^% IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) k /. /./ 'M < ^ ^M^ :/. %0 i/.. ^ 1.0 II 1.1 11.25 UilM 125 6" U 1 1.6 V] / '/ w Hiotographic ^Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 %. V kS i ^1 '^ "^^ •^^^ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. D D D D D n Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ D Couverture endommagde Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurie et/ou pelliculde I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque I I Colouv-ed maps/ Cartes g6ographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I 1 Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relid avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ Lareliure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsqi"? cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6td filmdes. Additional comments:/ Commenteires supplimentaires; Thi tot L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m^thode normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages/ v/ D Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restauries et/ou pelliculdes Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d^colories, tachetdes ou piqu6es Th« pea of fiM Orif b«( th«i sioi othi firsi sior ori □Pages detached/ Pages ddtachdes HShowthrough/ Transparence Transpar Quality of print varies/ Qualit^ indgale de I'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel suppldmentaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible The sha TIN whi Mai diffi enti bagi righ raqi mat Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une peiure, etc., ont 6t6 film6es d nouveau de facon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X X 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X "^^^i^^'s The copy filmed h«r« has b««n reproduead thank* to the ganaroaity of: L'axamplaira filmi fut raproduit grSca d la g^niroaitd da: University of Calgary University of Calgary Tha imagaa appearing hare are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specif icationa. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or iliuatratad imprea- sion. or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copiee are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or iliuatratad impree- sion. and ending on the iaat page with a printed or iliuatratad impreaaion. The iaat recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol ^^ (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol ▼ (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Lea images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compta tenu de la condition at de la nattet* de l'axamplaira film«, at en conformity avec les conditions du contrat da filmage. Lea axemplairaa originaux dont la couvartura an papier eat imprimte sont film6s an commandant par le premier plat at an tarminant soit par la darnlAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impraaaion ou d'illustration. soit par le second plat, salon la caa. Tous les autres exemplairas originaux sont filmte an commenqant par la pramlAra page qui comporte une empreinte d'impreasion ou d'illustration at en tarminant par la darniire page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaltra sur la darnlAre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: la symbole -^ signifie "A SUIV^E", le symbols V signifie "FIN". Mapa, platea. charts, etc.. may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Thoaa too large to be entirely included in one expoaure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, aa many framea aa required. The following diagrams illuatrate the method: Les cartas, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre filmte A des taux da rMuction diff^rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre raproduit an un seul cliche, il est fiirn^ d partir de Tangle sup^rieur gauche, de gauche d droite. et de haut an bas. an prenant le nombre d'imagea nAcessaire. Las diagrammes suivants illustrent la mMhode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 ■n { p'2X!^->- * I ' CORRESPONDENCE 'Vn BETWEEN JOHN QUINCY ADA»iS, ESQUIRE . I I I FRESIDEilT or THE VIIITED iTATEl, AND SEVERAL CITIZENS OF MASSACHUSETTS CONCERNING THE CHARGE OP A DESIGN TO DISSOLVE THE UNION ALLEGED TO HAVE EXISTED IN THAT STATE. Ronton: PRESS OF Tin: BOSTON DAILY ADVERTISER, W. L. Lowi), I'rintcr, No, 8 Consrcsj-strool. MUCCCIXIX. I ^ ■' ~-^ <. -.gan this controversy, and that tbe\ ari> not answerable for its ri'sult. That result they cheer- iully leave to an impartial and discerning public ; feeling assur- ed that the most thorough investigation will servo only more fully to pro\e the fiitility of the accusation. \^ !»■ ' .\ II FROM THE NATIO.XAL LMELLIGENCER OF OCT. 2J, 1828. ■i The publication of a letter from Mr JcflfiTson to Mr Giles, dated the 2oth of December, 182.3, con- cerning a communication made by Mr Adams to Mr Jefferson, in relation to the embargo of 1807, renders neccssnvy the following statement, which we are au- thorized by IMr Adams to make. The indistinctness of the recollections of Mr Jeffer- son, of which his letter itself feelingly complains, has blended together three distinct ])eriods of time, and the information, which he did receive from Mr Adams, with events which afterwards occurnd, and of which Mr Adams could not have informed him. It fortu- nately hai)pens that this error is apparent on the face of the letter itself. It says, ' Mr Adams called on me pending the embargo, and while endeavor- '.vere mak- ing to obtain its repeal.' He afterwards sa) ■>, that, at this interview^ Mr Adams, among other things, told Inni that ' he had information, of the most unquestion- able certainty, that certain citizens of the Eastern States, (I think he named Massachusetts particularly) were in negotiation with agents of the British govern- ment, the object of wliich was an agreement that the i^? 'S-Si, f J It New-Efif^lnnd Statos should take no further part in the war then iiohiL,^ un,^ Lc. The cmbiirgo was cnacti^d on the 22d of December, 1007, and re])eal(>d by the non-intereourst; act on tlio 1st of Mareh, ICOO. The war was deehued in June, 1812. In August, 1 809, Mr Adams embarked for Russia, nearly three years before the Declaration of War, and did not return to the United States till August, 1817, nearly three years after the conclusion of the |)eace. ]Mr JMadisou m as inaugjuated President of the United States, on the 'It h of March, 1809. It was impossible, tlierefon, that Mr Adams could have civen auv infornr.uiou to Mr Jerferson, of uegoti- atioiis by citizens of Massachusetts with Uritish agents, dnr'niii the var, or having relation to it. Mr Adams never had kno\A led^c of any such neirotiations. Thi! interview, to which Mr JeffiMson alludes, took ])lace on the l.jth of IMarch, 1808, pending tlu; embar- go ; but, at the session of Congress bcfor(> the substitu- tion for it of the non-intercourse act. The information, given by JMr Adams to Mr Jefferson, had only an indi- rect reference even to the embargo, and nom; to any endeavors for obtaining its repeal- It was the substance of a letter from the (Jovernor of Nova Scotia, to a \)VV' son in the Huxio of IMassachusetts, written in the sum- mer of 1807, and befon^ the existence of the embargo ; which letter Mr Adams had seen. It had been shown to him without any injunction of scM-rccy, and lie b(^- trayed no confidence in comnumic:jting its purport to Mr Jefferson. Its object was to countenances and ac- eredit a calumny then extensively prevailing, among ■A •J r ■A \ the enemies of Mr J. and the opponents of his Administration, that he and liis measures wore subser- vient to France ; and it aUcged tiiat the Dritisli <;ov- ernment were informed of a plan, determiiu'(l||iipou hy France, to effect the con(juest of tlie British provinces on this Continent, and a revohition in the government of the United States, as means to which tliey were first to produce war between the United States and Enghuid. From the fact that the Governor of Nova Scotia had written such a letter to an individual in Massachusetts, ccnmected with other facts, and with the movements of the party then predominant in that State, Mr Adams and Mr Jefferson drew their infer- ences, which subse(iuent events doubtless confirmed : but which inferences neitlnu- Mr Jefferson nor Mr Adams then communicated to each other. This was the only confidential interview which, dining \\iv. ad- ministration of Mr Jefferson, took place between him and Mr Adams. It took place first at the re(|uest of Mr Wilson Carey Nicholas, then a member of the House of U(!presentatives of the United States, a con- fidential friend of Mr Jefferson ; next, of Mr Robin- son, then a senator from Vermont ; and, lastly, of Mr Giles, then a senator from \ irginia — which rc(|U('st is the only intervention of JNIr CJiles ever known to INIr Adams, between him and jNIr Jefferson. It is therefore not surprising, that no such intervention occurred to the recollection of Mr Jefferson, in December, 182.5. This interview was in INlaich, 1808. In IMay, of the same year, Mr Adams resigned his seat in the senate of the United States. f ) « At the next session of Conj^rcss, which commenced in Nov(!inber, 1808, Mr Adams wns a private cjtizen, rcsidiiif; at Boston. The embarf!;o was still in force ; operating with extreme pressure upon tiie interests of the people, and was wielded as a most eflective instru- ment by the party prcivailing in the State, against the administration of Mr Jcfl'erson. The ])eople were constantly instigated to forcible resistance against it ; and juries after juries ac(juitted the violators of it, upon the ground that it was luiconstitutional, assumed in the face of a solemn decision of the District Court of the United States. A separation of the Union was o[)('nly stim*.-Jh. I « 1 that event, ho hatl no doiiht tlje Uadcis of llu; party would secure the co-operation with them ol' (Jreat Bri- tain. Tliat th(!ir ohject was, and had hcen lor several years, a dissoKilion of the Union, and tiie establish- ment of a separate Confederation, he knew from une- quivocal evidence, although not provciahle in a court of law ; and that, in the ease; of a civil war, the aid of Great Britain to eflt'ct that purpose would be as surely resorted to, as it would be indispensably neces- sary to the design. Tiiat these letters of ]\[r Adams tolMr Giles, and to other members of Congress, were n ad or shewn to ]Mr Jefferson, he never was inform(?d. They were written, not for communication to him, but as answers to the letters of his correspondents, miinbers of Con- gress, soliciting his opinion upon measures in delibera- tion before them, and upon vv hich they were to act. lie wrote them as the solicit(;d advice of friend to friend, both ardent friends to the Administration, and to their country, lie wrote them to give to the sup- porters of the Administration of Mr Jefferson, in Con- gress, at that crisis, the b(!st assistance, by his informa- tion and opinions, in his power, lie had certainly no objection that they should be communicated to Mr Jefferson ; but this was neither his intention nor dc'- sire. In one of tlie hitters to !\lr Ciiies Ik; repeated an assurance, which he had verbally given him during the jn-eceding session of Congri'ss, that he had for iiis sup- port of I\Ir Jefferson's administration no personal or interested motive, and no favor to ask of him what- ever. 1^ » h> 10 That those letters to Mr Giles were by him com- municated to Mr Jefferson, Mr Adams believes from the import of this letter from Mr Jefferson, now first published, and which has elicited this statement. He believes, likewise, that other letters from him to other members of Congress, written during the same session, and upon the same subject, were also communicated to him ; and that their contents, after a lapse of seven- teen years, were blcndc'd confusedly in his memory, first, with the information given by Mr Adams to him at their interview in March, 1808, nine months before; and next, with events which occurred during the sub- sequent war, and of which, however natural as a se- quel to the information and oj)inions of Mr Adams, communicated to him at those two prc^ceding ])criods[ he could not have received the information from liim. \ I h s?*., CORRESPONDENCE. Sir, Boston, November 20, 1828. TO TUG nONOUABLE JOIIX UUINCY ADAMS. The undersigned, cirizens of Massachusetts, re- sidnig in Boston and its vicinity, take the liberty of addressing you on the subject of a statement published in the National Intelligencer of the 21st of October, and which purports to have been communicated or au-' thorised by you. In that statement, after speaking of those individu- als in this State, whom the writer designates as 'cer- tain lead(>rs of the party which had the management ol the State J.egislature in their hands' in the year 1 808, and saying, that in the event of a civil war, he (lAIr Adams) ' IkkI no doubt the leaders of the party would secure the co-operation with them of Great IJntam,' it is added, ' That their object was, and had b.>en for several years, a dissolution of the Union, and the establishment of a separate Confederation, he knew Irom unecpuvocal evidence, although not proveable in a court of law.' This, sir, is not the expression of an opinion as to the nature and tendency of the measures at that time 1>"I) '<'Iy adopt(>d, or proposed, by the party i,revailing "I the estate of Massachusetts. Kyery citizen ^^•as a" hh.Mty to lorm his own opinions on that subject ; and ^^■c cheerfully submit the propriety of those measures 1 i 12 \i if ( 4, i : to the judgmoiU of an impartial posterity. But the" sontcnco which wc have quoted contains tlie assertion of a distinct fact, as one witliin your own knowledge. We are not permitted to consider it as llie unguarded expression of irritated feelings, hastily uttered at a time of great political excitement. Twenty years have elapsed since this charge was first made, in private correspondence with certain memhers of Congress ; and it is now deliberately repeated, and brought before the Public under the sanction of your name, as being founded on unequivocal evidence, witiiin your knowl- edge. We do not claim for ourselves, nor even for those deceased friends whose representatives join in this address, the tith; of leaders of any party in Massachu- setts ; but we were associated in politics with tiie party prevailing here at the period referred to in the statement above mentioned ; some of us concurred in all the measures adopted by that party ; and we all warmly approved and supported those measures. Many of our associates who still survive, art; dispersed throuiihout Massachusetts and Maine, and could not easily be convened to join us on the present occasion. We trust however that you will not question our right, if not for ourselves alone, at least in behalf of the highly valued friends with whom we acted at that time, and especially of those of them who are now deceased, respectfully to ask from you such a full and precise statement of the facts and evidence relating to this accusation, as may enable us fairly to meet and answer it. The oiyect of this letter therefore is, to request you to state •.4: 13 Dcine: First, Who are the persons, designated as leaders of tV -arty prevailing in Massachusetts in the jear 1808, viiosc object, you assert, was and had been for several years, a dissolution of the Union, and the estab- lishment of a separate Confederation ? and Secondly, the whole evidence on which that charo-e is founded. * It is admitted in the statement of the charge, that it is not provcal)le in a court of law, and of course that you are not in possession of any legal evidence by which to maintain it. The evidence however must have been such as in your opinion woidd have been pronounced unequivocal by upright and honorable men of discritiilnating minds ; and we may certainly expect from your sense of justice and self respect a full disclo- sure of all that you possess. A charge of this nature, coming as it does from the first magistrate of the nation, accpiires an importance which we cannot aflect to disregard ; and it is one which we ought not to leave unanswered. We are therefore constrained, by a regard to our deceased friends and to our posterity, as well as by a sense of what is due to our own honor, most solemnly to de- clare, that we have never known nor suspected that the party wiiich prevailed in Massachusetts in the year 1808, or any other party in this State, ever entertained the design to produce a dissolution of the Union, or the estal)lishment of a sejiarate Confederation. It is imjiossible for us in any other manner to refute, or even to answer this charge, until we see it fully and particularly stated, and know the evidence by which it is to be maintained. i-j tj t '!•• lU ! 4!W l:i' 14 The undersigned think it due to themselves to add, that in making this application to you, they have no design nor wisli to produce an effect on any political party or question whatever. Neither is it their pur- pose to enter into a vindication or discussion of the measures publickly adopted and avowed by the per- sons against whom tiie above charge has been made. Our sole object is to draw forth all the evidence on which that charge is founded, in order that the public may judge of its application and its weight. We are Sir, with due respect. Your obedient servants. IT. G. OTIS, ISRAEL TIIORNDIKE, T. H. PERKINS, WM. PRESCOTT, DANIEL SARGENT, JOHN LOWELL, \V:\]. SULLIVAN, CHARLES JACKSON, AVARREN BUTTON, BENJ. P1CK]\L\N, HENRY C\l?OT, C. C. PAKSOXS, Sim of Tlu'o|iliilus ruisiiiiM, lisii. (U'Ci;asuJ. FRANKLIN DEXTER, t>uii lit' llir lalu .■^aiuuil ilcxtcr. i V I U i ■iaiM MR ADAMS' REPLY TO THE PRECEDLXG LETTER. H'ashington, 3{)th December, ^28. Messrs IT. C;. Oti., Tsrnol Tl.orn.liko, T. If. Porki,,., WiHi,u,. p,,s.. cotf, DmhipI S:,r-,.nt, .l„hn Lowoil, William Sullivan, Ci.arios fack- «on, W arrcu Dull,,,,, I'.enjamin Pickuian.Hcmy Cabot, C. C. Parsons ami Franklin Dcxtor— ' Gentlemen, I liave received your letter of the 2Gth ult. and recognizing among the signatures to it, names* of persons for wliom a long and on my part un- interrupted friendship, has survived all the bitter- ness of political dissension, it would have aflbrded me pleasure to answer with explicitness and can- dor not only those persons, hut each and every one of you, upon the only cpiestions in relation to the subject matter of your letter, which as men or as citizens I can acknowledge your right to ask ; namely whether the interrogator was himself one of the persons, intended by mo in the extract which you have given, from a statement authoriz- ed by me and published in the National Intelli- gencer of 21st October last. ■P 16 />- i *) ;!^' i' 1^ .if J 1 If; Had you or either of you thought proper to ask mc this question, it would have heen more satisfactory to me to receive the inquiry separate- ly from each individual, than arrayed in solid phalanx, each responsible not only for himself but for all the others. The reasons for this must be so obvious to persons of your intelligence, that I trust you will spare me the pain of detailing them. But, Gentlemen, this is not all. You undertake your inquisition, not in your own names alone ; but as the representatives of a great and i)ower- ful party, dispersed throughout the States of Mas- sachusetts and IVIaino : A })arty commanding, at the time to which your inquiries refer, a devoted majority in the Legislature of the then United Commonwealth ; and even now, if judged of by the character of its volunteer delegation, of great influence and respectability. I cannot recognize you, on this occasion, as the representatives of that party, for two reasons — first, because you have neither produced your cre- dentials for presenting yourselves as their cham- pions, nor assigned satisfactory reasons for pre- senting yourselves without them. But, secondly, and chiefly, because your introduction of that party into this question is entirely gratuitous. Your solemn declaration that you do not know that the federal or any other party, at the time to which my statement refers, intended to produce the dissolution of the Union, and the formation of a new confederacy, does not take the issue, which your own statement of my charge (as you are 17 are pleased to consider it) had tendered. The state- ment autliorizcd by me, spoke, not of tlio federal [)arty, but of certain leaders of that party. In my own letters to the Members of Con<^ress, who did me tlie honor at that aironizing crisis to our Na- tional Union, of sohciting my confidential opinions upon measures under deliberation, I expressly ac- quitted the great body of the federal party, not only of participating in the secret designs of those leaders, but even of being privy to or believing in their existence. I now cheerfully repeat that declaration. 1 well know that the party were not prepared for that convulsion, to which the meas- ures and designs of their leaders were instigating them ; and my extreme anxiety for the substitution of the nonintercourse for the embargo arose from the imminent danger, that the continuance and enforcement of this latter measure would promote the views of those leaders, by goading a majority of the people and of the legislature to the pitch of physical resistance, by State authority, against the execution of the laws of the Union ; the only elVcctual means by which the Union could be dis- solved. Your modesty has prompted you to dis- claim the character of leaders of the federal party at that time. If I am to consider this as more than a mere disavowal of form, I must say that the charge, which I lament to see has excited so much of your sensibility, had no reference to any of you. Your avowed object is controversy. You call for a precise state of facts and evidence ; not af- 3 If i I Jit '" If 18 fectinjT, so far as you know, any ono of you, but to enable you fairly to meet ami to answer it. And you demand, 1. \Vlio are tlio j)crsons desitrnatcd as leaders of tlic party prevailin*,' in iMassaehusetts in tlic year 180H, wbose object I assert was, and bad been, for several years, a dissolution of tbe Union, and tlie establislnnent of a se[)arate confederacy r and 2. Tlic wbolc evidence, on wbicb tbat cbargc is founded. You observe tbat it is admitted, in tbe state- ment of tbe cbarge, tbat it is not proveablc in a court of law, and your inference is, tbat 1 am of course not in possession of any legal evidence, by wbicb to nuiintain it. Vet you call upon me to 7i(tine tbe persons alVected by tiie cbargc ; a cliargc in your jstimatc deeply stigmatising upon tbosc })ersons ; and you permit yourselves to remind mc, tbat my sense of justice and sclf-rcsjicct oblige mc to disclose all tbat 1 do possess. ]\Iy sense of jus- tice to you, (icntlcmen, induces me to remark, tbat I leave your self-respect to tbe moral in- fluences of your own minds, witbout presuming to measure it by tbe dictation of mine. Suppose, tben, tbat in compliance witb your call, 1 sbould name one, two, or tbree persons, as intended to be included in tbe cbarge. Suppose neitbcr of tbosc persons to be one of you. Vou however bave given tbem notice, tbat I iiave no evidence against tbem, by wbicb tbe cbarge is proveable in a court of law — and you know tbat I, as well as yourselves, am amenable to tlic laws 4 1A 1 your lis, as jposc \oii vc no ;«|G is that laws ID of the land. Does your self-respect convince you thiit the persons so named, if guilty, would furnish tlie evidence against themselves, which they have been notilied that [ do not possess? Are you sure that the correspondence, whicii wouhl prove their guilt, may not in the lapse of twentylive yours have been committed to the ilamcs ? In those (lays of failing and of treacherous memories, may they not have forgotten that any such corres- pondence ever existed ? And have you any guaran- tee to oiler, that f should not be called by a sum- mons more imperative than yours, to produce in the tem})lo of justice the proof, whicli you say I have n(^t, or be branded for a foul and malignant slanderer of spotless and persecuted virtue ? Is it not besitles imngiimblc that persons may exist, who though twentylive years since driven in the des[)erati<)ii of disappointment, to the nieditation and ijrcparalion of measures tending to the disso- lution of the Union, perceived afterwards the error of their ways, and would now gladly wash out from their own memories their participation in j)roiects, upon which the stamp of indelible re- probation has past? Is it not possible that some of the consjjirators have been called to account before a higher than an earthly tribunal for all the good and evil of their lives ; and whose reputa- tions might now sutler needlessly by the disclosure of their names ? I put these cases to you. Gen- tlemen, as possible, to show you that neither my sense of justice nor my self-respect does require of me to produce the evidence for which you call, 20 or to disclose the names of persons, for whom you have and can liavc no riglit to speak. Tliese considerations appear indeed to mc so forcible;, that it is not uitliont surprise, that I am compelled to believe tlicy had escaped your ob- servation. 1 camiot believe of any of you that wluch I am sure never entered tlie hearts of some of you, that you siiould have selected the present moment, for the purpose of drawinijf me into a controversy not only with yourselves, but with others, you know not whom — of darinif me to the denouncement of names, which twenty years since I declined committines forever rest exclusively upon a solenni j)rolestation against the natural inference from the irresistible tendency of action to the secret intent of the actor ? That a statesman who believes in human virtue should be slow to draw this inference against such solemn asseverations, I readily admit : but for the regula- tion of the conduct of human life, the rules of evidence are widely different from those, which receive or exclude testimony in a court of law. Even there, you know, that violent presumption is ejjiiivalent, in cases afl'ecting life itself, to positive proof; and in a succession of political measures through a series of years, all tending to the same result, there is an internal evidence, against which mere denial, however solemn, can scarcely claim the credence even of the charity, that believeth all things. liCt me add that the statement authorized by me, as published in the National Intelligencer, was made, not only without the intention, but without the most distant imagination of olVendinir you or of injuring any one of yon. But, on the contrary, for the purpose of expressly disavowing I , i!; i-JS f li Hi y •■i ') ) 51 clmrfro, which was helbrc tlio public, sunctioncd witli tli(; iiaiiu! of the late i\fr JcHursoii, iniputing to certain citizens of Massachusetts treasonable iieijotiations with the IJiitish "ovtMMuncnt dur'nw thr irar, and expressly statini,^ that he had received inronuation ol* this iiioM mi.. On the publication ol" this letter, I deemed it indispensably due to myself, and to all the citizens of Massachusetts, not only to deny having ever given such informa- tion, but all kn()wle{l<^e of such a fact. And the more so, because that letter had been published, though without my knowledge, yet 1 was well assured, from motives of justice and kindness to mo. It contained a declaration by Mr JelVerson hims<^if, frank, explicit, and true, of the character of tiie motives of my conduct, in all the transac- tions of my intercourse with him, during the ])eriod of the embargo. This was a point upon which his memory could not deceive him, a j)oint upon which he was the best of witnesses; and his testin\ony was the more decisive because given at a moment, as it would seem, of great excitement against me upon ditl'erent views of public policy even then in conflict and j)roducing great exacer- bation in his nund. The letter contained also a narrative of a ])ersonal interview between himself and Uic, in IMitrch, IDO.'!, and stated that I had then given him information of facts, which in- duced him to consent to the substitution of the nonintercourse for the embargo ; and also that I had apprized him of this treasonable negotiation by citizens of Massachusetts, to secede from the -A 1 tioncd :)iKiblo ccivcd ctition liic to usctts, roriua- ml the )lislio(l, 18 well ness to illbrson iiractcr raiisuc- ng tlic it upon a point and ills iven at tcmcnt policy xaccr- also a liinself I had ch in- of the that I tiation m the 23 I'niori during the war, and pcrliaps rejoin after the peace. iXow the snbstitution of the noniii- terconr.se for the einl»argatcd to Congress, hy the constitution of the L nited States, was my own opinion ; and it is recorded upon the journals of the senate, of w hich 1 was tlum a meniher. But far from thinking the act itself a justifying cause for secession from the Union, 1 regarded it as one of the happiest events, which had occurred since the adoption of the constitution. I regretted that an Jiccidental illness in my family, which detained me on my way to Washington to take my seat in the senate, deprived me of the [)Ower of voting for the ratification of the treaties, hy which the cession was secured. I arrived at Washington on the fourth day of the session of Congress, and on entering the <'ity, passed hy the secretarv of the senate, who was going from the capitol to the president's house, with the advice and consent of that hody to the ratification. -J 27 I took my seat in the senate the next day. Bills were immediately brought into Congress making appropriations to the amount of tifteen millions of dollars for carrying the convention into etTcct, and for enabling the president to take possession of the ceded territory. These mea- sures were opposed by all the members of the senate, who had voted against the ratifications of the conventions. They were warmly and cordi- ally supported by me. I had no doubt of the con- stitutional power to make the treaties. It is ex- pressly delegated in the constitution. The power of making the stipulated payment for the cession, and of taking possession of the ceded territory, was equally unquestioned by me ; — they were constructive powers, but 1 thought them fairly incidental, and necessarily consequent upon the power to make the treaty. JJut the power cf annexing the inhabitants of Louisiana to the Union, of conferring upon them, in a mass, all the rights, and rocpiiring of them all the duties, of citizens of the I'nited Slates, it appeared to me had not been (lelegiited to Congress by the people of the Union, and could not have been delegated by them, without the consent of the people of Louisiana themselves. I thought they required an amend- ment to the constitution, and a vote of the people of Louisiami: and I olfered to the senate, resolu- tions for carrying both those measures into effect, which were rejected. It has been recently ascertained, by a letter from Mr jt'ifterson to Mr Dunbar, written in 2» I I { ( 1 i ■i s; If I July 1803, after he liad received the treaties, and convened Congress to consider them, that, in his opinion, the treaties could not be carried into ef- fect without an amendment to the constitution : and that the proposal for such an amendment would be the first measure adopted by them, at their meeting. Yet Mr JeiVerson, president of the United States, did approve the acts of Congress, assuming the power which ho had so recently thought not delegated to them, and, as the Execu- tive of the Union carried them into execution. Thus Mr Jelferson, President of the United States, the federal members of Congress, who opposed and voted against the ratification of the treaties, and myself, all concurred in the opinion, that the Louisiana cession treaties transcended the constitutional powers of the government of the United States. But it was, after all, a (lues- tion of constructive power. The power of making the treaty was expressly given without limitation. The sweeping clause, by which all powers, neces- sary and proper for carrying into effect those expressly delegated, may be understood as unlimit- ed. It is to be presumed, that wlu-a Mv .Ictforson approved and executed the acts of Congress, as- suming the doubtful j)Ower, he had broiio;hi his mind to acquiesce in this somewhat latitudinarian construction. I opposed it as long and as fiir as my opposition could avad. I acquiesced in it, after it had received the sanction of all the orji'a- nized authority of tiie Union, and the tacit ac(iui- csccnce of the people of the United States and 29 of Louisiana. Since which time, so far as this precedent goes, and no farther, I have considered the question as irrevocably settled. -But, in reverting to the fundamental principle ot all our constitutions, that obedience is not due to an unconstitutional law, and that its execution may be lawfully resisted, you must admit, that had the laws of Congress for annexing Louisiana to the Union been resisted, by the authority of one or more States of the then existing confed- eracy, as unamstituliumd, that resistance might have been carried to the extent of dissolving the Union, and of forming a new confederacy ; and that if the consequences of the cession had been so oppressive upon ^cw Lngland and the North, as was ap])rehenle, still less of the legislature of any one Slate in the Union, to secede at j)leasure from the Union. No provision is made for the exercise of this right, either by the federal or any of the State constitutions. The act of exercising it, presupposes a departure from the principle of compact and a resort to that of force. if, in the exercise of their respective func- tions, the legislative, executive, and judicial au- thorities of the Union on one side, and of one or more States on the other, are brought into di- rect collision with each other, the relations be- tween the parties are no longer those of constitu- tional right, but of independent force. Each party construes the common compact for itself. The constructions are irreconcileable together. There is no umpire between them, and the appeal is to the sword, the ultimate arbiter of right be- tween independent States, but not between the members of one body politic. I therefore hold it as a princijde without exception, that whenever the constituted authorities of a State, authorize resistance to any act of Congress, or pronounce ! !! ^ 1 ir- 33 > i it unconstitulional, they do thereby declare them- selves and their State (/uodd hue out of the pale of the Union. That there is no supposable case, in which the pro/i/e of a State might jjlace them- .solves in this attitude, by the primitive ri<,dit of insurrection ajfaiiist oppression, I will not allirm : but they have delegated no such power to their legislatures or their judges ; and if there be such a right, it is the right of an individual to commit suicide — the right of an iidiabitant of a poj)ulous city to set fire to his own dwelling house. These are my viiws. liut to those, who think that each State is a sovereign Judge, not only of its own rights, but of the extent of ])owcrs conferred upon the general government l)y the people of the whole I'nion; and that each State, jriviu"- its own construction to the constitutional powers of ("ongress, may array its se})arate sovereignty against every act of that body transcending this estimate of their powers — to say of men holding these princii)les, that, for the ten years from 1804 to 1814, they were intending a dissolution of the Union, and the formation of a new Confederacy, is charging them with nothing more than with acting up to their princi|)les. To the purposes of party leaders, intending to accomjdish the dissolution of the Union and a new Confederacy, two postulates are necessary. First, an act or acts of Congress, which may be resisted, as unronstiiiitioiui/ : and, secondly, a state of ex- citement among the ])eoplc of one or more States ofihe Union suHiciently inllamed, to produce acts 5 : 34 of the State legislatures, conflicting with the acts of Congress. Resolutions of the legisla- tures denying the powers of Congress, are the first steps in this march to disunion ; but th(>y avail nothing, without subsequent and corresponding action. The annexation of Louisiana to the Union was believed to be unconstitutional, but it produced no excitement to resistance among the people. Its beneficial consequences to the whole Union were soon felt, and took away all possibility of holding it up as the labarum of a political religion of disunion. The projected separation met with other disasters and slumbered, till t!;e attack of the Leopard on the Chcsapeako;, followed by the Orders in Council of 11 th No- vember, 1807, led to the embargo of the 22d December of that year. The first of these events brought the nation to the brink of war with Great Britain; and there is good reason to believe that the second was intended as a measure familiar to the policy of that government, to sweep our com- merce from the ocean, carrying into British ports every vessel of ours navigating upon the seas, and holding them, their cargoes, and their crews in sequestration, to aid in the negotiation of Mr Rose, and bring us to the terms of the British cabinet. This was precisely the period, at which the governor of Nova Scotia was giving to his correspondent in Massachusetts, the friendly warn- ing from the British government of the revolu- tionizing and conquering plan of France, which was communicated tome, and of which i a[)prized 3.J } Mr JcfTcrson. The embargo, in the moan time, had been laid, and had saved most of our vessels and seamen from the grasp of the British cruizers. It had rendered impotent the British Orders in Council ; but, at the same time, it had choaked up the channels of our own commerce. As its operation bore with heavy pressure upon the commerce and navigation of the North, the fede- ral leaders soon began to clamour against it ; then to denounce it as unconstitutional ; and then to call upon the Commercial States to concert mea- sures among themselves, to resist its execution. The question made of the constitutionality of the embargo, only proved, that, in times of violent popular excitement, the clearest delegation of a power to Congress will no more shield the exercise of it from a charge of usurpation, than that of a power the most remotely implied or constructive. The question of the constitution- ality of the embargo was solemnly argued before the District Court of the United States at Salem ; and although the decision of the judge was in its favor, it continued to be argued to the juries; and even when silenced before them, was in the dis- temper of the times so infectious, that the juries themselves habitually acquitted those charged with the violation of that law. There was little doubt, that if the question of constitutionality had been brought before the State judiciary of Massa- chusetts, the decision of the court would have been against the law. The first postulate for the projectors of disunion, was thus secured. The f Vjt^"^' '« III' ( .1 ( I scco!i(i still lingcrccl; for tlio j)C()plc, notwitli stfinding tlicir excitement, still clung to the Union, and the Ibderal majority in tlio logislature was very small. Then was brought forward the first project for a Convention of Delegates from the New England States to meet in Connecticut, and then was the time, at which I urged with so much earnestness, by letters to my friends at Washing- ton, the substitution of the non-intercourse for the embargo. The non-intercourse was substituted. T\\q ar- rangement with Mr Erskine soon afterwards en- sued ; and in August, 1809, \ embarked upon a public mission to Russia. My absence from the United States was of eight years' duration, and 1 returned to take charge of the department of State in 1817. The rupture of Mr Erskinc's arrangement, the abortive mission of Mr Jackson, the disclosures of Mr John Henry, the war with (jreat IJritain, the opinion of the judges of the Supreme Court of Massachusetts, that by the constitution of the L^nited States, no power was given either to tho president or to Congress, to determine the actual existence of the exigencies, upon which the militia of the several States may be employed in the service of the United States, and the Hartford Convention, all happened during my absence from this country. I forbear to pursue the narrative. The two postulates for disunion were nearly con- summated. The interposition of a kind Provi- dence, restoring peace to our country and to the i i 37 I I 3 world, Jivcrtod tlio most doploruUlu of ciitasiro- phcs, and tuniing over to tlio roco|»tacl(; ol'tliiiiLfs lost upon ciirtli, the adjf)iinicd Coiivcntion IVoiii Hartford to lioston, cxtiiij^niisliod (by the mercy of Heaven, may it be forever!) the projected New Kn«,dand Confederacy. (leiitlcmeii, I liavo waved every scruple, per- haps even the |)roprieties of my situation, to give you tliis answer, in consideration of that lomr and sincere friondsliip for some of yon, which can cease to heat only with the last j)nlsation of my heart, l>ut I camiot consent to a controversy with you. Here, if you please, let our joint corres- pondence rest. 1 will answer for the public eye, or for the private ear, at his o[)tion, either of you, sj)eakinii; for himself, upon any <|uestion, which he may justly deem necessary, for th(! vindication of his own re[))italion. IJut I can recognise amom;; you no representative characters. .lustly a|)pre- ciatinq; the lilial piety of those, who have signed your letter in behalf of their deceased sires, I have no reason to believe that either of those pa- rents would have ;• thori/.ed the demaiul of names, or the call for evidenc(! u hich you have made. With the father of your last signer, I had, in the year H'OJ), one or more iutimatelv confidential conversations on this very subject, which I have flattered myself, and still believe, were not without their in''' iice uj)OU the conduct of his last and best < vs His sou may have found no traces of this ai iig his father's j^apers. He may believe me that it is nevertheless true. II • >-r*f: )fl r* ! ' I I ! ii \i 38 It is not improbable that at some future day, a sense of solemn duty to my country, may require of me to disclose the evidence, which I do possess, and for which you call. But of that day the se- lection must be at my own judgment, and it may be delayed till I myself shall have gone to answer for the testimony I may bear, before the tribunal of your God and mine. Should a disclosure of names even then be made by me, it will, if possi- ble, be made with such reserve, as tenderness to the feelings of the living, and to the families and friends of the dead may admonish. But no array of numbers or of power shall draw me to a disclosure, which I deem prema- ture, or deter me from making it, when my sense of duty shall sound the call. In the mean time, with a sentiment of affec- tionate and unabateu regard for some, and of respect for all of you, permit me to subscribe myself. Your friend and fellow citizen, JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. i \ APPEAL TO THE CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES. The following appeal is made to you, because the charges which have rendered it necessary were exhibited by your highest public functionary, in a communication designed for the eyes of all ; and because the citizens of every State in the Union have a deep interest in the reputation of every other State. It is well known, that, during the embargo, and the succeeding restrictions on our commerce, and also during the lato war with Great Britain, the State of Massachusetts was sometimes charged with entertaining designs, dangerous, if not hos- tile, to the Union of the States. This calumny, having been engendered at a period of extreme political excitement, and being considered like the thousand others which at such times are fabricated by party animosity, and which live out their day and expire, has hitherto attracted very little attention in this State. It stood on the same footing with the charge against Hamilton, for peculation ; against the late President Adams, as 40 \ '-K- i t being in favor of a monarchy and nobilitjs and against Washington himself, as hostile to France, and devoted to British interests. Calumnies, which vvcrc seldom believed by any respectable members of the party uhich circulated them. The ])UJ)lication i)y the President of the United States, in the National Intelligencer of October last, has given an entirely ncv/ character to these charges against the citizens of Massachusetts. They can no longer be considered as the anony- mous slanders of political ])artisunF; : but as a solemn and deliberate impeachment by the first magistrnte of the I'nited States, and under the responsibility of his imme. It apj)ears also that this denunciation, though now for the first time made known to the public, and to the parties im- plicated, (whoever they may be,) was contained in private letters of Mr Adams, written twenty years ago, to members of the general government : and that he ventures to srate it as founded on unequiv- ocal evidence within his own knowledge. It was im|)Ossible for those who had any part in the afi'airs of Massachusetts during the period in question, to suil'er such a charge to go forth to the world, and descend to posterity, without no- tice. The high oilicial rank of the accuser, the silent, but baneful inlluence olthe original secret denunciation, and the deliberate and unprovoked repetition of it in a public journal, authorized an api)eal to Mr Adains, for a specification of the j)arties and of the cvidejico, and rcMulered such an appeal absolutely imperative. i\o high-minded i* 41 the honorable man, of any party, or of any State in our confederacy, could e\i)cct that the memory of illustrious friends deceased, or the characters of the iiving, should bo left undefended, through the fear of a\vakeniuf>' lon<4 extinguished contro- versies, or of disturbing IMr Adams' retirement. ]\[c!i who feel a just respect for their own charac- ters, and lor public esteem, and who have a cor- res{)ondinii; sense of what is due to the reputation of others, will admit the ri any evidence in support of his allega- tions. The former part of his letter contains his reasons for that refusal ; and in the other part, he reuviats tlm original charges in terms even more ollensive than before. AVhen addressing to him our letter, we thought we might reasonably ex- pect from his sense of what was due to himself, as well as to us, that he would fully disclose all the evidence which he professed to consider so satisfactory ; and vvc felt assured, that in that I 44 I event wc should be able fully to CAphiin or refute it, or to fallow that it did not aifect any distin- guished liieinhors of tho ledernl party. And if, on the other hand, he should refuse to disclose that evideiice, wo trusted that the jjublic would presume, what wc unhe!^i{a^ingly believe, that it was because he had no cndtn'C that would bear to be suhmiHed to an inq)nriial and inttUl'^en commtnilii/. ]\Ir Adams has ado})ted the latter course ; and if the reasons that he has assigned for it should appear to be unsatisfactory, our fellow-citizens, wc doubt not, will join us in draw- ing the above inference. Vv'e thcrcibrc proceed to an examination of those reasons. Mr Adams iirst objects to our making a joint application to him ; acknowk'dging the right of each one alone to incpiirc whether he was includ- ed in this vague and sweeping denunciation. It is not easy to see why any one should lose this acknov.ledged right, by uniting with others in the exercise of it; nor why this mere change of form should authorize Mv Adams to disregard our claim, jjut tlK're are two objections to the course which he has condescended to point out, as the only one in which he could be approached on this occasion. Any individual who should have applied to him in that mode might have been charged with arro- gance ; and to each of tlicm in turn he mijiht have tauntingly replied, ' that the aj)plicant was in no danger of suliering as one of the '" leaders" in Massachusetts, and had no occjision to exculpate himself from a charge conveyed in the terms used 4 45 by Mr Adams.' The other objection is still more decisive. After allowing to this denunciation all tiie weight that it can be supposed to derive from the j)ersonal or ollicial character of the accuser, we trust there are lew citizens of Massachusetts wiio would be content to owe their political repu- tation to his estimation of it, and condescend to solicit his coiiiiicate to ac(jnit them ol' the sus- j>icion of treasonable practices. Mr Adams next objects, that we make our ap- plication as the representatives of a great and powerful party, which, at the time referred to, connnanded, as he says, a devoted majority in the legislature of the Commonwealth : and he denies our right to represent that ])arty. We have already stated the objections to a joint aj)j)li- cation by all, who might be included in this de- nunciation, and lo a soj)arate iiKpiiry by each individual ; and some of the reasons which we thought, justified the course which we have j)ur- sued. We certainly did not arrogate to ourselves the tillc of ' leaders;' and Mr Adams may enjov, undisturbed, all the advantage which that circum- stance can give him in ibis controversy. JJut we freely avowed such a close politi(-al connexion w ith al' wb.o could probably have been included under that api)ellation, as to render us responsible for all their political measures that were known to US ; and we, therefore, nmst have been either their dupes, or the associates in tlicir guilt. In either case, we were interested, and, as we appre- hend, entitled, to make this demand of Mr Adams. fl 46 )i r ■J As to the siigfifcstion, that ho spoke only of * certain lenders' of the federal jiarty, and not ot the |)arty itself; we certaiidy intended to deny our knowledfjfe and helief that any such plot had heon contrived hy any party whatever in this JState ; and it is explicitly so stated in our letter. 'J'his languafre would include any numher, whether lanrc or small, who niiijlit he supposed to have leagued together, for the pur|)osc suggested hy Mv Adams. There seems, therefore, to he hut little ground for this technical ohjection, that wc do not take the issue tendered hy his charge. IJut we wish to examine a little further this dis- tinction which Mr Adams relies U|)on, hetween a political party and its leaders. From the nature of represenlf.tive government, it results, that, in conducting the husiness of their legislative and popular assemhlies, some individuals will he found to take a more active and conspicuous j)art than the rest, and will he regarded as essentially inllu- encmg puhlic opinion, whilst they are gen(;rally themselves merely impelled hy its force, liutthis influence, in whatever degree it may exist, is tem- porary, and is possessed hy a constant succession of dilferent persons. Those who possess it lor the time heing, are called Itaders, and, in the course of ten years, they must amount to a very nume- rous class. Their measures and political ohjects must necessarily he identilied with those of their whole ])arty. To deny this, is to pronounce sen- tence of condemnation upon popular government. For, admitting it to be true, that the people may 47 1 be occasionally surprised and misled by those >vho al)iisc their confidence into measures repug- nant to tiieir interests and duty, still, if the major- ity oltheni can, for ten years together, be duped, and led hoodwinked to ilie very precipice of trea- son, by their perfidious guides, ' without partici- pating in their secret designs, or being privy to their existence,' they show themselves unlit for sell-government. It is not conceivable, that the federal |)arty, which, at that time, constituted the great majority of ^^assachusetts, will feel them- selves indebted to the president of the United States, lor a compliment paid to their loyalty, at the expense of their character for intelligence and independence. It is in the above sense oidy, that a free people can recognize any individuals as leaders ; and in this sense, every man, who is conscious of havino- enjoyed inlluence and consideration with his party, may well deem himself included in every oppro- brious and indiscriminate impeachment of the motives of the leaders of that ])arty. But it would be arrogance to su|)i)ose himself alone intended, when the terms of the accusation imply a con- federacy of many. And while, on the one hand, it would betray both selfishness and egotism to conline his demand of exculpation to himself; so, on the other, it is impossible to unite in one ap- plication all who might justly be considered as his associates. It follows then that any persons, who, from the relations they sustained to their party, may apprehend that the public will apply to them , M ■!>« ■■■ 48 f I charges of tlii.s vaffuc (lcscrii)tion, may join in sucli nuMibcrs as tlicy sIkUI tliiiik tit, lo doiunnd an cx- phmalion ol" charges, Aviiiclj will jtrobahly all'cct .sonic of thcnj, and may allcct ihcm all. 'J'ho riglit, npon liic immulahio principles of jnsticc, is commensurate with the injury, and should bo adapted to its ch:iracter. Again, who can doubt that the public reputation of high minded men who liave cmbarkinl in the same cause and maintained a connnnnion ol" prin- ciples, is a conunon property, which ;dl w ho arc interested are bound to vindicate as occasion mav re(|uire — tiie present for the absent — the living for the dead — the son for the IV 'her. If any responsible individual at A\'ashington should declare himself to be in possession of une- quivocal evidence, that the leaders of certain States in our coid'cderacv, were now maturing a plot for the se))aration of the States, might not the members of Congress, now there, from the States thus accused, in.-ist uj)on a disclosure of evidence and names ? Would they be diverted from their purpose by an evasion of the (|uestion, on the ground, that, as the libeller hisd not named any individuals, so there was no one entitled to niako this demand r or would they be satisfied with a misty exculpation of themselves ? This cannot bo imagined. They would contend for the honor of their absent friends, of their party, and of their States. These were among our motives for making this call. We feel an interest in all these particu- lars, and especially in the unsullied good name . ^ s of friomls and nssnciatrs, wlio, vonorahlc for eminent talents, ^i|•t^l(^s aiul puhlic seiviees, have i-one down to th(! -rav<> unconseioiis of any inii.iitafiou on tlieir eliaraeters. Mr Adams admits our ri-lit (o make seveiallv, t!ie iiKHiiiies ^v!.ieIl have lurn made Jointly ; tlioimli in a passage eminent for its e(|ni\oeation,'lie e.xpivsses a doiihl wiieilicr wc can come w itliin llie terms of his eliariics. On this remarkahh; i)assau(! we submit one inon; ohserv.uion. As Mv Adams deeiares that he vrll hicw Irom unnivinmil ecidnire the (;\istenee of such treasonahh; desi-ns, lie nuist have known, whetiier the parties who adchessed liim were eniiai;ed in those de- signs. ^ \Vhy then resort to the extraordinary s(d)terfuii-e, tliat //'tile si-ners of that letter were not leaders, tiien the eharijcs did not refe-r to them ? There is then no rij,dit on the part of INFr Adams to prescribe to the uijured parties, (and all arc injured who may be comi)r(;hended in his va^lle e.\j)r(>.ssions) the precise; form in which th(st aijain^t answerino- to the com- plaint of any \\hom Ik; had actually wounded, because they could not i)rove that his aim w'as directed at them. Another reason assigned by Mr Adanis for his refu- sal to name the; individuals whom he intended to nccuse, is that it mi-ht exposi! him to a Ici-al j.rosecu- tion. M.« , ertainly had not nmch to apj)rehend in this respect from any of the undersiuiied. As he had ori- ginally annomiced that he had no le^ial evidence to prove his charge, and the undersigned had nevertheless 7 w-. f" < ' 50 cullcil on lilm to produce such as lie did possess, lie must have hcen sulVuiintly nssurcd that llu ir piirposcj was not to resort to a lourt of justice, hut to the tii- hiiual of pnhlie opiiiiou ; and that they had virtually precluded themselves from any other resort. INIr Adams su^^ests another ohjection to naming the parties accused, on account of the jjrobahle loss of evidence, and the forgetfulness of witnesses, after the la])se of twenty years. He undouhtedly now possesses all the evidence that he had in October last, when he published his state- ment. If he then made this grave charge; against cer- tain of his fellow-citizens, with the knowledge that there was no evidence; by which it could be substan- tiated, where was his sense of justice ? If he made it without incjuiring, and without regarding, whether he had any such evidence or not, inteuuling if called upon to shield himself from responsibility by stiggesting this loss of documents and proofs, where was then his self- respect ? But did it never occur to Mr Adams, that the parties accused might also in this long lapse of time have lost the ])roofs of tlu}ir innocence ? i/c; has hioivn for twenty years past that he had made this secret denunci- ation of his ancient political friends; and he must have anticipated the j)ossil)ility that it might at some time be made; public, if he had not even determined in his own mind to ])ublish it himselt. He has therefor'3 had ample opportunity, and the most ))owerful motives, to preserve all the; evidence that might serve to Justily his conduct on that occasion. On the other hand, the parties accused, and especially those venerable patriots 1^: I 51 I i I nlio (luring tliis long interval liavo descended to flic grave, vnconscious ofrruilt, (did ii>)ior(iitt that thrij urie fvoi s}is/i(cU'(l, have Jon seen no ncci'ssili/^ (iiid had no motivr nlu(tn'(:i\ to /ircscicc anij mrmorials oftlnir in- nocence. W'v, venture to make this appeal to liie eo!\- seienee of Mr Adams himself. Mr Adams in ouv passage ap|)eals to the Teellngs of the midersiirned, and intimates liis snrprise lliat they slionld hav(! selected \\u) present moment for :!K!king tiieir demand. \\v did them l)nt justice in siipposipg that this consideration had its inlhience on their minds. Tlieir only fear was that tln^ir ap|)eal miiiht he consid- ered as an attack on an emin(Mit man, \^ iiom tlu.' pnhlic favor seemed to have deserted. iUit tin^ imdersi<^iied had no choice. Their accuser had selected his own time for hriniiing this sid)ject hefore the world ; and they were compelled to follow him w ith their defence, or consent that the seal should he set on their own reputations, and on those of their deceased friends for- ever. We said with truth, that it was not our design nor wish to produce an eflect on any political jiarty or (juestion. \\c were not unaware that oiu' appeal might lead to such measures as would seriously a fleet either ]Mr Adams or ourselves in the public opinion. lUit w hilst we did not w ish for any such result, so neither were we disposed to shrink from it. The necessity of correcting sotnc mistakes in a let- ter of Mr Jefferson, which had been lately j)ul)lished is assigsied by INfr Adams as the reason for his j)ul)lica- tion. If that circumstance has brought him before the pid)lic at a time, or in a manner, injurious to his feel- ings, or unpropitious to his political views and expccta- 62 tions, \vc. are not responsible for the consotjuen'e?. We A\ oiiid observe, however, that it would have been ii|)[);ircntlj a vimj easy task to correct those mistakes, wiihoiit adding this unprovoked denunciation against his native State. Finally ]Mr Adams declines all further correspon- dence with us on this subject ; and even intimates an aj)prehension that he may have already cond(?scend('d too I'ar, and waved ' ev(Mi the pro})rieties of his situa- tion,' in giving us such an answer as he has given. He very much misap[)reh('nds the ( haracter of our institutions, and the principles and sj)irit of his country- men, if lie imagines that any official rank, however elevated, will authorise a man to publish injurious charges against others, and then to refuse all repara- tion and even explanation, lest it would tend to impair his dignity. If he is in any danger of sucii a result in the i)resent instance, he should have foresecni it when about to publish his charges, in October last. If ' the ])roprieti('s of his situation ' have been violated, it was by that original })ublication, and not by too great con- descension in answer to our call uj)on him, for an act of simple justice towards those who felt themselves aggrieved. We have thus examined all the reasons hy m Iiicli ]Mr Adams attem})ts to justify his refusal to produce the evidence in support of his alleuations ; and we again apjx-al with confidence to our fellow citizens throughout the Unit(;d States, for the Justice of our conclusion, that no such evidence exists. 52 The preceding observations sufilcc, we trust, to shew, tliat we luive been reluctantly forced into a con- troversy, which could not be shunned, u ithout the most al)ject dc-radation ; tiiat it was competent to us to interrogate iMr Adams, in the mode adoj)ted, and tliat he declines a direct answer for reasons insui'licient, and unsatisfactory ; thus placing Jiimself in the predi- cament of an unjust accuser. Here, perliaps, ^^e niiglit saf(>lj rest our appeal, on the ground that it is impossible strictly to prove a negative. JJut though we are in the dark ourselves, wuh respect to the evidence on \\ hich lu; relics, to jus- tily his alh-ation of a ' project,' at any time, to dis- solve th(> Union, and establish a northern confederacy, (which is the only point to ^\ hich our in.piiries were directed,) it Mill he easy !,y a comp;uison of dates, and cn-cumstances, founded on his own admissions, to de- monstrat(! (\\]v,a we kno^\ must be true) that no such evidence ap|)lies, to any man who acted, or to the mea- sures adopted in iALassachusctts at, and posterior to the time of the emhargo. The ])r()jcct iisclf, so far as it applies to those men and meas.nes, and probably alto- gcth(>r, existed only in tin; distempered fan:-y of Mr Adams. ' This d<-sign ' (h(> says) ' /tad hcvn formed in the 'iCinteroJ'my3-\, imniediatehj ajhr, and as a conse- '(pience.of, the accpiisition of Louisiana. Its justify- 'in- causes, to those who entertained it were, that the ' annexation of Louisiana to the ['nion transcended the ' constitutional j)owers of the government of the United ' Stat(«s. That it Ibrmed, in fact, a iieu- confederacy Uo whieii the states, united by the former compact, 54 i J; . ' " ! * were not bound to adhere. Tliat It was oppressive ' to the iiUer(\sts, and destructive to tlie inlluence, of 'tlie norihcrn section of the confederacy, whose right ' and duty it therefore was, to secede from tlie new ' body politic, and to constitute one of their own. This ' i)lan was so far matured, that a proposal had been ' made to an individual, to permit himself, at the pro- ' per time, to be placed at the head of the military ' mov(nnents, which, it was ibreseen, would be neces- ' sary for carrying it into execution.' The interview Avitli Mr Jefferson was in March 1808. In May Mr Adams ceased to be a senator. In tlu; winter of 1808 — he made his communications to Mr Giles, In August 1800 he embarked for Europe, three years before the war ; and did not return until three years after the peace; ; — and he admits the impossibility of his having given to INIr Jefferson information of nego- tiations between our citizens, and the British, during the war, or having relation to the war — condescending to declare, that he Itad no knowledge of such negotiations. Tlie other ini^tsures, to which Mr Adams alludes, were of the most public character ; and the most im- portan*^ of them better known, in their day, to other's, than ;hey could be to him, residinir in a foreign country ; and if the chain by a\ liich these mea- sures are connected with th(> supposed plot shall ap- pear to bo wholly imnginary, these measures will remain to be supported, as tluy ought to be, on their own merits. The letter from the Governor of jNova Scotia, as will presinuly be seen, is of no possible significance in any view, but that of hav- ing constituted the only information (as he says) 55 I which Mr Adams communicated to Mr Jefferson at t!io time of his fnst, and only confidential interview. It was written in the summer of 1807, this country be- ing tlien in a state of peace. The Governor's corres- pondent is to tliis hour unlvnown to us. He was not says Mr Adams, a ' leader ' of the Federal party.' The contents of the letter were alto-ether idle, but iho effect supposed by Mr Adams to be contemplated by the writer, could be produced only by givin- them pub- licity. It was conuiuinicaled to MrAdams \^iihout any injunction of secrecy. He; has no doubt it nas shewn to others. Its object was, he supposes, to ac- credit a calumny, that Mr Jefferson, ;uid his measures, were subservient to France. Tiiat the iiritish -overu- ment were informed of a plan, determined upon bjr France, to effect a coihjuest of the British Provinces on his continent, and a revolution in the gov.>rnment o* Jnited States, as means to which, tlu>y wero fu.,t iv) produce a war betW(H'n the United States and England. A letter of this tenor was no doubt shewn to Mr Adams, as we luust b(>lieve u])on his word. The discovery would not be surprising, that IJritish, as well as French officers, and citizens, in a time of peace with this country, availed themselves of manv channels for convi yi„g their speculations and strata-ems, to other mnocent ears as well as to those of ]\Ir Adams, ^ itl, a view to inlluenee public opinion. But the subject mat- ter of the letter was an absurdity. Who did not know that m 1807, after the battle of Trafalgar, the crippled navy of France^ could not undertake! to transport vvni a single regiment across the British Channel r And if the object was the conquest of the British Provinces 5(5 !)y th(^ United States alono, how could a revolution, in their government, which must divide, and weaken it, promote that end ? Tlie lolly of a liritish Governor in attempting to give currency to a story which savours so strongly of the burlescjue, can be ecjuallcd only l)y the credidity of Mr Adams, in believing it calculated to produce effect; and if he did so Ixdieve, it furnishes a criterion by whic 1 to estimate the correctness and im|)artiality of Ifis Judgment concerning the weight and the a|)plica- tion of the other evidence which he stiil uiihholds, and from which he has (uidertakcn ^\ith e((ual confidence; to ' draw his inferences.' After the adjustment o'l the diplomatic preliminaries with Mr (Jiles and ethers, Mr Adams communicated notih.nc; to j\rr Jefferson, but the substance of the Nova Scotia Idler. If Mr Adams had then known and belic^ved in thi^ ' j)r()ject,' (the * kev ' to all the future; proceedings) it is incredibh^ that it should not ha\e been deemed ^\orthv of disclosure — (It thai time, anil on that ocrnsion. In this connexion ^V(! ad\(Mt for a moment to the temper of mind, and the st;ite of feelings, which ])ro- bably iiav(! rise to, and accompanied, this communica- tion of ATr Adams. Circumstances had occinred tend- ing- to embitter his feelings, and to waip his jiid'jnient. j\Ir Adams, Ju-;t before the lime of his interview W'ith Mr Jelferson, had voted for the embargo, lie had been reproached for having done this on the avowed principle, of rot in 'j\ ant! not (hlilicraling, upon the; Kxe- cutiv(; recommendation. Uv. had been engagc^d with bis colleague in a controversy on this subject. His con- duct, as he affirms, and as was the fact, had been cen- ^ I siircd, in terms of severity, in the public press. Tlic Legislature of Massachusetts had elected another per- son to succeed him in the Senate of the United States, and had otherwise expressed such a strong and d(;cid(d disapprobation of the measures which he had supported, that he felt compelled to resign his seat before the ev™ pnation of his term. These might be felt as injuries, oven by men of placable temper. It is probabie that his ieelings of irritation may be traced back to the contest between Jefferson and the elder Adams. It is no secret, that the latter had cherished deep and bitter re- sentment against llamillon, and certain other 'leaders' of the federal ])arty, su])i)()scd to be Hamilton's friends. It would not be unnatural that the son should j)artici- pate in these feelings of the father. When Mr Adams visited Mr Jefferson, and afterwards made his disclo- sures to Mr Giles and others, having lost the confi- dence of his own party, he had decided, ' as subse- quent events doubtless confirmed,' to throw himself into the arms of his father's opponents. But there was a load of political guilt, i)ersonal and hereditarv. still resting upon him, in tlu; opinions of the adverse l)arty. i\o ordinary proof of his unqualifi-d abjuration ol his late politics would bo satisfactory ;— some sacri- iice, whicli should put his sincerity to the test, and place an impassable barrier betw(>en him and his i'or- mer party, was indispensable. And what sacrifice was so natural, what pledge so perfect, as this private d('nunciation ! Nor does the ell^ct S(>(;m to Ikut been miscalculated or over-rated. Mr Jefferson declares that it raised Mr Adams in his mind. Its eventual consequences were highlv, and })ermanentlv advan- 8 mt 58 Mf^ i \ I -l tngoous to Mr Adams. And though ho assured Mr Cilcs, that he had rcnouncod his i)arty, without personal views; yet this 'denial,' considering that he had the good fortune to rec(!ivc within a few months, the em- bassy to Russia, 'connected with other circumstances,' which ended in his elevation to the presidency, does indeed, according to his own principles of presumptive evidence, r(;qnire an effort of ' the charity which be- lieveth all things,' to gain it 'credence.' To these public, and indis])utable facts, we should not now revert, had Mr Adams given us the names, and evidence", as requested ; and had he forborne to reiterat(> his in,.nious insinuations. But as they now rest wholly u])oii the sanction of his opinion, respecit- ing evidence which he alone possesses, wo think it but reasonable to consider, how far these circumstanc(>s may have heated h's imagination, or disturl)ed his eijuanimity, and given to tin* evidence, which he kee})s from the })ul)lic eye, an unnatural, and false com- plexion. AVe ])rocecd then to a brief examination of the al- leged project of lo03-i — of the Northern confederacy. In tiie lirst place, JFr solcmnhj disavow all knond- rilij^c of such a project, and aU rcmonhranrr of the nk/i- tion of it, or (i/'aiii/ plan (oialogoits to it, at th(d or any Huhsctjucnt jicriod. S(!condly, AViiile it is ol)\iously impossible for lis to controvert evidence ol" wlii(;li \\c. are ignorant, we are well assKved it nu:st be eepially inijiossible to bring any facts which can he considered evidence to bear uj)on the designs or measures of those, who, ;\\ the lime of Mr Adams' interview with Mr 59 al- JofTerson, and .iftenvartls, during the war, took an active part in the public affairs of Massadiusctts. The oflbrt discernible throiiglioiit this letter, to con- nect those later events, which were of a jjublic nature, and of which the natural and adequate causes were j)nblic, with the mysterious i)roject, known ojily to hiniself, of an earlier origin and distinct source, is in tlu! last dcgrcje violent and disingenuous. Tlie cession of Louisiana to the United States, when iirst promiilgcd, was a theme c' ^nplaint and dissatisfaction, in this part of die couniry. This could not be regard(>d as factious or unreasonable, when it is admitted by Mr Adams, that ]Mr Jcjflerson and liiujself ent( rtaincd constitutional scru])les and obje(;tions to the provisions of the treaty of cession. Ncjthiug, however, like a popular excitement grew out of the me;jsure, and it is stated by JMr Adams that this project ' slinnbcird ' until tlu^ period of the embar- go in Dec(unber luU7. Suppose then for the moment (what wc have not a shadow of reason for bc;lie^ ing, and do not believe) (hat upon the occasion of the Lou- isiana Treaty, ' certain h-aders ' • "need by consti- tutional objections, (admitted to h;. x'en common to Mv Jefferson, Air Adams and themsehcs,) had con- ceived a [)roject of separation, and of a Northern Con- ic'deracy, as the only |)rol)able coimteipoise to tlu; man- ufactun^ of new States in the South, does it follow that when the public mind became reconciled to the cession, and the benelicial eonsetpiences of it were realized, (as it is conceded by iVlr Adams, was the case) these same; ' It-aders,' whoev(n' they might be, would still cherish the embryo project, and wait for ^ > ;' \i , ' :4 ! GO other contingcncirs, to cnablo tlicni to cflc'ct it ? On ^vll!lt autlioiity can Mr Adams assume tliat tlic project merely ' slumbered ' for years, il" his private evidence api)lies only to the time of its origin. The opposition to the measures of government in I8O0 arose from causes, ^vhieh were common to the people, not only of New-Kngland, but of all the com- mercial states, as Avas manifested in New-York, IMii- ladelpliia, and elsewhere. I>y what ])rocess of fair reasoning then can that opposition be referred to, or connected with a plan, which is said to have originated in luO'i-, and to have been intendt.'d to embrace merely a northtrn confederacy ? The objection to the Louisia- na treaty was founded on the just construction of the compact between sovereign states. It was beli(>ved in New-England, that new members could not bo added to the confederacy beyond the territorial limits of the contracting parties without the consent of those parties. This was considered as a fair subject of re- monstrance, and as justifying proposals for an amend- ment of the constitution. But so far w ere the Federal party from attempting to use this as an additional in- centive to the passions of the day, that in a report made to the Legislature of 1813 by a committee of which Mr Adams's ' excellent friend ' Josiah Qiiinci/ was chairman, (Louisiana having at this time been admitted into the Union) it is expressly stated, that '■thcijluivc ' not been disposed to conned this irreat constitutional ^ (juestion with the transient calamities o/the daij, from ' w hich it is in their opinion very apparently distin- ' guished both in its cause and conseciuences.' Tiiat in their view of this great constitutional (jucstion, they % h 61 have confined tl.emselvos to topics and arguments drawn from tlic constitution, ' witli the Iiope of Jin.itin- ' tlu, iuither progress of the evil, rath.r than ^vith the ' expectation of immediate relief during the eontinu- 'ance ol existing inHiiences in the national administra- ' tion.' This report was accepted ; and thus the ' pro- ject inst<;ad of heing used as iuel to the llame, is dehberatelj taken out of it, and j)resented to the people hy'lhe leaders 'as resting on distinct considerations irom the ' transient calamities,' and for which present redress ought neither to he sought, or expected. To the enijurgo imposed in December, 1807 nearly all the delegation of Massachusetts was op ' I)osed. The pretexts for imposing it were deem- ed by her citizens a mockery of her sulferings. Owning nearly one third of the tonnago in tlie United States, she felt that her voice oul.ht to be heard in what related to its security. Depending principally on her foreign trade and fisheries for snpport, her situation appeared desperate under the o])cration of this law in its terms perpetual. It was a bitter aggravation of her suflcrings to bo told, that its object was to preserve these interests. No pcoj)le, at peace, in an equal space of time, ever endured severer privations. She could not consider the annihilation of her trade as included in the i)ower to regulate it. To her lawyers, statesmen, and citizens in general, it appeared a direct violation of the constitution. It was uni- versally odious. The disaffection was not confin- ed to the federal party. Mr Adams, it is said, and not contradicted, announced in his letters to the 02 members of Congress, that government mn^^t not rely upon its own friends. Tlio interval from UU)? to If'.ri was filled np by a series of restric- tive measures ubich icept alive tbe discontent and irritation of tbe popular mind. Tben followed tbc war, under circumstances wbicb aggravated tbc public distress. In its progress, J\liissacbnsctts was dejirived of garrisons for In^r ports — witb a line of sea-coast c<|ual in extent to one tbird of tbat of all tbe otbcr maritime States, sbe was left during tbc wbolc war nearly defenceless. Her citizens subject to incessant alarm ; — a portion of tbe country invaded, and taken possession of as a .conquered territory. Iler own militia arrayed, lind encamped at an enormous e\i)ensc : pay and subsistence supplied from ber nearly exbausted treasury, and reimbursement refused, ev(>n to tins day. Now, wbat under tbe pressure and excite- ment of tbesc measures, was tbe coiuluct of tbc federal i)arty, tbc 'devoted majority,' witli tbn military force of tbe State in tbeir bauds ; — witb tbc encouragement to be derived from a convic- tion tbat tbc Nortbern States were iii sympatby witb tbeir feelings, and tbat government could not rely on its own friends ? J)id tbey resist tbc laws ? Not in a solitary instance. Did tbey tbreaten a separation of tbe States? Did tbey array tbeir forces witb a sbow of sucb disposition ? Did tbc government or peo{)lc of JMassacbuscttsin any one instance swerve from tbeir allegiance to tbe I'nion ? Tbe reverse of all tbis is tbe trutb. Abandoned by tbc national government, because sbe declined, [ 03 I i for reasons which her higliost trihunni ndjndgf'd to be coiistitutioriiil, to surrender lier militia into the hands of a military prefect, althouy;h ihey were always equipped, and ready and faithful under their own olliccrs, she nevertheless clung to the Union as to the ark of lier safety, she ordered her well trained militia into the field, stationed them at the points of danger, defrayed their ex- penses from her own treasury, and garrisoned vv ith them the national forts. All her taxes and excises were paid with jjunctuality and j)rom[)tness, an example by no means followed by some of the States, in which the cry for w ar had been loudest. These facts are recited for no other pur|)Ose but that of preparing for the incpiiry, what becomes of ]\[r Adams' 'k(>y,' his -project,' and his 'postu- lates:' riie latter were to all intents and pur- poses, to use his language, ' consumnmted.' Laws unconstitutional in the |)ublic opini(jn had been enacted. A great majority of an exasperated people were in a state of the highest excitement. The legi'^lature (if his word be taken) was under * the management of the leaders.' The judicial courls were on their side, and the juries were, as he pretends, contaminated. A golden op|)()rtunity had arrived. ' Now was the winter of their discontent made jf'orious summer.' vMl the combustibles for revolution were ready. When, behold ! instead of a, dismemiiered I liion, military movements, a northern confederacy, and British alliance, accom- plished at the favorable moment of almost total ^'- 04 ill proslrution oftlin credit aii(i power of tlic luilionul rulijrsi, a .small and peaceful deputation of j»ruvo citizens, selected from the ranks of civil life, and le<^Mslative councils, assembled at Hartford. There, calm and collected, like the Pilgrims, from whom they descended, and not unmindful of those wiio liad achi(!vcd the independence of their country, they deliberated on the most cllcctual means of preservini^ for their fellow-citizens and their de- scendants the civil and jjolitical liberty wliich had been won, and bequeathed to them. The cliaracter of this much injured assembly has been subjected to heavier imputations, nnder an entire deficiency not only of proof, but of j)ro- babilitv, than ever b(;fel any other set of men, dis- charging merely the duties of a committee of a legislative body, and making a public report of their doings to their constituents. 'I'hese imi)U- tations have never assumed a prec'ise form : but vague opinions have prevailed of a cond)ination to separate the I nion. As INlr Adams has conde- scended, by the manner in wiiieli he speaks of that convention, to adopt or countenance those imputations on its j)roceedings, we may be excus- ed for making a few more remarks on the subject, .'dthough this is not a suitable occasion to go into a full explanation and vindication of that measure. The subject naturally resolves itself into four points, or questions : First, the constitutional right of a State to ap- point delegates to such a convention : \\ 65 Secondly, the propriety and exp»ai;cracy of ex- ercising that right at that time: Thirdly, the objects intendtv. no be attained by it, and the powers given i'or tiiat purpose by the State to the delegates ; and Fourthly, the manner in which the delegates exercised their power. As to the tirst point, it will not be doubted that the people have a right ' in an orderly and peacea- ble manner to assemble to consult upon the com- mon good ;' and to request of their rulers 'by the way of addresses, petitions, or remonstran'.es, re- dress of the wrongs done them, and of the griev- ances they sulfer.' This is enumerated in the constitution of Massachusetts among our l 'tural, essential, and unalienable rights ; and it is recog- nized in the constitution of the United States ; and who then shall dare to set limits to its cxer cisc, or to prescribe to us the manner in which t shall be exerted ? We have already spoken of the state of public aftairs and the measures of the general government, in the year 1814, and of the degree of excitement, amounting nearly to des- peration, to which they had brought the minds of the people in this and the adjoining States. Their sufferings and apprehensions could no longer be silently endured, and numerous meetings of the citizens had been held on the occasion, ui various parts of the country. It was then thought that the measures called for in such an emergency would bo more prudently and safely matured and promoted by the government of the State, than by 9 66 unorganized bodies of individuals, strongly excited by what they considered to be the unjust and op- pressive measures of the general government. If all the citizens had the right, jointly and severally, to consult for the common good, and to seek for a redress of their grievances, no reason can be given why their legislative assembly, which repre- sents them all, may not exercise the same right in their behalf. We nowhere Hnd any constitutional prohibition or restraint of the exorcise of this power by the State ; and if not prohibited it is reserved to the State. We maintain then that the people had an uncjuestionablc right, in this as well as in other modes, to express their opinions of the measures of the ijeneral "overnuient, und to seek, ' by addresses, petitions, or remonstrances,' to obtain a redress of their grievances and relief from their sulferings. If there was no constitutional objection to this mode of proceeding, it will be readily admitted that it was in all respects the most eligible. In the state of distress and danger which then op- pressed all hearts, it was to be apprehended, as before suggested, that large and freciuent assem- blies of the people might lead to measures incon- sistent with the peace and order. of the commuMitv. If an aj)j)eal was to be made to the governmo.it of the United Slates, it was likely to be more elFectual, if proceeding from the whole State collectively, than if from insulated assemblies of citizens; and the application in that form would tend also to repi'css the public excitement, arid 67 prevent any sudden and unadvised proceedings of the people, by iiolding out to them tiie prospect of relief through the influence of their State government. This latter consideration had great weight with the legislature; and it is believed to have been the only motive that could have induced some of the delegates to that conven- tion to quit the seclusion to which they had voluntarily retired, to expose themselves anew to all the fatigue and anxiety, the odium, the mis- representations, calumnies, and unjust reproaches, which so frequently accompany and follow the best exertions for the public good. If each one of the States had the right thus to seek a redross of grievances, it is clear that two or more States might consult together for the same purpose ; and the only mode in which they could consult each other was by a mutual appoint- ment of delegates for that j)ur|)Ose. i3ut this is not the only ground, nor is it the strongest, on which to rest the justification of the l)rocee(lings in (juestion. If the government of the linitcd States in a time of such distress and danger should be iuvahlo, or should neglect, to allbrd i)rotection and relief to the j)eople, the legislature of the State would not only have a right, but it would be their duty, to consult to- gether, and, if j)racticable, to furnish these from their own resources. This would be in aid of the general government. How severely the peo- ple of Massachusetts exp>erienced at that time the want of this ability or disposition, in the gene- ') 11^; J,l !!i [f« 68 ral government, we need not repeat. If the legis- lature of a single State might under such circum- stances endeavour to provide for its defence, without infringing the national compact, no reason is perceived, why they might not appoint a com- mittee or delegates, to confer with delegates of neighbouring States who were exposed to like dangers and sufferings, to devise and suggest to their respective legislatures measures by which their own resources might be employed ' in a manner not repugnant to their obligations as members of the Union.' A part of New England had been invaded, and was then held by the enemy, without an effort by the general govern- ment to regain it ; and if another invasion, which was then threatened and generally expected, had taken place, and the New England States had been still deserted by the government, and left to rely on their own resources, it is obvious that the best mode of providing for their common defence would have been by a simultaneous and combined operation of all their forces. The States origin- ally possessed this right, and we hold t'.iat it has never been surrendered, nor taken from them bv the people. The argument on this point might be easily extended ; but we may confidently rely on the two grounds above mentioned, to wit, the right of the people, through their State legislatures or other- wise, to petition and remonstrate for a redress of their grievances; and the right of the States in a time of war and of threatened invasion to make It 69 i ' the necessary provisions for their own defence. To these objects was confined the whole authority conferred by our legislature on the delegates whom they appointed. They were directed to meet and confer with other delegates, and to devise and suggest measures of relief for the adoption of the respective States ; but not to represent or act for their constituents by agreeing to, or adopting any such measures themselves, or in behalf of the States. But whilst we strenuously maintain this right of the people, to complain, to petition, and to remon- strate in the strongest terms against measures which they think to be unconstitutional, unjust, or oppressive, and to do this in the manner which they shall deem most convenient or etlectual, pro- vided it be in ' an orderly and peaceable manner ; ' we readily admit that a wise people would not hastily resort to it, especially in this imposing- form, on every occasion of partial and temporary discontent or suti'ering. We therefore proceed to consider. Secondly, thc})ropricty and expediency of adopt- ing that measure in the autumn of lol4. On this point it is e.nough to say, tiiat the grievances that were suffered and the dangers that were apprehend- ed at that time, and the strong excitement whichthey produced among all the people, which is stated more particularly elsewhere in this address, ren- dered some measures for their relief indispensably necessary. If the legislature had not undertaken their cause, it appeared to be certain, as we have /9 70 already suggested, that the people would take it into their own hands ; and there was reason to fear that the proceedings in that case might be less orderly and peaceful, and at the same time, less ellicacious. Thirdly. We have already stated the objects which our State .^ in i'ixci done (all which is nianiiest of record), there remains no prete.xi for impeaching the ujembers of the con- vention by imj)utiiig to ihcm covert and nefarious designs, cxc(\nt the uncharitable one, that the characters of the n>en ju.-tify the belief, that they cherished in their hearts wishes, aiul inf(Milions, to do, nljatthcy had no authority to execute, and what in fact they did not attempt. On this head, to tho people of Xew England who were ac(|uaint- ed v,ith the>e characters, no explanation is neces- sary. For the information of others, it hchoves those of us who were members to s|)eak without reference to ourselves. With this reserve we may all be; permitted to say, without fear of con- tradiction, that they fairiy represented whatever of moral, intellectual, or j>atr!otic worth, is to bo found in the character of the lS,o\v England com- munity ; that they retained all the personal con- sideration and conlidence, which are enjoyed by the best citi/,(>n<, those who have deceased, to the hour of their rivate interest, as sj)rings of hu'man action, it may Im? added, that among the mass of citizens, friends, ;tnd connexions, whom they represented, were many, whose fortunes were principally vested in th(> public funds, to whom tho disunion of the States would have been ruin. y 72 That convention may be said to have originated with the people. Measures for reUef had been demanded from immense numbers, in counties and towns, in all parts of the State, long before it was organized. Its main and avowed object was the defence* of this part of the country ufrainst the common enemy. The war then wore its m-^st. threatening aspect. New-England was destitute of national troops ; her treasuries exhausted ; her taxes drawn into the national colfers. Tlie proceedings, and report of the convention, were in conformity with this oI)ject. Tiio burden of that report consisted in recominonding an application to Coi!gi(>ss to permit the States to provide for their own defenc"\ and to bo indemnified for ilie expense, by !\;- imburstUKMit, ia some shape, from the National Gov- ernment, of; at least, a portion of their own money. This coiivt Mtion adjonrned early in January. On the 27th of the same month, an act of Congress was pass- ed, which gave to tlie State Governments, the very power which was sought by Massachusetts ; viz — that of * raising, organizing and officering ' state trooj)s, ' to be employed in the State raising the same, or in an adjoining State ' and providing for their pay and sub- sist(>nce. This we repeat, was the most important object aimed at by the institution of the convention, and by the report of that body. Had this act of Con- gress })assed, before the act of Massachusetts, for orsanizinc; the convention, that convention never would have existed. Had such an act been anticipated by the convention, or j)assed before its adjournment, that as- sembly would have considered its commission as in a I t- 73 groat measuro, superseded. For nlilioiiuli it ])re})nr(Kl and reported sundry aniendnnMits to tlie constitiition of the United States, to Ix; snhniitted to a!/ i\\v Stiites, and miglit even, if isnowinii' of (his art of Conijjress, have persisted in doinn' the same thin^- ; yet, as this proposal for amendments eonhl liave heen aceomplish- cd in other modes, they eonid have had no special motive for so doing, but \\\vM arose from tlieir heing together; and from llie eonsideratioii which mi^ht bo lioped Jbr, as to their i)roj)ositioiis, from that cir(;um- stance. It is thus matter of absohite demonstra- tion, to all who do not usnrj) the |!ri\ih'^e of ihe SEARfHKU of hcarl>i that the dcsi'.'n of tlu' Hartford convention atd its doings wert! not only constitutional and laudable, but sanctioned by an act of CoiiL^rcss, passed after (he ri'port was published, not indeed Avith c\j)ress reference to it, but with its princi])al features, and thus admitting- tlu; reas()nai)lcMU'ss of its general tenor, and j;rincipal o])ject. It is indeed grievous to perceive Mr Adams condescending to intimate that the Convention was adjourned to iJoston, and in a strain of rhetorical pathos coimecting his imaginary plot, tlu^i Tit least in the thirteenth year of its ag(>, with the ' catastroph(! ' whi'-h awaited th(> ultimate procec-dings of the conv(Mition. That as^-emhly (idjournvd v'ttlumi (Utij, after nuikitig its rrpnit. It was ipso facto dis- solved, like other CominitttM^s. One of its resolutions did indeed pm-port that ' if the application of these States to the governnKMit of the United States, (rccom- mnidfd in (t foregoing rrsolui ion) s/iouid he unsiiceess- ful, and peace should not he ronrluded, and the difenee of these States should he neglected as it has heen, since 10 »*-"««i.«i ■IMP 1/ •J 71 the coiiiiiiencLMiient of tlio war, it will be, in the opinion of this Convention, iwiu'diont I'oi the Legishi- turu of llie several Slates, to appoint (leleo;ates to ano- ther ConvciUion to niet^t at Ijoston on liie third Tuesday of June next, with sueii pouersand instruetions as the exigency of a crisis, so momentous may require.' On this it is to he observed, First, that the Convention confem[)hited in the fore- going resolution never was a|)pointe(l, and never could have been, according to the terms of that resolution ; because, as is shown ahove, the: object of the intended aj)plication to Congress had been attained. And, 8e- condlv, if the continiieneies mentioned in that resolu- tion had occurred, the «]uestion of forming such a new Convention, and llu^ appointment of the delegates, must have gone into tiie hands of new assemhlies ; because ail the Legislatures of the New-Kngland states would have been dissolved, and there would have been new elections, before the time proposed for tlie se- cond convention. And, lastly, it is matter of [)ublic notoriety that the report of this convention pro- duced the cU'ect of assuaging the pid)lic scnsibilitv, and operated to repress the vague and ardent expectations entertained by many of our citizens, of immetliutc and ciVcctual relief, from the evils of their condition. AVe pass over the elaborate exposition of con- stitutional lav/ in the President's letter having no call, nor any inclination at this time to controvert its leading principles. Neither do wc comment upon, though we perceive and feel, the unjust, and wc must be excused for saying, insidious mode !l,:'^ 75 in which he has grouped together distant and dis- connected occurrences, which happened in his ahsence from the country, lor the j)urj)Ose of pro- ducing, hy their collocation, a glaring and sini.-ter effect upon the federal party. They were all of a public nature. The arguments concerning their merit or demerit have been exhausted ; and time, and the good sense of an intelligent people, will j)lace them ultimately in their true light, even though Mr Adams should continue to throw ob- stacles in the way to this harmonious reaction of j)ublic opini(jn. It has been a source of wonder and perplexity to many in our connnunity, to observe the immense did'erencc in the standards by which public opinion has been led to measure the same kind of proceed- ings, when adoj)ted in dilVerent States. No pre- tence is urged that any actual resistance to the laws, or forcible violation of the constitutional compact, lias ever haj)pened in IMassachusetts. Constitutional questions have arisen here as well as in other States. It is surprising and consolatory that the number has not been greater, and that the termination of them has not been less amicable. To the discussion of some of them great excite- ment was unavoidably incident ; but in comparing cases with causes and elfects, the impartiid observ- er will perceive nothing to authorize any dispar- agement oniiis Staff, to the advantage of the pre- tensions of other members of the con federacv. On this subject we disclaim the purpose of in- stituting invidious comparisons ; but every one 1* is ) I n 7() knows that Miissaclmsctts has not been alone in coniphiiiits and rcMuonstranccte against tlic acts of the n;:tional government. iXotliing can be Ibund on the records of her legi.dativc proceedings, sur- passing tlio lone of resohilions adopted in other States in reprobation of tlie ahen and sedition laws. In one Stale oppo:iition to the execution of a treaty, in others to the laws instituting the bank, has sound- ed the note of preparation lor resistance in more impassioned strains liian v.ere ever adopted here. And at this moment, claims of Slate rights, and pro- tests against the measures of tiie national ijovern- ment, in terms, for which no j)iirallel can be found in JMassachusetts, arc ushered into the halls of Con- gress, under the most solemn and imj)Osing forms of State autliority. It is not our part to censure or to aj)provc thest; proceedings. Massachusetts has (lone nothing at any lime, in opposition to the national government, and she has said nothing in derogation of its powers, that is not fully justihcd by the constitution ; and not so much as other States have said, with more decided cmpliasis ; and, as it is believed, without the stimulus of the same actual grievances. We are no longer at a loss to account for the prevalence of these l)i"eju- dices against this })art of the I'liion, since they can now be traced, not only to cahnnnics openly ])roi)agated in the season of bitter contention by irritated opj)onents, but to the secret and hitherto unknown aspersions of Mr Adams. Mr Jelferson, then at the head of government, declares that the cH'ect of iMr Adams' communica- • 77 tion to him at their interview in March, in08, was such on his mind, as to mi luce a cliango in the system of his administration, fiikc impressions were douhtlcss made on l\Ir Giles and others, wlio then gave direction to the public sentiment. Not- withstanding these disadvantages, if Mr Adams had not seen lit to proclaim to the world liis for- mer secret denunciation, there had still been room to hope that those impressions would be speedily obliterated ; tliat odious distinctions be- tween the people of dift'erent tStates would bo abolished ; and that all would come to feel a com- mon interest in referring symptoms of excitement against the procedure of the national government, which have been manifested successively on so many occasions, and in so many States, to the feelings, which, in free governments, are always roused by like causes, and are characteristic, not of a factious but a generous sensibility to real or supposed nsuri)ation. But ]Mr Adams returns to the charge with new animation ; and by his politi- cal legacy to the people of Massachusetts, under- takes to entail upon them lasting dishonor. He reallirms his convictions of the reality of the old project, persists in connecting it with later events, ami dooms himself to the vocation of [)roving that the federal party were cither traitors or dupes. Thus he has again (but not like a healing angel) troubled the pool, and we know not whi u the turbid waters will subside. It must be apparent, that we have not sought, but have been driven into this unexpected and ■MOM 1. 78 unwolronic controvorsy. On tlio rc'toration uf poaco ill l<)l.'), tlio I'tMlcrJil j»!irty Iclt like moi,, wlio, as by a, niiiach,', liiid tliomsiclvcs safe from tlio most appalliiii; jHiil. 'J'lioir joy was too cn- j^rossinjj; to permit u vindictive reciiironce to the causes of that peril. Every emotion of animosity was permitted to subside. From that time until the a])pearance of Afr Adams' publication, they liad cordially joined in tlie j,f(Mieral irratulation on tlie prosperity of their country, and the security of its institutions. 'They were conscious of no devia- tion from patriotic duty, in (Uti/ mrdsnrc wherein they had acted, or which had passed with their approbation. 'I'hey were not only contented, but sirateful, in the j>rospect of the duration of civil liberty, according to the forms which the j)eo|)Ie had deliberately sanctiomMJ. These objects being secured, they cheerfully acquiesced in the admin- istration of government, by whomsoever the peo- ple might call to [)l;icos of trust, and of honor. With such s(MitiuH'Uts and feelings, the j)iiblic; caiuiot but i)aitici|)ate in tlu^ astonishment of the inideisiiiiied, at the time, the manner, and the nature, of Mr Adams's ])ublication. We make no attempt to assign motives to him, nor to comment on such as may be ima- gincHl. The causes of past controversies, passing, as they were, to oblivion among existing generations, and arranging thenjselves, as they must do, for the impartial scrutiny of future historians, tin; revival of them can be no less distastciful to the public, than j)ainful to us. Yet, it could not be expected, that while Mr Adams, iic iity 79 from Ills liiiih station, sends forth tlin unfoniidcd siiiicos- tioiisofliis iniiiuination, or his jealousy, as materials for present opinion, and fntmc history, we bhonld, hy silcnrr^ ^ivi; conntenanee to his eharj^cs ; nor that wo shoidd neglect to vindieafe the reputation of omselves, onr assoeiates, and our Fathers. II. (i. OTIS, isi{Ai:i. 'nionxDiKi:, T. II. I'KKKI.NS, vv.M. i»Ki:st'()'i''r, DAMKL S\|{(;i:.\'l', .101 I.N lc)\\i:m., W.M. SI LI.IV.W, CIIAIILKS .lACKSOX, WAKiiKN nrr'i'oN, HlvNJ. IMl K.MAV, I n:\uv cAiu)'!', i^iiii ul' llic lulu G'oiirgo ('allot. (!.(". TAUSONS, fun 111' 'riii'iiiiliiliit I'ursoiia, Edi|. doccaiol. Boston, JiLiuanj 28, \\\2i). I subserihed liio foreiioinj; letter, and not tin; ixejjjv, for the toliouinu' reasons : Mr Adams in iiis statement jjuhllshed in the National lnleHiji,cneer, spoke of tiie leaders of the Federal ()arty, in the ijiar IDUo and for si'iwnil i/cor.i jiiccloiis, as enii:aii('d in a systematic op- position to the "ieneral ^overmnent, ha\ in;; for its object the dissolution of the I'nion, and the esial)lishmein. of a "separate confederacy i>y tin; aid of a foreiiiu power. As a ])r()()f of that disposition, particular allusion is made to the opposition to the embargo in the Courts of Justice; in Massachusetts. This pointed the charge directly at mv l;i«c fathc whose efforts in that cause ..;' 'A .*! « ifMIWflii.i i' 80 are probably rcmemben'd ; and ^vas the reason of my Joining in the application to Mr Adams to know on what such a charge was founded. If this construction of tiic statement needs confirmation, it is to be found in one of the letters lately published in Salem as Mr Adams's. Mr Adams in his answer has extended his accusa- tion to a subse(]uent period. In tlu; ev(>nts of that time I have not the same interest as in those preceding it ; and as the Reply was necessarily co-extensive with tlio answer, that reason prevented me from joining in it. I take this oi)p()rtunity, however, to say for myself, that I fnid in IMr Adams's answer no justification of his chargers ; and, in reply to that jKortion of his lett(>r particularly addressed to me, that I h.ave seen no ])roof, and shall not readily believe, that any iiortion ol my father's political covmsc, is to bo attributed to the inllu- cnce there su^iiested. fra?;ki.l\ i)i:xti:u. Bu.stun, Januarij 2Q, 1821).