Mr. BrenCs Statement. 



On the 20th of April of the present year, I called upon Mr. Russell at hi$ 

 i.&amp;gt; Icings in this city, without the knowledge or direction of any other person 

 whatever, to inquire of him, as I did, whether he could and would furnish the 

 Department of State with a copy of his letter from Paris to the Secretary of 

 State, which was referred to in a resolution that I supposed to be then on its 

 passage (but which had actually passed the day before,) through the House of 

 Representatives, upon the motion of Doctor Floyd, in case the said resolution 

 :-hould be adopted by the House, and a regular application were made to him 

 fur it ; observing to him distinctly and particularly, however, that I had no au 

 thority to make such an application myself, and that my entire object was to 

 ascertain the facts just stated. In answer to this inquiry, Mr. Russell informed 

 mo that his daughter had recently transmitted to him the draft of the letter hi 

 question ; that he had it thereby in his power to give a transcript of it, and would 

 sot about making one immediately, which, when finished, he would deliver to 

 the President. Upon which I remarked, that this seemed to be the proper 

 rourso, the original having been addressed to him, the President, when Secreta 

 ry of State. I then observed to Mr. Russell, that he had better deliver it as a 

 duplicate than as a copy ; that he knew the original was not to be found upon the 

 filt-s of the Department of State, and that this was he common form with regard 

 to all such communications. Pie seemed pleased with the suggestion, and said 

 that he would conform to it, without giving me the slightest intimation that he 

 would prefer giving a copy, as such, or that he v/ould furnish any other than a 

 duplicate of the identical letter spoken of and referred to, which had been 

 transmitted by him from Paris to the then Secretary of State. I was prompted 

 by a double motive to this inquiry first, by an habitual wish that the Depart 

 ment to which I belonged should always be prepared to furnish what might be 

 required of it by the House of Representatives ; and, secondly, by an appre 

 hension that, if it were not so prepared in this particular case, unjust imputa 

 tions might be made against the Head of that Department, which I was desir 

 ous of obviating. In this interview, Mr. Russell told me that it was at his in 

 stance Doctor Floyd had submitted his last resolution to the House of Repre 

 sentatives ; that he was influenced, himself, by the wish that his letter should be 

 communicated to Congress, tor his justification as to the part he had taken in 

 the negotiation of the treaty of Ghent, with regard to the fisheries ; but that the 

 same gentleman s first motion upon the same subject, was made without his 

 knowledge or advice. On the 22d of the same month, Mr. Russell handed to 

 we, in my rrom at the Department of State, in the absence of the Secretary, 

 with a request that I would deliver it over to him, an open letter, marked &quot;Du 

 plicate,&quot; a copy of which was communicated by the President to the House of 

 Representatives, on the ?th of May last ; observing, when he did so, that he felt 

 no particular solicitude about it, and requesting that it might be returned to 

 him, if not used by the Department. A day or two afterwards this paper was 

 put into the hands of Mr. Thomas Thruston, one of the clerks of the office, 

 to be copied. Perceiving that it bore date at Paris, on the llth of February, 

 1822, when Mr. Russell was known to be attending the session of Congress in 

 this city, as a member of the House of Representatives, this young gentleman 

 asked my advice whether he should insert that date in the copy or not ; and I 

 told him, without hesitation, to insert 1816 instead of 18^2, as Mr. Russell had 

 evidently, from inadvertence, made a mistake in the date. Mr. Thruston gave 

 it that date accordingly, and made a correspondent alteration in the paper it 

 self, which Jie was transcribing, under the impression that he was likewise au 

 thorized to do so, and that it would never produce criticism of any sort. When 

 Mr. Adams came to be apprized of these circumstances, particularly of the al 

 teration in the date of the &quot; duplicate&quot; paper, he manifested and expressed 

 much surprise and displeasure upon the occasion. But Mr. Russell, whom I 

 s i\v immediately after they happened, and to whom I communicated what ha 



