The organizer., 1850-04-20
~ From the MssiSippiani
Lcttcr from Chief Justice ShaFECy.
JACKSON, Miss, April 4, 1850.

| ~N~AAS~*'f A'''@N'H - t'''t - ANcNN
Editors ofthe National Intelligencer.
GENTLEMEN Your number of thu
18th of March contains an article
headed "rhe proposed Remedy fol
the Evil of they Day Examined"
which does gross injustice 10 the
members of the Convention which
met in this place in October last.--
The part which it was my fortune to
take in that Convention, makes it ne.
cessary that | should foregO iTclina.
lion, and appear before the public to
repel an unfounded calumny. That ar.
ticle IS but the seque. OF severalwhlch
preceded it ofleSs boldness. The pub
lie journalist owes it to the country to
deal candidly and fairly with the con.
duct of others, and departing from
this duty he is like a swift witness;
be betrays his parIiaIity at the cost Of
his integrity.
Your article i, lengthy, and shall
content myself with noticing such
portions of il as place the convention
in the most prominent point Of view.
Your title seemed TO give promise of
discussion, but your essay begins and
ends in assertion and denunciation.--
You prove one thing however, which
may have not been generally known,
an entire identity in feeling with the
North in its high claims Of power On
the subject of slavery. Your North
ern readers will doubtless feel graft
fled at your devotion TO their favorIte
measure, but they viii not be much
enlightened by your argument
Your Southern countrymen can No.
longer regard you as neutral. ! am
not willing that the Convention shall
he judged by the open enemies Of the
South. and still less willing that itI
shall be condemned on evidence and
inierences not found in, or warranted
by, its own declarations; and Iasser.
in the most solemn manner, that MOI
tiyes have been ascribed TO the mem
bers which they did not entertain. /
Your allusion to the Hartford Com
is an arlifice which requires
no comment 10 show its object. is
history is given at length. and you.
from the "modc of compost
ion, and the objects" the Nashville
Convention is more deserving of odi-
nm. This is condemning il prema>
urely on assumed grounds. The
has not met; its composi.l
lion cannot be known, or at least huf
partially known. Its objects aro iusl
what the convention OF Mississippi cxI
pressed them to be. When men havt
openly and fairly declared their Obt
ect, IL is unjust to ascribe to thc3
motives which they did not expresi
unless the charge can be sustained
Dn more conclusive evidence. Nj
purpose Is with the Mississippi Conf
gention, and If YOU had dealt as fairl
by il as you have BY the Hartford
no vindication woull {
nave been required. The history ofon I
S given at length, bot not so with AL {
lther. The Hartford Convention Z
pronounced an innocent affair on M 7
strength Of the declarations containd {
IN its proceedings; but the Mississi q
Di Convention is not judged By u {
.ams rule; its declarations arc disrl &
garded. and motives ascribsd 10 &
which were not expressed. One c
With closed doors, ane is proceedinb S
we're kept secret, az a time when E
7ere a. war with a powerful foreih n
.nemy, which had been opposed a D q
be justice OF which had been den d
y q portion Of OUT people; yet is 4 G
ives are determined hy the iOurn ! Z
u its proceedings. The other r
With open doors published its PrOa j a