Newspaper Page Text
’4Pr
tl)c jttJfttcljmaH.
J. 1I. CHRISTY, EDITOR.
A VINDICATION
.OF THE IION AUGtJfITIN S. CLAYTON,
Agatnst the aspersions of George R.
Gilmer, as contained in his Sketches
of Georgia.
To the People of Grorgia.—The re
putation of your public men* who have
served you in the council or the field, is
a common heritage, and I claim the pri
vilege of vindicating the character of one
whose memory is cherished with affec
tion, and whose virtues are a never-
failing source of admiration. In the
exercise of this right I feel that I am
doing justice alike to the living and the
dead. I scorn to plead the sanctified
immunities of the grave: I ask no in
dulgence to the feelings of those who
survive ;jl challenge the strictest scrutiny
into his every act, whether official or
private; I appeal to his cotemporaries
at the bar or in the councils of the nation,
to speak out, if they know any thing
which attaches to his fame, and I call
up the records to protect the consistency
of his character and the integrity of his
life. „
I have-had placed in my hands a book
entitl-d “ Sketches of some of the First
Settlers of jfclpper Geoigia, of the Chero-
kecs, and 4 .the Author,” by George U.
Gilmer, containing, among other things,
a wilful, wanton, and malignant attack
upon the character and intergrity of
.1 udge Clayton It is my purpose in this
vindication to show the meanness of the
assassin and the misrepresentations to
which he has resorted. As to the book
I have but little to say ; and if the author
had confined himself to telling that his
wife “ gave Inina salutation worth more
than all the shaking of hands and plaudits
which lie had received Iron the listeners
and lookers-on” when he made a speech
in Congress, with which he hhnsslf was
very much pleased; or how “ Mr.
Adams took occasion to speak of him in
the most flattering terms, when he took
out his great grand-father’s watch, and
held it up to the Speaker, and bowed
out of the hall of the House of Repre
sentatives,” and announced that his right
of representing the people of Georgia
had terminated; or of the ‘‘mockingbird
that flew against his window” when
everybody thought he was going to die;
or to the collection of “ minerals, Indian
pipes, idols, amulets, lances, and arrow
heads” which adorn his domicil—it would
have passed as the innocent garrulity of
an old man without the benefit of ex
pcriencc. But ns lie 1ms thought to
rssail and impugn the motives of Others,
he must bear the consequences which
truth and justice exact in their defence.
Ilis attack upon Judge Clayton is
three-fold: first, his intelligence as
lawyer'; second, he endeavors to create
the impression that, in his judicial char
acter, when :he.controversy between the
Cherokeea and the State of Georgia was
t»« favored the etcneral
Government, and not the State; and
thirdly, lie insinuates that his mind was
influenced to this course by the relation
ship which existed between him and
Mr. Wirt, who was the attorney of the
Cherokees before the Supreme Court of
the United States. As to the first, I
have no disposition to discuss in this
controversy other than incidental; with
regard to the last two, I will show to
the satisfaction of every honest man their
utter and/complete futility.
To have a proper understanding of
the points, it will be well to state that
while Mr. Gilmer was governor of Geor
gia, lie received some time in the month
of June, 1S30, a letter from Wm. Wirt
informing him that “the Cherokee
nation had consulted him professionally
as iu their rights under their various
treaties with the United States', and,
among other questions, whether the
State of Georgia had a right to extend
her laws compulsively into their nation
and suggesting to his excellency that
“the decision may he expedited by
making a casej^y consent, if that course
should suit the views of the State of
Georgia.” The governor declined, with
out expressing much indignation or ex
hibiting much courtesy, the proposition
which he thought proceeded from di
honorable motives. That I may do him
justice, I give his own words : “ No one
knows better than yourself that the
governor would grossly violate his duty
and cxcc*-d his authority by complying
‘ with such a suggestion, and that hot
the letter and the spirit of the powers
conferred by the Constitution upon the
SupremcX’ourt forbid its adjudging such
a case."’ .All tlys happened in 1830
in 18-'>4'“tbe same year with the puldi
cation ofj Brtrnuni’s Biography, his bio
graphy appears, and informs iis tliat he
" never felt so indignant as he did upon
reading $*r> Wirt's letter.” To under
stand why. lie gives the following rca
sons, page 354 of his hook :
“Mr. Wirt’s first wife was my kins
woman, - the daughter of Dr. George
Gilmer, of Albemarle, the brother of
my grandfather. Mr, Wirt was poor, un
known, and undistinguished, when Dr
Gilmer took him into his house, gav
him his daughter, and introduced him
into the society of his friends—-then the
best in that pari of the country of his re
sidenc*. .Soon after the death of his
first wife. Mr. Wirt removed to Rich
mond, and then <o Norfolk, and was in
danger of being utterly ruined by dissi
pat ion, when lie again prospered by
marrying ihe daughter of Col. Gamble,
of Richmond, my wife’s first cousin
My wife lived with Mr. Wirt's family
in Richmond when she was a little girl
going to school, Mr. Wirt had been so
great a favorite; w«th my own family
friends, that he was named for his exe-
* cuter by my grandfather Gilmer.. His
jiioco, a young lady who had resided
rith him during the 1 foot his first wife,
after Dr. Gilmer’s death, taken into
house by my wife's fatherrMr. Grat-
io remained until
>or.
me
X
•'S’*', *■
age, high standing, and intimate rela
tionship with my family, friends, would
induce me to doat his request what.I
would refuse to. ? another. A fee of
twenty thousand dollars was certainly a
very urgent inducement to every means
of success.”
I pass over the fact, that while-lie con
sidered a dishonorable proposition had
been made to him Upon the presump
tion that they were of the same family,
and that he never felt so indignant in
his life at receiving the letter, not one
word of indignation is expressed in his
answer. I refer to this passage in his
biography to show bow low that man’s
mind must be who suspects that Mr.
Wirt was governed by such considera
tions in making the proposition he did,
There had been nothing in the past
history of Mr. Wirt’s life to excite tho
least suspicion of dishonor; the guilt
might have been somewhere else. “ All
things appear yellow to the jaundiced
eye.”
About twenty days after Mr. Wirt’s
letter was received, Mr. Gilmer addres
sed a letter to the Hon. Augustin S.
Clayton, who was theft judge of the
western circuity informing him that he
had received a formal notice from a very
distinguished lawyer of Maryland that
he .was counsel for the Cherokee In
dians, and giving the contents of Mr.
Wirt’s letter, without mentioning his
name. . This letter is found in his book,
page 356, and. strange to say, ho omits
to publish Judge C.’s answer. My dis
tance from Georgia prevents me from
giving the same, though I am able to
supply what I have no doubt Was the
purport of it from another document
He informs the judge in said letter,
dated July 6th, 1830, that “ I am induc-
to write thus freely and fully, be
cause it is understood in W asnington
city that you are desirous that the Fed
eral court should assume thejurisdictiou
of determining the extent of the rightof
the State to govern its Indian popula
tion and then continues in his book
Judge Clayton, to whom this letter
was addressed, was related by marriage
to Mr. Wirt id several ways, and his
association with Mr, Wirt and his
family very intimate.” In this letter,
and the subsequent statement, there are
two misrepresentations on which to
build his calumny; first, that lie, Judge
Clayton, was desirous of submitting the
question to the adjudication of the Fed
eral court; and secondly, that iiis asso
ciation with Mr, Wirt and family were
very intimate. No man in Georgia, I
assert without the fear of successful con
tradiction, can point to a syllable ever
written,or a word ever uttered,that Judge
Clayton ever desired any suqji thing.
All his writings prove the contrary; per
haps n oman in Georgia ever contended
more strenuously for the rights of the
States, or was more jealous of the as
sumptions of the Federal Government.
As to his intimacy with Mr. Wirt's fami
ly, my recollection is, that up lo this
time he hbd never seen any member of
it, including Mr. Wirt himself. In his
Atticus he had animadverted with some
severity upon his conduct; besides, he
was the warm personal and political
friend of Mr. Crawford in the contro
versy with Mr. Calhoun, wherein Mr.
Wirt was on the other side; and in an
article publiseed in the Georgia Journal
of April 21st, 4831, signed A. B, he
spoke of Mr. Wirt in such manner, as
one of the witnesses against Mr. Craw
ford, as to show that his associations
with him and his family could not have
been intimate. But why this reference
to the relationship of Mr. Wirt in this
connection? Does he intend to insinu
ate that his judician decisions were
biased by any sueli consideration ? He
can mean nothing else ; and none but a
low, mean, debased heart alone could
have justified such a conclusion.
Let us see how far the charge of A
desire on the part of Judge Clayton to
submit the queston to the arbitrament of
the supreme court is sustained by the
records. In Augusl following this let
ter, in a charge to - the grand jury of
Clark county, he holds this language:
Besides the fact officially announced
in the council of the - Indians lately as
sembled, I have received information
from the Executive branch of this Gov
ernment, that counsel have’ been em
ployed by the Cherokee nation to raise
for the adjudication of the Supreme
Court of the United States the question,
‘whether the State has a right to pass
laws for the government of the Indians
residing within its limits.’ Now, with
out intending the least disrespect to
that court, to whose constitutional au
thority this and all other State courts
wi'l, I hope, cheerfully submit, this ques
tion can qcver go Irom a court in which
I preside-juniil the people of the State
yiclff it, Cither from a conviction of er
ror, ascertained by their own tribunals
or the. more awful sense of their weak
ness to retain it; and it is useless to dis
guise the matter—to this issue the ques
tion must come, if the State is true 1q
itself.” Again, in another part of the
same charge, he says : “So long, how
ever, as the law remains unrepealed
the country has my solemn pledge that
it shall be faithfully and impaYtially ad-
ministe : ed, so far as l am concerned.. I
only require the aid of public opinion,
ami the arm of the executive authority,
and no court on earth besides our own
shall ever be troubled with this ques
tion*"
How malicious then is the allegation
and how badly sustained by the. records,
I will venture to say that not a con
temporary of Judge Clayton henrd-that
he desired to let this qnestion go before
tho Suprem e Court of the United States
and from the low insinuation, that he
was'influenced by his relationship with
M r, Wirt,l am justified in believing that
it originated in tho brain ofGeorgo R
Gilmer.
Again, at page 388of this biography
we have a repetition of the calumny:
“By a clause of the law all agents ol
e United States were exempted "
i operation. The judge of u *
'“a which included the
tofv, the relative of Mr 1
gined that be had read somewhere that
missionaries among the Cherokees were
agents of the Government He discharg
ed soveral - missionaries who were
brought before him upon .a writ of habe
as corpus, upon his own assumption
that missionaries were agfcnts of the
United States Government, and there
fore exempt by law from arrest.”
He has again to resort-to misrepresen
tation to keep up the calumny, without
the sagacity this time to perceive that
the decision was prejudicial to; the in
terest of his relative; for If the mis
sionaries were discharged the case could
not go to the supreme court; and unless
it Went to the supreme court, Mr. -Wirt
would not get the fee of twenty thou
sand dollars, which Mr. Gilmer in his
book says “was certainly a very urgent
inducemen t to every means of success.’ 1
One would suppose, from his asser
tion, that the court had assumed that
the missionary'was the agent of the
Government, without, any evidence to
establish the fact. At the March term
ofGwinnett superior court, 1831, Wor
cester and others were brought before
the court upon a habeas corpus charg
ed with violating the law of Georgia
which prevented all white persons from
restding within the limits of the Chero
kee nation without taking an oath to
support and defend the constitution and
law 1 ; of the State of Georgia. It is use
less to quote more of the opinion of the
court than is necessary to show that
there was evidence indicating that these
missionaries were agents of the General
Government. The extract runs thus :
“Under a l the. foregoing views of the
subject, I am of the opinion that the law
is perfectly constitutional, and that its
provisions must be carried into effect.
But there is one provision in it which
two of the individuals in custody seem,
for reason best known to themselves, to
have overlooked, and which will dis
charge them from their present arrest,ifl
have been correctly informed as to the
facts. Both of them are missionaries,
and one of them a postmaster. In the
first character they are there with the
consent of the General Government,
and, as its agents, are in the nation for
the purpose of civilizing and christiani
zing the Indians ; and as evidence of
their being Government agents, they
have the disbursement of large sums ef
public, money for the aforesaid objects.
Subsequent to this, this same Worces
ter and eleven others were' convicted
and sent to the penitentiary, Judge
Clayton presiding ; and yet Mr. Gilmer
in his book omits to mention the fact
that the “judge of one of the circuits
which included the Cherokee Territo
ry, the relative of Mr. Wirt, presided
on the occasion.
It will thus be observed, that If he,
the judge, had been correctly informed
as to the fads, they were b6th of them
agents of the General Government, and
disbursed large sums of money in their
public capaciiy; and yet Mr. Gilmer
prints in a book that he discharged
these men upon his own assumption
that missionaries were agents of the
United States. If this were so, why is
the fact referred to in the opinion that
they disbursed public funds ? I have no
means of coming at the testimony, ex
ccpt from the opinion of the cotfrt, and
such is the vigilance of the legal fra
ternity that it i-« unreasonable to suppose
that they would have permitted such a
statement to go uncoutradicted. It is,
therefore, not to be expected that jus
tice could or would be done either to
the acts or motives of Judge Clayton by
one who is so gratuitous in his asser
tions.
Besides the positive assertion to the
contrary in h:s charge to the grand jury
of Clark county, (an extract from
which I -have quoted above,) that no
other court had or should have the ju
risdiction of the question as long as he
had the honor to preside, the whole pre
vious life and writings of Judge Clay
ton stamp the allegation with impossi
bility. He had contended, upon every
occasion, as a member oi the legislature,
as a judge on the bench, in his political
essays, and in his public speeches,for the
rights of Georgia in this controversy
It is not saying too much to assert a;
my firm belief, that he had written more
than any other ten men in Georgia in
vindication of her rights in the contro
versy with the General Government
in regard to.her Indian relations, and
yet George R. Gilmer, who was hi
enemy when he was. in life, enilarors
to leave behind as history the assump
tion that his leanings were against his'
native State, and in favor of the United
States. The bare mention of the fact,
without a comment, should be sufficient
to bring to any human face a blush
where there was a heart which had the
sensibility to feei. And then, too, the
insinuation that he was influenced by
his relationship to the distinguished
Wirt, who was tho attorney of the In
dians before the Supreme - Court o:f the
United States, betrays a low, base, de
graded meanness, to which falsehood
could be no addition. To the contempo
raries of Judge Clayton, it would have
been only sufficient to have announced
that George R. Gilmer had printed a
book, and published as matter of histo
ry these things against him; but fo
the benefit of the rising generation, who
are not familiar with the history of
Georgia at lliistime, I have felt it my
duty to be more elaborate than I other
wise would. 1 have, I think, shown the
utter improbability of the truth of either
assumption by his accuser, and prove
from the records, that upon every oc
casion where he rises above an insin
uation and attempts to assert a fact, he
is not sustained. One word as to the
assertion that Judge Clayton’s relations
with Mr. Wirt and family were very
intimate, and I am done. According to
judge of the western circuit, was never
at his house, unless it was after January.
1832. I will go one step father. I do
not now remember- that Judge Clayton
ever wrote a letter to, or received one
Mr. Wirt in his life, and my con
front,
fidential relations with him were such
that I would have known something of
it, if there had existed anything like in
timacy between them. What occurred,
after he.was elected to Congress, here
in Washington city, in receiving and
returning the civilities and courtesies of
life, I kuow not; they may have been
intimate, but it was subsequent to the
judicial action against which Mr. Gilmer
lias made his misrepresentations and
directed his insinuations. I do not give
importance to the assertion that he was
intimate with Mr. Wirt and his family,
because I attach any impropriety to it
if the fact existed, but to show the utter
unworthiness of what is intended as
history, when it is written to gratify a
personal revenge or is the offspring of
disappointed ambition.
There are many other remarks in Mr.
Gilmer’s book relative to Judge Clay
ton which 1 deem it unnecessary to no
tice. Suffice it, he never speaks of
him in respectful terms, of which I make
ho complaint; he had the right to con
sult his own taste in writing his own book,
ing a candidate, and desirous that J udge
Clayton should be, obtained a48utilated
copy of my lettpr to Liddell, and used
it to excite the nullifiers into opposition
to my nomination. I was in Virginia
whilst this intrigue was going on. Up
on being informed of it, I wrote to Lid
dell that I had heard of his having com
municated lo others the contents of my
letter, and asked him to send me a
copy. The sorry fellow havingno suspi
cion that I had kept a copy answered
that he thought the letter did me great
honor, sent a copy of the part which he
knew to be offensive to the nullifiers,
and omitted that which qualified what
made it so, averring that his eyes were
so sore, and he so unwell, that it was as
much as he could do to copy what he
sent., I afterwards saw Judge C'ayton
and General Harris, who had been very
busy circulating Liddell’s mutilated
copy of my letter ; showed them the en
tire copy, and convinced them that they
had been misled.”
Where no records exist to substan
tiate facts, we are dependent entirely
upon recollection } and while I would
not say that Mr. Gilmer, in .this narra
tive, has suggested an untruth, 1 have
no idea that he has given all the facts as
they existed at the time. My recollection
of the facts are these ; On account of
limtlimi ‘Mrjinnin ♦ |is
LAW, ORDER, AWO THE CONSTITUTION.
ATHENS, CrA.
THURSDAY MORNING, FEB. 15, 1855.
J5"Mr. William Dostkb. of Atluitu, is our au
thorized Agent in Cherokee Georgia.
This paper U filed, and may at all times bo seen
at the ^Reading Room of Prof Holloway, 344 Strand,
London
and I am not disposed to deprive him of Mr. Gilmer’s position, which was a per
fect willingness to receive favors from
the State-Rights party, whilst at the
same time he was denouncing their
principles to their opponents ia letters,
around which he threw the sanctity ot
privacy, many, many State-Rights men
determined not to support him.
While lie and his friends wtre very
anxious to secure the nomination of the
State-Rights party, or perhaps it was
after he had been nominated, the letter
to Liddell was produced, to which he
gave a meaning and signification that
removed some of the objections which
had been urged against him. Judge
■ Clayton or his friends had nothing to do
| with liny intrigue to defeat his nomina
tion, or procure or circulate any mutilat
ed letter for any such purpose. My
opinion is, that a correspondence took
place between Mr. Gilmer and Gen.
Harris at the time, which I have no
doubt would have thrown more light ori
the subject than Mr. Gilmer wad willing
should meet the public gaze.
I have one extract to notice in his
book, and I conclude. At page 485 he
say’s:
“I was Opposed to recliartering the
Bank, and yet did not approve of the
means used by General Jackson for put
ting it down. The Georgia members of
Congress who had been elected on the
same ticket with myself were favorable
to the Bank, and partisan opponents of
General Jackson.”
This refers to the Congressof 1S33—
*4, at Which time the lions. Roger B.
Gamble, Seaborn Jones, Thomas F.
Foster, Richard II. Wilde, Augustin S,
Clayton, and, if I mistake not,.Tames M
Wayne, were elected with Mr. Gihner
upon the same ticket; and by reference
to pages 4S3—’4, of House Journal for
the first session of the 23d Congress, it
will be perceived—with the exception of
Mr. Wilde, who voted for the Bank,
and Mr. Gamble, who was absent—the
rest voted with Mr. Gihner against the
Bank. Why this misrepresentation in
a book that purports to be. history, I am
at a loss to understand
I have said nothing of his book in rela
tion either td the credit it will reflect up
on the State, the information it gives, or
the place it will occupy in the wprld as a
literary production., I have not sought
a controversy, and .therefore I have
avoided every tiling like attack. Besides,
I should be justly chargeable with more
than an ordinary malignity to subject
his book and his taste to the rules of criti-
solitary enjoyment he derives there
from.
In this communication I have not ap
peared before the^public to praise Judge
Clayton—I come to defend him : and
in this connection it will not be consid
ered inappropriate to refer briefly to the
cause which separated him and Mr. Gil
mer from those relations wh ch existed
prior to the controversy about which I
am going to speak. The cause of dif
ference was not any of the cases I have
referred to above ; there was -no con
flict between the executive or the judi
ciary of Georgia in either the case of
Tassels, the Indian who was hung
for murder, or the missionaries who
were first discharged as coming under
the provision which exempted the U. S.
agents from the operation of the law, or
those who were afterwards sent to the
pen tentiary, having no right' to claim
such exemption. The collision was on
accout of the decision of the judge in
the case of Canatoo, i Cherokee Indian
charged with digging gold in his own
nation, which the legislature of Georgia
had made a penitentiary offence. The
ground upon which that decision was
made and the law was unconstitutional
and violatied numerous treaties made
with the Indians, and expressly guaran
tying the undisturbed possession and
occupancy of all their lands not ceded
to the whites. I am not going to argue
the correctness of that decision ; at no
very distaitt day I contemplate present
ing to the public the life and writings
of its author, at which time I trust I shall
be able to do justice to the legal ability
by which it was sustained. My present
purpose is to appeal to the public, and
in that public to include his worsLcncmy.
George R. Gilmer, to know if Judge
Clayton did not deserve, in what was
intended as a history of the controversy
at that time, to have had justice meted
>ut to his motives. What are the facts ?
Mr. Gihner and he belonged to the same
political party; they had been personal
friends; every inducement upon earth,
save the conscientious discharge of duty,
existed why a contrary decision should
have been made. His own political
friends had passed the law; he in com
mon with every citizen of Georgia was
anxious to have the Indians removed to
the west of the Mississippi; fiis decision
he knew must have the effect to embar
rass that hoped-for object; the discovery
of gold had phrenzied the people, and
all were solicitous for an occupancy of . . . _ . _
the Territory ; his re-election or defeat C1 ° m » aa lt ,s > I have no defence against
The editor of this paper expects
to attend all the Courts of this Circuit
and a portion of those of adjoining Cir
cuits during the Spring riding—where
he hopes to meet with all his old sub
scribers, with their “pockets full of| * n S s > or w at
rocks,” ready to settle off past indebt
edness, and hundreds of new ones,
ready to give his paper a trial. We
have fallen upon stirring times—the
war in Europe now pending, and the
approaching State election, together
with the current news of the day, will
make papers more interesting than usu
al, and we confidently anticipate large
accessions to our already rapidly-in
creasing list.
We learn that Dr. Daniel Lee,-
Professor of Agricultural Chemistry in
Franklin College, (University of Geor
gia,) will commence his course of lec
tures on the subjects pertaining to his
department, on the 1st Tuesday in
March. The lectures are open to the
public. *
ESP There is, just now, a great
dearth of news, and of everything inter
esting in the newspaper world—besides
which, we hate been absent at Court.
If, therefore,our readers find the Watch
man unusually dry this week, we trust
they will attach no blame, whatever, to
the editor. .
E5P We regret that in the communt
cation of “ M. E.” published in our last
paper, a very material error escaped.
Our correspondent was made to say
that the span of the bridge, from one
abutment to the other, would be “ not
more than three hundred feet," when it
should have been “ about one hundred
feet.”
KdP* The Southern Cultivator and tho
Soil of the South for February, are both
upon our table. We again call the at
tention of our agricultural friends to
these excellent periodicals, devoted to
their interests.
the unkindness of directing public atten
tion to it. The misrepresent.ilions which
abound in his “Sketches,” when he
speaks of the acts and motives of other
men, are so common and so frequent,
that I have the charity to grant him the
benefit of the habit, to rescue his own
character from the infamy into which his
autobiography has plunged it.
P. Clayton.
Washington City, Jan. 23, 1855.
Washington,’ Feb. 9^-.
00" Senator A. C. Dodge, of Iowa,
was confirmed as Minister to Madrid.
The appointment excited universal as
tonishment. .
td^ r ’ Two slave boys were lately sent
from Richmond, Va., in charge of a
Mr. Graham of that place, destined for
Kentucky. They were to go by way
of the Ohio river, but finding it not
navigable, they took the Ohio Central
Railroad, intending to cross the State
of Ohio. An accident occurred to the
train at Guernsey, by which they were
detained long enough for a wril to be
issued, and the boys taken from Gra
ham’s keeping. The Court before
as judge was within sixty days of the
time; there was not the possibility of a
personal benefit to hini or his friends by
discharging the Indian, and yet, in the
face of all these difficulties, he did noth
ing more than what he conceived to be
his duty. For all which I do not claim
for him any credit, but I do th’nk,
that when the true history is written lie
should be exempt from censure. The
sequel was as every one predicted—the
legislature refused to re-elect him judge,
though the people elected him to Con
gress in less than sixty days thereafter
Mr. Gilmer was defeated for Governor
about the same time, having rendered
himself obnoxious to the people of.the
State. It had the effect upon him of
hydrophobia, from which he has never
recovered. He has been snapping and
snarling at every successful statesman
and every political organization in the
State ever since; the clear and pellucid
stream of charity throws him into con
vulsions and he .will soon pass away un
wept, unhonored, and unsung, with the
melancholy remembrance that the only
true services he lias ever rendered his
country or his kind are iiis omissions.
In speaking of political parties subse
quent to the time qf which I hare been
writing, Mr. Gilmer, at page 465 of his
book, has the following passage : “ A
few days after my, return home, ( from
the Auti-Tniff Convention at Milledge
ville,) I received a letter from James
Liddell, a leading member of the legisla
turc: in which he stated that he had heard
a pottion?of my remarks against the doc
trine of nullification ; that he did not
understand the subject, wished to be
informed, and asked me to give him my
views fully, saying that my letter should
be strictly confidential. I wrote to him
what my opinions were about the resolu
tions which had been adopted by the
convention, particularly that which set
forth the extreme opinions of Mrt O ’
houh of the power of a State to control *%The past belongs to God, the present
the legislation of Congress on the sub- only is ours,- and short as it is, there is
> JUDGE CLAYTON.
We devote much of our space this
week, to the. publication of the vindica
tion of Judge Clayton, by his son, P.
Clayton, Esq... We personally know
nothing of the subject-niatter of this
controversy; but it is due to tlie memo^
ry of the distinguished statesman and
jurist, who lived arid labored and died
in this town, that, if his acts have been
misrepresented, or .the purity of his mo
tives brought in question—however high
the authority—that the vindication of
them should appear before the public.—
Most of our readers are doubtless fa
miliar with many of the facts contained
Mr. C.’s vindication and therefore
ESP The Georgia coadjutors of the
National fera, are glorying in the eleo
tion of Wilson! by the Massachusetts
Legislature, and of the notorious Se- *
ward by that of New York, because*
as they say, the Know Nothings are re
sponsible for both—inasmuch as in
Massachusetts they clearly possessed
sufficient strength to elect whom they
pleased, and in New York it is con
tended they held the balance of power
in their hands, and might have defeated
Seward.
We see nothing in this to rejoice overt
It is ever a matter of profound sorrow
to us, to see such men returned to the
U. S. Senate as Wilson is represented
to be, and as Seward has demonstrated
he is. We care not by what party elect
ed—Whigs, Democrats, Know Noth*
not—the result is ever
the saute—a never-ending agitation of
the slavery question. These coadjutors
of the Era, however, rejoice over it*
because they tliiuk they can make it ap
pear that the Know Nothings are
leagued with the Free Soilers. If the
mere fact of sending anti-slavery agita
tors to Congress, be evidence of Free-
soil proclivities, then will these gentle
men convict their own party of being
Free-soilers. Out of their own mouths
are they condemned.
We know that in New York, Massa
chusetts and Ohio, it is extremely diffi
cult to elect a man to any office who is
not, or has not been tinctured with
free soil proclivities. Notwithstanding
all this, however, we had hoped that the
new party would have .scrupulously
avoided even “ the appearance of evil.”
We know not, at this distance from the
scene of action, how the wires were
managed, so as to re-elect Seward, nor
do we know that Wilson is now a Free-
soiler. Perhaps, like many of Presi
dent Pierce’s appointees to office, he
abjured bis Free-soil heresies, previous
to his election, or" intends, like them,
when he reaches Washington, to get
dipped seven times in the Potomac, and
have his leprosy healed.
One thing is certain, however. If
the Know Nothings hope to become a
national party, they must adopt tlie
doctrineof non-intervention, and “touch
not, taste not, handle not” the Aboli
tion, question. The South will act, with
great unanimity, with any party that
will do this—and nothing short of this
will satisfy her. She does not ask the
people of the North to join her in a pro
slavery crusade—she does not expect
this. But she does ask to be let alone ;
and this she is determined to exact of
her “Noriherri allies” of all parties.
prepared to do justice to all—the living
and the dead.
ceased:
remember that Mr. Wirt
s, Georgia, in his life,
—i - — — — -o "* ject of the tariff, stating to him that they
the best of my recollection, Judge Clay- were given to himself,, and not for.oth-
too never saw Mr. Wirt; or any member ^ers or the pqblic, I was thus cautious,
p ' - until after he'ook his seat because I wished to avoid writing any
, 1832, when his thing against my party friends. I kept
a. copy of my letter. When the Demo
cratic State Rights party were about
selecting a candidate for governor jn
th-tt his felativej tlie 1837, those who. we re opposed to my bp-
IdF 1 To such of our friends as have
kindly manifested an interest in our
success, we are pleased to be able to
say, that our circulation has been stead
ily increasing from the first, but since
tlie beginning of the new yetir—not
withstanding the hardness of the times--
it has received a considerable impetus.
If all our friends would just take hold of
the matter and aid us a little, by recom
mending, as far S3 they can conscien
tiously, our paper to the attention of
their neighbors, we would soon have a
circulation much larger than ever pos
sessed by any paper published in this
place. Will they not lend us their as
sistance ? *
TAKE A HOME PAPER.
We are satisfied that many persons
are governed by erroneous views, in re
gard to sustaining their home papers—
many of them believing that they con
tain little of interest, while those from
a di^tanie are brimful of every thing
great and good. Now the truth is, that
precisely the contrary is the fact. A
home paper is better than any one from
a distance possibly can It; because it
contains all the foreign and 4eneral
news to be found in a distant paper,
and besides this, the local news,. adver
tisements, &c., which can never be
fofind in a distant one. The man,
therefore, who takes but one paper,
stands greatly in His own light, if he
does not take the one nearest his place
of residence—and no one can take so
large a number of papers as to make it
desirable to dispense with the reading
of his local sheet.
diF Mr. C. T. Howard has bought a
half-interest in and become co-editor of| aiu ii e t their voice be heard and their in-
^g"The newspapers of this State
having failed to agree upon the selec
tion of suitable candidates for Governor,
it now remains for the “ pot-house poli
ticians” or the people, to settle this mat
ter. We are’ iii favor of the People ta
king it into their own hands—not by
means of the mockery of attending
county meetings to witness the carrying
into operation the cut and dried proceed
ings of a few ambitious men ; but let
them attend these meetings in f»l! force,
which they were
free.
taken, has set them
the Atlanta Daily Intelligencer—a pa
per which is a credit to the Railroad
city, in spite of its Democracy.
CARROLL COPPER.
We understand that H.'T. Read, of
Carroll county, shipped yesterday five
and a half tons of -copper from this city,
for New York. The Copper was taken
from the Carroll Copper Mines, and is
said to be the first shipment of any
amount thus far from Georgia;—Atlanta
Intelligencer.
—— —
more mit than we can well manage.
He who can well-measure it with his
purpose is doing a man’s work ; there
are few who do it and many who do less.
The future is a great land, A man cah-
notgo around it in a diy* he cannot
measure it with a bound, nor gather up
Jts harvest in a single sheaf. It is hroad-
er than the vision, and has no end.
ESP* 3 Although we have, on many oe
casions, given notice to “ all the world
and the rest of mankind,” that it is an
unalterable rule with us, to exclude all
articles intended for publication, when
not accompanied by the writer’s name ;
yet, strange to, say, we still receive an
onymous communications—some of
them well enough written and perfectly
harmless—such as we would be glad to
insert, if the writers would only comply
with our rules. Perhaps they think we
are not in earnest: well, they will find
out, by waiting until they see their con
tributions in print, >.
Often people fancy the world is be
coming Christian, when, in fact, Chris
tianity is only becoming worldly,
fluence felt. Let there be a State Con
vention, composed of delegates appoint
ed by those who are opposed to the pre
sent “powers that be,” both at Wash
ington and Milledgeville—let these del
egates honestly reflect the will of their
constituents, in the nomination of a can
didate who can unite the entire opposi
tion—and then, if the celebrated “coon-
killer" isjiot unearthed from his com
fortable quarters in Milledgeville, about
the first of October next, we will ac
knowledge we are no prophet.
Although \ve have studiously abstain
ed from expressing any preference for
any of the distinguished gentlemen who
have been named for the important of
fice of Governor, it does not, by any
means follow, that We feel no preference.
Our determination, however, is, to sup
port the'regular candidate, whoever he
■mi IhHprovided; he is,“ honest, capa
ble and faithful ” < ' '