Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1855-02-01

than once, the copy OF that letter which was
transmitted by Mr.. Belmont, and do not doubt
that the one which accompanies Mr.. Covers
note to me is a duplicate Of that which was on
file in the department, but cannot now be
found. The copy furnished by the Minister Of
the King of the Netherlands, and his note to
me in relation to it, accompany this communi.
cation. VI
All of which is respectfully submitted;
W. L. MARCY.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
WASHINGTON, January 9, 1856.
/ submit the following circumstances and
conclusions to establish the assertion / now
make, that the imputation affecting my con-
duct is false and groundless:
/. 1t does not follow that because the letter
is missing, it has been improperly distracted
The most favorable view presented by the Sec
retarys letter Of the state of affairs in the de-
partment renders it not improbably that the
letter may have been mislaid or lost.
2. Though it is true had access to the pa
pers in question, had no motive for desiring
the destruction Of the letter in question. With
out discovering the existence Of such motive,
it is impossible to drawn an unfavorable infer
ence from the fact of my having access to the
papers. So far from desiring to conceal the
fact of having addressed the Governor General
of Netherland India in behalf of my liberation
stated such fact to the Secretary in my first
communication on reaching this country after
my escape from Batavia. That communication
contains the following language: II had made
out q lengthy statement addressed to the Gov
ernor General, in which detailed the circum-
stances and occurrences of my late cruise up
to the time of my arrest. In this communica.
ton, | expressed many regrets for much i'm
prudence of language on my part whilst in Su-
matra, but denying the doing or divising Of any
hostile act against the government of Neither
land India. This personal appeal to the Gov
ernor Generals justice and magnanimity was
simply handed over the Attorney General as
evidence against me, but was rejected as such
by the court of justice of Batayia."-H. Elk.
Doc, No. l6, p. 8.
Unless could obliterate my own statements
to the Department, it would avail but little to
destroy the letter put forth by the Dutch as
the one sent by me to the Governor General.
Two several copies of the letter of the 25th
of February 1.-THE missing letter. was transmit
ted by the Dutch minister to M. Belmont. The
despatch of the Dutch minister transmitting it.,
sets forth all that the letter contains Of any con-
sequence as affecting me. Elk. Doc. lG, page
25.) If could destroy all the copies in the
PoooSGoAOh
vent the Dutch from transmitting more copies,
nor could obliterate from the dispatches Of
the Dutch minister the statement Of what it
contains. Mr.. Gevers, the Dutch minister,
offers copy to supply the place Of the lost
document before the Secretary of State has
actually learned the discovery Of the loss With
the eye of the Dutch minister upon the files of
the State Department, who Gould hope success
fully to abstract papers therefrom to the preju-
dice OF the Government of Holland needed
the letter OF the 25th Of February to correct the
inference as to its import created by the dis
patches OF the Dutch minister. The letter is
the best commentary on the dispatch.
In word, while nothing was to be gained
by suppressing the letter, its absence, from
whatever cause it might arise, could not fail To-
embarrass my relations with the Executive and
with Congress. 1t would virtually furnish the
hrst opportunity for open attack on the part Of
my enemies. So far, then, as motive can point
out the guilty-it lies with my enemies rather
than with myself to defend the accusation.
When have laid the true and the spurious
letter side by side, as shall take the liberty of
DONG In future communication, accompanied
by the proof and the attendant circumstances,
It will be seen plainly enough that far from
having occasion to get rid of the letter as a
troublesome circumstance, had reason to con-
gratulate myself that the infatuation of the
Dutch Government had furnished me with the
most irresistible argument of my innocence
and the duplicity of my enemies. In judging
my arguments, ask no credit for my integrity,
but only that l may be accredited with the
sagaclty common TO rational men.
3. II is not true that, beside myself and per-
sons attached to the department, no others had
access to the papers in question, myself know
OF several others that have had such access.
Before l became aware that the letter was
missed from the files, and on the 9th instant,
the day before the note by Secretary Marcy was
dated, saw copy Of the letter in question in
the hands of a gentlemen in the city of Wash
ington for the purpose of being transmitted for
publication in the New York papers; and on
the 10th instant four days before this message
was sent to Congress, in was actually published
in the New York Times. This fact was known
to Secretary Marcy before he produced the &C
cusation Of my having purloined the letter. It
was the knowledge Of this fact that first led the
Secretary to inquire for the lost letter. will
not certainly be charged with any participation
in the act Of obtaining and giving publicity to
this letter at all events by those who think that
l was most interested in suppressing it. 1t
then follows, that as copy Of the letter was
obtained by those no wise concerned in my in.
terest the fair inference is that it was obtained
from the files Of the department. This infer.
ence is rendered the more probable from the
fact, that it is not an unusual occurrence for
copies of papers on the files of the department
to be obtained by persons connected with the
press for publication.
! am unwilling to give any explanation Of
the circumstances, and acting upon principle
widely different from that which prompted
the Secretary's letter Of the 10th instant, /
shall forbear to insinuate what have not the
means to prove or the reason to believe.
II is proper to state, however, that it is posi-.
BILE the lost letter may have been taken from
the files, for the purpose Of being copied for
publication, and that the excitement occa-
stoned by the discovery Of its loss may have
prevented the person in whose possession il |
was from returning it to the files, and by that |
means subjecting himself to censure, If not
punishment.
Whatever conclusion may be formed as to