Showing posts with label John J Crittenden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John J Crittenden. Show all posts

Sunday, March 17, 2024

John J. Crittenden to Leslie Coombs, November 1, 1851

WASHINGTON, November 1, 1851.

DEAR COOMBS [sic],—I received your kind and friendly letter, for which I thank you. My position in respect to the senatorial election is just this, no more, no less: At the instance of some friends in Kentucky, I consented to their presenting my name as a candidate if they thought proper to do so upon the meeting of the legislature and upon a survey of all the circumstances. I thought I might go thus far without presumption or giving just cause of offense, and yet I confess that I felt some reluctance to do even that, because it might cross or conflict with the hopes and wishes of good friends and cause some dissatisfaction on their part. Yet, having yielded my seat in the Senate to obey the wishes of the Whigs of Kentucky in becoming, at their bidding, a candidate for the office of governor, it seemed to me that I might naturally and reasonably indulge the desire of being restored to my former position; yet I did not make myself a candidate,—I left that to the discretion and the will of others. From what I hear, I suppose they have presented me as a candidate. I therefore desire to be elected; it is the situation most agreeable to me, and a re-election would be felt as a great honor. Still, I want nothing that cannot be freely awarded to me; I am not to be regarded as a disturber of the party. Disturbance already existed so far as it could be produced by the conflicting pretensions or claims of many candidates, each one of whom is, to say the least, as chargeable as I am with causing any controversy. But enough of this. I desire, of course, not to be beaten, and I thankfully accept your proffered services and friendship. I hope that you will go to Frankfort and take such part in the contest as you deem proper. I never felt less like controversy. Wounded as I have been, I naturally turn away from the battle like a bleeding soldier. My friends must act for me.

Your friend,
J. J. CRITTENDEN.
Gov. LESLIE COOMBS.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 2, p. 19-20

John J. Crittenden to Orlando Brown, November 12, 1851

WASHINGTON, Nov. 12, 1851.

DEAR ORLANDO,—Before this can reach you, the senatorial question will have been disposed of, and, as I anticipate, by a postponement. Some few letters, and particularly two received from Morehead, lead me to that conclusion. Such a result is not the most gratifying to me, but I can bear it calmly and patiently.

I shall feel some curiosity and interest to know the course of some individuals in respect to this election, and will thank you for the information. The course of Judge Robertson and of Mr. Dixon does not much surprise me, though, as I am informed, they have displayed a sort of personally hostile opposition to me, for which I never gave either of them cause.

I understand that my old friend Ben Hardin speaks kindly of me, but opposes my election. I confess that in this I have been disappointed and mortified. He and I are cotemporaries. We have been long associated, and have stood together as friends through many years. The path which remains for us to travel is not very long, and I regret that he has found it necessary to part from me on this occasion. I do not mean to complain of him, but only to express my regret. My feelings and my memory suggest to me much more on this subject; but I will only add that I think if Hardin had considered it in all its points of view, his judgment, as well as his friendly feelings, I doubt not, would have decided him to take sides with me rather than with my opponents. There is not the least unkindness towards him mingled with the regret I feel on this occasion, and, as the matter will all be over before this reaches you, I am willing he should know. Indeed, I wish you would inform him how I feel and what I have here written in regard to him.

What part does our Frankfort senator and representative take? Farewell.

Your friend,
J. J. CRITTENDEN.
ORLANDO BROWN, Esq.

P.S. To my good friends, and better never were, give a hearty shake of the hand from me.

J. J. C.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 2, p. 20-1

Orlando Brown to John J. Crittenden, December 3, 1851

FRANKFORT, December 3, 1851.

MY DEAR SIR,—I propose to say a few words to you about the senatorial election. You and your family and friends are all greatly indebted to Mr. Thomas F. Marshall for his devotion to your interests during this crisis; he has surpassed himself as an orator in presenting your claims to the gratitude and love of the people of Kentucky. I read to Mr. B. Hardin what you said of him, and the old gentleman's eyes filled with tears; he exclaimed, with vehemence, "My God, sir, it is all a mistake; I have been for him, am for him, mean to be for him." And he has been making good his words. Mr. Abraham Caldwell, of the Senate, and your old fellow-soldier, Cunningham, are the most reliable of your friends. Captain Hawes is at our head, and is as gallant a leader as we could have. Neither Bell, nor Helm, nor Brock, nor Davis have come near us. The true policy of your friends is to refer the whole subject to the people. With the people, thank God, you are safe. You will probably be approached by some one before long, and may be induced to say, “Rather than embarrass my friends any longer, take my name off the list." Let me beg of you to say no such thing. You are not here; you do not know how things are worked. Dixon's election will be a Democratic triumph; he and his friends are afraid to go back to the people. If the election is postponed, you will be the means of bringing the Whig party again into line, and with you as our standardbearer we will triumph in '53.

I remain sincerely yours,
ORLANDO BROWN.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 2, p. 22

John J. Crittenden to Orlando Brown, December 5, 1851

WASHINGTON, December 5, 1851.

MY DEAR SIR,—You and other friends have been so remiss in writing to me that I have been, and am still, to a great extent, ignorant of the proceedings and incidents of the late attempts made in the Kentucky legislature to elect a senator to the Congress of the United States. This, however, I do not complain of. I am, perhaps, fortunate, in that it has saved me from some portion of those unpleasant feelings which are unavoidable in such contests. I have learned enough, however, to give me uneasiness and pain. The use which my friends have thought proper to make of my name seems to have been a cause of disturbance and controversy among the Whigs. I owe to them too many obligations for favors and honors received in times past to be willing now to be an obstacle in their way or to be a cause of dissension among them. If it will restore harmony and give them satisfaction, I hope that those of them who have desired my election will yield at once and withdraw my name from the contest. So far as I am concerned, I will be a willing sacrifice to the reunion of the Whigs. Honorable and desirable as it would be to me to be restored to a seat in the Senate, my ambition is not so selfish as to make me seek it through discord and alienation among my Whig friends. I prefer the good opinion of Kentucky to any office, and I would not excite the ill will of any considerable number of Kentuckians by any strife or contention for office with political friends. I do not see that the mere presentation of my name as a candidate ought to have produced any excitement against me, or among Whigs. I think I have not deserved this, and that there are few who will not agree with me when the passions excited by the contest are past. Still, we must look to the fact, and act upon it accordingly. For my part, I can say that I want no office which is not freely and willingly bestowed, and that I want no contest in which I am to conquer, or be conquered, by my friends. I would rather yield to them than fight them. By the first course, harmony might be restored among them for their own and the country's good; in the latter, nothing but discord and division could be the result. I am averse to be placed in any situation where I could, with any propriety, be regarded as the cause of such evils. I do not mean by this that I would feel bound or willing to yield to a competitor, however worthy, simply upon the ground that he preferred the place for himself, or that his friends preferred it for him. To ask such a submission would be illiberal, and to grant it would be unmanly. Such differences among friends of the same party ought to be settled in a generous and friendly spirit and leave no ill feeling behind. In such settlements, my aim would be not to be outdone in liberality and concession. I should dislike exceedingly to be engaged in any personal or illiberal struggle, and sooner than an election, which ought to be made, should be postponed, I would for the public interest and for harmony prefer to retire from the contest. There might be some mortification attending such a course; but this would be relieved by considering that it was done from motives honorable, friendly, and patriotic. I have served Kentucky a long time; I have served her faithfully, and, I hope, with no discredit to her; but I have no wish to intrude myself upon her for reluctant favors. When my services cease to be acceptable to her, to hold office under her would no longer be an object of ambition for me.

Yours,
J. J. CRITTENDEN.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 2, p. 22-4

John J. Crittenden to Orlando Brown, December 8, 1851

WASHINGTON, December 8, 1851.

MY DEAR SIR,—I received to-day your letter of the 3d inst. You know precisely how much and how little I have had to do in the presentation of myself as a candidate for the Senate of the United States. I think I may say that it has been the action of my friends; and since the contest began, I have looked passively upon it. I had left it to my friends,—friends deserving all my confidence,—and there I will, as you advise, leave it. It would be ungrateful as well as unjust in me now to thwart or cross them in the midway of a controversy, in which, for my sake, they have involved themselves, and about which I really know so little. I know that whatever they have done has been done in sincerity of friendship for me, and I will abide by it to the last. As they pitch the battle so let it be fought.

But in this contest it is always to be remembered that you are contending against friends, who, by accident or circumstances, have been made opponents for the present, and to whom a liberal and generous treatment is due. You, who are upon the ground, well know how to distinguish between such opponents and those who prove themselves to be enemies. I wish that all of you who are supporting me will remember, also, that you are not supporting an exacting friend, but one who would not be outdone in liberality, generosity, or conciliation; one who would rather suffer anything himself than see his generous friends involved in difficulties or perils on his account. I hope that they will act accordingly in this matter. But whatever they shall do or determine, that will I abide by, that will I maintain as right, and go to all honorable extremity with them in defending and making good.

I wrote to Mr. T. F. Marshall before the receipt of your letter, and before I read his letter in the Louisville Journal. I wrote upon the information of his course derived from the newspapers.

Somehow or other I cannot be a man of words on such occasions, but my whole heart is full almost to bursting at acts of free and manly friendship and devotion. I love Tom Marshall. Oh, if he will be but true to himself, how I would strive for his advancement! How I would love to strive for it!

I was touched to the heart, too, at what you tell me about my old friend (for such I may now call him) Ben Hardin. I felt like breaking at the root when I heard that he was against me, for in the days of our youth—of our growth—we were together, and have passed thus far through life in more of amity and good will than falls to the lot of most men occupying our position. Upon reading what you wrote me my eyes were not dry. Time gives a sort of sacredness to the feelings that arise from old associations and friendships. I wish I could live long enough, or had the means of repaying, Orlando [Brown], all the debts Ï owe my friends. But therein I am a bankrupt indeed.

Do give my grateful regards to my friends Caldwell and Cunningham, and to all the friends that in my absence have stood by me; my heart is full of thankfulness. And I really hope and believe that many of those who have taken part against me have been influenced to do so by circumstances that do not affect their good opinion and kind feelings towards me. I bear no ill will to them.

Your friend,
J. J. CRITTENDEN.
ORLANDO BROWN, Esq.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 2, p. 24-5

Thursday, February 22, 2024

John J. Crittenden to Count Eugène de Sartiges, October 22, 1851

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, October 22, 1851.

The undersigned, acting Secretary of State of the United States, has the honor to remind M. de Sartiges, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the French republic, that in the interview which he had with him on the 8th instant, he stated that he might have occasion to address him in writing on the subject of the information which M. de Sartiges then communicated, that the French government had issued orders to its ships of war, then in the West Indies, to give assistance to Spain, and to prevent by force any adventurers of any nation from landing with hostile intent on the island of Cuba. Having imparted that information to the President, the undersigned has now the honor, by his direction, to address M. de Sartiges in regard to it.

M. de Sartiges is apprised that a few days prior to the interview adverted to the chargé d'affaires of her Britannic Majesty had given to this department official notice that his government had issued similar orders to its naval forces. The President had regarded this as a matter of grave importance, but its gravity is greatly increased by the concurrence and co-operation of France in the same measure. It cannot be doubted that those orders have been occasioned by the recent unlawful expedition of less than five hundred men, which, having evaded the vigilance of this government, and escaped from New Orleans, were landed by the steamer Pampero upon the island of Cuba, and were soon captured, and many of them executed. That such an incident should have incited the combined action of two great European powers, for an object to which neither of them is a direct party, and in a manner that may seriously affect the people of the United States, cannot fail to awaken the earnest consideration of the President.

He cannot perceive the necessity or propriety of such orders, while he entertains the strongest apprehensions that their execution by French and British cruisers will be attended with injurious and dangerous consequences to the commerce and peace of the United States. They cannot be carried into effect  without a visitation, examination, and consequent detention of our vessels on our shores, and in the great channels of our coasting trade, and this must invest British and French cruisers with the jurisdiction of determining, in the first instance at least, what are the expeditions denounced in their orders, and who are the guilty persons engaged in them. It is plain, however different may have been the intentions of the respective governments, that the exercise of such a power and jurisdiction could hardly fail to lead to abuses and collisions perilous to the peace that now so happily prevails. By such an interference those governments seem to assume an attitude unfriendly to the United States. The President will not, however, allow himself to believe that this intervention has been intended as an admonition or reproach to his government. He has signally manifested his condemnation of all such lawless enterprises, and has adopted active measures for their prevention and suppression. It must also be known to the governments of France and England, in common with all the world, that this government, since it took its place among nations, has carefully preserved its good faith, and anxiously endeavored to fulfill all its obligations, conventional and national. And this it has done from motives far above any apprehensions of danger to itself. From its beginning, under the present Constitution, it has sedulously cultivated the policy of peace, of not intermeddling in the affairs of others, and of preventing by highly penal enactments any unlawful interference by its citizens to disturb the tranquillity of countries with which the United States were in amity. To this end many such enactments have been made, the first as early as the year 1794, and the last as late as 1838. The last having expired by its own limitation, and all the preceding legislation on the subject having been comprehended in the act of Congress of the 20th of April, 1818, it is unnecessary to do more than to refer M. de Sartiges to its provisions as marking the signal anxiety and good faith of this government to restrain persons within its jurisdiction from committing any acts inconsistent with the rights of others, or its own obligations. These laws were intended to comprehend, and to protect from violation, all our relations with and duties to countries at peace with us, and to punish any violations of them by our citizens as crimes against the United States. In this manifestation of its desire to preserve just and peaceful relations with all nations, it is believed that the United States have gone before and further than any of the older governments of Europe. Without recapitulating all the provisions of those laws by which the United States have so carefully endeavored to prohibit every act that could be justly offensive to their neighbors, it is deemed enough for this occasion to say that they denounce all such enterprises or expeditions as those against which the orders in question are directed.

The undersigned thinks it is of importance enough to call the attention of M. de Sartiges more directly to this law. A literal copy of it is accordingly herewith communicated. Besides the ordinary legal process, it authorizes the President to employ the military and naval forces of the country for the purpose of preventing such expeditions and arresting for punishment those concerned in them. In the spirit of this law, the President condemns such expeditions against the island of Cuba as are denounced by the orders in question, and has omitted nothing for their detection and prevention. To that end he has given orders to civil, naval, and military officers from New York to New Orleans, and has enjoined upon them the greatest vigilance and energy. This course on the subject has been in all things clear and direct. It has been no secret, and the undersigned must presume that it has been fully understood and known by M. de Sartiges. An appeal might confidently be made to the vigilant and enlightened minister of Spain that his suggestions for the prevention of such aggressions, or the prosecution of offenders engaged in them, have been promptly considered, and, if found reasonable, adopted by the President; his course, it is believed, has been above all question of just cause of complaint. This government is determined to execute its laws, and in the performance of this duty can neither ask nor receive foreign aid. If, notwithstanding all its efforts, expeditions of small force hostile to Cuba have, in a single vessel or steamer, excited by Cubans themselves, escaped from our extensive shores, such an accident can furnish no ground of imputation either upon the law or its administration. Every country furnishes instances enough of infractions and evasions of its laws, which no power or vigilance can effectually guard against. It need not be feared that any expeditions of a lawless and hostile character can escape from the United States of sufficient force to create any alarm for the safety of Cuba, or against which Spain might not defend it with the slightest exertion of her power. The President is persuaded that none such can escape detection and prevention, except by their insignificance. None certainly can escape which could require the combined aid of France and England to resist or suppress. Cuba will find a sure, if not its surest, protection and defense in the justice and good faith of the United States.

There is another point of view in which this intervention on the part of France and England cannot be viewed with indifference by the President. The geographical position of the island of Cuba in the Gulf of Mexico, lying at no great distance from the mouth of the river Mississippi and in the line of the greatest current of the commerce of the United States, would become, in the hands of any powerful European nation, an object of just jealousy and apprehension to the people of this country. A due regard to their own safety and interest must, therefore, make it a matter of importance to them who shall possess and hold dominion over that island. The government of France and those of other European nations were long since officially apprised by this government that the United States could not see, without concern, that island transferred by Spain to any other European state; President Fillmore fully concurs in that sentiment, and is apprehensive that the sort of protectorate introduced by the orders in question might, in contingencies not difficult to be imagined, lead to results equally objectionable. If it should appear to M. de Sartiges that the President is too apprehensive on this subject, this must be attributed to his great solicitude to guard friendly relations between the two countries against all contingencies and causes of disturbance. The people of the United States have long cherished towards France the most amicable sentiments, and recent events which made her a republic have opened new sources of fraternal sympathy. Harmony and confidence would seem to be the natural relations of the two great republics of the world, relations demanded no less by their permanent interests than by circumstances and combinations in continental Europe, which now seem to threaten so imminently the cause of free institutions. The United States have nothing to fear from those convulsions, nor are they propagandists, but they have at heart the cause of freedom in all countries, and believe that the example of the two great republics of France and America, with their moral and social influences, co-operating harmoniously, would go far to promote and to strengthen that cause. It is with these views that the President so much desires the cultivation of friendly feelings between the two countries, and regards with so much concern any cause that may tend to produce collision or alienation. He believes that this Cuban intervention is such a cause. The system of government which prevails most generally in Europe is adverse to the principles upon which this government is founded, and the undersigned is well aware that the difference between them is calculated to produce distrust of, if not aversion to, the government of the United States. Sensible of this, the people of this country are naturally jealous of European interference in American affairs. And although they would not impute to France, now herself a republic, any participation in this distrustful and unfriendly feeling towards their government, yet the undersigned must repeat, that her intervention in this instance, if attempted to be executed, in the only practicable mode for its effectual execution, could not fail to produce some irritation, if not worse consequences. The French cruisers sailing up and down the shores of the United States to perform their needless task of protecting Cuba, and their ungracious office of watching the people of this country as if they were fruitful of piracies, would be regarded with some feelings of resentment, and the flag they bore-a flag which should always be welcome to the sight of Americans—would be looked at as casting a shadow of unmerited and dishonoring suspicion upon them and their government. The undersigned will add that all experience seems to prove that the rights, interests, and peace of the continents of Europe and America will be best preserved by the forbearance of each to interfere in the affairs of the other. The government of the United States has constantly acted on that principle, and has never intermeddled in European questions. The President has deemed it proper to the occasion that his views should be thus fully and frankly presented for the friendly consideration of M. de Sartiges and his government, in order that all possible precautions may be used to avert any misunderstanding, and every cause or consequence that might disturb the peace or alienate, in the least, the sentiments of confidence and friendship which now bind together the republics of the United States and France. The undersigned avails himself of this occasion to offer to M. de Sartiges the assurance of his very distinguished consideration.

JOHN J. CRITTENDEN.
M. DE SARTIGES.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 2, p. 13-7

Sunday, February 18, 2024

Thomas H. Clay, June 7, 1852

My father was yesterday much depressed. He had held a long conversation with Mr. Crittenden and requested me to treat him kindly. Besides a cold sweat after dinner, all these things were sufficient to make him feel low spirited. He told me that he thought there would soon be a termination to it. The doctor thought on his afternoon visit that he was no worse than usual. God alone knows.

SOURCE: Calvin Colton, Editor, The Private Correspondence of Henry Clay, p. 634

Friday, January 26, 2024

John M. Clayton to John J. Crittenden, October 8, 1851

BUENA VISTA, DELAWARE, October 8, 1851.

MY DEAR CRITTENDEN,—Square yourself, for I have a favor to ask of you for one of my friends. Don't knit your brows, nor utter one of those significant snorts which you are accustomed to give when reading anything unpleasant, especially an application for an office. I must have what I am about to ask for, and if you grant it I will give you a receipt in full, and do you be thankful that I let you off so easily; for the appointment I want is no great affair, and it will do more to make the administration popular in this section of the country than any other appointment they could make.

I want you to obtain a promise from President Fillmore to appoint Charles I. Dupont, Jr., a purser in the navy of the United States, on the happening of the first vacancy.

Now, if I had you with me, just seated in the arm-chair opposite my table, I would talk to you in my own peculiar and sensible way; and I would give you such reasons as would start you right off to obtain the promise of this appointment. Deprived, as I am, of the influence of my colloquial eloquence, which was always deservedly great upon you, I shall present my wishes in less vivid colors and with much more feeble power by the aid of my pen.

I have often boasted to you of the Dupont family of Delaware; I have told you how proud I was of their friendship, and therefore I need not repeat to you the story of their merits. Eleuthere Irene Dupont and Victor Dupont, sons of one of the most virtuous and distinguished noblemen of France, both narrowly escaped the malice of Robespierre and the deadly hostility of the Jacobins during the French Revolution, and emigrated to this country and settled on the banks of the Brandywine, where, by their industry and talents, they converted what was but a rocky desert into one of the most beautiful and enchanting portions of our country. No men were more beloved and honored in their day, and it has always been with me a source of high gratification, amidst the struggles of this life, to reflect that I enjoyed their friendship and kind regard. Each of these left a family, whose sons are all highly esteemed and beloved in Delaware for their own virtues. Victor left two sons, Charles I. Dupont, the celebrated manufacturer of the Brandywine, known to you as your friend, and Captain S. F. Dupont, one of the most distinguished officers of our navy. Young Dupont, the applicant, is the son of Charles. He is a young man of the finest qualities of heart and head, well educated, moral, temperate, and industrious, of business habits, and possessing the same character, integrity, and honor which mark every member of the family, without an exception.

Now, my dear Crittenden, these Duponts have spent a fortune for the Whig party, and have never received a favor from it, for they never desired any, they have been the chief prop and support of our party ever since its origin; they did more to build it up, originally, than any other family in the State, and but for their powerful influence we should have sent two Locofoco senators to Congress for the last twenty years.

Charles has now set his heart upon the appointment of his son as a purser, and he is sustained in this application not only by the just influence of his relatives and personal friends, but by all the Whigs of the State and the friends of the administration, who feel that they owe more and have paid less to these Duponts than to any other family.

I think I am boring you with some things as well known to you as to me; let me, therefore, cut my letter short by begging you, as soon as you have read this letter, to go down and see the President, and tell him he would do more to gratify his friends by this little appointment than he could by a full mission abroad. Take a glass of Bourbon whisky before you start; call on Graham, and get him to go along with you, and do not leave the President until you get a promise that young Dupont shall have the first vacancy. This little appointment will do more to enable us to redeem the State at the next election than anything else the President could do for us.

I am, dear Crittenden, faithfully yours,
JOHN M. CLAYTON.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 2, p. 10-11

John M. Clayton to John J. Crittenden, October 27, 1851

BUENA VISTA, DELAWARE, October 27, 1851.

MY DEAR CRITTENDEN,—I see our friend Conrad has ordered my nephew, James C. Douglass, to the Portsmouth sloop of war, about to go to the Pacific. I am convinced that a voyage round the Horn would finish him now. Any ship going to a mild climate would save his life. I have lost all my children, and this nephew is nearly the only relation I have in the world. Do ask Conrad to order him to another ship. I believe if he goes to the Pacific I shall never see him again. Hurrah for the new Secretary of State! You have done nobly. If Mr. Webster shall resign I will lend you my countenance now to be his permanent successor. I pray that if the office shall become vacant you may take it. If you do accept it, the Whigs will rally on Mr. Fillmore. As soon as I hear of your appointment I shall go to Washington to apprise you of some things. Do not refuse if you have any regard for the Whig party. If you reject it, the party will not rally. Mr. Webster is going to Washington avowedly to resign before the session of Congress. Do not reject the permanent appointment of Secretary of State, unless you have resolved to see your friends in the dust, your party in ashes.

I tell you that you are the connecting link between the Whigs of Pennsylvania and Mr. Fillmore. I would be your man of work, without pay or clerk hire. The department would be right side up in three months. Now recollect that you were the man who induced me to accept this office. I have a right, therefore, to ask you to accept it.

Ever yours,
J. M. CLAYTON.
Hon. J. J. CRITTENDEN.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 2, p. 12

Friday, January 19, 2024

Daniel Webster to Daniel Fletcher Webster, July 23, 1850

Washington, July 23, 1850.

MY DEAR SON,—I gave directions yesterday, to have my old rooms arranged for me. This morning, at ten o'clock, I was sworn in, and I write this at my old high table, in my little room. The rooms are all clean, and very nice. Mr. Zantzinger is appointed agent and superintendent of the building, and Charles Brown1 is put again on "Continental Establishment." Some other things must be done, which, with Mr. Derrick's advice, I shall dispatch at once, so as to avoid importunity.

Would Mr. Sargent come here, and be my private and confidential clerk, for eight hundred dollars a year? Or do you think of anybody who would do better?

The weather cooler, and I am well. D. W., Mr. Corwin, and Mr. Hall were sworn in to-day. Mr. Crittenden and Mr. Graham accept; Mr. Pearce, doubtful. Mr. Bates, not heard. from.

Remember me to Mrs. H. and Mr. H.

Yours,
D. W.
_______________

1 A colored man who had been with Mr. Webster for many years.

SOURCE: Fletcher Webster, Editor, The Private Correspondence of Daniel Webster, Vol. 2, p. 379

Tuesday, October 24, 2023

John J. Crittenden to Robert Jefferson Breckinridge, April 21, 1851

WASHINGTON, April 21, 1851.

SIR, Your letter of the 12th inst. was received yesterday, and read with painful surprise. It is marked with such a spirit of rebuke and irritation that I hardly know how I ought to understand or reply to it. You have almost made me feel that any explanation under such circumstances would be derogatory. But, sir, suppressing all these feelings, and preferring in this instance to err, if at all, on the side of forbearance, I have concluded to address you a calm reply and explanation of the subject that has so much irritated and excited you.

Know, then, that I did receive the letter you addressed to me last winter requesting my assistance in procuring for your son the appointment of cadet in the Military Academy at West Point.

All such appointments, except ten, are so regulated by law that they must be made, one from each congressional district, on the nomination and recommendation of the representative of that district.

There was no vacancy in your district, and, of course, the only hope for your son was to obtain for him one of the ten extraordinary appointments at the disposal of the President. The power of conferring these is understood to have been given to the President for the benefit of the sons of officers of the army and navy, and especially of those whose fathers had perished in the service of their country; and although these appointments have not, in practice, been always confined to this description of persons, their claims have been generally favored and preferred. The number of such applicants has been greatly increased by the Mexican war, and their competitors from civil life are still more numerous.

From this general statement may be inferred the uncertainty and difficulty of procuring one of these appointments.

In the winter of 1849 and '50 I had, at the instance of my old friend, Gabriel Lewis, of Kentucky, very earnestly recommended a grandson of his to General Taylor for one of these appointments. He did not get it, and it was then determined by his family, with my advice and my promise to give what assistance I could, to renew or continue his application for another year, and I had, accordingly, again recommended him for one of the appointments that were to be made this spring.

Such was the condition of things and such my situation and engagement when your first letter was received. Notwithstanding all the difficulties in the way, I was not without the hope of serving you, for the sole reason, perhaps, that I wished to do so, and wished to obtain the appointment for your son. To learn something of the prospect of success, I conversed several times with the Secretary of War on the subject. He could only tell me that no selections would be made, that the subject would not be considered till the time had arrived for making the appointments, and that the number of applicants was very great, amounting to hundreds,—I think he said fifteen hundred.

I ought, perhaps, to have acknowledged the receipt of your letter and have given you all this information; and most certainly I would have done it if I had had the least apprehension of the grave consequences that have followed the omission. It did not occur to me that any punctiliousness would be exacted in our correspondence.

But, besides all this, and to say nothing of the daily duties of my office, and my almost constant attendance upon the Supreme Court, then in session, I had nothing satisfactory or definite to write. I waited, therefore, willing to avail myself of any circumstance or opportunity that time or chance might bring forth to serve you and to procure an appointment for your son as well as for the grandson of Mr. Lewis. I could find no such opportunity—no opportunity even for urging it with the least hope of success.

The appointments have all been recently made, and, with few exceptions, confined to the sons, I believe, of deceased officers, to the exclusion, for the second time, of the grandson of my friend Lewis, who has been on the list of applicants for two years, with all the recommendation I could give him.

I should have taken some opportunity of writing to you on this subject, even if your late letter had not so unpleasantly anticipated that purpose.

This, sir, is the whole tale. It must speak for itself. I have no other propitiation to offer. I am the injured party. When you become conscious of that, you will know well what atonement ought to be made and how it ought to be made. Till then, sir, self-respect compels me to say that I will be content to abide those unfriendly relations which I understand your letter to imply, if not proclaim.

I can truly say that I have written this "more in sorrow than in anger." I have intended nothing beyond my own defense and vindication, and if I have been betrayed into a word that goes beyond those just limits and implies anything like aggression, let it be stricken out.

J. J. CRITTENDEN.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 1, p. 385-7

Robert Jefferson Breckinridge to John J. Crittenden, May 3, 1851

LEXINGTON, KENTUCKY, May 3, 1851.
Hon. J. J. CRITTENDEN.

DEAR SIR,—I regret very much to perceive by your letter of the 21st ultimo that you considered my letter to you of the 12th April wanting in proper respect to you, and prompted by irritation on my part. I retained no copy of that letter; but, assuredly, I know very little of myself if it contained the evidences of either of those states of mind.

For the first time in my life I had condescended to solicit, from any human authority, anything, either for myself or any member of my immediate family, though many hundreds of times I have done what I could for others. It was particularly distressing to me that I had been seduced into such a position by the extreme kindness of an old personal friend (Mr. Duncan), as I explained in my first letter to you, and, by some ridiculous notion, that the present administration might consider itself any ways connected with that of General Taylor, so as to feel disposed to fulfill any expectations it may have raised.

Unless my memory deceives me, my first letter, making the application, intimated to you that I was not sure it was proper in me to write you such a letter, and asked you to excuse the impropriety, if indeed one existed. Such, I remember well, was the state of my mind, and I think I expressed it. The only notice ever taken of that letter, by you, is the allusion to it in your letter before me. What took place in the mean time may be uttered in a sentence, and need not be repeated here.

Under all the painful, and to me altogether unprecedented, circumstances of a very humiliating position, I thought it due to you to express my regret at having implicated you, in any degree, in such an affair by my letter of application to you; and I thought it due to myself to express to you, under such circumstances, my regret at allowing myself, in a moment of parental weakness, to embark in a matter which, in all its progress and its termination, was especially out of keeping with the whole tenor of my life and feelings. If my letter, to which yours of the 21st April is an answer, expresses more or less than these things, it is expressed unhappily and improperly. If, during the progress of the affair, you had judged it necessary or proper to have treated it differently, or had had it in your power to do so, I should not have been more bound to feel obliged by any other or further service than I am now bound to feel obliged, by such as your letter informs me you were good enough to render me, under circumstances which, it is now obvious, must have been embarrassing to you, and which, if I had known, I would have instantly released you from. But all this, as it appears to me, only the more painfully shows how inconsiderate my first application to you was, and how needless it was for my subsequent expression of regret for having made it to be taken in an offensive sense.

The sole object of this letter is to place the whole affair on the footing which, in my opinion, it really occupies.

Certainly I had no right to ask anything of the sort I did ask at your hands. But assuredly having been weak enough to ask it, and having, in the course of events, had full occasion to perceive that weakness, I had the right without offense to express sincere regret for what I had inconsiderately done,—to the needless annoyance of yourself and others, and to the wounding of my own self-esteem.

Permit me, in conclusion, to say that altogether the most painful part of this affair, to me, is that I should have given offense to a man who, for nearly if not quite thirty years, I have been accustomed to regard with feelings of the greatest esteem, admiration, and confidence, and for whom, at any moment during those thirty years, I would have periled everything but my honor to have served him; such a man will know how to appreciate the workings of a nature perhaps oversensitive and overproud, in the midst of unusual and oppressive circumstances. If not, it is better to forget all than lose our own self-respect.

As to Mr. Fillmore and Mr. Conrad, strange as it may seem to you, I would never, under ordinary circumstances, have asked either of them for any favor whatever. I rather considered myself asking you and Mr. Clay and Judge Underwood and Judge Breck and a few other old friends to whom I brought myself to the point—not without great difficulty—of saying what I did. This may seem very absurd to you; perhaps it is so; it is nevertheless the truth; and most certainly I did not suppose that any administration of which yourself and Mr. Clay and Judge Underwood and Judge Breck were avowed, if not confidential, supporters, would, under the entire circumstances of this case, have it in its power to refuse so paltry a boon; and after seeing the published list of successful applicants, from which alone I learned the fate of my application, I saw still less reason to comprehend such a result. As to yourself, three particulars separated your case from that of the other friends I have named: 1st. I loved you most, and relied most on you. 2d. I the most distrusted the propriety of writing to you, on account of your connection with the cabinet. 3d. From you alone I had no word of notice; and for these two last reasons, the more felt that an explanation was demanded of me as due both to you and myself.

If you have had patience to read this letter, it is needless for me to say more than that I still desire to be considered your friend.

R. J. B.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 1, p. 387-9

Saturday, October 14, 2023

Lewis E. Harvie to Senator Robert M. T. Hunter, January 19, 1852

APPOMATTOX DEPOT, AMELIA CO[UNTY, VA.],        
January 19th, 1852.

DEAR HUNTER: I am very solicitous to procure an appointment as Cadet, for my second son Jno. Harvie, in the military Academy at West Point. My only chance of getting him in is as one of the appointments by the President. I have written to Mr. Mason on the subject and desired him to show you my letter. I would not write to you because I thought about this time you would be annoyed by your election. Since I wrote I have been to Richmond and learnt (with sincere gratification as you will believe) that your success was well nigh certain. I have concluded to write to you and let you understand that I am much interested in procuring this appointment, hoping that you will interest yourself in it and aid me as far as you can. I do not know what step to take and hope you will let me know. This boy has as I am informed by his teachers a considerable talent for Mathematics which I wish cultivated and this is one among various reasons why I wish him sent to West Point. It has been suggested to me to state to you (what I should certainly not have thought of but for the suggestion) that he is a grand nephew of Maj[o]r Ja[me]s Eggleston who served as Lieu[tenan]t in Lee's Legion during the Revolutionary war, and was afterwards elected to Congress, from this District. As you know he was a gallant officer and highly respected as a citizen and Public man. His Great Grand father Col. Harvie, was also an active Patriot during the same struggle and a member of the V[irginija Convention in 1775 and 76. He was afterwards in Congress and signed the Articles of Confederation in 1778, and was then made Register of the Land Office in V[irgini]a, showing that his services were appreciated. I mention these matters with reluctance and only because I have been urged to do so. I hope you will forget I have done so unless they can be made available in favouring this appointment. I am sure that Holliday, Edmundson, Caskie, Bocock, Strother, Meade and Genl. Millson will aid me if I know how to use their assistance. I am under the impression also that I may be able to procure the intervention of Genl. Scott and Mr. Crittenden on account of others and not myself. My main reliance tho' is on you and Strother and I shall expect you to work for me as I would under similar circumstances for you and him. If I can't get him in this year I would be content to get him in the next. Let me hear from you as soon as may be.

SOURCE: Charles Henry Ambler, Editor, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1916, in Two Volumes, Vol. II, Correspondence of Robert M. T. Hunter (1826-1876), p. 134-5

Sunday, September 24, 2023

Robert P. Letcher to Senator John J. Crittenden, May 6, 1850

MEXICO, May 6, 1850.

DEAR CRITTENDEN,—Ah, my dear governor! not quite so fast. You have pulled trigger a little too quick. There is no discrepancy between my speech and my letters. What a man says in his official capacity is one thing, and what he has a right to say in his private capacity is quite another thing, it's all “as straight as a gun-barrel.” I spoke for the United States, and am in no way responsible for what I said as an advocate; mind, I appeared as counsel. I reserve my defense till my return. If Clayton is a tender-hearted man, he will give me leave to return in October. I could not go now if I had leave, because of the crowd of business,—because, also, of the vomito. I am surprised, disappointed, and mortified exceedingly to hear that you are all taking the rounds, eating and drinking just as merrily and as happily as if I were with you. It is too bad, really. Had the good ship Walker been cast away, sure enough I don't believe it would have made a single swallow less, particularly of the liquids, among the whole squad of you. What a prolific topic of reflection does this furnish to one of my tender sensibilities, whose vanity had prompted him to suppose his absence would make a vacuum in the social circle that time itself would hardly ever fill up! Nobody died of a broken heart, nobody shed a tear, nobody lost a meal, or even a drink,—in fact, increased their drinks when it was fully believed I was food for the sharks in the Gulf of Mexico; and if this had been so, by this time the whole matter would have been utterly forgotten. Well, all I can say is, my friends can stand trouble and loss better than any other man's friends living. A noble set of fellows they are! I am as bad off as Orlando Brown was in Washington, when he took it into his head that the Frankfort people were glad he had left, and asked me to tell him candidly how it was. I told him he was right, and the only fear was that he might possibly come home. I am not altogether happy in my mind, but I don't wish my rascally friends to know that, they might think it was on that account,—not a bit of it! My depression is owing to the deep interest I feel for my country. Write to me often, write me the longest sort of letters. The Prussian minister just called to take a last farewell. A noble fellow he is! It was quite a tender scene. I shall miss that man more than any human being in this city. I have had one of Bob's and Harry's hams boiled, and I eat it twice a day,—no eating three times a day in this country. Bankhead and his wife are here; they are more broken down than any couple I know. I am distressed to look at them.

Your friend,
R. P. LETCHER.
Hon. J. J. CRITTENDEN.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 1, p. 370

Senator John J. Crittenden to Orlando Brown, May 18, 1850

 FRANKFORT, May 18, 1850.

MY DEAR SIR,—Your letter of the 9th inst. was duly received, and, by the telegraph, we already know that all you taught me to expect has come to pass. The Republic has changed hands, and Mr. Hall has succeeded the former editors. It is to be greatly regretted that there should be any motive or cause for such a movement. Not that Mr. Hall is not very competent and worthy, but the regret is that there should have been any disagreement between the retiring editors and the administration. I had hoped that Burnley's mediation might have reconciled all differences, and that our friend Bullitt's known attachment to the President would have made him forego all his objections to the cabinet. The extent of his objections I do not know, nor do I mean to blame him, for I am very certain that he has acted from honest convictions and motives. But I must say, at the same time, that for myself I am not sensible of any objections that require such an opposition to the cabinet. Indeed, I doubt very much whether General Taylor could select another cabinet of more ability, or character, or personal worth. But I do not mean to make comments on the subject. The storm that has just passed by will be followed, I hope, by that calm that usually compensates for its ravages; and I trust that we shall yet see the administration emerging successfully from the difficulties that now surround it.

I shall be delighted to see you at home, but this is overcome by the absolute sadness I feel at your quitting old Zack at such a time, when, perhaps, he most requires the comfort and assistance of your society and counsel. I received Robert's letter yesterday. You may tell him so, and his children and all are well. I have not another word to say about his affairs and solicitations at Washington. Under a first impulse I said and wrote much more than I ought. Hereafter he can only have my good wishes, and must depend on himself. I must not be mixed up with any office-seeking for my own family.

I have written to our friend Mr. Richard Hawes, apprising him of your views and wishes, and inquiring whether he would be willing, in the event of your resignation, to accept your present office. I have not yet received his answer, but I anticipate, from many conversations with him, that he will not accept it. If he will, he is the very man, and the man of my choice. Without much acquaintance with Mr. Alexander McKee, I had formed a kind opinion of him, and supposed, from information, that he was very much a man of business. In a conversation last winter, I mentioned that it was not expected by your friends that you would continue long in office, and suggested to him the vacancy as one that would very well suit him. But little more was then said on the subject, and nothing since has passed between us about it. I am told that he went through the place a few days ago, on his way to the East, but he did not call on me, and I know not his object. I have heard that his thoughts have been turned of late towards California, and an office at Washington may not now be desirable to him; and in the present uncertainty I have no more to say about it. He is not apprised of what I lately wrote to you in his behalf.

I wish that before you leave Washington you would especially take it upon yourself to have something clever done for our friend, Mr. George W. Barbour, a senator in our General Assembly from the Princeton district. You recollect him, I hope. He is a fine-looking, high-spirited, and noble-hearted fellow, a lawyer by profession, and of fair capacity. He is poor, and too modest and proud to seek for office, though he wants it. He is an ardent and thorough Taylor-man. Now, what can be done for such a man? I have undertaken to be his intercessor, and have written in his behalf time and again to Clayton, and perhaps to others, but, so far, have not got even any answer relating to him. A chargé-ship to anywhere in South America would be very acceptable to him; so would a judgeship in any of our territorial governments, or the office of secretary in those governments. Now, this is a wide range; there are many offices in it, and mighty few such clever fellows anywhere as Barbour. The place that that fellow Meeker was slipped into, and ought to be slipped out of, would suit poor Barbour exactly, and he is worthy of it. I have told Barbour that he must be patient, and that I was certain something would, sooner or later, be done for him. It begins to be the "later," and nothing is yet done. The last alternative is to try and get you to make up this business and do something in it.

Your friend,
J. J. CRITTENDEN.
O. BROWN, Esq.

P.S.—I can do nothing more with Clayton in Barbour's case but quarrel with him, and that I don't want to do,—first, because he is a stout fellow and might whip me; secondly, I like the fellow.

J. J. C.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 1, p. 371-2

Senator John J. Crittenden to Orlando Brown, June 7, 1850

FRANKFORT, June 7, 1850.

DEAR ORLANDO,—I returned last Sunday from Indianapolis after a week's absence. Nothing could exceed the kindness and hospitality which attended me throughout the State. The receptions and honors with which they endeavored to distinguish me were almost overwhelming to one so plain as I am and so unaccustomed to such ceremonies and distinctions. I feel that I owe to Indiana and her governor a great debt of gratitude. In that State there is very little political abolition, and, with a strong and patriotic feeling for the Union, there is mingled a particularly fraternal kindness and affection for Kentucky. The prevailing sentiment there is for a compromise and amicable settlement of all the slavery question. The plan suggested in General Taylor's message was spoken of frequently as most acceptable, but I think they would be satisfied with Mr. Clay's bill. In my speech at Indianapolis I spoke of old Zack as the noble old patriot in whom the country might have all confidence, and, without discriminating between the various plans that had been proposed, I expressed my hope and confidence that they would result in some form of amicable adjustment. The occasion required me to avoid, as far as possible, the appearance of partisanship or party politics; but it was due to my heart to give old Zack a good word, and I did it. I felt it a duty, too, to talk right plainly to them about abolition and the mischiefs that its meddlesome and false humanity had brought and was tending to bring upon the country. I went so far as to advise those who, from tenderness of conscience about slavery, could not acquiesce in what our fathers had done, and could not reconcile themselves to the Constitution of the United States and the performance of the duties it enjoined, to quit the country, etc. All this seemed to be well received except, as I learned afterwards, by some half-dozen abolitionists out of a crowd of as many thousand. The convention is in session, and I have scarcely time to steal a moment to write to you.

Well, you have resigned. It makes me glad, and it makes me sorry; glad that you are coming back to us,—sorry, that you are leaving General Taylor. The difficulties that are surrounding him only tend to increase my sympathy and zeal for him, and I retain my confidence that the storm will rage around him in vain, and that his firm and resolute integrity and patriotism will bear him through triumphantly. There is one peril before him that is to be carefully avoided, and that is the peril of having thrown upon his administration the responsibility of defeating the bill of the committee of thirteen or any other measure of compromise. It has appeared to me that the principal questions of the slavery controversy might have been disposed of more quietly and easily on the plan recommended by the President; but the people are anxious for a settlement, and comparatively indifferent as to the exact terms, provided they embrace anything like a compromise; and it seems to me that any concession or sacrifice of opinion as to the mode ought to be made to accomplish the end. It is not necessary to enlarge upon this subject. General Taylor's message is the foundation of all their plans in this, that it avoids the Wilmot proviso; all the rest is the mere finish of the work. My whole heart is bent on the success of General Taylor. I know that he deserves it, and believe he will achieve it. Tell Robert his little girls are gay as birds, and are continually dragging me into the garden to pull strawberries with them. I have taken poor Bob's disappointment quite to heart; but let that go.

Your friend,
J. J. CRITTENDEN.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 1, p. 372-4

Senator John J. Crittenden to Albert T. Burnley, July 19, 1850

July 19, 1850.

DEAR BURNLEY,—I returned from Louisville last evening, where I was suddenly summoned a few days ago to attend the sick and, as was then supposed, dying bed of my son-in-law, Chapman Coleman. I left him much improved, and, as the doctors induced me to hope, out of danger, though still quite ill. This absence delayed the receipt of your telegraphic dispatches, in which you ask me if I will accept the office of Attorney-General, and say that it is important I should answer immediately. A little reflection will show you the difficulty of answering this communication with the telegraphic brevity of a "yes" or "no." Indeed, I find much of the same difficulty in responding to you in any mode. You are upon the spot, and with a nearer and better view of the condition of things. You give me no intimation of your opinions or wishes; nor do you give me to understand that the inquiry was made at the suggestion or by the authority of the President or any other official. I must therefore understand it as more an inquiry of your own, in order, perhaps, to enable you and other friends to press me more effectually for the office. If this be the object and purpose, I could not answer you affirmatively without in substance seeking the office for myself. That I am not willing to do, either in form or substance, directly or indirectly. I would not, for any consideration subject myself to the imputation of endeavoring to force or solicit my way into the cabinet of Mr. Fillmore. There are stations that can be neither agreeably nor usefully occupied except by persons having the personal good will and confidence of the President. My relations with Mr. Fillmore have always been of the most agreeable and amicable character, and I hope they may continue so. It seems to me that if he pleased to desire my acceptance of the office of Attorney-General, the most proper course would be for him to tender it to me; and that the most proper and becoming course for me would be to wait till it was tendered. The tender would then be most honorable to both parties, and certainly most gratefully received by me. I feel that before such an offer it would be indelicate in me to say that I would or would NOT accept. You will appreciate all this without any explanation, and so I shall leave the subject. There is no confidence, Burnley, that I fear to repose in you; and if it should appear to you that there is too much of reserve in this letter to be used towards an old and well-tried friend, I wish you to understand that it is intended to apply to the subject only, and to keep distinct and clear the line of conduct that I sincerely desire to pursue in relation to this matter.

My situation now is not exactly what it was when I declined an invitation to go into the cabinet of General Taylor; and to you, as my friend, my personal friend, I may say that my impression is that I should accept the office if tendered to me; but I will have no agency in seeking or getting it; nor do I wish my friends to place me in any attitude that can be construed into any such seeking; nor do I wish them to give themselves any trouble about the matter. If the offer of the office comes freely and without solicitation, then it comes honorably, and may be taken the more honorably. I think you will now understand me fully, and I have only to add that I am always your friend,

J. J. CRITTENDEN.
To A. T. BURNLEY, Esq.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 1, p. 374-5

Senator John J. Crittenden to Ann Mary Crittenden Coleman, July 23, 1850

FRANKFORT, July 23, 1850.

MY DEAR DAUGHTER,—Doubly near and dear to me in your affliction, I do not know how to address you, or to express my sympathy in your great calamity. You will find, my child, in your own heart and in your own reflections the only real consolations. If, as I believe, this life is but a state of preparation and probation, happiest is he who, having done his duty like a man and a Christian, is soonest relieved from it. You have every reason to be assured that such is the fortunate lot of that husband of whom death has deprived you. That very excellence, which you mourn the loss of, will become a source of comfort and consolation to your heart. The death of your husband has placed you under great responsibilities, and left you many duties to perform. Turn, then, courageously to the performance of those duties, and in their performance you will find strength and consolation. You will feel, too, the high and pleasant consciousness that you are thereby best gratifying and manifesting your respect and devotion to the memory of your husband. He has enjoined it upon you to take his place in respect to your children, and to be to them as a father and mother also. You will, I know, consider this a sacred duty, and will not abandon it by giving yourself up to unavailing grief. I had intended to go to Louisville, to-morrow, to see you, but, upon consultation with Harry, it is decided to be best to postpone my visit for about a week; then, perhaps, I may be more serviceable to you than now. Your mother will probably accompany me. Farewell, my dear child.

J. J. CRITTENDEN.
Mrs. A. M. COLEMAN.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 1, p. 376

John J. Crittenden on the Constitutionality of the Fugitive Slave Bill, September 18, 1850

The provisions of the bill, commonly called the fugitive slave bill, and which Congress have submitted to the President for his approval and signature, are not in conflict with the provisions of the Constitution in relation to the writ of habeas corpus.

The expressions used in the last clause of the sixth section, that the certificate therein alluded to "shall prevent all molestation" of the persons to whom granted, "by any process issued," etc., probably mean only what the act of 1793 meant by declaring a certificate under that act a sufficient warrant for the removal of a fugitive; and do not mean a suspension of the writ of habeas corpus.

There is nothing in the act inconsistent with the Constitution, nor which is not necessary to redeem the pledge which it contains, that fugitive slaves shall be delivered upon the claim of their owners.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S Office,

September 18, 1850.

SIR, I have had the honor to receive your note of this date, informing me that the bill, commonly called the fugitive slave bill, having passed both houses of Congress, had been submitted to you for your consideration, approval, and signature, and requesting my opinion whether the sixth section of that act, and especially the last clause of that section, conflicts with that provision of the Constitution which declares that "the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless when, in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it."

It is my clear conviction that there is nothing in the last clause, nor in any part of the sixth section, nor, indeed, in any of the provisions of the act, which suspends, or was intended to suspend, the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, or is in any manner in conflict with the Constitution.

The Constitution, in the second section of the fourth article, declares that "no person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."

It is well known and admitted, historically and judicially, that this clause of the Constitution was made for the purpose of securing to the citizens of the slaveholding States the complete ownership in their slaves, as property, in any and every State or Territory of the Union into which they might escape. (Prigg vs. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 16 Peters, 539.) It devolved on the general government, as a solemn duty, to make that security effectual. Their power was not only clear and full, but, according to the opinion of the court in the above-cited case, it was exclusive, the States, severally, being under no obligation, and having no power to make laws or regulations in respect to the delivery of fugitives. Thus the whole power, and with it the whole duty, of carrying into effect this important provision of the Constitution, was with Congress. And, accordingly, soon after the adoption of the Constitution, the act of the 12th of February, 1793, was passed, and that proving unsatisfactory and inefficient, by reason (among other causes) of some minor errors in its details, Congress are now attempting by this bill to discharge a constitutional obligation, by securing more effectually the delivery of fugitive slaves to their owners. The sixth, and most material section, in substance declares that the claimant of the fugitive slave may arrest and carry him before any one of the officers named and described in the bill; and provides that those officers, and each of them, shall have judicial power and jurisdiction to hear, examine, and decide the case in a summary manner, that if, upon such hearing, the claimant, by the requisite proof, shall establish his claim to the satisfaction of the tribunal thus constituted, the said tribunal shall give him a certificate, stating therein the substantial facts of the case, and authorizing him, with such reasonable force as may be necessary, to take and carry said fugitive back to the State or Territory whence he or she may have escaped,—and then, in conclusion, proceeds as follows: "The certificates in this and the first section mentioned, shall be conclusive of the right of the person or persons in whose favor granted to remove such fugitive to the State or Territory from which he escaped, and shall prevent all molestation of such person or persons by any process issued by any court, judge, magistrate, or other person whomsoever."

There is nothing in all this that does not seem to me to be consistent with the Constitution, and necessary, indeed, to redeem the pledge which it contains, that such fugitives "shall be delivered up on claim" of their owners.

The Supreme Court of the United States has decided that the owner, independent of any aid from State or national legislation, may, in virtue of the Constitution, and his own right of property, seize and recapture his fugitive slave in whatsoever State he may find him, and carry him back to the State or Territory from which he escaped. (Prigg vs. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 16 Peters, 539.) This bill, therefore, confers no right on the owner of the fugitive slave. It only gives him an appointed and peaceable remedy in place of the more exposed and insecure, out not less lawful mode of self-redress; and as to the fugitive slave, he has no cause to complain of this bill,—it adds no coercion to that which his owner himself might, at his own will, rightfully exercise; and all the proceedings which it institutes are but so much of orderly, judicial authority interposed between him and his owner, and consequently of protection to him, and mitigation of the exercise directly by the owner himself of his personal authority. This is the constitutional and legal view of the subject, as sanctioned by the decisions of the Supreme Court, and to that I limit myself.

The act of the 12th of February, 1793, before alluded to, so far as it respects any constitutional question that can arise out of this bill, is identical with it. It authorizes the like arrest of the fugitive slave, the like trial, the like judgment, the like certificate, with the like authority to the owner, by virtue of that certificate as his warrant, to remove him to the State or Territory from which he escaped, and the constitutionality of that act, in all those particulars, has been affirmed by the adjudications of State tribunals, and of the courts of the United States, without a single dissent, so far as I know. (Baldwin, C. C. R. 577, 579.)

I conclude, therefore, that so far as the act of the 12th of February, 1793, has been held to be constitutional, this bill must also be so regarded; and that the custody, restraint, and removal to which the fugitive slave may be subjected under the provisions of this bill, are all lawful, and that the certificate to be granted to the owner is to be regarded as the act and judgment of a judicial tribunal having competent jurisdiction.

With these remarks as to the constitutionality of the general provisions of the bill, and the consequent legality of the custody and confinement to which the fugitive slave may be subjected under it, I proceed to a brief consideration of the more particular question you have propounded in reference to the writ of habeas corpus, and of the last clause of the sixth section, above quoted, which gives rise to that question.

My opinion, as before expressed, is that there is nothing in that clause or section which conflicts with or suspends, or was intended to suspend, the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. I think so because the bill says not one word about that writ; because, by the Constitution, Congress is expressly forbidden to suspend the privilege of this writ, "unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it;" and therefore such suspension by this act (there being neither rebellion nor invasion) would be a plain and palpable violation of the Constitution, and no intention to commit such a violation of the Constitution, of their duty and their oaths, ought to be imputed to them upon mere constructions and implications; and thirdly, because there is no incompatibility between these provisions of the bill and the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in its utmost constitutional latitude.

Congress, in the case of fugitive slaves, as in all other cases within the scope of its constitutional authority, has the unquestionable right to ordain and prescribe for what causes, to what extent, and in what manner persons may be taken into custody, detained, or imprisoned. Without this power they could not fulfill their constitutional trust, nor perform the ordinary and necessary duties of government. It was never heard that the exercise of that legislative power was any encroachment upon or suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. It is only by some confusion of ideas that such a conflict can be supposed to exist. It is not within the province or privilege of this great writ to loose those whom the law has bound. That would be to put a writ granted by the law in opposition to the law, to make one part of the law destructive of another. This writ follows the law and obeys the law. It is issued, upon proper complaint, to make inquiry into the causes of commitment or imprisonment, and its sole remedial power and purpose is to deliver the party from "all manner of illegal confinement." (3 Black. Com. 131.) If upon application to the court or judge for this writ, or if upon its return it shall appear that the confinement complained of was lawful, the writ, in the first instance, would be refused, and in the last the party would be remanded to his former lawful custody.

The condition of one in custody as a fugitive slave is, under this law, so far as respects the writ of habeas corpus, precisely the same as that of all other prisoners under the laws of the United States. The "privilege" of that writ remains alike to all of them, but to be judged of—granted or refused, discharged or enforced—by the proper tribunal, according to the circumstances of each case, and as the commitment and detention may appear to be legal or illegal.

The whole effect of the law may be thus briefly stated: Congress has constituted a tribunal with exclusive jurisdiction to determine summarily and without appeal who are fugitives from service or labor under the second section of the fourth article of the Constitution, and to whom such service or labor is due. The judgment of every tribunal of exclusive jurisdiction where no appeal lies, is, of necessity, conclusive upon every other tribunal; and therefore the judgment of the tribunal created by this act is conclusive upon all tribunals. Wherever this judgment is made to appear, it is conclusive of the right of the owner to retain in his custody the fugitive from his service, and to remove him back to the place or State from which he escaped. If it is shown upon the application of the fugitive for a writ of habeas corpus, it prevents the issuing of the writ; if upon the return, it discharges the writ and restores or maintains the custody.

This view of the law of this case is fully sustained by the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Tobias Watkins, where the court refused to discharge upon the ground that he was in custody under the sentence of a court of competent jurisdiction, and that that judgment was conclusive upon them. (3 Peters.)

The expressions used in the last clause of the sixth section, that the certificate therein alluded to "shall prevent all molestation" of the persons to whom granted "by any process issued," etc., probably mean only what the act of 1793 meant by declaring a certificate under that act a sufficient warrant for the removal of a fugitive, and certainly do not mean a suspension of the habeas corpus. I conclude by repeating my conviction that there is nothing in the bill in question which conflicts with the Constitution or suspends, or was intended to suspend, the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.

I have the honor to be, very respectfully, sir,

Your obedient servant,
J. J. CRITTENDEN.
To the PRESIDENT.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 1, p. 377-81

John J. Crittenden’s Eulogy of United States Supreme Court Associate Justice John McKinley, July 20, 1852

Since its adjournment yesterday, the members of the bar and officers of the court held a meeting and adopted resolutions expressive of their high sense of the public and private worth of the Hon. John McKinley, one of the justices of this court, and their deep regret at his death. By the same meeting I was requested to present those resolutions to the court, and to ask that they might be entered on its records, and I now rise to perform that honored task.

Besides the private grief which naturally attends it, the death of a member of this court, which is the head of a great, essential, and vital department of the government, must always be an event of public interest and importance.

I had the good fortune to be acquainted with Judge McKinley from my earliest manhood. In the relations of private life he was frank, hospitable, affectionate. In his manners he was simple and unaffected, and his character was uniformly marked with manliness, integrity, and honor. Elevation to the bench of the Supreme Court made no change in him. His honors were borne meekly, without ostentation or presumption.

He was a candid, impartial, and righteous judge. Shrinking from no responsibility, he was fearless in the performance of his duty, seeking only to do right, and fearing nothing but to do wrong. Death has now set her seal to his character, making it unchangeable forever; and I think it may be truly inscribed on his monument that as a private gentleman and as a public magistrate he was without fear and without reproach.

This occasion cannot but remind us of other afflicting losses which have recently befallen us. The present, indeed, has been a sad year for the profession of the law. In a few short months it has been bereaved of its brightest and greatest ornaments. Clay, Webster, and Sergeant have gone to their immortal rest in quick succession. We had scarcely returned from the grave of one of them till we were summoned to the funeral of another. Like bright stars they have sunk below the horizon, and have left the land in widespread gloom. This hall that knew them so well shall know them no more. Their wisdom has no utterance now, and the voice of their eloquence shall be heard here no more forever.

This hall itself seems as though it was sensible of its loss, and even these marble pillars seem to sympathize as they stand around us like so many majestic mourners.

But we will have consolation in the remembrance of these illustrious men. Their names will remain to us and be like a light kindled in the sky to shine upon us and to guide our course. We may hope, too, that the memory of them and their great examples will create a virtuous emulation which may raise up men worthy to be their successors in the service of their country, its constitution, and its laws.

For this digression, and these allusions to Clay, Webster, and Sergeant, I hope the occasion may be considered as a sufficient excuse, and I will not trespass by another word, except only to move that these resolutions in relation to Judge McKinley, when they shall have been read by the clerk, may be entered on the records of this court.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 1, p. 381-3