The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1879-03-01

"it9'ni ~ aoNNSo lpiNtuu u Nht teNet Va
john Q. Adams to committee Of BostonieDs
To extract com iort from that document, in
exculpating the Federalis,s from the charge
Of being disuniouists, Is about as easy as to
gather figs from thistles, Mr.. wolie's mental
organization must be dull Of comprehension
indeed, in failing to see the direct charges Of
disloyalty made by Mr. Adams upon his Pc.
litical ancestors. In that part quoted by Mr.
Wolfe, Mr.. Adams, in speaking of his disclos-
ures to Mr.. Jefferson says
al was in these letters Of 1903 and 1909
that mentioned the design of certain leaders
Of the federal party TO effect dissolution of
tue Union, and the establishment of north
ern eoniederacy. This design had been form
ed in the winter Of 1904, immediately after,
aRd as consequence Of, the acquisition Of
Louisiana. Its justiiying causes 10 those rho
entertained IL were, that the annexation Of
Louisiana TO the Union transcribed the con
stitutional powers Of the government of the
United States; that il formed in eacl new
confederacy, TO which the States, united by
the former compact, were not bound TO adj
here; that il was oppressive to the interests
and destructive to the influence OF the north
ern section Of the coniedracy, whose right
and duty il therefore was to secede from the
new body polite, and to constitute one OF
their own. This plan was so far ma,ured,
that the proposal had been made TO an indi-
vidual to permit himself, at the proper time,
to be placed at the head of the military move
ments, which it was foreseen would be neces-
sary for carrying it into execution. In all
this there was no overt act Of treason"
Nj, Adams, then, as quoted by Mr.. Wolfe,
charges that the Federalists had formed u
design to dissolve the Union and to establish
northern confederacy, and had cast about
for military leader. There is the direct
charge of disanion, covered up in no verbiags,
bu, plain aud specific; and though it was
never openly attempted, does not argue that
the Federalists had not the desire to accom-.
plish it.
In summing up Mr., Adams letter Mr..
Wolfe says;-"He distinctly says there was
no open act of treason; that citizen may
lawfully resist an unconstitutional law Very
true, but while citizen may do so, Mr..
Adams asserts that for States 10 do so, leads
to civil war, and de taeto dissolution of the
Union. Here'are his remarks:
'But let us suppose the case that the legis-
/ lative acts of one or more States of the Union
are passed, conflicting with acts of congress
and commanding the resistance of Their citi-
/ zens against them, and what else can be the
result but war-ciyil war? And is not that
de .fdeiO dissolution of the Union so far as
the resisting States are concerned p
Mr. Adams charges that conspiracy for
establishing northern coniederacy was on
foot. Samuel Hunt, Uriah Tracy, and other
leading dsunionists desired that the work be
commenced by State legislatures. The OBJ
ieet in forming this coniederacy was to free
the seeding States from a constitution and
laws which they considered inimica to their
interests, The laws Of the government at that
time were not suited to New England tastes,
and il is not supposable that they would re.
tain the same enaetments. No, they would
lay down such legal guides as would compass
their own doctrines. The citizens would be
expected to obey the laws Of this new confed.
eracy, and not those of the former compact,
aud consequently war would ensue and Il de
.faeto dissolution of the Union result, as far
as the resisting States were concerned
Had Mr.. Wolfe comprehended the meaning
of Mr.. Adams letter, he would never have
chosen it as a defense of the Federalists.
Yet, how he could mistake such plain and
direct language, can only be explained upon
I Al. al. =
i,s MEANING R,, ,b;s doco,dar oe NJ. r..
-, ''''' - w" q"
anu ,s"'' IA" " say so"heehins' ne mas uh-
dertaken to purge New England Federalist
character from the charge of disunion and
treason. HIS silence might be construed into
=" au"',sa'on u uhe ru'h OF history ana ne
mas spoken out not wisely. HIS arguments
recoil with redoubed force to annihiate hi,
own position. He undertakes to yindicai,
The action of tho IIo,,e,.1 c.,,,.-,;,., Il,
- " '"' iiu'''o.u Oo"''"''o"' pu'
W. w;ll n;ro = Ii,,lo I;.,,,,. ,r,ha.r.I. -,
sban oooro.o H., o;,;n, 80. .e
oncss or no E.do.sI,,g -. -
hl;n, soa 90 ,,h;aL - -, =. -
onoted he ns Ia Zoe -. % -,
noared IN Tho H,y,c,rd co,a..,, III - "
other ib;ns, !, vas s,o,od
..Tho Nor,harn g.. -. -..h....
ton. as n republic without any co"noe,;n ,
with the South 1t cannot be contested, thai
III the Southern States were possessed Of the
Dam 5laLIa ' ,Sas union would SUI DC
Il becomes 4 serious opes.;on whether ~" -.
shall give up our Government, or part will
me states south OF the Potomac, no man norti
u no ae r,af' whose e nea.t Is not thorough,
make. ' 1'e''''' y
Mr.. Adams. in a pamnble, g;vos ;nc;d.n,
a.. r;,;, - pr. - ,en1 ~,
" =" ''''' ~ nuns iN'"s III io'i' auu says
81 found there sitting Timothy Pickering
who, shortly after went in, took leave an,
withdrew. Mr.. King said to me, Col. Pick
ering has been talking to me about prolec
.nsy nave ior .ns separation oil the States AM
governor Hummer, OF Ne" Hampshire
sS'''o' az '''' ''''e u ,"e "elus'
u'' u i''u'aiaHai Ia 'e'ter 70 mr. Auams
declared that be, Plummer, was disunionis
at that time-in favor of forming A separat
rovernmon, in Now E,o,an1 anJ H., r.
-.,.-, N " va
consu''eu On such a pan by federal member
OF Congress from New England.
In 1906 the Governor mentions in his ion,
nal thu, in 1874 rrno,l,,, p;.L.., -
-. s's ~ ''"f i'"Vthy AlSNerinsi Jhine