Alabama state intelligencer., 1831-09-10

 ed on Tuesday morning, and on Friday evening thought all the questions had been decided, and Mir | Adams was directed to draft a note to the Saansh Minister coniormaby to those decilio intend ed to set off for Georgia on Sun6ayl morning. and in order to prepare the department 6r my absence, was busily employed in office, hen about l or 2 o'clock receiveda note from the President request | ing my attendance. When I ente.ed the gre atest part of MT Adams note had been rejected and the remainder was shortly after, becar1se it written not in conformity to the decisions which had been made by the Cabinet, but expFessly contrary to them. He was then again digected to write the note conformaby to the decisions. This was late on Saturday evening. The next morning 1 set off for Georgia" Mir Adams letter ofhe 25th of July, lS30 now before me, reeratek all the arguments he urged in the cabinet and Tn Ii he informs me "1hat the exposition which appeared in the IGtelligencer was notwrlttenby him." From all these facts. think | il is fairly inemble that Mr Adams did not agree to the decisions the cabinef; and that yon must have known it. for il is certain that he did agree to it on Saturday and ii is highly improbable that any argument should have bFcn urged to convince him after he had been twice directed 10 draft his note in conformity to decisions which had been previously made" To this tram of reasoning, the Vice-Pres- dent appends the following note: This appears to be non sequur. Tie decision may have been unanimous and new note necessary because the note did not agree with it." am perfectly willing that the intelligent reader should decide te question of logic between us, by adding single observation, that in lhe ordinary routine it the duty of the Secretary of State tohave drawn the exposition which appeared in the Intelligencer and tl,at he would have done it, is highly probnbe, but from his having dissen,ed from the principles it contained. In tho foregoing note, tIe Vice-P President evidently objects to the argument presented in my letter. fine exceps to the argument in this case, he more strongly bound to except to that which tended to fix upon him the writing of the Nashville letter. if was illogical as Nyns tpfi in ,n. piance with his express demand, contained in his let ter ofthe 29h of May. 1880. By his obecting to he correctness of the argument in one and waving any objection to that furnisheda at his request he lust be considered having acqulesced ill the corr eot- ness and legitimacy, and suundness of the COT clu | sion that he is the author of the Nashville letter.
 l will now explain the reason why consider the Vice President the author of the notes appended to
 my litter in the Telegraph. In his elaborate letter of the 29h of May he says "ile, MT Craw ford, was at Mlledgeve, on the 10th of August, a few days after he pussed through Augusta and al little after, there appealed statement in the Journal, somewhat varied rom that made in Edgefeld, but agreeing with in most of the particulars cannot
 lay my hand the article, but have distinct recol- lection of it. Ton doubt remember il; crcum- stances fixed it upon Mr Crawford, and it las not to my knowledge been dcnied." Here it is seen tlIat MT Calhoun relies upon my silence evidence of guilt; as evidence that had communicated cabinet secrets
 
 does not pretend, that the statement in the Georgia Journal was charged upon me by that Journal, and does not state dy of the CircumStdnceS that le says fixed it upon me. When it is presumed that he had Clarks pamphlet before him, and which, though written by tie most vindictive and malignant being that ever existed admits that the Editor of the Geor ga Journal formally denied it in the following pa ragraph Gj' It may be proper to state that we did not, as has been eroneously supposed, derive our n formation from the Secretary of the Treasury, MT Crawford, respecting the reported division of the cabinet on the proprieiy of argesting General Jack son for his late conduct" l never suspected that
 had been charged with any conneXicn with the state ment in the Georgia Journal, until sometime in Oc- ,ober of tile year 1920, when pamphlet published by John Clark then Governor of Georgia, fell into my hands, which contained the charge accompanied by the evidence of the charge which the Governor had been able to collect, but the evidence of a nature so ridiculous that none but the author would have made the charge. The same Wilson Lnmpkn who ignres in the correspondence and address of the Vice President, informed me tbat Governor Clark had sent the charge and evidence to General Jack son, to be by him laid before the President. It is I presuI ned that MT Calhoun was connusant of this fact IS he tells the President in his letter of the 29h | May, 1890, "You no doubt remember it." l was never informed by Mir Monroe whether the charge was submitted to him. But he informed the Sena- tors from Tennsy lyana that the General had urged my removal from the Cabinet, and they communi- caied it to me the same day. The pamphlet just re- ferred to obtained currency do not recollect to have seen single reference to it in any newspaper, mot even in the Washington Republican, although the pamphlet published expressly 10 affect the II Presidential election. 1t was so ridiculous and ma Il lignant that even Mir Calhouns Press the Wash N ington Republican, which teemed with daily abuse of me. thought it prudent not to use it. Yet it Is a charge contained in such pamphlet and under such circumstances that the Vice President considers Io,., mo bpcnusp hnd mi
 A number of the Globe dated in the latter end of February last contains notes explanatory of the notes appended to my letter of the 2d October, 1880, by the Vice President, which is headed by the follow ing remark 1.-The Editor of the Telegraph has pub Iished MT Crawlord's letter to Mir Calhoun patched all over with the notes of lis antagonist. It is but fair to give the explanatory notes, given by friend of Mir Crawford" Here the charge is direct and po- siliye The Vice President in the city, and must be presumed to have seen the charge. His silence therefore, evidence that he the author of the notes. IL is at least, evidence to which he cannot object for it is teDlod stronger than that which he has urged against me. This remark has already been published in variety of papers, and must therefore have reached him through a variety of channels He has contradlced none of them ,and must be presumed to have acquiesced in the thurh of the charge. Besides no one believe that Mir Cal rl houn would have confded the task of writing the notes to another person. In his letter of the 3ls October last, returning mine, 1t IS seen that he n tended that letter against me. have never,be fore the appearance of Mir Calhoun's several publ cations understood and felt the force and intensity o that exclamation of the patriarch Job, "Oh that mine adversary had written book" Mine has written two books and one set of noes by which he IS conUiccd
 through legal erdence, Ist or haring aorten, orcaus ed to be rrtten the Nashuie letter. which in his let ter of the 29h of May 1930 he asserts to have seen. 2d. Of having set up the Washington Repub iicam, for tie purpose cf uifing my reputation. 3d Of having conspircd ieih Nnian Ed,oards 10 destro my official and prirate character. In his letter las