Newspaper Page Text
Ni J offered to accede." Tim minority, in 1 < ” '■ pn'r.'i 1, Her to tr.y i r.li, ..fuc«, \ ; r>r< -to defraud the rev cnuc and to cic-itc the’; « liictl stnnd like
rm! fin,,.-s Mir ihfir .Went at that confer- 'y PS their privnli-or scpien c Ictteis liml nut I Indians. If our instri.cl'hon, ol tho Mil «l u we fill days, long
™ af ., J boon .•in.imunli-atrd tome. 'I Imt tliry diil <><•• April, 181.3, InuJ burn no longer lu.po,alive
f ’’ , : ■ . 1 .“‘7 1 ‘ r ’| iennsist-! 1 R»ioiinl!y "'i it i- ruidi letters i- not only probii they furnished, ut Icu-t, evidence in point
cannot be fairly adjud^i u f a • lb c, but the letter of Mr. Gallatin, of the flotli which was rntitlcil to attention. Ihepiivi-
cully sum then ass. ..I. l»ry nail oppo. - , |) , ( , r , I„.. proof in iioiut. That lit- I.-*;.- of Hiitisli t.udeiH fioiu t.’iuiuda, mid the
id « here only tin ir 1
I I i» :..i . r ™ ’
two old chroniclers of
ed llwt proposal
I anil
Opposition could Inivn hull »» lifmlioial *'f-
f,( t, and prod lid no ovil. To have dis
turbed a innlor-r.i n with tile British mints-
tins by protesting against an act id (In:
majority, or to li.-ne rotund to sign a note
from an objection to flint net, conlil Itate
produced toil only. It would intro dcscov-
-i r . d to the adterse party dissension in our
Councils, end thence might have had a ills-
ftstrotis rfleet on the whole negotiation. In
rclnlion to the proposal itself, such a dis
covery to lliut party of our opposition to a
{ •articular proposal, tvas calculated to cn-
lame the value of that proposal, in their
estimation, and to induce them to accept it
—-thus consummating the very evil which
We deprecated. The net of the majority
was, in respect to the other party, tile act
of the whole ; and Mr. Adams l.imscll t<C-
kuowled^es that “ it wonld have liocn e-
qusily valid without my concurretice or
signature as with it." In Iiis opinion, there
for, it would have been useless, and iu mine,
for the reasons just stated, it would have
been highly mischievous, to have notorious
ly refused my nctpjiosrenre in the will ol
the majority. For what is called assent,
concurrence, and joining in the offer, was
merely ail acquiescence in that will. For
such an acquiescence I have long since ac
counted to my conscience, and now cheer
fully account to my country. By the prin
ciples of our institutions the minority, though
free to disapprove tile acts of a majority,
aiu bound to submit to them. If Mr. Ad
ams tines not agree with me in this view of
tile rights and duties of a minority, lie will
only present another instance in which we
d.flVr from each other in opinion
I did not give a silent vote, which Mr. Ad
ams says “ it may lie I did,’’ after having
said that I concurred with Mr. Clay in op
posing it. 11 1 did entertain, and express
at Ghent, the opinions disclosed in my let
ferand, if 1 did not disclose them “ to
Vie same extent,” I did state them with suf
ficient precision and perspicuity to entitle
them lo all the consideration which they
might deserve.
Mr. Atlatns charges me with ascribing to
my colleagues opinions which they never
t-nteitained, arguments which they never
advanced, and doctrines which they not on
ly would disclaim with indignation, hut dia
metrically opposed lo those w hich they did
maintain. I .ft it he remembered here that
my letter received from Paris was confined,
in justification of my conduct, to com
batting the opinions, arguments, and doc
trines of the ma jority, which, in the despatch
of the 25th of December, 101 I, (rl) were
stated by them, or at least by Mr. Adams
for that despatch was drawn up by him.
Mr. Gallatin, indeed, in his separate letter
of the same dale, (c.) does not go to the
same extent. He merely states the assump
fion of the peculiarity of the treaty of 17!<3
To support this charge, Mr. Adams says
I impute to my colleagues an opinion that
the independence of the U. States was de
rived from the treaty of 1783.
In what part of my letter he finds such
an imputation I am at a loss to discover.
In contending against any peculiarity of that
treaty, I simply said “ I could not believe
that the independence of the United States
was derived from the treaty of 17C3."—
Without admitting such a derivation of our
independence, I could not perceive, indeed,
any ground for the peculiarity ascribed to
that treaty—for a mere recognition of a
prior right furnished none ; no other treaty
containing such recognition having been
considered as possessing it. In denying such
a derivation, although fairly inferrible from
the doctrin of Mr. Adams, 1 charged no one
with believing in it, hot I removed the only
foundation, as 1 conceived, on which the
doctrine of Mr. Adams could be supported ;
and now, in disclaiming that foundation, un
less lie ran shew a better, he virtually re
nounces that doctrine.
He says, also, that I impute to my colleagues
“ that they rested their claim to the fishing pri
vilege on prescriptionbut he adds that, “ as
the settlement of the colonies themselves lmd
not been of time immemorial, it urns not, amt ne
ver was pretended to he a title by prescription.''
This appears to have b n cii a recent discovery.
In the letter of the CSth of December, above
mentioned, it is said, “ this liberty, then,"
(1783) “ no new grant, but a mere recognition
ot a prior right niicayi enjoyed." And again,
in the same letter, “ without adverting to the
ground of prior and immemorial usage,' ire.—
If t erroneously inferred from these passages
tlint a title was claimed from prescription, my
error, 1 trust, will he considered a venial one.
Mr. Adams can undoubtedly explain what hr
meant by “ u prior always enjoyed/'
and by “the ground of prior and immemorial
iisaga.” He did not menu, it seems any thing
like prescription. Is he quite sure that, iu dis
cussing this privilege, while in England, in 1815
or I8lw, he never set up a prescriptive title, or
u title from immemorial usage?
Mr. Adams likewise asserts that I represent
“ the oiler of an article, granting to the British
the right of navigating the Mississippi, as an
tcpiixaltnt for the fishing privilege in British ju
risdiction." I certainly believed that it might
have been so interpreted, even in its original
form; and tli.it, if so interpreted, it could be
made to mean more than would be meant by a
simple continuance of that right, and of’that
. privilege, as they stood, independently of each
. ... • . I. . .-4* 1 — o*> TI. : .
if Mr. rtnltnliii was never shown to uie, ami Northwest Company, were not to bo renewed,
I i i-itninly never felt myself aggrieved because because “ the pernicious rjj'eeit oj this privilege
it wn • not, although be stilted In it the grounds\had been must sensibly Jell in tho pra-cut win,
on which be bail acted us one ot the majority. 1 t>y the iajlueiicc which it pare over our Indians,
! here most solemnly protest, ns Mr. Adams' trims- 1 chute force has been wielded ly means
appears to believe a protest to he necessary to 1 thereof against the inhabitants oj our western
piovc .sincerity, that nothing which I have writ-1 states amt territories
ten was directly or remotely intended to im- We ourselves hud born testimony, during the
pute either vveukuess, absurdity, or treachety, i negotiation, to the. magnitude ot the evil restil-
to the majority, and lo infer such' n.v imputation | ting horn allowing to tli-iti.sh Tinders und A-
front my letter, w ould seem to require a mind i gents acres, to our Indians. In our note to the
destorteil by passion and “ a jouloiisy that dis-1 lb ill -h Ministers of the 2 It of September 18 Id
other, in the treaty of 1783. That the naviga
tion of the Mississippi was, ut last, offered, not
under the principle of Mr. Adams, or the status
ante betiuni, which thus far were the same, but
gs an equivalent, sufficiently appears from the
documents, notwithstanding this subsequent inti
mation that “ we considered that offer as mere
ly declaratory.'' Besides, Mr. Gallatin, iu his se
parate letter of the 25th of December, says, “ if
the l ight must lie considered as abrogated by the
war, wo cannot regain it without an equivalent.
tVe had none to offer but the recognition of tin-
right to navigate the Mississippi, and we offered
it.'
I have now, I trust, satisfactorily explained
the inconsistencies tint] tissue of miso prtsentn
tines with which Mr. Adams has, with so much
dignity und propriety, charged me. To whom
inconsistency and udsrrpre-eiitation can bi
justly imputed, an impartial public is left to de
cide.
With regard to what is considered so serio-e
an offence, my not having shewn my letter
written u 1 I’uris, to my colleagues, at the time
I will merely observe, that the majority hadal
rea ly, in the despatch otthc 86th of December
(d) given their reasons for the affirmative, with
out taking any notice of the reasons on which
the minority supported the negative. I believ
e l it just, therefore, to account for my conduct
by stating my objections to the reasons assign
ed by the majoritv, and to these objections in)
letier wat confined. I imputed to the majority
C.idling which they had not alleged for them
stars. Their rase was before tin- government
on their own showing, and I did not believe that
there was any obligation to consult them on tin
ease of the minority. To tin: only member ut
the mission who had a direct interest in that
case, I did show, at the time, the letter written
at J’aris I certainly was not aware of the pro-
colours every thing."
There was a dilfevenre, and I believe an ho
liest difference of opinion between me (s some
ofiny colleagues, on certain points, and if I felt
it to be my duty to act according to my own, I
certainly had the right to state the grounds of
my opinion to those to whom I was immediate
ly urconiitiible for my conduct. In doingthis,
I accused no one—and if in endeavoring to
prove that my opinion was correct, I implied
that the. opinion of those who differed from me
incorrect, I did no more tow arils them,
than what, from the very nature of the case,
was indi-pensahle, or thuii what they, in de
fending their opinion, must necessarily have
done towards me. Mr. Adams, Indeed, goes
much further, lie appears to believe that sclt-
vindiention cannot he separated from reproach.
In ii conscientious difference of opinion be
tween fnllihle men, who reason but to err, there
:an be no just cause for reproach—but a pre
tended difference of opinion between infulliiblc
men must necessarily imply wilful error some
where. I do not pretend to infallibility, and
sincerely pity those who do. It maybe less
difficult to some inindsto abuse the man, tlmn to
refute the argument. “ Censure, reproach,and
misrepresentation is, indeed, u shorter und nisi-
sr process,"
1 still differ with Mr. Adums on his doctrine
that the treaty of 1783, by reason of its peculi
arity, could not be abrogated by war.
1 still differ with him concerning the relative
uliie of the navigation ol the Mississippi und the
fishing privilege.
I still differ with him, in respect to the con
sistency of his principle with the proposal which
was first decided on, und alter a period ol three
•eks, actually offered by a majority.
I shall probably continue to differ with him
on these points, unless he can produce other
und better reasons for my conversion than
thoso contained iu his remurks.
For his doctrine, he nppeuls to a classof trea
ties which are not known to exist,and to the
ordeal of minds with which he has not made us
acquainted. Hcielieson instinct when he .uyi
“ I stop here for a moment to observe how in-
stinetively both parties recur to the treaty of
1783, with a consciousness that it was yet in full
force,” when ut the very first conference the
British ministers gave us notice that the fishing
privilege, granted by that treaty, would not be
renewed, w ithout an equivalent, thus consider
ing that treaty to he at un end.
Express i enunciation or conquest, that is, con
sent on our part or force on the part of Great
Britain, might, according to Mr. Adams him
self, abrogate our rights under the treatypf 1783
— und these arc precisely the means only by
which we can ire deprived of our rights unrier
any treaty. The peculiarity, therefore, for
which Mr. Adams contends, is left on a very
quivocal foundation. Mr. Adams insinuates that
the convention of 1818 confirms his doctrine,
and gives a final stroke to mine. That con
vention does not contain the slightest allusion
to the doctrine of Mr. Adams, nor even to the
treaty of 1783, but settles the differences which
had arisen on the subject of a grant entirely new
By the way, if an cxpress renunciation was
necessary, oil our part, to surrender the fishing
privilege, the implicit renunciation which Mr.
Adams says was made by the British, cannot
be sufficient to surrender their right to navigate
the Mississippi—According to Mr. Adums
therefore, that right is unimpaired.
1 certainly was not walling to renounce or to
surrender the fishing privilege to fo.ee or con
quest, but 1 was willing lo adopt a doctrine
which i believed and still believe to he the true
one—&. which, if it deprived us of the beuefitof
the fishing privilege, released us at Ihe same tune
from the evils of tile British right to navigate til
Mississippi, because 1 believed those evils out
weighed that benefit. I have seen no cause
since to change this opinion
All that Mr. Adams says, in his remarks con
corning the fishing privilege, is, “ tlg)t we had
renounced certain parts, which wiiimvt being
of much use to ourselves, had been found very
inconvenient to the British—and that my views
with regard to the magnitude of the fishing iu
terest, lie believes to he as incorrect us my
principles on which I would have surrendered
it. If 1 erred in my estimate of the fishin
privilege, there is nothing in these remarks of
Mr. Adams to demonstrate my error, i acted
on tho-best information which 1 had ut the time
And, if i erred, my error could not deserve re
proacli. I believe, however, that the view-
disclosed in my letter, did not underrate or ap
prcciate that privilege. The most authentic
information which I have until now been able
to obtain on the subject justifies the opinion
which I then entertained in relation to it. I
am informed by respectable citizens well ac
quainted with the business, that fi w or no lis
are now dried or cured within the British juri
diction, ami that most, if not ull that are taken
there, are taken by the few fishermen who hav
not sufficient capital to procure vessels of ade
quatesize ic.strength to li-h on the grand bank
or iu the open sea—and that even those few
fishermen ai e annually decreasing in number
With regard to the British right lo navigate
the Mississippi, Mr. Adams says that it was a
mere phantom—that they had enjoyed it for3u
years w itliout ujing it—iliut in all human pro
bability it never would have been of more
beneficial ti-e to the British nation than would
be to the people of the U. States the right
navigating the Bridgewater (’mini or the Dan
ulie—and that, in surrendering it, the British
would have surrendered absolutely nothing.—
Although till this was not said at lihent lo the
same extent, yet Mr. Adams certainly did ex
press there his greut contempt of the BritisI
right to reach and navigate that river. I have
ood reason to believe, however, that there
was not another member of the mission who
ntcrtimicd tire same opinion. Each member
stiinuted differently the importance of that
right according to his own information ami im
pressious. Some believed it to be of more im
portancc—some ol less importance, and some of
about the same importance, us the fishingpriv
lege, but not one, expecting Mr. Adams, con
sideied it a mere phantom, worth absolutely
nothing. Air. Gallatin appeals to have thought
it equal, at least, to the fishing privilege. In his
separate letter, already mentioned, (r) lie says “if
the right" (the fishing privilege) “ must be con
siilered ns abrogated by the war, we cannot re
gain it without un equivalent. We had none
to offer but the recognition of their right
navigate the Mississippi, and we offered it. On
this In-t supposition," (the abrogation of the
treaty ot I7n3, by war) “ this right is also lost
to them, and in a general point of view ice liaee
certainty lost nothing. " The necessary con
-traction ot this clause is, that, bv uhrogalin
the Mississippi light, we gained us uiuch us vv
lost by abrogating the fishing privilege—anu
thus, tit n general point of view, wc lost nothing
by abrogating both—thul making the two
eq' ul value
we say, “ The undersigned v ery sincerely re
gret to he obliged to -ay that an irresislnbte
mass of evidence, consisting principally ol tiic
correspondence of British Officers and Aleuts,
part only of which has already been published
in America, establishes, bcyoml ull rational
doubt, the fact that u constant system of ex
citement to these hostilities was pursued by
liritisli Tarders and clgrnts who had access to our
liidinns, not only without being discountenanc
ed, but with frequent rnenuragement, by (he
British authorities—And if they ever ilissuailed
the Imlinnsfrom commencing hostilities, it was
only by advising them, as iu prudence, to sus
pend their uttucks until Great Briluin could re
cognize them in tho war."
Here wus surely evidence to pruve the dan-
I certainly differed very much from Mr
Adams iu h,s estimate of this right under hi
doctrine, muled with his construction, or uu
dvr his proposal. I did not appreciate it bvtlie
mere beneficial or legitimate uses that might he
made ut it. It- importance 1 considered to he
derived from its evil-—from the abuse of it,
giving to British T raders uml Agents
re-s to our Indians. If this access, owing to ex-
ting circumstance, had not hitherto, to any
at extent, been practically derived from tin-
right. to approach and to navigate tho Mississip-
yct this right, having become the only means,
access, would undoubtedly Inn e been made
thoroughfare of this nefurous intercoiixc
1 erred in this opinion, still I should hope to
find charity lor my motives. As a citizen ol
Mu—iicliu-ctf-, I believed that justice und round
lolicv required that we should tieat fairly and
ibcrully every othcr.section of the Union, und
iJousAve would be done by. As a minister
of the United Stutcs, it was my duty to act im-
puitiuliy towards the greut whole.
The inconsistency of Mr. Adams' doctrine
vvitli his conduct, in relat.ou to the fishing li
berty needs no illustration. If that liberty was,
be alleged, inseparable from the general
lit, why separate them, by offering a specific
proposition for the one, and leaving the other
to rest on the treaty of 1783 ? If this liberty
, by our instructions, included in ti.c right,
hy discuss it, ns those instructions forbid us
bring that right into discussion ? If this li
ly was an attribute of our independence,
why rely for its continuance on the peculiarity
' u treaty, and at the same time oiler to make
an article of anuthcr treaty, where there
could be on such peculiarity to perpetuate >t?—
It that liberty w as indeed, an attribute of our
dependence, 1 s;iy that it depended on no
treaty, hut oil lliose eternal principles oil w hich
hud been declared previous to any treaty—
and on that high spirit and resistless energy
which dictated and accomplished that declare
tion. AN henever that independence, or any of
the essential attribute-of the sovereignty, whii h
necessarily results from it, shall be denied nr
questioned, I trust in God null the valour, not
the West only, but of all, that we shall not
sort to the dreams of a visionary, or the dead
letter of a treaty, to asseit our rights and rank
among the nations of the worliS
1 shall now close this defence against an un
provoked and unprincipled attack", trusting it,
for my vindication, with the justice and liber
ality of my lellow citizens. If I had been pre
viously entrusted with the remarks of Mr. Ad
ams, hs lie Irankly was with the paper which has
mainly been the subject of them, I should have
had an opportunity of simultaneously offering
i-se explanations, mid been spared the un
pleasant necessity of thus appealing to the pub
lic. If i have not retorted tha virulence and
acrimony ul Mr. Adams, it is because l have
not felt them sufficiently to forget the respect
which I owe to myself und to the public 1 re-
t, equally vvitii Air. Adams, the necessity
which helms supposed to exist for the virulent
character of his remarks ; hut I shall have
abundant reason to rejoice, if, in directing the j
infirmities of his temper against me, they shall ’
have been diverted from a course in which they
might have beau disastrous to the country.
JONATHAN UUSSELE.
rnoM tiie Richmond enquirer.
REVOLUTIONARY RELICS.
The following letter wus written hy a gentle
man of high literary distinction—tint not w ith
the slightest intention of publishing it—it hav
ing pleased the tastes of u lew ol his friends,
permission has been asked and obtained to lay
it belorc the public. The following introduc
tion to it is from the pen of the gentleman to
whom it was addressed :
The writer of Lite following letter,
ind the person to whom it was atliires-
ed hud no idea of its publication ; tin-
may be seen from its maimer, and style:
but it having been shown to a few friends,
they earnestly requested its publication,
if from no other cause but this, the re-
leival of the finest recollections of the
American heart, of gratitude for the glo
rious achievements of their forefathers,
the heroes, and patriots of the revolution.
Extract of a letter from a gentleman tra
velling to the .Mirth to his friend in
Virginia, dated 1821.
I have thought of you oflenor no
note tenderly this summer than l hav
for some time gone hy—and I set down
to tell you how this has happened : In
the first place, I have had more leisure
to think of you, for I have been travel
ling— and, in the next place, I have been
travelling in a direction full of associa
tions of though! and feeling derived from
you, for 1 have been quite as far to the
however, you were only one of a party,
associated and grouped together in my
rctollveiion - f but when on returning
from lake George, we fell into the route
of iiurgoyne’s invading army, you were,
il nut ail alone, ut least the loid ol the
asseiidatif, and all that I could recollect
of •• Jack 1 lie king's commander,” 1
(-haunted aloud &. merrily. O t thought
i, if my dear F were imt hereto
give it all to us, how much nhouhl we
enjoy it, and how much would he enjoy
these sceneB—i
Then 11 First lie c..rac lo Canada, next to Ti-
condtrogu,'
And leaving- thus", uway he goes strnitway to
Saratoga “
To Ticondcrga we should have gone from
the head of lake George if we could have
got a safe boat, hut leaving those away
ae treat (Oil 1 what a falling oil) str.iit-
way for Saratoga. We full in on lJur-
goyne’s track at Sandy Hill, a beautiful
little village on n high and most com
manding site, at the point at which you
obsei ve on your map, assending from Al
bany, the North river bend at right an -
gles, to the west. Thence, going down
the l iver, on (lie eastern bank, two miles
and a half, and within half, a mile of Old
Fort Edward, we were shew n tlie -piing
at which the Indians who had charge ol
Miss McCren, stopped to drink, when
they were discovered and fired on by tiie
whiles ; and the tree nn tha root of
which she was found sitting. “ She was
found after the action was over,” says
tlie historian, “ tomahawked and sculped
and tied to the tree there being a
tionse near, I borrowed an axe and cut a tumult
chip out of that indetiticul rootfci whirl,
with some other holy relirs, 1 shall -
you Ivy the first opportunity. Tiie tree
is a flourishing pine stump, 50 feet hii;h
—Full ol hall-, “ the <op twisted ■ if b :
a storm, indicating, thereby, cc-
“ hation ol heaven al such cruel hai - n i-
“ ty inflicted on innocence it-eil ;
“ the hark of the pine tree i-. engrave.
“ Jannetj McCrta, 1777 ; at tiie foot <t
11 the tree a tine spring.hre ik* out an
“ the water flow mg from it “ forev cr si
lent and forever sad.” At Fort Eil
ward there is a little village—and wlul
onr horses were watering, I procured a
revolutionary bullet or t-vn, win Ii h.t i
been dug out of the wall of the fort. Wc
got to the village of Saratoga to dinner,
tho field on which Bntgnvne laid down
his arms, being immediately in front ol
the tdVern, and distant about hail a mile
I his field is now a beautiful piece ot
meadow land, al the junction of Fish
creek with tiie North river, which you
can also see on the map. 1 have some
relics, also, from this field for yon. Von
remember that Burgoyne was on his re
treat, endeavoring to get back to For*
Edward and thence into Canada, when,
finding his father retreat cut off, he sur
rendered on this plain ; so in following
his track down, we came to tiie field ot
surrender, before we came lo the battle
ground where lie had for the first time
became convinced for the erroneous es
timate he had made of tho American
character. Having walked over the
field of surrender, and pulled some
boughs from a tree, near the spot at
which Burgoyne's marquee was pitched,
we moved down the river in the eve
ning, and about an hour by son, came to
the house in which fhe celebrated Bri i-ii
general Frazier breathed his last. This
house was the quarters of the German
general, the Baron Reidesel—and on the
day on which Frazier was killed, the
Baroness lieidese! (who, with two or
three small children had followed her
husband, into the war) was engaged in
preparing dinner for Burgoyne, I’hilips,
Frazier, und Aokland, who were to dine,
oil that day, by invertation, with her
husband. The tabic had been already
set out for dinner, when the action be
gan, and alter some time, poor Frazier
was brought in wounded, not to dine,
but to die. The baroness’s letters have
been published, in which she gives a
most interesting aeconnt of all these
particulars, which you will find in Wil
Army, in both Ihe battles of (lie 19th 1
Sept, and 7th Oct. and was with our
troops till the surrender. He is now 77,
and his usual gate in t iding is 12 miles
per hour, on a very hard trotting horse;
you will see honorable mention made ol
him by Sillimnn—Not at all fatigued
with the excursion from which lie
had just returned, tic wheeled about
again and accompanied us with the ut
most alacrity. Then you should have
been with me, my dear F to walk
over tiie fields—the very fields which,
four and forty years before, hail been the
theatre of such desperate st|ife—vvhpre
the great cause of American liberty ton
was slaked on the issue of that strife, in
some degree, and where those great ex
ertion- were made for us by the lierors
of the revolution which we have, at lea-t,
the grace to remember once a year “
our flowing cups and so thought 1
“ this is the field on which tlie famous
Imtiles of.Still water Acd liemns, Height
were fought, four and forty years ago !!
these fields, 1 take it were not quite so
still and quiet, (lien, as they are now.
How did these grounds swarm wilt)
armed men !” “ Here Morgan was post
ed” said Hie old man, interrupting my
meditations “ here was Arnold then
patriot and un excellent soldier,'’ &c,
•Sec. and so the old gentleman arranged
the lielil and conjured up bofore,my eyes
the whole host—then h painted tho bat
tles, with great spirit—shewed by what
ac. iiif-nis the) h.i.i commenced on botli
occasion* and how (hey became general';
depicted the struggles, in particular parts
of the field—and enabled uie to imagine,
at (nil' s, th it I saw and heard all the
'itution, shouting thunder, and
(ii, of i long and well contested field.—
llral Htavi’tia—wh.it a warming illti-
•I- a . rgan's eye of fire and bugle
M-i- -Arnold’s irresistible nnpe
i > ! Fee rattling of musk* try, the
-.ll.irp cia-.kii g ol llii- ilfivs, the deaf !.-
log tour ol a tilh-ry, the animating shout
t the soldiery, (he war-whoop of the
I di ins, the i ncuuraging and applauding
nos of the olfi 'ms—tiie rhargt—thf
retie.n—riio i pul and regul r ev diiliuii
i. one point—the dt- nuJcily movements
at mi liter—tin h. adlongcoril'ision—the
groan* i I the dying—Hie ery lor quar
ter, ipiuitci—gha-tly A blei-diug ooonds
—severed limb- — men and horses min-
gl don tin: plain in one wide scene of
indi« Tiinin ile blood and carnage—O!
« hat an uproar, then !— How still and
quiet now ! !—Where are they all ?—
W hat i* i' that yonder plough is turning
up ?—“ Oui, a skeleton ” “ What yet!
to this day !”—'• Even yet—onr ploughs
lie constantly striking against canuon
bull’s or dead men’s bones, to turning up
grape shot or bullets.”—“ Then I guess
the people were not idle on that dav.”
‘ You may depend friend, they were
busy.” “ I believe u—but. 1 have a
t lend in Virginia who would be glad lo
have some r.fihe bullets that were fired
in those gte.it battles—battles, that gave
the lir»t great and decided turn to the
American revolution.” “ To be sure—
there is a ball which has been rolling a-
bout tiie yard fur some time—yon shall
have the bullets too—aod you, John,
go up in the loft and bring down that
*kuli.” “ I trust you will excuse me
from ihe skull — it will not be convenient
tn carry it—Gut the halt and bullet9 1
will gladly take”—and so 1 did. We
went to several other houses which have
been all built since—for it was then en
tirely wood, except Freeman's farm,
which you will see mentioned in the
books—and at all those houses, bullets
and bones were offered ; even the little
children handing and offering the hu
man bores with ns total an absence from
ull emotion as if they were chicken's
hones or dry-ti ks. Having examined
tiie battle grounds of both days—and
walked, listening to my guide—and sigh
ed till tny limit was full and heavy, 1
returned to my quarters and slept, very
little to my honor, without dreaming ;
] for 1 was too uiuch fatigued to sleep
\fancifully. The next morning 1 look
I another rule with old Ezra, to see the
American encampment, and above nil,
his last and dying (peer):, at a n iKcr
so that both lo victor and to vamp i In
was Hie prelude only to mi-li-rUinc.
Such is the passing glory id il i- wcrlil--
Now as to Buigoyne—piay my iu ,r
did you ever read the siqiii-
1
mental comedy of the Heiress—or the
Maid of the Oik-—nr did you ever read
the tender and t-legenl song* of" Anim’l
Urn” or “ For tenderness form’d ?"—•
These were written by Burgoyne ; and
although our printers, our revolutionary
flicers jn their letters, ami our song
inditers of that day used to charge him
with bombast, 1 do think that he was one
of the most classical and elegant waiters
that the English nation has ever produced..
If Burgoyne had been born to the wealth
of Byron, he wonlj, in my opinion, have
pitched the poetic bar beyond him by
many a league—war was not his proper
element—and while upon the fields of
his battles, and final surrender, and re»
membeiing the beautiful and pathetic
effusions of genius to which 1 have al
luded, I could not help pitying such a
man whose mistake of his own character
had put hitn ut tiie head of a band of mer
ciless, tomahawking, sculping savage*
and ".damn’d llewiin*, Hanoverians,
Auspackers, Waldeckers, and VVolfen-
bolttlers”—if I have mistaken your ar
rangement of these harmonious names,
pray put me right. From these ti Id*
my mind followed (he Btitish prisoners
to the barracks near Charlottesville—
and then came the recollections ofyoiir’s
and Mr. It ———’a anecdotes of that
place—The temporary theatre—-the ac
ting of plays by the British officers.
What would I give, my dear F ,•
tn go again, over those grounds witU
von—-to catch vonr feelings by rebound
-- is it impos-ible ?
By the bye, tins is a pretty long let
ter—-it is time to stop and l am rather’
tired of writing---! began it nhout an
hour before the close of the mail of this
lay in the hope of having it ready ; hut
interruption has now lost me the mail :
However yon shall have the epistle
“ tinhonsiled, unanointed, unanealed;
with all ils -ins ,t blotches on its head ”
but remember that in this case, you are
the father confessor.
“ The relics” will he addressed to
the rare oi Col. G They have no
value except from (he associated senti
ment you will give them and perhaps
the associated image of your friend. I
have forborne to touch the picturesque
scenery through which I travelled—-be
cause I hope you will see it and I wish
you to enjoy it to the full, its novelty and
all—which description would spoil.
F. S The labels nn the holly relics 33
edition* d above are :
Bullets of September 19th, 1777,
Freeman’s Farm battle fiphl.
Bullets of the 7th of October 1777,
near Freeman's Farm battle ground.
Bullet-. &c. at Saratoga field of sur
render, 1777.
Blossoms and twigs from the oldest
tree ou the field of surrender at Barato-
ga.
Chips from the root nf the tree or*
which MissMcCrea rested, while the Ir.
dinns drank at the spring beneath it---
and which have been presented to Mr,
Warrell at (be Museum.
vmuvuuw
in his tour to Canada, which I will send
you as soon as 1 can procure the book.
The generous sensibilty evinced by Fra
zier after ho knew bis wound was mortal,
has given me much tenderness for his
memory. The baroness says be was
continually apologising to her for the
trouble he was giving tier—and that
while sitting in tiie other room (there
North, 1 suspect, as your hero C. C. ever j were but two, and they were very sin ill)
was—though I must confess the north she coold hear his groans and exclama-
stars never appeared to the south. As i tions—“ O! fatal atnbtion !” " Poor
we passed through Trenton, 1 thought I General Burgoyne!”—“ My poor wife!!”
of " Christmas day in ’70,” and that j He was killed it seems hy one of Mor-
Umson’s memoirs if you have or can Grates’ head quarters. The house is
procure them : if not, you w ill read all | slill .*tantlirig—-ii is a small, red hip roof-
that is affecting and touching in regard to I * d, one story , i Id house that has quite a
these incidents collected by AIr. Silliman revolutionary look--” and here,” the old
brought you with a groupe of hearty fel
lows, from Bichmond before my mind’s
eye, and 1 thought of 11 departed joys.”
After tint your image was hy my side
whenever 1 approached an interesting
scene of the revolutionary wars.—
Princeton, where Gen. Mercer fell—the
tree was pointed out to me, nrxd is still
preserved, and I saw the. tears in your
eyes—then Kingston—New-Brunswick
—and New-York. In going up the
North river you were with me continu
ally, and I saw your eyes alternately,
sparkling with triumph at some recollec
ted achievements, as in gazing nn Stoney
Point, as we passed, or flaming with in-
donation at the rememberanre of Ar
nold’s treason, when the spot was point*
ed out to us, at which the Vulture sloop
of war was moored, or bedewed with
sympathy, as when the grave of the ge
nerous, and accomplished Andre wn« in
dicated. Then came West Point, the
subject of so much solicitude and bloody
gan’s riflemen. Silliman says lie had the
anecdote from onr Richard Brent, for
merly of Congress, and Brent from Mor
gan himself. In the action of the 7lh
Oct. 1777, Frazier wus then soul of the
British army, and was just changing the
disposition of a part of the treops, to re
pel a strong impression which the A-
mcricans had made, and were still ma
king on the British right, when Morgan
called together two or three of his best
marksmen and pointing to Frazier, said,
“ do you see that gallant officer—that is
” Gen. Frazier—1 respect and honor
" him; but it is necessary lie should die.”
V Ins was enough*—Frazier was irnme-
diMfely carried from the field, mortally
wounded. But ynn will read it ail in
Wilkinson or Silliman. Well, sir, " as
1 was saying,” we arrived at this same
house at about nn honr by sun—and, as
good fortune would have it, before we
amt from the pernicious falicity which it would I strife in the revolutionary war with tiie
jyriaty «r etiquett* *1 •ftsuftuaicatiag » Jirivftle Hlaecl to Butyilj »»iijfgl»rs Briti.it> eniinsu- ruitjs ofits old forts, Clinton anil Putnam,,
man said, “ the General remained during
both the battlesw IT h wer - fought a
least a mile from this house, and cer
tainly out of sight---lhi-i the old guide
said he was told, was right—us it was
the general’s hu-iness to be at one place,
always, to receive information and give
orders. But what do you think of these
armies resting here in their opposiu
encampments, their sentinel- within hail
of each other, for seven days without
striking a blow, and at last the lit-In
tion, lhat of the 19th September, ’77
being brought on by an accident ? Ga
tes had a good motive for the delay, fu
his army was continually ga’hering
streng'h---but that Burgoyne, in the
spirit of proud and contemptuous inva
sion, with such an army and so appoin'
ed, should have set down so quietly an i
so fooltihly, while his enemies wetv
hourly increasing in strength, satisfies
me that he was no Bonaparte—-lie oughi
to have pushed undauntedly forward-—
or, tn have retire.d while, yet, he could
—his remaining on the ground was the
very worst thing lie could have done.
But there is a fashion in war, as in eve
ry thing else. The Bonaparte style of
daring was not tha order of that dav.—
But enough of this way nf judging im o
a posteriori—at their time of day and in
their place even yon and I, great g- ne-
rals as we are, might havu done the seni
or worse. Poor Gates !—This was his
first and last field of glory !—AVliat a
Savannah, JiiIv 13.
LATEST FROM ENGLAND.
Captain Harris, of the ship Lady Galla
tin, arrived here last evening in 35 days
from Milford Haven, has politely furnished
us w ith a file nf papers containing London
dates to 31st May—eiavon days later than
before received.
There, now appears to be a prospect of an
amicable arrangement of the differences be
tween Russia and the Purlc. The latest
dispatch from Vienna remains what is called
a full confirmation of the important fact,
that the force* of the Sublime Porte, are
evacuating the principalities of Moldavia and
Wallachia.
Rumors of ir counter-revolution in Spain
have been industriously circulated in the
French papers but are contradicted in later
accounts. Di-turbances in Lisbon are also
spoken of. Tile distress in Ireland increa-%
Si'S.
The most important extracts which we
have gleaned mi a ha-ty perusal of the pa*
pers will be found below.
London, May 27.
The f illow ing i- in extract of u privata
letter from Constantinople, ilati A| n|
25, received this morning by an eminent
house in the City :
“ I t ike this opportunity of statimra
piece of inhumation I have had from
good authority, which will no doubt disj
pel all fears ns to the probability of war.
The Porte has finally consented to n«
vacnate Wallachia and Moldavia ; by
('•is time the troops are withdrawn.-«•
The public. f--i 1 itier will not at present
admit of ihe admini-lrali-in of ihesc pro*
viners being given to the Greek- ; nn.
airangenpnt has therefore been made
'In* il v- HI lie given to twelve until e> of
Ibnse provinces, to be chosen from theiV
respective rt,irf-. This Provincial Go*
comment sba'I have eight Representa
tive* fixed in Cot ; nlino; lo. nppearer t^
I’ as l-ostaces f- r 'he conduct of tbs
alighted, another traveller rode up, hav-1 triumphant opening of his military cit
ing juet returned from viewing the battle | renr in America !—What a reverse was
fields, accompanied by old Ezra Buell he doomed to experience in noo short
w ho had be«i a guide, t» thq American * year—and far pool Burgoyne, it was
Administrators. ’1 he*e people are ex*
peeled hern very shortly. Turkey'
havino thus arreded to (be principal
point demanded hy Rus-ia, there ran be
be doubt that th 1 -ru Her ones will by
eqn illv adjusted.”
The Mb win - is nn extract of a pri«
vato letter received this rnoreieg ;
“ P.V&IS May SI-
“ A letter has arrived from Petertue
hlirgh. dated the i t ofthis month, which
-tates that the Emperor’s departure from
Petersburg!) will not have for its object
a visit to the army, but to Warsaw
where lie will convoke a Diet, which
will !a-t lor a ini.n'h. He is tlmn or.'
I" e'f d, tn go to n Congress, at which the
affairs of Turkey will be discussed; and
an arrange mutt be cuockd.'d.' TuoLev