Newspaper Page Text
V
4%
mem ufihe motives of the leaders of that pat tv.
But it would bo mrog.iiice to suppose himself
alone intended, when the terms of the bcciis.i-
ti .ii jmplv « confederacy of many. And whilo,
oil.the one hand, it would betray both sUfidi-
,Hess and egotism to confine his demand of ex
culpation lo himself; soon the other, it is im
possible to unite In one application all who
might justly he consideteii as his associates. It
follows then that any persons/ who, front the
relations they sustained to their party, may ap
prehend that the public will apply to them eb ir-
ges of this vague description, may join in such
nmnheists they shill tifnk St, to demand an
explanation of charges which will probably af
flict some of them, and may affect them all.—
The right, upon the immutable principles of
justice, ought to be commensurate with the in
jury, and should ho adanted to its character.
Again, who can doubt that the public repu
tation of deg!! minded men who could have
embarked .in the same cause and maintained a
The necessity of correcting some mistakes
in a letter of Mr. Jefferson, which had been
lately published, is assigned by Mr. Adams as
the reason fur his publication. II thut circum
stance has brought him heforotho public at a
time, or in a manner, injurious to his feelings,
or uupropitious to hi* political views and expec
tations, wo are not responsible for the conse
quences. We would observe, however, that
it would have been apparently a very easy task
to correct those mistakes, without adding this
unprovoked denunciation against his native
Si ite. , , ,
Foully Mr. Adams declines all further cor
respondence with us on litis subject; and even
intimates an apprehension that he may have
ah cad v condescended too far and waived ‘even
the proprieties of his situation,’ in giving us such
an answer as ho has given.
He very much misapprehends the character
institutions, and the principles and spirit
ground taken in his circular, aud intrench him
self in the safer positions of his address. That
eifectly apprised of the
the people may he peifectly apprised u
difference between the Address and the Cir
cular, I invito their attention to extracts from
both :
In the Circular lie says,
“But the truth is, that the
In the Address he says,
I said in my former ad
dress, t hat the provisions of
of our — . . ■ „
of his countrymen, if he imagines that any ntu-
cnmmuiiion of principle*, is a common proper- cialrank, however elevated, will ®
• man to publish injurious charges against others,
ty, which nil wiio are interested are bound to
vindicate ns occasion may require—the present
for the absent—the living for the dead—the son
fur the father.
If anv respimsdileindividual at Washington
should declare himself to he in possession of un
equivocal evidence that the leaders of certain
states iw our confederacy, were now maturing
a plot for the separation of the States, might
not the members of Congress, now them, from
the States thus accused, insist upon a disrlo-
_ sure of evidence and names t Would they he
diverted from their purpose bv an evasion of
the question, oil the ground, that as the libeller
had not named any individuals, so there was
and then to refuse all reparation mid even ex-
pl mation, lest it would tend to impair his dig
nity. I f be is in any danger of such a result in
the present instance, he should havo foreseen
it when about 10 publish his charges in October
last. If‘the proprieties uf his situation* have stances
been violated,it washy that original publication
and not bv too groat condescension in answer
to our call upon him, for an act of simple jus
tice towards those who felt themselves aggriev
ed. "
We have thus examined all the reasons by
which Mr. Adams attempts to justify his refu
sal to produce the evidence in support of his
ven a single rogiineut across the British Chan
nel? Ami if the object was the conquest of the
British Provinces by the U. Stales alone, how
could a revolution, in their government which
must divide, ami weaken it, promote that enu i
Tim folly of a British Government in at
tempting to give currency to it story which si-
vmirs'strongly of (lie burlesque, cau Im equal- , lrc!SS ,, latt h/ provisions
led oidv by the credulity of Mr. Adam ithe law 0 f 1799badbeen.~
believin'" it calculated .to produce effect} and it: universally considered as
lie did so. believe.it furnishes a criterion by mere formalities, and with,
which to estimato the correctness and i thaUhe’y had'not been re-
linlity of his judgment concerning the wei ? m ca || e( j to my memory."
and the application of the other evidence which
he still withholds ant| from which ho has under
taken will equal confidence to ‘drawJhiS inferen
ces,’ After the adjustment of the diplomatic
preliminaries with Sir. Giles and others, Mr.
Adams communicated nothing to Mr. Jeffer
son, hut the substnnee of the Nova Scotia let
ter. If Mr. Adams had then known and be
lieved in the ‘project,* (the key to all future
proceedings) it is incredible that it should not
have been deemed worthy of disclosure at that
lime, and on that occasion.
In this connection we advert for a moment
to the temper of mind, and the state of feelings,
which probably gave rise to, and accompanied,
ibis communication of Mr. Adams. Circum
stances had occurred tending to embitter his
feelings and to warp his judgment. .
Mr. Adams, just before the time of his inter
J ‘ ‘ •**■■■ -
nan not named any miiiviuu.us, *<• mne -™- i- , ■ ... .....c,
nn one entitled to make this demand ? or would allegations, and we again appeal .
donee lo our fellow citizens throughout the tJ-
nited Stales, for the justice ol our conclusion,
that no such evidence exists.
The preceding observations suffice, we trust,
to shew, that we have been reluctantly forced
into a controversy, which could not be shun
ned, without the most abject degradation; that
it was competent to us to interrogate Mr. Ad
ams in the mode adopted, and that he declines
a direct answer for reasons insufficient, .and un
satisfactory ; thus placing himself in tho predic
ament of an unjust accuser.
Here, perhaps, we might safely rest our. ap
peal, on the ground that it is impossible strictly
they be satisfied with a misty exculpation of
tticifcii-lvcs 1 This cannot he imagined. They
'•would eoniend for the honor of their absent
friends, of their party, and of their States.—
These wero anions our motives for m iking this
• call. We feel an interest in all these purlieu-
bus, and especially in the unsullied good name
* of friends .and associates, who, venerable for
•. eminent talents, virtues and pubic services,
have gone down to the grave tinconscious’of at*V
imputation on their characters.
Mr. Adams admits our right to make sever-
• ally, the inquiries which have been made jointly;
though iii.i passage eminent for its equivocation
he expresses a doubt whether we can come , to prove a negative. But though we are in the
within ilie terms of his charges. On this re-1 dark ourselves, with respect to the evidence on
markable passage we submit one more observa- j which he relies, to justify his allegation ot a
tion. As Mr.. Adams declares that he well ‘project,’m any time, to dissolvotlie Union,
knot) from unequivocal eridrnce the existence
of such tiieason.ible designs, he must have known
whether the parties who addressed hint were
engaged in those designs. Why then resort
to the extraordinary subterfuge, that if the sign
ers efthat letter '.veto not leaders, then the
chorees did not refer to them?
There is then no right on the part of Mr. Ad
ams to prescribe lo the injured parties, (and ell
urn injured who may bo comprehended in his
pvai'itc expressions) the precise form in which
they should make their demand. And Ins re
fusal to answer that which we have made, is
like that of one who having fnpd a random shot
among a crowd should protest against answer
ing to tlte complaint of any whom he had actu
ally w eunded, because they*could not prove
that his aim was directed at them.
A nether reason assigned hv M'. Adams for
hi* refusal lo nanut tho individuals whom lie in
tended to accuse, is that it might expose him
to a legal prosecution. He certainly had not
much to apprehend in this inspect from any of
the undersigned. As lm lips originally announ
ced tint he had no legal evidence lo prove his
charge, hd the undersigned had nevertheless
called tot him to produce such as he did pos
sess, he must h .re been sufficiently assured
tint thrir purpose Was liol 10 resort ton court
qj justice, hot to the tribunal of public opinion;
an ! th o they # had virtually precluded them-
selva.' from any other resort.
Mr. Adams suggests another objection to
naming the parties accused, on account of the
probable loss of evidence, and the forgetful
missef witnesses, after tho lapse of twenty
yens.
He undoubtedly new possesses all tire evi
deuce dial le> had in October last, when lie
published his statement. If he then made this
grave. enugn i'mu certain of hit folio w-
ciuzens, with the knowledge that there was no
evidence by which'it could he sustained, where
was Its sense of justice ? Ifhe made it Without
inquiring, and Without legal ding, whether he
had any such evidence or not, intending if call
ed upon to shield himself from responsibility bv
suggesting this loss of doemoents and progfc,
wll."e WaS then his setf-ie-pec! I
Bir d d it did never occur to Mr. Adams,
• -thin die parties accused might also in this long
* lapse of .ime have losi .lie proofs of their nmo-
ccm.t 1 - le. has known for twenty years past
that .» hail m tic his secret denunciation of his
ancient politic • tfriends ; and he must have an
ticipated the possibility that it might at some
time he made public, ifhe had not even deter
mined in It's own mind to punish it himself. He
has therefore had ample'ppporPrity, and the
mosi powerful motives, to preserve all the ev
idence that mutht servo IP justify his conduct on
that occasion. On the other hand, the parties
accused, tiJ especially those venerable patri
ots, who ddriog.thix long interval have descend
ed to the (>• iv », unconscious of guilt, and igno
rant th-t f'.cy were even suspected, have fore
L ' seenno n-e sf ti,,a.> i had on motiee whatever,
to preserve any memorials of tiuir innocence.—
We venture to make tfiis appeal to the con
science of Mr. Adams himself.
Mr. Adam* in one passage appeals to the
- fmdmi’sof the imdeis-gned, and intimates his
, sui p: i.-e SliHt they should have selected the pies-
,v cut mortiftU fur in .k.ng their demand. He did
:/ them bin justice ill supposing that this consider-
* ntion had its influence mi their minds, their on-
‘ Jy teai why that their appeal might be consider-
/ ed its an attack mi -m eminent man, whom the
.. . pubic tavog seemed to have deserted. But
the uiiaersigited had no choice. Their accu
ser h d selected Itis own time for bringing this
subject before the world ; and they were coni'
' pciled to follow him with their defence, or cow
sent that tho seal should be set on their own
repieation, nml on those of their deceased
ft tends forever. Wo said with truth, that it was
nut our design nor wish to produce an effect on
any political party or question. We were not
; unaware that unr appeal might lead to such
•vin.-cs as would seriously effect cither Mr.
and to establish a northern confederacy, (which
is the jnly point to which our inquiries were
directed,) it will be easy by a comparison of
dates, and circumstances founded on his own
admissions, to demonstrate (what we know must
he true) that no such evidence applies, to any
man who acted, or to the measures adopted in
Massachiiset's at, or posterior to the time of
the embargo. ’ The project itself, so far as it
applies to those men and measures, and ^oba-
bly altogether, existed only in the distempered
fancy of Mr. Adams.
‘This design’ (lm says) had been formed in
‘the winter 1803—4, immediately after, and as
‘a consequence of, the acquisition of Louisiana.
‘Iih justifying causes, to those who entertained
‘it were that the annexation of Louisiana to the
‘Union transcended the constitutional powers
‘of the government of the United States.—
•That it formed, in fact, a new confederacy to
which the States, united by the former com
pact, were not bounded lo adhere. That it
was oppressive to the interests, and destruct
ive to dtp influence, of the northern section of
the confederacy ; whose right and duty it there
fore was, to secede from the new body politic,
and to constitute one of their own. This plait
was so fat matured, that a proposal had been
made loan individual, to permit himself, at the
‘proper time, to be placed at the head of the
‘militaty movements, which, it was foreseen,
'would ho necessary for carrying it into execu
tion. The interview with Mr. Jefferson tvas
in March 1808. In May Mr. Adams ceased
to he a Senator. In the winter of 1808—9 he
made his communications t<« Mr. Giles, In
August 1809 he embarked for Europe, three
years before the war; and did not return till
three years after tho peace;—and he admits tho
impossibility of his having given to Mr. Jeffer
son informations of negotiations between our
citizens, and the British, during the war, or
ondescending to
view with Mr. Jefferson, had voted for the em
bargo. He had been reproached for haying
done this on the avowed principle, of voting,
aud not deliberating, upon the Executive rec-
omenilaiion. He had been engaged with his
colleague^ in a controversy on ibis subject.—
His conduct, as ho affirms, and as was the fact,
had been censured, in leans of severity, in the
public press. The Legislature of Massachu
setts had elected another person to succecdjhim
in the Senate of the United States, and had
otherwise Expressed such a strong and decided
disapprobation of tho measures which he had
supported, that he felt compelled to resign his
seat before the exp’ration of his term. These
might be felt as injuries, even by men of plica
hie temper. It is probable that his feelings
of irritation may be trared hack to the contest
between Jefferson and the elder Adams. -It is
no secret, that the latter had cherished deep
and bitter resentment against Hamilton, and
certain other ‘leaders’ of the federal P arl y „ .
supposed to be Hamilton’s friends. It would S | ate( i that if I did not mis.
not bo unnatural that the son should participate take, Mr. Forsyth was the
in the feelings of the father. member whoso right to a
Wb» Mr. Adams «kl Mr. MffigStBSlt
and afterwards made his diclosures to Mr. Giles t t, e power of the H. of R.
provisions of the election
law which the Governor is
note enforcing against me,
have been so universal!'
considered as Were formal
ties, ar.d of no compulsory
obligation." &c.&c.
Omitting the words marked by me in thca-
bove extract front tho Circular,. Mr. Gilnter
changes the whole character of his proposition,.
and piesents me as denying the correctness ot
another not then presented for consideration.—
1 had supposed the explicitness of my ow t
words had left no room for doubt, and believ
ing that they cannot he misunderstood by those
who are willing, to comprehend them, instead
of following Mr. G’s argument to prove, that
while recollecting in Madrid, the provisions of
the election law, now the subject of controvcr
sy, I had forgotten the provisions Mr. G. i
determined, if possible, to dispute about, I shall
simply repeat them—My words are, “How far
the opinion expressed” (in tl;e extract from tho
Circular),“/Aaf the provision enforced is a mere
formaility, without compulsory obligatiort is en
tertained, 1 have no means of judging, it never
was mine.” I ant therefore represented in the
Address as seeming to think that Mr. G. is
mistaken in supposing all the provisions of tho
election law are universally consideied not of
compulsory obligation, because I entertained a
different opinion, although it will be perceived
that I disclaimed the expression of any judg
ment on Itis assertion in the Circular, except as
to my own opinion, and. that was confined to
tho single provision enforced in his case. This
is the more striking, as I took occasion must
distinctly to express nty convictions, that the
statute of Georgia was unconstitutional in the
provisions which make three years residence
aud the payment of taxes qualifications to hold
a seat in Congress.
Mr. Gilmer quotes the report of a Commit
tee of Congress, made in 1824, to shew the
accuracy of another of his statements iu which
I believed him to have been mistaken:
In the Address he states. 1
In my former Circular, l
lathe Circular he states,
‘By the Constitution each
House shall judge, &c.—
Under this provision of the
Constitution, it is under
stood that the II. of R. has
determined that it was not
bound by the election law of
and others, having lost the confidence of his 1 to judge of the election of Georgia, as to the qualijica-
its own members—In an-
tion of its membersfrom I hot
Stale, aud in one instance,
if 1 mistake not, (5ov. For
syth was the member whose
right to a seat was the sub
own party, he had decided, ‘as subsequent
events doubtless confirmed,’ to throw him- “""JMrG.doMmUtXe,
self intdr the firms of his father s opponents. 1 ant j t)j a t he might have
Bat there was a load uf politicial guilt, porson- known that he diasohy nn
h! and hereditary, still resting upon him, in the examination of the office je“ct ot adjudication.”
of ,l« -d—. . No ordinary
Pi!!« Here.gain,Ihe pro..,.,to of,ho Addrj.
which should put his sincerity to the test, and <° l* ro ‘ lf ls i W« 19 “.«"» *
place an impassable barrier between him and «« ‘ ha ‘ presented in the Circular, and
his former party, was indispensable. And what | « ll ?? atlon s ° P llice(! “ £ m ^° « n ,',’P 1 - v . , °
sacrifice was so natural, what pledge so perfect,
as this private denunciation ! Nor does the et-
fret seem to have been miscalculated^ over
rated. Mr. Jefferson declares that it raise
Mr. Adams in his mind. Its eventual cense
qeiices were highly and permanently advanta
geous to Mr. Adams. And though he assured
the Address and not to the Circular. My own
allegation is applied to the Circular, and in
these words—“Mr. G. does mistake, both as
to the person whose right urns decided upon and
as to the decision made, as he might have as
certained by an examination in the office of
the Clerk of ihe H of R.—J/y seat in the
‘connected with ° . her |n C ^ naturally; thai Mr. G. alluded .o .hat case;
ended io his elevation nrinriules^of ore and notwithstanding the production of there-*
indeed, according to h.s ? wn I"™ JT bho i" my case of 1825,1 still think that was
sumptive evidence, requite a. <jffertt»f the K f. |() R)r 0>s thoughti when , lis C ir-
chanty which bel.eveth all things, to gam «L ul(ir ^„ ttrilton . This is not however of
Republic indisputableftcUmJ^J
foreborne to reiterate his injurious insinuations. “ nder thc of Georgia, That repor con
But as they now rest wholly upon tho sanction la ".' 9 «^ ence ” our .tatute, nor ,s the de-
.. ... i„„-„ „,i,:_i, c- ciston made mcontraventionofnt. The report
of his opinion, ® 1 * . . „. nnjt ,| n , n | is ill these words—"That in compliance with
alone possesses, • . , i nve the instructions contained in tho resolution of
conxtder, how farthese circumstance may have |ho Hqusd ofthe2Wl of February, they (the
heated his immag a . . , i-i committee) have obtained from the Depart-
equanimity, and gi n ^ _ _ , | ment of State, certain documents in relation to
of tho members returned
proceed -hp,. m n hrinf examination ofi: « Geo.gia, which they^ ask
liavin" relation to tho war-
gecl .ro, .hat ho hud no knowledge of such ho- U»CZ| j*™
got ia turns.
The other measures, to which Mr. Adams
alludes, wuro of the most public character; and
the most important of them bettor known, ir
theii day, to others, than they could be to him
residing in a foreign country : and if the chain
by which those measures are connected with
the supposed plot shall appear to be wholly im
aginary, these measures will remain to be sup
ported, as they ought to be, on their own mer
its. Tim letter from4ho Gov. of Nova Srco-
tin, as will presently bo seen, is of no possible
signifiranco in any view, but that of having
constitu cd the only information (ns ho says)
which Mr. Adams communicatod to Mr. Jef
ferson at the onie of his first,, and only confi
dential interview. It was written in the sum
mer of 1807, this country being then in a state
of peace. The Governor’s correspondent is
to this hour unkown to us. Iio was not, says
Mr. Adams, a‘loader’of tlm Federal party.—
The contunis of the letter were altogether idle,
but thc effect supppsed by Mr. Adams to be
contompla oil by tho writer, could bo produced
only by giving them publicity. It was commu
nicated to Mr. Adams without any injunction
of secrecy. He has no doubt it was shewn to
others. Its object was, he supposes, to accred
it a calumny, th it Mr. Jefferson, and his meas
ures, were subservient to France. That the
British government were informed of a plan,
determined upon by France, to affect a con
quest of the British Provinces on this continent
and a revolution in die government of the Uni
ted States, us pionns to which, they were first
to produce a war between the United States and
England. A letter of this tenor wai,no doubt
sliewu to Mr. Adams, as wc must believe upon
bis word. The discovery would not be sur
prising, that British, as well as French officers,
and citizens, in a time of peaco wifi) this coun
try, availed themselves of many channels for
conveying tlieir speculations and stritagems to
other innocent ears ns well as to those of Mr.
'Adams, witlfa view to influence public opinion,
Bui the subject mattsr of the letter was un ab-
Aii- n»siy.oiiriw lves in the public opinion. Bin surdilv.—Who-did mujtnow that-in 1807, af-
whilst we did not wish for-uiy such result, so ter the battle of Traf ilgar, the crippled navy
neither were we disposed lo shrink from it. 4 of Frauco could ooi uadertako to transport e-
it i,e racy. , ,.. was elected a member of Congress during the
„ the firs, place, Wt solemnl^ditavowall ^ ofhif ^ t|)e £ 0|m of S “ ain|
- - jf^k'eofsuck apraj • , . I in the character of Minister Plenipotentiary
»/the mention,of it, * f l/ P * from the United States—The committee are of
tion inhabitants of the States from which they
were respectively returned, with the facts ofife
case, and their opinion thereon ; and that the
committee have power to send for persons and
papers.” The Committee of Elections w^j
not constituted therefore a tribunal to try
right to a seat under tho law of Georgia, big
specially instructed to enquire ns,to a particy. J
lar point, whether I was at the if^io of mv c-
C| | lection an inhabitant of the Stale from wliicb{
iv was returned ; this is the only point considered
ii- in the report—the only one on which the com.
‘ niittee presented facts and expressed an o|ii n .
ion, and tho only one decided by tho House.,
tho general rule df presumption of which Mr
G, speaks in relation to the decision of tribu.*
nals, admitting it,to be a fair professional rule
of presumption, is inapplicable to the decisions
of a committee acting under special instructions
to report facts and opinions on a particular
point.—Mr. G. errs in supposing there is any
discrepancy between the. conclusion of the
Committee and the act of Georgia. The act
of Georgia and the Constitution of the United
Stales agree in this, that a person lobe eligible
as a member of the House of Representatives,
must he an inhabitant of (lib State when elect!
ed—Our act requires that the person should
havo been nn inhabitant three years. The
character of the inhabitancy required, is the I
same in the statute and constitution; the ouiy j
difference is that of time—“An octual rc«•
deuce” is required by neither. Mr. G. ha
been led into ah error by too hasty an examin-1
ation of our statute—the words of the act are,
'“that no persen shall be elected a Represents-1
live in Congress, who has not been an inhaU-1
tant of this State three years next preceding I
his election, &c.”—in the proviso, which Mr,
G. has not accurately remembered, the wr.rdy
used arc, “Provided, no certificate or comnus. I
sion shall is^uo until satisfactory proof is pro. I
duccd, that tne tax of such person has beta
regularly paid as above mentioned, and that he I
has actually had the residence, therein presmi, I
ed that is, the residence of an inluhitaut fix
three years preceding his election—“an arts.
al residence," at the time of the election, and
actually having thc residence prescribed by the
statute of three years inhabitancy, are not e.
quivaleM things. Mr. G. uses them aseqitiv.
alent, and that creates the necessity lie suppo.
ses the committee labored under to report *
gaiftst my right to a scat under the act of Geor
gia. This necessity however would not luuj
existed, had the statute corresponded with hill
statement. A Representative of the Unite!I
States in a foreign country, while absent frog
his country, has an actual residence in thc St:iii|
to which he belongs, as completely as a Rep-|
resentative in Congress from the State whili
perlbrmin^person-dly his duties in Washing-1
ton for half the year. While In Madrid oil
official duty, I was as much an Inhabitant, a
actually a resident of Georgia, as Mr, G. not
is, while in Washington as a tteprosunutiti
from the State. Ills examination of the Cbdd|
office of the House of Representatives imtlioi-
ises me therefore, to repeat, that Mr. Gdine
was mistaken in supposing my tight to nsei
under the act of Georgia was ever questiunelj
in the House of Representatives, or that 1 ua
ever the subject of an adjudication in that badjj
in which the provisions of our statute tvd
brought into view for discussion or decisiotw
the question made in the case quoted by lit!
was oil the provisions of ihe Constitution,
it was deckled exclusively pu constitutiwd
grounds.
Mr. Gilmer supposes me to have denied luj
statement, that according to the opinion «f
practice of former Governors, the provisii*
of the election law were unconstitutional, M
much as I affirm that the l»w lias been cora,di(l
with so as to render decisions hy former Gud
ernors unnecessary, and tlut the practice ofw
Governor sustains his assertion except Grd
Clark’s ; and in answer, offers to acknotvMfl
that ho has erred if I will give to the poUtl
the copies of the proof of eligibility which thr
members of Congress produced to Govetw
Troup during his administration—Had 1 un i
any assertions about the practice of former Wj
vernors as to the proofs of eligibility, 1 slid!
with great pleasure ni.ikn public all the d :r -j
meats in relation to them placed in the oil j
during Governor Troop’s adiniiilstratioft—H
refering only to tho provisions enforced in q
G’s. case the practices and opinions of fo«l
Governors in regard to that point alone «l
brought into view— 1 Theexamination of the 1
cords and files of the department was-matM
ascertain tho practice on that point, And th-’ -I
ter of Mr. Pierce relates to it, exclusively—1
public did not I hope misunderstand my fj
pose. It is not improbuble that lie, Mr. Gj
correct. Commissions may have issued to |*j
sons who havo not furnished proofs of then
mont of tlieir taxes and of three years in^j
tancy of the State, and commissions underSj
t0 ®° | opinion, that there is nothing in Mr. Forsyth’s
condly, While it is obv.ously laipossible for us ^ ^ d - lifle# h , m f { - - -
to controvert evidence of wh«ch we aje tgnor- |n ^ HouJ|J ; \ 0 capi(cily m which ||e acled
possible roWngany facts which can bo con- excludes tho idea, that by the performance of j circumstances may have been issued during
sidered evidence w bear upon tho designs or I l>s duty abroad ho ceased to be an inhabitaiit i ilt0 administration. Former Governors*
measures of those, who at the time of Mr. | of *. h ° United States, and insomuch as he had have thought the law in these provisionsunc
measures ”i .“'ose, who ai uib umo i no inhabitancy in any-other part ot the Union • • r 1
Adams .ntev.ew with M . ^"O", end af- (han Georgi ^ h , be considered as in the
forwards, during * . P same situation us before tho acceptance of tho
m tho public £ f “ n I a PP0'mtment. The committee respectfully ask
uppointinent,
| lcavo to bo discharged from tho further consid-
e subject refe
.... . , eration of the subject referred to them.”
Mr. Gi mer lias thought it necessary to pub- Tfc queilion discussed aud determined is
tboCoDstilotion of Uoi.od S.u.e,,
ii correct judgment of the points of controver'
sy between him and tlie Executive. In tho
execution uf this task, Mr. Gilmer does not
suffer himself to see that there is but one point
in the election law, ou which there ia a
S j)e
„ a. Tho latter is
neither quoted nor referred to, was not exarnin
ed, and I believe not thought of by the com
mittee who made, oi the House of Representa
tives who confirmed, the report. That our
enco of opinion between us, requiring any dis- ,u e“ b ‘.' v « ac ‘ w f “ s d>*r«gardod by them, with-
cussion. His remarks and arguments ate found- °. ut ev,do “‘ :e of aa > k| nd, that it was before
ed upon the erroneous sssumptjo". that all the ,h ° c “"“’ Mr ' u G * ,nfar, ‘ because‘ he
provisions oftlie election law of 1799 arc to be “ ct of , 1799 ' e T'! ros an ™ tua ' residence" in
discussed, and that by shewing, that in relation G * or 8 ,a * »"?. " tho c ?. w . m " , “ h;,d it
to some of them, the statement in his circular obhgatory, they would have been compelled to
may be correct, that he must stand quite jus.i- W rt againat tho validuy of Mr. Forsyth’se-
tied imho eyes of the public for every thing ‘“i-and the decw.ons of every tnbunal are
contained in it. There is but one point of the P resumad “ be made in reference .to ail the
election law involved tn his casc-the provis- ,aws wl,,cl . 1 co . n,ro1 ‘ h ° SS?* 1 of l hom - T ,u
ion which requires a person elected to signily 5 omra,,, .° "* ,h ° L y c ?!: 1824 ‘ «««» under the
his ucceptance within a limited time—his fail- ,nslrucl,ons “V. 110 n ° u ! e T- ,he, £. ,n9lract, " ns
ureto comply with that provision is admitted, I '^ e F. e con ' nined ia n re *°l utwn offered by Mr.
and the act required of the Executive in con- ®' ,d y» whose right ton seat as a member from
sequence of that failure, has been performed, M»«"Chusoltt was contested, because lie was
The denials made in answer to Mr. G’s circa- wh _ e 1 n « ,e . c . ,ed * res ' d,,, C ,n Washington, holding
lar, have all of them relation to that part of the * C1 .« rk *b'P '« «he Department of State i it
aet, and to that only—the testimony published ,n wo . rds Resolved, that the com
mas directed to that part of tho act, and to that rat ? ee Elections, lo winch was referred sov-
only—and if it is not satisfactory to thc public, eral l»Pf" «■!“««'“« L »ta n^hl of the member
uo satisfaction can be offered by tho Chief Ma- ^turned from Norfolk Dwtr.ct in Massachu-
gistrate . I setts, to his seat in this House, be instructed to
' ‘ I cannot therefore, however it may suit Mr.] «port whether any other members returned to
G*aconveBieucCi pciiuii him to ubuudoa thoi House not uttho tinio of thoir clcc-
stitutional, and might therefore consider w 1
selves authorized not to regard them—lf|
act differently { actuated by a belief thala^J
adherence to all parts oftlie law will P u! t j
sons elected to but little inconvenienconnuj
not deprive them of any right; nnd from
willingness to disregard any. part of the *JT
which has received the usual taoctionsel
State and been in operation for thirty yetfj
To return to the disputed point—there
rorcommitlcd in a former nddross which li
this occasion to correct—when I wrote. 11 '1
not apprized of any decision huving beco >
by formor Governors on the point inv°l’'
Mr. G’s case—tho opinion expressed l>y
Jarkson in Ids correspondence with tne A|
ney an J Solicitor General in the ease
Taliaferro, was found after the addre« w L ‘l
pared for the press aud ill the hands ol tl‘J' j
ter—as that opinion is buforc the P u r|
should Jiopo that Mr. G. is convinced tpj
tho provision enforced against nini th® J
and practice of the Governor who wj 13 *
to execute the law of 1799, was in « ^
conformable to mine, and in supposing ,|1 ‘
Jackson, one of the Governors of *F (
wrote, believed the provision cnforccu^.
formality, of no compulsory bl)lig aUoD ', |
milted a palpaple mistake. ' , J
In taking a final leave of this sulij^ j
is not my intention again to trouble t 1 1
about it, I cannot but remark upon 1
nacity with which Mr. G.dwellsupon I
of power in the Executive to lake wj
in Congress bestowed by tho
veto upon the People’s will. 1 j
mode of Boating this matter oblige™'