Alabama state intelligencer., 1831-03-16

which was sent to him, and in General .lackson's let ter 10 himself dated 10th July, he is distinctly told that the statement referred to in Mir Crawford's let ter, came from Col. Hamilton, of New York. cannot be otherwise understood, than that this state ment is letter from Mir Forsyth to tCol. Hamilton which was referred to Mir Crawford before it wa. submitted to the President.
 In this long letter he then proceeds to mention
 letter written by Mir Crawford to Maj Baney in lS2S, urging him to use his influence with the Ken | lucky electors not to vote for Mir Calhoun. Now what had this to do with the question Does it show that MT Calhoun had not pursued course of duplic city towards General Jackson from 1877 down to lS3O, It only shews, what every body knew before | Mir Crawford's hostility to him
 MT Cahoun's part of this correspondence is sim gular enough Instead of giving direct answer to the Presidents inquiry he throws in pile of extra neous matter, He discusses his responsibility Gen. Jacksons orders, Mir Crawford's veracity, the man. ner Tn which the President has at length arrived at | the truth, and many other things, not tending to throw light the subject, but to involve it n dark ness The plain old Soldier tells him, lic haS no- Ming to do tch all this dat by his admission of has condnct in Mr Monroe's cabinet he finds he has detetred him, and he 'oaafS 10 htar ob0at t. | And what apology does Mir Calhoun make, for bringing all this mass of matter before the public Why, he says his conduct in Mir Monroe's cabinet has been called in question and msrePresented l. Who las called that conduct in questions Not the President. He has only called in question Mir Cal houn' conduct towards MmssT Mir Calhoun is his o'on a'cuser hefore the people, He has cal!ed lis o,en conduct in question before that tribunal He is both tccuser and defendant, and will have all the benehi of the verdict.
 Nor is the second reason given by him for this wantoa publication whit better. He insuuates, that the President had divulged the affair before his arrival in Washington last December so that it had become topic ofconyersaton and discussion in the newspapers
 Now, ,ee happen to know, that the Presidents enc mes in the West were Tn possession of all the facts embraced in this correspondence, ote letters, if not coples, last stmmcr! They did not derive their in- tegence from the President or his friends at Wash ington.
 Moreover t is well known, that soon after MT Calhoun's arrival here the correspondence was by ham, put into the hands of members of Congress for perusal, and that nightly meetings were held for reading and explaining. Mir Calhoun's particular friends have long since, in their private letters, we well know, been attempting 10 make impressions abroad on this subject favorable to him and injari- ous to others. The allegation that it is not the 'con- troversy of two individuals" but matter between him and his constituents, is equally unayaling. He well bnows, that nobody has called in question his oihca acts or motives. Gonereral Jackson has askedRchat his acts uere He has not censured him for those acts. He only blames him for making him belieP that his acts were different.
 In addition to these reasons for bringing this mat ter bebre the public Mir Calhoun charges 1ndre,e jachs ,ciM participation in political intrigue 10 c0mpas lis destruction commencing GSe0rly ds 1927 On what authority does he predicate this bold chargeP On letter from MT Crawford to Alfred Bach, Esq. of Nashville, dated 14th December 1e27 Tn reply to letter from that gentleman, suggesting the proPiety of his making known publicly his pre- ference for General Jack son. MT Crawford de- clnes public expression of his opinion; but says, tl,,,. .zH.I that of Tennessee, be given to General Jackson, in opposition to Mir Adams. The only difficulty that this State has upon that subject, s that if Jackson should he elected Calhoun will come into power" And closes the letter by saying, If you ascer- tain that Calhoun will not be benefited by Jaclsons election, you will do him benefit by communicating the information to me-" This letter, it 5 alleged, was shown to General Jackson. Ofthis we doubt; but what if it were' Did he promise that Calhoun should not be benefited by his eectionl It is not pretended. Did not the electors of Tennessee vote for Calhonn as Vice-Presdent2 Ihey did. Was he not supported by General Jacksons friends eve General Jacksons friendship for him remain un- impaired until the year 1899, when circumstances induced him to think he was mistaken in Mir Cal houn's characterl H dd Why then, does Mir Calhoun put this letter almost in the front of his book, preceded by his own dark insnuations! As well might he charge Maj. Barry, and all those to whom Mir Crawford wrote with the view of defea- ting Mir Calhouns election, and all those to whom the letters were shewn with intriguing to produce his political distraction.
 This has the appearance of another effort to lead off the public mind and break the force of his own exposure. Lest too much should be said or thought about his own condnct towards General Jackson, he, perhaps, wishes to set the people to thinking and talking about something else.
 It was rumored before the appearance of this pub lication that it would not be attack the Presi dent Bet it is impossible we think, to view it in any other light The President and Mir Calhoun were directly at issue in private correspondence. That issue the latter has carried before the public with the avowed object of seeking the verdict of the people lftbs be not an arraignment of the Presi- dent at the bar of public opinion it has motive or meaning We have treated it as we understand it. It is only so far as it affects the President that we feel any interest about it.-THe Globe.
 MnNranMERY. March II. 1Sa1.