"''-'i ' E 449 .P162 Copy 1 CORRESPv NDENCE BETWEtB NATHAN APPLETON A N D JOHN G. PALFREY T INTENDED AS A SUPPLEMENT TO MR. PALFREY'S PAMPHLET ON THE SLAVE POWER. « 1 BOSTON: 1 846, EASTBURN S PRESS. CORRESPONDENCE BETWEKN r Ky' NATHAN APPLETON AND JOHN G. PALFREY INTENDED AS A SUPPLEMENT TO MR. PALFREY'S PAMPHLET ON THE SLAVE POWER. BOSTON: 1846. EASTBURN'S PRESS. .? \^ •V l4 ^- CORRESPONDENCE. NUMBER I. MR. APPLETON TO MR. PALFREY. Boston, 15th October, 1846. Dear Sir, You have published with your name a Pamphlet consisting of twenty-four numbers on the slave power, first published anonymously in the Boston Daily Whig, In this pamphlet you have given my name a particular prominence, devoting to it a large part of three different numbers. In your ninth mmiber you attribute to me the unenvi- able distinction of having caused the Mexican war. You speak of " surprising news from Boston." " Mr. Appleton and some of his friends had given their adhesion " (to the slave power.) " The news of the new movement reach- ing Washington." ''The game of opposition being up" by this ''demonstration of Mr. Appleton" coming "as unexpectedly as a thunder clap in a clear sky." No " thunder clap" could have taken me as much by surprise as did the perusal of this article. Any one read- ing it would suppose that I had been engaged in some deep intrigue, some strange plot against the peace of the country. Now the simple fact was, that I had received a letter signed by yourself and two other gentlemen to which you requested an answer. I did not choose to be guilty of the incivility of declining your request. I wrote 4 This ,vas my whole ac,trrrnr:; .ouVre:o:r:tsV;r:r "ir^ ,r r*- -h dae, to set this .atter L .s .rS helr^rtde^ August 8, 1846. NUMBER IV. MR. PALFKEY TO MR. APPLETON. Boston, Oct. 17th, 1846. Sir: Your note of the 15th instant, reached me through the Boston Post Office, after some little delay, occasioned by its being mailed to Cambridge, where I do not send for letters. I cannot sufficiently express my surprise at the treat- ment I receive. You have been for years a leader of the Whig Party, of which I have been an humble but a trust- ed member. Some of us who last Autumn undertook to obtain an expression of the freemen of the Common- wealth on the pending measure of the annexation of Texas, understood ourselves to be standing precisely on the Whig platform, as laid down in the Resolves of a suc- cession of Massachusetts Whig Legislatures. It is now the opinion of many, that a secession from the ground taken in those Pvesolves was determined on, in high quar- ters in Boston, as early as the beginning of last Summer. As a member of a sub-committee, I signed a large num- ber of printed circular letters, intended to be addressed to such as, from their past course, might be expected to favor the object. The circulars then passed into other hands, to be so addressed. To one sent to you, you replied in terms understood to indicate a purpose on your part to put down the movement, as far as your influence would go, by heaping a load of undeserved odium on some of those who were conducting it. Your letter was published by the Texas State Committee, for reasons which have since been set forth in an editorial of the Boston Whig ; which reasons appear to me to be very valid and sufficient. I had however nothing to do with its publication. In the presence of others I heard a part of it read by a gentleman in relations of particular friendship with you, and I took it to be addressed to him just as another letter on the same 10 subject was addressed to Mr Adam, r i "s be,„g i„ answer to one of ,t cTreul. s r r," °" °' of my having anv Dor.nnM "'""'''"' I had signed, or til i. met my ey iHl e n """ '""' '' ^''>«^^". •>"- of .he persons Tdd s 717" "'" "^ "=""^ ^ °- herore the p,.M,e, s.T^mati ef ^Z;'':: ^f • °*-' o-|oode,t.en:tr:ft;;rar:fVrLtr'-^ 'he hgln. I. pre t taf . T' " "°"" "°' ''^^ ^^^" tiser and other Zera-^n'r ''''*'''"' '" '^e Adver- .hey e,ren,ated Z^ll^ ^^Z ''Zn^T' has gone out over the -lobo T "^^^'^^ vin*cat.on. i suhm,: t ■,?:., or X'asTr J't ^'t ^ ~r yTdTLf : " r "-' -• "°" '-™ ^^^^ ietter whfch eon, s t t'" "'™^' " """^'hing in ,he circulate the n.s . It J;'' ^° ^° '^'^ ^ '^ -k me to your mind. I lianne. el to '^ ™'"™' P'''™^'°" "^ ocal was your lan^u,!e H ™T' '" ""'''"^''^ =5"'^- stood as meanitt ,°hTh J°" '"'" ''"^ ^^^" ""''"- were words that w,/ ""''' ^^""^^'i ''^ ">^ "'"on" in using. "^ '"' "^Tre-'y '""'^d you to join „s A."rr;r/t:::t:frTi:aV:»^^" '-'-"-- cation, and never expected to n!,hr , ''•" '" "'"' '''PP''- »»"er, betng "qu.tecomom" ^"^^^"'^"'°"' "'^ We my cha'ae.e'r ,rtrha" ds :^ C^J^T' ^'"^ course, I was notmsensible to the ,'rdsh n 'r'„ "^ '"^ I undertook last summer to f , ^ ""^ '"'^"""■• Slave Power to the w". uTf """^ "^^^'^ °» '"« when I be<.an thern thn 7 , , ^'^ °°' °""''-^'' '° ■"". 11 War," and, " it is to that publication [the publication of your letter] that you [Ij attribute such tremendous re- sults." Pardon me for asking you to give that paragraph a second reading, and to consider whether it sustains your remarks. In that number I have spoken of what appeared to have been understood at Washington of the secession of yourself and others from the ground hitherto occupied by the brave Whig party of the North, which party had hitherto been the chief agent in keeping a profligate ad- ministration in check in its enormous usurpations upon right and freedom ; and I have guessed that the adminis- tration was emboldened in its bad designs by seeing the party which it dreaded thrown into confusion and dis- abled in its strong Northern hold. Certainly you do not think it incredible that the government should be relieved and encouraged in pursuing a favorite policy by seeing opposition to it in a formidable quarter enfeebled or aban- doned. The "demonstration" of yourself and your friends was of course too important a part of the history to be passed over. It consisted of whatever you and they said and did, at that critical time, to discourage and check further opposition to the annexation of Texas. Your letter was not the " demonstration," but it was the most salient part of it known to me, presenting the argument against us in the most tangible and explicit form ; and as such I referred to and quoted it. You call upon me to print an account of the circumstances under which it was published, in or- der to shew that I have miscalled it by the name of the " demonstration" of which I speak. But I have not called it so. On the contrary, I have distinguished between them. My language is (No. 9.) '' The demonstration of Mr. Appleton and his friends, whejiever and Jiotcever else it might have been raade^ was simultaneous with and vjas apparently occasioned hy,^^ &c. ; and I then refer to your letter as part of that demonstration of yourself and those who acted with you. How could I do better? These were your sentiments, carefully written out under 12 your hand. Referring to that, I was in no danger of mis_ representing you. I could not refer to any of your letters not before the public. I could not refer to any of your conversations, which might have been incorrectly reported. When you say, " this [the letter] was my whole action^ my whole demonstration," I cannot understand you as in- tending to declare that you did not express the same sen- timents in other forms. You wrote a letter to the Editor of the Whig respect- ing my remarks, which he published. You did not see lit to address me upon the subject, though I believe it was known to you that I was the author of the papers. Pre- viously to the publication, the editor asked me if I would make any comments upon it. I declined. I did not and have not said of it, nor will I, what the Advertiser said of the comment of my friend on your first letter, that it v/as "too puerile to deserve publication." But I did not attach to it any considerable importance. Nor, I was fain to think, did you. I have it not now by me. But my recollection cannot be in error as to its being light and sportive in its tenor and tone, and further, if I remember rightly, in the unpublished note with which you accompanied it, you expressed yourself to a great degree indifferent whether it was published or not, and left it at the disposal of the friend to whom it was sent. You now ask me " as an act of simple justice" to pub- lish it, and by the offensive language with which you ac- company the request, you of course decline to put it on any other ground. Were there any alleged misstatement of a fact, the claim of justice would be good. But such is not the case now in hand. I do not perceive that there can be any danger of misapprehension of what I have said of a demonstration of yourself and your friends. On the two occasions on which I have referred to your letter (Nos. 9 and 22, pp. 26 and 77 of the pamphlet,) I have distinctly said that it was in reply to an application in be- half of the Texas Committee to you for aid. So far from intimating that you published it, I have not, I think, any- 13 where spoken of it as having been published at all. As you appear however to attach some importance to the point, I will, should the papers come to a second edition, state that it was published by the Slate Texas Committee. I may also publish your letters, though at present I think I shall not do so. In that case I shall of course accompany them with this note, or with such other comment as may then seem to me to be proper. You speak of '-'personalities." I am not aware that I have been stung by the bitter personality with which I was first assailed, into any transgression of the legitimate freedom of discussion of the course of men exerting great influence on public affairs. As to unworthy personalities, I will try patiently to bear, but I do not intend to deal in them. In connexion with my humble name, I have with- in a few weeks heard not a few such, with which I am told " all State Street rings from side to side." You have perhaps seen the Atlas of three or four days ago. Did I ever use a personality like that, of any man of any fair standing ? But I let it go, " content to leave my charac- ter in the hands of the public." I do not allow myself to be pained by your overbearing language. It is best that we should understand one another. I am not to be so overborne. Doubtless in sta- tion and influence you have greatly the advantage of me. But I, as much as yourself, am a freeman of Massachu- setts, in the enjoyment as yet of political privileges, in- herited from ancestors who did their full part in winning them, and which, please God, I will do my best to se- cure for their posterity and mine. Nothing, I think, will stay me from doing what I judge I ought to do, in duty to them and to my country I am sir, your obedient servant. JOHN G. PALFREY. Hon. N. Appleton. 14 NUMBER V. MU. APPLETON TO MR. PALFREY. Deak Sir : ^"'^°^' ^^^^^ ^cx. 1846. Yours of the 1 7th reached me on the 20th in.f .a^ r;-:rzsr:;:-- f.m>,sh,„g your readers wi.h a co,feet sta.ement'f.T' grounds on which that opinion was f^Led ' "' "' Your answer of ten pages introduees a number of new ssues, some of w,>,oh appear to nre wholly "rre evant I m paidon me for passing over very summarrly. ieaI™ft:wL^";;;^.'''" "'^'-'^ ^--'oryearsa uu >vmgpaity —an assert on howevpr fl^t^o known or heard of my interferencl 7T \ . """"" consu ted about flinm ^r /> . ' ^^ ^ °^6" no. have app^ved "' °"""" ' P-^ably should You then refer to mv letter nf Inct m were condue.ing the Texas movem m That t::.;: "- yourself wUh others, st,gmat.ed hy X^r^ 15 imputation under (my) hand of disloyalty to the Union" — and that you consider my request to you to publish that letter, as asking you "to circulate the insult anew." I must be strangely incapable of using language suited to convey my meaning or to express my feelings, if there is the slighest ground for these charges — I had no idea of heaping odium on any one, nor of saying a word disre- spectful or offensive to you, or either of the gentlemen who sent me the letter which I was answering. My ob- liquity of vision continues, and I cannot with all the light you throw upon it, perceive how I could, with these feel- ings have expressed myself more cautiously and carefully. I had lately seen in the book called the " Liberty Bell" printed for the Anti-Slavery Fair of 1845, an article in which the phrase, " Accursed he the Union " was many times repeated in a manner giving me a disgust bordering upon horror. The name of the writer was attached to it, and I ob- served that name amongst the signers of the address which 1 was asked to furnish funds to circulate, together with those of many others, who from their connection with that Society, I had reason to suppose approved of that sentiment. It was in reference to this circumstance that after having referred to the political action of the "Aboli- tion party " I used the folloAving language. " I cannot sympathise with their cry of ' accursed be the Union,' and I cannot but regret some of the sentiments contained in the documents enclosed to me. I cannot furnish funds to aid in their circulation." How you can construe this as casting "undeserved odi- um" on those whose own sentiment I quoted in their own words, or as imputing "disloyalty to the Union" to your- self, is past my comprehension — I did not then believe, nor did I intimate, that you and some others whose names I regretted to see attached to that address, did sympathise with that cry — But I thought the following expression came somewhat too near it for me — " Be it that the United States Constitution nullifies our consciences and 16 religion,''^ — which certainly to me sounds rather odd from the lips of those who liave sworn to support that Consti- ution. Neither as matter of fact or of taste could I assist in circulating the following — " Remember the Bowie Knife horrors between the whites themselves with which the whole South teems.'^ These quotations are only samples. I am bound in charity to believe, as I certainly hope, that some of those who sianed that address did so without reading it. You seem desirous, by violent special pleading, to avoid the application of your expression, " the demonstration of Mr. Appleton and his friends" to the simple fact of the publication of that letter, made by yourself and your asso- ciates. You intimate that I might have said the same thing in conversation, and that the letter might have seen the light through my agency. I do not perceive the perti- nency of these suggestions, but for your satisfaction will assure you that I never had the slightest idea of publish- ing it myself I never had any agency in its republica- tion or circulation. And I have no recollection, in the numerous instances in which it was mentioned to me, of ever being called on to make any explanationof it. Cer- tainly, I never heard of its casting any unjust imputation on any one. I wish you at the same time to understand that I never made any complaint on account of its publica- tion. It was unexpected to me, but I never complained of it. You refer to my letter to the Editor of the Whig, and would seem to imply, that it ought to have been addressed to yourself. I should have thought it indelicate to do so as your article was anonymous, even had I not considered the intimation made to me, of its authorship, private. It is true that letter was written in perfect good humor and I make no objection to the character you give it, as " light and sportive in its tenor and tone." At the time I wrote it, I had not seen your No. 11, and was not aware of the tremendous personal consequences which you de- duced from my letter of November. Our social relations had always been friendly. On 17 readin- that number I found myself fallen very low m your esteem. Regret it as I might, of this I had no right to complain-but I thought it somewhat unkuid to publish it to the world. I regretted on your own account tlie comments with which you thought proper to accom- pany this annunciation in your original publication, and fn its amended form, I cannot but think the expression uMr Appleton's position is not favorable to elevated views of public policy," any thing but complimentary to the whole mercantile community, as embraced m the same category. ^ . . r The insinuation of unfairness in my Examination of Mr. Walker's Revenue Standard is as unjust as it was un- called for. ^ ... I find some palliation for all this, in the fact which you now communicate to me, that you had felt yourself sUmg bv what you term " Miter personality- in my first let- ter-the venom of which must have been rankling m your bosom for nine months. I confess the knowledge of this fact is some relief to me, for notwithstanding my ina- bility to imagine the mental process by which that feel- ing was produced, from language so perfectly harmless as mine, it furnishes a motive for conduct which was pre- viously to me wholly inexplicable. You had introduced rpy name into your pamphlet, I should think at least twenty times, and always disparagingly. It appeared to me the most truly spontaneous and gratuitous ebullition of ill nature which had ever fallen within the circle of my observation. , ■ I cannot answer for your grievances with the Adver- tiser, Atlas, or State Street. I have no control over either of them. But I may be permitted to inqmre what jou mean by attributing to me -overbearing language? 1 challenge you to point out any sentence, word or syllable of mine to which that epithet will apply. I commend your determination not to be overborne. It is a worthy sentiment, but should always be accompanied by the de- termination to avoid injustice to others. 18 I shall not repeat my request to you to print my letters. It is my intention to publish the whole correspondence. This will do justice to us both. I am sir, Your very ob't serv't, N. APPLETON. John G. Palfrey, Es^. APPENDIX. From the Liberty Bell of 1845. Extracts from " The American Union," by William Lloyd Garrison. " Accursed be the American Union, as a stupendous republi- can imposture ! " Accursed be it, as tbe most frightful despotism, with regard to three millions of the people ever exercised over any portion of the human family ! " Accursed be it, as the most subtle and atrocious compromise ever made to gratify power and selfishness ! " Accursed be it as a Ubel on Democracy, and a bold assault on Christianity ! " Accursed be it as stained with human blood, and supported by human sacrifices ! " Accursed be it for the terrible evils it has inflicted on Africa, by burning her villages, ravaging her coast, and kidnapping her children, at an enonnous expense of human life, and for a diaboli- cal purpose ! " Accursed be it for aU the crimes it has committed at home— for seeking the utter extermination of the red men of its wildei*- nesses, and for enslaving one sixth part of its teeming population ! " Accursed be it, for its hypocrisy, its falsehood, its impudence, its lust, its cruelty, its oppression ! " Accursed be it, as a mighty obstacle in the way of universal freedom and equality ! '• Accursed be it, from the foundation to the roof, and may there soon not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down! " Henceforth the watchword of every uncompromising abohtion- ist, of every friend of God and liberty, must be, both in a religious and political sense — 'no union with slaveholders!" \ LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 20 Extracts from " The National Compac 011 899 538 7 " The Constitution of the United States, both in theory and prac- tice, is so utterly broken down by the influence and effects of slavery, so imbecile for the highest good of the nation, and so powerful for evil, that I can give no Aoluutary assistance in hold- ing it up any longer. " Henceforth it is dead to me and I to it. I withdraw all pro- fession of allegiance to it, and all my voluntary efforts to sustain it. Extracts from "The Constitution," by Wendell Phillips. " Now the Constitution of the United States is either anti-sla- very or pro-slavery in its character. If the latter, if it binds us to sustain slavery in any degree, then surely it is ' a covenant with death and an agreement with hell/ and ought to be immediately annulled. No abolitionist can take office under it or swear to sup- port it." " If on the other hand it is an anti-slavery instrimaent then union itself is impossible without guilt. * * * There is no course left for honest men but to join in the battle cry of the American Anti-Slavery Society. '•No Union with Slave Holders." These gentlemen were all signers to the address, for the circu- lation of which, funds were asked. \ 1 J M«,^.f,M,?''^ Of" CONGRESS 011 899 538 7 pemrulrfe* pH8^