University of South Carolina Libraries
* -v Me will cling to the Pillars of the Temple of our Liberties, and if it n_ -!fall, we will Perish amidst the Ruins." VOLIJII XI. WO.2 6 2113 -a C U. SI' a, PUBLISHED EVERY WEDNESDAY B Y W.M. F. DURISOE. P t OP I 1 E T O R. NE II' TERMS. T' o DOLT.ArS and FIFTI CEN's..pernnnuni ifpaid in advane-$3 i fnot paid within six rno-nths from the date of snbscription. and $4 if not paid before the expiration of the tear. All subscriptions will be continned, inless otherwise oidered before the expira tion of the year ; but no paper will be dis continued until all arrearazes are paid, unt less at the option of the Publisher. ADVERTISENETS cons.plCnotstyi nserted at75 cente per square, ( 1-2 lines, or less.) for the firstinsertion. and 37. for each c,,ntinuance. Those published monthly or quarterly, will be charge.d $1 per square. Advertisements not having the number of insertions markedI on them, will be continued'uutil odered out and charged accordingly. Cotmunications, post paid, will be prompt ly and strictly attended to. Letterfron Mr. Cass. DETRoIT, July 10, 1849. Da Sla: I am much obliged to you for the extracts you have sent me, and for talling my attention to the remarks of some of the whig papers upon a letter from the editor of the New York Courier and Enquirer, published in that journal a short time since; and in which an effort is made by those papers to 'onvict me of in sincerity. I am sure you will bear me witness that I have been beretofrbe pretty patient under similar attacks, some of them as remarkable ror their virulence as for their falsehood-remarkable even in this country, where political investigations are so prone to degenerate into personal abuse; and I had supposed, as the motive had passed away with the occasion, that I should be allowed a reasonable measure of justice by our opponents, even il my opin ions or course should he deemed worthy efk examination. But the resujlt shows that I iave been deceived; and as no con siderations' of propriety connected with my position forbid me from defendinig my consistency, I choose to do so in the resent instance, not only because the ,harge is speciously preferred, but because it is calculated to place me in a false posi 'a before the ptblic. .have delayed. writing you for some 'Pays, awaiting the return of Col. Webb, ~prF ; llI did* not wish to refer it him thus publicly, without a previous conversation with him; but he has not yet returned, nor do I know when he, will; Oni. as I am unwilling to be subject to such imputations, without applying the j'oper corrective, I have determined to delay this nbswer ho longer. I have knowin Col. Webb from his boyhood, and . Lave never ceased to esteem him. Our perso nal relatioris iave always been kind. Di vided in politics, we have not ceased to be friends; and be will be as much surprised as 1 wai it the disingenuous ellerts to -concrt his letter into the proof of my in consistency-an idea, I am' sure, that never occurred to him. Nothing I state in this letter will be called in question by Col. Weil[; and I may add, that Mr. Greely's remarks are written in no unjust spirit; and though I cannot command his care to ascertniu ,the truth, I do not con demn the spirit of his article. Whatever his brethren of the :whig press thay do, I believe lie is disposed to do me justice. I am accused of inconsistency, amount. ing to dishonesty, in my opinions con, cerning a lirotectivo inrifi, internal imn provements, and th.e Cxtension of slavery. 'The first I shall dismiss very briefly, but very explictly. The Baltimore resolutions contain my sentiments on the subject of a tariff. And neither to Col. Wetub nor to any other an have I uttered a word in cotsihtent with them. 1 voted for the tariff of 1846; and ihough there wvere some things I should have beenm glad to see otherwise, (and where are-there not in such complicated questions 1J yet 1 gave it my hearty support. I never exchanged a word w.ith Col. WVebb on the subiject of a pro. teeuive iarifi' in my life. Nor does he say I did. Why ho supposed I favored it 1 -know not. It is enongh to say lie is..in error, as are all who .form a simi[st con chusion. In the courde of conversation betw.een Col. WVebb and myself, I referred to the last presidential cotntest. and to the palpa ble injustice which .had been doue me by the whig press and politicians in holding up my letter to ;uhe Chicago Conventiotn as an evidence of my hostility to all ima provemetnts, however general atnd neces sary, by Congress. and to rmy letter to air. Nicholson as evidence of mty desire that slavery should be estalished in the terri tories ceded by Alexico to the United States. I called these efforts the buanhug4 of the day. as they were. and tmust now be confessed by .every carndid mant. In neither of these letters is thre to b~e founda one syllable favorable to the constructionis lhtis put upo them. The le'ter to the Chicai go Conventiono makes not the most distant allusion to the question oE inrtnal im provements. A person ma y .he the great.. est latitudinarian, or the srricmcest vonstruc iionist, rind yet have w.ritten that lcttcr with perfect consistency, simply because all it does is to decline beiug present on that occasion. Tihe letter to aMr. NichOl saa exa-mines and denies the power of Congress to' pass the 'Wilmot proviso, and endeavors to show thamt thutt meoasuro would be inexpedient andI unnecessary, even it were con~stitutional. This is its extent. There is not iin ii, from begitn ning to end one word going to show msy opinion was that slavery would, lio estab. lished there, or my wish that it should be established there. All this will surprise many good men who yet retain the im pressiens they received during a period or excitemnt, and which they gained from the press, too orten pursuing its otject without regard to the higher considera, tions of justico. Let him who doubts what I say on the subject of these letters, turn to them and read for himself. To the law and to the testimony. I will now. ask Mr. Greely-for I res pect his candor-what has my letter to a gentleman who invited me to attend the Chicago Convention to do with my opin ions upon-the subject of internal improve ments! I was asked to attend that con vention; and thit was all I was askcd. I answered that I should not attend; and that was all I answered. And yet this answer, as I have stated, was circulated from one end of the tnion to the other du ring the late presidenital contest, as conclu sive evidence of my hostility to any imn provenment by the general government. be the character of the objec*t what it might. I had supposed the dovice had served. its purpose, and was among the things that have been. Little did I anticipate that a [man of Mr. Greely's intelligence and reputation for integrity would revive this exploded charge, and would refer t.o that letter as furnishidg any Index t ;my senti men-ts on this subject, or any.otber ground to convict me of inconsistency in my acts or opinions. I did not go to the Chicago Convention, because I did not think any good would resuli from its Iibore. I did not believe, nor do I now believe that such bodies, in periods of political excitetment -perhaps, indeed, at any period-either by the concentration of public opinion a'r by the diflusion of information. can lead to any useful plan of action. Invited, as the members of that convention were, from every portion of .the Union, the sphere of;operation was far too extensive for wise and cautions deliberation and de cision. There were too many interests involved. If general propositions only are to be laid down in such a convention, the object is not worth the effort; f'r. in the divided state of public tmind upon the question, whatever platform might he adopted, the opinion of iarties, and gene rally of individuals, would remain the same. If a general plan of operations is Io be members are under little responsibility; and as each section of the country will have its own objects to attain, these must he attained by concessions to the objects of others, and the result will furnish evi dence of a mutual spirit of accommota tion, rather than a ciutious regard for the general interest. Such an assemblage is a 'erg different thiig from^ the attempt to cencentrate opinion and action in favor of any improvement afecting a particular portion of the Union, where there is a com munity of infornation and interest, and where there is no weighing of one project against another, nor any sacrifices to iu sure the desired result. And I am fully confirmed in my presi otis anticipations concerning the Chicago Convention. I imagine the first man is vet to be found who will venture to say ihat any advantage has resited from its labors. But I hd yet another reason for decli ning to atiend that cimn'tention. I did not like its origin. The earliest notice of it which I taw was connected with the names of some well-known whis, promi nent politicians of the city of New York; and I believed, and I have yet no reason 10 doubt, that one great oiject was to injute the democratic party by taking ad vaitage of the excitement which prevailed in ceriain portioits of the country in con - sequence of the failure of two successive internial improvement bills.. Andi I have since understood, though 1 cannot vouch for the fact, that such wa-s thte actual in tent ion, and that the proceedings of the conivention wvould have assumed a party character, and been directed to this .ibject, .had not not the design been frustrated by the firmness of the democratic members. Now Mr. Greeley will understand why I did not attenad this convention. But I cannot understand wby he seeks may opin ions5 on tlais question in my letter, which is wholly silent on the subject, and .not in my speeches and votes in the Setnate of the United States. Emtinent whig politicians whom I could name, but that it wvould be invidious to do so, were invited to attend' the Ci-cago Convention, but neither answered nor at tendted. I tught it due to the gentleman who invited tme to acknowledge his atten-, tiotn, and didl so. And this act ficuotrtesy, whlich constitotes the only difference be tween myself and others, has been made the text book whence tmy opinions are to be deduced, aiid by which my inconsis tency is to bie proved. On the q'iestion~ of the piower of thec United States over the [subject of internal itnsproverments, my sentiments Kre int accordance with thiose of the great democratic party, and are fully exprewmed in the resolutions oif the Balti more Cor-vention. In the words of one of tthese resolutions, I believe "that thte con stitution does not confer on the genmeral goveronent thte pter to commence and carry on a generul system of interntal im prove," atid no man livingt has the right to gainsay this arssertion. But at the same time 1 have never disputed the right of' Congress to impirove some of the great hsarbors and rivers and lakes of the Unione natioral in thteir character, and important to the commerce, atnd some of thems to the reenc of... ~,...,,ntr. While th. ,dmo.. cratic party deny the power to devise and carry on a vast system of opetations whose pecuniary extent no-man can foresee and what is still worse, whose corrupting influence, as well in the legislature as out of it, cannot-bo viewed but i~tri ohe most serious apprehensin-the great nmjoriTy of that party, indeed nearly all of it, has advocated particurar'appropriations jusli fied by the circumstances of position and importance. Almost, at the same time that I declared my idhesion to tlre resolu tions orthe Baltimore Conventiie, I voted with equal good faith for bills in the Sen ate providing for the improvement of rivers and harbors and lakes. and advoca ted their passage in my seat; and this is precisely the reason why I accuse tnany ofthe whig papers and politicians of dis ingenunousuess, or something worse, itn asserting that my Chicago letter, which conttined not a word on the subject, was proof of my hostility to all- the action of Congress, in the very race of my ollicial course and my publicly-dechared opinions. And my position was that or most of the. ;-rominent men of our party, who, while they held to the doctrincs of the resoln tions, held likewise to the power or special legislation, and voted for the same billa. I do not know, indeed, that there is a single senator who dedies to Congress all power to legislate over this matter. Certainly Mr. Calhoun does not, who adopts the wholesome doctrine of strict constructi6n. I am aware it is difticuh to draw a practi cal line at all times .between objects that ought and that ought not to engage the attention of Congress; and f :thinik, there fore, !ookrn to the siuge. to wh'ich the whole subject is liable, that the oliort should be to narrow, and not to enlarge, the circle of power; and such I understand to be the views of the democratic party. The other proof of it)sincerity, tts I have already stated, is drawn from. the Fact that in my letter to Mr. Nicholson I took ground agaitst the Wilmot Proviso, excluding slavery by law from the territtries. and now believe that slavet-y with or without that rest riction.'will notbe established t here. And the wonder is gravely expressed how I could write that letter and the letter of three lines to the Chicago Convention, and vet claim the character (of an honest mntn. It is a much graver wonder to me, how in telligent editors of public papers, wvhose influence on public op'nion is so great, p t me ppunuuM, m tit! agarif o rti' true position. It will not surprise you. but it will many vho have -iesved my course only in a party aspect. to he told that in that very letter to Mr. Nicholson I ex pressly stated my opinion ta he tih- slave rv wou!d never extend to California or New Mexico; and tlat "the inhabitants of those regrions, whether they depend on tieiF pThulhs, or their herds, cannot be slaveholders." I quoted With full appro bation the opinions of Mr. Buchanan an-1 of Mr. Walker, the former of whom says: " It is morally impossible? therefore, that a.majority of the emigrants to that portion of the territory south of36 30 will ever re establish slavery within its limits." Mr. Walker maintains that " beyond the Rio del Norte slavery will not pass, not only hecause it is forbidden by law, but because rhie colored race there preponderates itt the ratio of ten to one over the whites; and holding, as they do, the government and most of the offices in their possessiot. they wlil not permit the enslavement of any portini of the colored race, which makes and executes tle laws of the coun, try." And to these remarks I add : The question, it will therefore be seen on ex amination. does not regard the exclision of slavery from a region where it now exists, and where, from the feeliigs of the inhabi tanis, and the laws of na:ure. -it is moral ly impossible, as Mr. uchanan says, "that it can ever re-establish itself.'' I have never untered to a htnman being a semi ment in opposition to these views. And subsequent events, the events indeed of every day, confirma their justicc; and render it imipossible that slavery should be re-es tablished in the region ceded to uo.b Mexico. Such is the general npi:dion in the non-slaveholdintg States, ntnong those who are most attached to the cotmprontisest of the conit tution, and most determined to maintain them. And I do ntot doubt but there are many persons in the South, ern States who resist the WVilmot Proviso with all thteir power, as offensive to the feelings, and injurious to the rights of the Sout h, but who still believe it is.a quest ion rather of principle than of action, antd that circumstatnces are preparintg an exclusion which Congress has no right to pionouuce. In the view here taken, thr effort to etngraft the Wilmot- Proviso utpra an act of Congress, ev'en if Congress hadethe requi, site power, is a useless attemet to direct the legislatiat of the country a an obiject whith nwould be as easy attainsd without it. If Congress have not the t.ower, as I hielieve they have not, in commoa witn a large portion of the people, it becomes worse than useless, by btecotgt uncon. s!itutional. And] in addition toihtis, ir is p~ecutliarly oilensive to one-hef of the States of the Union, who see i' in an tat tempt to) circumnscribe thteir rigits, and to mortify their pride of charactcj No tan can look at thte signs of the tires withtout being satisfied that the prose,,tion ohf this 'question is produecg the whrst statte of heeling; and though I trust ihat happen wvhat tua, our southern brehiren will still cling to the Union, egallyfthteir at-k of safety and ours, still thei-e 1re evils short of ai separation- wlieh eveg good cituzen should seek to avoid. HeI 'hould seek to avoid alt occasions of uofrindly feelings: queswutios InosMe to the senimens or inter est of dillerent sections of the country, and thus tending to array one or them against aniother.- Tre is enough passing in iti Old WorldI- nd if therewiere not, there ia enough p oing nroundos-at teach us te Ines'imabMe value of ou'F'institulions. and that theia ought not to be hazarded by internal-dissensions, as unnecessary tu their origin as they are portentous it thei. consequenc':. So much r the expediency of urging a mensum.. thus-advocated and opposed. But beyond this question is a still more im portant one ip a constitutional government and thiit is die power of Congress to legis lnte over tflieasubject; and this must be settled nffirnfiatively before the propriety of legislative -tmetion can be considcred. I am not goint'over this ground at present. I have alreatiy ttched upon it in my letter to Mr. Nichdison, and I shall probably have an opporturlity of exprbssing my scriments misore fully at the next sessio of Congressi. I shall conlent myslf with presenting a rew general Femarks here, as the subject lies in amy vay. There is one important consideratinwhich meets us at ihe very threshold of ilis inqiry; there is uo ex press powerin Congress to legislate over the territories to be found inl the consitn tion; fur I believe it is now generally con ceded-as indeed it most be-that the power .mo dispose of -and make needfai rules and reblalions for the territory and other properly of the United States con tains no grat of political power over per sons upon s uih property either within or without the tespective States. And- if it does in the obe, it must in the other; fur ithese words are equally applicable to the territory antOiher property of i he United States, wherever situated. But there are some five omasix provisions itn the cosBtilu tion whencethe power is sought to he de duced-somi persons deriving it from one clause, and spme from another while each is nmore irt, t, int showing where it does not, tha wfere it does exist. The exer cise of a greni pulitical power like this by o legishnture d.eriving its existence fram a written instidinrevt, ought not to depeni on such lose co structions. Nothing shows the i groumnded doubt respereling this power ite; than tihe very uncertain ty in whichfc are involved in the enden, var to mainihmn it by -ni express constitu a r circnstances bring -this question toute forcibly than ever before ihe country, the true foutdation cf the power should-he severely investigated. Those who maintain L'ie righi of Con. gress to pass the Wilmot Proviso. must mainnitan ot only the right of that body to establish governmeas. and to provide for tIme neces.hiies of legislation over tihe public territory, w bich is one thing, but ulso the power to direct 'all the in.ernal territonrial legislationi at its pleasire, with ont regard to tihe will of the people to lie afrected by it, which is another and qite a dillerent thing. I shall not enter into tiny subtleties touching tihe condition of sovereignty, or the rights it brings %% th it. That subject was a good deal debated at ithe last session of Congress; but it had been already exhausted in the discussions pre. viously to our revolutionary situggle. We are sovereign. said the British government to the colonies, and may legislate over you as we please. You are sovereign, said oujr fathers, and may establish govern ments; but yon have no right to interfere, by your lecislation. in our itternal eP. cerns. Such legislation, withoAt :epro senitation.Iis the very essencedj fi despo tism. This disputie divi-'ed one empire. Let ums take care thikt -. r'milar assumption of power dors nu 4ivlde anotlier. flave Ct.- ss nty power to legisatie over the ten:tories ? I sail in my letter to Mr. Nicholson, "Hiow far an existing nece-ily inay have opterated in prodincing tii legishmiton, anid tihus cemding, by a ratber a volatent imnpiicationt, pttwers not d inecty g'vent, I knowv not. But cer tain it is, that time ptrinciple of linterference shtoubai not lie carriedi beyond the necessary imlienction whtich prodtuces it." Th'le grntnnda of niecessity is that umpotn which Mar. iMladisoni ptlacedl the acain of the oit1 ennfederation in pnissinig thte or dlinnnee of i7S7; nad if I do not mnisun derstand tihe late Mr. Jnstice Story. he en. tertained sirmihiar views when he sad that aequired territotry ' umtst hto nndmer time dominmion amid jurisdiction ofithe Uniont, or it would lie .withtout any government at all." If to avoid t',is latter consequence Congress exercise a power not otherwise to lbe defendedn, thmat power should be limi ted byv the necessity or the ocasion whidh calls it forth. To preserve the peace of society--and to this gmund oE support we must come tat last-there is into mote need that Congress-should condluct the legisla lion of time territories titan that they' should conduct te legi-dation of Virginia-or otf Miassnechusetts. It is entought that they should organmize governmet s, anmd ithen the necessiry fair their interference ceases. And. time resadi proves this, lor the local governmenats dim mnage intternal concerns of the territories in most cases, atnd would as safely int all, if nt restrained bay con gressionmal imerposiion; anid if Congress can pass beyaod the ptower to oargmaize governaments, they rmay rule a erritory as thmeir pteuutre,-ad partosirate every barri er (if freedoatm. If. mis I have heremofotre said, thtey can re'guitc thme relation taf master atal servant, whIm hut thmeir oiwn will is tao prevenmt hem from n regalattinag' tihe ot her relatitins oif li fe--the relutitoni tat husbatnd and wife, amnd ofh parent and child and, indeed, all time uobjects wh iichm belonag tn thne snrhal stnte ? 'tber is nno ,nnn n-ho can show the slightest necessity for this interference on lhe part of the generali governin.tt, ind there is consequently no man who can sionv that it has any tigh: t to interfere on the ground of its necessary t acion. LFtze people of the territories % are fully competent to conduct their owrr r aflairs; and the veiy first principle of our I social system dem-ands that they should -e permitted to do so. ' "Whichever. mnayhe the source," says Chiefriuaice Marshall, speaking doubt fully of the original of the jurisdiction, "whence this power may, be derived, the I possession of it is unquestionable." He is speakirg of the power of government; r and no doubt it hab been possessei; but it becomes very important to ascertain ho v, and how far, Congress has justly possess- 1 ed it, in order to ascertain to what extent it may be exercised. In alm'ost all-I be lieve I may say in all-the speeches and b essays in support ofhfie power of Congress to leni'slate over slavery. after endeavor ing vaguely to deduce it from some clause i or othet of the constitution the principal i reliai.co is at last- upon the authority of a the few-instances, of its exercise to be il found in the statute booki.' Authority and i precedent have weight, nnd ought to have ri some weight ii doubtful question.; but I a trust there. are few to e frotnd who are a prepared to shut ithe constituilon, and to I seek in the practice of the government the 1 foundation of its power; and more especial- 'I ly when, asin this case. the early legisla- * tive proceedings passed, as we have ien son to believe, without objection or itiqiti- o ry. .'They commenced by adopting the provisions or an ordinance of the old go. verinneat to the administration of the new one, and thus impliedly recogmnsing the exclusinn of slavery, and seem to have gone on silently and utnqnestioned fur years. I have not. had time to look back to ascertain theifacts precisely; but I believe it will be found that this power has never been exercised where there was a united sectional opposition to it. Precedent may h weigh much in the consideration of a doubtful question, where the whole sub ject has. been maturely considered, and h many minds have been brought to bear ttpon its adjustment. But as the founda- k tin of polttical power a pratice thus itt troduced is of little value, particularly when it comes to involve grave questionrs seriously alfeeling the Union. We turt, -. - - - 11 from Wvhat have tjzen authority of precedent to the ntl.'ority of the constitution. These are times which try such iuestions. Who can vonder, that with the views entertained of this subject by the South, n.n appeal should be made to the conmtro. charter of the coun try, or that a large portion of our citizens should be satislied with no answer not derived fro*n it? That what has been Itust ni'jnue to be, is a principle which has done inore to perpetuate abuses than -ill itie other causes which have operated Sponn political institutions. Those who, advocate nod those vo - oppose the Vilmot Provise or-eupy very dihTerent positions. The former urge its adoption as a matter ofexpediency, tn order to exclude slavery fron the newly acqutired territories, where it does not ex ist, and where it cannot lie denied that this exclosion is as morally certain without it as Wih -,t; while the latter all oppose this neasure on the ground of its uncon sttutio.!ality, and a large portion of the U.:ton on the ground also of its interfer- I ecce with their rights and feelings. 'The contest to which this subject has given rise has already been productive of the t wyorst consequences. For tiio years it has ( prevented all lepislation dyer most impor tant regions, ad has left them without < government, ..d in a state of social dis, c trgnization, to our own reproach and to < the sturprise of the world.i I do tt't believe there is atnother country on the fatce of the earth n~ hie-h would have pcrtmited such a state of things. AndtI howv lotng is it to cotntittue ? Is Califorttia to btecome a prey to intestine dissensions r in the absenice of all law, or is it to be I driven to separate frotm uts because we nteglhect to discharge one of ouar first duties [ -a duty oif tnecessity-thtat of organtizina a government for 'the people whio inhatbit it.? Those who oppose the Wilmot Pro vise on thte grountd of its unconstitutioiality I cant never surrendier their opiniionms and, I vote for it. Those who htave hteretofore advocated its adoption may sveli nbanndontt it, convinc-ed, as they toust be, that there object will be as wcil attained without itr as witht it. It appears to mte otte of the most barren quiestions that ever dividdd a country, barren in useful resuhts, lint I fertile in ditlicubties antd dangers. I free- *t ly cod~ess thatt I hook with amazemnent upon the zeal nnd peruinacity displayed im arguimg this measure under rtese.eircum-. standes. . atnd augur -from them the wvorst con-sequences.. Tihese are tmy semtiments. Thtey will I give offentce to many. atid wvil carpotm a ro much oblogquy, lBnt I tdo not heshite I titus openly to avow thtem; for every pub. I lie tmati whto is not preptared to tnke a e decidled part agreeabily to his convictions, , in times like these, in not prepared in dis- - charge one of tht first d'utie!, whc-dihs to hiis positiont. '-iTi insure -domelstic li trantquiillity" itn the twrds oft the constimu- h lion, was onec of thte great motives of the a people of the United Sates itt the organiz'a-a d tonit of the present governmtent. Jleastureesa which imay end1anger- that trangqoillity ' shotuh heIa scrutinized with cant iont. an'd c nevei~r adlopted butt in the last necessity, a atnd then wiih great reluctance. I utr, I dear sir, with great regard, trttly yours, a LEW..CAS:S. -a Tn1OSI nm mcu.. Eq t From the Spartainbnrg Spartan. F. 1. Bairett, the Aboliionisft This.personage ins. doitilessily very inexpectedly to himsef,-achieved on un? aviable notoriety hi a very slhort time$ vhnt mny be the penabiy of this notorietf enaind it) be seen, by the award of the aw. The iharge nuder which he. waj .rrested is punishable by twelve mqolths nmpriduinnteit and One Thousand Dollari ne. - But lie irray lie indicted under tb rrest for any crime of which the States cttorney may ihicik himself able by.cgii. eent testimony to convict the prisonert 'there is more than a possibiility, Bar ett may be indicted for san offence, ih.e enaby of which is death. without benefit f clergy, and assuredly, if convi.:ted, all he Abolitionists in the United States dad ot save him. ., If this nian be the innocent vicim, as e pretends, of unknown incendiaries, fho wriie to him at almost every point ri tihe Stat,.ard charge him with thecare rd listribution of their infam&n docu ient, why the repetition f the kindest dvice and caution ? Why. the delicate antery for his -ervi-ces ? Why the eoig intical character of a portion of the cor !spondence addressed to him ? They re his friends at least, and appear to knoiw ud appreciate their itan. The following mter fixes, we think conclusively, the lace of publication of tihe lrutus. and 'rue Gorolintinn. In the letter were two nclosures, addresse-l to tiwo higihly valuo4 itizens of this 6tate, couaining copies - r 3rutus: To J. Al. Barrett. Esq.: Post marked Cinncinnati, 12' ALy, 1849. "DEAR Ska: Ilving learned that you' re travelling in S. C., I take the liberty of aquesting you to drop into some Post fllce along your route, the etclosed let srs. Albough comparatively a stranger >yti. I take this liberty because I wish. > oblige a "Carolinian," who desires me > take some plan of communication with is friends, which will not by the Post mark reveal ho present location. Be ind enoughi. to destrqy this when you dve read it. You, will pardon me fo - o0 six-iing my name, but that you may uoti' I ai to. be relied upon. I will just 'ime that Mlessrs. E. Barweod & Co. ave sent you $20 to Colut.bia, S. C.'' s The following letter contained some 2 to 15 enclosures addressed to various fruiusad05reh. -q'vnas iet t atte, N. C., and.forwarded to Barrett at his place. This is the letfer referred to ast week, as one. the hand writing- of which is probably.. known to a, friend of urs, aud n hich we expect to verify soon; nd here we add, for the benefit of Mr. arrett's correspondenis - in Cincinnati, )iio. Dublin, Indiatia that our Committee f Vigilance n ill take ithe necessary mea-P ures to procure the real names of those utionyrmous gentlemnwn w:ho areso very esirous of remaining unknown. We vill strip oll thir.itcogniio, nnd if we can lu no nore, will hold them up in their rue characters, to the surn and contempt f the honorably disposed, in, every por ion of the country;the traitorous Carolini. ,n shall have the most conspicuous niche n the Temple of Infamy. The Rev. S. . Chase, is a gentleman compared to hm "Ciacisq-i, Oh., .une 15, 1849. "IMr. Bariety, dear. sir i A. friend of nine from South Carolina wishes me to vrite to some.one, .1here, and get him to leposit in some oflice within the State. ie letters ncconparying. this. I thought if sending them.it, some one of my friends vho reside there, but as they ard also ac. luainted with him, his object would.be lefeated, ts he does not wish them to knom of his being here. While you. are travell. r~ ftm .tt .I thtought itwould not ilt in this tmatler. I have sent somea rien~to o:her persons with t he sa me request. ashIe nays cte Pst:mge on these pack ies it wil cost you and thetm nothinly put the trouble of tdepnsiiing. For his iwn reasonis hic desires that they be drops red inito dlif'eent otlicersq. anid lhe partie nlarly desires that you-shouitl tnot deliver hem to any of the~ persons yourself, shotuld 'otu hacve themi in yomur .wamy. It isiun., iecessary for you0 to know the object he as in view. -. 'Yott will mutch oblige me;. and indeed will take ii .as great- favor, if you-wi cot give the slighest hint to any one of this natter; anid in yotur correspondence 'tig 'our friends. here, please not a.liuda, tq tt c all. Yon need not even ackntow ge hat you have received- the package fromr ies, except in a letter add resseg~ to ai'yself. I hope youi will return in' better health3 han you' left us. - "I am,.tdear Si;. - . * :Very regpecml'ily..yours.. "P. S.. Iwas about signing my names. N ut my friend suggested.. had better: not,. s by smie mns Ibs may fal. toother audg, trod ht4s*..his' friends, in C. get a it of his being here. You will rhaereforaw xcuse me for not doitig su, ad getusa af Une." flat t-hs.Rev..,Dr. S. P. Chase. who. robatbly has no.:affinity with SoustCaro tnn. acorna th'e annonymous in adcfitasing is dear Jahnt, and boldly signs-his'name,. etling the chances at defhmtes, probably ~sitding that the "foorer" o' Dr-. Cturtis, Itoutd beO moreo witlely known, thatn he ms likely t'i bo by ordinaty means. The htampiion of. the "Ph"j1~ after tfie signmai nid disgraceful defeat of Dr. Singar ncid Pr. Scai hi, annihilates Dr.. Curtir in thme rgumient, and after praying for the "aole" ndl body.of dear John, gives the-result og' me fight.. without touching rietas Tbn..