Virginia advocate. [volume] (Charlottesville, Va.) 1827-1860, 1830-07-30

In laying before the public the fruits of the
investigation, which we fortunately had it in our
power to make, into the authenticity of the Let
ter to a " distinguished manufacturer 1--WE are
not told OF what, may be of ietters) we did not
expect to repose upon a bed of roses. We laid
our account in becoming the object of the espe-
cial wrath ofthe coalition. We are sure we shall
not be disappointed. We already hear the NUT
terings of the coming storm-taste the preliba.
lions of the honors which the Coalition have in
reserve for US. The Wing, as in duty bound,
leading the van of the forces, commences the
onset. We accept his censure for what it is
worth, and value it accordingly-well aware that
1T, faud0rt a Laudato DirO be no mean praise, then
the censure of the Wing mnst be invaluable.
But we pass to matters of more importance.
Commenting on the concluding paragraph of our
article on the LETTER, the Wing remarks. I" If
The letter be a torgery-if it he proved so-by
what diabolical ingenuity can it DE made to com.
prehend and .inculpate the Coalition, the party
so stiled by the editor of The Advocate, &c. And
pray, whom else does it inculpatc? 1t is a ruse
attempted by a detachment of the party in Mas.
sachusetts or Rhode Island, and the value thew
set on 1T, is evinced by the eagerness with which
they seize on it, the triumph with which it is
paraded in the columns of their presses. and the
loud echo with which it is re veIberated in the
toasts of the Coalition in the late Anniversary
cclebrations.-The cheat is detected and expos
ed, and the Wing, innoccntly enough, desires to
know by what " diabolical ingenuity" we would
inculpate the Coalition.
But does not the usual ingenuity of the able
editor desert him in the following commentary on
che proof, by which we the think the forgery is
conc!usively established f" To render the proof
cited in the Advocate of a straws value, il must
also be shewn that Mr.. Jefferson was in the habit
OF antographing all the letters written by him
Now was this so? We infer otherwise from the
language of the Advocate itself, which saws
" we have examined the Autograph correspon-
dence," which seems to admit that there is other
Jurisprudence not autographed" What does
the Wing mean when he requires it to be shewn
that Mr.. Jefferson was in the habit of 90 auto
graphing all the letters written by him" Now
we had supposed that whatever is written by a
man must nece ssarily be his autograph. But
let this pass. We editors are frequently obliged
to write, currente eatamO, and we know none of
the fraternity whose pen is more rapid than that
of MIR. Peasants.
When we said that we had examined his auto
graph correspondence, we used the word in re-
ference to the fact that the letters furnished for
publication by Mr.. Jefferson executor were all
copies. In making out the copies we supposed
1t possible that some might have been omitted
either to have been copied, or forwarded to the
printer, and therefore having access to the orr.
ginal correspondence in Mr. Jefferson's hand
writing, we examined il. 1t is well known to
have been the almost invariable practice of Mr..
Jefferson to preserve his correspondence especial
ly at the period at which the LETTER pretends to
be dated, as it is generally known that long pre-
vious to that time he was in the habit of writing
with the Polygraph-so that the labor of copy
ing was saved. We affirm that no such letter is
to be found in his correspondence. 1t is a matter
OF opinion-but the style is not Mr.. Jefferson's.
We predict that the Literary Subaltern will fail
in his proof.