Newspaper Page Text
cuippcr' iuinc4. The great rna&s of p«r<
native eftppjr, it; sni.l, lie* in the b«d of
the river winch empties into
Lake Superior on the south.
The cl finiteof Huron is Uc votWl the
iilueuce of ths lake, ami is riunnrkahly
tine ml pare, fremark* Mr. Ctlrfc A-
Arater, who ac rompanied the negoetators
in making the Indian treaty befone allu
ded to. ) The table land, east of the
Mississippi, is about jIM:) feet above the
level of the sea. The streams of this re
gion, copiously and briskly gliding o
ver pebbles of cornelian, topaz, jasper,
agates, opal and quartz, are as pure as
crystal. Originating in springs, they are
coni enough for drinking in the hottest
day in August. The Mississippi, from
Hock Island to the mirth of the Oniscon
hiti, a distance of two hundred miles and
upwards, and which forms the western
boundary of the cedar territory, is on an
average, about three fourths of a mile
in widllu The fish are abundant, of fine
flavor, and furnish food for the Idiaus on,
the wester • shore of that beautiful river.
The Ouiscotisin is about half a mile in
width, a a 1 at a low stage of water, is
shallo w mrl full of islands and sand-bars;
asceiiding tHI miles from its mouth, the
whole surface appears covered with wild
rice (when in its season,) Rock river is a
beautiful stream. It has various branches,
which form the swift currents, must fur
nish sites for mills in abundance. Sunflow
ers and rosen-weed (from the position of
its leaves the N. and S. point of compass
can be ascertained,) abound, as also nu
merous flowers, shrubs, &e.
The soil of the immense prairies is fine
for growing gram, far. The prairie wolf,
between the black wolf and the grey fox,
infests all p uts of the prairies, and is a
very mischievous animal. The musk-rat
occupies the lake and streams.
she trees of tins region are confined to
tie- banks of the water courses, and to
rough places, and oaks, red, white and
brack, are the most common gfowth in
leg*' grounds, while in wet ones, the bo
tu tv is richer.
Tim mounds are lofty piles or rocks, m
the r natural aosition, except such as have
fallen downwards from their summits.—
These piles lying in horizontal strata, are
verv el.-watcd, and may he seen in any
direction.
l T :>ou the ogamzing of the territory of
II tiro a, the seat of government will doubt
less be at Green 15uv: hut the spot dt-stg
n 'i and .iji the future sent of government in
ill at tfiipfory, is somewhere near the !’ur
tage,. between tiie Ouiscotisin and Fox
rivers"
Some-have entertained fears that our
territory was too extensive, and that we
should be iu danger of dismemberment;
but ill experience shows this argument
to lip weak and fallacious. So long as
the old states can swarm so easily into the
lICW terhtorirn* Imvnitf fimih fiAoilitirm t<»o T
as the New Englanders have, there will
be no fear of dismemberment.
Feelings of consanguinity would for
hid the entertainment of such opinions.—
Th" people of anew state have generally
enough to do, in clearing up their lands,
without indulging treasonable designs
against the govern tpe lit.
»w. ant t. 1- m. j »»» in m — ■ '»e»r»a.
POLITICAL.
Mll. MADISON’S LETTER.
the American Sentinel.
:>i<i.\ rpr.t.iLK, June ’25, 1831'
T)rar Sir: 1 have received your friend
ly i< tter of 18th trtfil. The lew lutes
wh clt .liiswcriu! vour former one of the
21. U of Jun't.iry liu-t, were written in liuste
and 1,1 hud health ; but they expressed,
though Without the attention in some re- 1
spects line to tiie occasion, a dissent from
the v iews of the President, as to a Bank
of th United States, and a substitute for
it: to winch i cannot, hut adhere. The
oi.j ctioos to the latter have appeared to
me '•» preponderate greatly over the ad
vautnges expected from it, and the consti
tutio laltty of the former 1 still regard as
sits: 1 dby the considerations to which I
yielded, in giving my assent to the exist
ing Rank.
The charge of inconsistency between tny
objection to the constitutionality of such
a bank in 1701, and my assent in 1817,
tun:., on the question how far legislative
precedents, expounding the constitution,
ought to guide succeeding legislatures,
an I to over-ruie in tividir.il opinions.
Suttne obscurity has been thrown over
the question, by confounding it with the
res pc t due from one legislature to laws
passed by preceding legislatures. But
the two cases are essentially dtflerent.
A 'constitution being derived from a su
per.or authority, is to he expounded and
obeyed, not c out rolled of varied by the
subordinate authority of a legislature.—
A taiv on the other hand, resting on no
higher authority than that possessed by
every successive legislature, its expedien
cy as vy.-ll as its meaning is within the
scope of the latte*.
Tiie ease in question has its true anal
ogy in the obligation arising from judi
cial expositions of the law on succeeding
Judges; the constitution being a law to
the legislator, as the law is a rule of de
cision to the Judge.
V 1 1 why are judicial precedents, when
formed 00 due discussion and considera
tion, a.id deliberately sanctioned bv re
views and repetitions, regarded as of
hi i.l-ng influence, or rattier of authorita
tive force, in settling the meaning of a
law? It m Ist he answered, Ist, because
it is a reaso table and established axiom,
that the good of society requires that the
rules ot'conduct of its members should he
c rt fa and known, which would not he
the case if any Judge, disregarding the
dec.sinus of Itis predecessors, should to
ry the rule oflntr according to his indi-
vidual mlerpretation of it. MiscTa est
servitus übi jus est nut vagum aut incog
nitnm. 'id, because an exposition of the
law publicly made, and repeatedly con
firmed by the constituted autlmmy, carries
with it, by fair inference, the sanction of
those who, having made the law through
their legislative organ, appear under cir
; cuinstaiices to have determined its mean
ing through their judiciary organ.
Can it he of less consoqm'ncq that the
' meaning of a constitution should he fixed
unit known, that the meaning of a law
■ should be so? Can united a law he fixed
j in its meaning and operation, unless th.
| constitution be mol On the contrary, if
a particular legislature, differing thecon
' struction, of the constitution, from a se
ines of preceding construction.-, proceed
to act on that difference, they not only
introduce uncertainty and instability in
the constitute'm, but in the laws themsclvs;
inasmuch as ail laws preceding the new
construction and inconsistent with it, «r«
not only annulled for the future, Imt vir
tually pronounced nullities from the be
giuing.
Rut it is said that the legislator having
sworn to support the Constitution, must
support it iu his own construction of it,
i however different from that put on it by
' his predecessors. And is not the Judge
under the same oath to support the law?
yet has it ever been supposed that he was
i required, or at lilx l'ly to disregard nj I
precedents, however solemnly repeated
| and regularly observed; and by giving
effect to his own abstract and individual
opinions, to disturb the established course
of practice iu the business of the commit
i nity ? If is the wisest and most consci-
| entiotis Judge ever scrupled to acquiesce
in dicisions iu which he has been over
ruled by the matured opinions of the ma
jority of his colleagues ; and subsequent
ly to conform himself thereto, as to au
thoritative expositions of the law? And
I it is not reasonable that the same view of
the official oath should he taken by a le
gislator, acting under the Constitution,
which is his guide, as is taken by a judge,
acting under the law, which is his ?
There is in fact and in common under
standing, a necessity of regarding a course
of practice, as above characterized, in the
light of a legal rule of interpreting a law:
and there is a like necessity of consider
ing it a constitutional rule of interpreting
a constitution.
There may lie extraordinary and pe
culiar circumstances controlling the rule
in both cases, may lie admitted: but with
such exceptions, the rule will force itself
oil the practical judgment of the most ar
dent theorist. He will find it impossible
to adhere to, and act officially upon, his
solitary opinions as to the meaning of the
law or constitution, in opposition to a
construction reduced to practice, during
a reasonable period of time; more espe
“•'•'h* n tx.ro no nrospect existed of a
change of con ft ruction by tfio ptiDiic oi ns
agents And if a reasonable period of
time, marked with usual sanctions, would
not bar the individual prerogative, there
could he no limitation to its exercise, al
though the danger of error must increase
itli tlie increasing oblivion of explana
tory circumstances, and with the contin
ual changes in the import of words and
phrases.
Let it then he left to the decision of ev
ery intelligent and candid Judge, which,
on the whole, is most to be relied on for
the true and safe construction of the con
stitution, that which has the uniform sanc
tion of successive legislative bodies
through a period of years, and under the
varied ascendancy of partiespor that which
depends upon the opinions of every legis
lature, heated as it may be by the spirit,
either in the pursuit of some favorite ob
ject, or led astray by the eloquence and
addresss of popular statesmen, them
selves, perhaps, under the influence of the
same misleading causes.
, It Was in conformity with the view
here taken, of respect due to deliberate
and reiterated precedents, that the Rank
of the United States, though on the or
iginal question held to be unconstitution
al, received the executive signature in the
year 1317. The net originally establish
ing a Bank had undergone ample dis
cussio’ts in its passage through the sever
al branches of the government. It had
been carried into execution throughour a
period of twenty years with annual legis
lative recognition ; in one instance, in
deed, with a positive ramification of it in
to anew State : and with the entire ac
quiescence of all the local authorities, as
well as of the nation at large; to all of
which may be added, a decreasing pros
pect, of any change in the public opinion
adverse to the constitutionality of such
an institution. A veto from the execu
tive under these circumstances, with an
admission of the expediency and almost
necessity of the measure, would have been
a defiance of all the obligations derived
from tt course of precedents amounting to
the requisite* evidence of the national
judgments and intention.
It lias been contended that the authority
of precedents was in that case invalidated
by the consideration, that they proved on
ly a respect for a stipulated duration of
the Bank, with a toleration of it until the
law should expire, and by the casting vote
given in the Senate by the Vice President
in the year 1811, against a bill for estab
lishing a National Rank, the vote being
expressly given on the ground of uncott
stitutioiiality. Rut if the law itself was
unconstitutional, the stipulation was void,
and could not he constitutionally fulfilled
or tolerated. And ns to the negative of
[ the Senate by the casting vote of the pre
siding officer, it is a fact, well understood
•it the time, that it resulted not from an
j equality of opinions in that assemble on
; t'.to power of Congress to establish it
Rank, but from a junction of those who
i admitted the power, but disapproved the
plan, with those who denied the power.
On a simple question of constitutionality,
there.tvas a decided majority in favor of
5
Mrs. Madison joins me in hoping that
| you will not fail to make the intended vis
it to Virginia, which promises us tire
; pleasure of welcmniug you to our domicil,
‘ and in a sincere return of all the good
wishes you kindly rexpess for us.
JAMES MADISON.
i Mr. Ixcansoi.i,.
From Ike Hus' ington Globe of July 11.
It will he ri’memliorfld that we sometime ngn
■ denied tint nnv member of Congress was auth
orised by the. President to inform Messrs. Ing
ham, Berrien, and Branch, “that'll inis his de
te ewi ration to remote thi IP frow ’ dice it th/ y re
fused tu compel their families tie associate, with
i that of .Major Eaton — This was pronounced
! an equivocal denial and Col. Johnson, from
; Kenlnekv, was pointed out, in letters, as the
member of Congress making the cnmnrrnitlca
, lion to those pe.nl[omen, ami upon his character
j the story was propagated a* entitled to credence
J although emphatically denied in the Globe.
\\ e now declare, with nit qualification, that
] Col. Jidinson never did make such c minunica
] lion to Messrs Ingham, Berrien, and Branch.as
that imputed to him He assured those gentle
j men un the contrail/ that the. President did not
1 e <1 ire. social iatei course better en the fumilies of
I thi member* of the Cabinet uml that he express
j ty disclaim'd any such pretension.
From the Washington City Globe.
MR. BKSIUF.S TO MR El AIR
Washington. I Vtli July. 1331.
Bir —ln an arlielo under the Editorial head in
your paper ol this morn ng. which has relation
toa controversy between the Kditor of the Tel
egraph and yourself, I observe the following re
mark:—
‘‘At this point, we should have dropped the
controversy, but vc have understood, that it. is
reported to give countenance 10 the contradict
ed statement of the Tclegtapfc, that Mr Berrien
has received a letter from Colonel Johnson,
which shows that he . ad no wart ant tor the de
inal, we made as to him. Wo take the liberty,
therefore, of quoting from the letter of ('monel
Johnson, which wo nave, hir express declara
j lion, that the President did not make the exae
j <ion of the members of his (Cabinet., charged by
j the Telegraph. The Colonel says—“lie [Gen
Jackson] never authorized me to requiro social
j intercourse, Ac. Ac lie always .disclaimed it
! I told the parties so.” These ale the words of
I'ho ( Oloncl, to the wotd, point, and letter If
| this does not satisfy, we must refer the parties'
making the charge, to the witness called by
t them."
I The reference thus made to me, renders it nc
j cessary. that 1 should submit tho following ob
: serrations to the public, and I have accordingly
to ask that you will give tlioni a place in your
paper.
1 have rot authorized tho report of which you
speak, and I would have told you so, without
hesitation if you had intimated its existence to
me. That such a course would have been more
conformable to the views of Colonel Johnson, 1
infer from the following considerations
I have a letter from hat gontleinan in which,
after Mating hisobject,and motives, in seeking
the interview, which with lire approbation ot
the President, he held with Messrs, Branch, Ing
ham, and myself, he proceeds to remark that lie
has not himself seen the necessity, or propriety,
ot any allusions in newspapers, to this interview
-and adds, that if any should consider it neces
convcrsation correctly, for which purpose his
views wete made known in that letter, in order
that any misunderstanding might he corrected.
Acquiescing in tho propriety of this suggestion,
I immediately communicated to Col Johnson,
a statement ol the conversation referred to, as it
was very distinctly impressed upon my memo
ry—and sufficient lime has not yet elapsed, lie
lieve, to Authorize me to expect an answer in the
regular cours* of the mail. However this may
he, I have not received any Independently
therefore of my reluctac. ;e to appear before tho
public, in red rUon to any matters conneet r d with
tho dissolution of the late cabinet, a reluctance
which could only be yielded to my own strong
conviction of the propriety of such a measure, 1
have thought that the understanding implied in
tin correspondence, to which I have referred
would lie violated, by publishing a statement of
what passed at the interview in question, until
it could he accompanied by the remarks of Co
lonel Johnson, on that which I had transmitted
to him. A departure from this understanding.
by that gentleman himself, would of course re
lieve mo from its obligation. But from the ten
or of your editorial article. I infer that the act. of
publishing tho extract from his letter is not au
thorised by him. I adhere therefore at pres.nt,
to the determination, which I had formed; and
assuming that your object as public jo 'realists,
is to present nothing to your renders which is
not true, and not to withhold from them, that
v\ hiclt is so. I take the lilrerty o f suggesting, a-
Well to the editor of the Telegraph, as to your
sell, tiio propriety ol abstaining from any par
tial and imperfect statements of the convbrsa
timi, occurred a tho interview in question.
1 he delusion produced by such statements, must
be speedily corrected; but until that correction
is made, their etl'c.ct is to mislead the public
mind, on a snhject of awakening interest to the
American people.
I am, very respectfully, bir, your obedient scr
uant.
j\ t o. McPherson berrien.
To Francis P. HI air, Esq.
E, iter ~ f the Globe.
MR. BLAIR re MR BKHRtEN.
Washington, duty 10, 1831.
Dr.An Sir—l liavo tins moment received y'our
letter, to wliidi I will ijivo immediate publicity.
I did not suppose that you had authorized tin
report which impos' and on me the necessity of
giving r.n extract from Col. Johnson’s letter
Under such an impression. I would not have
hesitated to call upon you to disavow it. Tiie
report, i knew, was false, and was merely cir
culated, to keep in countenance the charge made
against the President until it could work some
prejudice against him in the public mini!. 1
did not supjKise lhat you were an accessary in
this business, and tio cfi.ro, w ould .not insult
you by an application which Could only be fouii
ed on such an inference
The course I have taken with regard to Col
Johnson’s letter, grew out of circumstances
which will justify me to him, although he did
nut authorize me to publish hie letter. = My sole
object was, at once, to clear the skirts of the
President of a charge which yon are well a
ware ought not to be attached to him, for you
hav , as I understand, explicitly declared that
he disrlniined ! . you, at tiie time wheii you were
iu CoiutnUoMaltim with Col. Johnson, any design
like that now imputed to him.
\\ i li regard to conversations between your
self and t.ol Johnson. I shall certainly abstain.
j» I have hitherto abstained, from makiit" “any
partial or imperfect statements "
1 atn, sir ; your obedient servant,
K P. BLAIR.
From the Globe of July 22.
XIII BKRRIKN TO MR. HI. An.
Washington, July 2H, 1831.
Fir: Your note of yesterday was received un
dor circumstance! winch prevented my immedi
ate attention tu 1 reply to it now, i > correct
the niistf'prcscn'.ai.vm Vito <*. hjr’i you have been 1
led, and which, bv lltc nuMicif v which yen ha e I
given to it, is calculated to mislead flic public.
I extract from your note the following sen
tence:
“M v sole olidet was to clr-r the skir sos the
President from a charge, which yon are well a
’ ware ought not to he attached to him; tor you
have, as I understand, explicitly declared, that
he disclaimed m you. at the time when vou were
in communication with Col Johnson, any de
sign like that now impli ed to him ”
I make this quotation lor the purpose of say
ing to you, tiiat you have been en’irely ntisin
(ol ineil—that the statement contained in this
extract is not warranted liy any and claratiou ev
er made by [me:] amt stili a sinning it to be your
wish to represent this matter truly to the pub
lie. lam under the necessity ot asking you tu
give publicity to this note.
1 am, very respectfully, Sir, your obedient
serv't,
.IN. MACPHKRSON BERRIEN.
To Francis P. IS:air , Fsq. Kditor of the Globe.
MR. £I. AIK TO MR. Bir.RirN.
Washing ton. July 20. 1 Mill
fin: Your note of this morning will be given
immediately to the press. In reference to the
sulj<ct of-• hu hit ti cits, you da me but. justice
when you say that “I wish to represent this mat
ter truly to the public ” You will penult me,
tin lel'orc. briefly loshow the ground on which I
foil ntysc.f authorized to say that ‘ you irr.t
well aicuie,” that the charge implicating the
President, ought not In he attached to him, and
t hat you had vom sell t-xplii it ly declared that he
disclaimed the purpose imputed to him.
As lo the first branch of this statement,
which you uo not seem directli to controvert,- I
have to support me the positive written declara
tion of Col Johnson, in w) ich he says that the
President always disclaimed such a requisition,
and that he laid, you so. Besides tins, I have
before me, in the liand willing of the President,
the identical paper, which he read to yourself,
and Messrs Branch and Ing am, and which
presented the attitude that he th' light it his du
ly to a seme iu relation to the cucuinstanccs
which adapted the harmony and character of
his 1 ahiuet. 'I lie course which lie thought
proper then to adopt, was predicated on inf r
ination given him by Several members of COll
gress.showing that a combination had been en
leredinto, in which yourself and the other gen
tlemen named were concerned to disgrace Ma
jor Eaton, and coerce his dismission from the
Cabinet. After a prefatory verbal explanation
of tho reasons inducing the interview, the Pres
ident proceeded to say, that if it were true, that
you had taken the course of which he spoke, lie
felt himself cal cd on to make the decimation
which lin read to you from Ins written memo
randum, in which he says that it was, using his
own wolds, “eot only uiq-iut in iteolf. iert high
ly disrespectful to me” (the President) “and
. well calculated to destroy the harmony of my
Cabinet The grounds upon which this opinion
is founded, are substantially these. / do ,at
elaini the right to ihtcrj’crc, in any manner, in
the dam: Stic relation or /icisonut intercourse of
any member of my Cabinet, nor have 1 in any
manner attempt! U it." i\ r
In 1 lie conclusion of the same paper, after re
capitulating the circumstance to which he wish
ed to cull your attention lie says, as the result
of the matter, ‘ therefore hare l sought this in
terview, to assure you that if there os any truth
in the report that y./u liarc antered into the com
bination churgtil. to time Major Eaton from m ,
Cabinet, that I feel it an indignity and insult of
fered to mysef, and is of a character that will
he console red if."
This is the ground on which this matter was
placed bi the President in Ins interview with
you ri the beginning 01 the diriiculties. Arid
from i', and the absolute asseveration of Col.
Johnson, I consider my statement, lhat you weio
ic U jin-M.ec that llic. President, disclaimed all
right ty mterlere amt dictate Um soCiiit inter
course of tho family of any member of the l abi
net, to be iccLl warranted.
That 1 am also well warranto din having said
that you, yourself, had declared that tho Presi
dent disclaimed to you any disposition of the
sort, will appear from the extract which I make
from a lettei of your own now before me. Al
ter recapitulating a conversation of your own,
held with Cos! Johnson, (tho tenor of which you
inform rna is to be adjusted between you and
him,) you make this single remark in relation
to 1 lie President:
“In the interview to wlii< U I was invited by
the President, s me fe w days afterwards, i
Jrankly cxpoied to him my cicicson this subject,
and he disclaimed any disposition to press such
a requisition.”
In tins yon have .illusion to the written de
claration read to you by the President, m inch
can bear no other interpretation than that which
you have given il in tins extract.
In built tiie points presented by me, in the
extract quoted 111 yout last note, I feel myself
lullv sustained hy 1 lie documentary evidence,
w.iicli I now lay before you; and trust you will
also consider it as fully vindicating the state
ment which I have made. Having thus justifi
ed niysolf, you will permit mo to conclude my
correspondence with you.
I am, Sir, your obedient setvant,
F. P. BLAIR.
MU BLUntEN TO MR. BLAIR
Whshiiigton 20 th July, 1331.
Sr.: I have tins moment received your'note,
in answer to mine ot tins dale 1 make no a
pologv for couth uing tins correspondence, al
though you intimate a wish to conclude it, be
cause it will be readily understood that it is in
your character as a public journalist, and not
as an individual, that 1 add I ess you. I exercise
a rigid, therefore, which, as tho Editor of a pub
lic journal, jou can with no propriety withhold,
when [claim the insertion of this note in the
same paper which conveys your own communi
cation lo tiie puolic.
1 tepeat the quotation from your ne'e of yes
terday :
“Mv sole object was at once to clear the
skirts of tho President of a charge, which you
are well aware ought not to be attached to him;
for you have, as 1 understand, declared that he
ditcianmd lo you, at the time when you Mere
ia communication with Col. Johnson,' any de
sign like that now imputed to him ”
j 1 lie first remark which I have to make upon
this quotation, with reiererroo to your observa
tion that f did nut scum to controvert the first
branch "f this statement, is tiie follow it g:
1 o ur assertion that 7 was will aware that tiie
charge against the President, to which you re
ferred, ought not to he attached to him, u4s
made expressly to rrst upon t;our understanding
lhat I had explicitly declared, that lie (tiie pre
sident) disclaimed to me any such design.
When, therefore, I told you that such a state
ment was not warranted bv anv declaration ev
er made by me, and of course that your uinlur
standing was not correct, I gave you a very;
broad denial of my having any such knowledge I
as that whieh you iia .c imputed to trie. Ju more
distinct terms liowcv t.(if tint he possible.) 1
now renew t int declaration / hrme no such
knowledge.. Nay, more, Hir; I hive no knowl- '
edge ol the paper, “in the hand writing of the j
I President,’ to which you refer No sueli paper j
j was ever read to mo, or shown to me, or spoken 1
of to me. If it had been, 1 should most certain- |
ly not now have had occasion to uddiess myself j
;to tho public on tins subject, through the eo! j
1 umnsofyour paper.
Having thus disposed of tho paper to which
you ret r, and >how 11 that this can furnish no j
! ground for your understanding of u-h it I us or i
1 tens not atruia of, since I n'ri i saw it, and its j
r a ill nits were urn r eomminiiale.il to 111 , I ad-1
j veil next to your suggestion, that tins iimlsr- 1
1 blanijiiqj i-ujrijuteil try (,\J Johns >n’» pnai- 1
tiv asseveration U;*n jin* sufijocl Ihave *;
ready tmd the piiOkc,-thr.nigh y„i,. rt, Hf j
.srder myself bound by ihe -implied, limle tat and
tng resulting from my cowesponor with il.at
gentleman, not to publish aßy stateiernt ..f r 1,..
conversation which nt'Uiicd between him,
tlr-ssrs. Brmeh. and Ingham, and niysc I', onlil
lie shall have lind a reirtoeahle, time to ri'nlv to
my Ictt r 1 told V"«. at the -nine • j
11V departure from this understanding. « h'eh
was authorized bv that gentleman u onbl ah- ,|v,.
me from its obligation. 1 stilt adhere to ti,j s
view, and content mvse'f. al pro—»nt; wit U 're
pealing, in refer rice to lhat ot'winch v«n si|.,-
pos; me to be well aware, lhat 7 ha re no Such
knowledge The time must speedily arrive
when this forbearance will he no longer iijecc.- a
ry-
Y'our Hex! reference is to a te’ ter of mine to
Mfij. Eaton, which you sov is in yotir possess
ion As you have puhli-hed an rjtrnet. von am
bound In give the correspondence —even hcfoie
'hat is done, it is very e;c-v lo see Unit you have,
entirely mi- understood tJc* r-xprcssion which you
have quoted—that a rii. elatuier of an o' 111 iv-i
to press a requisition, is a wholly diffeieht thing
fro n n denial of ever having m ids it: ami That
in using this expression i could not hove had al
lusiomto “a written declaration,” which l had
never seen or hoard of
Y- it will perceive then, Eir, that, van arc
wholly unsustained in all the points’of vdur
statement, except by a declaration w hich you
admit that you have used «i limit authority, and
which will l.e met if it becomes necof snrv. As
a faithful journalist, you will, ot course', seize
• the occasion to correct your esror. You ein
no dotih ,do this, in relation to tho paper
which you have placed so much reliance, by'a
direct appeal to the President, who will not , l
think, authorize the statement that that paper
was ever shown to me. I lovvever this may be, I
bear this testimony »o the truth. Neither invi
ting controversy, nu seeking pofiiicil effect, I
find myselt in 3 position, in which i must ei
ther speak, or silently peimil. tiie public to tie
misled 1 have a sufficient reuse <TwlV:t is duo
to them, not toinliude myself nncai'cd upon
their notice; and the ensriov,sne-s 1 f u hat I
owe to inyscl will not permit me to shrink from
the performance of my duty.
I am, very respectfully. Bir your ob't rrry’t
'.IN. Me Pit HR BON BERRIEN.
To Francis P. Hi air Esq
Editor of the Glebe.
MR. BKAtn TO SIR. BKRRIV.J!
Washington, July 21, 18”!.
Hir: \ r our last letter was 1 cceived late at
night, when tho Globe tvas made ip fur the
press To give it insertion with the correspon
dence which preceded it rendered it necessary
that 1 should defer the whole until this day ,4ml
substitute other matter, previously tel up, for
my paper.
tViliiout advertinir to the special pleading of
votir letter, (in which being no lawyer, 1 have
noskiH.) 1 come at once to 1 lie point You tak.o
issue again with u.c.by declaring ! that no such
/mper as that quoted by Me irns ever rend tu [.yo,]
or shown to you, or spoken of to non." And you
further say, that the President '“will nut. you
think, authorize the. statement that that paper
was ever shown tu [you.' ]
1\ hen the statement which I made, predica
ted upon Col. Johnson s letter, was impeached
' in your second note. 1 made the appeal to .the
President which you seem to think 1 ought'row
to make, fie immediately put into my hands
the original memorandum Which lie wrote, and
w hich he rctni to Messrs. B anch, Ingha.n, and
yourself; and I atn now expressly authorized to
-fate again, that in the interview referred to' in
mv note and in your own letter, quoted theTeff,
he held in his hand, and read to y ti, the paper
from which I hare gicen the extracts, which you
say yvas never read, shown, or spoken of to you.
And lam authorized further to suy, lhat i f you
will call on the President he will exhibit and
. tv y./.-t ill is O’ emit iturnvt till. It was prv
paicd by him in contemplation that the inter
view might lead to an immediate dissolution of
his cabinet, and it was intended by him to record
the basis he assumed in doing an act which in
volved his own character and the interests of
the country. The paper thus prepared by thi
President was communicated at tho time t
several of Ins friends, whom lie consulted on the
occasion. And the substance of the conversa
tion which preceded and followed the commu
nication was also immediately reduced to \vr.-
ling, and connected with the document read t..
you, that nothing might he left to n c dicctiqn.
if circumstances at a remote period should main,
a reference to it necessary. With regard to n
transaction so recorded, 'and vouched bv tin
concurrent testimony of those nonsuited oil tin
occasion, there ran be no mistake. A man':,
.memorymay he treaeheinus when the maifhim.
self is honest. I am willing to believe this is
your case You have innocently lh'rgoUen tin
declaration made by the President winch stahds
authenticated .os 1 have told you, as wadi .as the
communication of the same purport made to yon
by col. Johnson.
I am obliged lo rely on this mriUr.n- record of
a fact, rather than mi your memory, especially
when I find this positive proof Continuing tin.
statement of cul. Johnson, that the Predden'
disclaimed any right or desire to interfere with
the private associations of yourself or your fam
ily, and that y a knew it.
I next quoted your own written adtnissioi
confirming the statement of col Johnson and
the written recotd of the Preside it, in the fol
lowing inords: “In tho interview to which I was
invited by the President, .ome few* days after
wards, (after col. Johnson’s visit,) I frankly ex
pressed to hi limy views on ihe subject, and he
disclaimed any disposition to press such are
qiusilion.”
You sjy that “a disclaimer of an intention to
press such a tequisition, is a w holly differont
thing from denial of ever having made it.”
1 thougnt not, in this case; because no such
requisition had been made Col. Johnson sqys
ilm President disclaim'd to him anv desire to
control yout and micstic affairs, or private .inter
course, and he told you a The record of what
tiie President said to you, declares, tit a e clai
med no right to interfero “in tho domestic re
lations or personal intercourse of any member
of his cabinet;” and. hi allusion to the same con
versation. you say', he “disclaimed any dispo
sit inn to press such, a requisition." When no
such requisition hud been made by cd Johnson;
when lie told you the President made none; anil
when you do not pro tr ad he wade ary lilher di
rectly or indirectly, I would not hut understand
your declaration, that “hr disclaim'd any dispo
sition In press sue/, „ requisition," ns a declara
tion that he made no such requisition.
But I find, in the cliaraclor yon have alway s
sustained before the public, other conclusive
proof, that no such requisition was ever madt! of
you, ami that you hnew it. If tho President had
signified lo you, directly or indirectly, that he
required you to com’icl your family to assuciato
w ith any one. contrary to their will and yours,
vou would not, as a man of honor, have waited
fir an invitation to resign. You would have
thrown tour e.ninnttlsioii in the free of tho Pro
aidant, and said to him “Si-, I am no longer ad
viser oi u-iouclnte with a man who requires mo
to d:sgrueo myself ami family, though ho bo tho
President of Ihe United Slates I!" In your public
cliaraclor I had a guarantee that you would nut,
for tlio sake of your lmuor, salary ami oinolu
meets, as Attorney General, sink your charac
ter ns a man, by lamely listening to such a re
qaisiti in. No Si 1 ; it is iinpos ible to believe
that you could ii.avi listened to such a requisi
tion ; dismissed your self re-pect, forgot your
southern honor, and humbly bowed in rooming
reveronoo to the nun who had insulted you,
an il pal'le.ly invited to res in f |i is impossi
ble that you could hurv such an insult, uro’oso
lu he tho friei 'J of 1110 President, mana tiir
spapeh you did >oce>pl iti Georgia, an 1 now
