In this tour, the President was received in every place through which he passed with those demonstrations of respect and attention which are overdue to the chief magistrate of a free and enlightened people. Whatever opinionswere entertained of his administration by his political opponents, they united in every suitable expression of honor to the man, whom the suffrages of a majority had elevated to the highest office in the nation. The President’s tour commenced on the 6th of June, and was suddenly terminated in the beginning of July—his return to Washington being hastened, as was said, by the state of his health, which had become too feeble to endure the fatigue incidental to such an expedition.
About this time several changes were effected in the cabinet. Edward Livingston, secretary of state, received the appointment of envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States to the court of France, and Louis M’Lane, secretary of the treasury, took his place, and William J. Duane, the office of Mr. M’Lane.
On the 18th of September, a communication was read to the cabinet by the President, showing his decision on the subject of the removal of the public deposits from the Bank of the United States. His own mind was determined upon that of removal; and he begged his cabinet “to consider the proposed measure as his own—in which he should require no one to sacrifice opinion or principle.” Mr. Duane being opposed, as was thought, to this course of the President, was removed, and R. B. Taney appointed in his place.
On Monday, the 30th of June, congress terminated its session. A few days before the close of the session, Andrew Stevenson was nominated as minister to the court of St. James, and Roger B. Taney, as secretary of the treasury. The latter gentleman had received his appointment from the President, during the recess of the senate. It had been the uniform practice for appointments of this kind to be laid before the senate, at the commencement of the session; but General Jackson had withheld his name till near its close; and for nearly seven months Mr. Taney had been permitted to discharge the duties of an office, which, according to the substantial meaning, if not the literal construction of the constitution, he had no right to hold.
The rejection of Mr. Stevenson was justified, on the principles early advanced by General Jackson, that the appointment of members of congress to important offices was calculated to introduce corruption into the government. But other reasons operated, and among them, the disclosure made to the senate of the assurance of the President months previously, through the secretary of state, to Mr. Stevenson, that he should have the appointment. This promise was made, it was said, under the expectation that Mr. Stevenson would carry out the views and several measures of the Executive; and in this view the ratification of his nomination was deemed highly improper.
Before the session closed, the following nominations were made and confirmed. John Forsyth, of Georgia, to be secretary of state; Levi Woodbury, of New Hampshire, secretary of the treasury; Mahlon Dickerson, of New Jersey, secretary of the navy; William Wilkins, of Pennsylvania, minister to Russia.
Just before the termination of the session, June 21st, the President communicated to congress, in a special message, the death of the illustrious La Fayette, which took place at his residence, La Grange, in France, on the 20th of May, at the advanced age of seventy-six. At the same time, orders were issued to the army and navy to honor the memory of the last of the generals of the Revolution. The house and senate chamber were both hung in black, agreeably to a resolution, unanimously adopted. It was also recommendedby resolution, to the people of the United States to wear a badge of mourning for thirty days; and John Quincy Adams was appointed to deliver at the next session of congress, an oration on the life and character of our country’s friend.
The second session of the twenty-third congress commenced December 1st, 1834. The foreign relations of the country were represented by the President in his message to be unimpaired, and with all countries, save France, the understanding was such as was desirable. That government, however, still continued to persevere in her omission to satisfy the conceded claims of our citizens. The other prominent subjects regarded the United States Bank—the regulation of the deposits—and the impolicy and unconstitutionality of appropriations for internal improvements. The conduct of France towards the United States, in neglecting the payment of a just and already allowed debt, was generally censured in the United States. The President informed congress, “that, in his opinion, the United States ought to insist on a prompt execution of the treaty, and should an appropriation not be made by the French Chambers at their next session, prompt measures would not only be most honorable and just, but have the best effect on our national character.” This recommendation of the President was considered by some, in its practical effect, as a declaration of war, and especially as he recommended, in case of longer neglect, a law authorizing reprisals upon French property. But the expediency of reprisals upon French property recommended by the President, or indeed of any immediate action on the part of the national government, was considered by many extremely doubtful; and the senate, on the 14th of January, by a unanimous vote, stated this to be its opinion in a resolution to that effect. A similar resolution was adopted by the house. The prospect of a serious collision between these two nations, for a time so dark, at length passed away. In 1835, the President announced that France had acknowledged the validity of our claims as liquidated by the treaty of 1831, although payment was still withheld.
It may here be added, that during the year 1836, the President announced to the great satisfaction of the country that the appropriations having been made, our diplomatic relations with France had been resumed, and promised to be mutually beneficial to the two countries.
On the 6th of July, occurred the death of the venerable John Marshall, in Philadelphia, in the eighty-eighth year of his age. He had long been an ornament to the legal profession, and for several years had filled with distinguished ability the office of chief justice of the United States. To great talents and distinguished attainments, he united that integrity which inspired all parties with confidence, and that Christian principle which caused the nation to mourn over him at his decease, as “a great man fallen in Israel.”