120 



I had left Washington on the 5th, io the belief that, at so late a 

 moment of the session, no call, in reference to that message, would 

 be made, or, if made, that it would produce the letter only receiv 

 ed from Paris, with the corresponding report of the Secretary of 

 State. My surprise was not diminished when, on reading the re 

 marks of Mr. Adams, 1 discovered that they mainly owed their ex 

 istence and character to a paper, which had been considered not to 

 be the paper called for, and which had been obtruded on the 

 House, after my departure, at the special instance of Mr. Adams 

 himself, and to afford him an opportunity of giving another speci 

 men of his taste and temper to the public. 



Mr. Adams, on the 6th of May, the very next day after my de 

 parture from Washington, went to the House of Representatives, 

 and there, in person, sought for a member who would consent to 

 make the call whic^i was necessary for the official publication of 

 his personal remarks. To one member from Massachusetts, at 

 least, he had applied in vain, before he finally succeeded in his ob 

 ject. It would seem that the evidence furnished by these facts 

 oughr to have been sufficient, at least, to deter him from accusing 

 others of &quot; a wanton promulgation before the legislative assembly 

 of the nation.&quot; 



For the previous calls, whatever might have been the motive 

 for making them, I am not responsible. With the gentleman who 

 made the call on the 17th of January, for the correspondence 

 which led to the treaty of Ghent, not already made publ^, I had 

 not the least personal acquaintance at the time, nor hadBpbefore 

 that call was actually made, the slightest intimation, direcuy or in 

 directly, of any intention of making it. 



In an interview with Mr. Adams, at his house, a short time af 

 terwards, he said, in reference to that call, that a letter had been 

 found from me, in the archives of State, which might be considered 

 to be embraced by it. He desired to know if I was willing to have 

 it communicated. I replied that I had no distinct recollection of 

 the letter to which he alluded, and that I wished to see it before I 

 gave my consent to its publication. He acquiesced, and I repaired 

 accordingly to the Department of State. I found the letter to 

 which Mr. Adams had referred, to be that which I had written at 

 Ghent, on the 25th of December, 1815, and which announced the 

 fact of my having been in the minority on the proposition relative 

 to the navigation of the Mississippi and the tishing privilege, and 

 intimated my intention of communicating the reasons which had in 

 fluenced my conduct on that occasion. I could perceive no good 

 cause why I should object to the communication of such a letter, 

 and I consented that the part which related to the subject just 

 mentioned, should, with the approbation of Mr. Adams, be commu 

 nicated. Mr. Adams at that time expressed no dissatisfaction that 

 I had written such a letter, nor made any comment on its contents. 

 This is all the participation which I had, directly or indirectly, 

 with the call of the 17th of January. 



