Edwardsville spectator. [volume] (Edwardsville, Ill.) 1819-1826, 1826-01-07
not correct, for had not, a, the time he

| NOT correct, Tor nad NOT, al the Time nc
reques ed it, made any publication. But
he says he heard was about to publish
something, and without knowing what II
was, or when, or in what newspaper or
form it would be published, he fastened
to request the publication OF his opinion
in every newspaper printed in the state.
Did any man ever hear Of such defence
as this lie certainly must have been
conscious OF his weakness, and greatly
/ alarmed, when he FASTENED to defend
himself at all points, before he knew
when, where, or how he would be at
| tackled.
Judge M'Roberts, in one of his letters
| to me, asserted that he did not write "a
anonymously Tor newspapers. 1 replied
that common report had much belied
him il he had not written many OF the
most violent pieces which had appeared
in favor of Convention. He re oined
by saying, " be had been very much be-
lied not only in shiS but other things"
then proved by the Editor OF the Hi
nois Republican, that he had written for
that paper " several pieces with fictitious
names" And then, behold he denies
the plain and obvious meaning oil his
own words, and asserts that have mis-
represented him.
As Judge M'Roberts has often dwell
very loog, and laid much stress on the
fact Of my having published my structures
on his opinion anonymously, | will now
state 10 explanation, mat there were va
rlous circumstances, some OF which |
have since communicated 10 him, which
led me TO believe that Judge MIR. was
displaying a zeal against me which did
not become his station, and that the pub
ilcation ct his opinion, 10 which his rea-
sonins, fouoded, as believed, on wrong
citation OF the constitution, and his mis-
taking the case, 10 saying there was
judgment egalns me, when there was
none, aud the extraordinary efforts he
made in support OF what conceived his
newell and erroneous opinion, were al.
calculated, if not intended, Ia operate TO
my prejudice in the suit which was sill
pending, aad seemed 10 call upon me to
notice them, and II possible TO correct
some of the prejudiclal effects resulting
FROM their publication. first thought
Of doing it under my own name, boi il
occurred to ne that II might, and would
in all probability, be said that | was
bringing the influence OF my Office TO
bear agains, the Judge. | the. efore de-
termmed to publish my remarks auony-
mouaiy, thai they should have neither Of
fetal nor psrsona influence, but should
rast entirely on their own merits, il they
has airy, and il not, they would of course
pass without effect. took pains, how
e, er, &c interm the Editor, il Judge NJ
ROBBERS should inquire, to tell him | was
the anthOr.
Jndae M Eaharfs says. I" il is trne, as
say in my letter to Mr. Forquer, l did
offer publicly 10 cerrec, the anonymous
publication | made against him, if ne
would accept Of ny doing i, anonymous
~, TO wit over JUSTICE" Now / will
stale lhe offer, and lhen ask any man if
this IS fair statement of ii In my let
ter Of June 90, TO Judge NJ n. say, :" if
,hese sr,ciures be incorrect, let the err
rors be pointed ou,, ana it convinced tina,
any material injustice has been done to
you or your opinion, II will be publicly
corrected by "Justice :" and in my let
ter to Mr. F. in recapiiulatihs sumo Of
the extraordinary things contained in
Judge MRS. letter o. June %, OBJ
serve. g he says the offer to correct pub
liciy by "Jusuce" any errors which may
be satisfactorily she@n 20 exist IN the
piece over that signature, is not accept
&c" In neither of these citations is it
| admitted that there are errors in the
anonymous publication, bur it is only as
serted, that if there are errors, and then
should be salts factoriiy Shogon to e.rist,
hey viii be corrected.
will now take leave of Judge MIRO
ber,s, after briefly recapiula,ing some
OF the most extraordinary parts of his
conduct.
LIST. His opinion was known to my sd-
yerssries previous to the suits being
called up in court for his consideration
and decision.
Cd In giving his opinion, he misquot
ed the constitution and misrepresented
the case, in saying there was judgment
against me when there was none; and he
endeavored to Sustain himself by refer
ring to decisions which had no analogy
10 the case under consideration, as they
were cases in which judgment had been
pronounced, and in which he penalty or