OCR Interpretation

The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1800-1810, December 29, 1809, Image 1

Image and text provided by Library of Congress, Washington, DC

Persistent link: https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045242/1809-12-29/ed-1/seq-1/

What is OCR?

Thumbnail for

o,a i'lik juf.vr /•>/■:so Tjrrrojv
Jififir'tvihi* the duct of.the Executive
in re.Ui'i ,n. to t/i reftfial to receive
tit?v jw'h'r r immoncation from
lfvaruln .fame v hi kstvn.
■P.m December 20.
Tii conm ce f'. '.ho whole, Mr. Bas
ket : t • - c.\,Ar—
M». Emott sr.id he rose with some ;
rcltw*^• c <■» add'ess the committee
; s !;« ; if) 's$ of tl.m hour and the gists'*
owr ■•! •.• •;■•:! taken place if# l>i«ti
;.to b'-n, ifi thai genO..".iui would not
v xUariy r.ttc:sd to the detail whiah
he !?."'! to #ade through, bur as he
Jmif.c no ,>e son ready ;'q. take the flour,
b' '•••n;; i ocruoy toe ti*ne of the com
t.:: '■■■• -n ■ni»ml;ij, l g to ihern his view
° '• ' &' s
?•:: (?;id '•»") the resolution on yon*
f. "' ; c,a *Is upon us.to Rive our assent
to !v. o pr< osE'cn*. First, that Mr.
J act; - <■>'(-: hi. 1 . "<o h;s ' covrc-ipondsnct
r.i'h Mr Smith i 'mlted the gotQW
jr.cm, by umtlli; g thai the Ext cu
•' ">'• i had A Lio ieri^-.e,' bat the arr, : - -
in ant 'Wtercd into Witsl Mr. *Lr. c
was without aytko: by on hh pi;rt ;
;•» aud '•econ< : !y, »».•}s' \u rcfusmg to re
Pr.A ve any further c r. Un 3ci ibrs f^om
tie fc: i i hm. b: ,in 'onsequerice (
' *'J '■ nit. the Exccc'.tve has ma- ,
riiui '.f o just regard to thecbarac- ,
fjjr aid ji 'nests of t'* ■ American i
j-eop'e. N'>w I can jjigrce to neither •;
of thess inasmuch as I »
have not h'ren »W« to dis over tht t
ij'.swdf, and as I do-not 'believe that the r
inter ;t of the people has bceo con- j
in the measure. ' m t
I o:ak;,,g this declaration, I know ]
.1 suitjeci rnyscii (not here I hope) to r
.the imputation ot being a British rpo ,
'lo± i'.t: at:d fihrlzMiy and of taking, part /
government of my coun a
try. But if the President hts his
duty to perform, I also as a »cpre/.ei} r
ki\vc have, mine, awl aith utrb 1i ;
might have remaii ed silent if his v
had not cal|ell iip this subject; j
yet whet, i an: thtrs pressed lb, an j ;
opiT'hJn ft is my duty to give it fsiirly. r
;nd I veil! d'> it. *'t is not I trust neces i,
sary in order l'> evince my i cspcct far
the governmeftt to approbate every j,
"Executive mcasnfe', or to join with tfte v
Administration in its plar.s ar.d views. c
Out present Chief Magistrate will"'
•1 )iib;:oss locolJect the time when he n
dhi rot deem a love of i>
'ft due fegirii tp. its governmentincom- \
)■. Me wi ha J/ia. kcd-disiippnol33tio»t |,
«>f ia;. "cutive measures and an earnest a
lo l'ie views of. the ' t<
in iH>wcr. In all this there is nothirtrfj
fob u.*ne when the opposition pre .-reeds ! r ,.
f.'(.rr, good motives. lam not in tht: j n
ho! i', sir, of making professions, bu! j, r <
I will on this occasion say, that* I bave4 \t
not a dt-op of biood runniug in mv"! ).
viens that is not purely Anterican, and j ( ]
that I have :iot a wish InK fur the lian j r
pincss, the prosperity, & the bwror of j [ ; ,
tn,y country ?.nd the prcservi:tion oSjii ■ - {f
.* j
As to ti insult, it is said by /Jr.' t j,
Smith, in L : r, letter cf the 8 h <u" Nov.} t |
to cuisist in the use of language cn J
the part o' Mr. Jackson un n t j.
kKti&kdgc in this government e ,
ins:ructu.n9 0f his predecessor did not ! 9i
ruthori e the arrangtmet t ft": c:d bj '
hirn." IT <] such language Ixjen used || r
by the B i ish minister in the com-1 (e
me cement of the correspondence, it
dots nor appear to me Jo follow that J t ,
I: would have been an insult, for it can j C)
bs.ro ofF"!>ce for our government, to !, T
enter into a provisional arvan;.;em«nt |
willi a reaideiit minister who fcf.s not i
full power. Nay, l,. a J Mr. E.i'fckfne }s,
shewn h s instrueiibiis of tJic 23.1 o! f ; .
January in ex'tuso. di chui% them {
to be the only Instruct: ,nr; r-.c ."e:l i t \
by him from his gave; i.rnet:!, and | r
had the terms-hetd out by them b<u n|, w
negatived by our as they i <j
certtiinly ought ; it would h .ve ht-fii
competent for the miwie- to r4c< : ».v« « }'
neg<-;:i tte on other > mure | r
]iis>t in tfesrrtscives ,ajjd to send the re-i »,
ault to bit government for i.to accept ?•;
ance. Indeed this is the view wl;tch r
?.Irj Spriith hi'.r.'vetf appears to h**vc t
!;;kcn of st.'.«js et. in his jetcer* /
rt the first and eighth of Nov. he in'ti- \
mates th.-t Mr. .h cksor.'a Bmt ieltt r | w
coac ni< (i tl<« ■mplicMtions,?.' hr- speaks r
of the r< hciition cf a language con- n
vey:; g-the idea th>t on: Ejcf-'iPive :i
Kid a how dge that t <s at rat-ge- j
w.th iM- Ei skine v. s wiii-.otu \
P'jthority, ~i,din-to!h ic.:;cts tJ.-e <f. ,
fence is placed hi tne n. pt ti' ton af;. :
■tit# <iecliia:,:on . tat i!;o»e t- no 'uoh ' f
(t'C% i K (T 1 --' 4 X
$l#lf ioltm Sf I tiIIIi|MC£XI
v j# {.; iKi H. ;V l ■ . J .: . * ■ t . j:.:
■ %-'• • /to*?'
**. WASHING" 1 ""'' '- ' APVESTISER
knowledge. The same course Is n~
dopted l>y the vcsr lutions, as the-- on it
all t/;enti6h of Mr. Jackson's fir'jt
letter £c f! d the insult in fkpresnons,
' e jfh the letters of TV 23d of October
!e a!id ;he 4;h of November. It is not
' n therelore strictly necessary to exam
ine the fi st letter, but as it ht.sin the
debate of tliis day been mncli dwelt on
by gentlemen ate in fivor (>t
'* resolution, I shall claim your'attcstion
: while I in a brief manner analyse the
e j entire correspondence
1 Ik-h.re 1 commence this analysis,
'* permit me, sir, («aid Mr: En.oti) to
1 observe, that Mr. Jackjon 13 not stat
' ed to have made any direct charge,
' but to have contented himself with ii> :
" si' tuuions, oeinother words, the in-j
' suit co np'ained of is a cons ructive ,
one. Now, s a rule of construction,
' I n derstand, that wiieu an intent is j
t > be m >de out, the whole paper is to
be taken into consideration. A parti- ;
1 Hit: r paragraph or phfase frpoi its j
• generality or its loose tess may convey
an im{-:ression whit.ii was ot in he
whet it mind, 'i'ldsis peculiarly the.
ease with a correspondet ce where
" iii re is teas C'.ution used than in pa
pers of more permanent use.
How tt fail it is to play upon worth
in a correspot deiice, l>r by
1 adi' "tmg to Mr. Smith letters, which
cei tainly are drawn with ability, a. d
• we arc to presume with great <
• care. I take a single pa/agraph in i
the letter of the 19th of October as i
it relates more immediately to the ;
present discussion— 44 The drclara t
tion that the despatch from Mr. Can t
ring to Mr. Erskloe of the 23d of i
January \\the only de-patch by which i
•the conditions were prescribed <oMr. <
Erskine for the ccnclusioti of an ar r
rangemerit on the matter to which it *
relates, is now -for the time mptfe to t
this government. Ar d I need hardly ?
a d that if that despatch had -fx; et. ?
< f mronnicoted at the time of the ar- 1
rangen:e.nt or if it had bVfen KM%>n that i
the propositions contained in li. ntid i
which were at fust preserved by Mr. c
J .rfhine ve re the ot»ly noes on which £
(it •»«.-. <:i. • t.os is>«: d to rnahe an arrange- \
rr-e't, tl? ;n rangemeht Would not have >
f n ade " t
No w the knowledge of the thing might c
have "been .gained in a variety of ways 1
without a declaration. Thus our Se
cretary might have had a view of the 1
instructions of Mr. Erskine—there «.
might have been an understanding f
b, ]we or 'hem on he sunjec;, or i
Mr. S o<n» miffh have the know- v
of circonrxbtanees (without ' a
an open avowal by the minis- c
ter) which would necessarily have
. led to the same concfnsio.n. Again, j
| r. r , the Secretary is not the govern- k
i inent, but a mere accent who until di- ( I
J rected bv the President could not move ( ]
; in thebof':mess, the declaration might 1 I,
have bpeh made to ?dr. indivi- ri
I dually before the negoeiation, or he n
misfit have had ittll knhwledgc of the §
fact ard yet this letter would be true P
in its P
The dcc'rres that if the f £
despatch had been . co-rimunicated at a>
the or if it had been known that jt
Mr. Ersk'uKJ had no other authority, t;
the arra'ii eiricr.t wcvdd not have been r ,
entered into. Now does he mean to
say that th< mere c-ou nntnication of 0
the despatch, accompanied ti
by farther instruction*;, jind better r '
ter? s would lr%aty . a
and yet this is in the terms of the, sen- \
ter.ee. Was it necesscrv that the
communiotition to have had its effect, d
traiiit have been made at the vety time b
cf -he arrangement-? What, if nr4.de 0
beXcre, would t-h; -. liave vv.ricd the re- ! | }
suit ? As;'aih, Mtppr 4 se that in point of c
fac' cur coverrment did not absolute- s
ly- knyw, Lut had tfie strongest possible k
reason to believe and thiol;, and did e
; in truth believe and think, w|>«-n the tt
arrangement was iy lulo with Mr. E<- f<
<-kt c that l;e was not authbiiscd, would 1
thi-5 form att excuse on their part ? a
Tntthese criucwiflf, \»oh*ncc I ad
r it >s done to the intent of thewwrit]
ter, ar.d they are nude only to shew c
the us fairness of seizing on la word to §:
make but thfe intent aj> ainst the iiitc p
tis collectable from the whole M
And yc f , sir, ti - Brilisb 'Senate mt-y f i
h< told U it our Secretary is a mar of •
j w it, a maker of puns, a vender of /,
r.oftuvdtutbs, aj;d a master of 1 quivo- p
one, ai d that thereforefKe intent lies |
the tf 1 ti)!, a'lid is there to be sought, t'
If thi-y do so rea c on, however highly v
In av think < f ihtdr ingmttiry, Isi all \
i!tnk Htthe ot ifrcir Jot V;
C\ evm c n r.re brief. I takr bp the >
rci .<:r.-cu i'::s. i wish r<. 1 to bt
EfUDAY, DECEMBER 29. 1809*
tr-' *
a- understood a", stan i'rig hftre the apo'o 1
it 1 ist of Mr. Jackson, for the manner j
st in w! ich he cundik-ted his pari of the '
s, correspondence, nrfy, I am ready to i
•r admit that this® ssi 1 some of his let
)t ters a harshness of expression an'd a
i- Want of courte«g whic'i is not
e h!c. Jiut on this I am not called to
n bulge. Tie Executive has placed t!ie
ft: ami as a I on a oifferes.t ground, and |
n by the resolutions.we are to pronounce j
e whether the ground taken by him is I
deist 'Iblc.
;, ri e correspondence on your table
a was commenced by this govern men
- with a letter from Mr. S nith to Mr
>, Jackson, in whioh the Secretary after
- ; stating the arrangement with Mr. Er
- j skine, the dis avowal of that arrange
e , ment by his Britannic Majesty, and
, j the expectation of this goverrfmem
s | that an explanation of the grounds of
) refusal would have been given by Mr
- ; Jackson ; goes 011 to state' that the
i President understood that the Hritt-Ji
f ntii ister had no instructions from hi'
:> government authorising him to make
5. any explanation as to the reason' of the
5 disavowal, and calls upon Mr. J . kv>t
to correct Hit's statement if he had
been fnis«ndorstood.
The letter of Mr. Jackson of the I
1 Ith of October, in ansa er to this call,
state: that he is not altogether certain <
i w he'her M • S iih meam to complain !
of the disa owjl i-self, of a total want \
1 of explanation of it, or that the < xpla- 1
i na ion had net been made through him, i
: mid under the influence of this doubt, [ 1
the letter is continued with a reference j
to each of these particulars* Speak <
ing of the disavowal Mr. Jackson re- <
marks, that he had found no trace of t
complaint on the part of this govern- 1
merit in the records ot his precicqes- 1
sor, and that Mr. Smith had not in I
their conferences distinctly announced t
any such complaint. He adds, 44 that;
he had J< en with pleasure in this for- t
bearance on the pad of Mr. Smith, an c
instance of that candor which he did
not doubt vould prevail in all their I
comu unit a'ions, inasmuch as Mr. }
Smith o.uid ot bu- br.vc thought it 1
unreasonable to con plain of the* disa- t
vowal of an act done under cuch cir a
cumstat.ces, as euuld only Itad to the t
cor.'erpicnccs that had actually fol t
lowed." t
It is to this part of the letter that we r
have been referred for the insult, and 11
very properly, for if it is not to be jc!
found hel e, we shall in vain seek for ' I
it elsewhere. It has been urged that j t
when Mr. Jackson declares that the j e
' arrangement was made usder such cir- : -
cumstarices as could only lead toadi-- t
£a vowal, he i« to be understood ascharg- i y
j ir.g the Executive not only with a ; I
! knowledge of the instructions of Mr.' ii
i Erskine, but with dis honorable con- i d
] duct in procuring with such know- : r
ledge bis assent to at. act which his in- f
ntruetinns did not authorise. Now, i s
sir, is this the charitabJe or fair con- r
struciion of this sentence ? Are there o
not other circumstances which would e
equally warrant the disavowal ? If the v
fact is so, that Mr. Erskmenot only 1 d
acted without authority but against his ' it
instructions, who can reasonably ques- I n
tion the right in his government to c
refuse to recognise his agreement ? h
To solve thi9 point we need not refer b
ourselves to writers on the laws of na- ri
tions. The. every day doctrine of the li
rights and dulies of principle and
agent is sufficient for our purpose, j:
Why then will the Executive insist a
upon an insinuation which he cons;- u
ders so o'lious, when the sentence will c
bear another and a better constructi
on ? A construction too, which will E
' be found necessary to give force to the a
conclusion, as it is not the circum- ' c
stance that the instructions were 0
kriown, but that they were disregard- t!
Ed by the minister, on which the right h
to disavow is founded. I like not the c.
feverish epprehertfiion which' can so 2
readily discover insult in disguised tj
at d veiled imdouations. 1 t]
I am sensible that another part of r,
the sentence has been enlisted in the 3r
came of the insinuation. Mr. Jackson w
sta'es, thM in the forbea' ame cf com- c
plaint on-t'ie part of Mr. Smith, he had ti
witnessed that catujor which he did not ,
d' übt would prevail in'their g
ppT dence, as Mr. Smith Could, not but !
have thought it unreasonable to con>- b
plain of the disavowal. It is.materi
l-.eff in the On,t place, to asccrtoio th i
t'roe to w ich Mr. Jack-ion allmh; :
when he r fcrs to iMr. Smith' -
the 1 ght?. Is the period at which t! ;
arraivj.en-crt was n ad" ir-tended-? i >
Not so surely, becaurc then there was •>
> ' no disavowal of which to omplain- j
r j The sentence in this point at least Is I
e ' ttiflr.'ienfiy clear. Mr. Jackson vsry
o j dUtinetly that during their con
- f "e r< s Mr, Smith could not but have
a thought it u l enSoiiab e to complain of
the disa\(»Wc;| of an act done under
0 such rireu distances us could only lead
e to a disavowal You will bear it in mind
3 , that the conferences were had asho.
B j time hefue the writir.g of the letter,
s as Mr. Jackson in it declares, that but
a days had elapsed sine, hi*.
1 i' trorfuc'ion to the President. Now
what were the materials, for thinking
which Mr. Smith had at.the peilod of
r the conferences.
Erom the papers on your tabic, si»,
(said Mr. E ) you will find that our
1 mi lister at Eondon, on the 28th of j
May, our Secretary an account
! of a conference with Mr. Canning, in
which the English Secretary declared
that Mr. Eiskine had acted not only 1
1 without but in direct oppo- '
; ition to his instructions, and read the
despatch ol the 23d of Ja -uary, the '
üb'uance of which is contained in Mr. ; 1
Pinkney's letter. Jiy Mr. Pinkney's j
letter of the 9th June, it appears that
'lie instructions of Mr. Erskine had 1
been laid before the House of Com
mons, and a copy of them were then
enclosed to cur Secretary. In the <
letter of the 23d June, Mr. Ptnkney <
gives to our Secretary the reasons 1
which Mr. Canning had stated to him 1
for the disavowal. Mr. Smith in 1,13 I <
I latter to Mr. Erskine cf the 9th Au-„'<
gust, declates that he had just recciv- 1
ed from Mr. Pinkney the primed copy 1 1
q/ the despatch of Mr. Canning of '
the 23d of January, aed it appears ' '
irom the leitp.i of Mr, Jackson, which 1
lam now tetliiig, that, this despatch 1
had been a subject of' Conversation bis <
tween him and Mr. Smith. 9 >
We have now in review forrfe ;
things which might in the conctpliftiV <
of the British minister have found ma t
terials for thinking for our Secretary. <
lie kr.cw the pretcmions of the ffritsh t
government that its minister had vio t
lated his iiistructions. He had seen -
tEe despatch in its whole extent ' •
and mipjht have compered it with
the arrangement. Mr, Jj: kson tho'l I
there was a substantial slim Pence be i
tween the instructions and arrange* s
ment ; and perhaps he had a right s
. therefore to conclude that Mr. Smith
j did not complain, because after what '
had come to his knowledge he found »
j that the act \v*s done under such eir- r
; cumstances as justified the disrtv-w d r
I —Nay, fir, he must at this very a
■ time have had in mill 1 the latter »
| part of the letter of Mr. Sndth to Mr. li
E r t.kine which I have just alluded to, r
in which after the conditions in the 0
' despatch of the 23d of January are
' menioned, our Sccvetary savk-— ,£ I *
forbear to express to you, sir, the r
! surprize that is felt at the extraorditu f
ry pretensions set forth in this letter j a
of instructions and especially at tup 1 0
expectation that this government j '
would as a preliminary recognise con- ! ''
' ditions two of which are so manifestly !
| irreconcilable to the dignity aiid inte- j fi
i rest of the Uniied States." The Se- j 1
cretary had thus officially volunteered j k
his opinion respecting the difference '
between the instruction of the 23d Ja- j 1
riuary end the.arrangemcnt to the Et.g-
lish legation itself. " 0
If however there is yet room for a 1
jaundiced or a jealous mind to suspect a
an insinuation in the sentence before 1
us it must be obviated by what imme- h
ciately follows in the Same letter. h
" U was not known when I left f !
England, whether Mr. Erskine had, '
according to the liberty allowed him '
communicated to you in e.rtenco his
original instructions. It now appears «
that he did not. But, in reverting to u
his official correspondence, and par i- si
cuiarly to a despatch addressed on tie .
| 20th of April to His Majesty's 11
tary of ita.ie for foreign aff.irs, I find i
, that he h;;d submitted to your con'sui*".- 1
ration, the three conditions spacifi • ,
in those instructions, as the grou k- tl
work of an arrangement, Which ar !
cordi M- to. information received fro.n.>
this country, it was thought in Engia :d
night he t».ade, with a pi-o pect ot o
treat mutual advantage. Mr Erskine,
hen verbatim ct scrip ft n you h
observa'iona upon each of tlrj thre
onditions, and the reasons which J
induced you to think that othera mt;>.
:e std *til:uted in'lieu ofth'-fm. Itnti
»av. been conclurled between ym
I e p latter wore an e(juivalet 1 f.»»■ •
| niginal conditions ; but the very at
i if aubstii'.tt':. n evidently shcoy '•
i'Atn in Jw.'.acg. ■
i I' 'ose original (:.<>> "li'ioHfc i >.
s t'ery explicitly i-.mfntini* at-d <•v ' )
y id by you ot ci/iu e!n' ! •
i- !'"U:sidf».t >>r cotkl'-etYitior.., 1
C Cl 'Mird'y n.j ', t lir:t t 'if «t: r?\ '■.ic t?
>1 >£ivreen these <'auditions ; «Hi t
r ddnt-iined In the &v :•»<» - r>-t c/tt.j
d 18 th and 19th April is rutyr?«o>i-v o;.
d vIoiH to ri?q«:rt no chici hvtio] } r <"■.?
-eH f draw the coim hision, .., i
■ y consider us ; dmitted b> HI oh- nee of
t cox plait. ori the t>..«vf tl»o
> can gpv. rumeiu;, vis That m •\-t "
v r.ircuimi>u cc"y fjfj Majesty !«;•.! :>
;• Utid wTK;d aid inC'irt <;\ mi. !!".,(
f to tU?arow ihe.Wt tslv> Mi |
must here ;Umlct to a ; vi; ;. >• tcioii,!
, which yon have morte': !»a: o: :<-e m«n
r tinned to me, and Ely \vi 'eh >. h h-t,
f I any the slightest 6,ur-.d thin ri&fifc
t might perhaj>3 in ome d ■ !iv >■
i been affect?d. V o fcitve i, ; .rno-.j
1 me that yon understood that M-v Er'S
r - kino had tw > set* of inb'.i UtUionj. by
. 1 which io regulate his v>; duc-'t ii«.A
s that upoo one of theon* which 1< > t not
5 I been co mmunicated either to • • v.-'
. ; to the public* via" to be res' d ti? ju '-
i j tification 61 the tern's fir>.-.sty
: ! upon between you and biro It is j .•••.;*
duty, Sir, •oienudy to dec'lure t-> yo[;«
and, through yon, to the Pro si tie if*
i that the despatch from Mr C;m ;
: to Mr. Ersku'i", which you ha ■( ni -hi
the basis'of an official corivs:n-nd <hsu
i with the latter Minis*• r. «,r -v'foch
was read by the former t,) the
, can Minister in Lord >n, is t&r CHff
; despatch, by vhiob to condhhrti?
. were prescribed to Mr. I''»Ski be far
' the Conclusion of en armngeipc-t r/n?i
this country on the tniitUi- to which i?
j Here we'find that MK' fnckiah
pressly places the disavowal ot: tor.,
difference ij) the conditions com j r<i
in 'he instruction and the t<;rmg of the
arrai gemupij and in dra«ys his con -
clusion that tfnder such
the J&ingbed a right the
act of his minister. Wh'eVj sptaHois
of h i strurtion he not tohly id.- r
that Mr. Erskine had not corn -nnicat.-
ed it in extenso, but deems' it tftcesfW}'
in arswer a suggestion n>:«<«•• hy
Mr. Smith' in thtir f or.ftrert: s,'
Mr. Krikine !iad more than one set F
instructions seletnniy to fessmc ohi?
secretary, and ihrOugh l> j
sidem, that such was not tiif 4fesS*
I'his decoration is to me utter'y
irreconeil' fee With the notion of s-w
insinuation that the excctrive of this
countfy knew at the tioje of ar
rangement that the Hi ititih ws<
ac ii|g witboqf Afjfh rity. I r Mr. Jack - '
son hadietonded ;i charge of this i ind.
he cert, inly would not thns notice u
mcTc'convs't'satidn for the solt-pn u JS K
of giving an official negative to it,
There is one part of the paragraph
which I hiVe last read to you vhith
requires a moment's attention as it*
has been the e libj; et of ->oms caril ; i
allude to that part of the sper?g j»tioU
' of the letter of Mr. in wliioll
J Mr. Jackson sap that.Secretary Smith
j had made it ths basis of a correspond
! deuce with Mr. Erskine. This fy
sufficiently explained by a refermct t:>
j the letter from Mr. Smith to Mr. £rg«
j kine of the 9th of In thai
| letter the despatch 34 indeed made the
| basis of a correspondence. It was yot
so anterior to errangf tw nt. OfitJ
observation mof< , sir, in rolattot W
this letter. It Iss been ttrged thst in "
a fair and critical c nstruc ion of ti c
terms used by Mr. Jacktnn, it not
ly does not appear thst Mr.
h; d 110 authority to coneludfi' t! c •
t anger.ient., but it is to be. h r .
red that he had authority. Thr t cion
faaa Is not my construction of the teU
tor, but it L Hujrc'y stvaiige f«>r t.hnzfi
who make and to beltet'd ,'to:
urge .d the savn-e time that V,ir. 'J »ck
son in t«':o sarhe tetter has charge'* the.
i ovcrnr.ie'it r.-ith. the knowledge ;*
mi'ttcir 'wb'n-h-tit' admit*, to he nnirit?-,
hat- .Mr. /vfskihe acted without autiioi'
J shall now, for Ih't prefett
injg, *n the part of it ♦•■hiP'
.live hai before tti| T w
•s ftn iho
diPr r; jverornr a". -ed Nwn
• rp! v'voien ()' t-hc'dtiivow;!,
he atiempti f o ao.swef sithf*
''erring to the
January s.sCnUai
icy rvt h:s p ; cdcceaso I '-, ?
ic disavowal as
v r »- r tho j> r 1 *<
'«mne it h.'d;:pr," 'ire Tew
iiar ". A 'ta the ins" •
/L-tr:' V' f .',n, ;•
J :( ) .i ' a

xml | txt