Virginia statesman. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1828-1829, 1828-08-06

c,1 voUr official Drcss -A on have there adntteu
80 mich and VET youpresumed too much upon
the supposed ''profound ignorance OF your ac-
cnsers and the imagined weakness OF their proofs
Refore you venture again to make pubic stare
ment on the subject. | advise you carefully TO re-
view all those books and papers, which you nave
now so snugly concealed but the contents oil
which may. at some future day, be made TO rise
m in judgement against YOU But | repeat H.
YOU have admitted too much, and now quote d
sentence from this your labored defence, as most
conclusive against YOU.
"On the 18th Nav, 1911, Joseph Coleman, Hor-
ace Green and Andrelo Jackson entered into arIl-
cles of agreement with r. Apperson tor the pun
chase of 4 number ofnegroes The terms otpay-
ment were, S2O5O in hand $4,000 at the eXpra-
ton of SIX. and $1,000 more al the expiration OF
twelve months.--For the payment OF the two
last sums, Coleman, Green, and JacsS0H, were 10
rive their bills on 4 house IN Philadelphia, ana
for further security III case the bills were dis
honored. they gave their notes tor similar sums
payabe in the Bank Of Nashville. These are the
provisions of the contract, on which the charge
of negro trading has been preferred against Gen.
Jackson"
Here sir. is your own confession, and what
more Is required 10 fix upon You conclusyely the
correctness of the charged II IS no longer ne
cessarv TO search for old bank books, or papers
mr. secret memoranda. Here Is your own state
nent published 10 the world, and founded on a
copy of the original agreement deposited with
vour printers. You did then, IA company with
two other persons, enter into O written agree
mcut for the purchase Of negroes, amounting 10
$40 $50. and YOU gave your notes, and drew your
bls-in the name of the firm l suppose, "Coic-
man, Green aud Jackson for the payment ol the
purchase money. Il is not Pretended that theSc
negroes was bought for the permanent use OF FL
thor of the partners Neither yourself nor Cole
man nor Green intended 10 keep them. The
qyove9 object of the purchase was a sale for pro
A. Here then the matter Is u rest You Were
acco-iigr 10 your own admission, concerned M
NEGRO trading. You we've partner to contract
"A deliberate WRITER. contract Tor the purchase
OF NEGROES amounting TO Sl0O0O1 which negroes
were bought solely for the purpose OF beng sold
ar,in FIR Inc sake of profit. II surely then is not
necessary 10 arue frr,hcr on tins subject, nor 70
search among old rubbish for private papers, TO
prove the charge You have yourself publicly
admitted H. am not about TO inquire INTO the
degree Of crimnaliy or imProprlety Il any at
tendant on such a transaction The fact j. all
have to DO with. Whether II be right or wrong
% deal In human flesh with q view 10 gam, TO
buy Up and transport 90 a distant market, like so
many cattle, unfortunate fellow creatures, who
hanpcn TO be of a different color from ourselves,
is q question which leave for every man TO de-
eide for himself But that YOU, Andrew Jackson,
were once a partner 10 q speculation OF that KIND,
cannot now be denied, for IL has been admitted
by yourself and is proved by tho written contract
deposited by YOU in the hands Of your printers
But j is sill said You were not principle IN
the speculation--yOH ircTc OR6 security Twill
presently examine the strength OF tins amusing
and shallow apology, bat lmust M the tirst place
express nv admiration of the conclusive and
able argument by which II is attempted TO
establish the fact of your securtyship from the con
tract itself The following is extracted from
your defence.
"Fbo very face ofthe agreement indeed would
be sufficient TO convince man of business OF
this fact Gen Jackson was known TO be "a man
| of property and credit. Green was young man
| Just commencing business without fortune, and
! Coleman's circumstance any thing but flourish
! ing. II then IN had been the understanding OF
the parties, that Gen. Jackson was a principal m
the transaction, would not his name have been
put first in the contract Would IL not have been
! Jackson, Coleman and Green, instead ~ Coleman,
! Green and Jlclson1 This consideration of itself
Is sufficient to rabut The suppostiou, that he was
a principal in tAe transaction"
Whether this argument were original with
yor amanucnsis or were suggested by Yourself, or
some OF Your coyIlra Of lrqr. / cannot say; butt
is "A specimin Of logic worthy the brain Of pro-
/ found attorney at law, Judge Of the supreme
court, senator in congress, and aspirant 20 the
| presidency The man whose name Is placed tqSi
| in the style of a firm, If he happens 10 possess
more capital or credit than the others, is 10 be
regarded as security and not as a parmcrll Il
would be difficult, [ imagine, according TO tins
rule, 10 determine whether the 'lnior editor, so
cqHld in your printing establishment is really a
partner or only a sccuity Which of the o5tcn-
s.bIc members of that firm has the largest amour,
either Of capital or credit, i at least am unable 10
/ decide But who does not feel the full force OF
! the argument contained IN the above extracr--
/ "Gcn. Jackson was known TO be a man Of prop
crty and credit Green was young man Just com
mencing business. without fortune. and Cole
mans circumstances any thing but furnishing;
therefore, II most couClusiyely and irresistaby fol-
/ lows that the two last without money and tn
out credit, were the principals in the transaction
and that the former was involving hmself--assl-
ming responsibilities, aud running risks lrjfb0u
the slightest chance or hope Of profit merely as Sc
cunty 20 the flflng amount Of $1,000, for a
young man gust commencing business, without
fortune and for a man whose circumstance,
were any thing from ilourshngll!" The irresis-
tible force Of this reasoning will not surely BIZ
denied by any Jacksonite in the land.
But, Sir, taking II upon your OWL
ground, and admitting, contrary to ali the
probabilities Of the case, and contrary tc
the weightof evidence so far as It has ye
been exposed, that you were originally
concerned in this speculation, only as 4
security for others. and did not ''deSire moi
intend TO participate in tie profts,o wha
then! Is the aspect ofthe affair materially
changed! If there were any improperly
in the transaction, is it any better for yoi