Newspaper Page Text
RELIGIOUS.
^ THE CATHOLICS
Unr from tho Duke of Wellington to tlio Cath
fjPrimatc of Ireland, publisher! in the Dublin
ing l*o*t of Decenur23 It it* in these term*—
(l London, Dec 11,1828.
Dear Sir :—I have received vour letter of
Jjth mst. and I npsure you that you do me justice
Sieving that I am sincerely anxious to witness the
went of the Homan Catholic Question, which
*|nefitting the state, would confer a benefit on
5 individual belonging to it Hut I confess I see
rospect of such a settlement. Party has been
n d up with the consideration of the Question to
It a degree, and such violenco pervades every
'Mision of it, that it is impossible to prevail upon
to consider it dispassionately.
!jf wo could bury it in oblivion for a short time,
iamphiy that time diligently in the consideration
°ts difficulties on all sides, (foi they are v«r.
I,) I should not despair of seeing a satisfactory
Relieve mo, my dear Sir, ever your most faithful
bio servant, WELLINGTON.”
Ifttcr of Dr. Curtis to the Duke of Wellington
o DROGHEDA, Dec 19, 1828
y Lord Dub*—I have never been more agroeuhlv
prised in my life than by the unexpected honor
eceiving your Groce's very kind and even friend-
^attcr of 11 tli inst, which, coming from so high
, nrter, I should naturally wish to reserve if pns
; but as it was franked by vourselt. the new*
'tsariivnl was known all over tlio town (ns might
-.xpected from a provincial post office) before the
yr reached my hands ; so that 1 was obliged, in
't Grace’s defence and my own, to communicutc
contents to a few chosen friends, for the satisfuc
t' of the multitude, who might otherwise fabric*
yin its stead somo foolish, or perhaps misrhiev
,nonsense of their own But fortunately, you
,ce*s letter contained only such libernl and bene
lint sentiments us ell parties must eulogise, and
* a could possibly malign. Besides, it very sen
ably strengthens the testimony that I, ns a faith
(Witness, have on all occasions given ofyourgenor
1, upright, and impartial disposition
t would be somewhat worse than rediculous in
yto olTer anything in tlio shapo of political advice
consummate Statesman, at the head of the first
jinct in or out of Europe ; but as your Grace has
.(humanely condescended to mention somo of the
clcullics tending tojnaralyzo your efforts to sattb*
Roman Catholic Question, I beg leavo to submit
irour supeiior judgement a few lefiections, made
hne by some well informed and unbiassed friends,
pvell Protestants ns Catholics, who certainly un
‘Stand tlio subject much hotter than 1 can pretend
°lo. They have rend with groat pleasure and
ititudo the noblo declaration, in which youi Grace
J strongly expresses your sincere anxiety to wit-
2|s the settlement of the Roman Catholic Question,
Jjicli, you are convinced, would, by benefittmg the
ate, confer a benefit on every individual of sucio-
and you tegrot that you see no prospect of such
statement, because violent party feelings oro mix*
hup with that question, and provido every discus*
n of it to such a dsgroe as to preclude the possi*
fity of piovniling upon mon to consider it dispns*
jnately. But that if it could bo burned in oblivion
A a short tirno, and if that time woro diligently em-
>yed in the consideration of thu question, you,
ftuld not despair of seeing a satisfactory remedy
•Those humane and Slntovrnanhke sentiments (as
I- as they go) do great honor to your Grace's lieud
r d heart, and might appear sufficient if you were a
ivate nobloinan, but not in your present exalted sta*
Jn, with power to wield, when necessary, all the
isources of Government; foi it would be a slur on
unrivalled mid far famed British Constitution to
’lert, that even when well administered it docs not
t Mess or supply means for establishing any thing
<own to he essential for the poace, welfare, and trim
Glity of tho empire at large, and for pulling down
i removing any intrigue or party spirit that might
vntonly attempt to oppose so gteat a blessing
My friends allow that such momentous exertions
vy bo sometimes unsuccessful when Governmont
'Conducted by weak or unsupported heads or bunds,
t dI that they require such a IVimo Minister as the
tion lias now—and, I hope, will long have the
fppiness to enjoy—who, after un uninterrupted
Vries of the greatest victories, and a successful ar
ngemont of tho most important interests that per
lP* ever yet occurred, lias boon placed at tho head
r Governmont by the entire and well earned con*
Hence of our most gracious Sovereign, and with
e universal applause of tho whn.o empire, and,
deed, of all other nations. Undor such • chief,
erting bis legitimate prerogative, they say that no
.^rly would dare to oppose the general good ; and
lit if your Grace would intimate your serious rcso-
jiou tosettlothc Roman Catholic Question, its op
ments would instantly fly and appear no more;
-id if the settlement were once carried, it would in
Jew days bo no more spoken or thought of than the
mcessions noware that woro lately made to the
•issenturs ; for the oneminu of such airangement are
pt half so angiy in reality as they now appear to he
{ order that by that bugbear to carry their point —
ut my friends have no hesitation in declaring, that
fffjpiojoct mentioned bv your Grace, by burying the
ialholic Question in oblivion, for the purpose of con
Bering it moront leisure, is totally inadmissible, and
otild exasperate, in the highest degree, those who
**0 already too much excited, and who would only
insider that measure as a repetition of tho same old
retext so often employed to elude and disappoint
'Heir hopos of redress ; but that if it even weio ad*
^>ted, it could only servo to augment tlio difficulties
y allowing the contending parties, and particularly
; 4e Gnomics of all concession, tlio opportunities they
iek for preparing their means of resistance and vi*
Aenco which they f.avo lately curried to the most
; nrming lengths, which Utoy have avowed and pub-
bkly announced in attrociuus artd sanguinary terms,
lion for a shoittime ; first because ike tiling is utterly
impossible ; and next, because, if the thing were pos
sible, I fear that advantage might be taken of the
pnuse'by representing it as a panic achieved by the
late violent reaction, and by poclaiming that if the
Government at once and peremptorily decided against
concession, the Catholics would coaso to agitate, one
then all the miseries of the last years of Ireland wil
be to be renctod ..
“ What I do recommend is, that tho measure should
not bo for a moment lost sight of, that anxiety should
continue to be manifested, and that all constitutional,
(in contiadistmctionto merely legal) means should
be resorted toto forward thecausc; but that, atthe same
time, the most patient forbearance, the most submis
sive obedience to the laws Should bo inculcated—that
i personal and offensive languago should bo held to*
irds those who oppose the claims
Personality offers no advantage--it ofl’ects no good ;
on the contrmy, It offends and confirms predisposed
aversion Let the Catholic trust to the justice of his
_usc -to tho growing liberality of mankind Unlor
tunatcly, ho has lost some friends, and fortifiod his on
emies, within the Inst six months, by unmeasured and
unnecessary violenco lie will soonest recover from
the present stagnation of his fortunes by showing
more temper, and by Ousting to the legislature for re*
dress
Brute force, he should be assured, can effect noth*
It is the legislature that must decide this great
question ; and my greatest anxiety is, that it should be
met by the Parliament under the most favorable cir
cumstances, and thut the opposers of Catholic eman
cipation shall be disarmed by the patient forbearance
an well as by the unwearied perseverance of its advo
cates
“ My warm anxiety to promote the general interests
of this country is tho motive that has induced me to
give an opinion and to offer advico. I have the hon
or, &e (Signed) “ ANGLESEY
“ To the most Rev. Dr. Curtis, &c &c ."
POLITICAL
CORRESPONDENCE.
Boston Nov. SO. 1038.
To the Hon John Quincy Mams.
Sir: T « unde signed, ciliz ns of Masnachu
•ftls, residing in Boston iind ita vicinity, take tin
libe rty of iiildre-sing yon > n tin* subject of a
Htatem n' published in tile National Intelligencer ot
the 21 ei Oc'nbi r, end which purports to have
been communicated or authorized by you.
In Ibis statement, after speaking of those indi
vidnal- in this State, whom the writer designate
as ceit lin leaders of the party which had the
management of the State legislature in their
'lands, in llu- year IHOS and saying, that in (lie
event of a civil war he (Mr. Adams) 'hud tin
doubt the leaders of the party would secure (hr
•n operation with them of Great Britain,’ it is
idded, ‘ That their object was ‘ and had been for
sev eral yenrs, a dissolution of the Union and Ihe
stahlishinent of a seperale confederation, he
knew, from unequivocal evidence, although not
proveable in a court of law.
This, sir, is not theexpression of an opinion as to
the nature and tendency of the measures ut that
one publicly adopted, or proposed, by the party
prevailing in the Slate of Massachusetts. Every
eui/.en was at liberty to form tvs own opinions on
thu' subject ; and we cheerfully submit the pro
priety of those measures to the judgment of an
impartial posterity But the sentence which we
have quoted contains the assardon of a distinct
ficl. as one within yi ur own knowledge. We
are not permitted to consider it us the unguarded
expression of irritated feelings, hastily uttered at a
time of great political excitement. Twenty years
have elasped since ihis charge was first made, in
p*ivnte correspond! nee with certain members of
Congress : and it is now deliberately repeated,
and brought liefore the Public undor the sanction
of your n im**, as heinz founded on unequivocal
evidence, within your knowledge.
We do not claim for ourselves, nor even for
those deceased friends whose representatives
join in this address, the titleof lenders of any par
ty in Massachusetts ; hut we were associated in
politics with the party prevailing here at the per
tod referred to in the statement above mentioned ;
s uni! of us concurred in all the measures adopted
by that parly ; and we all warmly approved and
supp irted those measures Many of our aesnei
• tes who still survive, are dispersed throughout
Massachusetts and .Maine, and could not easily
cm.veiled to.join ns un the present occasion.
We trust, however, that you will not question our
ight if not for ourselves alone, at least in behalf
of the highly Tallied friend with whom we arted
at that time, and especially of those of them
who are now deceased, respectfully to ask from
you such a full and precise statement of the facts
and evidence relating In this accusation, ns may
.. able us faiily to meet and answer it.
The object of this letter thureforc is, to request
\ 011'ii stale
First, Who are the persons designated as lea
ders of the narty prevailing in Massachusetts in
ihe tear I BOG. whose object, you assert, was.
and h >d h en for several years, a dissolution of
t o' Union, and the establishment of a seperate
in.nfi duration? and
S. condly, The whole evidence on which that
Ii a ge is founded.
It i* adm.tied in the statement of tho charge
that it is not proveable in a court of law, and of
course that you are not in poses'ion of any legal
evidence by which to maintain it. The evidence,
however, must have been such os in your opinion
would have been pronounced unequivocal by up
right and honorable men of discriminating minds;
. whir'*, howevor, I should not hero uiiuu,?, '<>r I ne „ .
ir wish to bo an accuser, but that I am certain | "nd we may certain y expect from your sense of
M.race must havo lead those limriblo throats, „!’| 0n 1 p.-Mce and elf reqiect a full disclosure of all that
ipeatud in the Bcunswiok and Orange public prints ;
sd to this latter subject ut least I must beg leave to
All your Grace’s auoritinn, and to implore your
pwcrful protection, humbly proving that you
ill not sutler public peace and concord to bo vio-
,ted or disturbed under any pretext wliuluvor. An
nectual remedy would coat yourGraco not one word,
do not, however, hereby mean to meddle in tempo
.1 afiairs ; but I consider it my botindon duty to te
ar incess uitly, in concurrence with all my venerable
mfrcrcs, to impress upon the minds and hearw of
J tboso committed to uur spiritual care, sentiments
I true Christian chaiity, moderation, and kind for-
varanco, towards all men w ithout exception
I beg your Grace will excuse the length of this let-
Ir, and vouchsafe to consider it as a proof of my un-
.igned regard, and of the sincere respect with which
have the honor to remain, my Lord Duke, your
^race’s most obedient and most humble sonant,
< R. CURTIS
+ tier of the Marquis AngUsr.a, Lord Lieutenant of
Ireland, to the Roman Catholic 1‘relats
j'l’lie Dublin Morning Rigisler, of Thursday, which
crived in Liverpool 011 Friday contains the following
nponant document;
, “ I'harur Park, Dec 23, 1828
'"Most Reviresd Sib—I hasten to aeknowlede
ib receipt of your letter of the 22d, covering that
hirli you received from tho Duke of Wellington, of
le 11 ill inst. together with a copy of your answer to
1 “ I thank you for the confidence you have reposed
I me.
Vour letter gives mo information upon a subject
f tho highest interest. 1 did not know the precise
mtiinents of tlie Duko of Wellington upon the pre-
ant stale of the Catholic question.
* " Knowing it, I shall vontore to offer my opinion
,pon the course which it behoves the Catholics to
ursue.
; “ Peifuctly convinced that the final and cordial set
jemeni of this great question* an alone give peace, liar-
Sony, and prosperity to all classes ofhia Majesty’s
ubjecis in this kingdom, l must acknowledge my
jisappoinlinem on learning that there is no prospect
if its being effected during tho ensuing session of
farliatnem I, however, derive some consolation fro
bsarving that his Grace is nut wleily udvcrsu to ihe
feature ; fur, 11 As can be induced to promote it, As,
if all men, will liavo Ihe greatest facility in carrying;
•' into effect.
“ If! amcorrect in lliisopmion, it is obviously most
important that the Duke of Welliiliogteii should ho
(iropitinted ; than no obstacle that can by possibility
Je avoided should be thrown in his way that all pei-
tonal and offensive insinuations should be suppress
oed , and that ample allowance should be made for
'be difficulties of hie situation
. " D.lficult it certainly is, for he has to overcome the
j>ry strong prejudice, end the interestc-l motives of
Miany persons of the highest influence, as well as to
Mt*y the real alarms ot many of the more ignorant
roteslann.
“ I differ from the opinion of the Duke that an at
pi shottM bo made t» bury itr obliviun’ the quea-
fordevi me pleasure to answer with explicitness
bc.imlor, not only ihose persons, but each k oyny
one of y u, upon the only questions in lelaltuo to
the subject 111a terofupon your letter, which asmeo
or as citizens, I can acknowledge your right to ask
namely, whether the interrogator was himself one
of the persons intended by me. in the extract
which you have, given, from a statement author
ized by m" and published in the National Intelli
gencer of dlsl October last
ILitl you, or either of you, thought proper to
ask mu Ihis question, it would have been more
Silisfactory to me to receive the inquiry seperate
|y fiom each individual, than arrayed in solid pha
lanx, each responsible nut only lur himsell but
for all others. The leasons for this must he so
obvious to persons of your intelligence, that I
trust you will spare me tile pain of detailing
them.
But, Gentlemen, this is not all. Yon unde
take your inquisition, not in your own mm
alone ; but as the representatives of a great ai.it
powerful party,dispersed throughout the B'atcs
of Massachusetts and Maine : A party comman
ding, at the lime to which y -ur inqniiies refer a
devoted majority in the L igWUlure of the the*
United Commonwealth, and even now, if judged
of by the character of its volunteer delegation, nl
great inllntnre and respectability.
I cannot recognise you. on this orcasinn, as the
representatives of that parte, for two reasons—
first, bccaii“e you have neither produced your
credentials for presenting yourselves as their
champions, nor assigned satisfactory reasms fur
presenting yourselves without them B it, se
condly, and chit flv, became your introduction ot
that party into this question is entirety gratuitous
Your solemn declaration tlintjou do no not know
that the federal nr any other party, at the time
to which my statement refers, intended to pro
duce thu dissolution of the. Union, and (lie forma
tion of a new confederacy, does not take the is
sue, which your own statement of my chargi
(as you are pleased to consider it) had tendered
The statement authorized by me, spoke, not 01
the federal parly, but of certain leaders of tint
party. In my own letters to the members o!
Congress who did me the tumor at that agoni
sing crisis to our National Union, of soliciting
my confidential opinions upon measures under
deliberaplinn, I expressly cqnitled the great ho
dy of the federal party, not only of participating
m - he secret de-igns of those leaders hut even 11
being privy to or believing in their exislene".—
I now cheerfully repeat that declaration. I well
know that the party acre not prepared for that
convulsion, to which the measures and design-
of their leaders were Instigating them; and my
xtreme anxiety for the substitution of the non
intercourse for the embargo an-.- from 11n- itn i
nent danger, that theeoti'inuance k eufom tn-10
of this latter measure would promuti tin- view
f those leaders, by goading a m jurity ot the p
pie anti of tile legist .tore to the pitch of |>hy-.ie:d
resistance, by State Hiilhmily, against the execu
tion of the laws of the Union, the oily .ff e o .
means by which the Union could lie dis- ohed —
Your modesty lies prompted you to di-claim the
character of leaders of the federal par V ut ilia;
time. If I am to consider this as more than a
mere disavowal of form, I must say that tin-
charge, which I lament to see has. x.-ited so inuc
of your sensibility, had no reference to any o!
you.
Your avowed object is controversy. You i ,.|i
for a prerise stale of facts and evidence; not at
fecting so far as you knew any one of you,
hut to enable \ ou fairly to meet and to answer It
And you demand
I. Who are the person! designated us leaders
f lh" party prevailing in Massachusetts in thi
year I GOB, whose object I assert w as, and lu-c
been for several years, a dissolution of Ike Un
inn, and the establishment of a seperate confed
eracy ? and
2d. The whole evidence, on which that charg*
is founded.
You observe that it is admitted, in the state
men! of the charge, that it is not proveable in a
court of law, and yotirl inference is, that I am of
course not in pos-e-sion or Huy legal evidence
by which tn maintain it Yet you call upon m.
to name the pwr-ons ned by the charge ; a
charge in four estimate deeply stigmatizing upon
those pontons; end you permit yourselves to re
mind me, that my sense of justice and self res
pect oblige me to disclose all that I do possess.—
My sense of justice to you. gentlemen, indue s
me to remark, that I Ipbvp. your self respect tn
the moral mfluencces of your own minds, with
nut presuming to measure it hy the dictation of
mine.
Suppose, then, that in compliance with yom
call, I should name one, two, or llireepcreons as
intend'd to lie itxluded in the thaige. Sup
pose neither of those persons to lie one of you.
You, however, have piien them mil ce that I
have no evidence agains' them, by which - ill
charge is proveable in a court of law—and you
know that I, as well yourself a n a nmlile to t hi
the laws of the land Dors your self respect
convince yon that the persons an named, if god
ty would furnish the evidence against themselves
which they have been notified that I do not
po'Seas? Are you sur h it the co r s 0 dem e
which would prove their gudt, may not in the
lapse of lb years have hern committed to the
flames ? In these days of failing and of treacher
ous memories, may they not have forgotten that
any such correspondence ever existed ? And
have you any guarantee to . (Ter, that I should
not lie called, hy a summons more imperative
than yours, tn produce in the h triple of justice
the proof, which you say I have not, nr be bran
ded for a foul and malignant slanderer of spotless
and persecut 'd virtue ? Is it not besides irna
you posse . . , ,
A charge df this miturt', coming as it does from
the first Magistrate of tnd nation, "Ctjulrea an im
portance which we cannot affect id uiJ.-“* a f“
and it is one which wu ought not to leave l ,n '1 „j ni ;)de that persons nicy exist, who though twen-
answered. We are therefnreconstraiiied hy a re- ~
garil to our deceased fiiends and to uur posterity,
as well as hy a sense of what is due tn our own
honor, most solemnly to declare, th;at we have
never known or suspicted thut the party which
prevailed in Massachusetts in the year 1B0G, or
any other party in this Suite, ever entertained the
leeign to product! a dissolution of the Union, or
the establishment of a separate confederation. It
is impossible for us in any other manner t > re
fill . or even to answer this charge until we see
i folly and particularly slated, and know the evi
dence h> which il is to be maintained.
Tl o nod 'reigned think it duo to themselves to
a Id that, in m iking this application to yon, they
have on design nor wish to produce an effect on
any political parly ur question whatever. Neither
is It their purpose to enter into '• vindication or
discussion of ti e measur. s publicly adopted and
avowed by the persons ag ii, st whom the above
charge .as been in .d-. Oji- sole object is to draw
forth ill tlie evidence on which that charge is
founded,in order that the pub ic may judge of its
application and its weight.
We are si- with due respect.
Your obedient servants.
II. G OTIS.
ISRAEL THORNDIKE,
T. II PERKINS.
WILLIAM PRESCOTT,
DANIEL SARGENT.
JOHN LOWELL,
WILLIAM SULLIVAN,
<11 \RLES JACKSON,
WARREN DUTTON,
HENJ PICK MAN,
HENRY CABOT,
son of the I it** George Cabot,
C. C PARSONS,
son of Theophilu Pars ms, E q. deceased,
FRANKLIN DEXTER,
son , f the late Samuel Dexter
MR. ADAMS’ REPLY TO THE PRE
CEDING LETTER
Washington, doth December, I8S8.
Messrs .1 . G. Otis, lsra* I Thorndike, T, II. Per
kins, Wm. Prescott, Daniel Sargent, John Lo
well, William Sullivan, Charles Jackson. War
ten Dm 11 Benjamin Pick man, Henry Cabot,
C. C Parsons, and Franklin Dexter—
Gf.ntlkmen : 1 have received your letter of tin
SUtli ult. and recognising among the signatures t
1 11 mes of persons for whom a long, and on im
part uninterrupted fiiendship, has survived all th<
bitterness of political dissension, it would have ttf
?v five ’ ears "bice driv. n in the desperation of
disapoi.1t.T0nt, to im) m^tHi preparation
of measures tending 11 'In' (lis»<)lu.( nc Un-
ion, pe-ceived afterwards the error ol tnC'r l*uy
nml would nnxv gladl.f wish nut from their otrn
un'innries their participation in projects, upon
which the stamp of indelible reprobation has
past ? Is it not possible that some of the con-
spirutoia have been called to account to fore a
higher than an earthly Irihnii d for all the good
and nil of their liv. s ; and whose reputation-
might now soft' r needlessly hy the disclosure ot
tlivir names ? I put these cases to you, gentle
nu n. as oossilile, tn shoxv you that neither my
sense of ju slice nnr my self respect does re-
quire nf in to produce the evidence for which
you call, or to disclose the n oue* of persons, for
whom you havo and can l.a'e no right to speak
These considerations appear indeed to me so
forcible, that it is not without so:prise that 1 am
compelled to believe limy had escaped your oh
serration. I cannot believe of any of you that
winch I am sure never enter'd the hearts of
someof you, that you shuilid have selected tin*
present moment lor the porpus* of drawing tin
into a control ersy not only with yourselves, hut
with others, you know not whom—of daring me
to tho denouncement of the names, which twenty
years since 1 declined committing to the uar of
coofid-n'ial fi ii o l; tii|'; and to the pi eduction of
evidence which, though perfectly satisfactory lo
my own mind and perfectly cumpt tent f.*r foun-
da ion of honest and patriotic public c nduct, was
adequate in a court of law neither to 'h- convic
tion of the guilty, nor tn tho ju tification of the
accuser, and so explicitly pronounced hy myself.
You say that yon have no design nor wish tn
produce Mn effect on any political pnity or ques
tion whatever.—nor to enter into a vindcalion o
Ihe measures publicly adopted and avowed by
tile persons against whom the above charge, has
been made. But can you believe that this sub
ject could be discussed bet seen you and me, as
you propose, when calling uponm«i for a state
ment, With the avowed intention of refuting it,
and nut produce an 1 fleet on any political party
ur question? With regard to the public in* a-
ores oftlinse tiniesand the succeeding, which you
declare to huve had your sanction and appruba-
tinn it needs no disclosure now, that a radical
and irrccoiicihiuble diff rence of opinion h* tween
most of yourselves and me existed.—And ran
you suppose that in disclosing names and stating
; acta, known perhaps only to myself, I could
consent to separate them from those public meas
ures which you to cordially approved and which 1
so deeply lamented ? Must your own defence
against these charges forever rest exrlusivel)
upon a solemn protestation against the natural
inference from the irresistible tendency of action
to the secret intent of the actor ? That a states
man who believes in human virtue should be slow
to draw this inference against such solemn asse
verations, I readily admit: but for the regula
tion of the conduct of human life,,the, rules of evi-
d* •nee are widely different from those which re
ceive or exclude testimony in a court of law.—
Even thrre, you know, that violent presumption is
equivalent, in cases effecting life itself, to positive
proof; and in a succession of political measures
through a seiies of veais, all tending to the same
result, there is an internal evidence against which
mere denial, howevei solemn, cun scarcely claim
the crede. cc even of the charity that believeth
all things.
Let me add that the statement authorized by
me, as publish*d in the National Intelligencer,
wa« made, not only without the intent on, but
without the most distant imagination of offending
you, or of injuring any one of you. But, on th
contrary, fur the purpose of expressly disavow
ing a charge, which was before the public, sane
tinned with Ihe name of the late Mr. Ji ff 'Son
imputing to certain citzens of Massachusetts
treasonable negotiatinns with file British govern
mi nt during ihe war, . nd expressly Hating tha
h - had received information of this from me. On
the publication of ihis letter, I deemed it indis
pensably due to mysi-lf, and lo ail the citizens of
Massachusetts, not only to ilt ny having ever given
such information, but all knowledge of such a fact
Anti ihe more so, because that Littor had been
published, though without my knowledge, yet.
I was well assured, from motives of justice and
kind ess to me It contained n declaration by
Mr. Jefferson himself, frank, explicit, and true,
or ihe character of the motives of my conduct, in
II the transactions of my intercourse with him.
during the period of the embargo. This was a
point upon which his memory could not deceive
him, a point upon which he was ihe best of wit
nesses ; and his testimony was the more decisive
because given at a momc.nl, us it would «ee
of great excitement against me upon different
views of public policy even then in conflict and
producing great exacerbation in his mind. The
lettei contain' d also a narrative of a personal in
erview between himself and mn in March, I80S.
and staled that I had then given him informatim
of facts, which induced him to consent to the
"ill- tiiotion of the non-intercourse for thoembar
go;and that I had appriz-d him of thi" treason
stib negotiation hy citizens of Massachusetts, to
secede from the Union during the war, and per
haps rejoin after the peace. Now the substitu
tion of the nonintercoursit for the embargo tunh
place twelve months after this interview, and at a
succeeding session "f Congress, when I was not
ev.-n a member of that body. Tile negotiation
for seceding Irom 'he Union with a view to rejoin
it afterwards, if it * ver existed, must have See 11
doling the war. I had 00 knowledge of such
negotiation, or even of such a design. I could
1 here fore have given no such information.
But in giving in unqualified denial to this state
ment of Mr Jefferson, and in showing that upon
the face of the letter itself it could not he correct,
it was doc tn him to show, that the misstatemenl
■ n his part was not intentional; that it arose from
an infirmity of memory, which tile letter itself
candidly acknuwl* dged ; that it blended together
in one indistinct mass, the information which I
hail given him in March, 1808 with the purport
of coofidi niial letters which I had written to his
and my fi irnds in Congress a v ear after and with
events, projects, and perhaps m re suspicion-.,
natural enough as eonsi qm nees of the precci d
ing times, lint which occurred, if Rt all, from
'hreeto six year- later, and of which he could not
have had information from me The simpl
fact of which I apprised Mr Jefferson was, tha',
in the summer of 1807, about the time of what
was sometimes called the affetir of the Leopard
and Chesapeake. I had seen a better from the
governor of Nov 1 Scotia to a person in Massachu
sett*, affirming that tile British government had
certain inforinati in of a plan by that of France,
'oro qm I-the British possestions and ('fleet a
revolution in the Ui ifed States, by means of a
w r with Groat Britain. As the United States
and Great Britain were in 18(17 at peace, a cor
respondence with the governor of Nora Scotia
held by any citizen of the United States, import
ed no violation of law ; nor could the correspond
ent he, reasonable for a - y tiling which the gov
ernor might write. But my inferences from this
fact were, that there existed between the British
government and Ihe party in Massachusetts op
posed to Mr. Jefferson, a channel of comraur.i
cation through (lie governor of Nova Scotia
which lie was exercising to inflame their hatred
against France and their jealousies against their
own government. The letter was not to any
leader of the federal party ; but I had no doubt
it had been shown to some of them, as it had
been to me, without injunction of secrecy ; and,
as I supposed, with :i view to convince me that
this conspiracy between Napoleon and Mr. Jef
fersnn really existed. How that channel nf com-
'iiunication might be further used was matter nf
conjecture ; for the mi"*ion of Mr. John II nry
was nine months after my interview with Mi. Jef
ferson, and precisely at the time when I was wri
ting to my friends in Congress the letters urging
the siihstitu'ion ofthe nnninterenurse for the em
bargo. Or Mr Henry's mission I knew nothing
t il it was disclosed hy himself in ISIS.
I' wisin these letters of 1808 and 1809, that I
mentioned the design nf certain leaders of the ted
eral party to eff.'et a dissolution of the Union,
and tile establishment nf a Northern Confederacy
This design bad been formed, in the winter m
I80S-4, immediately after, and as a consequence
of the acquisition of Louisiana. Its jtistifyin
causes to thnve who entertained it were, that th
annexation of Louisiana to the Union transcend
c jJ ;•>*■ constitutional powers of the governmenl
of (tie Uniir " ^Into v That it formed in fact a
m w' confederacy iP «o'”'l> I be Slates, united by
tho former compact, were 1 61 Icunu to ."“her
IT | W
treaties, by which the cession was secured I
arrived at Washington on the fourth day of the
session of Congress, and on entering the city,
passed hy the Seentary ofthe Senate, who wa-
g ing from the capitol to the President’s house,
with the advice and consent of that body to the
r tification. .
I took my seat in the Senate the nex; d»y
Bills were immediately brought into Congres ,
making appropriations lo the. amount of fifteen
millions of dollars for carrying the Convention in
to effect, and for enabling th* President to tak.
possession ofthe ceded territory. These mea-
ores were opposed by all the members ofthe S.n-
ate, who had voted against the ratifications of ;h>
Conventions. They were warmly and cordiall
supported hy me. 1 had no doubt of the Const 1
tutional power to make the treaties It is express
ly delegated in the Constitution.—The power
of making the stipulated payment for the cession
and of taking possession of the ceded territory
was equally unquestioned by me ; they were con
struetive powers, but I thought them fairly in
cidental and necessarily consequent upon tt ■
power to malic the treaty.—But the pow- r of an
nexing the inhabitants of Louisiana lo the Union,
of-onferring upon them, in a mass, nil the right ,
and requiring of them all the duties, of citizens of
the United States, it appeared to me had not
been delegated to Congress by the people ol the
Union, and could not have been delegated h)
them, without the consent ofthe people of Lo
iaras, but
Stales, but not between the members of one body pof-
itic I therefore hold it ae a princple without oxception,
that whenever the constituted authoritiee of a Mat*
authorize resistance lo any act ofCongrees, or pro
nounce it unconstitutional, they do thereby declare
themselves and their State quoad hot out of tha pala
ofthe Union That there no euppostble case, in
which the people of a State might place themselvee in
this attitude, by the primitive right of insurrection
against oppression, I will not affirm : but they hava
delegated no such power to their legislature or thoir
judges ; and if there be such a right, it is tha right,
of nn individual to commit suicide—the right ot*
anl inhabitant of a populous city to set (ire to his
own dwelling house These are iny view*. But
to those wlm think that each State is a sovereign
judge, not only of its own rights, but of the extent of
powers conferred upon the general government by
the people ofthe whole Union; and that each State,
giving its own construction to thnconstilutional power*
of Congress, may array its seperate sovereignty against
every act of that body transcending this estimate of
their powers—to say of men holding these principles,
that for the ten yoars from 1804 to 1814, they were in
tending a dissolution ofthe Union, and the formation
nf a new Confederacy, is charging them with noth
ing more than with acting up tn their principles.
To the purposes of parly leaders, intending to ac
complish the dissolution ofthe Union and a new
Confederacy, two postulates arc neceesary. First, an
act or act of Congress, which maybe resisted as tin-
constitutional ; and, aeeondlv, a state of excitement
among the people of one or more Slates of tlio Union
sufficiently mflnmed, to ptoduco acts of the Stato le
gislatures conflicting with the acts of Congress. Re-
uisiana themselves. I thought they required an solutions ofthe legislature denying tho poworsol'Con
amendment of the Constitution, c vote of the
people of Louisiana, and I offered to ihe Senate
resolution" f r carrying both those measures into
effect, which were rejected. It has been recent
ly ascertained, by a letter from Mr. Jefferson to
Mr. Dunbar, written in July, 1808, after lie had
received the treaties, and convened Congress to
onsider them, that, in his opinion, the tieaties
could not be carried into effect without an amend
ment to the Constitution, and that the proposal
for such nn amendment would he the first meas
ore adopted hy them, at their meeting Yet, Mr
J fferson, President of the United States, did ap
prove the acts of Congress, assuming the power
which lie had so recently thought not delegated
0 them, and, as the Executive of the Union, car
i"d them into execution.
Thus, Mr. Jefi" rson. President of theU.Sta.es,
Ihe federal members of CorgresR, who opposed
nd vot'd against Ihe r itification of Ihe tieaties,
and myself, all concurred in ii'e opinion, that ti t
Louisiana session treaties transcend'd the con
stitutional poor's of (tie government ofthi Un
ted States. B r it was after all, a question ot
constructive power. The power of making tin
paty was expre-sly given nilhout limitation
Tile sweeping clause, by which all powers, ne
e.essary and proper for carrying into 1 ff'-ct those
expressly delegated may lie understood as unlim
ited. It is to be presumed, that when Mr J• 1
ferson approved and executed tho acts nf Con
gress assuming the doubtful power, he. had brought
his mind to acquiesce in this somewhat latitudina
rain construction. I opposed it as long and as fa
as my opposition could avail. I acquiesced ii
it, after it had received the sanction of all the or
ganized authorities of ihe Union k the tacit arqui
escence of Ihe people of the U. States and of Lou
isiana. Since which time, so far as this prece
dent goes snd no further, I hare considered the
question as iirevocably settled.
But, in reverting to the fundamental principle
of all our constitutions, that obedience is not due
tn an unconstitutional law, and that Its execution
may he lawfully resisted, you must admit, tha!
had the laws of Congress for annexing Louisian
to the Union been resisted, hy the authority of
one rr more States of the then existing confed
eracy, as unconstitutional that resistance might
have been carried In the extent of dissolving the
Union, and of forming a new confederacy ; and
that if the consequences of the cession had been
so oppressive upon New England *nd 'll-' Norl
as was apprehended by tin federal leaden 1
whose conduct at that lime, all these observation
refer, the project which they did then form "f
severing the Union, and estaiilishing a Northern
Confederacy would, in their application of th
abstract prineiple to the existing state of thing'
have been justifiable. In l/ieir views, therefore
1 impute to them nothing which it could bn ne
eessary for them to disavow ; and, accordingly
these principles were distinctly and explicitly
avowed, eight year* afterwards, by my exeellenl
friend, Mr. Quincy, in his speech upon the nd
mission of Louisiana, as a State into the Union
Whether h had any knowledge ofthe practical
project of 1803 and 4,1 know not; but tile argu-
ment of his speech, in which he referred to my
recorded opinions upon the constitutional power,
was an eloquent exposition of the justifying t au
ses of that project, as I had heard them detailed
at the time. That project, I repeat, had gone to
to Ihe lengtli of fixing upon a military leade.r fin
ite execution ; and although the circumstances of
the times never admitted of its execution, nor
even of its full development, I had yet no doubt,
in 1808 and 1809, and have no doubt, at this time,
that it is Ihe key to all the great mevements "f
those leaders of the federal party in New Eng
land, from that time forward, till its final catastro
phe in t' e Hartford C invention
Gentlemen, I obsoive among the signers of your letter,
the names of two members of that Convention, togeth
er wilh that ofthe son ofits president You will not
understand me as affirming, that either of you was
privy to this plan of military execution, in 1804.—
That may he known to yourselves and not to me.
A letter of your first signor, rocently published has
disclose tlio fact, that he, althn’ the putative, was
not the real father ofthe Hartford Convention. As
lie who ha* hitherto enjoyed uniivallod the honois.
is now disposed to bestow upon others the slmme "f
its paternity, may not tho ostensible and tho real
character of other accidents attending it, be alike di
versified, so that tlio main and iilmnate object of
that assembly, though beaming in {splendor from its
acts, was yet in dim eclipse to the visiun ofits most
distinguished members ?
However this may bn it was this project of 18(13
amt 4 which, from the time when I first took my sent
in the Senate ofthe United States, alienated me from
the secret councils of those leaders of the federal par
ly I was never initiated in them 1 approved and
gress, are the first steps in this inarch of disunion ; but
That it was oppressive to tha interests, r.lld (Jgs- I supported th* acquisition of Louisiana ; and from the
tractive to the influence of the Northern sectio;
of the confederacy, whoso light and duty it
therefore tv is to "-cede frurn (he new hndy pol
itic, and to constitute one of their own. Thi-
plan was so fir matured, that the proposal had
been made to an individual to permit himself, at
tile proper tint", tn be placed ut th*' heed of the
military movements, which it was foreseen would
lie nee. saury fer carrying in in'o execution. In
all this there was no overt act of treason. In the
sh-traet them y of our government, the obedience
of ill** citizen is not due to an unconstitutional
law lie may lawfully resist its execution, lfa
single individual undertakes this resistance, uur
constitutions, both of the United States and of
each separate State, have provided a judiciary
power, judges and juries, to decide hetwe m tile
individual and the legislative act which he has
resisted as unconstitutional. But let us suppose
til" case that legislative acts of one or more States
of this Union are past, conflicting with acts of
Cnngrt ss, and commanding the resistance of their
citiz-ns against them, and what else can b" t *■
result Imt war—civil war; and is not that, defacto.
a dissolution of the Union, so far as the resisting
Slates arc concerned ? and what wnuld he the
condition of every citizen in the resisting States ?
Bound hy Ihe double duty of allegiance to the
Union, and to the State, he would he crushed be
tween lh' upper and the nether millstone, with
the performance of every civic doty convered in
to a crime, and guilty nf treasnn "y every act
of obedience to the law.
That the power of annexing Louisiana tn this
Unio had not been delegated t Congres-, hy
the Constitution of the United States, was my
own opinion ; and it is record, d upon Ihe journal,
of the Senate, of which I was then ii member.
But far from thinking the act itself n justifying
cau-e for secession from the Union, I regarded
it as one of the happiest events, whirh had oc-
enrred since the adoption of the Constitution. I
r.'greite I that an accidental illness in my family
which detained me on my way In Washington,
lo take my seat in the Senate, deprived me of
the power of voting fur the ratification of the
first nn!.' I ' cnt that •ho project nf separation was mado
known to mo, t "Ppo ! 'C l1 10 *< “ determined and in-
flexible resistance
It is well known to some of you, gentlsmcn, that
the cession of Louisiana was not the first occasion
upon which iny duty to my country prescribed to mo
a course of conduct different from that which would
have been dictated to ino by the leaders nnd the spir
it of party More than one of you was present at a
meeting of members of tho Massachusetts Legislature,
on tho 27tli of May, 1802, the day after I first look iny
sent as a.member of that Legislature. A propusal
then made hy me, tn admit to the council of tlio com
mon wealth a proportional representation of the mi
noijty as it existed in the two houses, has, I trust, not
been forgntten It was the first act of my legislative
life, nnd it marked the principle by which my whole
public career lias been governed from that day to this.
My proposal was unsuccessful, and perhaps it for
foiled whatever confidence might have been other
wise bestowed upon me ns u party follower. My
conduct in tlio Senate nf the United Slates, with re
gard tn tlie Loiiisimn cossion, was no! more accepta
ble to the leaders ofthe federal party ; and someof
you may perhaps remember that it was not suffered
to pass without notice of censuro in thu public fedoral
journals ofthe time.
With regard to the project ofa separate Northern
Confederacy, formed in tho winter of 1803, ’4, in con-
sequonce ofthe Louisiana cession, it is not to 1110 that
they avail nothing, without subsequent and corns-
lending action The annexation ot Louisiana to tho
Jniun was believed to be unconstitutional, but it pro
duced nn excitement to resistance among the people.
Its bcneficinl consequences to the whole Union worn
soon felt, and took away all possibility of holding’it
up as the labarum of a political religion of disunion.
The projected separation met with other disasters,
and slumbered, till the attack of tlio Lcopsrd on thu
Chesapenko, followed by the Orders in Council of
11th November, 1807, led to tile embargo ofthe 22d
December of that year The first of theso event*
biought the nation to the brink of war wilh Great
Britain ; and there is good reason lo believe that tha
second was intended as e measure familiar to thu pol
icy ofihat government to sweep our commerce from
the ocean, carrying into British ports every vessel
of ours nav igating upon the high seas, and holding
them, their cargoes, end their crews, in sequestration,
to aid in tho negotiation of Mr Rose, & bring us to the
terms ofthe British cabinet This was precisely tho
period at which the governor nf Nova Scotia wesgiv-
it’g to his coirespondent 111 Massachusetts the friend
ly wanting from the British government of the re-
ionizing ami conquering plan of France, which
cominunicutod to me, and of which I apprised
Mr. Jefferson. The embargo, in tho mean time, had
been laid, and had saved most of our vessels and sea
men from the grasp ofthe British cruisurs II had
rendered impotent tlie British Orders in Council; but
at the same time it had choked up channels of our own
commerce As ils opeiation bote with heavy pressure
upon the commerce and navigation of tlio North, thu
federal leaders soon began to clamor against it ; then
to denounce f as unconstitutional; and then to call
upon tlio Commercial States to concert measures
among themselves, to resist ita execution. The ques
tion made ofthe constitutionality of Ihe embargo, only
proved that, in times of violent popular excitement,
the clsercst delegation of a powei to Congress will 00
more shield the exercise of it from a charge of usurpa
tion, than that ofa power tho mot remotely implied
or constructive. The question of tlie cnnstitutionelily
ofthe emberzo was solemnly argued before the Dis
trict Coutt ofthe United States at Salem ; & although
the decision of the judge war in ils favor, it continued
tn be argued lo the juries ; and even when silenced
before them, was in Ihe distemper of the tiinea so in
fectious, that the juries themselves habitually acquit
ted those charged with the violation ofthat law. There
was little doubt, that if the question of constitutionali
ty had been hrongbl before the 8late Judiciary of Mas
sachusetts, the decision of the court would have been
against the law. The fust postulate for tho projector*
of disunion, was thu* secured. Tho second still
lingered ; fur the people, notwithstanding their excite
ment, still clung lo tlie Union, end the federal major!
ty in tho legislature we* very email Then was
brought forward Ihe first project for a Convention of
Delegatee from the New England State* to meet in
Connecticut, *nd then «*ae tho lime, at which I urg
ed with so much earnestness, by letters tu ray friends
•t Washington, the substitution ofthe non-intercourse
for the orniiargo.
The non intercourse was substituted. The arrange
ment Wilh Wt. Krskine son* afterwards ensued; and
in August, 1809 I embarked upon a public mission
to Russia i#y absence from the United Btales wet
of eight yeare’ duration, and I returned to tike rhtrgo
ofthe department ..(State in 1817.
Tho rupture of Mr Erskines arr.ingemont, tho ab
ortive mission of Mr Jackson, tho disclosures of Air.
John Henry, thu war with Great Britain, the opinion
ofthe Judges ofthe Supreme Court of Massachusetts,
that by the constitution ofthe United States, no pow
er was given eithtir to the president or to Congress,
lo determine the actual existence nf the exigencies,
upon which ihe militia of the aeveral states may bo
employed in the service of tho United States, end thu
Hartford Convention, ell happened during my ab
sence from this country. I forbear to pursue the ntr-
rativo The two postulates fur disunion were nearly
consumatcd. The interposition of a kind Providence,
restoring peace tn our country and to the world, avert
ed the most deplorablo of catastrophes, end turning
over to the receptacle of things lost upon earth, tho
adjourned Convention from Hartford, to Boston ex
tinguished (by the mercy of Uonvcn, may it be for
ever) the projected New England Confederacy.
Gentlemen, I have waved every scruple, perhaps
oven tlie proprieties of my, situation to give you this
answer in consideration of that lung and sincere
friendship for some nf you, which can cease to beat
only with the last pulsation of my heart. But I
cannot consent tn a controversy with you. Here, if
you please, let our joint correspondence rest. I will
answer for the public eye, or for tlio private ear, at
iiis option, either [ofyou, speaking for himself, upon
any question, which lie may justly deem necessary,
for the vindication of his own reputation. But I
can recognize among you no representative chara
cters Justly appreciating the filial piety oflhose,
who have signed your letter in behalf of their de
ceased sires, I havo nn reason to believe that either
of those parents would have authorised tho demand of
names, or the call for evidence which you have made.
With the father of your last signer, I hud, in the yegt
1809, one or more intimately confidential conversa
tions on this very subject, which I have flattered my
self, and still believe, were not without their influence
upon the conduct of his lust and hast day* 11 is son
may have found no trace* of this among his father'*
papers Ho may believo mo that it is nevettheleaa
true.
!'. Is ndt iirlpfoljaUu that at some future day, a tame,
of solemn duty to my country, may require ofm*
to disclose tlie oviijeuce, which I do possets, and for
which you call. But of tint day tho selection must
be at my own judgment, and it may be delayed till
I ntysclf havo gone tu answer for the testimony 1 may
bear before the tribunal of your God and mine.—
Should a disclosure of names even then bo made by
me, it will if, possiblo, bo made with such rcseive,*a
tenderness lo tlie feelings of the living, and to the
families and friends ofthe dead, may admonish.
But no array of numbers or of power shall draw me
to a disclosure, which I deem premature, or deter me
from making it, when iny sense of duty shall sound
the call
In the mean time, with a eentiment of affectionate
and unabated regard for some and of respoct for ell
of you, permit me to subscribe myself.
Your friend and fellow citizen,
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
MVORGAN County, Georgia.- ■ AUca
1"JIL Heavers applies for letters of administration on ilie es
tate ot' Kliiabetb Heavers, late ol'said county, dec’d.
This is therefore to cite the kindred and creditors of said dec’d.
prescrib'd lu)f law, to shew
appear at my othce, within the
cause, if any they have, why said letteni should not tie granted.
Given under iny hand this lbtli tiny of February, 18.’9.
JOHN W. PORTER, C. C. O.
you must apply, for copies of the correspondence in » —
which it was contained To that and to every other | rBl WTGGS County, Georgia.—-• Edward
been constantly opposed. A. Epps, of Cant. Fitzpatrick’s di$t. tolls before me one bay
project ol disunion, I have
My principle* do not admit the right, evnn ofthe peo
ple, still Ice* of the Legislature of any one Stale in
the Union, to secede at pleasure from the Union No
provi*ion is made for tho exercise of thia right, ei
ther by the federal, or any ofthe State constitutions.
Tho act of exercising it, preeupposee a departure from
the principle of compact, and a resort to that offorce.
If, in the exercise of their respective function*, the
thu legislative, executive, and judicial authentic* <»t
the Union on one side, and of one or more states nr
the other are brought into direct collision with each
other, the relations between the parties are no longer
those of constitutional right, but of independent force
Each party construes the common compact for itself
The constructions are irreconcilable together Therein
no umpire between them, & tho appeal is to the sword,
tho ultimate arbiter of right between independent
horse, about 12 hantils high, and about 4 or 5 years old. wilh a
star in ids face, and a snip on his nose,and three white hind feet,
appraised by Dr. A. B. Nash and Henry Anglin, to be worth GO
dollars, this 18th Jan. 182S*. JOHN FITE PATRICK, J. P.
t* copy from the minutes ol the Inferior court, when silting
n.v nurimcuc JOHN II. BLOUNT, C. I. C.
F KAN KLIN County, Georgia.-—-James
Wilson, of Capt. Coker's district, tolls liefore Samuel Me.
Collum, Esq. one bay mare,about 16 year# old, 14 1-2 hamlshigh,
both hind feet white, a star in her forenead, some white spots on
the back, shod all round, no brands perceivable, appraised at 20
dollars, 9th February, 1829.
A true extra-t from the Estri y Book.
march 2 THOMAS KING, C. I. C.
jTXEBTORS to the estate of William Clc-
ments, late of Jefferson county, dec’d. are requested to
nake immediate paymeut, and those having demands agaiust
said estate will preseul them in term* of the law
JOHN CLEMENTS, ) Vw , nrc
march 2 WILLIAM BOYD, 5 JTmb