Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1845-02-13
THE ENQUIRER.
Richmond, February l3.
To The Editors of The Enquirer:

Addms-IHr Mem YORK. Courier AMI Enqui-
Ter-.Samnet L. GorsyRenr, CHARTS j. MgeysoN
amt A. Y. Brorn.
Every intelligent man in the United States is
well aware that the Treaty OF 1919, which Sc
cured the Floridas, and lost US that part of Loui-
siana, known as Texas, was negotiated by John
Quincy Adams as Secretary OF Stale on The part
OF our government, and Don Louis de Onis. the
envoy OF Spain; and j, is equally known by those
who have investigated closely the correspondence
which took place between those Two diplomatic
functionaries on The part of their respective Co
vernments, that MIR. Adams could have secured
fort The United States much better Treaty than
The one which was negotiated; as will be seen by
reference 10 the communication of Mr.. Ervins in
1929. But, Don Onis who was man of great
diplomatic powers, saw that MIR. Adams was moi
very particular as 10 boundary and he took ad-
vantage Of il, and secured 10 Spain, independent
of olhcr pecuniary advantages, territory OF
more importance than The one she lost. In The
face of these historical "reminiscences, and pari-
cularly al this juncture, when the lost territory is
anxious 10 re-annex herself 10 lis, to secure 10
her citizens that liberty and independence which
had been guaranteed 10 them by the treaty with
France, and who had been alcnaled By blum
dering piece OF diplomacy, which was inconss-
tent with the letter and spirit Of the Constitution,
so boldly and beautifully asserted by the Hon.
| VIM. II. Hammett in his speech upon the ques-
tion Of annexation the Hon. John p Kennedy,
| in his puny efforts 10 establish for himself a
!, reputation rs 4 statesman and man Of Ia
Tents, and 10 shield Mr. Adams from The
imputalion Of having lost sight OF The true
interests Of his country in that negotiation;
and being controlled by sectional and geopraphi-
cal feelings rather than those which should be-
| long TO a statesman Of enlarged views reiterated
the assertion OF MIR. Adams, made up from his
celebrated diary, which had been sleeping silently
ever since that General Jackson gave his assent
10 The Treaty of Florida before ii was negotiated;
| and that il was submitted TO him, by Mr.. Adams,
| for an expression of opinion He said il The
friends OF General Jackson denied this assertion,
the evidence was in the possession Of one of the
legal representatives Of Mr.. Monroe's family,
Samuel S. Governeur,) in a correspondence be-
i, tween General Jackson and MIR. Monroe which
established the fact as stated BY Mr.. Adams, and
recorded in his diary. As friend Of General
Jackson, whose fame is the common property OF
his country, boldly proclaim, that the assertion
Of The Hon. Mr.. Kennedy is not warranted BY The
facts; and, unless he establishes what he asserts,
even by bis volunteer witness, Samuel S. Go
yerneurD who received the lucrative appointment
\ Of Postmaster at New York from General Jack
! son, in consideration of his connection, BY mar
riage, with Mr.. Monroe, that he for veracity,
/ will be placed in the same category with Mr..
Adams upon this subject. Upon the mere ,psc
diEit of this Don Quixote, the New York En-
| quirer, OF January 18th, said that General Jack.
son was in an "unt0rtannte dilemma, 6v dcnmag
tie assertion Of Mr.. ADAMS that he 0pmorcd of Tie
| Treaty OF 1919, at Me time Of its Adoption" II
! further stated, "Mat Mesrs Charles j. JagcrsoN,
\ A. " Brorn, and the Globe, had not Aesitated
/ 10 accuse Mr. Adams Of forgery, IN order 10 rcpsl
| his assertion, sustained as il 1ras IN his diayB"-
! These extracts show the New York Enuuirers
own statements, based upon the authority OF
\ Messrs. Adams and Kennedy, ofMc issue between
! General Jackson and Mr.. Adams What is il?
/ That General Jackson was consulted before the
presentation Of the Treaty 10 Don Ohis for sigma
lure, and that he approved the Sabine as the b0un-
Diary. General Jackson has denied emphalically
| all remembrance of the alleged call ofMr Adams
on him, or of himself on Mr.. Adams, and also.
tina, he ever received the Treaty or returned it,
as stated by MIR. Adams, with his appreciation
Of that particular boundary. This issue was
made many years ago. In the course of the
! last year MIR. Adams revived it, and General
| Jackson met it in his letter OF Oct. 22d, 1914 in
the following language:
81 say, in advance OF the review shall take
| of this extraordinary production, thus heralded
| before the public on the eve of the Presidential
election, that the assertion OF my having aalriscd
the shadow ofproof TO sustain it," &C.
| Now, is ii not evident, from this ready and un-
equiyocal denial made by General Jackson him
| self, that the oams prOJandi fell upon Mr. Adams?
| Why, then, was it necessary for such an anto-
malon as John P. Kennedy to reilerale il! The
friends OF General Jackson call for the proofnow
while he is living and Mr.. Kennedy, with the
aid Of his quondant friend, Samuel l.. Governor,
must produce it. They Think that The correspon-
dence, alleged to have taken place, between Gen.
Jackson and Mr.. Monroe, will putlhe issue between
but they may rest assured that the friends OF Ge
neral Jackson will allow no miSatemcnts If The is
sue Mr. Adams has averred, viz: prerious consul
talion and precious appreciation OF that particular
bounda1W and 10 the support of this avernlcnl,
General Jackson and his friends will doubtless
hodMr Adams and his hiends in all their al.
temps TO escape from The "nnt0danatc dilemma"
| in which he has involved himself and ! shall
wait for the promised publication OF General
Jacksons letters. | can readily imagine how il,
should be, that Mr. Monroe (ong after the sigma.
ture oflhe treaty, and when Spain was still hang
ing out against its ratification, and when there
was considerable opposition 10 il here at honey
writing TO General Jackson of all The difficulties
by which he had been surrounded in its neso,a-
lion. might well receive responses from him an
predatory ofwhal he had done, under all The cir
cums,ances ofthe case but this would moi aid. in
the slightest degree, MIR. Adams in aver
ring that he had held a personal consultation
with General Jackson, and secured his previous
approbalon Of the treaty before il was ratified
The points at issue are, that General Jackson de.
MES positively having been consulted ycYsonalv
by Mr. Adams, in relation TO the terms OF the
trea,y and that he never gave his previous oppro-
! bofion 10 il. Here is the issue, and Mr.. Adams
dc .usfh ha ~,l l.
sustain il. or the world will award 10 them an un-
enviable position in The history of their country.
| Gen. Jackson has never denied having had a
correspondence and consultation with MT. Mon
roe bn, he denies positively having had one up-
on The subject with MIR. Adams This is The dis
pute, and Mr.. Adams is bound to prove his asser-
lion with corroborative testimony TO sustain his
Diary, which has never been exhibited 10 The pub
lie gaze But when did Gen. Jackson ever saw
mr. write, that he was dissatisfied with the Florida
Treaty al 1nitiO? Who pTeends that he ever
complained of il, or Of Mr.. Adams's negotiation
of It until he received the communication of Mr..
Eryne in 1922 That communication contain
ed a statement Of facts never before known to
Gen. Jackson until its reception. In his letter
of 1880 Mr.. A.V Brown, he expressly says
az ,ras filled .piM astonislncnlo At what was he
astonished 7 At the disclosures made 10 him in
the communication of Mr.. Eryins. Now, here
is the startling point, as far as have any know
ledge Of the subject Of Gen. Jackson's opposition
to the Florida treaty. Bcfofc that he had learned
no doubt from Mr.. Monroe, the general course Of
the negotiation, and the difficulties which attend
ed it, and he might have thought that Mr. Monroe
had done all that was in his power to get favo-
rabe treaty, and, therefore, may have expressed
his appreciation to him. But how vast the differ
ence in many cases, between recommending The
making of treaty "befoychand," and "aequicsing"
in one after it mad been done, and could not be al
tered. The case Of the lale treaty with Great
Britain, in relation 10 our Northeastern boun-
Diary, is an apt illustration. How many Sc.
majors thought it best TO ratily that treaty at.
ter it had been made, who would never have
made it themselves7 But, after Mr.. Erving's
statements were made, Gen. Jackson then found
that Spain had given express authority to hss
Minister 10 surrender as far as the Colorado, or
even the Rio del Nore. He saw in the face of
this express authority. that Mr.. Adams had ac