Portland gazette and Maine advertiser. (Portland, Me.) 1805-1818, 1808-05-09

own free republican govern ulent, ana OF the
rights and duties of the legislature espe-
cialiy Of their right and dntg TO consider, to
deliberate, and according to their cum 1A4g-
gsent, independently Of executive pleasure,
TO decide OIL every public measure When,
\ say, the people of Massachusetts see this
viii they wonder if T75ag0Yiy in Congress
should be oVerSghekasird by the authority Of
e;srcRtIve recommendation /? And had ] not
| reason to De alarmed at So the dangerous ex-
! tent OF executive influence" which to me
| appeared 10 be leading the Publick mind,
| by its blind confidence, to phbiick ruin
Without commenting on the very excep-
| tionable language in which your Excellen-
cy has Judged il not improper to indulge, in
respect to my remarks ON your proclarna-
tion for day OF pubhck fasting and prayer,
/ feel myself called upon to repel the
| charge, that my "brofessiors 10 have read
thar Proclamation viFh plrGSnrei can ne0fy Ec
considered as funded III .iHceyly." You, Sir,
may affect to doubt my sincerity but no
persons acquainted with my life and con-
versation will suspect it. These persons
know | am not hypocrite n religion and
BY this time I believe your EXcellency is
convinced that am not hYpocrite IN poll
| ticks.--But, Sir, / must ayow to YOU, that l
am incapable Of prUfaning any religious in
stitution. With perfect truth, repeat to
your Excellency, that l did read your pro-
clahatiOn for fast with great satisiac-
ton And, further assure you, that my
friends here, delegates from Massachusetts
manifested the like satisfaction we all APP
proved Of the religious sentiments YOU ezs
pressed. But your Excellency knows, and
-. II. ~tr,rr.
may be issued, and other external marks OF
christianity be exhibited, and the weigh
IL matters Of the law BE- omitted"
This leads me to another passage in your
letter. Having refused TO Lay ny .ettsr bee
fore the legislature, you and your partizans
have laboured for reasons As we'll to justify
the refusal, as to decry the letter itself A
nong other things, il has been reported 70
be " an electioneering letter" And your
E1cellency, as if to give your sanction to
that report, has said, that ny lettgf t1Gs priif
ea betore yoH received u 6y she atatL
Ii at a mOm6ntOus crisis, 70 exhibit a
Dlain, unyarnshed tale Of truth before the
eyes Of people misled by the partial state
mems or -misrep presentations OF pretenders
to republicanism and patriotism, be IA itself
proper, ought ms letter 70 be censured as
an electioneering project Why DO we
Le.aa, Of tha freedom 81 the press, but for
its sefulnGss, Id a free country, 10 convey
correc' information TO the people Certain
ne VS. papers had long been the vehicles Of
mistatements and talschCOds, calculated 10
deceive the people. II was Il sVcA Q tf'ae
that / thought il my duty to come forward
with q statement Of the situation Of orr pub
lick aiiairs-so far as we were permitted 10
know them-and to v0uCh Tor the rHa Of
the statement with my name. l knew that
this would disturb the hornets nest, and
put the insects on the wing and that with
increased venom they would dart Il me
their poisoned stiRgs but armed with
ruth, as with coat Of mail, bad nothing
10 fear from their attacks.
In your Excellency's letter TO ne CT the
18th Of March, you say, have read your
lstter iii print, since ! returned the manu-
script II Ssas tylated, l. find, bstsFe LreceIvea
u By the mail" Really, Sir, with all my pre-
viUus information III your character, was
astonished at this decltration to me and
III writing under your hand, which wlll pre-
clude all evasion and when the falsehOod
OF the assertion was Of SO easy detection. /
viii state the iacts-My letter bears date
the 10Th Of February. On the 20th put II
into the post-c flee at Washington. In your
letter Of March Cd, you Acknowledged ITS
receipt on the 2l--On the 2lst Of Februa-
~ put into The post office here; the cory
ct my letter of February 10Th, addressed
to friend in Boston. This friend, ln his
letter Of March Sd, acknowledged the re-
ceipt Of that copy. lie said Also, that after
vzyatftrrr Lone - u rprfttIweI for "A
communication Of It through the medium OF
the Legislature; the press would give the
letter To the people III pamphlet = short
address to the reader, prei,Xed to the prlht-
ed letter. is dated al Boston the yth q
March--the very day on which J received
al Washington your letter Of Tie Sd
But your Excellency Was not contented
with the positive assertion, thar tAa lettsy
Sgas printed before y5a receibca i By the mai
you meant to induce belief in tie assertion,
by suggesting some ground for il. Apnr
words are, " II was printed, ! fHa, BEFORE
RECEIVED il by the mail - as if your EH-
cellcncy Lad made a previous inquiry ior
the purpose Of ascertaininE the fact. Ana
Of whom would your Excellency, as a law
yer-of whom would any man OF commoA
sense, make the enquiry Certainly OF tte
printers who set their names on the title
page Of the letter. and If you had inquired
Of lAenl, you would have fould that il was
not printed before you reserved It, nor ulul
YOU had acknowledged the receipt n NJ.
The Facts which have stated, demonstrate
The inPossi5iAiy If gyhat yon assert Thus Wlil
enable every reader duly to estimate al your
other as crtlons.
- Excehency unques,ionably intended
70 prnt The whole Of your letter, and II by
bold assertion, you could have satisfied the
people thai mine was printed before YOU re-
cciycd it, 1t would have ccunJenanced TIE
report Of your friends, that il was mcreG
an alectIoneering letter, and unworthy O.
credit. But rejecting afterwards on lhe
certainty OF detection, YOU concluded, ~