The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1842-02-24
Hon. A. UPsHUB.
RICHMOND, Feb. IA, 1912.

RICHMOND, Feb. IA, lS42.
DEAR JUDGE: Your letter under date of the 18th in
slant is at hand and in answer have to say that in
the year 1885, think, you and myself were going
from Williamsburg to take the steamboat for this
place. When the boat to the wharf for us, and
we got on board, Mr. Philip Harrison was there and
told me that he his way to Williamsburg to
attend youl court | remarked TO him that you had
adjourned your court, and your way to Rich
mond Mr. Harrison appeared vexed at your having
adjourned your court before he got there, and said
you ought to be impeached and removed from the
bench that, instead of attending to your judicial du
ties, you going about the country preaching your
helsh doctrines of notifications did not think any
thing OF Mr.. Harrisons strong language in relation
to notification knew he though. it the greatest of
all political hereses, and believed there was no de-
renee between it and dsunon.
Last winter, when your name was spoken of in
connection with the office of United States Senator
Mr. Harrison came to me and said that you were not
TIT Tor the place, that you were disunionst, which
did not surprise me at all nor did even ask him why
he thought TO, because knew he thought notification
and dlsunion the same. concluded he only alluded
to your being a nullifer | said to Mr.. Harrison
that if you nominated for the office of Senator
that would tell the House that you were nullfer
and state all your opinions fully and fairly. Mr.
Harrison and myself parted; heard no more of his
objections. mentioned the conversation to several
of frieLd and they agreed with me in the opin-
ION that Mr.. Harrison meant nothing more than that
you were nullifer. have always considered Mr.
Harrison as belonging to the old Federal party and
do not remember ever to have of that high
ly respectable and intelligent party, who did not
think like Mr. HARRISON that notification and dis
union were one and the same. The ground taken by
those in the Virginia Legislature in l798 against the
adoption OF the resolutions of John Taylor, Esq, was
that they would inevitably lead to disunon. The
Republicans of that day thought differently, as they
do now. They were right then, and SO think they
now.
You also ask me to say whether have had an OPP
portunty of knowing your political opinions ] have.
We have been acquainted for about ten years, and
have, during that time, conversed frequently about
all the political questions which have been agitated
have heard your opinions frequently, in private and
in company, and i have always heard you contend
that yours the true conservative principles of
the Constitution l never saw but one nulIifer who
was disunonist. remember that you, he, and my
self were together; discussing various sub
jects about men and measures, when he said nulif-
cation would do very well in ordinary cases. but that
he thought that the time for disunion had arrived
You at once entered into an argument with him. to
show him the error of his opinion, You contended
that disunion must inevitably be succeeded by war;
which you seemed to deprecate more than any thing
except to be pundered of our property or liberty
have always heard you contend that, sooner than
great central Government built up on the
ruins of the Constitution, and the rights and liberty
OF the people destroyed, you would dsunion. You
contended that, in such a case, disunion would be
proper, because there could be no longer rational
hope of right or justice from the Federal rulers
You said that when such an event happened, the
Government had failed to be what it intended to
be by its framers and that it had virtually dissolved
itself,
l have given, as briefly as l could, such informa-
ton you ask of me. am afraid that have crowd
ed so much together, that you will hardly under
stand it.
In haste, l am very truly your friend,
JNO. M. GREGORY.