| John W. Taylor, | New York, | Nineteenth Congress, | 1825. |
| Andrew Stevenson, | Virginia, | Twentieth do. | 1827. |
The policy and views of Mr. Adams were, in the main, conformed to those of his immediate predecessor. As secretary of state under Mr. Monroe, it is believed that no important measures were adopted without the advice or consent of Mr. Adams. He would, of course, have been apt to continue in the same general line of conduct. His qualifications were of the highest order; he well understood the interests of his country, and was skilled in every art of diplomacy and government.
On one point, perhaps, he differed in theory from Mr. Monroe. He expressed less regard for state rights, or allowed more power to the general government, according to his construction of the constitution, than Mr. Monroe did. The latter considered the United States' government strictly federal; the former viewed it rather as a consolidated or national one. In their public measures, however, this difference of opinion did not often lead to the exercise of greater power by one than the other. The constitution was the guide of both; but one might approve an act of congress for internal improvements, from which the other would probably have withheld his assent, from scruples as to the constitutional authority of the federal government for such enterprises.
The administration of Mr. Adams was, however, destined to be confronted by a very formidable opposition. This was from the beginning, on the part of numbers—they were determined to dislike his measures, whether right or wrong, as they differed with him in matters of opinion, and were dissatisfied with some circumstances attending his election. It was alleged that the latter was brought about by corruption. This state of things constituted a second era of political asperity in the history of our government, which has not subsided to this day. But the constitution has happily survived the shock, though, at the present time, it begins to be assailed by the more dangerous spirit of sectional divisions. Another portion of Mr. Adams' political opponents, more honest or honorable than the rest, were willing to judge him by his acts. "It is but justice to add, that the charge of a bargain between Mr. Adams and Mr. Clay has not been satisfactorily supported. On the contrary, it seems now to be generally admitted that no alliance had been formed between these gentlemen, previous to the election which issued in Mr. Adams' accession."
The following are the principal topics upon which we propose to dwell in noticing the administration of Mr. Adams, viz:
| Controversy respecting the Creeks, | Fiftieth Anniversary of |
| Proposed Mission to Panama, | Independence, |
| Internal Improvements, | "American System," |
| Election of General Jackson. | |
Controversy respecting the removal of the Creeks.—At the commencement of Mr. Adams' term of office, a controversy arose between the general government and the state of Georgia, respecting the territory occupied by the Creek Indians. There had long been a dispute between these people and the Georgia state government, which claimed the lands on which the Creeks resided. The claim was professedly founded on a compact into which the United States entered with Georgia, in 1802, of extinguishing, at the national expense, the Indian title to these lands, and of removing the natives, "as soon as it could be done peaceably, and on reasonable terms." The consideration, on the part of Georgia, was the relinquishment of her claim to the Mississippi territory. Georgia was impatient to have the compact fulfilled—the Indians, having grown more attached to their homes, refused to alienate their territory. Between the vehemence of Georgia and the resistance of the Creeks, the general government had a difficult task to perform. As it had been invariably desirous of observing good faith with the Indian tribes, and had treated them with much lenity and kindness, it was fully disposed to do justice to the Creeks, while it was equally desirous to satisfy Georgia. Before the government could extinguish the Indian claim in the manner before agreed upon, i. e. "peaceably, and on reasonable terms," the governor of Georgia insisted on the removal of the tribe, and threatened to take possession of the territory by force. It was in contemplation, however, on the part of the federal executive, to resort to force to prevent these proceedings on the part of Georgia. The danger of a collision, at one time, appeared to be imminent. The national executive, nevertheless, by his prompt and vigilant measures, passed through the crisis with safety, and effected successfully the object in view.
Removal of the Creek Indians.