newed by any other member : but I neither a^fced Mr. Fuller MM, 

 any other member to renew it. I did not, therefore, procure Mr, 

 Fuller, to renew the call and if I can be said to have procured thr 

 call, moved for by him, it was only by the expression of a general 

 wish to him, as to many others, that the papers should be commu 

 nicated to the House ; a wish which had already been made known 

 to the House by the message of the President. 



Nothing offensive to Mr. Floyd was intended by me in my Re 

 joinder, nor, if he had been governed by his own maxim, could he 

 have seen any thing offensive to him in it. But there is one thing, 

 at least, in which there is, between Mr. Russell and Mr. Floyd, a 

 community of purpose : that of assuming an attitude of defence, for 

 the purpose of making an attack upon me. 



Mr. Floyd, in the publication here alluded to, has indulged him 

 self in m$ny reflections and insinuations against me, which, having 

 no relation to the subject of this controversy, I deem it most respect 

 ful to the public to pass over in silence. I bear no enmity to Mr. 

 Floyd. Having no personal acquaintance with him, I can have no 

 feelings towards him, other than those excited by his conduct as a 

 public man, which is open to my observation as mine is open to 



There had been a time when, upon a critical occasion, in which 

 my public conduct was not a little involved, Mr. Floyd, still more 

 pnknown to me than at present, had in the House of Represent 

 atives taken a part which had given him claims to my esteem per 

 haps to rny gratitude. His copduct and opinions then, were doubt 

 less actuated exclusivejy by public motives, and without reference 

 at all to me yet I was grateful to him for his support of a cause 

 which it had also been my duty to defend : the cause of a hero, 

 upon whose public services was invoked the public censure of his 

 country.* 



Whatever were his motives for moving the first call for the 

 Ghent papers, or the second, for Mr. Russell s letter, as he thereby 

 only exercised his right as a representative of the people, 1 could 

 take no exception to it. There were no ties of private friendship 

 between Mr. Floyd and me, which made his case different from 

 that of Mr. Russell ; and if he had received his impression of the 

 transactions at Ghent from representations such as those of Mr, 

 Russell s letter, he might, without impropriety, move a call for the 

 papers, for the purpose of bringing the whole subject before Con 

 gress, and the nation, and of exposing what he might deem to be my 

 misconduct in the transaction, even though it should have no bear 

 ing upon his bill for the occupation of Columbia river. 



By his publication in the Richmond Enquirer, he seems desirous 

 of being understood to disclaim any other purpose in moving the 



* See the Debate in the House of Representatives, on the Seminole War, 

 February, 1819, Mr. Floyd s Speech. 



