Charles D. Miller to Watts Sherman, February 13, 1860

Peterboro, February 13, 1860.

Watts Sherman, Esq.:

Sir: — My father-in-law, Mr. Gerrit Smith, has at length so far waked up from the eclipse of his intellect as to be able to read and to hear reading. He has just now seen, for the first time, the “Manifesto of the New York Democratic Vigilance Association,” published last October, in which you connect his name with a certain “Central Association,” of bloody and horrible purposes.

As Mr. Smith belongs to no society, has always opposed secret societies, had never before heard of this “Central Association,” and condemns all shedding of human blood, save by government, he necessarily feels himself to be deeply wronged by you and your associates. He holds you and them responsible, for calling in effect upon the people both of the North and South to detest and abhor him.

Mr. Smith wishes to know without any delay, whether you and your associates will persist in your libel, or make the unqualified and ample retraction which the case calls for.

Yours respectfully,

Chas. D. Miller.

SOURCE: Octavius Brooks Frothingham, Gerrit Smith: A Biography, p. 246

Samuel L. M. Barlow to Charles D. Miller, February 22, 1860

New-York, February 22d, 1860.

Chas. D. Miller, Esq.:

Sir: Yours of the 13th inst. was received by me a few days since; and but for other pressing engagements, would have been answered immediately. Since its receipt, I have looked over carefully the “Manifesto of the Democratic Vigilant Association” to which you refer, and so far as Mr. Gerrit Smith's name is mentioned in connection with the “Central Association,” have no hesitation in saying that his statement, that he is not a member of that body, renders it obvious that in this particular the writer of the pamphlet has fallen into an unintentional error. With regard to the letter also inserted in this pamphlet, dated Peterboro, Aug. 29th, 1859, purporting to have been written by Mr. Smith, as you do not allude to it, I suppose that is correctly set forth. By comparing the general tone and sentiment with the constitution of the “Central Association,” I think you will see that the writer of that pamphlet might very naturally have fallen into the mistake, (as you assure me that it is a mistake,) of supposing that the writer of one approved of the objects of the other. This was doubtless the view of the writer of this pamphlet, in regard to which particular care was taken to insure accuracy in its statement of facts, and for these the writer of the pamphlet relied somewhat upon the current newspaper articles of the day. After the information now received from you, I am very sorry to learn that Mr. Smith's name was thus connected with the “Central Association” to which you say he did not belong, or that any injustice was done to him in this publication.

Mr. Phelps and Mr. Sherman have each perused this letter, and I am requested by those gentlemen to say they concur in the same, and beg you will receive it also as their reply to the communication you addressed to each of them on the same subject. They also request me to say that it gives them great pleasure to correct the error into which the writer of this pamphlet has fallen in regard to Mr. Smith, as, however much they differ from the sentiments held by him as expressed in the “Jerry Rescue” letter, they respect the boldness and personal integrity of Mr. Smith, and desire to do him full justice.

Yours very truly,

Samuel L. M. Barlow.

SOURCE: Gerrit Smith, Gerrit Smith and the Vigilant Association of the City of New-York, p. 5-6

Royal Phelps to Charles D. Miller, February 18, 1860

New-York, February 18th, 1860.

C. D. Miller, Esq., Peterboro:

Sir: I have received your letter of the 13th inst., complaining, on behalf of your father-in-law, of the use made of his name in a publication by the New-York Vigilant Association in October last; and although the publishing of my name to that document was an unwarrantable liberty, for I never signed it, or authorized any one to sign it for me, yet, as I did not contradict it at the time, I can hardly set up this plea now.

I have been disappointed in seeing Mr. Sherman today, but you shall hear from us early next week.

I am, sir, your most obedient servant,

Royal Phelps.

SOURCE: Gerrit Smith, Gerrit Smith and the Vigilant Association of the City of New-York, p. 5

Charles D. Miller to Watts Sherman, February 13, 1860

Peterboro, February 13, 1860.

Watts Sherman, Esq.:

Sir: — My father-in-law, Mr. Gerrit Smith, has at length so far waked up from the eclipse of his intellect as to be able to read and to hear reading. He has just now seen, for the first time, the “Manifesto of the New York Democratic Vigilance Association,” published last October, in which you connect his name with a certain "Central Association," of bloody and horrible purposes.

As Mr. Smith belongs to no society, has always opposed secret societies, had never before heard of this "Central Association," and condemns all shedding of human blood, save by government, he necessarily feels himself to be deeply wronged by you and your associates. He holds you and them responsible, for calling in effect upon the people both of the north and south to detest and abhor him.

Mr. Smith wishes to know without any delay, whether you and your associates will persist in your libel, or make the unqualified and ample retraction which the case calls for.

Yours respectfully,

Chas. D. Miller.

P. S. — I do not as yet write to any of the Executive Committee except yourself, Mr. Phelps, and Mr. Barlow.

2d P. S. — It occurs to Mr. Smith that it may have been the "Provisional Government" adopted by the Convention at Chatham, C. W., with which you intended to identify him. But Mr. Smith bids me say to you that this can not relieve you, since never, until within a few weeks, has he heard of that "Government," or that Convention. What that Government was, he has yet to learn, as he has not heard or read a line of its provisions.

SOURCE: Octavius Brooks Frothingham, Gerrit Smith: A Biography, p. 246; Gerrit Smith, Gerrit Smith and the Vigilant Association of the City of New-York, p. 3-4