The North-Carolina standard., 1844-10-30

and did not profess to give more thans the sub
stancei How shameless is this charge when the
adverse party then had the means Of instantaneous
exposure if we had been guilty -
! Bun this is not all. Mr.. Leigh is himself gull
! ty of the very offence he charges upon ne. He
gives the following extract from cur exposition OF
! Mr. Clay's letter in 1928, viz: ,q = ~
"My friends entertain the belief that their kind
wishes towards me will, in the end, be more likely
to be accomplished by bestowing their votes on IA
Adams. Your representative is inclined TO concur
with in these sentiments and views, ana u tney
should meet your appreciation, as | know ne 1 ads =
great respect for your opinions, would be gao
you would, by the return mall address te.eI 10 20
him eng;hen him in his inclination Be pleased
to show this letter 10 Crttenden alone J@<ft t3
Now, in our letter to Mr.. Clay in 1928, from
which this extract purports to be taken, our real
! language was as follows, VIZ: ~ s2E#
my friends entertain the beliefthat their klnd
wishes towards me will, IN the end, be more likely
to be accomplished by SO bestowing their votes" !,
You then declare that you hare urged them to
be goUe1ssed by theiF Die9es Of the Ple0tlc gooG
alone, and drer that yO,s haze been iafaenced
only by that consideration. @.'e go.
In conclusion, you use nearly the totlo'0tng
1oords: t.@+
"Your representative is inclined to concur with
us in these sentiments; aud as know his respect
for your opinions, request, it you concur IN cur
views that you viii write him by return mail 10
strengthen him in his inciinations. Show this 70
Crittenden alone"
1t will be perceived that the words in italics are
entirely omitted by Mr.. Leigh, and others some
what altered. By reference to the foregoing par
allel columns it will also be that the substance
of Mr. Clay's professions of disinterestedness was
given by US with hperfect accuracy; yet Mr. Leigh,
BY "garbling" our letter, attempts to prove that
we suppressed them altogetherl To sustain a
charge of garbling against US, he gGrbtes himself
This is the honorable and high-minded Benjamin
Watkins Leigh!
1t is little curious that Mr.. Leigh begins
with boldly asserting that he thought it i'm
possible that any man could read the letters
without seeing and admitting that they contain no
evidence prejudicial to Mr.. Clay; no evidence of
any impropriety in thought, word, or deed; no
evidence of any selfish or personal feelings; no
evideace of aught but patriotism - and ends with
an argument to establish his dsimereStedness, so
weak as to be coptfmptiblel We shall not now
enter into any discussion the subject; content-
ing ourself with asking, why should Mr.. Clay, if
he desired the Kentucky members Of Congress of
be governed "solely by tile public good" take so
much pains to bring personal influences TO operate
on Mr.. White, and in so doing refer to the kind
wishes" of his friends towards him 10 be accom-
plsheds,, i" in the end" by the election Of MIR.
Adams.
The commentary of the Richmond Whig, as
we find it copied into the National Intelligencers
characteristic of that press and of its party. Thore
is but one point in it which we deem it expcdicnt
to notice The Whig says: I" Blair has had the
letters in his possession for nineteen yeats. Ken
dali has had access them as his garbled extracts
prove" That paper further says:
"Mr. Clay is not only right for departing nO1O
from his original resolution of not publishing his
letters to Blair but he ought years ago to- have
that resolution, from the moment in
deed that the seal of private confidence was broken
by Mr.. Blair. AS these letters made the ,
foundation OF criminal charges against him, there !
was no mode of repelng those chaI ges and vindi- }
eating himself bat by the production Of these letters
A correspondence is no longer confidential when
one of the parties to has betrayed the trust repos
ed in him: nay, to make it public is often, as in
this case the only means left of sustaining limo.
cence and holding treachery up to merit, d scorn"
Mr. Blair is able 10 vindicate himself; but it is
due to truth to say, that never saw the origi-
nails any copy ofthese letters, either ofthem,
in Mr.. Blqir's possession; Of the original or
any copv other than that deposited for exhibition
by Mr.. Clay's consent in the hands of the Frank
ort committee; nor did we obtain from Mr. Bk,ir
he slightest information as to their contents
that Mr.. Blair was Mr.. CIay's con6deh-
ial correspondent and kno,cing that he told us in
January, 1925, that Mr. Clay would be Secretary
If Stale if Mr.. Adams should be elected President
~ the House of Representatives, me inferred that
ls obtained the information from Mr.. CIGy him.
elf The first clue we had to the existence ofthe
etters, was from an accidental remark which fell ,
rom Mr. Blair publicly, when before the Senate
If Kentucky, at the celebrated investigation of
1878. That Mr.. Clay himself viewed Mr..
8lair's conduct as everv way proper, is shown by
1is published letter to John HarvIe dated 5th June,
1928, some months after that investigation Ger
ain it is, that he never before or since showed us
he letters, or any copy, or gave the least infer
nation in reference to their contents; and our
garbled extracts were not and did not pretend TO
Be- anything more that our RECOLLECTION OF lis con-
ents from reading the copy or original exhibit
with Mr. Clay's consent &
zIE