Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1831-03-07

) from me 10 the Hon John Forsvtb of IN. (,
nate of the United States, is incorrect If iher
was no evidence but thai which ID contained !
That essay should not he afraid Of convin
cling every rational and uuprejnaiced MUD
that my statement 10 MIR. Forsythis substan
italy correct.
In the brief comment which intend to max
upon your essay OF eleven sheets, | propose {,
avoid the example you have set me in tire
thlngs,viz shalt not begin by deprecat,ng IN,
ofhcIal dignity and weight of character oil tai
person address when meet with fact tha
cannot frankly aud distinctly deny, will no
attempt to prove negative by argument, and
stall not falsely aud hypocrtleaily profess
forbearance which do not teel.
shall frat notice your observations upon thu
disclosures OF the secrets Of he Cabinet, which
you say IS the FIRST that has occurred at least Ia
This country. Do you really believe this asser
non, Mr.. Calhoun How did the written O.
plnions Of Messrs. JEFF rson and Hamilton on
he first bank bull ever see the lghll How
were facts and circumstances which preceded
and accompanied the removal OF Ed Dund Ran.
! holph from the State Department, Oy General
:. hshmgton disclosed aud made known 10 the
puohc! II your ass Iilon be tue, these facts
aud circumsta Cos would at this moment, be
buried in EgVptinu darkness. While Cabi-
het "a IN existenc'. and It's usefulness liable Ia
be impaired. reason aud common sense point
out the propriety of keeping it's proceedings
sc ct But after the Canine no longer exists,
when us usefulness cannot be impair ed by a
dis .losure OF IFS proceedings, nellher reason,
common sense, 0Or patriotism, requires that
those proceedings should De shroudrd IN i'm
peneirablc darkness. The acts of sach a Cabi.
MT become history, and the Nation has the
same light tn knowledge OF taem, thar il has
10 any other historical fact. II is presumed
thal all Nao1s have eniei tanned this opinion
and have acted upon il. lIruoe the secret his
tory Of rabinets, the most despoDic in Europe.
iiehce the history OF the house oil Stuart, by
Charles james Fox, which disclos.s the most
secret Intercourse between Cnaries the II and
The French Minister, by which ii was proven
hat Charles was IA pensio0er Of Louis The XIV
k3hg Of France and had secretly engaged 10
re establish PopeIy in England. YET in the
tace OF all these fscts, you dare 10 presume
nion The ignorance of the distinguished per
sou sou were addI essng, 50 lar ar to iusnu-
ate THAT that such disclosure, had ltvpT been
a'ade IN any country, but certainly had not IN
his Republic.
The next Thing which shall observe is. the
manner IN which you attempted TO obtUId evt-
dence TO coutroYert my 'ement 10 Mr..
Forsyth. That statement Contained one pro.
intent aud distinct fact every thing else IN
lllhl Statement WIS secondary dnu { JlldttIHl u
that fact IL was reasonable in coniroverng
Tat statement, that you should have sought
10 obtain evidence to conWovert thgt fact. You
apply to MI Monroe and MIR. Writ for evl-
dencr. But of what2 Not of the principal
fact, but Of "A secondary collateral matter The
omission 10 appeal 10 Mr.. Monroe whether you
made the proposition asCrlbed 10 you IN my
letter TO Mr.. Forsyth, i strong presnmptive ey.
ldence that you believed his answer would con.
finn my statement You remembered the eI-
chement which your proposition produced in
the mind aud upon tn feelings of the President,
aud did not dare TO ask him any question ten
ding 10 revive his recollection of that PROPOSE
lion, The diff rent manner in which you APP
proach the President aud Mr.. Writ, even upon
the collateral secondary fact upon which you
do venture 10 nierrogate them, proceeds from
the same fact that made you avoid iaerrogal-
Ing, upon the principal fact. When you make
the inquiry OF MIR Writ you enclose him such
an extract from my letter as informs him OF
the nature of the evidence you are in search of,
because, presume, you bell we'd that extract
wouid not Tend to refresh his memory,or relied
implicitly upon Mr.. Wlrts disi o,ton To give
such el ldenCe as you desired from han. But
you were apptehensye that the same extract
sent to Mr.. Mouroe might refresh his memory
81 enable tim 10 give such an answer as wooli
not suit your views. The eYtrsci oil my letter
sent To Mr.. Writ Described facts and circum'
stances in which MI. Monroe waBa principal
acior. 1t was therefore deemed unsafe to
sabnit item TO him. Inc excitement prodnG-
ed upon the President was so manifest, that
you did not believe II could have escaped the
attention II Mr.. Wnt-yon therefore believed
il unsafe TO interrogate him rs to your PROPOSE
ton personally affecting Cen Jackson AIR
Monroe says not a word tending 10 show that
the confidential letter was not produced and
read in the Cabinet which vas not suggested
by Mr.. Witt. Every tyro IN the science OF
law will tell you, that il is d rule of evidence
that one affirmative witness o0t"eighs many
n gative but although you were al The bar
several years, IT is possible your la" learning
never assembled so high. ] might safely resi-
the case here; bal will produce oae aiiii-
native witness III support OF the accuracy o.!
nv statement opposed as it is by Mr. Wirts ne,
gaive statement. The Hon. BehJhmIn w.
Growing shield, in Letter dated 10th July,
1889. saws" you ask II recolleci While IN
thu councils of the Cabinet, of ie ter written
by General jackson TO the President Monroe
| do Iecollect OF n conversation about irl-
yate letter which Mir. Calhoun, believe, ask.
ed for. and he President said he had not got It,
hut ppon examination found he had II. Inns
letter contained information aud opinions res
pccting Spain and her colony. the Flondas-
but The particulars cannot now undertake 10
saw or state correctly. remember, l THINK,
your ating that the circumstances then 81 Oxen
oil did fully explain Gen. Jacksons conduct
during the campaign. rememoer' too mat
Mr.. Calhoun was severe upon the conduct oil
the General, bat the words particularly spoken
have slipped my re objection" Now, S",wha'
do YOU think vfthe negative statement oil MT
Writ Do you think IT no" SO se'y ce,'a'"
II, N t prluuged anu Tedu III
the CABINET. upon which your memory is so
distinct Doy not, on tue contrary, leei
ronv;ncra OF having tempted 10 pass oil
falsehood upon tue President ot tue United
StHtes' :.
The main fact contained in my statement Is
mn, denied. directly or indirectly, IA your Ella
borate essay. But negative Is attempted oy
argument. And wha kind Of an Argument Ia
offered Wby, that il wonld be 10 rate ms