der secret orders from the Government, to take cautiously avoided an exposition of any thing the posts in any event, and under any circum-which could be deemed confidential or private. stances, whether the facts existed to justify the I had also earnestly desired not to conact or not. That Mr. Monroe and himself had nect it in the least with the names of individuals, entered into a "private understanding," to who are not in any degree responsible for my seize the military posts of a country at peace acts, and with whose feelings and opinions in with the United States, whether just cause ex-reference to any other subject, than that of our isted or not? The facts under which they were immediate inquiry, I have nothing to do. You taken, in my opinion, fully justified the act, have, I think, ungenerously introduced the but they could only be known to the command-name of Mr. Calhoun; but as you have openly ing General. He needed no "secret orders," charged him before me, with at least some acts no "private understanding," to do what he of which I know him to be innocent, justice to did. The transcending of his orders was a dis- both you and myself, compels me to say so. tinguished point of his merit. Admit that he Inferring then, as you do, that there is a conhad "secret orders," or a "private understand. flict between the public and private views of ing," and you open a field for remark, which 1 Mr. Monroe, which I take occasion here merely to have scarcely entered. deny, and which I may take occasion hereafter You will, I think, bave inferred, that whether at large to refute; you say "the guilt belongs to you speak of the "secret orders of the Go-those who furnished Mr. Calhoun with a private vernment" or allude to "private instructions and confidential correspondence, as well as given through a friend to the Commanding Mr. Calhoun himself, who violated the most General," or "a private understanding blending sacred principles of honor in giving it publi itself with the public orders, and constituting city." If there be any thing so horrible in in fact a secret order," I deem them equally that view of the subject, which, if necessary, I objectionable. Your explanation is no doubt am well prepared to meet, Mr. Calhoun ought intended as a modification of the remarks, to not to be charged with it. It was the act of which I referred you. From it, in either shape, Mr. Monroe himself—and he alone ought to be as I conceive, all the consequences to which responsible for it. Living, he never would advert must flow; and to it all that I have said have shielded himself, if called upon, by suffer. may be as readily applied. In this state of ing another to be openly charged with that the case," you ask me how I can make it ap-which he himself had done. His representapear that the article in the Globe is an attack tives only claim to defend him, on the same on the purity and honor of Mr. Monroe? You principles of honor, upon which he would have siy, "I force the conclusion." Possibly I do: defended himself. He not on y furnished Mr. I think others need not. It is the inference-1 Calhoun, but he expressly authorized him to repeat, it is the inference, from all this, which publish them. There was no violation of I can never admit-and it is the fact you assert, honor, and when all the facts are known, it which I continue to deny. will be clearly shown. Being in possession of But you say," that I have no right to con-his reasons in writing for that act, I should feel sider you the originator of the statement con- no reluctance in submitting them to you. From tained in the article of the Globe, nor to im- the candid manner in which they are expressed, pute to you the inferences which I have drawn if they do not change your views of the act, I from it to the advantage of Mr. Moorne," be-think they cannot fail to convince you that his cause you add, “I expressly say, that "a de- motives were good, and that no injustice to any claration of the same fact was made by an ho- one was intended. If I do not greatly miscon norable Senator in his place, which did not es ceive them, the warmest advocate of any incape my notice, but which nevertheless I did terest in this question, could not object to not think fit to contradict." This of itself you them. It is proper that I should add, that of say would be sufficient authority for the remark their existence, Mr. Calhoun is as uninformed of the Globe. Perhaps it might, if it were as yourself. true-but here your error is too palpable to admit of a doubt--or for a moment to escape detection What did I say?" a declaration made by an honorable Senator, &c. &c."

But you say that there is another circumstance much inore decisive, and refer me to a certain letter, written by a certain individual, calling the attention of Mr. Monroe to the fact Do you not perceive the difference, and that alluded to; and from the pointed manner in by the insertion of four little words, "of the which you mark the fact, which you assume same fact" which I did not say, that you reach to be true-that it is without contradiction, you a conclusion which is utterly without support? seem to infer, that because it is without conIt was precisely because the declaration of the tradiction, it may be made to sustain your poHon. Senator was not of the same fact, which sition. Retaining the strong desire, to which formed a principal reason for not addressing I have adverted, not to refer, unless it becomes myself to him, although the declaration did my duty so to do, to any thing private, I still not escape my notice." It was because it was owe to you a candid reply to the remark which not susceptible of the clear inferences of which you have made. There is no shape in which your's was, that it was thought proper by me the fact alluded to has not ever reached the to address myself to you. eye or ear, of Mr. Monroe, that it has not been You will do me the justice to remark, that contradicted. It is as his representative, and upin all the discussions on this subject, I have on his authority, that I contradict it, and that

you may at least do some justice to my motives and views, I do not hesitate to add, it is under circumstances of a sacred duty that I do contradict it. I have every personal motive to be silent-I am bound to speak.

the public in any shape, I would promptly deny it in his name."

Since Mr. Gouverneur's letter has come to hand, we have conversed with an intimate and confidential friend of the late President Mon On one point we fully agree, that it is "to roe, who was with him at the time of his death, the invasion of confidential relations" that this and has seen and read Gen. Jackson's letter to question must be traced. But, pardon me, Mr. Monroe, and also that of Johnny Rhes, speaking that which I honestly bel.eve, it is which Mr. Monroe deemed it his duty in such not on the part of Mr. Calhoun. I trace it to an emphatic manner to pronounce "utterly certain precious confessions, of that which ne- false;" and we learn that it is completely in ver existed but in the imagination of the author; the power of Mr. Monroe's representative to and to the annunciation of a sudden conversa-prove that Johnny Rhea's statement is "uttertion, which can be proved to have been as un- ly false." founded then, as it is now insincere What you or I may think or say, will hereafter be very unimportant. Truth will prevail and when the period for unmasking arrives, if it do not exhi bit singular groups, I will at least acknowledge that all my anticipations have not been realized.

With great respect,

Your obedient servan',

We can readily suppose that, chiefly solicitous for the fame and character of Mr. Monroe, Mr. Gouverneur was anxious to satisfy General Jackson that the charge, if persisted in, could and would be successfully repelled, and that knowing the influence which the patronage of the Government brings to bear on its pensioned presses, he was solicitous to preventa question, so deeply involving his feelings, and the fame and charac ter of the departed statesman, from becoining the subject of party discussion. But he should have known that Andrew Jackson is not the GEN. JACKSON'S CONSPIRACY AGAINST conflict with which he wished to avoid, was enman to falter in his course; that the power, a MR. MONROE'S CHARACTER. trenching itself daily deeper and deeper in corWe lay before our readers interesting ex-ruption. That Gen. Jackson was busily engaged tracts from the New York Standard and the Globe, casting more light on this conspiracy, for such it will in the end be seen to be.

SAM'L L. GOUVERNEUR,

New York, July 3d, 1822.

The refusal of the Standard to publish the correspondence, and the desire of the Globe to prevent its agitation at this time as "a theme for partisan discussion," are admissions that the facts and the arguments are conclusive against General Jackson.

But the reader will be struck with the fact, now for the first time admitted, that Johnny Rhea did write a letter to "Mr. Monroe immediately before his death, attempting to induce some admissions, or to be the instrument of future inferences in respect to the events of the Seminole war." That "it excited his strongest indignation," and that "in such manner as he thought due to himself, he made his soJemn declaration at the most interesting pdriod of his life, THAT IT WAS UTTERLY FALSE."

Yet, we are now told by the Globe that, "as to the communication of Mr. Rhea to General Jackson, which the latter construed into confidential instructions as to the mode of conducting the Florida campaign, the fact of its reception by the General, has (as the editor believes) never been disputed. Whenever the President's veracity upon that point is questioned, by any individual worthy of consideration, we imagine that proof will be adduced that will put it beyomp controversy."

66

It will be seen that Mr. Gouverneur says, that Mr. MONROE declared the statement, in Johnny Rhea's letter to be utterly false," and proceeds: "He confided his papers to me, and gave him my pledge on his own requisition that whenever the matter should be brought before

in preparing materials to establish, as truth, that which Mr. Monroe had so solemnly declared to be "utterly false." And he should have remembered that a delay on his part is not only pregnant with deep suspicions as to himself, but may be deeply prejudicial to the fame of Mr. Monroe. Already is he told by the Globe, that he should have joined in the issue with Johany Rhea in his life time, and what will be said if he procrastinates a full defence of Mr. Monroe's character until after General Jackson's death!! Will it not be said, this issue should have been made in General Jackson's life time " And should the sacred duty be postponed until then, it will be impossible for Mr. Gouverneur to escape the imputation of having faltered be cause General Jackson held the power of punishing him for the faithful discharge of the solemn duty, imposed upon him by Mr. Monroe.

We learn that Johnny Rhea's letter repre sents that he did, at the request of Mr. Monroe, make a communicat.on to General Jackson, and that he afterwards, at Mr. Monroe's request, prevailed upon Gen. Jackson to destroy the letter making that communication. We learn, too, that General Jackson has the affidavit of one of his old Tennessee witnesses to sustain Johnny Rhea's statement. This is, no doubt, the proof to which the Globe refers; but we are satisfied that Mr. Gouverneur will be able to convince the public that this statement, as well as that of Johnny Rhea, is utterly untrue. We ask for light.

FROM THE NEW I HK STANDARD.

Mr. Gouverneur called upon us yesterday, and stated that he did not authorise Webb to say thit the correspondence was left with us (J.

W. Webb.) because the Jackson organs dared ceased friend? Will you look at my first letnot insert it," and Mr. Gouverneur released us ter to Mr. Blair, and at his reply? Will you from our promise to publish it. We shall not, read my second, and say whether its language therefore, insert it to-day, if ever. Our future or its tone exceeds the bounds of propriety, or course will be governed by future events. Let the restraints of a moderate but firm remon Webb get on with his "because" as he does strance against injury suggested? Will you with his cause. We insert Mr. Gouverneur's hear me declare that I stated to him in person letter to us with the simple remark, that our o- all the facts and particularly the promise which pinion is unaltered as to the necessity for the I stood pledged to redeem? Will you then immediate publication of the correspondence. read his article of the 22d instant, and say that We do not feel bound to hunt up the articles it contained that which was due to the occa in the Globe and Telegraph, none of which sion, or ought to have been satisfactory to me. have been read by us, and we stated this last But, Sir, even here I would have paused. fact to Mr. Gouverneur, both on Friday and yes- The motives which you told me would be imterday. As we know nothing of the merits of puted, were carefully appreciated at the time; the controversy, but what the correspondence I had contradicted the assertion to the face of discloses, except so far as we are informed by the man who made it, and then under all the Mr. Gouverneur's introductory remarks in yes- peculiar circumstances of my case, perhaps I terday's Courier, and Webb's comments, we might have safely stood as I did. I would have choose for the present to let the matter rest, done so, but when I had ascertained beyond a having enough to attend to in which we, if not doubt that all my communications to Mr. Blair the public, are more immediately interested. had been submitted to others, and the article It cannot be expected that we shall be drawn in question was unsatisfactory in itself, and in into a controversy by answering the questions italics reiterating the very substance of the origiof Mr. Gouverneur. We will not be. Theynal charge, was written under their immediate who are curious to read the correspondence can see it in yesterday's Courier.

JOHN I. MUMFORD, E-q.

Editor of the Standard.

SIR: There is only one remark in your paper of this morning to which I think it proper to reply. What passed between us, at any time, inust be destitute of interest to others. As you have chosen, however, to state a fact which it was not my wish to be made public, you may take the responsibility of the reply I shall make to it. I invite no injurious imputations; but I will, at all hazards, repel any

You say that I told you I had reasons for my conduct which were unknown to you, and did not wish to disclose. As you have chosen publicly to allude to them, they shall be frank. ly stated.

dictation-I thought it time to reflect upon the position, in which, single handed as I was, I might hereafter be placed. The charge assuming some character of an Indian fight. It was prudent for me to show myself fairly in the open field. I have done so. I have done it in a spirit of the most respectful consideration for every claim which ought to have been respect

ed.

But, Sir, as motives are the question, I must give you more. In the meantime, the editor of the Telegraph, taking advantage of the guarded and equivocal paragraph, contained in the Globe, makes a most unmerited and unworthy attack upon me, full of insinuations of the most degrading character. To suppose that I could have most remotely countenanced such an attempts the worst of injustice. But, Sir, there is another fact. On the appearance Mr. Blair is correct in his supposition, that a of that article, and in my absence from the city, letter was written by an individual to Mr. Mona near relative of Mr. Monroe assumed the re roe, immediately before his death, attempting posibility to pledge himself that I would reto induce some admissions, or to be the instru- ply to the article on my return, or that he ment of future inferences in respect to the would do it himself. My trust could not be events of the Seminole war. It excited his delegated with honor--and I could no longer strongest indignation, and in such manner as he hesitate to act.

thought due to himself, he made his solemn But, Sir, as you are so sensitive to the time, declaration, at the most interesting period of at which I have thought proper to defend the his life, that it was utterly fal-e. He confided character of Mr. Monroe, what do you think the papers to me, and I gave him my pledge on his own requisition, that whenever the matter should be brought before the public in any shape, that I would promptly deny it in his name. Mr. Blair and others not only brought the matter frequently before the public by allusions, but finally, in his paper of the 9th of June, made the very declaration in substance. Of the manner in which it was met the public are already possessed.

of the time at which others have thought proper to as ail it. Did they not know that the Presidential election was at hand, when they connected his character with their discussions, and were they to do it at pleasure, while we were to be prudently silent. If it is imprudent to defend the character of Mr. Monroe, on the eve of a Presidential election, is it right, is it just-is it honorable, for others to assail it, at such a season, and make that a pretext why

Now, Sir, I ask of you, on this simple state-reply should not be given to their charges? ment of facts, what would you conceive to be SAMUEL L. GOUVERNEUR. the duty of an honest representative of a de

New York, Oct, 1, 1832.

FROM THE WASHINTON GLOBE.

Mr. Gouverner's correspondence with the Edi tor of the Globe.

difficulty by showing, from his own message, that his son-in-law, Mr. Gouveneur, had mistaken his views of the transaction; and Mr. Gou

We publish the correspondence for no other verneur, as will be seen from his letter, admits, object than to correct the very singlar mistake that in saying that Mr. Monroe "disapproved" which appears in it, as published in the Cou-of Gen. Jackson's acts in Florida, he is made rier and Enquirer. to signify "more than he intended." How i

The fact stated in the Globe, that Mr. Mon- our manner of quoting the remarks changes the roe had given secret orders authorizing Gen. signification, we leave to the public to decide. Jackson's course in Florida, is seized on by He expressly, in his first letter, points to the Mr. Gouverneur as involving Mr. Monroe's acts of the General in Florida, as "THE FEET character-because, he says, it would fasten ACTS WHICH HE (Mr. Monroe) AFTERWARDS BIS“evasion and duplicity" on Mr. Monroe, who APPROVED." We beg the reader to consider had "disavowed before the world his (Gen. the declaration in conjunction with the whole Jackson's) conduct in Florida," and would context, the meaning of which we are said to show that he had "privately encouraged and have altered, by having separated from the promoted the very acts which he afterwards that purpose, and we must confess, that of Mr. context. We have marked it in capitals for disapproved." Our whole auswer to this attempt to make our article a crimination of Mr. Gouveneur does not mean to say that Mr. MonMonroe, consists in a direct denial of the facto not only "disavowed," but "disapproved" the General's conduct, we are incapable of as stated by Mr. Gouveneur And we prove, conclusively, by quoting Mr. Monroe's message reading the English language. to Congress, that he has "NOT DISAVOWED BEFORE THE WORLD HIS (the General's) CONDUCT IN FLORIDA," but expressly declares, he "AUTHORIZED MAJOR GENERAL JACKSON TO ENTER

We, however, dismiss this subject. If Mr. theme for partisan discussion, it shall not be Monroe's character and conduct is made a our fault. We refused to enter into a controFLORIDA," and further, we prove by the same very on this subject, in a private corresponmessage, that so far from having "AFTERWAGDS dence, and will not be drawn in to make a pubDISAPPROVED" his acts when in Florida, Mr. lic controversy about it.

Monroe expressly maintained before Congress,

that they were justifiable." But the whole THE POWER OF THE FEDERAL PÅweight of this proof is lost by the substitution

of Mr. Calhoun's name in the place of Mr.JMon

TRONAGE.

roe's, in the correspondence. Where we say We lay before our readers to-day two inte"after the termination of the campaign, Mr. resting documents, which, as connected with MONROE, speaking of his orders to Gen. Jack-the topics now agitated by the Van Buren pres son, " &c. &c., the Courier and Enquirer makes ses, deserve their serious attention. it read "after the termination of the campaign Amos Kendall, in a series of articles, in which Mr. CALHOUN, speaking of his orders," he assails the Bank of the United States, har &c. &c. We do not think that the mistake labored to prove that tha institution is danger exists in the letter sent to Mr. Gouverneur. ous to the liberties of this country, because it It does not, in the copy we have retained. has loaned certain specified sums of money to

With regard to the question which is now to editors of newspapers, and to members of Con be made, it seems, between Mr. Monroe's re-gress. It is not pretended that the sums the presentative and the late venerable John Rhea, loaned by the bank will not be repaid. 1 for a long time a member of Congress, we have deed, so far as relates to the loan to Webb & nothing to say, except that we think it should Noah, which is cited as the strongest case of have been made in Mr. Rhea's life time. As to corruption against the bank, it is admitted, that the communication of Mr. Rhea to Gen. Jack the whole debt has been repaid, which is the son, which the latter construed into confiden-clearest proof that could be adduced of the soitial instructions as to the mode of conducting vency of the borrowers. We ask the reader, the Florida campaign, the fact of its recep- then, to examine the bearing of this charge, tion by the General, we believe has never and to test the administration by the principle been disputed. Whenever the President's ve- which is urged by its press against the bank. racity upon that point is questioned, by any By looking over these documents, it will be individual worthy of consideration, we ima-seen that there are in the State of New York, gine that proof will be adduced which will put it beyond controversy.

So far as Mr. Monroe's character is concerned, the public will have observed that we have studiously avoided making any inference to its disparagement. Mr. Gouverneur, by stating that he "disavowed" and "afterwards disapproved" the General's conduct in Florida, was enabled to draw inferences bringing his re. putation in conflict with the remark in the Globe, in which (by the bye) he was not nam ed. We disentangled Mr. Monroe from this

one thousand four hundred and ninety-one Postmasters, whose annual receipts are $312,018 93, and that in the city of New York alone there are two hundred and forty-five persons attached to the custom-house, whose salaries amount to the annual sum of $269,177 84. If we multiply the sum received by the Postmasters by four, it will be found that the sum received by them during Gen. Jackson's first term, will be $1,248,07572 If to this we add his second and Mr. Van Buren's two terms, we have the enormous sum of $4,992,30% 88: which the Post Office Depart

ment alone throws into Mr. Van Buren's scale. States for the purpose of transferring their votes For, although the Postmasters receive but a to Martin Van Buren! These sums added tocommission, the whole is disbursed by the De-gether, are equal to $777,500, which is the inpartment, and the disbursement goes to swell terest on the sum of $12,051,500, with this the number of partisans enlisted through its remarkable difference: that in the case of the bank the borrower is required to repay the

agency.

If we apply the same rule to the custom- principal and interest, in the case of the officehouse, we find that there are in New York two holders he refunds neither principal or interest! hundred and forty-five persons, whose salaries, But we are told, that the Government must in sixteen years, will amount to the sum of have officers, and should pay them. We grant $4,306,845; that there are in Boston, sixty-this-so must the bank have borrowers. Coreight persons, whose salaries will amount to ruption, therefore, does not necessarily attach $1,243,649; that there are in Philadelphia, se- either to the bank or the Government. That venty-four persons, whose salaries will amount depends upon the abuse of the powers necessary to $1,235,490; and in Baltimore, thirty-six of each. If the bank lend its funds for the purpersons, whose salaries will be $655,181. pose of buying up partisans to insolvent perNow, in the case of the bank, the principal sons, it must sacrifice the interest of the stockand interest is to be repaid, and that the bank holders, and that would be corruption. But no confers no obligation by lending money which is such case is alleged, even by Amos Kendall. well secured, appears from the fact, that it Now, how is it as to the patronage of the Go. lends to its enemies as well as its friends. But vernment: the whole of it is carried into the in the case of the officeholders, they put the political market as so much capital in trade, whole sum into their pockets, and not a cent is and openly vended in exchange for votes in fato be returned to the Government. If there be vor of the President's favorite!! Is not this corruption in either case, which is the most most profligate corruption, and are not the fact powerful engine? The bank or the Presi- and the enormity of the evil sufficient cause to dent? alarm the citizens of this country?

Will we stop by the way to prate about a petty bank accommodation to a printer which has been paid, or put it in comparison with corruption like this!

The business of the bank is to lend money; it was instituted for that purpose; and unless it can be made appear that there was gross partiality or corrupt motives, there is nothing in the fact of lending money that should impeach As to Webb and Noah, our opinion of them the institution. On the other hand, the offices has undergone no change. But it is clear that, of the country were instituted for the public if Webb is corrupt, Noah is equally so. Noah, good, and should be filled with men who are however, supports the re-election of General devoted to the public interests. Mr. Marcy Jackson, he adheres to Martin Van Buren, has declared public offices to be "spoils," be- and he not only escapes censure, but he is relonging to the victor party in politics, and this warded with an office worth four thousand doladministration has practised on the princip e. lars per annum, and is complimented as a paIt would be wrong in the bank to deny accom-triot-while his partner is denounced and huntmodations to any but its political friends, and it is ed down as the corrupt and bribed advocate of certainly more wrong for the President to be- the bank. How is this?

stow his patronage exclusively on the partisans But this is not all. When General Jackson of a particular personal favorite. Yet, such is came into power, he established rules by which the fact, and it cannot be denied. The immense all persons in the employment of the Governsum of $312,018 disbursed annually through the ment, who had taken an active part in the elec Post Office Department in the State of New tions, were to be removed from office. The York, and the sums of $269,177 disbursed in impropriety of bringing the patronage of the salaries to agents of the treasury in the city of Government to bear upon the freedom of elecNew York; and the sum of $195,895 annually tions, was a principle which his friends and the disbursed in salaries to like agents in Boston, people recognised; but what has he done? Philadelphia, and Baltimore, are in the charac- Instead of reforming the abuse, he has put out ter of so much money annually paid in those one set of active electioneering agents to put in another!! Is this reform!!

Mr. Marcy, one of the Senators from New

Did not the editor of the Globe go on to New York, in the course of the debate on the nomi-York, and levy six thousand dollars on the ofnation of Mr. Van Buren, said, ficeholders in the cities of Baltimore, Philadel

"But it may be, Sir, that the politicians of phia, and New York? Are not the officers of New York are not so particular as some gentle-the Government in those cities the owners and men are, as to disclosing the principles on which conductors of newspapers devoted to his rethey act. They boldly preach what they prae- election? Are not the officeholders in the large tice. When they are contending for victory, cities required to contribute a per centum on they avow their intention of enjoying the fruits their salaries to party purposes? And yet, of it. If they are defeated, they expect to retire from office. If they are successful, they claim, as a matter of right, the advantages of success. They see nothing wrong in the rule that to the victor belong the spoilt of the enemy

The fact was proved in the Wiscasset case, and the editor of the New York Courier and Enquirer, who is intimately acquainted with the arrangements of the party, says