138 



MR. ADAMS' REJOINDER TO MR. RUSSELL. 



Mr. Jonathan Russell having thought proper to transfer the scene 

 of his attack upon the character and conduct of his colleagues, the 

 majority of the late mission to Ghent and especially upon mine, 

 from the House of Representatives of the United States, where he 

 lirst volunteered to bring it forward, to the newspapers, it becomes 

 necessary for my defence, and that of my colleagues, against this 

 assault, to apply to his new statements and representations a few of 

 those " correctives^'' which, at the call of the House of Represent- 

 atives, I did apply to the original and duplicate of his letter of 

 nth February, 1815. 



The paper published by Mr. Russell in the Boston Statesman, of 

 the 27th of June last, bears the same relation to truth that his ori- 

 ginal letters bear to their duphcates, and his sentiments to his 

 signatures. 



Nearly two columns of the paper published in the Boston States- 

 man, are occupied with a narrative of circumstances which preced- 

 ed, attended, and followed, the delivery, by Mr Russell, at the 

 Department of State, on the 22d of April last, of the paper pur- 

 porting to be a duplicate of his letter of 11th February, 1815, from 

 Paris, to the then Secretary of State. In the course of this narra- 

 tive, Mr. Russell makes the following admission ; how reluctantly, 

 the very structure of the sentence in which it is contained, will 

 show - and it is proper that it should be exhibited in his own words : 



" I certainly did believe that I was permitted to make those cor- 

 " rections of the copy in possession, which appeared to me to be 

 *' proper to exhibit my case most advantageously before thattribu- 

 *' nal" — [the tribunal of the public] 



The reasons of Mr. Russell for believing that he was permitted, 

 in 1822, to make corrections which happened to suit his own pur- 

 poses, in a paper furnished by himself to be communicated to the 

 House of Representatives of the United States, as a specific letter 

 written by him in Paris, in the year 1815, are as singular and sur- 

 prising as the belief itself They consist of insinuations and infer- 

 ences that he had furnished the paper at niy solicitation ; that the 

 word " duplicate ^''^ written upon it, with his own hand, gave no 

 further intimation or assurance that it was so ; that 1 had the sole 

 power to publish it or not, as I might judge proper, and to consult 

 my own feelings and interests in forming my decision ; and that the 

 paper was not to be exhibited to the public without the previous 

 examination and consent of the adverse party. And with these 

 ingenious principles, he has interwoven a statement of facts, with 

 which he has believed himself permitted to take the same liberty 

 that he had taken with his own letter ; making in them those cor- 

 rections which appeared to him necessary to exhibit his case most 

 advantageously before the tribunal of the public. 



