Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-06-08

tho resolution was assigned by the Secretary to the
Chief Clerk, and was performed by him. And, by
the nercuiation in his hand writing in the origin
al rough dra, of the Secretarys report under that
resolution which is herewith transmitted it will be
seen that the report passed through his hands from
the Secretary the House. From the lapc OF time
that gentleman is not now ablc to explain why the
Collectors letter, of the 9th of March, was not
mitte with the other letters: but the probability is
that in collecting the papers required, ms examine
ton was confined to the files of the several Coec-
tors and Officers of the customs, without recolcct-
iny that this letter of the Collector and MIR. Mitch
cls letter of tine I9th of February had hecn put up
will, the Attorney Generals opinion, and placed
with it Ola the file set apart for that officers
muncatious. The originals, Of the opinion and OF
these papcrs with the endorsements made on then,
at the time, now transmitted in the state
as tina, III which they filed; and, it is belicve
that their appearance aloruS Intrinsic evidence that
they were filed.
The papers herewith ira nsrnittcd, include all the
correspondence i'll the possession of the Secretary.
or in the Treasury Department. having relation to
the subject of the letters reqThed b. the committee,
not heretofore communicated TO the House of Re-
prescntatives.
1t has been insiuuated by Mr. Edwards, that
these letters were withheld by the Secretary in vi
oiation of the resolution oftbe iouso OF Reprcscn-
tatves of the 3lSt DeCeubcr 1919, for the urpose
of screening Nir. Mitchell. The charge, however,
is contradictcd by the facts, and particularly By the
facts upon which 1t purports to- be founded. The
letter Of the Collector CT Darion. of the 18th of
March, which was communicated under that rcso
luton, and to which, as well as the other papers,
communicated by the Secretary on the llth Janu-
airy, 1890, the committee is respectfully REFEREED be-
gins thus had the honor address you per last
mail, and to enclose to you papers respecting forty
seven African negroes, taken by the surveyor of
Daren, from one Jercd K. Grocc, their way TO
the Alabama Territory, through the Indian ma ton,
and forty-one others that the Creek agency, from
the negro houses of the agent for Indian Affairs"
Here, then, disclosure of the very fact, which If
the Secretary S design was to- screen MIR. Mitchell,
1t was fatal to disclose, viz: that large numbe.
OF Africans, who had been iictly introduced, had
been seized, not only ut Mr.. Mitchels rcsid encc
and at the seat OF his authority, but in his own ne
gr" houses 1t will be seen by the committee, that
the collectors letter of the 9th, though it contains
The details OF the seizure, does not more strongly
implicate Mr.. Mitchell, than he is implicated by
this disclosure. But, whatever may be the purport
and bearing Of the letter of the 9th that letter is
particularly pointed to in the letter of 18th, con-
tanning papers respecting the seizure of those ne
groos. And if there had been design 10 suppress
the letter of the 9th it was necessary to its success
that this reference to letter which would have de-
fcated the dcsig should also have been suppress
ed. But upon what principle that govern human
conduct, can the design of favoring Mr.. Mitchell,
at the expense even OF honor and of duty, be re-
concilcd with the suppression ofpapers that tended
TO his justification For it will be seen by the
committee, that Mr.. Mchells letters which the Sc
cretary has been charged with concealing and with
holding, represent his conduct III the transaction
referred to- as that OF vigilant, and faithful pub
iic o.:ccr And it is believed that if the guilt or
Innocence of Mr.. Mitchell were to dc determined
OH no other grounds than those afforded by the conn
nhunca,ons made 10 The Secretary by the Collector
oil DarIcn and himself, ali of which with the ex-
cep'ion OF The letter of the 25th of December are
now before the committee. MIR. Mitchell would be
Tree from suspicion. SO far then, from having
been improperly influenced by any sentiment Of
partaiity towards MIR. Mitchell, in Withholding
these papers, II is believed that if any error has
Dcen committed by the Secretary in relation 10
them, il is the other side. If on the one hand the
letters OF the Collector inculpate Mr.. Mitchell, SO,
on the other hand, his own letters justify him and
communicated 10 the House, yet, on the other hand
all the letters of Mr.. Mitchell were omitted So that
as far as Mr.. Mitchell was concerned, the CHARGE
was presented without the Justification
Ii Is believed, that, while the circun,stan stated
IN tS communication explains satisfactorily the re :
son why the correspondence referred TO by the com,
mitcc, was not laid before the House. under the re-
solution of the 3lst December, 1919, it is Lcrnon
stratcd by the communications made by the Sectc
tary to the President, to the coarittcc of the SEN
ate, TO the Attorney General, and TO the House IL
sell, that there has beer no wish intention on
the part of the Secretary, to withhold from the nro
per authorities any mformation whether mad,
known 10 him officially, unofcially OF the viola
ton of the law, i'll the case alluded to- or of Mr..
Mitchells conduc, in the transaction