Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1840-1842, 1842-02-15
TOihc Editors Of the National In,,iiise,er,

The Editors Of the Independent have this momen,
placed IN my hands the letter from Mr. Rufin here.
with enclosed, Claiming for himself whatever Of me-
TT or dsmerit may attach To the authorshp of "Re-
vcuton IN Disguise" which, in nv ,ate et,er IN
the Public ascrioed to the pen OF Me- Unshur.
and hasten 10 request of you 20 give i, an early
place IN your paper, in order to arrest as far as nos
shc, any injurious impression that may I've mad.
upon the public mind relative TO Mr. Upshur's
views, as TAR as thew were 10 be gathered from Tho
article thus hscribed To him.
few days after MIR US first card to Nlr Wise.
received pamphlet containing that article from
highly respectable gentleman residing in the vcipi
~ of Judge Upshur-one who for many years 1
knew as a member ct the Virginia Legislature. and
who WIS supposed 10 be very familiar with JUDGE
Us opnions-and at the foot OF the page he wrote
ny Mr. opshur, now Secretary OF the Navy
And upon this authority nscrbed il to his pen. IL
was the hrst time had seen the article; and
upon showing II TO gentleman who had been upon
terms oil the closes intimacy with MIR Upshu- he
pronounced u unhesliatlngly rs his belief that il
was the production Of Mr. Upshur. MIR IT, has |
understand, been from the time OF its publication tbe
reputed author, ami | suppose only because there
was recognized throughout the piece an cntirs con
iormliy 10 his own opinions
However, | promptly and cheerfully withdraw
every part OF my late letter having reference TO
Revolution in Disguise" and rest the case upon the
letters OF Mr. Harrison, Mr. Brax'on, and Mr. John.
sIon, TO establish what had undertaken TO nrove
10 VIII tn MIR upshur was 1T one time an open.
dissolution
OF the Union. But # Mr. Upshur has never ex-
pressed the opinions quoted f,om 'Rcvoluti,n in
DISGUISE, as 10 the necessary means OF Carrying
on the Government there is too much reason TO he
lieve that they acted upon by the presen, heads
OF The Government. Mr. Harrson's letter alone Is
s2itcient for all my purposes; and all the negative
testimony that can be collected together during Mr.
Opshur,s lifetime cannot inyalidae it.
Mr. KUHN, however, is mistaken in supno,ino
thai there is any error IN the quotations from thai
book. The consequence attached to the oninions
was, thit they should have come from Cab;nc,
minister The proof, ms to the original ALLEGATION.
IS not weakened in the east decree. II was no;
(as IN my last letter II was stately founded on his
writings, but his conversations only threw th,t
IN as conhrmatory testimony.
Let not the public mind be diverted from the true
question at issue 10y this comparatively unimuor
tant error into which have been led by n friend
Few OF the papers that have seen h,vs published
the entire letter, but, like the Madsonan, have
c'niented themselves with the publication Of the
letters OF the gentlemen named above dc ming the
charge as overwhelmingly sustained by them.
Other writings of Mr. Upshur would hive been
referred 10 in the first instance but for the recein,
OF the paper IN question. They will I've hereafter
referred TO, If il should become necessary: from
which the same facts will appear, as far us the |
charge OF dsunon is concerned. The only oues,ion
to be decided IS does MIR Philip Harrison ,eIl The
truth And there man IN the whole country to
be found to say lac does not believe hm2
JOHN NJ. Bolts.