Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1837-06-15
g8R4g Esfta l..
Tlom ne l}g3t'aord Patriot.
MIR STEPHENSON.


We copy from In. Glele aflasl evening commit
nica,ion from our Nial-fHf 20 ENGLAND explanatory
of hls Ictter Published IL IT, Nv nr> American,
which prudncod the safast attack on HIM by the
Government paprroa In 81 ol' March lusi. 70
" HON this communication j. addressed does not
clearly appear; and ae m.ef hat ltboush the Globe
calls letter ITS ttnre eIef isthat OF Ctri sent
n that paper ton publication. Il will hr seen thu
thoueh thcy,oenl deaeaetatan ii him by the Globe
fled Mr., Stevenson With painful surprise, - hc
tuthcars To- sp'ak OF the f1ne OF that mncr." lie
eowcrs before Blat heuaa' aud the rel oi that pos
ticroHs crrv, aud dare, nut give nfcanrr to the ia
,ligu1tuu lrcI. a1.sfe 81 honor and epliit, h'
could aot hU t., Ill Ire nf#aHtasuled ABUSE they
helpod upon hna. II d.-elaus any intention to
mpc1rh the conluatul w. Rush IN connection Wlth
that persons annus leuei totIlr Editor otthr Globe
aud 50 far troul dissenting Iom the opinions OF Mr.
Van Bncu IN Ms LETTER 10 Steuo Williams, he says,
he is " IN foil and perfect accord with them" He
adds, that he intended II express no opinion Of
the proprcy oltie fe publication oiiat letter by y
thers.
Upon tins di>clan II, We have Only observe, that
IT is IN very remarkable eoniafefs 10 the declarations
hy Mr.. Stevenson n his former letter, FIRST that the
impuatuu that lac Wlnfs the said letter OF Nh Rush.
was "a rouf9p aud i4af7csa r4AHiay," and second
", that the charge that he had any agency OF di-
yecton in the republication OF Mr. YIN Bmcns let
tcr' WAS "jtlSc and eabaa4oas.' People with th,r
faculties about them Wunl mi consider it q c7Iam-
NJ, 10 be charged with the authorship or republican
uon Of what HEY apprafel-allaough the charge
might be untrue. Pefhap, that pink Of consistency
and magnannou, advocate 81 tue Minister, the
Richmond Enquirer caa reconcile these contra
dctionS.
The Globe cndeaeors to produce the impression that
the Minister denies whit Alr. John Dncr (thc gen
ieman to whom Nh Sieyusans former letter was
sddressed) said in his postscript to the New York A
nlerican, and especially that part which referred to
Mr.. Rush The Minister does no such th.ng-and
ali III !,
He distinctly intimates thai when his opinion was
asked as to the soYeucy and ability Of ouf none,
institutions, and especially those Of IhjL3deIylia
and New York, he made such declarations as were
calculated to ds>lpae the fears that were entertain
ed, and restore confidence. And sotoe, nlc.lrd to
Mr.. Duer's statement that M. Bates (ofthc house
OF Barngs) assured the Mnisleriha his declarations
had fully ccunteracted the mischesous effects that
the conduct & opinions Of Mr. Rush would otherwise
has had not merely on the credit oil the Bank but on
the character Of the country" Mr. SeYcnson's adnis
SION corrubordtes instead Of conlladIol,ng it, He
says Mr.. Bates ''remarke1 thai il was unjust To-
charge me with an attempt TO njuie the credit and
institutions OF our country, when my opinion had
been relied on as counefactina that of otaerS" Mr.
Rushs aaate IS not mentioned II is true. but no one
can entertain doubt that he Was included in the
term others"
LETTER FROM MIR. STEVENSON.
LeNnoS, April %.
~.
article in relation aetter OF lnnr recently pub
lislicd III New ork, which have read with painful
surprise. OF the tone OF fins article shall torbcar
la speak. As the writer, however. seems evidently
10 labor under total Misrepresentation of the Gu
cuhstances under wllchmv letter WAS written and
the motives which prompted feel it due to myself
as well as others. to seize the earliest moment OF a.
king frank explanation of the whole matter
have, therefore, 10 request the publication of this
communication. II quite manifest, from the tenor
at 4 hoo tfIfI.. ,ts,tg a., IL
that the written sndleaton OF my self against
abe charges ofthe n. DIRK Advertiser, was calculated
iInointended, to inpeach the conduct OF Mr. Rush in
relation TO the sentiments contained in his etterto the
editor I the Globe, aud published last fall and ca
press my dissent from the opinions of Mr.. Van i'm
rem. in his letter to Mr.. Williams, republishcd IN
LONDON 1t is proper, in the first place, TO state pv
piciIy that nothing Of the kind vas either intended
ofthought OF by myself. Certainly had no aIluson
10 either when wrote my letter, nor to the republ
can IN London of Mr.. Van Buren's letter further
than to state that had participation in that re-
pubtatioD nor any Que connected with the mission
II doing thus, intended to express no opinion as to
The propuety ofthc republication BY others Nv re-
iatons both with Mr.. Van Buren, aud Mr. Rush for
bid any such thing With the views contained in
Mr. Van Burens letter TO Mr.. Williams, | am in
full and perfect accord. Nor is there any authority
for supposing that in any thing | have done here,
nave acted as the friend or partisan Of the bank. NV
opinions IN relation To that institution have not un
aergone the slightest change. They have been ex-
pressed here without reserve when it was proper Ia
do So as my friends well know, and none more So AS