The Massachusetts spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1821-1823, 1822-07-24
WORCESTER.
Mr. ADa.NS and M. RUSSELL.
WEDNESDAY, JuLY "a, 1922.
a...a -


Mr.. .aD.4.3S and Mr.. RUSSELL.
Finding it impossible TO abridge Mr.. Adams's
Reply to Mr.. Russell in a satisfactory manner.
we have commenced its publication at length
in this days paper.
1t will be recoilected that the nature of
many parts of Mr.. Russell's Answer called for
reply, and other parts Of it led the publick TO
anticipate that they would not pass uunoticed.
More especially was it expected tliatwe should
hear further of the circumstances attending
the delivery of the " duplicate" at the De-
partnent Of State and that facts would be
stated and arranged in such order as to rem
der obvious and striking, to the dullest eve.
what before could not escape even very
flight scr;d ny. Nor has this expectation been
disappointed. Most people did not need any
further assurance Of the character of the whole
transaction; and they who waited for addi-
tional light, were those who, in this case, were
'auiting to see. The former Lave now u as
sarance doubly sure" and, we think, the lat
ter can no longer remain blind TO the blaze
which glares upon them. The most incredu-
Ious must now yield to the convection which
: has long since forced itself upon the minds OF
the unbiased
Weespecially commend to the attention of
the reader, Mr.. Adams's account CT the circum-
stances preceding and attending MIR. Russelrs
delivery of the 6 duphcate.'' 1t cannot have
escaped the observation of any one who has
rerused Mr.. Russell's Answer, that Mr.. r. en-
deavours to impress the reader With tire belief,
that he did not intend the 6 duplcGte'' to be
considered as an exact counterpart of the orig
inal and that il was marked so, rather in COM
pliaace with suggestion from :" the Depart
ment'' than in pursuance of his own purpose.
The reader viii judge, however, whether Mr.
r. could have relied much upon the success
ofhis endeavours, had he disclosed the fact that
he had himself first marked the paper as
"copy,n and afterwards substituted the word
" duplicate."
tmay CRAFTY some of our readers 70 learn
what is said of this affair in the mestern couu-
try, The Editor Of the Cincinnati (Ohio)
Gazette, the only paper in that quarter, in
which we have seen the subject noticed,
says" We cannot refrain from expressing our
surprise and Indignation at the disposition
manifested by Mr.. Jonathan Russell, who is
evidently the procurator of an Investigation
that has resulted much to h;a own DISCOUNT
tuFe.n He speaks of Mr.. RS. g attempt to
elevate himself as a patriot and prophet, and
to impair the wel-earned reputation Of his
co-labourers,n as "unwarf. nted and unman-
W" and adds" As it is probable this UNI
pleasant discussion was originated with view
toprejudice in one case, and TO propitiate in
another, the important " interests of the
west,n in relation to the ensuing Presidential
election, we feel it an act of Justice to say
that Mr.. Adams appears to have evinced as
ardent an attachment TO these interests as
either of his colleagues and we cannot but
feprobate this ungenerous effort TO suhorn the
prejudices of any section of the country a.
gainst him. THUS the fate of Raman hap
pens to others.