Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1827-12-12

tor the support oil The charge is still said to be
found IN the pre-existing hostility of Mr.. Clay to Mr..
Adams; and h's letter to the Editors Of the National In
OF tie l5ta OF November 1922, is relied on
as evidence Of The fact. There are none so blind NJ.
those who will not sec, and it is not for them tina, we
publish the following extract from MIR. Clay's address
10 his constituents in 1921. II is impossible for the can,
did and upprejudiced. TO read ii, without being convia.
ced that there was nothing in the relation in which
Mr.. Clay personally stood to Mr.. Adams, to prevent
iis voting for hun in pr eference 10 Gen. Jackson; tile
more especially when it is recollccied that 10 Mr..
Cla,'s speech on the Seminole war. he had charged
Gen. Jackson with having oisycrcydcs M or,I.r. =.
hc government, and hcping rioiatcd The const;fuf;oa
9he Usited States; besides other acts of a high ,apd-
ed ard ,yrannical nature.
Extract, from .Hr. C3ry,s address to his cona;,uerrs
in 1924.
The relations in which / stood 10 Mr.. Adams con-
stit,''e the next theme of the address which I shall
notice. am described rs having assumed ga postum
OF peculiar and decided hostility 10 the election of Mr.
Adams" and expressions towards him are attributed
10 me, winch ] never used. | am made also res
ponsib.e for pamphlets aud ESSAYS of great ability,
published BY my friends in Kentucky in the coursc-of
the canvass.
The injustice of Tie principle of holding me thus
answerable, may be tested by the applying il TO the
case oi.Gen. Jackson, in references 10 publications.
! sued, for example in the Columbian Observer. Tia,
1 was not IN favour offhe election of Mr.. Adams wbe,,
the contest was before the peop,e. is mos, co,t,;p
t'clti'er was in favour Of thai of Mr.. Crawford or &c.
neral Jackson That I ever did any thing against AIR.
adams or either ut the other gentlemen, inconsisten,
win q 'air aud honorable competition. I utterly depy.
My relations 10 MIR. Adams have been The subject OF
much misconception, if not misrepresentation. bave
been stated 10 be under a public pledge to expose
some neiarious conduct OF that gentleman, during tue
negotiation at Client, which would prove him TO he on
tlrely unworthy of the public confidence; ant that viii,
a knowledge OF his pc, iidy, ! nevertheless voted for him.
IL these 'nputotions are well founded, I should indeed
be a III o. -ct tor public censure; but ii on the contra
~, 1t shall be found that others inimical. both 10 him
and TO me, have substituted their own Individual wishes
Tor my pi1lc promises. l trust that the Indignation
which they would excite, will be turned from me. Nv
letter, addressed 10 the editors Of the IutetIipencers an
der date oftl.e fifteenth, Of November, 1889, is made
the occasion of ascribing 10 me the promise and the
pledge TO make those reasonable disclosures ON Mr..
Adams. Let that letter sneak for itself and !, v;Ii h.
seen how little Justification there is for such an asser-
tion. II adYerts TO the controversy which had arisen
between Messrs. Adams and Russell, and then proceeds
10 slate THAT IN the course Of the several publications.
OF which 1t has been ;hc occasion, and, PARTICULARS in
inc appendix 10 a pamphlet which had been recently
published by the honorable John Quincy Adams, 1 think
there are some errors (no doubt uaintenLionaN both as
TO matters OF fact and matters of opinion, in regard 90
Tue transactions al Chem, relating TO the navigation OF
the Mississippi, and certain liberties claimed by the
United Sia'esin the fisheries, and The pdrs 10 acLieh Y
bore an those tyulisuctiOns. These important in,eres,Y
are now we'll secured" can account. ,Icreao,a of
what occurred IN the negotiation at Client, or these
800 - 80 tsS necessary ~ IN DIaCRnt mr.
future security OF any of tie rights Of the nation. and is
on!y interesting as appertainfng 10 lis past history.
with these Impressions, and being extremely unwilling
to present myself, at any time, before the public. / had
almost resolved TO remain silent, and thus expose myself
TO the inference of an acquiescence ia the correctness OK
ol the statements made by both my colleagues; but
nave on more reflection, though it may be expected Of
me, and be considered as a duty on my part. to contri-
butte all in my power towards a full aud faithful under
s'ahd'ng OF the transactions, referred TO. Under this
cohVic'ion,l VIII at some future period, more propitious
| man lie DfGSPnt u a n a I'm m
lion, and when there can be no misinterp citation of mo.
ives lay before the public q narrative of these transac.
tons, as l understood them
FROM even a careless perusal of That letter, IL is an
parent that The only too subjects of the negotiation Of
Ehent, TO which 1t refers, were the navigation of the
Mississippi and certain fishing liberties; that tho errors
which / had supposed were committed, applied both 10
MIR. Russell and Mr.. Adams, though More partic n,rlv
to the appendix Of the latter; that thew were unin,en.
',onal; that they affected myself principally; that
deemed them of no public importance, as connected
WIN HE then or future security Of airy OF the fights of
tue na'ion, but only Interesting to its past his,sry; that
l doubted the nee ssiy cf my Offering 10 the public
any acc cunt OF III Sc transactions; and tb.t ll,e nara
tive which, promised, was TO be- presented "a q sfascn
OF more calm, and when there could be no mis:pte rorc-
tahon OF motives. Although Mr.. Adams teIieyes OH
eI"Se'i yet THINK there are some uninfeni ;onal err
roFs' 10 ne controversial papers between him and Dir.
russell. But l have reserved 10 myself an exclusive
rightof Judging wien shall execute the D, omiee which
have made, and ] shall neither be ~qnickened nor re-
tarded I'D ITS performance, by the friendly anxiety G..
any of my opponents.
H'njury accrue to any one by the delay of publishing
III narrative, tho public will not suffer by il. IL is ui,ea-
ny known by the publication of the British and American
pfoyets, the protocols. &c the correspondence be, wee., the r.
spective plenipoteniaries, that the British government, made
u Hhen'' Il demand of che navigation Of the AIississip-
P' by a" article IN their projc,, nearly in The same words
IS nose which were employed in the treaty of 1893; thai
d minority OF the American commissioners was in favor of
acce"'hs 10 'ilat demand, upon condition that the British
soVe!""ieh! wonid c"neede to us the same fishing liberties
within their jurisdiction, as we're sec,,ysd 10 ns IL
same treaty otl183; and that boil, demands were finally
abandoned. The fact of these mutual propositions, was
Wv, ~" ny me 10 me American public, in a speech
which delivered in the House OF representatives. on Tie
29th day OF January, 1916. Mr.. Hopkinson had srairn-
ed iAc terms oil the treaty of peace, and charged upon The
war ana the administration, the loss of the fishing I;sp,tiss
within the British jurisdiction, which we enioyed prior 20
the war In vindicating, in Hy reply TO him, the course OF
ted, P %"
"When the British commissioners dernn..a in lii.