The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1806-10-31
Do,llesttr
THE ARMSTRONG PAMPHLET.

LIE AMMO NONJ PAMPtLEI.
From the pamphlet written in vindication of
General Armtrong's conduct in the cafe of
the New Jeriey, and attributed to his fervid
pen, we extract the following obfervations
upon the letter which was publifhed in
our paper during the laft year, on which
the federal editors delighted 70 much to
harp. The whole pamphlet is written in
an aitonIfhing ftran of eloquence and cut
ting fatirc; and but for its extreme length,
we fhould prefent it entire in our columns.
Its principal faults COMMIT i'm the overtran-
ed feverity with which it fpeaks of its oppo-
nents (among Others, of Mr.. J. Randolph, in
reply to part of his fpeech of the 9Th of
March,, and the coarfenefs of the allufions,
which although always pointed, are fome-
times fcurrious and vulgar.
he reader mutt obierye, that this pamphlet
profeiies to be an " examination of the memo.
rial OF the owners and underwriters of the
American ihip New Jerfey, and of the do
cuments accompanying it, as prefented to
the Senate and Houfe of Representatives at
their laft felton," Hence the fig. VIII. in
the following quotation, which correfponds
to the proper paragraph of the memorial.
VIII. e. That, notwithstanding thefe premifes,
general Armftrong in anfwer TO rhe minifer of
" the treafury of France, under color of his Of
" fee as miniiter of the u. S. wrote the follow
" ing letter, which, for its terms and its doc
trines is incapable of abridgment."
Agreed we ihall give it at fun length, and
our remarks with it /; they will be at leaf as
jut, as thofe of Carpenter and Coleman.
Paris, Dee. IS, 1904.
The undersigned mnifter plenipotentiary of the
United States, to the minfter of the public
treafury.
" SIR had the honor of receiving your let
ter on the fubje6t of the claim made by MefIrs.
Nicklin and Griffith, of Philadelphia.
With regard to the facts which you allege,
viz" that this is an Engliih houfe doing only
" bufinefs for Englilh merchants; that the fhip
New Jerfey was loaded from the Englifh fac
4" tories at Canton, and that ihe belonged TO
Engliih merchants" knoqv sotbing from
any doewneafs in my pe1sIEon.-The only writ
ten evidence applying to this cafe, within my
reach, is the record of the American commiRion
to which you alludc, and which is directly adj
verie to the fuggeltion you have made; for
find that the commiilioners united in admitting
the New Jerfey to have been American proper
ty; and that the proteft of one of the members
of that board againf the ultimate decifon of
the other two, was founded, not on the fact of
her being Englj@ property, but on that of the
claimants not having purified their remedy a.
gainft the csptors, to its proper coniequence
viz. to an afurance that they were unable to
pay"
Thefe paragraphs have hitherto efcaped CEN
fnre: no fault is found with them, nor ought
any to be found. The irft is merely introdua-
tory the fecond prefents fllort and clear view
of the qoriffes and poftiVe epidencs then in the
generals polieilion the force of which is no
where attempted to be lel1ened, evaded, or def
troyed and the tendency of which goes direct
ly to fupport the claim.
" The record" Jays he, " of the American
" commiiIion, to which you allude, is directly
" adverie to the fuggefton you have made"
at Get.
Could he have ftated this faet more ftrongly ,
and if not, how entirely is this oppofed to the
idea, that, from fome preconceived prejudice
againf the claimants, he determined to battle or
defeat their pretenions. Had fuch prejudice
exilted, how eafily might means have been
found TO keep this fOng and direa teftimony
out of view and how naturally would it have
led to iilence, on the part taken by that mem
Der of the American commilion, who, not con-
tented with merely oppoiDg the paffage of the
claim, had even entered foIemn protect againf
it ? Candid men will at once perceive, that
gen. ArmArong had neither win nor motive to
throw any improper obtruetion in the way of
this claim.
d" On the other hand, though have, as alrea-
" dy Rated, no written document, have had
" much aerial information, which furniihes
" frong bre(1mbfipe evidence of two facts, Il,
" that the New Jerfey was partially or sltoge-
" Their EnEIifh property; and, I'd, that, whe-
A" Their American or EngIifh, 1he was injured ;
&" and that no Iofs was fnaained by the ofenG-
" bic claimants"
IN this paragraph, we difcover the fame truth
and juitice which dictated the former fbaI
lbowed there was 10 improper bias agaiaR the
claim this fhows there was no improper bias
in faVor of it. Rofb exhibit the prscife impar.