Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1825-04-07
% take Mr.. Kremer's declaration that

10 tahC NAfs hISuCT oSSioso sAS" 1890
he was not the author of the letter, as
made to the late Secretary of the NAVY"
Having nothing to do with this CON-
troversy, further than as considered
the introduction of my name intended
personally and directly to affect myself,
i might omit any notice of the con-
Guiding part of your remark as derived
from Mr.. Crowninshield, late Secretary
of the Navy. In justice, however, to
an absent individual, with. whom my
name has been associated, shall not
forbear the opinion, that Mr.. Kremer
never did use the language imputed to
him. 1t is a mistake; any thing but
fact; and, without intending to ascribe
the error to you, claim the right of
saying, that reason revolts at the idea,
that he should have made Mr.. Crown
inshield his confession, and to him ut
tered language, at war with his pub.
lie and repeated private declarations
made to his friends.
The concluding paragraph Of your
letter expresses belief that / "pre-
pared, or advised, the publication of
his (Mr. KS card, in the guarded
terms in which it is expressed;" and
you declare yourself ready to acknow-
ledge the mistake, if will offer any
disavowal.
IF you had properly reflected as to
what belonged to courtesy, you would
have sought from me information about
this, before my name was introduced
before the public, and your belief form
ed. You know me sufficiently well, to
believe that | would not decline candidly
to answer any inquiries necessary and
proper to be made This was not done;
but on the information you had receiv-
ed, you Welded it your confidence, and
proceeded to defence before the pub
lie. Without intending to be under.
stood, as either admitting or denying
any thing respecting my imputed visit
to Mr.. Kremer, on the evening preced-
ing the publication Of his card, sup
pose the fact to be, that I did visit him;
and suppose too, that it was, as you
have termed it, ga nocturnal visit" was
there any thing existing that should
have denied me this privilege? or does
it therefore necessarily result, that |
should have been engaged in any plan
against your rights, or conspiracy a.
gainst you? There is no one more in
terested than yourself in denying the
force Of conclusion as derived from cir
cumstance; and it is little strange,
that while, in your own case, you should
object to it, as rule of proper applica-
ton, you should at the same time claim
it as rightfully entitled to operate in the
cases Of others.
You will excuse me from making an
attempt to remove any belief, which
you entertain upon this subject; it is
matter which gives me no concern
In the communication made to you,
my object was to ascertain, distinctly,
your meaning as to the letter published
ir the Columbian Observer, and to that
you have frankly replied. Had you
referred 10 me FIVE days ago, on this
subject, should with pleasure have
answered you; but having exhibited
your belief and opinions to the public,
l am precluded from any explanation ::
you have no right to ask it; nor in JUS
tlce to yourself any right to give it.
Respectfully, your obed't serv't,
JNO. II. EATON.
Hon. II. CLAY, Secretary Of State.