The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1844-09-06

IN 1883, they must recognise the claim OF the peo
pie of the United States to the liberty to fish, and
to dry and cure fish, IN question. To place both
points beyond all future controversy. amajorityo Of
as determined to offer to admit an article confirm
be silent in the treaty upon both; and to leave out
altogether, the article defining the boundary from
the Lake ofthe Woods Westward
Mr.. Adams in his book upon the Mississippi and
fisheries, page l59, shows how the peculiar phrase.
ology came to be employed in that despatch, viz:
"The draught having been passed round to all
the members of the mission for revisaI was brought
back to me by Mr.. Russell, with an alteration,
which, he said, was desired, not by him, but by Mr.
Clay, to say, instead of"we offered" "a majority
of US determined to Offer
On the same day, Mr.. Russell wrote separate
letter TO the Secretary of State, stating that he
should thereafter Communicate the views which
led the minority to differ with the majority on that
question. Accordingly, on the 18th February 1916
while Mr. Clay and himself were together in Paris,
he wrote long letter to Mr.. Monroe, then Secre-
tary ofStae, setting forth the grounds ofdiference
and animadverting upon the position assumed by
the majority. In publication made in Boston Oh
the 9Th June, 1922, Mr.. Russell said, "To the
only member of the Mission who had direct in
teresti the case, [meanng Mr.. Clay,] did show
at the time the letter written at Paris" When it
is considered, that the alteration of the joint letter
of the Commissioners at Client, was notdesired by
Mr.. Russell, but by Mr.. Clay, it appears singular
that the former should have taken so much pains to
expl iin the grounds of difference between the
jorty and minority Be the true reason what it
may, there is abundant evidence, that Mr.. Adams
considered it joint conrivance of Messrs. Russell
and Clay to effect his political ruin
Mr. Russell's Letter was marked "Privae," as
If intended to be seen only by Mr.. Monroe, who
was expected to succeed Mr. Madison as Presi-
dent and might select Mr. Adams as his secretary
of State, thereby placing him in the line of "safe
preccdents" for the Presidency Itappears to have
been mislaid and forgotten. Mr. Monroe was
elected President and appointed Mr.. Adams Sec
retary of State. Mr.. Cay's friends were not at
Reporter, Mr.. Clay's peculiar organ in Kentucky,
then edited by Mr.. Smith, who was connected by
marriage with his family, on the 14th July, 1918,
used the following language: viz.
"Mr. Adams is designated by the President aud
his presses the heir apparent, the next successor
to the presidency. Since the principle was intro
duced, there has been rapid degeneracy in the
Chief Magistrate; aud the prospect of still greater
degeneracy, is strong and alarming. Admit the
people should acquiesce in the Presidential appoint
ment of Mr., Adams to that high office; who again
will he choose as his successor? Will itbe Josiah
Quincy, H. G. Otis, or Rufus King? An aristo-
crat, at least not TRAITOR, will be our portion"
From all the politicians who were nearly allied
TO Mr.. Clay, were heard expressions exhibiting
their dissatisfaction aud distrust of Mr.. Adams |
Adams as Secretary Of State, which secured Flor-
da to the United States aud ceded Texas to Spain,
Mr. Clay came out in open opposition. In March
1920, he offered resolutions against the Treaty in
the House Of Representatives and made speech |
against it. He did more. BY private letters he
created distrust of Mr.. Adams integrity and pa
triotism as negotator One ofthose letters dated
18th April, 1920, addressed to the Editor of the
Western Argus, found its way to the public in
1928, and contains the following paragraph: VIZ |
"There is a rumor in the City which will aston
sh you, in regard TO the conclusion of that treaty
1t has been asserted by member of Congress, as
coming from high authority, that, prior to the con-
cluson of the treaty, it was known to Mr.. Adams
hat ya hav nht han,
9eyed to US; that is, that the Spanish negotiator
was allowed by his instructions, to grant US more,
but that less was taken, because the Spanish min
ster declared, if he went up to his Instructions he
should be afraid OF some personal injury, upon his
return home What will you in the west think
-ender an important part -four territory from such
motive"
What followed in the West, Mr. Adams him.
elf describes in his book on the Fisheries and the
Mississippi, first page of the Introduction: viz.
"In the course of last summer, (of 1921 was
lpprized by friend, that rumors very uniavorable
o my reputation, even for integrity, were indus
rously circulated in the western country. That
t was said had made proposition at Client to
,rant to the British the right to navigate the Mis-
issippi, in return for the Newfoundland fisheries,
md that this was represented as, at least, high
"He said, the proposal was to be
represented (as an ofence) SO that it was charged
upon me; and that should hear more
bout it ere long" M 4
In January. 1922, the documents relative to the
ihent Negotiation were called for, and in Febru- {
ry laid before the House Of Representatives. Mr..
adams says, that while these documents were ly- Il
ng on the table, ''the correspondence from WASH
ngton, and the newspapers ndoctrnated by it, had
ot been equally inactive Through these chan
els, the public was assured, that the proposal of
ffering the navigation Of the Mississippi for the |
sheries had been made by me; that Mr.. Clay had
niformly declared that he would not sign the I
arficla In Il. tha nro-