Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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