Washington, March 8, 1824.
DEAR JOHN,—That there are men who will ascribe my actions to
any motive but a reasonable one, I know, but that any should suppose that I
have come to Washington for the purpose of electioneering against Mr. Clay is
an extravagance that I did not anticipate would have been charged against me.
My great motive in coming here was to get a hearing and decision in my suit for
the land at Falmouth; in this I have succeeded. The opinion is delivered, and
is in my favor. I endeavored to lay a contribution on other suitors in the
court to help pay expenses of the trip, but the people of Kentucky are not
drilled to paying fees to the lawyers. They pay in promises. As to Mr. Clay, he
has broken the cords of friendship which bound me to him; they can never again
be tied. I have no desire to interfere with your friendship for him, nor to
trouble you with complaints of his conduct to me. Beware of such sunshine
friends! As to electioneering upon the subject of President, I am as far
removed from it as Washington is from Kentucky. I have heard a great deal; said
little. I am not a member of Congress, and have, therefore, no right to go to
caucus or vote in caucus, nor have I a vote when the question shall come before
the House of Representatives. A listener, who hears all parties, is perhaps
better able to form his opinions than those who are heated, busy, bustling
managers. The grand Harrisburg Convention has decided, with but a single
dissenting voice, for Jackson. Roberts was the only man who did not, upon the
first vote, declare for Jackson. This has given a new impetus to him. The
anticipation that Pennsylvania would declare for him gave him great advantages.
The undivided voice of the Convention at Harrisburg has surprised the friends
of all the other candidates, — save those of Calhoun, — they looked for it
after the meeting in the county of Philadelphia, for the purpose of choosing a
delegate to the Convention at Harrisburg. It seems that the people of North
Carolina are taking up Jackson, as Pennsylvania did, against their politicians
and of their own mere will. So it is in New York. The majority of the Senate
are disposed to keep the appointment of electors in the legislature, — that is
their calculation for Crawford; but a large majority of the House of
Representatives of that State are decidedly opposed to Crawford. Adams is the
most potent there. With the people, Jackson is next to Adams, and should
the election go to the people Jackson may prevail in that State. The
indications in Maryland are for Jackson. Tennessee and Alabama, Mississippi,
Louisiana and Missouri, for Jackson. All New England for Adams. As for Indiana
and Ohio, it is difficult now to say for whom their vote will be. The most
knowing say that the substantial controversy is now between Adams and Jackson, and
by a union of the slaveholding States with Pennsylvania Jackson may be elected.
Unless Clay gets the votes of New York he cannot be one of the three from whom
the House of Representatives is to choose. What revolutions in the electoral
votes may take place before the time of choosing the Electoral College, should
the friends of Crawford find out what everybody else seems to have found out
(that he cannot be elected either by the people or the House of
Representatives), cannot be foreseen. Jackson's ticket is every day acquiring
new friends. Since the Convention at Harrisburg his pretensions are placed
before the people by means of newspapers that were devoted before to other
candidates. So much for politics. The great case, between Jersey and New York
as it is called, upon the constitutionality of the law of New York, giving to
Fulton the exclusive right to navigate the waters of New York by steamboats, is
decided against New York. In this cause, I heard from Wirt the greatest display
that I have ever heard at the bar since the days of Patrick Henry. His legal
argument was very strong; his peroration was beautiful and grand. I did not
hear Webster, nor Oakley, nor Emmett in this case, but all are said to have
exhibited great talents. I have heard Webster, Sergeant, and White, of
Tennessee. Wirt, Webster, White, and Ogden are the ablest lawyers, and Walter
Jones should also be ranked among the first. Emmett I have not heard, but his
reputation is high. After all, I have not been convinced that the bar of Kentucky
does not contain as much talent and force as any other bar in the Union.
SOURCE: Mrs. Chapman Coleman, The Life of John J.
Crittenden, Volume 1, p. 60-1
