Newspaper Page Text
J
ts.
iho rti-ult 61 y- nr operation lujFiJiiii*, Was r<
oeivid. Mr. Monroe stu'^S, that ‘'orders had
beco given lo ihe General in command not to
cnt*:r Florida, unless it be in pursuit of thrrene
my, and in that case, to respect the Spanish
atilhofity, wherever it may he maintaihed; and
he wdl bo instructed to withdraw his forces
Iron* the province, as soon as he has reduced
'that tribe (the Seminole^) to order, and se
euro our fellaw-citizens in that quarter, by sat
4^factory arrangements against its unprovoked
%ud savage hostilities in future.” tn his an
imal message at tbo opeomg oi Congress in
JlJov ember of the same year, the President,
fepeakmg of your entering Florida says “on
on* nor ;zu»g Major General Jackson to enter
Jj'. 'iitia, in pursuit ofth» Seminole*, care was
taken n>l to encroach on the rights of Spain.”
Again: * In entering Florida to suppress this
Combination, no idea was entertained of hostil
itv to Spain, and, however justifiable the com-
ttiandrag General was. in consequence of
misconduct of the Spanish officers, in entering
&... Marks and Pensacola to terminate it, by
’proving to the savages, and their associates
that they could not be protected, even there,
yet the amicable relation between the United
Sijitus and Spain could not he altered by that
■ii-zt alone. By ordering the restitution ol those
|>osls, those relations were preserved. To a
change of them the power of the Executive is
<dee ned incompetent. It is vested in Con
gress alone ” The view taken oi this subject
•met your entire approbation, as appears from
4ho extract of yuur letter, of 7th December,
• 618, above referred to
- Aunr *uci* full a«.*I J’cisiva proof. HS It
seems to me, of the view of the Executive, I
bad a right, as I supposed, to conclude that you
long since knew that the administration and
■myself :n particular, were of.the opinion that
the orders under which you acted, dul not au
thorize you to occupy the Spanish posis ; bill
I now infer, from vour letter, to which this is
ju answer, that such conclusion was crroiie
feus, and that you were of the imoresdon tdi
you roc- ived Mr. Crawford’s letter, that 1 con
purred in the opposite Construction, - Inch you
gavo to your orders, ihat they were intended
toauilionze you Io occupy the posts Y u ro
ly for this impression, as 1 Under-tan J y<-u, on
certain general expressions in my letter K Go
vernor B.bb, of Alabama, of the 13 h of May,
4813, iu which I stated that • General J ickson
is vested w.lli fail powers to conduct the war
iu lb® manner ho shall judge best. and also
. jo nov iaUer oi the 6 h-Fobruary; 1813. in an
swer to yours of the^Oih January, of the same
venr, in which I acquainted you ‘ with the en
tire approbation of the President of all the
measures yon had adopted lo terminate the
Tuptnre with the Seminole Indians
I will not reason the point, that a letter to
Gov. Bibb, which was not communicated to
you, which bears date long after you had oc
cupied St. Marks, and subsequent to tho time
you had determined to occupy Pensacola, (sec
your letter of June 2d, 1818, lo me published
with the Seminole documents.) could give you
authority to occupy thos* posts. 1 know that,
iu quoting the letters, you could not intend
suen absurdity, to authorize such an infer
ei ce: and 1 must therefore conclude that it
was your intention bv the extract to .show
lUl^ll„.i;n.|lfll'limi;r«kUJ M J. .^r-
act, were intended to authorize the occupation
of the Spanish posts. Nothing could have
been more remote from my intension in writing
letter. It would have been in opposition
to the view which] have always taken of your
orders, and iu direct contradiction »<> tin- Presi
dent's message, of the 25th March, 18i8,coin-
iu'J. cutod but a few weeks before to the House
Of Re pre-eatatives, (already referred to.) and
which gives a directly opposite construction
'to your orders. In fact, the letter, on its face,
proves that it was not the intention of the G •
veroment to occupy the Si anish posts. By
referring to it, you will see that 1 enclosed to
the Governor, a copy of inv order to General
Games, of the 16th December 1817 authnz
jng him to cross tho Spanish lmo, and to at
tuck the ludians withm the limits of F orida,
tlcless they should take slither under a Span-
isti post, in which event., he was directed to re
port immediately to the Department which or
der Governor B bb was directed to consider as
bis authority for currying the war into F'orida,
thus clearly establishing the fact that the order
Was considered still in force, and not supersed
ed by that to you, directing you to assume the
C- mmand in the Seminole war.
N ,r can my letter of the 6th of February
be, by any sound rule of construction, inter
preted into an authority to occupy the Spanish
posts, or as Countenancing, on my part, such
«n interpretation of the orders previously giv
en to you Your Utter of ti e 20:2i January,
to which mine is in answer, bears dale at Nash
ville, before you set out on tho expedition, and
Consists of a narrative of tho measures adopt
ed by you, in order to bring your forces >w -o
the field, where they were directed to r.-mirz
vuay the time intended for marching, the or
ders for supplies given to the contractors, with
other details of the same kind, without the
slightest indication of your intention to act a
gainst the Spanish posts, and the approbation
of the President of tne measures you had a-
dopted could be intended to apply to those de
tailed in your letter. I do not think that your
letter of the 13th instant, presents the que>
tion whether the Executive or yourself plac
ed (he true construction, considered as a mili
tary question, on the orders under which you
lictcd. But I must be permitted to say, that
(he construction of tho former is in strict con-
fo mity with my intention in drawing up the
orders ; and that, if they be susceptible of a
diff rent construction, it ivas far from being
oiy intention they should be. I did not then
suppose, nor have I ever, that it was in the
p wer of the President, under the constitu
tion. to order the occupation of the posts of a
fiction with whom we were no: at war,
(whatever might be the right of the General,
under the law ot nations, to attack an enemy
sheltered under the posts of neutral power ;)
qnd had I been directed by the President to is
sue such order, 1 should have been restrained
from-comedy mg by the higher authority of tho
-consniytirm which I had sworn to support.
N *> Will I u s the question whether the or
4er iu Gpoml Qmaes, inhibiting him from at
1.eV» S the Spanish posts. ( ^ **" "**
xvhh sunt to you,) was m fact, ahd according to
military usage, an order to you ahd ot course
obligatory until rescinded. Such, certainly,
was mv opinion. I know that yoUrs was dif
ferent.’ You acted on vour construction, be
lieving it to be right; and, iu pursuing the
course which I havedone, I claim an equal right
to act on the construction which I conceived
to bo correct, knowing It to conform to my
tention in issuing tho orders But in waiving
now the question of the true construction of
the orders, I wish it however to be understood,
it is only besups- I not think it presented
by your letter, and not because I have now, or
ever had, the b ast doubt of the correctness ol
the opinion which i entertain. I have always
been prepared to discuss it on friendly terms
with yon, as appears by the extracts from Mr,
Monroe’s correspondence, and more recently
by my letter to you of the 30th of April 1828,
covering a copy oi a letter ol Major II Let*,
in which I decline a correspondence that he
had requested on the subject ot the construc
tion ot your orders. In my letter to Maj Dee,
1 stated that, “as you refer to the public do
cements only t**r the construction winch the:
Executive gave to the orders, I inter that on
this subject you have not had aeces** to the Ge
neral’s (Jackson’s) private papers ; but if I b<*
in an error, and si the construction which the
administration gave io the orders be not si a
led with sufficient distinctness in I be then Pro
sident’s correspondence with him, t will cheer
fully give, as one of the members ol the admin
istralion, my own view* luiiy in relation to Ui-
orders, it it be desired by General Jackson ,
but it is only with him and ai his desire that
under existing circumstances, l should feel
myself ju.v ificd m corresponding on this or
any other subject connected with his public
conduct: to which I added, in my letter to
vou, covering a copy of the letter Iroin which
itie above is an extract, “with you l cannot
have the slightest objection to correspond on
this subj'-ct if additional information be desir
able ” Y *u expressed no desire tor luriher
i formation and I look »t fur granted that Mr
Monroe’s correspondence with you, and the
public documents, itiinished you a full and
clear conception of the construction which the
Execuuve give to your orders; u ider which
.mpression I remained till I received your let
ter of the 13‘ h inst.
Connected with the subject of your orders,
th ro are certain expressions in your letter,
which, though 1 am a* a loss lo understand, 1
CduOot pa.--i>Vei ia silence. Aber announcing
your suipiise at die contents ot Mr. Crawford’
letter, \ uu ask wneiher the inlormatiou be cor
rcc , ‘.‘under all of • he circumstances, of winch
you anil 1 «ir> both informed, that any attempt
seri -usly to affect <ou w.v. ua *ved arid sustain
ed t»y y«jii in cubiuel cuuuc.il, when, as is known
tu you, 1 was executing the wi-h sol’ the go
vernmeiil ” It bj wishes, which you have un
dniscored, it be meant that there was any inti-
mation giv n by myself, directly, or indirectly,
of iiio desire of the Government that you
should occupy the Spauisu posts, so far from
b-ing “luloimed,” I had no i iie slightest know
ledge of any »ucu mhum.il ion. nor d.d 1 ever
hear a whimper of any such b foie, lint I can-
n >t imagine that it is your i..tention to make a
di-tiitCiion between the wishes mid the public
- rorrew m your corr spun b /ire won the
President, nor in any of the pu -bo document*;
but on the Cwuirary, it is -»r<»i»giy retailed by
y air relying for your justifi ati * , constantly
and exclusively on your public ord rs Tak
mg, then, tbe wishes oi tf.e goveumienl” to o*
bui another expiession tur iis ordm-, I mu i
refer to tiie pr*jof already offered, to show
that the wishes oi the govcrnui. nt, »e reialiu.. 1
to the Spanish posts, were not such as you as.
suine them to oe»
Having. I trust, sati.factorily estahlisheri
ttiai there has nut beeu the least di guise as t<
t-id cuii-uuctton o: your orders, 1 w Ji non
proceed t«» state tiio part whicti I look, in tin
d liberal ions of Hie cabinet. siatein^n
will be confined stnc ly to uiyseli. a.- i do riui
teel myselt justified to speak oi ilie course ot
tbe other members of the administration ; ai d
in fact, only of rny owum sen defence, under
ihe extraordinary circumstances connected
with this correspondence.
* And here 1 must premise that the object oi
a cabinet council i- not to bring together opin
ions already lonm-d bin to Imiu upimoos .
the course which the goverumont opgut to pui-
sue, after luli and mature deliberation. Meet>
mg in tbir spirit, the first ot j. ct is a free ex
change ol sentiment, in winch doubts and ob
ject j-.-us are troclv presented and di -c-Jssed —
It is, I conceive, tne du»y of the .nettu-ers
thus to present their doubts and b|eclluus,
and to support them by off.ring fully ait of
the arguments in their power, nut at the same
time to take care not to form uu -pinion till ..12
tiie facts and view* are fully brought out, and
every doubt uni objection Careludy weigiico
In this spirit I came- into tho meeting. T«
questions involved were numerous arid nri^ ui
taut, whether yoa ha-i transc* uded - u<
•Jers, d so, what course ought to licaJ '.'ta .
what was the conduct of Spain arid her Hi-. t
in Florida; what was the stale of on rel-
wim Spain, and, through her, with loo c*.
European powers—ra question at lhai fm
• *t uncommon coinplicaltou abil didicuity —
These questions had af! to be carefully ex.
ine<f and weighed, boih separately ami in
nexion, b"loro a final opinion could he wisely
formed; and never did I see a deliberation tu
which every point was more carefuiiy exam
ined, or a greater solicit udo displayed toarnve
at a correct decision I wa» ihe junior mem*
bur ot tbe cableet, and had been but a few
months in the administration. A Secretary el
War, I was more immediately connected with
the questions whether you had transcended
your orders, and, if so, vv’h&t course ought to
b- pursued. I was of the impr-ssion that you
h id exceeded your orders, and had acted on
your own responsibility ; hut I neither que»
tinned your pat riotism nor your motives. Bo
lieving that wfit re orders were transcended
investigation, as a matter of course, ought to
follow, a* due injustice to the government and
the offi-er. unless there he strong reasons to
the contrary, I came to the meeting under th
impression that, the usual course ought to b<
pursued m this case, which I supported hy pr.
seutuig ludy & Ireely all the arguments that oc-
meats growingoot 61* a more enlarged view of
the subject, as connected with the conduct ot
Spain and her officers, and tbe course of policy
which honor and juterest dictated to be pursue
towards her, with Which some of the members
of the cabinet were more familiar than myselt,
and whose^Iutv it was to present that aspect ot
the subject, as.it was mine to present that more
imm|diatelv connected with the military opera
tion^ After deliberately weighing every qees
tion VVheo ihe memt-ers of the cabinet came to
form (hetr final opinion on a view of the whole
ground it W a ® unanimously dotermit*ed,* ns I
understood^, in favor of iUe’ wwoo
and which was fully made known to you by Mr.
Monroe’s letter ot the IDth ot July *
gaVe it my assent and support, as being that
which*, under all the circumstances, the public
interest required to be adopted.
I shall nuw turn to the examination of the
version which jMr Crawford,ha* given of my
course in this important deliberation, begin
ning with his “apology for having disclosed
what took-place in a cabinet meeting. * lie
says, “In the summer alter the meeting, an ex
tract of si letter from Washington was pub
iished in a Nashville paper, in which it was
slated that l (Mr Crawford) bad proposed to
arrest General Jackson, but that he was trium
phantly hefended by Mr Calhoun and Mr. Ad
ams. This letter, 1 always believed, was writ-
*en by Mr Calhoun, or by his direction* U
had (he desired effect ; General Jack on be
came inimical to me, and friendly to Mr. Cal
houn. 4 * •
I am not at all surprised that Mr. Crawford
should feel that he stands in need of an apolo
gy for be'r iving the deliberations of the cabi-
r tC t It i», IJoelieve, not only the first instance
m our country, but one of very few instances
Lo be found’in any country, or any age, that
in individual lias felt absolved from the high
obligation which honor and duty impose on
one situated as he was It is not, however,
my intention to comment on the tnorali'y of
his disclosure; that more immediately con
cerns himself; and I leave him undisturbed to
establish his own ruics of honor and fiJelity,
in order to proceed to the examination of a
question in which I am more immediately con
cerned—the truth of his apology.
I desire not to speak harshly of Mr. Craw
ford. I sincerely commiserate bis misfortune.
I may be warm in political contest-; but it is
not in tne to retain enmity, particularly towards
the unsuccessful Iu the political contest
which -ended -tn 1825, Mr Crawford and my
self took opposite sides; but whatever feelings;
of urik ndrtess it gave rise to, have long since
passed away on uiy part. The contest ended
•o an entire change of the political elements of
ihe country ; and, in (he new stale of things
which followed, I found myself acting with
many of the friends of Mr. Crawford, to whom
I had bt-eu recently opposed, and opposed to
many of iny friends, with whom i had. till tGen
lo-eti associated. In this now stale of things,
my inclination, my regard for bis friends who
,vore acting with me, and the success of tbe
cao.-o f. r which wo were jointly contending,
all contributed to remove from my besom eve
ry feeiine iowards him, save that of pdy for
his misfortune. I would not spoak a harsh
wool.jf .Lrvuif/ i‘rtW“drfti , aordinary position in
which ho I) ts placed me, compels me, in self-
defence, to say any thing which inurt, ia its
con.-r.qjence, bear on bis character.
I sp k iu 'In spirit when I assert, as I do,
bat lbs aoologv has no foundation in 'ruth,—
He «-*ff j rs no reason lor charging inc with so
dishonorable an act a- that of betraying the
proc sMings t-l the cabinet, and th it for the
ourpose of i juriug untr of my associates in the
•duiinislration, Tbe rh rge rests wliollv on
• ;s suspicion, to which 1 oppose my positive
•HS 'rtion that is wholly unfounded. I had no
knowledge ol tin* Mw; or connexion with it;
ior do l recoil**; » that. I ever saw ihe extract.
Bu* why charge in *, ,»nd not Mr Adams ?t—
1 bad then been bu! a few months in the adinin-
i iration, ;ind Mjf Crawford and myself were
-.n i he best term-, without a feeling, certainly
•a rny part, of rivalry or jealousy. In assign-
g the motive that h does for the letters, he
o.rgets the relation which existed theti.be-
w*-f*n you and himself. He says it had the
lesired effect;.that v< u became friendly to me,
•nd extremely inimical to him He does not
remember t ; a I vour bostdity to him long pre
ceded tlii^ p :riod, and ha * a very difforeot or-
'gin. He certainly c .old ool have antic.pated
fb-at a copy of his left or would be placed in
your hand.
r.ie.se are not the nlv difficulties uccompa-
ay'iig ins ajiology • tiiere ary others still more
formidable, m l
tier
1818, & Tew day9 after he passed through Au
gusta and a little after, there appeared a state
ment in the Georgia Journal, somewhat vaiied
from that taade in Edgefield, but agreeing
with it in most of the particulars. I cannot lay
rov hand on the article, but have a distiuct
recollection of it Circumstance9 fixed * on
Mr. Crawford and i! has not to my knowledge
been denied v
With such evidence of macuracy. either
from want of memory, or some other cause, in
what relates to his own motives and actions, it
would be unreasonable to suppose that Mr.
Crawford’s statement swill prove more correct
; n -**!>»«'me 1 will now proceed to ex
amine them: fte first states that t proposed
lhat you should “be punished in some form,
or reprimanded in some form;’* and to make
my course more odious, as I suppose, he adds,
that “MV* Calhoun did not propose \d arrest
Gen. Jackson.” I will not dwell on a state
ment which, oo its face is so absurd. How
could an officer under onr law be punished
withoat arrost and trial? And to suppose that
I proposed such a course, would be to rate my
understanding very low.
The next allegation requires much more nt«
tention He says, “indeed my own views on
the subject had uudergone a material change,
after the cabinet had covened. Mr Calhoun
made some allusion to a bitter that General
Jackson had written to the President who had j
he, according to his showipg now, knew that
it was false 1 And how can he reconcile his
silence then, when you stood so moch in need
of his assistance, with his disclosures now;
when the agitation has long since passed away,
and his aid no longer required? But let us
turn to the other branch pf the Legislature,
and see whether any occurrence there can ex
plain this apparent mystery. Gen. Lacock, of
Pennsylvania, tho particular friend of Mr.
Craft ford, aud in the habit of constant inter
course with him, was the chairman of the com
mit tee in that body to Whom the part of the
message which related to the Seminole war
was referred. Mr. Forsyth then, and now a
Senator from Georgia,, and who now acts a
prominent part in the transaction which has
given rise to the present Correspondence was
also a member, and was then, as ho is now, an
intimate personal and political friend of Mr.
Crawford. With two 6uch able and influen
tial friends on the committee, he had the most
favorable opportunity that could be oflkred
to do you justice? That he did not, I need not
offer you arguments to prove. The, report of
the committee is sufficient testimony. Should
fie say that he was restrained by feelings of
delicacy, from interfering with his friends on
ti,e committee, how wnl he reconcile on the
principles oi justice and honor, his silence at-
jter tbe report so severely assailing your mo
tives and conduct when admitting his presept
statement, it was completely io his power to
forgotten that he had receiver! aueh a letter. i iflie!( , you f ron , censure 1
but said if he had received such a one, he
wontd find it and went directly to his cabinet
and brought it ortt. In it Gen. Jackson ap
proves of the determination of the Govern*
men* to break up Amelia Island and Galvcz-
town; and gave it also as his opinion (hat Flor*
ida ought to be taken by the United StateSi
He added, it might be a delicate matter for ; t after an account so minute and circom
the Executive to decide, but if the President i ‘ aiUlJl!t no Mlch iellcr a s ho ever referred to
approved of it, he had only to ge/c n hint to | lvas eV e r _before the cabinet* or alluded to in
some confidential member ol Congress, ™.v j its deliberations. My memory is distinct and
Johnny Ray, and he would do it and take the j clea| . ^ Con fi rmtM | hy the’no less distinct
responsibility upon himself I asked the Pres ; :eCO j[ er ,,; on ot * Mr. Monroe, and Mr. Wirt,
ident if the letter had been answered; lie re
But why should I waste lime and words Id
prove that Mr, Crawford’s wbole course is in
direct conflict, with his present statement of
the proceedings of the cabinet, wheu -there re
mains an objection that cannot be surmount
ed ? The statement is entirely destitute of
foundation. It is not true. Strange as it may
or
-ign
c.eedi:*gs
Mr Me Do li;-.’-
•t «viocb I . .
t’ruwf H i
h’-s c t.‘»i ■
r of Ids
’• : is ’! ) b.-t
on Nashvi!
hi- . .«v.
hi h mu-., compel him to as
a.-oii fof disclosing the pro
tu -I’t
cl' ( | ■ o me of t b i 14* h inst.
*jjie u copy, proves ih^i Mr.
freely of ! he proceedings -(f
■ s w.^y i<> Georgia, in the ,-u n-
aod dates w di show that tie
I nine have seen tin* extract
paper, on which tie now
l'ii deliheraiion <<t the cub
! !
I?. I-
-ei pr-
Li- i t
>: th
13
between the 11 .5 mi 25tii of
‘>0 rhe former Mr Monroe
i t « Washington from London, and 6n
• a general e.xp .sifion ol ttie views
government in - reiatiou to tl»e ope
>n F. r.da appeared in 1I10 lulelli-
I 1 *crter •■( Mr M mroe to you of
J*)'v 1818. iixr - probably the day of
'' final dvcistuu of itie cabinet. Mr Craw
- .r:i Po-s. d'through A .^usta on the 11th Au
irust.. a* aiinotiuced ni itic papers of that city
:0 which day or the proceeding, Ins conversa
tion tor k,place, Co Which Mr. McDuffie s let
f**r relates, most have taken place On a com
orrison «)f-*.eSe dates, y.di rll >«e that it iv is
imp s-iMo (hat Mr. Crawford r ..mM have seen
-ho cxfrac.r f ruin ihe Nashville paper, when he
wasm aftrt-.be must consequently
hod sorrifi otherjjmh ... f., r hi- disr.b.siPc- —
This was not th. o-.l v instance of his making
disclosures* hem*, re s.»w the
plied no, for that he had no recollection of re
ceiving it. 1 then said that I had no doubt
that General Jackson in taking Pensacola, be
lieved that he was doing what the Executive
wished. After that letter was produced un
answered. I should have opposed the infliction
Qf punishment on General Jackson, who had
considered the silence of the President as a ta
cit consent; yet it ttasnftcr the letter was pro
duced and read, that Mr Calhoun made the
proposition to the cabinet f«*r punishing the
General.” Again: “I do not know that lover j
hinted at the letter to the President, yet that
letter had a most important bearing on the de
liberations of the Cabinet, at least in mv mind
and possibly on the minds of Mr Adams & the
President; hut neither expressed any opinion
on the subject. It seems it had none on the
mind of Mr Calhoun, for it made no change
in liis conduct ”
It will b no easy matter f«.*r Mr Crawford
to reconcile tbe statement which he has thus
circumstantially made with his conduct in rela
tion to the Seminole affair, from the time ot the
discussion of the cabinet, till the subject ceas
ed to he agitated.
.. Mt'iTifi^Tgcfiefi statement, of which Mr
McDuffie’s letter gives au account ? The con
trast between that and the present is most
striking, to illustrate which 1 will give an ex
tract from Mr. McDuffie’s letter —Mr McDuf
fie’s letter says that “he (Mr Crawford) sta
ted that you (Mr Calhoun) “bad been in f,iv<>r
of an inquiry int<f the conduct of General Jack
son, and that lie was tho only member of the
cabinet that concurred with you He spoke in
strong terms ot disapprobation of ttie course
pursued by General Jackson not only in hi-
military proceedings, but in prematurely bring
mg (he grounds of bis defence before tin
country, and forestalling public opinion ; thus
anticipating the administration On ibis point
ho remarked, that tf the administration could
not give direction to public opinion, but per
initted a military officer who had violated ins
orders to anticipate them, they had no busi
ness to be at Washington, and bad better re
turn home.” Such was the language then
he’d, and c uch his lone of feeling at that time.
We hear not one tvord of the letter which
makes so conspicuous a figure iu his present
statement; not one word of the change it ef
fected in his rnind in relation to your conduct ;
not a word of lus taking a course different
from me : but on the contrary he then sta
ted directly, that be concurred with me in fa
voring au inquiry, and indicated no difference
on any other point ; and so tar from exempt
ing Vou from the charge of breach of orders,
as.he now attempts to do, he asserted posi
tively, that you had violated your orders.——
Shull we find an explanation of the conirast in
the two statements iu the difference of his mo
tives then and now ? Is his motive now to in
jure me, as was it then to attack another mem-
j her of the administration ? Or must it be ;.t-
j tr.buted as lire more charitable interpretation
to the decay ot memory ? Whatever may he
the true explanation, all will agree that a state
ment when events were fresh on the memory
is to be trusted in preference to one made
twelve years alter the transaction, particularly
it ?he former accords with after events, and
ihe latter does not, as is the case in this in
stance. At the next session of Congress, your
conduct in the Seminole war was severely at-
tHiked in both brauches ®f the Legislature —-
Let us see if the course pursued by Mr Craw-
as wiil fully appear by copies of their state
ments herewith enclosed. Feelings of delica
cy growing out ot the political relation ol Mr.
Adams & Mr. Crown nffiield, the other member
of the then administration, both towards you
and myself, have restrained mo from applying
for (tie r statements; but I^I.ave uot the least
apprehension that they Would ■‘vary Iroin Mr.
Monroe’s or Mr. Wirt’s.?
Comment is useless. 1 will n >t attempt to
explain so gross a mi-statement ot the procee
dings of the cabinet, but will leave it to those
friends of Mr. C who have placed h*tn in this
dilemma, to determino whether Ins hose state
ment is to be attributed to an entire decay of
memory, or to some other caui-c , and d
former to exethpt themsolvos <rom tbe respon
sibility of thus cruelly exposing a weakness
which it was their duty to conceal.
It now becomes necessary to say something
of your letter of the 6: h January to which Mr.
Crawford has given in his statement, with so
much prominence. My recoliec'ion n relation
to it, accords with Mr Monroe’s statement.—
I came into his room when he had Apparently
just received the letter, lie was indisposed
at li»R tinM* I fhlvlt he opuritM 1 tiie letter irt
my presence, and finding it was from you be
gave me tbe letter to road. 1 cast mv ey* s o-
ver it, and remarked that it related to the
Seminole affair, and would require his atten-
'ion or something to that effect ; 1 thought no
more of it. Long after, 1 think it was at the
commencement of the next Congress, I heard
ouio allusion which brought the letter to tny
recollection. It was lioin a quarter which in
duced me to believe that it came from Mr.
Oxawlurd. 1 called and mentioned it to Mr.
Monroe, and found that he had entirely forgot*
ten the letter. After searching some time
wa< at M‘t!o
r
-o ' b 16
exirac: He
• ’>f August,
Acquiesced svoufd prob bly be more correct at least
a 'ipphciibitr'tLj one ir tiub* r of th*- cabinet.
tl w * sil na* to be understood ns intinn'iinz th:tt Mi-
\dams lind th * least connexion »v« b lb* ffiur. I belinve
•mo lobe inter | y incapable of *uchba». hc* -
miked ft? 1 ** A th ® aJ °* 0#w 3** Mc *> uflia » Appendix
f°rd aud his personal confidential friends, can
he reconciled to the statement which he now
gives of his course in the cabinet. Mr. Cobb
ot Georgia, now no more, was then a promin
( j nt member of ihe House of Representatives
He was the particular, personal and eonfiden-
tial trieod of Mr Crawford, bu near neighbor,
and formerly a law student under him What
p.irt did he take ? He led the attack ; he
moved tho resolutions against you ; he accus
ed you expressly of the violation of your or
ders, and sustained the accusation with all his
powers.* Ail this accords with Mr Craw*
ford’s statement of his sentiment and course
at the time : tmt how can it bo reconciled to
bis present statement ? How could he on any
principle of justice stand by and hear you thus
falsely accused u the face of the world, when
* '6* Vpp-iotix
Robert Uaroett.-
H. <1. Letters from tbe Honorable
he found it among some other papers, aud read
it, as he told me lor the first time.
Having staled these fact?* I should he want
ing iu candor, were I not also to state, that if
the facts had been otherwise, had Mr. M mroe
read your letter and intentionally omitted an
swering it and had it been broo-'ht before
the cabinet, in my opinion it would not
have had the least influence on its delibera
tion. The letter was not received till several
weeks after the orders lo you were issued,/and
could not, therefore, as you know, have had
any influence in drawing them up; anil such I
conceive was your opinion, as i do no- find any
allusion io the letter in your public and private
correspondence at tho tune, which would not
have been the case, had it, in your opinion,
formed a part of your justification. You rest*
ed your deteuce on what I conccivo to bo
much more elevated ground—on the true con
struction, as you supposed of your orders, and
and the necessity ot tho measures which you
adopted to terminate the war, and not on any
supposed secret wish of the Executive in oppo
sition to the public orders under which you
acted. Mr Crawford m placing yoiir justifica
tion hozv on such grounds, not only exposes
your motives to be questioned, but as far as his
acts can, greatly weaken vour defence.
On a review of this subject, it is impossible
not to be struck with the time and mode ct
bringing og this correspondence. It is now
twelve years since the termination of the Se
minole war. Few events in our history have
caused so much excitement, or hecu so fully,
discussed, both in and out of Congress Du-/
ring a greater part of this long period, Mr.
CrawforJ was a prominent actor on the public
stage, seeing and hearing all (bat occurred,
and without restraint, according to his own
statement, to disclose freely all he knew; yet.
not a word is uttered by him in your behalf)
but now, when you have triumphed over all
difficulties, when you no longer require de®
fence, he, for the first time, breaks silence, not
to defend you, hut to accuse one who gave yoii
every support in your hour of trial in his power,
when you were fiercely attacked, if not by Mr.
Crawford himself, at least by some of his most
confidential and influential friends Nor is tha
manner less remarkable than the time Mr.
Forsyth, a Senator from Georgia, here in hi#
place, writes to Mr Crawford, his letter cov-
ring certain enclosures, and referring to cer
tain correspondence and conversations in rela-
t S* c my teller to Mr. Monroe and Mr. Wirt, and
ih'iir answers; also a letter to Mr. Adntns, and his answer
written since the date of this letter. Mr. Crowninshiek!
‘he other Member of the Cabinet was absent, teehia idler.
See appendix, J. h* L. M. N* Q, P.