The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1842-02-19

assumes air of infinite candor, every that
he has drawn up his statement with a lawyers art,
with particular view to make the worst possible inn
preston Ia regard to If he had been preparing
an indictment, he could not have arranged his mate
rias artfully The advocate is in the testi-
mony of the icitness. Understanding that Mr. Boris
had applied to him for testimony, and knowing the
character OF his mind and the state Of his feelings
wards me, | was anxious to know what he would
| prove, in order that might have opportunity to
\ refresh his memory and correct his errors, if he
should commit any. For that purpose, l requested
Joseph Mayo, ESQ., of Richmond, to obtain from him
the substance Of his testimony but he refused gipe
Il. MIR. Mayo certifes as follows:
FEBRUARY IL, 1912.
Con the morning of the 9Th of this month, l called
on MIR. Philip Harrison, and said to him that Judge
Upshur had requested me to call him and say TO
him that he had heard that Mr.. Bottss charge made
| IN Congress was to be sustained by Mr. Harrison s
statement and that, act of justice to him. the
Judge asked to be furnished with copy of it. Mr.
Harrison expressed some ulprse that Judge Upshur
should SO soon have heard of his having furnished
statement, and remarked that he supposed no one
knew it but Mr.. Bolts, and asked how the Judge
heard it. replied did not know, but that he had.
he said he could not furnish copy of the statement
as il was made by letter, and he had not retained
copy. then asked him if he would make state
ment of the substance oft He replied that he would
rather not, that he had no doubt it would be seen in
the papers Of Monday. Then Mr. Harrison said that
all communication between himself and Judge Up
shur must be in writing, and the conversation ended
JAMES MAYO"
The temper here displayed cannot be mistaken
His surprise that had heard of his purpose, shows
that he meant to do his work in secret, and his de-
mand that all my communications with him should be
in writing evinces a consciousness that he was acting
with hostile feelings. And yet, when last saw him
there was nothing of this in his manner! What re-
spcct can attach to witness who testfes all one
side, and refuses to be Intercepted the other He
affects great reluctance to have his certificate pub
shed, and begs that it may not be done if it can be
avoided and yet every that he prepared it
for that very purpose. 1t was for that purpose only
that it desired and he kne,D that it 1ooud be pub
shed and the precise time lcen it erpected to be
published, for he so informed Mr.. Mayo. He
asked for his evidence touching particular CONFER
sation board steamboat and he has, unasked,
and of his own accord spoken of many Others of
which he acknowledges 10 have been strictly private
He is what the lawyers call a sniff lcitness one
who is eager to 20 beyond the point as to which he is
Intercepted He himself knows the effect of this.
He is not entitled to speak of my political opinions,
because it is impossible to make him comprehend them.
Many very amusing proofs of this have been afforded
to the gentlemen Of williamsburg He is Fede-
ralist; ultra even beyond ordinary ultrasm He has
grown old with set of fixed IDEAS which it is i'm
possible to unsettle He thinks all State Rights doc
trnes abominable, and denounces them with most i'm
perial scorn. He announces his own dogmas, &c
hedra and is utterly impatient of all contradiction.
He himself informs us that he runs away from all
such discussions when he is at liberty to do so, and
impores forbearance, whenever he is pent up that
he cannot fly. Modification is, in his view not only
dsunon but something not far short of treasont and
his anathemas against it given forth with solemn
pomp and authoritative emphasis absolutely ire
sistble. His acquaintance will not be at loss to
recognize the truth of this picture.
Such is the attitude and character Of the witness.
Let us see what he has proved
Admit for the present. (and have no sort of OBJ
lection that should be considered that politi
cal conversation held the deck Of steamboat
and that both Mr.. HARRISON and Mr.. Boris were
present. Mr.. HARRISON himself says that he heard
only the beginning of it, and retired out Of the way,
not to hear either its progress its conclusion
Mr.. HARRISON knows, as lawyer, that testimony Of
this sort would be worthless before any Jury in the
country. Indeed, they would not be permitted to
hear it. So that, far from having proved the case,
MIR. HARRISON has not in any just Of the term,
given epidence tending to prove it. And yet, af
ter the lapse of six years, he undertakes to give from
memory alone, not only the effect, but the general
tenor and course of whole argument of which he
admits that he heard only small part!!
AS to what Judge Barbour said to Mr. Harrison, it is
rather too much to call to answer his opinios
thus delivered at second hand In the excited times
referred to there few men in Virginia of any
note who did not hold that State had right to
terpose in some form other, to arrest unconstit-
tioaal legislation on the part of the Federal Govern
ment They differed to the form of such nterposi
tion and they all agreed that nothing short of an ex
IRENE would justify it in any form. Judge Bar
bour, in common with many other distinguished men,
held that secession the rightful remedy took in
my obscure and limited sphere the ground that
notification the rightful remedy. / wrote Sc
res of essays under the signature of Locke prove
that notification was not only justified but was con-
tempated by the celebrated resolutions of 1893 and
1899, commonly called Madison's resolutions; and
these the creed of all State rights at that
day. AS supplement to the essays of "Locke, y" l
wrote others under the signature of "Napier'' to
prove that secession could not be the rghtfu remedy
because it necessarily broke the Union and that nufca-
ton the righfu remedy because it necessarily
preserved the Union | commended that there was no
power to force State out of the Union against her
consent, and that she had right to refuse obedience
to unconstitutional laws without FORGETTING her right
to the benefits of the Union This doctrine Judge
Barbour resisted and contended that notification
cessarily placed the multiplying State out of the Union.
know, therefore, that he considered me a dsunon-
st precisely as considered him one; not in feeling,
nor in wish nor in design, but from the necessary
tendency of his principles If, therefore, any such
conversation is spoken Of was ever held at ALL null
! hication the doctrine advocated by me--a doc
time to which Mr.. Harrison cannot be made to listen
lo1g enough to learn what it is This the famil-
| la topic in all political circles at that day.t
| What Judge Barbour himself thought of me, as
lac 1840 will appear from the short extract which
/ publish from letter from hsnephew, John S. Bar
bor, Esq. in the following words;
Extract of letter from j. S. Barbour, Esq, to the
| Hon. A. r. Upshur, dated
FEBRUARY Is, 1912.
'And in October 1910, the last time l him,
(Julge Barbour your became the subject of con-
versation with Judge Field, Judge Barbour, and my
SELF at his house, and that occasion his language
of y,u marked with the highest concentrations"
| Bat was any such conversation held at all.
The Hon. William Smith, to whom Mr.. Bolts APP
piled prove it, does not recoec it; Edmund Chris
tain, Esq, referred to by Mr.. Harrison having been
present, does recolect it R. c. Nicholas Esq,
eired to by Mr. Harrison, does not recoect it !! These
are the only witnesses referred TO having been pre-