Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1844-06-07

a speech against il. He did more. BY private
letters he created distrust of Mr.. Adams's integrity
and patriotism as negotiation One of those lei
tiers dated 10th April 1890, addressed TO the Edi-
tor Of the Western Argus. found its way 10 the
public in 1929 and contains the following para
graph, viz:
"Thcre is rumor in the city which will asto-
nish you in regard 10 the conclusion CT ;hatrcay
1t has been asserted bv member of Congress, as
coming from high authority, that, prior 10 The con-
clusion OF the treaty il was known TO Mr.. Adams
that We could have obtained more than was con-
vcved TO US; tina. is, that the Spanish negotalor
was allowed by his Instructions To grant us more,
but that less WIS taken, because the Spanish mi
mister declared. if he went up 10 his instructions.
he should be afraid oi some personal injury upon
his return home! What will YOU in the West
think of The wisdom Of that policy which consents
10 surrender an important part OF our territory
from such a motrel"
What followed in the West Mr.. Adams him
self describes in his book on the Fisheries and
the Mississippi, first page of the Introduction, viz
"ln the course OF last summer, (ot 1871 was
apprzcd b. friend, that rumors very uniavora-
bic 10 my reputation, even for integrity, were in
dusriouSly circulated in the Western country
That il was said | had made a proposition al
Client 10 grant To the British the right 10 navigate
the Mississippi in return for the Newfoundland
fisheries. and that this represented "a, al least,
high mi>dcmcanor" He said, the proposal
was 10 I've represented Gas an otlence) - that it
was charged exclusively upon me; and that |
should hear more abou, j! ere long"
In Januar. 1922 the documents relative Ia the
Client negotiation were called for, aud in Fchru-
ary laid before the House of Representatives
Mr. Adams saws, that while these documents were
lying on the table. :" the correspondence from
Washington, and the newspapers indoctrinated
by il, had no, been equally inactire. Through
these channels the public was assured, that The
proposal of Offering the navigation OF the Mls>is-
sippi for The fisheries had been made by me that
Mr. Clay had uniformly declared that he would
moi sign The treaty with such an article in it. and
that the proposal had been finally set aside by Mr.
Bayant> having changed sides, and come over TO
the opinion ol. the minority
In April. l-22, through some mysterious inu-
cnce never vel explained, Mr.. Rus>clis private
letter written in 1873 was called for 10y the House
OF Representatives.; hut ii was said Ia have been
losi or miSaid MIR Russell, however. furnished
4 duplicate, and in June the call was renewed
On that occasion. Mr. B. Hardin, a member OF
the House from Kentucky is reported 10 have
said that this letter would show the Western
people, i'll what manner their interests were diSre-
saricd or sacrificed; that the Commissioners lat
Ghentl offered TO give up the navigation of The
Mississippi 10 secure the fisheries OF the East
Mr.. Russell'> original letter was now found.
and with the duplicate was submitted 10 Mr. Adj
ans. who detected many differences between them
which he exposed in 4 severe commentary. The
Two papers and the commentary were all sent 10
the House and the effect was 10 di>crcdt Mr..
Russell altogether Mr. Adams followed up the
advantage which he had obtained hy Mr. Rus
sells alterations Of his letter, repeatedly insnua-
ting as we'll in his commentary as in subsequent
publications. that he considered Mr.. Clay al Tie
bottom OF the whole scheme A single extract
from his Book on tho Fisheries and the Mi>sis-
sippi page 23l, will be sufficient To prove This
point viz
The perusa of Mr.. Russell's duplicate, dis
closed To me the mystery OF ruin which had been
brewing against Inc, from the very day after the
signature Of the treaty of Gheld Ii was by re-
presentations like those of that Letter. that the
minds of nv ftllow-c,ixens in the West had, for
a succession of years, been abused and liberated
against me- That letter, indeed, inculpated the
whole majority ofthc mission of Client; bnt sub
sidiary SANDER had performed its part OF pointing
all the guilt and fastening all the responsibility Of
The crime upon me"
So direct were Mr. Adams's illusions 10 Mr..
CLAY is the author of Il diShonorabe intrigue Ia
DESTROY him tina, the latter was obliged 10 come
before the public. Mr. AdamS's book reviewing
the controversy. was published about the Is; Oc-
tohcr, 1922 In December OF that year. the fol-
lowing letter appeared in the National lntelliger-
Ger viz LEXINGTON l6!h Nov, ls22.
Gentlemen have witnessed with very great
regret, the unhappy controversy which has arisen
between two oi INV late colleagues al Ghcnr. In
the course Of the Scvcral publications of which it
has been The occasion. and particularly in the ar-
pcnd;x 10 pamphlet, which has been recently
published b. the honorable John Quincy Adams,
| think there are some errors (no doubt unintcn-
roEal) both as To matters Of fact and matters OF
opinion. in regard to the transactions at Client.
relating H. the navigation Of The Mississippi, and
certain liberties claimed BY the United States in
the fisheries, and to the pant which bore in those
transactions These important interests arc now
well secured, and, as il respects that of the nari-
CATION Of the Mississippi len as it ought 10 be, on
the same firm footing with the navigation Of all
other rivers Of the conference.-the hope may be
confidently cherished, that ii never will hereafter
be deemed fit subject OF negotiation with any 10
reign power. An account, therefore, of what oc-
cured in the negotiations al Client on these two
subjects is not perhaps necessary To the prescn, or
future security of any Of the rights of the nation,
and is only Interesting aS appcrtaning 10 is past
history With these impressions and being cx-
trc:nciy unwilling "a present myself II any time
before the public. had almost resolved 10 remain
silent ami thus expose myself To the inference OF
an acqtliCsccncc in the correctness of all The stale
Incnts made BY both my colleagues; hut have
on more reflection thought that il may he expect
cd of me- and I've considered aS a duty on my part,
10 contribute all iii my power towards full and
faithful understanding Of the transactions referred
to- Under this conviction | will at some time
more propitiouS than the present TO calm and dis
passionate consideration and when there can be
no misinierprciaton of motiveS, lay before the
public 4 narrative of those transactions as I'M
derstood them will not, at this time. I've even
provoked Git would AT any time be incxprcssibly
painful 10 me 10 find it necessary to enter the
field of disputation with either of my late col
leagues
'.As to that pant of the official correspondence
al Client which had not been communicated Ia
the public by the President of the United States,
prior 10 the last session of Congress. certainly
knew Of no public considerations requiring it 10
lie withheld from general inspection But had
no knowledge Of the intention of the honorable
Mr. Floyd to call for il, nor of the call itself,
through the House Of Representatives, until
saw il announced in the public prints Nor had
anv knowledge Of the subsequent call which
was made for the letter of the honorable Mr.. Rus
sell. or the intention 10 make il, until derived ii
from the same channel.
Al will thank You Ia publish this note in the
National Inteligencer. ami 10 accept assurances
of the high respect Of your obedient servant,
II. CLAY"
The next day the following reply appeared in
the same paper:
TO the Editors o. the National Intclligenccr:
Gentlemen: In your paper of yesterday
have observed 4 note from Mr.. Henry Ciav.
which requires some notice from me.
"Aiier expressing the regret Of the writer, at the
unhappy controversy which has arisen between
two of his late colleagues al Client, j, proceeds 10
say. thai in the course Of the several publications
Of which it has been the occasion, and particu-
larly in the appendix TO The pamphlet recently
published By me, he thinks there are some ey-
rorS mo doubt nin,entional,) both as to matters
OF fact ard matters of opinion, in regard TO the
transactions at Client, relating to the navigation
of the Mississippi and certain Liberties claimed
bv the United States in the fisheries, and to the
part which he bore in those transactions
"Concurring with Mr.. Clay in the regret tia.
the controversy should ever have arisen, have
only 10 find consolation in the reflection that
tLy, 4 ~. .,,F