Edwardsville spectator. [volume] (Edwardsville, Ill.) 1819-1826, 1824-06-01

vie ldlng fnheAlDle IDteb my, 'i"' " .a,,,.,,
have supposed him capable OF suDSel.,e
in any unfair PURPOSE. confess Ios heen' I
the change was made, tor had II ,'o' 80.
80, res;st The belief, that j should nave
bees, s,ared much OF the labor OF TINS vll'uioa
lion But. without yielding to unavalling re,
grets. must be content to take Things 40 ~
Them |. therefore, proceed to examine 'io
This is, substantially, Isl. That no such let
ter from the Receiver Gas that mentioned IN
my examination) is to be found in the files OF
the Department. 9. That the officers em-
played in it, have no recollection of the re-
ceipt of such letter. And ). That the re-
cords of the Department do not show that it
was answered.
Surprising it to be true that this letter can
not be found sin the files of the Department, i"
il by no means proves, that it was not received
by Mr.. Crawford.
! This is not the first occasion, on which
( have had to regret, that a letter received by
him could not be found, when it became ne
cessary for my defence.
1 Finding myself grossly misrepresented, II
| relation to a letter had written to HI n, and
being determined to vindicate myself against
the insinuations that were predcated upon 1t,
| wrote to him on the 9Th January, 1921, re-
guessing a copy it. In his reply, daed 10Th
January 1921 he says, F" The letter which you
| have described in yours OF the 18th instant, has
been sought for in vain. Mr. Jones states,
that, according 10 the best OF his reeoilcction,
he considered Il not Of description TO 50 on
the files, and that consequently Il was not Med.
If his recollection is correct, II accounts Tor
the absence of the letter from the files, and
for its being lost or mislaid" Ny letter being
thus disposed of, Mr.. Crawford, in his answer,
impliedly repeated one of the nsinuatons
above referred to. This was promptly repel-
led by me; and since then, have heard no
more on that subject.
From this case alone, it might not be unreal
sonable to presume that some similar DISPOSE
ton may have been made of the letter now in
question. But, with every motive to make
such an assertion, Mr.. Crawford has not ven
tured to say, he did not receive this letter.
1t viii not be difficult to show that other let
tiers of infinitely more Importance, have been
received by him, about which, it mightbe truly
said, "no such letters are to be found in the
files of the Department" He has sometimes,
another depository for them, in which, the
letter mentioned in my examination, may also
have been placed It may have been address
ed TO him "without the addition Of Srcretnry'
of the Treasury - which we have seen grave
ly insisted on, as giving him a right to cons-
der any letter as ga private paper" though
exclusively relating to matters Of official duty.
Or he may have'r considered it not of de-
scriPtion to go on the fes;" and thus may
its absence from the files or sc its being lost
or mislaid," be very naturally accounted for,
according to the PRACTICES of the Department.
The probability Of this snppostion is greatly
strengthened by the following case:
Between 1916, and the 31st December, 1919,
he received important communications on the
subject of the illicit introduction of large
number of African slaves into the United
States, which strongly implicated one his par
tcular friends By resolution of the House
OF Representatives, of the last mentioned date,
he was directed to lay before the House of
Representatives, of the last mentioned date,
he was Directed to lay before the House copies
of such communications as he had received
since 1916, and such Information asAe possessed
in relation to the illicit introduction of slaves
into the United States. But, Notwithstanding
this positive call upon him, assert, land
challenge investiga tion,) that he did withhold
letters and information, upon this subject, i'm
plicating his friend, which ought to have been
communicated to the House, and some of
which he did not even permlt :" TO go on the
files of the Department" Ofcourse, it might
be very truly said of them, that "no such let
tiers are to be found on the files of the Depart
ment; and that, the officers employed in it
have no recollection of the receipt of them"
for, having been deposited in his own private
bureau, those officers could have no means Of
ascertaining the fact, and the very motives for
withholding them from the files, would render
frultless all attempts to find "anszoers" to them,
's by an examination of the records OF the De-
partment." And vet there is no doubt of