Indiana Palladium, Volume 7, Number 10, Lawrenceburg, Dearborn County, 12 March 1831 — Page 3

iTTR. CALHOUX. We have read the address of this gentleman to the people of the United States. The first impression made upon our mind, is one of wonder, that a man possessing Mr. Calhoun's tact and prudence, should have brought a subject of this nature before the public. The only point in this discussion, except iuch as Mr. Calhoun has himself created, is altogether personal. By his private letters, and those of Mr. Monroe, by his whole public conduct, and by publications in the newspapers, general Jackson had been led to believe, that he had been uniformly his friend, in the cabinet of Mr. Monroe as well as out of it, vindicating all his conduct in the Seminole campaign. Under this impression, he had given Mr. Calhoun his warmest friendship and

firmest confidence. Compelled at length, by facts and circumstances, to doubt the sincerity of his supposed ancient friend, he determined to know the truth. With this view, he obtained in an authentic shape, the charges which had been made of Mr. Calhoun's course in the cabinet, so different from what he had supposed, submitted them directly to the person implicated, and asked whether they were true? Mr. Calhoun admits (heir truth. Gen. Jackson expresses his surprise at the admission, and says Mr. Calhoun has pursued a course of duplicity towards him. The latter declares the charge of duplicity to be unfounded. VVilh this issue the correspondence closed. What was there in this which required an appeal to the public? It was a mere private difference It concerned only the breaking of two gentlemen towards each other. One of them, it is alleged, had deceived the other, who had just fotind it out. By an interchange of letters, these gentlemen finally Understood each other. VVhat have the public to do with gen. Jackson's and Mr. Calhoun's opinion of each other? Are they called upon to decide whether Mr. Calhoun was guilty of duplicity or not? gen. -Jackson says he was. He ays he was not. Whether he was or was not, does not now concern the public. Mr. Calhoun's publication, therefore, was wholly uncalled for. It is a firebrand wantonly thrown into the republican party. Mr. Calhoun will be held responsible for all the mischiefs which may follow. The character which the President Xiow ascribes to Mr. Calhoun will not derive any relief from this correspondence and its publication. What was it which gen. Jackson asked of Mr. Calhoun in his letter of 13th May, 1830? Simply to state whether he had actually pursued the course ascribed to him by Mr. Crawford in Mr. Monroe's cabinet; He did not call in question his acts or his motives. All he wanted to know, was the truth or falsehood of a single proposition; It required not five lines to answer the inquiry. It was only necessary for Mr. Calhoun to say, " did move and speak against you in Mr. Manrot's cabinet" or "ldid not." This was all the President asked. He asked from Mr. Calhoun no justification nor excuse; all he wanted was an isolated fact. How does Mr. Calhoun answer this inquiry? An honest, plain man would pronounce sentence against him from the mere length of his reply! It occupies nearly six columns in the Telegraph, and twelve pages in a large pamphlet! A correspondence which, necessarily, embraced only one short cuestionand a shorter answer, is made, by Mr. Calhoun, to cover nearly three . pages of the U. S. Telegraph, and fill a large pamphlet of fifty two pages! Is there not something suspicious in the very length of Mr. Calhoun's reply, and the accumulation of his documents? But the considerate reader will find this first impression confirmed by a perusal of the papers. Instead of a direct and frank yea or nay to the inquiry, he begins by denying his responsibility to the President for what passed in .Mr. Monroe's cabinet. Who said he was responsible? Kot the President, nor any one else. He does not intend, he says, to offer apologies or excuses for his conduct. Who asked him for apologies or excuses? Nobody. The President only asked what that conduct was ? He then affects not to understand the President; but supposes he means that they did not put the same construction upon his orders in the Seminole campaign, and that he has been guilty of some duplicity in that respect. The President's letter was a direct inquiry of Mr. Calhoun, whether his course had been hostile to him in Mr. Monroe's cabinet, as was represented. He did not ask how Mr, Calhoun understood his orders, nor whether they understood them alike. He only desired to know, whether be had been secretly hostile, while professedly and publicly his friend. But Mr. Calhoun, instead of nnswering directly, leads off into a long discussion about the orders

nnd the manner in which they were understood, poiuU which were not at all involved in the inquiry to which he was replying? After wasting several pages in this unnecessary discussion, he comes at length to his own course in the cabinet. Here again, instead of a direct answer he fills the better part of a page in softening the admission, that Mr. Crawford's statement is subtantially TRUE! He says to the President, was of the impression that you had exceeded your orders" ' came to the meeting of the cabinet under the impression that the usual course ought to be pursued in this case, which 1 SUPPORTED BY PRESENTING FULLY

AND FREELY ALL THE ARGUMENTS THAT OCCURRED TO ME." Here the charge, so far as the President is concerned, was admitted to be true . No room for controversy was left, except in relation to Mr. Calhoun's conduct towards gen. Jackson. The general says to him, in all your letters to me, you projessed to be my personal jriend, and approved entirely my conduct in relation to the Seminole campaign ." That the President was deceived, we have his positive declaration, supported by his conduct from the close of Seminole campaign, down to the present moment. In addition to private assurances, a letter from Washington was published in a Nashville paper, soon after the cabinet council, stating, that Mr. Crawford had moved his arrest in the cabinet, but that he was triumphantly defended by Mr. Calhoun and Mr. Adams. From the tone of Mr. Calhoun's own letters, and the letters of the President, gen. Jackson could entertain no doubt of this fact. So firmly was it impressed upon his mind that Mr. Calhoun had been his foremost advocate, that, on his way to VVashington, when his conduct was in question before Congrees,at a public dinner in Virginia, he toasted "John C. Calhoun" as " an honest man, the noblest work of God" He always supposed Mr. Crawford to be his only enemy in Mr. Monroe's cabinet, and openly gave vent to his feelings. All this Mr. Calhoun permitted in silence. After his confession he attempts to show that Mr. Crawford has given a false account of some minor incidents connected with this affair. That, Mr. Crawford and his friends will probably settle with him; but what if Mr. Crawford is mistaken on those points? Does it in the least affect Mr. Calhoun's conduct towards gen. Jackson? What if Mr. Crawford was not actuated, in disclosing this matter, by the motives he adduces; does that prove that Mr. Calhoun did hot make gen. Jackson believe he was his friend, when, in fact, he was secretly acting as his enemy? Or, if gen. Jackson's confidential letter to Mr. Monroe was not before the cabinet; does that prove Mr. Calhoun innocent of the charge the President makes against him? . Having led the reader an useless journey over these subjects, he begins to complain of the manner in which the truth has finally reached the President's ear! He is very curious to know the names of every body who has heard or said a word about it. Does he want somebody to attack for the purpose of leading off the public mind from an unbiassed view of his own conduct? The knowledge of names, he says, is important. Now, does he pretend that the persons whose names were withheld, knew any thing about his conduct in Mr. Monroe's cabinet, or his intercourse with gen. Jackson? Not at all. But he seems to think thev had some per sonal motive in bringing the truth to the knowledge of the President. If it were so, would it alter the fact? Would it at all extenuate his own conduct? But he has the names. In gen. Jackson's letter to Mr. Forsvth, dated 7th June, 1830, a copy of which was sent to him, and in gen. Jackson's letter to himself, dated 1 9th July, he is distinctly told, that the statement referred to in Mr. Crawford's letter, came from col. Hamilton, of New York. It cannot be otherwise understood, thau that this statement is a letter from Mr. Forsyth to col. Hamilton, which was referred to Mr. Crawford before it was submitted to the President. In his long letter he then proceeds to mention a letter written by Mr. Crawford to maj. Barry in 1823, urging him to use .his influence with the Kentucky electors not to vote for Mr. Calhoun. Now, what had this to do with the question? Does it show that Mr. Calhoun had not pursued a course of duplicity towards gen. Jackson from 1817 down to 1830. It only shows, what every body knew before, Mr. Crawford's hostility to him. Mr. Calhoun's part of this correspondence is singular enough. Instead of giving a direct answer to the President's inquiry, he throws in a pile of extraneous matter. He discusses his responsibility, gen. Jackson's orders, Mr. Crawford's veracity, the manner in which the President has at length

arrived at the truth, and many othar things, not tending to throw light on the subject, but to involve it in darkness. The plain old Soldier tells him, he has nothing to do with all this; that by his own admission of his conduct in Mr. Monroe's cabinet, he finds he has deceived him, and he wants to hear no more about it. And what apology does Mr. Calboun make for bringing all this mass of matter before the public? Why, he says his conduct in Mr. Monroe's cabinet has been called in question and misrepresented? Who has called that conduct in question? Not the President. He ha3 only called in question Mr. Calhoun's conduct towards himself. Mr. Calhoun is his own accuser before the public. He has called his own conduct in question before that tribuual. Pie is both accuser and defendant, and will have all the benefit of the verdict. Nor is the second reason given by him for this wanton publication a whit better. He insinuates, that the President had divulged the affair before his arrival in Washington last December, so that it had become a topic of conversation and discussion iu the newspaper?. Now, zee happen to know, that the President's enemies in the west were in possession of all the facts embraced in this correspondence, of the letters, if not of copies, last summer! The) did not derive their intelligence from the President or his friends at Washington. Moreover, it is well known, that soon after Mr. Calhoun's arrival here, the correspondence was by him, put into the hands of members of Congress for perusal, and that nightly meetings were held for reading and explaining. Mr. Calhoun's particular friends have, long since, in their private letters, as we well know, been attempting to make impressions abroad on this subject favorable to him and injurious to others. The allegation that it is not the "controversy of two individuals" but a matter between him and his constituent, is equally unavailing. He well knows, that no-body has called in question his official acts or motives. General Jackson has asked ivhat his acts were? He has not censured him for those acts. He only blames him for making him

believe that his acts were dillertnt. In addition to these reasons for bringing this matter before the public, Mr. Calhoun charges Andrezo Jackson ivith participation in a political intrigue to compass his destruction commencing as early as 1827! On what authority does he predicate this bold charge? On a letter from Mr. Crawford to Alfred Balch, Esq. of Nashville, dated 14th December, 1827, in reply to a letter from that gentleman suggesting the propriety of his making known publicly bis preference for General Jack son. Mr. Crawford declines a public expression of his opinion; but says, "the vote of the State of Georgia will, as certainly as that of Tennessee, be given to General Jackson, in opposition to Mr. Adams. J he only dimcultv that this State has upon that subject, is that if Jackson should be elected, Cal houn will come into power." And he closes the letter by saying, "If you can ascertain that Calhoun will not be ben efitted by Jackson's election, you will do him a benefit by communicating the information to me." This letter, it is alleged, was shown to general Jackson. Of this we doubt; but what if it were? Did he promise that Calhoun should not be benefitted by his election? It is not pretended. Did not theleltctoig of iennessee vote for Calhoun as Vice President? They did. Was he not supported by gen. Jackson's friends every where, except in Georgia! He was. Did not gen. Jackson friendship for him remain unimpaired until the vear 1829 when circumstances induced him to think he was mistaken in Mr. Calhoun's character? It did. Why, then, does Mr. Calhoun put this letter almost in the front his book, preceded by his own daik insinuations? As well might he charge Major Barry and all those to whom Mr. Crawford wrote with the view of defeating Mr. Calhoun's election, and all those to whom the letters were shown, with intriguing to produce his political destruction. This has the appearance of another effort to lead off the public mind and break the force of his own exposure. Lest too much should be said or tho'l about his own conduct towards gen. Jackson, he, perhaps, wishes to set the people to thinking and talking about something else. It was rumored, before the appearance of this publication, that it would not be an attai k on the President. But is impossible, we think, to view it in any other light. The President and Mr. Calhoun were directly at issue in a private correspondence. That issue the latter has carried before the public with the avowed object of seeking me verdict ol the people. II this be not an arraignment of the President at the bar of public opinion, it has no motive or meaning. Vc have treated it

as we understand it. It ii only to faras it effects the President that we feel any interest about it. Washington city Globe, Feb'y 19

PALLABflSJilL Iawrcnceburgli, march 12. We are indebted to Mr. Sam'l Morrison for an abstract statement of the census of this county, taken from the return of the assistant marshal; which we have thrown into form and present to our readers. The woman noticed in our last as missing, and supposed to be drowned, we are happy in saying has been found secreted in a corn house, about a mile from town, where she had lain 9 days. The privations she endured seem3 to have restored her reason, and she is in a fair way to regain her strength of body. The space occupied in our paper today by the circulars of Messrs. Boon Sz. Lane, precludes much other matter. These documents have an interest, aud to many of our readers will be quite as acceptable as any thing we could present them. Gen. James Noble, senator In congress from this stale, died in Washington city on the 26th ult. His funeral took place of the 2Cth, and was attended by the president, heads of departments, members of congress, Sec. arranged in regular order of procession. The following persons were elected at the late election officers in this township: H. W. Cloud, L. G. Elder, and T. Longley, constables; J . W. Hunter; supervisor; E.Jackson, J. S. Stevenson, and C. Roland, trustees; J. P. Dunn, treasurer; &. D. V. Culley, el'k. Dr- Ferris. It seem necessary that we should notice this gentleman's publication in our last paper, not from any nevt evidence he has adduced to extricate himself from the awkward position he occupies, but to demon, strate to the public that, however much he may pride himself on his tact of making- the worse appear the tetter.hehds rot the wroncw4. - o O ject to woik upon. There are some people in mis nine political world, who think tbemse.vet perfect, and so far above the level of common people, that it is almost a criminal offence to question their actions. The bare allusion that they have done wrong, sets them a squirming and floundering- about like the huntsman's stick, that was so crooked . that it wouldn't lie still. The notice we have already taken of the Doctor, has set him to turning-, when he will stop we 6hall not pretend to predict, lie delights in recounting the favors he has received from the people of Dearborn, and seems to think that these should shield him from the imputation of having proved recreant to their interest. But this is a slim covering- for imperfection. Arnold, the tube gallant defender of his country's liberty might, by a parity of argument, lay claim to our gratitude, for he, too, did his country much service in early life. We introduce this to show that a man's character cannot be fairly estimated until he has ceased to act. With this little exordium, we shall pass to the consideration of the Doctor's article oi tne otn. In answer to our question, he admits that he did say in the house that he was in favor of reducing Dearborn to 2 or 3 members ; but salves the matter over by saying- that he asked a corresponding reduction in the other counties. Wow, it appears "passing 6trange" that a man possessed of so much experience and political accumen, as Dr. Ferris, is supposed to be, should not discover that he was spending his breath to no purpose but the injury of his own county. The bill which passed the house, in opposition to his vote and protest, was sutncient evidence, we would suppose, to convince any man of common sense, that there was nothing to be gained by opposing the majority. Yet we have seen the Doctor, aided by a fewstraggling members, who, unlike him, had some reason to complain of the bill, take the field and gallantly assail the legislature for what? liecause they would, not be dictated by hirh. The Dector throws down the glove, and calls on the majority to throw ofF the iniquitous burden they are placing upon the people, and wrestle with him in the work refoim. They meet him, but it is only to compiy with his wishes so far as to relieve Dearborn of cue of her members, and give it to some county less deservinir. This, we ipnpat. was the practical effect of the Doctor's vote and protest. He appears to think it wonderful strange that he should have more influence in the legislature than Messrs. Pollock and Armstrong. ; We do not see any thing strange in it. The Doctor and his right-hand man, Mr. Dowden, could, and on many questions did, neutralize the vote of this eounty ; it was therefore nothing more than reasonable to exnect. that on a bill reriuirine" unitv of nrtinn. th A O J " - " ' 7 -" - interest of the countv would be nnsunnnrtpri. Divided amoner themselves, thev wer imahV to assist others, and therefore were neither courted nor dreaded. What if Messrs. Pol lock and Armstrong voted to give Dearborn 4 members? Messrs. Ferris and Dowden could destroy its influence, by throwing- their weight into the opposite scale. l he uoctor comments on our knowledrp of legislation, ana says tne senate's bill was not stricken out in the house, but only amended. We will readilv admit his sunerinr trnnwj.---. - i - .. ..... of the rules of the house, but fllll.it rrav. th liberty to say, that matters of form do not alter matters oi jact in our estimation the very thine: we wish to come at. v ram.n what difference it makes, whether the senate's bill was stricken out, or amended to resemble that of the house. The fact Wft Wish tn chmv is, did Dr. Ferris, after his vote and protest, against one bill, turn round and support another similar but more obiectionthlp. in its rm. visions? Mr- Pollock's letter. tor does not pretend to controvert, establishes this fact in audi a manner as to admit of no doubt. The Doctor refers to the forth coming journals, with no little complacency, to euitaio him. Has he forgotten the senatorial campaign of 1828? These memorials of offi cial conduct failed him then; and may we not, judging by the past, anticipate the same result in 1831? We make do threat, do promises, but merely throw out this hint,

without knowing whether tho Doctor will ta a candidate. We presume, however, that the same itching for office that has for year distinguished hiiu as a public man, will agt'm break out. Like the ghost of the murdered Baoquo, be is frequently vpt nor will ho daien, for friend or foe, until be is propitiated by a fat office Defeat only gives him greater zest for the pursuit. One more point in the Doctor's article and we shall dismiss him for the present. Ho endeavors to produce the belief that Dearborn is well provided for under the present law. Does the Doctor wish to add insult to duplicity? Do not the provisooa of the law show that some counties with 5 and 600 polls have a representative assigned them; while Dearborn, neglected and insulted Dearborn, with 2742 polls, has only 3 members allowed her in the lower bouse? It is also well known to the Doctor, that while Dearborn has a surplus over her senatorial ratio, other counties are allowed one with two thirds her number of polls. With these facts staring him in the face, it is vain to preach up that this county has her just weight assigned her in the law that has passed.

3IAItlSIEDOa the lOfb inst. by the Rev. Mr. Scovel, Miss JJilIiClt Hertford to Mr. JTured lcr rival all of this place. Land for Sale. Y virtue of a decree of the Dearborn cir cuit court, will be offered for sale at tho court house door, on the 9lU of Jiprll hex?, between 10 and 11 o'clock on said day, ia the town of Lawrenceburgh, Indiana, to tho highest bidder for cash in hand, ail that certain tract of land situate on the Ohio river, cbout five miles below Lawrenceburg, in tho county of Dearborn, bounded as follows, ba gining at the lower line of fractional section; number 4, town 4, range one west, wbere tho same strikes tbe Ohio river, thence with said line to the south west corner of said section, two hundredand ninety seven poles, tbeoco with tbe west side of said fraction to the dasision line between Horsley and Swing, ae agreed upon and Surveyed by Jesse L. Hoiman, thence with the said division line north, seventy five degrees east, one hundred and fifty-seven poles to the Ohio river, theoco down the same to tEe place of beginning; containing one hundred and twenty three acrea and ninety three and one balf poles, being the lower part of said fractional section. JOHN M'PIKE, ) JOHN WEAVER, 1 JOHN SPENCER, S ? January 21, 1831. S-w3 Regimental Order. 55th Regiment of Indiana Militia; . Lawrenceburgh, Feb'y 26, 1831.5 COMMANDANTS of companies will muster their companies agreeably to law in tbe months of April, May and October; 1831. Those belonging to tbe 1st battalion; at Oliver HeusnVa on the SOth of May, to' perform battalion duty. Those belonging to tbe 2d battalion, at the public square in tho town of Lawrenceburgh, on the 31st of May; to perform battalion duty. Those, belonging to the 55th regiment tvilt meet at Jacob Dils's, on the 26th day of October, to be mustered, reviewed aud inspect ed. By order of the brigadier general. Those whose duty it is to perform regimental drill, will meet at Jacob Dils's on tbe 2d. and Sd days of September. The court of assessment of fines, will bo beld at the same place oq the 1st Monday in November, 1831 Court of Appeals samo place, on the 1st Monday in December, 1831; In consequence of (be court of appeals for 1330 having neglected or failed to meet and hold said court at tbe time pointed out by law, all concerned are hereby notified and direct ed to meet at the said Di.V. oo the 1st Menday in December next. Tbe field officers, captains and commandants of companies, are hereby directed to meet at the house of Jacob Dils, on the 19 h day of March next, to alter company bounds, set off new companies, attsch light companies, and to perform all other business necessary to be done. By order of JOHN SPENCER, Col. Comsdt55lb R. I. M. on the Ohio fc Eric canal. THE subscriber (residing at Portsmouth, on the Ohio, 115 miles above Cincinnati,) wishes to employ a large number of laboring hands, to whom be will give good wages and constant employment during the season. He also wishes to engage 25 OR 20 TSA3MSTERS for the season, to whom he will give $33 per month, and hoard. In all cases it is expected that bands engaging for the season, either as teamsters cr caramon laborers, will faithfully fulfil their engagements to entitle them to tbe highest rate of wage. LEMUEL MOSS. March 5, 1631 9 tf. Idministrator's JYoticei ALL persons indebted to tho estate of ELEJjXOR IIIGGIJVS, deceased, Kite of Craig township, Switzerland county, la. are requested to make immediate payment; and all persons having claim agatcst the same will present tbem for examination. 8CT The estate is solvent. JOHN HIOGINS, Administrator. Printer's Retreat, March 8, IS31. 10-S IVoticc to Trustees The Trustees of Lawrenceborgh township are requested to meet at tbe office of J. W Hunter, esq cn Wednesday celt, at 10 o'clock a. m. to transact township business. March 1 2. D. V. CULLEY, cTk.