred instrument; and, with the power of the
court, wreaks his vengeance on his adversary, under
the pretext of maintaining the supremacy of the civil
tribunals! J\"ot one of these men was found upon t'M
lines when ihe enemy was attempting to obtain posses-
sion of that beautiful city, No, sir; not one of these
men stood by our country in the hour of battle. But
after ihe victory was achieved, they came forward as
the defenders of your Constitution!
But whom have we here in opposition to the old
chieftain now? His political enemies; those whose
schemes to place this Government under the control
of a moneyed aristocracy have been so often
thwarted by him. The gentleman from New York,
who aspires to be the leader of his party on this
floor, stands in front, proclaiming that, to pass this
bill refunding that fine, to the general, would be a
palpable violation of the Constitution! Why, sir, in
the last Congress, that gentjermwi smd his party
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Congress. The Congressional Globe, Volume 13, Part 2: Twenty-Eighth Congress, First Session, book, 1844; Washington D.C.. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth2368/m1/72/: accessed April 19, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.