amin me generil of the The letter was worn by United States 18-19, to his friend Jom Jalter, of Rehmend. Virginia, and of Chatham in Safort Councy, the Rappahannock opposite Fredericksburg Fredericksburg in Coulter, who had been a judge of the general court of Virginia from 1800 to 1311, was from 1811 to 1991 a jodge of the supreme court of appeals. He had married a half-sister of John Randolph of Roanoke, a daughter of Judge St. George Tacker. The original letter is the property of Miss Nina Grinnan, of Madison County, Virginia, a descendant of Judge Coalter. Miss Grinnan gave permission to President Charles William Dabney, of the University of Cincinnati, to copy and publish it, and by his kind favor it appears here. To Mr. John Coaiter of WASHINGTON, Oct. 25. 1819 Crow my word this is a bright as well as a bold thought—and were it not for the very near approach of congress, to whom the question of 1 Congress was to meet December 6. peace or war properly belongs, I believe it would be quite as well to right ourselves, by the short cut you propose. I believe that Virgil's coalt turned loose, at the close of a long winter, into a rich meadow, would not enjoy the luxuriant frolic more than Jackson would, to be turned loose into the Spanish Provinces, Cuba included. What antics, what tantarums, what didos would be cut-stand clear all ye Arbuthnots and Anbristers,2 and all ye Seminolean and Spanish chiefs-for the devil is to play among the tailors. Suppose you drop this hint to congress, either through the members whom you know, or through the papers. I think it would be well worth their while to enquire whether the temporary occupation of the Texas, as far as the Colorado, would not be expedient, considering the inability of Spain to hold it, even against intruders, for the purpose of meeting the final decree of the court-and then when we have it (and Florida, for the same reason, viz. it's protection for the right owner) we may, after the example of Spain, go on to negociate at our ease. But I am against the example of the French republic-no fraternal hugs by force-it does not suit the genius of our government. Justice, forbearance, generosity, moderation and magnanimity are the characteristics with which we ought to seek to cloathe our nation-all these, however, are perfectly compatible with the cool and firm assertion of our rights-and although Spain, from her imbecility, would be an object of pity, if her ludicrous arrogance did not make her one of contempt, yet I think we have humored her childish and wayward caprices long enough-and I would take her play-things from her, 'till she came to her sober senses and to a sense of justice toward us. The truth of the matter is that all these provinces must fall off from Spain, in a very few years, whether we take them or not. The parent trunk is rotten, and can no longer sustain such extensive and ponderous branches. The date of knock [?] is out" and "off must drop the sympathetic snout" not that the analogy is precise in this case-for it is not by sympathetic decay that the provinces will fall-but by the weight of their luxuriance and by the disposition of Spain to repress and circumscribe their growth and to trim them into a senile subjection to her whims. I believe that every man who observes what is going on, is satisfied that all that tissue of provinces down to the isthmus will be inde'pendent in a few years. Now tell me what will be the consequence of their seperate independence, each for itself, or their forming themselves into one or several confederations. Would it be better for us, for our peace, that they should hold this seperate existence, or that they should be incorporated with us. If in the infant state the stronger powers of Europe shd. make a run at them, supposing them to continue seperate, what should be our course? Should we aid them? If we should what would be the consequences-Russia being, as she certainly would, among the ambitious invaders, for she has indicated already a strong hankering after our coast on the Pacific-only observe with what great events this movement of the Spanish colonies is pregnant-pray how far can you see into the womb of time? I think (as at present advised) that it wd. have a good effect on the powers of Europe, to make these provinces a part of ourselves as fast as it can be constitutionally done-for I don't think that either of them (the powers of Europe) would be very forward, to seek a quarrel with us, wantonly. I think that less than half 2 See J. S. Bassett, Life of Andrew Jackson, pp. 254-258. a century will find the U. S. at the Stony Mountains and powerful enough to cope, in a defensive war, with the combined world. How hard is it upon us, that we cannot live to see these things-but we can look from Mount Pisgah, with Moses, upon this promised land. Pray indulge the cabinet with some of your prescience on these subjects, with a sketch of the policy which you think they ought to pursue. Are you satisfied that our title to Texas is clear? If it be, tho' a nation as well as a man may (perhaps) have a right to take it's own property, whenever and wherever, it can do so, without a breach of the peace, can it do so, per force, without creating that state of things which is called war—and if so, can the Presidt. of the U. S. produce that state of things, without invading the powers of congress?-as these questions stand immediately connected with your present advice, the cabinet would thank you for your opinion. Can the President do more than to recommend your measure to congress? I suppose it will be impossible to mark out, in advance, any general course of policy which it would be certainly proper to pursue in relation to these colonies. Each emergency must be met as it arises, and under it's own circumstances-which will vary infinitely, and produce a different course, in one case, from what it will be proper to adopt in another-sufficient to the day is the evil thereof, says laziness-what says political prophecy? Where is my friend Judge Tucker. I hope I do not mistake in calling him still my friend, altho' I confess I have not deserved it, if I am to be judged only by the number of letters I have written him—but if I am so to be judged, I am not worthy of the friendship of any man or woman (except my wife) since there is no one to whom I have not given apparent cause of displeasure on this head. But, indeed and in truth, I have so much writing to do, by force, that I am glad enough to rest when I can and I ask from my friends no other indulgence than I am willing to extend to them-which is the consummation of gospel morality, so far as concerns our earthly relations. Has Mr. Tucker seen Walsh's new book called "An Appeal from the judgments of G. Britain, respecting the U. S. A.?" If he has not, I hope he will see it, for if I mistake not he will be much gratified by it. It contains a good deal of curious, antiquarian research into our history; and, with much truth and a good deal of address, “rolls back the torrent of British calumny on it's source". I would send the book to him, but that I infer from a late enquirer that it has reached your city. . . . So then we are not to see you and your new coat, at last for as you have not come while Henry Tucker was in congress and furnished you a good excuse, I take it for granted you will not come, now. You are a shabby fellow. But suppose you come on this winter and hear the interesting debate to which our affairs with Spain will no doubt give rise― 3 St. George Tucker (1752-1827), stepfather of John Randolph of Roanoke, and father-in-law of Judge Coalter. He was a judge of the general court of Virginia from 1788 to 1804, and of the supreme court of appeals of that state from 1804 to 1811. From 1813 to 1825 he was judge of the United States district court for the eastern district of Virginia. 4 By Robert Walsh (Philadelphia, 1819); see McMaster, History, V. 326–337. 5 Henry St. George Tucker (1780-1848), son of Judge St. George Tucker, and brother-in-law of Judge Coalter. He had been a member of the House of Representatives from Virginia, 1815-1819. besides they will stand in need of you to set them to rights-if you come, come on straight to my house where you shall find a bed ready for you and such a welcome as, mutatis mutandis, you would give to me—which I own is a bould word. Suppose you come on and meet Dabney Carr, here? for here he will be the winter. I wish I could suggest some motive to bring you on-for I am sure it would contribute to your amusement as well as to our happiness. Mrs. W. and L. unite with me in love to you and yours. THE following letter, for which we are indebted to Professor Herbert D. Foster, of Dartmouth College, presents several points of interest. The tariff bill reported by Verplanck in the House of Representatives on December 27, 1832, in order to avert conflict with South Carolina in view of the ordinance of nullification passed by her state convention on November 24, had been debated at intervals ever since, with varying fortunes. President Jackson had followed his proclamation of December 10 with a message to Congress on January 16, 1833, reviewing the progress of events in South Carolina, and asking for additional legislation to enforce the revenue laws. Three days after the date of this letter, January 21, Senator Wilkins reported his bill to enforce the collection of the revenue, passed February 20.1 Of particular significance, in view of the later criticism of Webster for his courtesy to the dying Calhoun in the Seventh of March speech of 1850 "On the Constitution and the Union", is the expression of that kindly personal feeling which Webster always preserved 6 Dabney Carr the younger (1773-1837), nephew of Jefferson (see Jefferson's letter to him in Writings, ed. Ford, X. 15), was one of the chancellors of Virginia from 1811 to 1824, and a judge of the supreme court of appeals from 1824 to 1837. He was Wirt's most intimate friend, to whom many of the letters in Kennedy's biography of Wirt are addressed. 7 Laura, Wirt's eldest daughter, born in 1803. In 1826 she married Thomas Randall of Annapolis; she died in 1833. 8 Frances Leila Coalter, the judge's eldest daughter, born in 1803, died in 1821. 1 Supported by Webster. Writings and Speeches, "National Edition" (1903), XIV. 152 ff. toward Calhoun even when most strongly opposed to his political The letter was written to Webster's intimate friend. Stephen White, merchant and member of the Massachusetts senate. He was a nephew of Captain Joseph White, of Salem, whose murderers Webster helped in a famous case to prosecute. The letter was given by White or his family to Mr. Marcus Cormerais, father of Mrs. Alfred E. Wyman, of Newtonville, Massachusetts, who presented it to Dartmouth College. My Dear Sir WASHINGTON Friday Eve' I have read your letter of Monday, 14th. and am glad to hear there is a probability of some expression of good sentiments by Massachusetts. Such a proceeding will help us. Our prospects here grow daily better. I begin to think our friends have got the mastery of the Tariff, in the H. of R. There may be some renewed effort; but at present the repealers are heartless and desponding. This effect has been brought about, first, by the vigorous attack made on the Bill, in Debate. Our own Delegation have behaved most manfully, in this respect. No men could do better. Poor Davis has been sick, it is true, and that is a great drawback; but others have supplied his place. He is getting well, and I hope will be in the House by Monday. The effect has been produced, secondly, by the Presidents Message of the 16. This has convinced many members that the question with S. Carolina must be seen thro', and that no modification of the Tariff would do any good. I went into the House, today, after our own adjournment, and several Gentlemen told me they looked on the bill as already a corpse, though they may continue the debate, perhaps, a week longer. The Message of the 16. has produced a strong sensation. People begin to see, at last, what Nullification is, and what must be done to put it down. It makes them look sober. Mr. Calhoun is highly excited. He acts as if he felt the whole world to be agt. him. I expect that, tomorrow, he will move a set of instructions to the Comee that is charged with 2 Mr. Lodge, it may be remembered, speaks of Webster as "never in the habit of saying pleasant things to his opponents in the Senate. . . . But on the 7th of March, he elaborately complimented Calhoun ". Lodge, Webster, pp. 325-326. 3 Several familiar letters of the same period are in the Private Correspondence, I. 519-526. 4 The expression took the form of a joint resolution, passed by the Massachusetts senate on January 18 and by the house of representatives on January 23, "instructing the Senators and requesting the Representatives" to use all the means in their power to prevent the passing of a bill reducing the tariff to meet the views of the South Carolina nullifiers. Sen. Doc. 60, 22 Cong., 2 sess., vol. I. 5 John Davis (1787-1854), representative from Massachusetts 1825-1834, senator 1835-1840, 1845-1853. • Richardson, Messages, II. 610–632. |