Herald of the times. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1830-1846, 1830-09-22
TIE CORRESPONDENCE.
A & A 4 ID.
T'o the editor of the Baltimore Gaze,

| 10 Ule t1llOr OI the Baltimore Gazette.
l observe, in your paper Of last even
ing, as extracted from Poulson's Phia-
dclphia American, q letter of mine to the
Governor of Georgia, Of June eth, 1880,
and the Governors answer of the 10Th
of that month. ] wish it to be UNDER
stood that the publication of these letters
has not proceeded, either directly or in
directly, from me; although IEhavc GER
tainly no cause to regret it, on my own
account. My letter to the Governor is
in accordance with the professional cour-
tesy which prevails in Virginia and Ma
.ryland, Of giving notice, even to apriroie
gentleman, ofa contemplated suit, before
proceeding against him. 1t is always in
tended as a mark of respect, and in this
quarter Of the Union is always so rccciv-
ed by the gentleman addressed.
thought it still more imperiously due to
to the Governor of the State of Georgia.
The other motives ofmy letter are appa-
rent upon its face, and are checrlully
submitted to the construction of the pub
lie.
There is only one passage of my own.
letter which, to the general reader, can
require word Of explanation. My sug-
gostion to the Governor is not that "ml-
SELF, The Indians, ard he Gorernor shall
make up a case to be submitted to The Sa-
preme Court" 1t is simply, that "thc
decision may be expedited, by making
case by consent, if that course should suit
the views of The State Of Georgia." The
State of Maryland has done this, on the
occasion Of her law to tax the Branch
Bank of the United States established at
Baltimore, Nc CuIioch VS. State Of Mary
land 4 Wheaton 3l6; and, again, on the
occasion of another State law, requiring
the importers and vendors of foreign
goods to take out license from the
State-Brorn VS.. The S'a!c Of Maryland
l2 Wheaton, Ala last case is made
up in the form of plcadings, not requiring
a statement of facts. But in both cases,
the Attorney General of the State, it is
understood, co-opcratcd in the measure,
and under the instruction OF the State au-
thorities, gave facility and despatch to
the reference of the questions to the de-
cision of the Supreme Court. In both
these cases, the question involved was
the constitutionality of state law; and,
in both, the State of Maryland united in
the reference of this question to the Su-
premc Court, and acquiesccd in the de-
cson. 1t was with these cases in view,
that | made the suggestion in question, to.
the Governor of Georgia.
| did not answer the Governors letter
because it must be seen that it neither re-.
quircd nor admitted an answer in the spi-.
sit of courtesy in which had addressed
him, and from which thought and still
think it improper to depart His letter
surprised me, because supposeS the OBJ
jcct and language of my own too plain to
be misunderstood, and too respectful to,
have awakened feelings of displcasure.
The Governor having viewed it in DIFF
fcrent light, am not at all dissatisfied
with the publication of the letters, which
| presume is intended as an appeal to
the people of the United States. TO such
an appeal | can have no objection,
though my respect for the State OF Geor-
gia and my desires to avoid all needless
irritation, would not have permitted me
to make it. WIN. WlRT.
Batlimore, Sept. 9. 1880.