% 
 
MR. riiELrs' ArrEAL 
 
 TO TIIK 
 
 *,. » 
 
 PEOPLE OF VER^|J^T, 
 
 1 
 
 IN 
 
 VIi\DICATIOJV OF HIMSELF, 
 
 Against the Charges made against him 
 
 UPON THE OCCASION OF HIS RE-ELECTION TO THE 
 
 SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, IN RELATION 
 
 TO HIS COURSE AS A SENATOR. 
 
 r 
 
 
 MIDDTJCBURt 
 
 PUBLISHED BY THE .V ^ ' A 
 
 Nov. I'^T, ?^- 
 
f\ 
 
 K346 
 
 ^biicvtiscmmt. 
 
 le question may be asked why this vindication has been 
 , ved so long, when the testimony was within my power 
 la^t /inter and could have been presented to the public before. 
 The explanation of the matter is, that my object has been my 
 own vindication merely. Had this appeal appeared Ji^. an 
 e: ii)3r period, it might have been regarded as an attetnpt to 
 jofl;' 3nce the late elections in some shape, and I chose not to 
 sub; :ct myself to any such charge. The period ha? now 
 arri 3d when no imputation of that sort can be made, and 
 wh. 1 I feel at full liberty to submit it to the public. 
 
 SAMUEL S. PHEL' ^^ 
 
 Hr^")^ 
 
 \s 
 
 I 
 
TO THE PIDPJ.i: UF \ EKMOAT. 
 
 As a public servant invested by yon with a hi^'bly iiiifMirtant and responsible public trust, 
 I entertain a hi;,'l» scn«n of my accountability t<i you tor iho manner in wliicli tliat trust 
 is diHcbarjjfcd ; anil I fcnl bound on all proper occaiiions to vindicate my public course 
 wlionover and wherever it niav be (piestioned. It is nnw nearly fourteen years that I have 
 been honored by your confidence, fcven of which were spent in the responsible station 
 of a Judge of your highest judicial tribunal, and more than six in the highest oflicc in your 
 gift, that of your representative m the Senate of tiie United States. Nor is this all. By 
 my recent re-election to that post you have expressed your continued confidtMJCC in me, 
 and conferrcfl upon me for si.x years to come the responsibilities of that high station. 
 L'nder these circumstances, my character as a public man becomes public property, and if 
 It be assailed it is due to you as well as to myself that it be vindicated. Turthcr apology 
 for this appeal I deem unnecessary. 
 
 The occurrences of the last fall, upon the occasion of my re-election to thfc Senate, 
 must be fresh in the recollection of all who witnessed th'?m. The attacks upon my char- 
 acter both public and private made too deep an impression and elicited too much feeling 
 to be readily lorgotton. Possibly it may be thought that I should be satisfied with the 
 decisive verdict then pronounced by the rcprc.-jentatives of the freemen of this State. A 
 most decisive one I admit it was, when we consider that it was a fjueslion for the wliiga 
 alone, — the adverse party in voting for one of their own political faith oflering no dispar- 
 agement to me. To a certain e.xtent I am satisfied ; but t.» a certain e.xtent it is due to 
 those who sustained me on that occasion to vindicate them, and, at the same time, to show 
 them that their confidence was not misplaced. 
 
 Tiie right of selt-del'ence is admitted everywhere. It is one which I cannot surrender. 
 There are strong and satisfactory reasons why I should avail myself of it now, not the 
 lightest of which is that I had on that occasion no opportunity for defence. 
 
 Indeed a more extraordinary proceeding than the inquisition established to investigate 
 my conduct is not to be found in the history of this or any other country. It certainly has 
 no precedent, and it is to be hoped will never be repeated. The institution of acommitteo 
 to inquire into the character of an individual merely because he is made a candidate for 
 office, — to search for his personal defects and failings, — to violate the sanctity and confi- 
 dence of his domestic fire-side, — to gather up the gossiping tales in relation to his private 
 and confidential intercourse which the malignity of his enemies may have set afloat, — to 
 
 embody them in the imposing form of a report of a committee of the Senate of Vermont, 
 
 to publish the whole to the assembled representatives of the people, and through them to 
 the world at large, and to leave it recorded for future use whenever personal hostility or 
 selfish motives rnight dictate, is a device to which party malignity has never resorted else- 
 where, and which seems to^have been reserved to do honor to a certain portion of the whigs 
 ot Vermont. If the project itself was a novelty and an outrage, the constitution of the 
 
 4 
 
committee and their proceedings were worse. Two of the three committee-men were 
 known to be personally hostile to me, and one of them had been mousing about the Stale 
 to pick up the scandalous gossip in relation to my private life, and soliciting of those who 
 had boarded with me at Washington, information in relation to our social and domestic 
 intercourse tliere,which solicitation they, as honorable men,felt bound to repel with contempt. 
 The third man was one of whom I knew neither good nor ill, but who was probably regardc; J 
 as a cypher when he was selected. That such a committee would do me justice, was not 
 to be expected. The only excuse to be given for the selection is that no honorable man 
 could be found to undertake the service. 
 
 'J'he first step of this committee was to address letters to metj not only notoriously 
 liostile to me, but two, nay three, of whom were candidates for my place, and who were 
 well understood to bo acting in concert to sacrifice me to make way for their own preten- 
 sions. These letters were neither limited in their purpose to my public conduct, nor to 
 the personal knowledge of th( se to whom they were addressed ; but my conduct and 
 demeanor in the domestic circle was called for, and evidence of hearsay was in terms solicit- 
 ed. That such inquiries should be directed to men thus situated, is surprising ; yet it is 
 still more so that men thus situated should have had the indelicacy to respond as they-did. 
 The reader will perceive that much, nayall, of the testimony which bears upon my oiucJiJ.^ 
 conduct, and which is material, is hearsay, and that the committee proceeded to lay bete rp 
 the whig convention, for the purpose of sacrificing, ruining and disgracing me, evidenc ; 
 which would not in any justice court in the State have settled the title to a card of gingM- 
 bread. Nor did the outrage stop here. These communications were laid before the con- 
 vention without giving me an opportunity even to know their contents, much less to explain 
 or rebut them ; and it was not until after these statements had been commented upon ia 
 speech after speech and enforced by all the ingenuity and talent of ray enemies that the 
 convention saw fit to admit me to address them in my own vindication. And even then, I 
 was forced upon my defence without the opportunity to look for or obtain any evidence 
 except such as had been accidentally within the reach of my friends in the convention. 
 Indeed I had then seen but one of the communications addressed to the committee, and 
 that I had read for the first time the very evening that I addressed the convention. The 
 contents of the others were never known to me until the 21st day of January last, wl.en 
 copies of them were received by me at Washington. 
 
 Having been thus assailed and thus treated, with all for which a man might desim to 
 live, at stake, and depending upon a proceeding so utterly at war with all our notions of jus- 
 tice towards an accused^ I deemed it my duty to avail myself of my position at Washing'.'u 
 to procure the evidence of those with whom 1 have had the honor to be associated thL're. 
 In doing this I have confined myself to what I consider the only legitimate subject of pu'v '. 
 inquiry and discussion, to wit, the discharge of my duty as a public servant. 
 
 I might perhaps have been justified in declining to notice the proceeding at all. 
 committee was got up to make an inquisition into my private life, — to hunt lor and ( 
 into light, and array before the public my imperfections and frailties, and for this purj t 
 to invade and to betray the confidence of social and private life ; — this committee •■-.■m' 
 packed, partial, and utterly disqualified by previous personal hostility to me, for the ho'.' .^t 
 discharge of their duty (if duty it can be called) ;— they appealed to known and vindu -^ve 
 enemies for proof, and even from them solicited, not merely their knowledge of facts, but 
 information derived from idle gossip, rumor, reports, — set afloat by personal and party m ■.- 
 lignity, and from which no man in a station of high responsibility is at this day exempt ; — 
 thus resorting to a species of evidence which, if tolerated at this day, would prostrate a.id 
 distrrace the best men of all parties without distinction or discrimination, and by iorce ot 
 which, if it have any force, the great leader of the whig party, and their candidate lor the 
 hifrhest station in this country and perhaps in the world, may be made out a drunkan ,^a 
 whoremoncrer, and a blackleg. Such was the material to which the committee resorten ; 
 and when^they had gathered it, the mass was thrown betore the representatives ot tbe 
 people of this State without aflbrding me an opportunity to meet it, or even to know its 
 purport. The scandal thus scraped together was enforced with all the zeal and power 
 which the conspirators could command ; but unfortunately for them, with a personal bitter- 
 ness and malignity which betrayed and defeated its purpose. 
 
 With these remarks I will proceed to examine the charges brought against me ; ana i 
 shall take first in order the charges upon my public and official course. These charges 
 are contained in a communication addressed to the committee, and signed WiUmm Silade, 
 and by the committee laid before the whig convention. Its language is as toliows : 
 
5 
 
 ' AmoniT your inquiries I find one askinjr of me information in regard to Mr. Phelps' Laving 
 at finy time without sufficieut cause neghcted hi* appropriate duties. 
 
 rtnlv to this inquiry seems to involve the necessity of staling the facts in connexion with 
 
 )te oil the tariff hill of l^J-J. That bill, (I mean "the bill that btcaiue the pn sent tariff 
 
 ■A) having passed the House had been before the Senate some lime when the clay arrived 
 
 .lich It was supposed would terminate the debate. Great an.xiety was f<lt for the result 
 
 liich was regarded as doubtful, and many member i ofllie House were in the Senate chamber 
 
 tness the debate. I was among the rest and observe^thal Mr. Phelps appeared very 
 
 1 excited. 1 was informed (by whom I cannot remember) that he had been offended at 
 
 supposed slight or want of attention (on the part of some senators) and used oppro- 
 
 s language in" regard to them and declared with oaths that he would not vote on the bill, 
 
 understood in the course of the day that several senators had made ineffectual efforts to 
 
 II' him. 
 
 " Sometime after sun-down, the Senate being still in 8e9sion,and it being surpected that the 
 
 nal vote on the tariff would be taken that night, Mr. Cranston, a member from Kliode Island, 
 
 arae to me and said that Mr. Phelps was acting strangely, swearing that he would not vote 
 
 nd requesl.d me to go to the Capitol and sro if something could not be done. I accordingly 
 
 paired to the Senate Chamber and found that .Mr. Phelps was not in his seat. 1 inquired 
 
 •" the (loorkirpcr at the southern entrance where he wa.s who informed ine that he was in a 
 
 1 liail ante-room just at the entrance with Mr. Conrad of Louisiana who I understood was 
 
 e\ deavoring to persuade him to vote. Tins 1 learned from the door-keeper as well as from 
 
 '»' lers, I returned into the Senate Chaml>er where 1 remained until the debate closed. Mr. 
 
 ■ lodbridge of Michigan was the last speaker. The secretary was thereupon orrlercd to call 
 
 Yeas and Nays. I immediately went to the door-keeper and asked iiim where Phelps and 
 
 rid were, who replii'd that they had left the senate-room and gone into some other part of 
 
 till Capitol he did not know where. I rerpiested him to go for llieni immediately. He went 
 
 OD'l fonud them, and they came and went past me in the senate chamber just as Mr. Phelps' 
 
 name was called. He did not answer but passed to his seat which was in the southern part of 
 
 •'i'- chamber. 
 
 The roll having been gone through, the clerk called the name of Mr. Conrad who answered 
 III the affirmative. He then called Mr. Phelps, who did not answer, but turned round to Mr. 
 (.'onrad who was standing behind him, and said " Conrad have you voted .' " to which Mr. C. 
 replied tliat he had. I stood some !.'> or "Jfl feet from them, and heard the whole distinctly. 
 The secretary then again called Mr. I'helps who answered in the affirmative and the bill was 
 vrried by a majority of one. 
 
 *' I conversed with the whole of our delegation, including Gov. Crafts, on the subject the 
 next day and stiled the accurrence as I have here done. 
 
 " Mr. i'helps had at the previous session, as I understood, declared that he would not vote 
 for the land distribution bill under circumstances similar to those connected with his refusal 
 , to vole for the tariff, but of this I had no personal kjiowJe<lge." 
 
 Beforo I proceed to disprove the statements here maJo, I have a word to say as to the 
 
 lurce and character of this testimony. It comes from a man wlio lias been for years 
 
 notoriously a candidate for my seat in the Senate, he having in numerous instances avowed 
 
 himself such, and one who, if he has not beeo egregiously misunderstood and belied, has 
 
 been for si.x years laboriou.'^Iy and zealously at work to supplant me. So well was his 
 
 position in relation to me understoo I, that, unle.*.-^ I am misinlormed, it was suggested and 
 
 assented to, hy those present when this e.xtraordinary committee v/as appointed, tliat no 
 
 appeal should be made to that source for information. If this person, thus situated, was 
 
 poese.-^sed of facts known to himself and known on/y to himself, it would furnish an apology 
 
 for callin;^ on hirn, but this in my judgment is tiic only apolocry which the case admits of. 
 
 To call upon him for rumors and rejwrts, and for hearsay, which he would catch at witJi 
 
 n .idity, and unless po.ssessed of more candor tlian I am di.^pused under the circumstiiices 
 
 award to him, would aj^^ravate as far as possible, only indicates the temper with whicii 
 
 e committee undertook the business and the spirit with which it was prosecuted. 
 
 A w.ird as to the character of the testimony. In all those formidable statements wJaat is 
 
 there which is within the knowledge of its author and which can be regarded as competent 
 
 evidence ! Nothing on earth of the least importance, or which bears upon my character or 
 
 conduct, unless it be, first, my absence from my seat at the moment when the question 
 
 was put, a circumstance not only of daily occurrence in the Senate among member.«, but 
 
 one which is never regarded by them as important, and which, in the very instance alluded 
 
 to, led to no i)ractical result ; and secondly, my decliuing to vote when I came in, with 
 
 respect to which he is unfortunately contradicted, as wiUbo seen presently by numerous 
 
 witnesses. All the rest is mere hearsay ; and is introduced by phrases like this: "I was 
 
 iformed, by whom I cannot remember" — and "I understood' in tlia course of the day"—- 
 
"Mr. C. caine to mo anJ said" — "I inquirod of the door-keeper, who informed me" 
 
 " Who I understood was endeavoring"::-" This I understood from the door-keeper, as well 
 as from otiiers" — "I went to the door-keeper and inquired, wiio replied," Sic. Here are 
 seven instances in the course of this short statement of this sort of phraseolooy. Now the 
 committee must liave known, as lawyers and as men of common information,'^and His Ex- 
 cellency knew, as a lawyer, and ought to have known and felt as an honorable and candid 
 man, that no man should be sacrificed upon such evidence. The latter has perhaps 
 this extenuation, that it seems from tlie introduction of his statement, that the committee 
 ask him "to state such incidents as have come to my knowledge either by my own obser- 
 vation or through the testimony of others whose assertions I could not discredit," &.c. Now 
 that this qualification (in italics) was regarded both by the committee and His Excellency as 
 mere form, to throw a gloss of decency over the course of inquiry, is apparent from the con- 
 duct of both. His E.xcellency gives the committee to understand, either that he does not 
 understand them to desire to know the source from which his information is derived, or that 
 he is willing to endorse the credibility of his informant without knowing who he is. The 
 grand charge of all depends upon "/ was informed, by ichovi I cannot remember," Sic. Did 
 His Ex'cellency or the committee consider that, in using this language, the one was givino* 
 and the other receiving reliable testimony, — or did they mutually understand the purpose 
 of each other to be to gather up tho unfavorable rumors within their reach, and hv embs?- 
 dying and giving to them the imposing form of a Report of a Committee of the Senate ot 
 Vermont, to render them doubly effectual to my prejudice? It is in vain for them, in my 
 judgment, to attempt to impose upon the people of Vermont the belief, that in this course 
 of proceeding they considered themselves as acting an honest or an honorable part. 
 
 Stripping Mr. Slade's statement, then, of hearsay and riimor, and admitting all which he 
 prolesses to knoiv as true, what does it amount to? Why, simply to this : that I was not 
 in my seat when the question was put, and did not answer to my name at the first call. 
 Still I was in my place, and voted in season to have my vote recorded and counted, and the 
 bill was saved. How my temporary absence is to be regarded, the reader will perceive, 
 when we come to the testimony. 
 
 Yet these trivial circumstances are gravely put forward, under the imposing authority of 
 the Governor of the Slate, as an instance in which " Mr. Phelps neglected his appropriate 
 duties." The spirit which can advance such a charge with so much form and parade, wiii 
 be duly appreciated by the public, and they will learn from it how to appreciate the credi- 
 bility of the witness. 
 
 But hearsay, as the whole statement is, at least in all its material particulars, I will pro- 
 ceed to examine it in detail, and to show that the whole story, in all that is material, is a 
 vile fabrication. 
 
 The first thing relating to me is, that Mr. Slade "observed that Mr. Phelps was very 
 much excited." That we were all excited at that great political crisis, io nut to be doubted. 
 If I were so from "excessive anxiety for the fate" of the bill, it is a feeling in which tlie 
 Governor himself participated, if you can believe him ; for he has taken great pains to im- 
 press the people of the State with a due sense of his deep anxiety and invaluable services 
 in the matter. If he means a different kind of excitement, and from the temper which 
 evidently dictated his communication I suppose he does, it belongs to another branch of the 
 subject, and we will dismiss it for the present. 
 
 " / loas informed, by whom I cannot remember, that he had been offended at some suppo- 
 sed slight or want of attention, [on the part of some Senators,] and used opprobrious lan- 
 guaa-eln regard to them ; and declared with oaths that he would not vote on the bill: and I 
 understood in the course of the day, that several Senators had made Inejj'ectual efforts to soothe 
 
 him" , , ^ 
 
 This, it will be perceived, is the, 5TrtiT/??jen — the sum and substance of the whole charge. 
 It was this that startled the good people at Montpciier who did not appear to perceive that 
 the whole story was a piece of gossip, and that the witness, who had put forth the story, 
 and who was called upon to sustain it, in reality knew nothing about it. Yet this hearsay 
 from ''whom I cannot remember" has well-nigh both sacrificed and disgraced me forever. 
 
 Before adverting to the testimony, let us note the state of things in the Senate at the 
 time this miscontfuct is supposed to have occurred. The Whig party, wliich came mto 
 power the year before under the most cheering circumstances and with the most brilliant 
 prospects, found itself suddenly arrested by the decease of the lamented Harrison, and the 
 accession to the executive chair of one in whom they had most unluckily reposed confi- 
 dcuceas the second executive officer, and who had already not only betrayed to them and 
 
to the world his utter destitution of all consistency and principle, but had given most uner- 
 rio" indications of his purpose to thwart their measures, to sacrifice theui as a party, and, it 
 necessary to the altaiimiciil ol his vindicUvc purposes, to sacrifice the great iiitcrpsls of the 
 country with them. The Bank bill, after passing both houses of Congress, had been de- 
 feated by the perversity and bad tiiith of llie President- The land distribution had been 
 adopted, but both these were, in the estimation of the whigs generally, secondary measures. 
 The great njcasure of a protective tariflfsvaa asyct unaccuiit|)iislied. This last was regarded 
 by the wiiigs of the north especially as the radical mea.-uro for the relief of the country, 
 and the one' upon which both the others if adopted must dciHind for their elliciency. It was 
 Uie last and only remaining hope of the whigs, and if defeated in this it was a very general 
 opinion that the parly must be dissolved. In this state of things the tarifi" bill of 1842, 
 liaving |)assed tiie House of lleprcscntativcs, came before tlie Senate, where it encoun- 
 tered serious dilhcullies. It was well understood that the bill could not receive the execu- 
 tive sanctKHi unless the land distribution should bo surrendered, at least for tiie present, 
 and many Senators had expressed a fixed determination not to yield to executive dictation. 
 Some soiithern Senators did not teel at liberty to vole for the bill in defiance of the preva- 
 lent opinion at ilie south, adverse to llie protective policy. Under these circumstances, it 
 ..us uncertain wliether llie bill could be carried at all. During the last day of the discus- 
 sion, the day on winch the bill passed, it was well undcrBlood that its fate depended upon a 
 Senator from Michigan, wlio was hesitating in regard to yielding the distribution. N\ ith 
 his vole the bill could be carried by one vote — all the wing Senators from New England 
 Leiiig counted in ilu lavor ; and without it, llie bill must be lo.st. llis ultimate determina- 
 tion watj not made known until the moment of taking the vote, lie was the last man who 
 spoke upon the bill, and he simply expressed his decision to go for the bill — his whole 
 speech occupying but six or seven lines of the ordinary newspaper column. As soon as lie 
 sat down, the vote was taken, and the bill carried by a majority of one. It was during this, 
 day of anxiety and excitement when the hopes of the whig party in the opinion of all, and 
 those of the country in the estimation of most of us, were at stake, that Mr. Slade charges 
 me with "■declaring iiUh oaths Ihat I would not vole for the bill," and resisting the efibrts 
 of "scleral !Scitalurs" to bring me to a sense of my duly- It is apparent that at such a 
 crisis the detection of a whig Senator from New Kii:'land would have astounded the Senate 
 and ihe country, and the least indication of such a pur|H)8n would have produced a sensation 
 bolh in the Senate and out of it not to be forgotten. Such a ihing could not be kept secret : 
 it would not only have been instantly known through the Senate, but the report would have 
 found itpway wiih the rapidity of lightning to my constituency at home. 
 
 Aow let us hear the tcslimony ot the members of the Senate on the subject / have 
 ^nfurrri with every Seiialur who voted for the tarij}' of \6^Vi, and with every whig then in the 
 Senate, xvilh one eu.cej)tion, and I have, with thai solidary exception, Ihe written testimony of 
 all in reference to this charge. These testimonials are subjoined, marked from 1 to '.i'2 ; and 
 the reailer is requested to examine them for himself. I have also subjoined a list of the 
 ayes and noes on the final passage ot the tarifi" bill, -jn order to show who were members of 
 the Senate at that period, and how they voted. 
 
 It will be seen that not an individual among them lias the slightest knowledge or recollec- 
 tion ot' any of the matters laid to my charge, in the above extract from Mr. Slade's written 
 communication to the committee. 
 
 The only whig member whose statement I have not procured, is Mr. Preston of South 
 Carolina, who was decidedly opposed to the tariff", and voted against it throughout. He is 
 a man with whom 1 had little or no intercourse, and he having been out of the Senate for 
 some years, I did not think it necessary to appeal to hiin. The unanimous testimony of all 
 the friends of the bill, I think sufficient of itself, as it is almost impossible that there should 
 have been any difficulty about my vote v.ilhout its being known to some of them. Nor is 
 it very probable that my political opponents, who were opposed to the bill, would have " en- 
 deavored to soothe" me. I have not, therefore, deemed it necessary to obtain their 
 testimony. 
 
 Had any of these occurrences franspired, as stated by Mr. Slade, would they not have 
 come to the knowledge of Mr. Evans, who, as Chairman of tlie Committee of Finance, had 
 tlie peculiar charge of the bill, — of Mr. Porter or JNIr. White, who sat next me, one on my 
 right and the other on my left, — of Mr. Wright, who sat immediately behind me, or Mr. 
 Rives, who sat in front, — of Mr. Merrick and Mr. Clayton, whose scats were the second en 
 " each side, — of some other member from New England, so deeply interested in the measure ; 
 or, at least, of my colleague, Gov. Crafts, between whom and niysalf there subsisted the mcst 
 
cordial good feeling, and who, from his age, the high respect I was kx \\m to entertain for 
 him — his position as my colleague, and his mild, kind, and persuasi :;aructer, would 
 have been at once designated as the man most likely to exercise an re- over me I 
 
 The inference is irresistible. No such things occurred, or they won . ijeen known 
 
 to some one of the friends of the bill. 
 
 It would now be gratifying if His Excellency would inform us ■ hr> these "several 
 Senators" were who " made ineffectual etTorts to soothe" me, and eq no if he would 
 
 tell us who was the gentleman " whom he cannot remember," who -ated fhe story, 
 
 and so kindly thrust it into Ilis Excellency's ears. 
 
 But to proceed with the statement : 
 
 "Sometime after sundown, the Senate being still in session, and it bj '.ed that 
 
 "the final vote Would be taken that night, Mn Cranston of Rhode Islaa'l i .3 at rny 
 
 " lodgings, and said, that Mr. Phelps was acting strangely, swearing that Jie v.uuiJ isot vote, 
 "and requested me to go to the Capitol and see if something could not be done." Yery 
 kind indeed in Mr. Cranston,— and very considerate withal, considering the quarter fruin whicli 
 he desired interference ; but as His Excellency has a letter from Mr. C, of which i ha^e a 
 copy, I will leave him for the present, until I get through with Mr. Slade ; 
 
 "I a-ccordingly repaired to the Senate Chamber, and found that Mr. Phelp'- v.i^ not in 
 *' his seat. I inquired of the door-keeper at the southern entrance where ;>■ .s, who 
 " informed me that he was in a small ante-room, just at the entrance, with Mr. Conrad of 
 " Louisiana, iclio I understood was endeavoring to persuade him to vote. This Ilea rued from 
 *' the door-keeper as leell as others." 
 
 Here we have fortunately the authority upon which the statement was made, viZ: the 
 door-keeper and others. Who these nameless gentlemen were,who pas^s und^r the denomi- 
 nation of others, it is desirable to know ; especially as we shall soon fiu'l that the?e unknown 
 personages must shoulder the responsibility of the story. The door-kneper, however, is a 
 real tangible person, who is fortunately still alive, and can speak, — nay, has spoken, for 
 himself. It is a Mr. Larner, whose statement is hereto appended, and numbered '62. Now 
 from this statement of Mr. L., two things appear very distinctly : First. tii?t Mr. L. told JVr. 
 Slade no such story ; and secondly, if he did, it was wholly untrue. Mr. L. says, ** Mr. 
 Slade is mistaken if he supposes that I i? formed him that Mr. Conrad 'f [,ouisiina toas in 
 an ante-room, endeavoring to persuade you to vote." lie further stati -, that 1 liad passed 
 out before either Mr. Slade or Mr. Conrad came, — that Mr. Slade cam and inquired for me 
 first and Mr. Conrad afterieards. This shows that Mr. L. could hav( ' 'fr. Slade no 
 such information. But this is not all. It is apparent from Mr. L.'s ., that Mr. 
 
 Conrad and myself were not in the ante-room together at all. It may be (iur« toUescribe 
 
 the position of this ante-room. It is a very small room, immediately l ,^.. out * '1 • i^outh- 
 ern entrance of the Senate Chamber. As you approach the iimer door of the P ..lu. 
 
 ber, the door of the ante-room is on the right and as near the door :,•' ' ..niuicr as it 
 could well be placed, and so near that when the attendant stands on tliat . . ., lie impedes 
 the passage to the ante-room. This passage is through a wall three or four feet tliick, and 
 so narrow that two persons cannot pastvacli other in it. The room is used for depositing 
 the hats and cloakes of tlie Senators, and they occasionally retire to it for ririvate conversa- 
 tion. Now,it appears from the statement of Mr. L., that 1 passed out bytl ;e wliich 
 leads towards the Rotunda, and that when Slade and Conrad came and .:. , _.:. % instead 
 of directing them to the little ante-room, the passage to which was within his reach, he 
 informed them I had passed out. 
 
 The same thing appears from the letter of Mr. Conrad, which is also suh.Toined, (No. 21). 
 This letter of Mr. Conrad's, to which I shall allude again hereafter, shows cond -. vely that 
 no persuasions were used by him to Induce me to vote. It shows what there was to make 
 a story out of; but of this hereafter. It is apparent from this that we did not go into the 
 ante-room together. Mr. C.says, " Seeing him take his hat and move owirds th door lead- 
 ing out of the Capitol, I endea-vorcd," &LC. It so happens that my hal alv ays hung upon 
 the second peg from the door of the ante-room, and so near the door that uiy practice wr.s, 
 when going out in haste, not to enter the room, but to stand in the narrow passage and 
 reach niy hand in and take my hat. In this position Mr. C. could no' pass me; but ftuirt 
 this position he saw me move towards the door leading out of the Capiol 
 
 Hr. Slade proceeds to state that he went into the Senate Chamber and listened to the de- 
 bate, and when the Secretary was ordered to call the yeas and nays, "I immediately went 
 to the door-keeper and asked him where Phelps and Conrad were," who replug] t'-'it they 
 had left the ante-room and gone to some other part of the Capitol, he dicj not l.riow where. 
 
Here His Excellency is unfortunate a?ain. Mr. Larner says that he told himno such thinrr. 
 ¥h 8 staLmcnTfaTse and un.mp<.rtant in itself as it is.yet led to one of the v.lest features .n 
 Xp who leTon^mracy. This ".o.ne other part of the Capitol" was interpreted to mean the 
 re?e o J in the'b'slmen., and it wa. ver^ gravely asserted that we went below or some 
 lhh,l,o^drink. And it was, I suppose, up.n this assumption that one of the tools of the 
 conspirators, a member of the House, had the impudence and the meanness to declare m 
 fhepresenc; of both Houses in reference to me. that " he did not want a man there u ho 
 had to be dra-aed out of a jrrog-shop to p.ve his vote." N\ ho manu actured the falseho^xl. 
 is not. perhaps: for me to determine,-it lies at present at the door of the governor. 1 or- 
 hap. he is not responsible for the inference ; but the letter of Mr. Conrad shows where we 
 went, and shows the inference to be as false as the premises. , r .. 
 
 Mr Shdo proceeds,— "I requested h.m to jro for them ,mmr<halely. He wentandM^ 
 "Ihem, and thev came in and went past me in the Senate Chamber, just as Mr Phelps 
 " name was called." Here the (Jovernor would doubtless clain. preat credit for h's vigil- 
 ance in preventing the loss of mv vote, and the con.«e.iuent loss of the bill. Indeed he had 
 discovered great activity as well ax vigilance during the five minutes tha. I was out of my 
 place • for it will be pereeived that Mr. learner says, we were not ab.-ent but about five 
 ininofe" and Mr. C,>nrad says he followed m? immediately. Indeed, trom his statement, it 
 ifl evident we wero absent but a verv short time. If the Governer did not make something 
 out of a five minntos aH«enre Ip.miiiv Heat at 8 ..'clock in the evening on the 27th day of 
 August, after a confinoment to the Clramber as stated by .Mr.<'onrad from 10 in the morning 
 in the hot climate of Washington, it was not from want of bustle and activity, nor of ears to 
 hear many valuable su^rrestions which unluckily appear to have e.-^caped the hearing of 
 everybody else. But here afrain His Rxcelienry is as ill supported as ever. Mr. Lanier 
 Bays, "Mr. Slade i» mistakm if he suppnunt thai he sent me in pursuit of them, — that I 
 **fnuntt them, and they rtlumed. I did not pn in purruit of you," &c. Here, too, the 
 bottom is out; and all this superstructure of the Governor's merit to hunting me up and 
 saving the bill, fails to the ground. Rut let us proceed : 
 
 " He [.Mr. l'l>elps] diil not answer, but passed to his seat," &,c. •' The roll having been 
 gone throuirh with, the Clerk called the name of Mr. Conrad, who answered in the affirma- 
 tive. He then called .Mr. Phelps, irho did not nnsioer, hut turned to Mr. Conrnd who uas 
 standintr behind him, and said, 'Conrad, have you voted !' — to which Mr. C. replied that he 
 had. Tslood some 15 or 2() ff'et from them, and heard the whole distinctly. The Secre- 
 tary then called the name of .Mr. Phelps, who answered in the affirmative, and the bill wan 
 carried by a majority of one." 
 
 Here is a great parade about nothing. Supposing all this to be true. I know not that it is 
 an indictable offence. By the practice of the Senate, a member can vote at any time before 
 the result in announced ; — of course, there is no very great anxiety to answer at the first 
 call ; and it is every day's occurrence that Senators do nt>t vote at the first call of their 
 names. — (See Mr. Evans' Letter, No. L) But His Excellency has at last got upon ground 
 whore he can profess at least to know something about what he is stating; and he announces 
 with apparent pride, and no doubt great satisfaction, " I stood some 15 or 20 feet," &.C., 
 " and heard tl;e whole distinctly." 
 
 The reader will soon be satisfied that the Governor is blest, not only with wonderful 
 acuteneas, but with some little vividness of imagination. 
 
 If there is any pith or meaning to this part of the story, it consists in this : that I 
 voted with apparent reluctance, and in a way indicalin;^ an aversiorv to doing my duty. 
 Now, if it should turn out that my name was not called at all until I requested it, that 
 on entering the chamber I went directly to my seat, requested the call of my name, 
 and immediately answered, there would' seem to be very Irttle- left of the story. Let 
 us hear Mr. Slade's own witness. And here I ought to remind the reader that if he 
 will turn to the letter of Mr. Conrad, (Xo. '21,) he will find that his letter is addressed 
 to Mr. Slade, and is in answer to a string^ of interrogatories propounded by Mr. Slade 
 to him. If, thereforsv it is not sufficiently explicit in negativing the assertion that ho 
 "was endeavoring to persuade me to vote," it is not my fault ; but as Mr. S. doubt- 
 less interrogated him as to the most material part of the whole statement, his failure 
 to obtain any thing in support of his statement is sufficient for my purpose. What 
 says Mr. Conrad !•—" I do not 'think' that Mr. Phelps' name was called 'just as he 
 entered the chamber.' — on the contrary I think, as I have already stated, that our names 
 had both been already called in their regular order before we entered, aii^ that his 
 name was not again called until he rose and requested the Clerk to call it, and that he 
 2 
 
10 
 
 irnmedia/eh/ answered in the afflrmattve." " I have no recollection of his havino- been 
 * twice' called — nor of his asking me if I had voted." Governor Crafts states "that I. 
 "answered at the first call of my name. Mr. Hale, late Secretary of the Governor, was 
 then in the gallery of the Senate, reporting for the press, lie states the same, and 
 adds that if there had been any hesitation on my part, he is confident he sliould have 
 noticed it. Mr. Clayton, who sat near me, says there was nothing in my manner of 
 voting, which drew his attention, and so says Mr. Machen, the Clerk, (No. 'S'S.) 
 
 But there is a view of this subject which is decisive. By the testimony of Mr. 
 Clayton and Mr. Machen, it appears, that after the roll has been gone through with, 
 it is never practised to call the name of a Senator except at his request. Mr. Machen 
 says, " it would be regarded as an official impropriety." It is apparent then that my 
 name could not have been called after I entered the chamber, unless by my request 
 Mr. Conrad says I rose and requested my name to be called. Now if I had risen an(i 
 requested my name to be called, and had then stood mute, it would have attracted th( 
 notice, and excited the astonishment of the whole Senate. Such a spectacle as a Sen 
 ator on the floor requesting his name to be called, and yet declining to answer, wa:- 
 never exhibited there, and never will be. Should any such case occur, it would excite 
 universal attention. And yet nobody but the Governor remembers the transaction. 
 
 There is a circumstance stated by His Excellency, which is of no importance excep 
 as it illustrates the accuracy of his "recollection. Mr. P. "turned round to Mr. Conrad, 
 who stood behind him, and said, 'Conrad, have you voted'!'" Sic. My seat is in the 
 centre row of seats, and of course near the outer circle of the chamber, and nearly in 
 front of the chair. Mr. Conrad's was in the front row, on the extreme right, and next 
 to the southern entrance. Both Mr. Conrad and Mr. Slade state that I was in my seat, 
 Now every person acquainted with the chamber, will perceive, that the Senate being 
 then full, there was no place for Mr. Conrad behind me, unless it was in the lobby. 
 But he says that he stood at the Clerk's table, which is in the centre of the semi-cii. 
 cle. directly under the Chair — in front, and some distance from me. To address hii 
 under such circumstances, instead of turning round, I must have done it across th 
 chamber, and in as loud a tone as I should address the Chair. 
 
 I have now gone through v.'ith the charge in relation to the tariff of 1842. Befor-: 
 dismissino- the subject, however, it may be well to bestow a few remarks upon M ■. 
 Conrad's letter, as this shows _all that did occur, out of which even the zeal of M •. 
 Slade could fabricate a story. ,^ ^ , , 
 
 And first, I have to say, that as it is apparent from Mr. C. s letter that the occur- 
 rence was never mentioned by him, Mr. Slade could not have made his statement upc n 
 his (Mr. C.'s) authority. If the letter goes in any way to sustain or excuse Mr. ^ 
 he must consider it as a God-send to the rescue of his veracity. But if any one . , 
 disposed to re"-ard the transaction as detailed by Mr. Conrad, as evincing on my part h 
 disposition throuo-h impatience at the debate to jeopardize that important measure, ; 
 have to answer, Uiat although I have at this day no distinct recollection of the occi - 
 rence vet I have no idea that I entertained the serious purpose of leavmg the Ca-i. 
 tol or losi-o- my vote. We had been in session from 10 o'clock in the morning till 
 about 8 in t1i- evenin--, in a hot climate in the month of August, in a room badly vcn, 
 tilated and excessively crowded by reason of the deep interest felt m the subject of cIq- 
 bate That we should have become impatient of unseasonable debate, is not to Ix"- 
 wondered at And that iny movement was intended as a finesse to stop the discussi i 
 is crobablv the fact. Such movements are not uncommon ;— indeed I have on ot] ■: 
 occasions practised the same. That I had no serious purpose of leaving the Capit .„ 
 is evident "from Mr. Conrad's statement, that on reaching the open air I stopped ol my 
 own accord, and probably had he not followed me, should not have proceeded as lar 
 
 ^'in the next place, had I left the Capitol, the bill was in no danger It is no uncommon 
 thin-T for members, when fatigued with the debate, to retire to their lodgings ; and as it is 
 never the practice of the Senate to press an important question under such circumstances, 
 except iVveiT"vgent case.=, theVesuit would have been that the vote would have 
 been deWd until the next day. This is ofteu the case when members retire at a late 
 S. An^lInX the bill was fn no danger, had the vote been taken. T ere were Sena, 
 tors oresent who would not vote for the bill except in case ol necessity, but who neveithe- 
 e s des red s passage And had the bill been negatived that evening, both Mr. Mangum 
 tS President, and Mr. Berrien of Georoia, were prepared, as the reader will perceive hoin 
 
11 
 
 their letters, to move a re-consideration the next morninfr. The result of tlie wliole is, tliat, 
 to put tlio worst construction on my conduct, I did not do what I threatened to do ; and if I 
 had, no harm would have been done, as none was done. Nor wa:^ my conduct singular. 
 Senators often leave in consequence of the lateness of the hour, and more frequently leave 
 tliir seats and threaten to retire, and are yet persuaded to remain in the hope that the ques- 
 tion will speedily be taken. And it often happens that the vote is after all deferred. Upon 
 the whole, 1 think the reader will agree with Mr. Conrad, when he says that he "cannot 
 imagine how it Blu>uld have become necessary to refer to a circumstance so very unimpor- 
 tant." Perhaps however the reader, being better acquainted with the parties than .Mr. C, 
 will discdvcr the motive and see the necessity of adverting to the circumstance, in order to 
 enable His Excellency the Ciovernor to make much ado about nothing. 
 
 One thing farther : Mr. Siade has been foraging about the country for material to back 
 
 " -tatemcnt and bolster up his veracity. The letter of Mr. Conrad is one of the fruits of 
 
 • labors in this way. If he succeed no better elsewhere, he will be convinced, I trust, 
 
 i; t it is but an unpntrttable labor. Ho has, however, a letter from Mr. Cranston of Rhode 
 
 ' ! ■ 111, a copy of which is subjoined, (No. 'M), which deserves a passing notice. In this 
 
 r I atlacii no imp<jrtance to his statement of what Mr. Slado ^learned,' because he evi- 
 
 ; . repeats what lie must have heard from Mr. Slade, and which has already been proved 
 
 -•,ike. All which is important in his statcm'snt is the assertion, that I declared to him 
 
 1 Senate Chamber that I "would not vo^e for the bill, and it would be lost." Now it 
 
 1 ily proved, as the fact was, tiiat Mr. Cranston was under a misapprehension in this 
 
 u . ciculur. It IS apparent that if any such conversation occurred, it must iiave been sometime 
 
 i -.ore 1 left my seat, as 8tale<l by Mr. Conrad ; for, as I waa out of the chamber, as stated 
 
 ly Mr. Lamer, and as is apparent from the whole testimony, but about live minute.s there 
 
 '* -I not time for .Mr. Cranston to go to Mr. Slade's lodgings and bring him while I was out. 
 
 'J us being the case, the result, as is evident from all the statements, is that while Mr. Oan- 
 
 • .' was on this errand of kindness, I was in my seat, impatient fur llie question, and com- 
 
 ning of the delay. If I harl determined not to vote, I had nothing to do but leave the 
 
 mber and go home. Instead of that, it is fully proved that I was impatient to end tho 
 
 . y late, and get at the question. The true explanation of it is, that Mr. Cranston probably 
 
 f jrheard some e.vpression of impatience, and perhaps a threat to leave the chamber unle.s.s 
 
 I debate ceased. Some remark of tiiis kind addressed to him or .-Jome one else, and which 
 
 L. probably did not fully api)rehond, startled him, and sent him oH'upon this unneces.«ary, 
 
 ai, , as it proved, foolish errand to Mr. Slade. This is apparent from his own letter; tor 
 
 iroceds to say, " 1 did not believe he would vote against it, or even withhold his vote ; 
 
 . 1 yet I felt alarmed," &,c. ; and from his letter to me, in wljich he says, " I have only to 
 
 1. and I do it with pleasure, that, on no occasion before or since that day, did I ever see 
 
 "1 aiiyihing in your conduct that indicated a feeling of hostility, or even of indilFerence 
 
 ards that important measure ; but, on the contrary, on all other occasions, you appeared 
 
 in.\ious tor its success as any other member." From all this, it is evident that, whatev- 
 
 ' / !ie may have heard from me, he i!i<l not understand to what I had reference. 
 
 . have ever considered Mr. C. an honorable man, yet I am somewhat at a loss to explain 
 '. course in this transaction. He boarded with me at that time, and must have known 
 Ihut there was no intercourse between me and Mr. Slade, and ought to have known, that if 
 T were out of humor, he might as soon appease me by throwing a rattlesnake into my bosom 
 ' I. s motives were doubtless gcwd ; but if, instead of posting to xMr. Slade, he had appealed 
 '.. e/overnor Crafts, or any of my Iriends in the Senate, he would have discovered the mis- 
 lake. By the indiscreet course he took, (doubtless unintentionally,) he merely afforded Mr 
 S; idc an occasion lor the gross fabrication which he has attempted to impose upon rae and 
 i: y constituency. 
 
 I have now done with this matter of tho tariff of 1811 The next charcre in Mr. Slade's 
 communication to the committee is couched in these words: "Mr. I'helps had at a former 
 session, as lumlerslood, declared that he would not vote for the land distribution bill, under 
 circumstances similar to those connected with his refusal to vote for the tariff; but of this 
 1 had no personal knoirled<re." 
 
 Jsenate, in the person ot one IlUand Hall; to whom doubtless this part of the labor of love 
 Jiad been assigned. It seems that the redoubtable committee had ad-iressed a letter to this 
 
12 
 
 Mr. Hall, being well aware of his position and prospects, and feeling confident that he would 
 be equally disposed to do me justice. And in this application they also ask for what has 
 "come to his knowledge either by his own observation, or through the testimony of others 
 whose opinions he could not discredit.^' Whereupon Mr. Hiland Hall makes the following 
 statement : 
 
 " Before the passage of that bill [the distribution bill] by that body, [the Senate,] some 
 "-person came to me in the House of Representatives, and said that the vote was about to be 
 **■ taken, that it was likely to be close, and that Mr. Phelps was in an angry mood, and 
 "^declared he would not vote ; and requested me to go and see if I could not exert a favor- 
 "able influence over him. I acdordingly went to the Senate, found some Senators speak- 
 " ing, and Mr. Phelps, I think, walking in the lobby. I accosted him mildly, and inquired 
 "how the vote would stand, and if the bill would pass. He answered me sharphj, he did 
 "not know and did not care, — that he was not going to vote upon it. After a ievf more 
 "words, either at my suggestion or his, we went together into a smnll adjoining room, 
 "within ready call of the Senate, and had a conversatiin of half an hour or more. M?. 
 "Phelps appeared highly excited, and iii the conversation my efforts were directed' to pacify 
 "him and persuade him to vole. He complained of leading whig Senators — named several 
 " of them, — said they did not notice him, but treated him as i'f he was nobody, — that he ha<I 
 "no friends there or in Vermont,— talked of a plot against him, but without specifying 
 "particulars, — said he would not vote on the distribution bill, — that he should never give 
 "another vote in the Senate, — that he was going to resign his seat in the Senate, — that he 
 " had his resignation already written and in his pocket, — that he should send it to the Gov- 
 "ernor, and pack up and go home. These declarations in regard to his not voting, and 
 "having his resignation in his pocket, were often repeated." 
 
 He then goes on with the usual stereotyped phrases of "coarse language" and " abuse 
 of leading whig senators," and winds up with saying that "'Mr. Phelps however voted for 
 
 And this twaddle is gravely put forth by a candidate for the Senate of the United States- 
 as a dereliction of duty, to be laid before the assembled wisdom of the State of Vermont, as 
 a sort of impeachment under the auspices and management of David M-. Camp & Go. It 
 seems that Mr. Hiland Hall was rather more cautious than his Excellent coadjutor, for he 
 introduces but one unknown gentleman, and refers to nobody by name for his -authority, — 
 confinino- his statement,, to a private conversation with me, and thus proteetmg himself from 
 eontradiction or exposure. Happily, however, the journals of the Senate give the lie to all 
 pretence of a dereliction of duty, and furnish evidence of my course in relation to that bill,, 
 which Mr. Hall can neither deny nor evade. I meet this charge boldly with that journal in 
 my hand. It shows that / voted fifty-nine time on the call of the ayes and noes on that hill 
 at that session. And yet such miserable twaddle is introduced to show me unworthy the 
 confidence of my constituency^ as having wavered in my duty in relation to this measure. 
 
 In order to present the whole of my course in regard to this bill, I will pursue the journal 
 further The bill was first taken up for consideration on the 9th of August, and was finally 
 passed on the 26th. During that period, the ayes and noes were called, it I count right, 
 67 times, and I voted 59— thus losing 8 votes. On the 11th of August the bill was taken 
 UD late in the day,— two small amendments were proposed and rejected. I do not appear 
 to have been present. The votes stood 27 to 18, and 22 to 18. My vote would have in- 
 creased the majority. On the 12th the ayes and noes were called twice,— I lost one vote, 
 which stood 35 to 11 : on the 13th, three times,— J lost two votes, and m neither case 
 would my vote have affected the result. On the 17lh there were six calls : I voted every 
 time. On the 18th and 19th six : I voted every time. On the 20lh eighteen tinies : I 
 voted sixteen— losing the 7th and 8lh vote, where my vote would not affect the result On 
 the 21st, 5 times; I voted each time. On the 22d twelve times : I voted eleven times, 
 losing one vote, which was withheld for this reason : The vote u-as on the famous proviso 
 of Mr. Berrien. I was satisfied that we could not carry the bill without the proviso, and still. 
 Sid not feel at liberty to go for it. I therefore withheld my vote to let the F«v.so succee^^ 
 The vote stood 24 to 18. My vote of coursewould not have varied the result Th«y ^^ ^^ 
 called three times on the 26th: I voting eacht.me. These, with ten calls on the Sth^and 9 h 
 when I voted each time, make in all sixty-seven times that they were called on that bilK 
 The loss of seven votes I cannot explain. It may have been from occasional absence 
 from the Senate ; or • pairing off,' as it is termed, with some ^-ator or. the opposite side 
 But the manner in which the omissions occur, shows most satisfactorily that t could not 
 have been from Indisposition to act upon the bill. Mr. Hall lays the scene of my delinquency 
 
13 
 
 on the dav before the final passage, the 2oth. No vote was taken on that day. From the 
 2l8t to the "iitli inclusive, the ayes and noes were called twenty times. 1 voted nineteen 
 time" and purposely withheld my vote once, for the rcaM)n 1 have slated. And this is the 
 period when Mr Hall represent-s me as wavering in my duty 
 
 Havmg thus shown that I have been guilty of no neglect of duty m regard to this bill, 1 
 will'adve"rt again to Mr. Mall's statement. ^ .. „ r w 
 
 Nofwithstanditif,' the etf^jrt of Mr. ll. to give prominence to what he calls my refusal to 
 vote on the di.stnbution bill, the truth cannot be conro ilod. There was no iiitimaticn that 
 I should not vote on the hill, if I remained in the Sriiate. No reason was given why I 
 should not, except that if I resigned my place, I should not be there to vote. Upon his own 
 statement, thr-ro was no more of it than expres.«ii ' -mng. Supposing then 
 
 that I did, under the influence of constitutional .1. . • by ill health and by a 
 
 dissatisfaction with my position, express a momentary pnrpo.«c ot rcHgning, which wa.s nev- 
 er carried into cITect ; is this an otfence for which I am to be arraigned before the people 
 
 of Vermont tned, convicted, and punished. If it be ho, it is an offence which I think r.oi- 
 
 therof the gentlemen whose commiinicatiftns J have been examining, will ever lay upon 
 their consciences. Ncitlier IIis Excellency nor Mr. Kill will. I think, ever entertain the 
 sinfid pur|)08c of resigning an office which they may bo fortunate enough to hold, unless it 
 be with tho vorv laud.iiile view ol obtaining a l)etter one. 
 
 As lor .Mr. I liiii'.s nirmamlf. about my abuse of " leading ichig Senators," &c., it is scarcely 
 deserving of notice. 'I'i. .■; to liHve boon a favorite topic with certain gen'lemen. Mr. 
 HIade has his opprobr."" „ 'gf — Mr. Hull Ins hi.'^s.hiise ni Iradin-^ wh'fg Srn'fors — Ez- 
 ra Meach ha8 a spice of the same. Now these gentlemen do not tell us whether they trot- 
 ted off to these /r/7t/i;)ir ' ' ' ^" ''^r.t to inform them of the o-' If not, they were 
 
 evidently fiolirionf in : •' of duty which they so lav fess, and which has 
 
 compelled them (ihinmh wnU ijlreme r ) to place this very important imttor in the 
 
 archives of that illustrious and novor-l' j gotten commitloe for the edification of po?- 
 terity as well as the present generation. That pains have been taken to prejudice me in 
 the estimation of < ertaiii prominent members of the Senate, I have reason to know, upon 
 authority no more questionable than that of Senators themselves. But I can assure the.se 
 gentlemen that they have failed there, as well as elsewhere ; and, if I were to venture 
 an opinion, I should pay that I stand infinitely higher in the estimation of the Senators to 
 whom I suppose they allude, than the wretched plotters against my reputation and peace. 
 
 Mr. Hal! >, that I talked of a plo' -t rue. If I did so, thr? public will give 
 
 roe credit : -f-'Jfi'y. That such a |i 1 even ihon, which deveiopod it.«clf at 
 
 Montpelier la.^l fall, no eensiblo man can doubt. The records if the commilte': furnish 
 overwhelming proof of it. That Mr. Hall was in it, there is as little doubt ; and if it be any 
 satisfaction to him, I can assure him that I expected, from the outset, to find him its 
 cat'.^-paw. 
 
 There is one more aspect in which I desire to present Mr. Hall, and then I will leave 
 him. Mr. Hall, hearing that I was in an ^^ angry mood," comes to me in the gui.se of a 
 friend, — he finds me, as he says, "highly excitc(r," — takes me into a private room for pri- 
 vate and confidential conversation, — firaws from me expr -ssions offensive to other irontle- 
 men, (if his story is to be believed,) and the expression of purpo.ses never carried out, — en- 
 deavors, as he says, to pacify me, — tinds at last that his purpose is elected, and ray duty 
 faithfully discharged, — and yet volunteers to disclo.^e to the world garbled, colored, and 
 distorted, as they evidently are, remarks made not only nnder the influence of excitement, 
 but in confidence. I envy not to Mr. Hall the lioii'.r which his own statement reflects upon 
 him in the estimation of honorable men. What had I'le world to do with this conversation 1 
 And for what purpose wns it trumpeted forth ? Did .^i^. H. supprse that this sort of treach- 
 ery would elevate him in the estimation of the good people of Vennont, and increase his 
 pretensions to my place ? All men are liable to this breach of confidence, — men of irrita- 
 ble and confiding temper, more than others, — but should the old adage of "rogues fallino- 
 out" be verified among these cuns()irators, Mr. H. himself, with all his mousing caution', 
 might be exposed, and a picture of him presented, as little palatabe to him as iiis is tome. 
 
 Mr. Hall states further, that he "understood at the time f?-om others upon whom I could 
 not but rely, that Mr. Phelps had a similar difficulty about voting for the tariff act of 1842; 
 but I had no conversation with him in regard to' that vote." It will be remembered that 
 Mr. Slade also ''^understood" that "Mr. Phelps declared he would not vote for the didtri- 
 bution bill." The manner in which these two worthies endorse each other, is somewhat 
 ludicrous. Mr. Slade makes his charge about the tariff; and, to back his veracity, Mr. Hall 
 
 3 
 
14 
 
 states that he heard the same thing at the time. Mr. Hall makes a charge about the distri 
 bution ; and, to back him up, Mr. Slade " understoocV the same thino- atlhe time Neither 
 of them disclose from ivhom they heard the report. Mr. Slade, ho\\"ever, in his anxiety to 
 spread the report, (which is proved to be false,) tells the committee no less than three 
 tmies in his letter, that immediately after the occurrence, he stated the transaction to his 
 colleagues, and to the ivhole Vermont delegation. Thus Mr. Hall got his information from 
 Mr. Slade. Mr. IL, on the other hand, entrenches himself by confinino- his testimony to a 
 private conversation which nobody heard but himself. How then did Mr. Slade set it ex 
 cept directly or indirectly from Mr. Hall! Tlie result is, that Mr. flail gets hold of some- 
 thing, and runs to Mr. Slade,— Mr. Slade thinks he has got hold of somelhing, and he runs 
 to Mr. Hall, — and when they tire ready to astound the world by their disclosures, each en- 
 dorses the other by very gravely asserting, " I heard of the same thing at the time." 
 
 I will now dismiss these charges — the only specific ones made against my official con- 
 duct — and submit the matter to the public judgment, observing, as I do so, that after 
 having been subjected to a four years' espionage by these men, — an espionage which has 
 invaded my boarding-house and intruded into my sick-room, and even a.'scertaTned the med- 
 icine which was administered, it is rather gratifying that the only char;':'->s of official delin- 
 quency which I have been called to meet, are the two thus feebly supi-rted. 
 
 I might leave the whole subject here. But myassailan' - have seen fit, not only to arraign 
 my public conduct, but in their zeal have attacked me in my private character and habits, 
 charging me with habits not only degrading in themselve.s but which tf'nd to disqualify me 
 for the discharge of my public duties ; and they have eve.i invaded my domestic and social 
 circle at Washington, accusing me of being troublesome in the mess, — of exciting "very 
 unpleasant feelings among the boarders, especially among females," some of whom are 
 named, — of using language in the presence of females coarse and unbecoming a gentle- 
 man, — in short, of otl'endmg the nice moral sense of Charles Adams and the virgin delicacy 
 of Ezra Meech. Mr. Hall and Mr. Slade are quite philosophical upon the subject of my 
 natural jealousy and violence of feeling. My constitutional defects are such as the God of 
 nature made them. No man is without defects of some kind ; and if I were to turn the 
 tables upon some of these gentlemen, I might draw a picture true enough at least to be re- 
 cognized everywhere, which would not be very gratifying to them. But this is not my 
 purpose at present. My object is self-defence. Yet I cannot admit the right of these gen- 
 tlemen to draw me into public discussion of my own defects of tempeiv.ment or constitution- 
 al character ; nor do I in this particular admit the jurisdiction of David M. Camp and Com- 
 pany. If such an inquisition is to be sanctioned, and to serve as a precedent for the future, 
 some other candidates for public office may hereafter enjoy the (jii'. licfrt oi figuring at ilts 
 bar. But my personal character is before the public, where it has been for thirty yeartj 
 past, and of its defects they must judge. It is a case which I shall not argue in oerson. 
 Nor shall I apply to the females with whom I have been associated at Washmgioh lor 
 certificates of my good conduct in the domestic and social circle— much less shall I degrade 
 myself; the Senate, and the country, by appealing to their husband^ for certificates that I 
 was not habitually drunk in the Senate Chamber. If my enemies cUoose to torage m the 
 domestic circle for such material, they are welcome to all they can glean. 
 
 Much in the same way shall I dispose of the charge of intemperance. So far as this stale 
 charge, so pcrseveringly persisted in, is concerned, 1 shall content myself with the evidence 
 already before the public, and shall leave it where the investigations of this redoubtable 
 committee left it. 
 
 Mr. Slade labors hard upon this point, arid after charging it upon me during the whole 
 four years he was with me at Washington, adds, " This was more apparent, I think, during 
 the long session of the 27th Congress, than it had been at any previous time." Now, it so 
 happens that this was the session when Gov. Crafts was associated with me, and although 
 I shall not ask certificates of honorable members, or anybody else, yet I may avail mysell of 
 his testimony as given before the convention at Montpelier before hundreds of the people 
 of this State. He says in his communication to the committee, " While I was at Wash- 
 ington, I never saw Judge Phelps drink but one solitartj glass of uune, and no distilled spirit 
 at all. I never saw him when I supposed he had been using any, nor do I believe he was in the 
 habit of using it privately during the time I ivas at Washington." Such is the testimony 
 of my colleague, who was in habits of daily intercourse with me. He staled the same thing 
 to the convention. 
 
 But there are other reasons why I need not dwell upon this charge. It is not only a stale 
 one, but has been repeatedly passed upon by the people of the State. In 1831, when I was 
 
15 
 
 first elected to the Bcncli, the charge vis urged ;— it was repeated (and by some who have 
 already <'onc to the "rave, the victims of intemperance) tor years alterwards, durmg which 
 1 was honored by. seven successive elections to that Bench ;— lor the seven years wh.le 1 
 occupied that seat, I was exposed, under circumstance? of hiorji and trying responsibility, to 
 the observation of the people of the State at large. At the end of that period I was trans- 
 ferred, notwitjjstanding the same thing was urged, to the Senate of the United States, and 
 alter live years of scrv'ice there, was re-electpd to the same post in defiance of the testimo- 
 ny of Mr. Slade and his coadjutors. With these nine successive verdicts, running through 
 a period of thirteen years, I am satisfied ; and I do not deem it necessary to present to the 
 iwopio (.f the State any new evidence on the subject 
 
 Tlicro IS howuvcr one point of view in which this ia a fair topic for discussion, and in 
 this ;isp'-ct I am rondv to meet it. If my habits are such as to disqualify me in any degree 
 for the faithful, and eftcctive discharge of my duties, it is an objection not truly pnipcrjor 
 public discussion but one not to be overlooked. I will take the 2ii session ol the -JTth 
 CoiiLT.-.^H wiiori .Vr. Sl.-ido ••nys the thing was more apparent, and when he says I boarded, 
 at "Ifroirn's oivni" for a specimen. I went to Brown's I think some time in Jan. 184'2, — 
 remained ihrre till the VM\ of May when I left for home,— stayed there a very few days 
 Iter my return, and moved upon the llill on the ISth of June where I remained to the 
 lose of the session on the Slst of Aug. It is well understood that the busy season does 
 not conn iiitil after New Year's. On the 10th of January I was appointed Chairman 
 
 of tlio (■ on on Revolutionary Claims at that time a very laborious committee, and 
 
 was ai the .«ame time a member of the Conunittee oti Claims, — of the Committee on In- 
 dian Alliiirs, and Chairman of the Committee on the .Viiitia ; — and upon the resignation of 
 Mr. Prentiss that spring, was placed on the Committee on Pensions; thus being upon five 
 conimiitroH and ciiairnian of two, — four of which are esteemed laborious committees. 
 From the 'M day of Jany. to the 2"Jd of March inclusive, I presented to the senate ^y'Z re- 
 ports upon subjects before various committees. Five mornings in the week was I under 
 the necessity nf attending the session of the committees, and the whole labor of investiga- 
 ting the cases and preparing the reports was thus thrown upon the evening. The course 
 of bnsines- in these committees is this : The ca.ses are parcelled out among the members; 
 each takes the case home and examines it at his leisure, — after doing so, he states his 
 views to the committee. If they agree with him, he then makes out his report. This re- 
 port must not only state the fact;- but give the views and reasons of the committee, in such 
 a manner that any senator may form his opinion from the report alone. These reports with 
 il'- iiions cost me upon an average more labor than the investigation and drawing 
 
 1. lon in tiie same number of cases in the Supreme ("ourt. In short I have 
 
 ■ r>r while on the Bench performed the same amount of labor in the same period. The 
 ^ mentioned re/K»rt3 occupy a space of about LtH' pages in the printed documents,and will 
 \ for themselves whether they were written by a man intoxiceted. This is the period 
 ■ f liy Mr. Mangum President of the senate in his letter hereto subjoined [No. 22.] 
 ime session tlie subject of the claims growing out of the Choctaw treaty and also 
 alluded to by Mr. Mangum came up and the resp<jnsibility of protecting the treasury against 
 claims to the amount of some millions rested chiefly upon me as one of the committee of 
 Indian Atfairs. This subject was under debate for weeks, the great amount depending 
 rendering the claimants and thair friends extremely pertinacious. Before I left the city in 
 M ly the business of the committee of which I was chairman was disposed of and very 
 Jittle left before any committee of which I was a member, unless it was the Committee on 
 Pensions. In the course of the session I made about 80 reports in all, filling over 200 pa- 
 <:es of the printed documents, in addition to my ordinary duties of attending the senate. 
 For the tniih of these assertions I appeal to the tetUimony of the President of the senate 
 and the printed Journal and documents of that body. On the 18th of June I left Brown's 
 Hotel and went upon the Hill. Mr. Slade has the disingenuousness to say that he under- 
 stood that 1 » icas persuaded to remove from Brown's tavern." "Gov. Crafts told me he had 
 advised Mr. Phelps to leave Brown's ! ! It is not unusual for members to board at the Ho- 
 tels. During the last session from 3.=j to 40 members of both Houses boarded at the seve- 
 ral Hotels, and a large mess of which Mr. Woodbury was one at Brown's. The insinua- 
 tion of Mr. Slade can not be misunderstood. In part he shelters himself under the usual 
 subterfuge of "■ I understood'' but in giving Gov. Crafts as authority he is as unfortunate 
 as in other instances. Gov. Crafts being questioned on this point says, as I have it in his 
 own hand writing before me, " It was not that I saw anything to create a suspicion that 
 (you) frequented the bar, for I saw nothing" &,c. Indeed if the reader will turn to 
 
16 
 
 Gov. Craft's letter he will find that he clears 2ue boldly and decisively from such an imputa- 
 
 I will not stop to comment upon the unparalelied meanness of such insinuations but will 
 proceed to othor statements eciually un;^enerouH and equally false. 
 
 " For several weeks (says Mr. Slade) during that session, he (Mr. P.) was confined to his 
 lodgings under the care ot Doct. Sevvall, with wliom I was intimately acquainted, and of 
 ^yhom I occasionally made enquiries as to Mr. Phelps condition, d.x\djromwhom as well as 
 from others I understood that his ill-health was the effect of excessive drinkinw." " He was 
 dunng his confinement at a private house a little east of the Capitol, to ichick I understood 
 he had been persuaded to remove from Brown's tavern." Now it so happens that the Jour- 
 nals of the Senate and the Register of debates in the Globe show me in my place iu the 
 Senate every day from the 18th day of June when I went upon the Hill to the 81st of Aug. 
 the day of the adjournment inclusive with the following exceptions viz : the 27th and 28th 
 of June. The death of Mr. Southard was announced on the 27th and his funeral was on 
 the 28th. The senate did no business and of course the Journul sliews nothing. I well re- 
 member being present.- The 7th of July when I was probably absent. The 15th, 16th, 
 18th and 19th of July when I admit I was confined by sickness. 
 
 The 19th of August when the Ayes and Noes were not called and the Journal shews 
 nothing. It is worthy of note that there are but three members who can show them- 
 selves present by the Journal of that day to wit, Messrs. Bagby, Bates and Evans who 
 severally made motions. 
 
 And the 22d day of August where the Journal shows nothing satisfactory. The ayes 
 and noes were called twice that day, once upon a squabble about a light house at the 
 mouth of the Mississippi, and once upon a private claim ; two questions of so little inter- 
 est to me that I niight not have voted although present. But to shew that I was not alone 
 in my transgression if absent I will state that the highest number of votes given that day 
 M'as 32, and the lowest 31 — out of 52 members. On the 7th of July the highest vote was 
 42, and the lowest 32. 
 
 The result is, that I am able to show by documentary proof, that I was present in the 
 senate every day during the whole period, when business was transacted, except the 4 days 
 when sick and 3 others when it is uncertain whether I was present or not. The three days, 
 being at several periods, could not have been a portion of the sickness. What apology can 
 be made for such statements ] Here are four days magnified by the Governor's zeal and 
 imagination into several weeks! The public will judge from this specimen of the elasticity 
 of the Governor's memory how much allowance is to be made for liis general charges of im- 
 propriety of demeanor, which are either two indefinite to admit of a formal issue, or relate to 
 private and confidential domestic intercourse, where delicacy and self-respect forbid that I 
 should follow him for proof. 
 
 One more falsehood exposed, and I have done on this point. The reader will recollect 
 the information from Dr. Sevvall, as to the cause of my sickness. I have before me a note 
 from Dr. Sewall, m his own hand-writing, delivered to me by himself, in which he denies 
 having given occasion or authority for any such statement. 
 
 Here I leave Governor Slade. Comment is unnecessary. The facts and the proof speak 
 for themselves. The public must judge of the truth of his charges, and the sincerity of his 
 declaration that, "it is exceedingly unpleasant to state such facts vvith regard to anybody; 
 yet neither my respect for you (the conunittee) nor my sense of duty permit me to refuse an 
 answer to your inquiries." 
 
 In addition to the statements of Mr. Slade and Mr. Hall, there was addressed to the com- 
 mittee a voluntary communication from Hon. Ezra Msech, and another from Charles Adams, 
 Esq. These four written statements were all the evidence before the committee which 
 contained anything, so far as I am informed, to my prejudice. A letter was indeod received 
 by them from the Hon. George P. Marsh, in answer to a communication addressed to him by 
 them ; but as tliis letter was not received until after the election, and was never, to my 
 knowledge, made public, it is not necessary for me to notice it. Justice however to Mr. 
 Marsh, as well as myself, requires that I should state (having a copy of the letter in my pos- 
 session) that he (Mr. Marsh) professes tr know nothing disparagmg to my course, either pub- 
 lic or private. He had heard unfavorable reports, but does not stale what they were; and 
 refers to some of the gentlemen to whom the committee had addressed similar letters of in- 
 quiry, as his informant's, and very properly leaves these gentlemen to speak for themselves. 
 
 Having commented upon the statements of Mr. Slade and Mr. Hall, it only remains toad- 
 vert to the only remaining evidence, that of Judge Meach and Mr. Adams. 
 
17 
 
 Juiltre Meech having retired from public life, I am not desirous either to drag him from that 
 retirement, or disturb his repitse in it. But having volunteered very unncccs^iariIy and very 
 improperly in t'lis matter, he has obtruded hmiself upon my attention, and niuft pardon me 
 if I bestow a levv words upon him in self-defence. Further than that I do not desire to go. 
 J hive ever, certainly, down to the transactions of 1844, entertained towards Judge Meech 
 no other sentiment than that of res|>ect and kindness. He has many good qualities ; but 
 that he is imperfect like the rest of us, I have long known. It is perhaps his misfortune 
 rather than his fault, that he lacks that sagacity and shrewdness which would have saved 
 h r 1 in more than one instance from being made the dupe of artful and designing men, and 
 Iruin more than one awkward |)redicament. It is to this mental delect that I attribute his 
 unstable and inconsistont political course, — suflering himself to be buffeted back and lorth 
 like a shuttle-cock between the two parties, by |)olili(:il jtigirlers, who have seen fit to pre- 
 sent him to the public at one time aa the Jackson caiululale for Cioicrnor, and at another as 
 Chairman of a public meeting, got up in favor of the I'nUed Stales Bank. It would be per- 
 ve to appiv the epithet •dnugh-facedness' lu this susceptibility to the influence 
 lUt It is to this (j'lality that I aitribiitn his course .toward me, and in this way I 
 I he fact that he has suflered himself t<» be made a cat's-paw for a certain unprin- 
 
 > ;. 11 (or rather cluiue) in Burlington, and to be placed in a position of which I have 
 I : ho is by this time heartily ashamed. He has been induced, by a set of malignant 
 
 rs, to put his signature to a letter which, in my opinion, he never wrote ; and to e.\- 
 I 1 it an opinion, which, if he entTtaiiifd it at all, is entertained ;it theirdictation. He 
 
 has been led by them into a breach of that r o which should always subsist between 
 
 honorable men; and should the e.vamplebe i >..l by iht'se withwhomhe, in the course of 
 
 his public life has associatrd, ho might |)erhap8 be filaced in no very enviable [>osition. 
 
 lie came to W'n early in l'?41, ostc - bearer of the |trJ!-<i(liMilial votes of 
 
 tliis State ; but he \^ > charged with the n of a candidate lor the odirc of Col- 
 
 lector at Burlington. 8oon after his arrival, he disclosed to me his business, and I en- 
 tered very cordially into his views in relation to the colicctorship, in which I had the con- 
 currence of the very estimable man who was then my colleague. Mr. Meach spent the 
 residue of the session ai Washington; and alter the adjournment, we returiifd to Vermont 
 togellier. During Ins sojourn there, I was always at his service, as I t<K»k a pleasure in 
 furthering his views. lie was often in my room, and, as might be expected,Jthere was a 
 free, unrestrained, and in many res[>ects confidential intercourse between iis. It is not 
 BtranifR it, during that [leriod, much idle conversation occurred, and much was said which 
 ' e.vpected to be either rejieated or remembered. Nor is it to be wondered af, con- 
 ■^ our comparative age, and my confidence in his friendship, if I should disclose to 
 him matters which deeply affected my own feelings. Those who have tried public life, 
 know well that it has its trials ; and he must be a novice who imagines that a seat in the 
 United States Senate has no thorns about it. I had even thf n, as well as since, encounter- 
 ed many things calculated to disturb my sensibilities. I need not disclose what they were. 
 The people oi Vermont have only to consult their own recollection of political events in this 
 State, and my connexion with them, to know, that if I possess the ordinary sensibilities of 
 our nature, they have been severely tried. That I should have unbosomed myself to Judcre 
 Meech, was not strange; and if I spoke of injuries, or supposed injuries, with deep feeling 
 and with warniih, it will not surprize those who are acquainted with my constitutional tem- 
 perament. Doubtless much was said that would not bear repetition upon the house-fops, 
 and much perhaps of a personal character, which if disclosed, was calculated to give ofFence'. 
 But I supposed 1 was communing with a Iriend who would not betray rny confidence. No- 
 thing was farther from my suspicions than that I was furnishing material to a secret enemy 
 to be proclaimed from the house-lops, or spread before the representatives of the people o! 
 Vermont, lor the purpose of degrading me in their estimation. That Judge Meech then en- 
 tertained such a purpose, I cannot believe. His sense of propriety and of hon.r,— his self- 
 respect, would have shrunk from it. Yet his pliancy and want of moral courafre, has led 
 him to subimt to the task of drawing upon his recollection for a colored and garbled repre- 
 sentation of the occurrences of that period, in order to minister to the maiirrnity of a few in- 
 dividuais who, from the basest motives and for the gratification of the vilest passions, had 
 undertaken the work of my destruction. 
 
 Judge Meech and myself returned from Washington in the sprino- of 1841. From that 
 time forward until the .session of the legislature in 1644, 1 had no Reason to suppose that 
 any other than a friendly feeling subsisted between. I have the best authoiity lor sayintr, 
 that Jrom 1841, doicn to the summer of 1844, he uniformly advocated my re-election to ihe 
 
18 
 
 Senate, and did so in repeated instances during that summer. This I think he will not deny. 
 The reader will then judge of my surprize to find him at Montpelier in the hands of a cabal, 
 as a volunteer witness in support of charges calculated and designed to disgrace me forever. 
 
 The convention at first refused to hear his testimony, on the ground that he was a volun- 
 teer — not called upon by the committee, ilis letter was afterwards read. This letter, which 
 was never written bij him, but/o7- him, as I think is apparent on the face of it, after stating 
 that he was much in my company, proceeds as follows : 
 
 " I regret to say, that during the time that I was there, the conduct of Judge Phelps was 
 ♦' marked by great impropriety, and occasioned great uneasiness in my mind." 
 
 Here is a sweeping charge, and its generality leads us involuntarily to inquire for partic- 
 ulars. The first specification follows : " He was much out of his place ki the Senate, inso- 
 much that members of that body and of the House frequently said to me, that I must take 
 care of hijn." 
 
 Now, as to the first branch of this specification, I have to say, that there have been verv 
 few members of that body, during the last six years, more constant in their attendanT. 
 more attentive to the particular duties thrown upon them, or more prompt in dispatching ' . 
 ordinary business than myself; and for the truth of this statement I appeal to the members 
 of that body at large. I have already given a view of my labors at the succeeding session, 
 in answer to the statement of Mr. Slade. 
 
 But I desire to put this matter on a broader footing. During the whole six years of my 
 first senatorial term, I was under ths observation of members of the House from my own 
 State, who were decidedly hostile to me. No loss than three of them have been candidates 
 for my place ; and three of them, in letters addressed to this e.x'traordinary committee, have 
 furnished recorded evidence of a disposition which is anything but friendly. x\t the last ses- 
 sion of the legislature, an attack was made upon me, which, for acrimony,- transcended eve- 
 rything heretofore witnessed in our State. My public and private life were ransacked for 
 material for censure ; and yet I have still to learn in what instance, on what occasion, and in 
 what respect I have fallen short of a full and faithful discharge of my duly as a public ser- 
 vant. How and when have my constituency sufTered through my delinquency "? Who has 
 sufl[ered by it 1 Mr. Slade and Mr. Hall were watching me for four years, with no friendly 
 eye ; and during the very session of which Judge Meech speaks. They have been called 
 upon for proof o1" any neglect of duty, — they have contented themselves with the story about 
 the tariff and distribution bills, both or which I supported; but not one word of neSlect of 
 duty.in the session of 1840-41. Now, if my delinquency was such as to call for the inter- 
 ference of members of the Senate and House, and appeals to Mr. Meech on the suljoct, how 
 happens it that those two faithful guardians of the interests of the State, in this particxdar, 
 were not acquainted with it] The charge is too vague— too general. Let Mr. Mee/^h su"- 
 cify the occasion when my absence can be regarded as a breach of duty, and I wil' '^ rioavor 
 
 to meet the charge. i - r 
 
 But that any member of the Senate or of the House out of Vermont ever appeal^:-'! so :,\r. 
 Meech to " take care of me," as he states, I cannot believe. I am too well acquamted 
 with the sense of decorum which prevails there, and with the views entertained -of such offi- 
 cious interierence on the part of one Senator with the duties and responsibilities ot another, 
 to give credence to such a story. . 
 
 But he proceeds, " /n his concersatinmvith me he was quite often fretting, scolding and 
 " findinrr fault with the senate, that the senate paid no attention to him, and in a vulgar way 
 "savino^that they turned their back upon him, and frequently threatened to resign and go 
 "homerand on one occasion stated that he had his resignation written and in his pocket and 
 " I took oreat pains as a personal friend to appease him and calm his turbulance.' 
 
 Now ff Judo-e Meach had set out to make himself supremely rediculous he could iiave 
 taken no more^effectual course to effect his object than to inflict upon the public nnnd such 
 
 a piece of twaddle. ^ ^ , ., . , , 
 
 i The reader can not fail to perceive that all this is but an attempt to make something out 
 of my free and confidential conversation with him, for he limits his statement in terms to 
 such conversation. The reader will also bear in mind that the discription is in the Judge s 
 own language, and that the terms fretting, scolding, &c., are rather indefinite '"their im- 
 port, and nmy be applied to any expression of dissatistaction i made with warmth. Men 
 will have different ways of describing the same thing, and it the Judge choses to employ 
 terms which he probably picked up in his own Kitchen he is at liberty to do so. /^"^ f"p- 
 pose he had said that Mr. Phelps was often out of humor, and expressed his dissatistac- 
 tion with warmth and sometimes harshly— and once intimated his purpose to resign, would 
 
19 
 
 he not have expressed the same thing in substance? Is the charge any graver for being 
 expressed in the language of a scuUion ' Is there not, on the face of this paragraph, an ob- 
 vious effort to rrivc^a coloring and produce an etrect by the selection of such language 1 
 And will not the Judge himself see, if he will read his own statement again, that he has re- 
 sorted to a most puprTle and vulgar device to do me an injury ! But it is not on this ground 
 alone that I chof>sc to command the matter to his deliberate consideration. Does his sense 
 of propriety approve of the gross violation of confidence, and of one of the first rules of gen- 
 tlemanly demeanor involved in his conduct? While ho was daily commanding my aid and 
 ass'-t^iiro there, as the representative of his State, and of course was admitted freely to my 
 1 ' admitted loo as a personal friend, did it behoove him to pick up my expressions 
 
 o: „ -..on, or, if you please, ill-temper, to be paradcil before the public to my preju- 
 dice ? And should he ever visit Washington again upon a like errand, does he imagine that 
 such a course will commend him to respect or favor of members? 
 
 But to proceed : " I have further to say, that during all the time, be was often greatly ex- 
 " cited by the free' use of liquor, and I considered that to this cause is to be attributed his 
 ^^slrangf-fils of spleen and ungmemahle conduct." 
 
 Here we have a touch of the old story about intemperance, about which I have now only 
 to say, that my life for the list fifteen years has not boon spent 'under a bushel,' and that 
 there are at this day verj' few men who are more exposed to the general observation of the 
 people of the Stale, than myself ; and every man who has the op|)ortunity of observing me, 
 mut^t, on this point, judge for himself. But what is meant by **_/f/s of splcrn and nngov- 
 er liable conduct" } Is there any peculiar virtue in these terms, which are evidently used 
 without much meaning, but which may mean anything which the reader's imnirination may 
 suggest ! Il he means periods of deep depressioii of spirits, ! plead guilty to the charge. I 
 have been subject totlicin from my childhood — the propensity is hereditary, and may be tra- 
 ced through many generations. If such be his meaning, I ask him, does he consider it the 
 office of "personal friendship^" to give such a coloring to a constitutional misfortune ? If ho 
 doe.«, I have only to say that I think he mistakes that office. But what "ungovernable con- 
 duct" have I been guilty of? The term seein-s to imply more than has been expressed ; for 
 certainly there is nothing in his statement to which it can apply. 
 
 The above is all which Mr. Meach has Xo stale. But he comes to a very grave conclusion 
 .1 these terms : "I thought tlien, and still think, that his conduct was very far from riffht, 
 "and that he was an unsafe dep<.~;iory of pul)lir j)ower, an unsafe public agent, and that it 
 " is dangerous toentrHst to such hands the great interests of the State of N'ermont." 
 
 The letter winds up with the usual cant about "{icrsonal friendship" to Mr. Phelps, 
 and a "hiijh sense" of duty to the public. 
 
 R'jader, 1 have given you the whole wi.'sdom of Ezra Meach on this subject, — his whole 
 letter except fhe introductory part, which is not im|K)rtant. I have but one answer to this 
 sago conclusion. The expression, " I ihovght then, and still think" mxiaX. have been a flour- 
 ish of the draftsman of the Ictter.and must have been overlooked by the Judge when he siirned 
 it. The Judge came to no such conclusion at that time ; but, on the contrary, unless he 
 has been most egregiously misrepresented, he has unilormly advocated my re-election until 
 within a very few weeks of the last session of the legislature'. What he observed at Wash- 
 ington |)roduced no such conviction for more than three years, nor until he lent him-^elf to 
 the conspiracy which was so fully developed at Montpelier. Then, indeed, his eye.s were 
 opened. Then his high sense of duty began to operate. His conscience .slept until the con- 
 spiracy was ripe. During the whole canvass of 1844, while the senatorial election next to 
 that of President was the most important, not a word is heard of Judge Meach 's observa- 
 tions at Washington ; but when the time arrived for final action— when°I was to be disposed 
 of, as was confidently predicted, so suddenly that I "should not know what hurt me"— then 
 his "sense of duty" compelled him to make the statement. I know well the influence 
 which made him its dupe. I need not point it out. Nobody acquainted with the inlrio-ues 
 in Ins neighborhood, will be at a loss to identify it. I regret his weakness in yielding to it, 
 both on his account and my own ; for it has placed rae in a position in relation to him, which 
 I did not desire. In taking leave of him, he will permit me, though a much youno-er man 
 than himself, to caution him against such influences for the future, and to recommend to 
 him to be wary hereafter in what hands he places his conscience or his reputation. 
 
 As to Charles Adams, I approach him with a very different feeling,— with the same feeling 
 ttiat 1 would undertake the dissection of a dead carcass, already becoming too stale for the 
 operation. I have seen many instances of moral delinquency in my day ; but rarely, if ever, 
 fiave 1 encountered such a specimen of hypocrisy, duplicitv, and heartless treachery, or of 
 
20 
 
 shameless disregard of truth. This fellow came to Washington in the winter of 1844, for 
 what purpose the public must judge. Nobody there, I believe, knew his business, or who 
 bore bis expenses. Subsequent events led me to suspect that he came as a spy, hired 
 to scrape the common sewers of scandal for the material which might suit the purpose 
 of his employers, or to manufacture it, if eriough could not be found there. He has 
 proved himself worthy of the employment. On his arrival, he sto])ped at a hotel. Be- 
 ing disposed to e.xtend to him every civility as a citizen of Vermont, and not being then 
 aware of his utter unworthiness to be regarded or treated as a gentleman, I invited him, 
 with the concurrence of the mistress of the house, to taks up his residence with our 
 mess. I was not then aware that I was nourishing a viper, although I was then warn- 
 ed by a gentleman, who it seems knew him better than 1 did, that he was a treache- 
 rous scoundrel, and that if I confided in him, he would betray me. He stayed witth 
 us a few days, and left the city in a huff, or, as one of oar delegation then expressed 
 it, "mad wiili all the world." Upon his return to this State, he began to traduce me, 
 (and indeed 1 believe he spared none of tlie delegation,) whenever he thought bis slan- 
 ders would be effectual ; but in other places, and on other occasions, holding language 
 directly the reverse, — thus carrying out a system of duplicity designed to put ni<^ li!'' 
 my friends off our guard, and to give more point and effect to his rrtalignity.- 
 
 He began immediately, upon his entrance into the State, at Castleton, wiiere he cau^ii., 
 a Tartar°by pouring his scandal into the ears of one of my -noat decided personal friends. 
 He proceeded to Vergennes, where he met another, and there saw tit to chanofft hia 
 tone. He there spoke in the most flattering terms of my appearance and conduct at 
 Washington, without a word of disapprobation. Upon his arrival at home, he sat down 
 and wrote me a letter more highly charged with flattery and professions of personal re- 
 gard than any which I had ever received. This letter v.-ill be hereafter presented. 
 During the succeedincr summer (in August, 1844,) he had a private conversation at 
 Burlington with a genlleman from Addison county, in which, although he stated that I 
 had beljn imprudent at Washington, he advocated my re-election in the most decided 
 terms, and declared his purpose" to use his best exertions to secure it. In the course 
 of sixty days he was found at Montpelier under the auspices of a clique, a volunteer 
 witness, committing to paper a scandalous libel, in which he represents me as degra- 
 dino- myself and disgracing the State at Washington, — talks of a 7nind rendered power- 
 Zis.s" by an incontroUable habit of drinking ; and yet, before he left Washington, very 
 gravely proposed, in order to help along a political juggle, t^ "):>k- me r.biftf Justice of 
 the Supreme Court! This last somerset disposed ot wha-; iittte character or si. aid mg 
 he had left. The duplicity, heartless insincerity, and shameless absurdity exhibited in 
 his course there, rendered him at once a bye-word and a laughing- ■.civdmo..'^ li^nor- 
 able men, while the malignity of his letter to the "committee," iaLuxed«ks that Jetter 
 was by his own proposition to make me Chief Justice, made him a moral stench in 
 
 their nostrils. , - v.- • i • 
 
 But what is his statement? He starts with saying, that soon alter his arrival, ne 
 was invited to remove to Mrs. Buck's, "where, among others, the Hon. S. fe. I'heips 
 » boarded. / ivas told that he had been sick some two or three weeks, and was gixen 
 "/o understand thai his sickness was occasioned by the free use of liquor, and that the 
 "presence of a a friend from Vermont might be of service to him ; and having alioays 
 ^■felt a warm friendship for Mr. Phelps, and with the sole view oj benejMing him, 1 took 
 "up my lodo-injTs at JVlrs. Buck's." . ,- • j, r *-^r. 
 
 Here I have the rewards of my politeness, and the verification of my triends prediction 
 at the time. He went there under my friendly invitation, and this is the account h^ gives ot 
 the matter. The first exercise' of his ^^warm friendsldp^^ fur me is to f P>-«^^' bf^''^ ^'^^^^f '^: 
 lature and the State a scandalous story of the truth of which he ^^''^ZTlne^^^^^^t 
 of hearsay iron, whom derived, he does not say,-and which he, as a lavvyer, l^"«;j ^/^ "J^ 
 proper evidence. He is the more inexcusable as he had a ways professed J^Jg^^d ^^^J 
 stories with contempt, and was well aware that both Mr. Upham and Mr. i^oot who ad 
 boarded with me at that period, were at Montpelier, and had '^"^h ^«f "/^'^^ ^f,,X h°d then 
 knowledge of the tacts. He knew nothmg of them, as he says that ', ^i^" { '\^'PJ^.^l'to '^ 
 recovered, and 1 had the pleasure of seeing him in his seat." As a gent^^;^/"' fe "^^^ 
 to leave that matter to thein. But his " loarm friendship" for me ""Peile^ J ™ ^° f/^^^J^'^ 
 mite to the general contribution of scandal picked up anywhere and everywhe.e, as t such 
 reports constituted proof, and as if it was my duty to look up evidence t^^'' P^J ^^^j^^ ^ ^^3 
 iQor traced to no particular source, and for which nobody is responsible. But probably 
 was his peculiar business at Washington. 
 
21 
 
 Tl.. nroreed. "soon aAcr my arrival Mr. MoDuffie made his great speech in opposil.on to 
 
 S nudfron^subsrr^.Ll er..n,s .1 appeared, thnt Mr P expected to reply, but the 
 
 .„„r was V.v.n to Mr. Evans. Mr. P. was ... a rage about this. an,J used very strong lan- 
 
 L ,.r.. sav'm- ' tA.U he would tai.e no further part in the senate.- " Tl.,s reader .s the first 
 
 -ntcMM.n of the fabrication of Charles Adams. It is an esre;r,ou3 talsehood. 1 ^vas not in 
 
 ara'e „„r did I say I would lake no further part in the senate. , ^ .„ . . ., 
 
 Rut'to show the in<renuitvof Ih.s feMow in manufaetur.n? falsehood, I w.ll state the c.r. 
 ,„„tanc<.>, fro,n which he derives the story. I did .nd.-ed desire to get the floor when Mr. 
 
 • DofT..- took his seat, and supposed that the courte.-^y of my Ir.ends won d g.ve it to .ne ; 
 ,; Mr Evans rose suddenly and un.-.xpectedly to me and addressed the cha.r tirs ,-and ot 
 
 -irse took the floor. I at that ti.n.- IhoUL'ht it a departure from the et.qu.tte o the senate, 
 
 1 made some re.nark about it. Mr Evans i.n.nediately erne to me and explained to me 
 
 t he thou.rht th- tloor beion-ed to h.m as Chairman of the Committee ol !■ inance, to 
 
 , h nninioiT I v'-ld -d. lie further assur-d .nc th -t if 1 desired to speak he would consult my 
 
 .vonience by "hiving ih.- bill l.e or calling it on as I m.-ht desire._an assurance which ho 
 
 V scrupulously carried out. Now for the " subsequent events" Mr. Adams .mportune.1 
 
 "r. pealedly to .speak on that subject. 1 at first declined, urirmg several reasons w'^hy 1 
 
 . averse to it. viz, that the subject was a stale one in itself,— had been even then debated 
 
 .t-n^tl., and It was irksome to enter into a debate after the senate had become weary ot it, 
 
 1 tl7at I did not think Senators were desirous of hearing me or would listen to me, and I 
 
 iiiloned that I had once designed to spf-ak but the floor had been taken from me. From 
 
 ^ Mr A. to.k his c.ie, and f.ibricat<-d th.- story. He however continued his importuni- 
 
 nulil i yielded and promised to speak, which l did. It is a little surprising that he should 
 
 poss<-s"jed the impudence to ciin such a fiUehoo.l wh.-n he saw me daily in the senate, 
 
 iiblv vvcry day, while he wan there, attending to my duties. 
 
 I us next falsehood is more far-fetched still, "and I was then told that he neglected to meet with 
 
 " the committee of which he was a member, and that Clovernor Morehend called on him and 
 
 "endeavored to persuade him to return and discharge his duly." Now all this is but a 
 
 .T">ss perversion of an incident which occured in 1-J41, and which I related to him myself. 
 
 •..I. sequence of .nv not attending the Committee on Indian Aff*.iir3 of which Gov. M was 
 
 irinan, he imbibed the suspicion'^lhat the reason was that I had taken a personal ofTenco 
 
 irds him Me very frankly stated his suspicions to me, and I as frankly disclaimed any 
 
 \i reason ; and to convince him of his error was very prompt .n my attendance on the 
 
 unitlee afterward-", so long as he wos chair. nan. 1 related this occurrence to Mr. A., and 
 
 M tell, .f necessary the c.uir.se of conversation w^hich led to it. Yet this " warm friend" 
 
 xc-s use of it as he does. He got no such story from any body else. CfOV. Moreheod never 
 
 If nt.oi.ed sMcli a matter to me that session, nor can Mr. A. designate the man wiio told him 
 
 I / s.ich thinjf. 
 
 Having fal)ricated two falsehoods he next resorts to hearsay again. "I had frequent conver. 
 ■ions with the fa.nily (Does he include the black servants in the family.') and with mem- 
 '.-, and the) nil concurred i.. representing that the conduct of Mr. P. was stra.ige, irregu- 
 , and ungenllemaiily, and all attributed it to the excessive use of liquor.'' Here is anotii, 
 instnnce of Ihrowi.ig resp insibility upon so. ne unk.iown shoulders. Who does he mean 
 the lamily .-—and bv"" members .' If I am to meet s.ich accusations let me know from wiiom 
 y proceed. If he mcludes Mr. Upham and Mr. f'oole in the family, I have only to say 
 t both those gentlemen were before the convenlio at Montpelier, made these statements, 
 1, if I am correctly informed, stated no such thing, hut the reverse. If he had any con- 
 silion with them he probably perverted it as he did mine. 
 
 • At many limes while I was there he appeared to be greatly excited and as I believe wholly 
 y the use of liquor, and to such a degree as to render him unfit fur the discharge of any public 
 Illy." .\nd yet this is the man whom he proposed to make Chief Justice of the Supremo 
 I •'urt I But more of this anon. 
 
 '» His language in the fa.nily and in the hearing of ladies was gross and unbecoming a gen- 
 
 ■lleman, and while at table sremed to produce great restraint.'' Now I am not aware that 
 
 li '^ing my whole service at Washington, I have ever given offence in this way or in any 
 
 other to any lady with whom I may have hoarded. I can call to .nind no instance in which 
 
 th y have manifested toward me any other feeling than that of kindness and respect. This is 
 
 * >ugh for me. I can not undertake to look Uiem up for the gratification of Charles Adams, 
 • '.- to get their certificates of goad conduct. Probably it would do no good, as their sensi- 
 
 1 ties are perhaps less keen on this subject than those of Mr. A. I ought perhaps to have 
 / lected, while in his presence, upon the extreme delicacy of his sense of propriety in regard 
 lo ''ladies." I have no doubt that iiis notions on this subject are extremely nice, and that to 
 ij: s circumstance we are to attribute the peculiarly happy condition of his own domestic 
 -tlations. 
 
22 
 
 He then g-oes on to sfato tliat" "Mr. Foot denounced the conduct of Mr. Phelps in tlie 
 most emphatic manner." How far Mr. Fcot will feel indebted to him for this disclosure, if 
 there be any truth in the statement, is not for me to say. I leave that matter to be settled 
 by themselves. But it would have been as well for Mr. A. to have left Mr. Foot to do his 
 own denunciation. IMr. F. was before the whig- convention which nominated me for the 
 senate in 1814, and as I am informed advocated my nomination and election. A more 
 striking- illustration of the absurdity and folly of picking- up such gossip for such an occa- 
 sion can not be had, than to see Charles Adams bottling up Mr. Foot's denunciations for 
 uae at Montpelier and Mr. F. in person at Montpelier to vindicate me from his aspersions. 
 
 '•I was greatly chagrined and mortified at Mr- P's. apparent neglect of duty," (what du- 
 ty did I neglect?) " and with the grossness of his language; and had no doubt then and have 
 "no doubt now that the whole was owing to tlie immoderate use of strong drink. In con- 
 " sequence of the feeling thus produced, I hastened away from Washington sooner than I 
 "had otherwise intended." Poor soul ! He is moriijied Tind chatrrmed ! And at what'.' 
 my neglect of duty. I knovv^ of nothing of interest which was on the tajiis while he was 
 at Washington except the tariff bill. 
 
 If the reader would know whether I lacked the disposition to discharge my duty in re- 
 gard to that measure he may consult the testimony of its friends in the senate which is 
 appended hereto. If I fell short of doing justice to that subject, or as full justice as Charles 
 Adams or Mr. Slade would have done, I hope he will attribute it to want of ability, which 
 is a misfortune and not a fault. The speech which I made at the instigation of Mr. A. 
 was long enough in all conscience. It occupied two days in the delivery. How it was re- 
 ceived by the senate can be judged of by the testimonials just referred to, — and how it was 
 received by the country it behooves not me to say. But poor Charles Adams is mortified ! 
 
 He is mortified too that the representative of his State uses "gross language," in short 
 is " no gentleman," and he owes it as a duty to the State to rouse them to a due sense of 
 their dignity. They should not be disgraced there by a senator who does not pass for a 
 gentleman. The good people of this State may however console themselves with the re- 
 flection, that possibly every body at Washington has not found out that the senator Irom Ver- 
 mont is " no gentleman." About the last time that I received an invitation to go out at the 
 last session, was to attend a private dinner party. It consisted of Mr. Webster, Mr. Crit- 
 tenden, Mr. Evans of the senate, Mr. Packenham, the British Mi istcr, his Secretary and 
 myself I hope these men were not "mortified." If they were they had the kindness 
 not to let me see it. And I hope Charley will not tell them that they have been in bad 
 company. Perhaps also the senate have not made the discovery. I hope the " Commu- 
 ted' will not send the result of their enquiries there, tor the authority of D. M. Camp, 
 Elder Sabine, and Justin Morgan might go a great ways there. 
 
 At the very last session of that body I was placed upon the Committee of Finance, al- 
 together the most important conunittee in the senate ; and placed ihere, in conjunction with 
 m't. Evans as the representative of the great tariff interest of the country, the free trade 
 interest being represented by Mr. Woodbury, Mr. McDutTie, and Mr. Benton. I was also 
 placed upon the Committee on Military Affairs and on that on Indian Affairs, two very 
 important committees, especially at the present crisis. I believe it is the first time that 
 Vermont was honored with a member of the Committee of Finance— yet poor Charley 
 Adams is mortified ! He should be doubly mortified at the degeneracy of the times 
 when he finds this poor drunken devil, with whom strong drink plays these mad pranks, 
 placed in such responsible stations. at -ni, i »> / u 
 
 But hear Charley throuo-h, "I make this statement m no hostility to Mr. 1 Jielps (oh 
 no it is all warm friendship") "I have always admired him as a man o( liigh order of 
 "talent, a clear headed and sound jurist, and one of the best Judges m the State;— 
 " (■x\yem)—hut it vnins me to see such talents prostrated, and such a mind made powerless 
 "for good, by an uncontrollable habit of drinking; and it is only irom Uie conviction that 
 "I owe the State a duty that 1 am willing to say a word abo-at it." , , , 
 
 lam much indebted to him for his encomium— it doubtless comes warm from the heart; 
 but its utter hypocrisy is disclosed by what follows: — , , . . , j - *i - 
 
 This is however the fourth time that the subject of strong drmk is introduced in this 
 short letter ; as if the charge was more likely to be true, or be more likely to be be- 
 lieved because it is so often repeated. . , ,• i i i„„^,i iUr. 
 
 That he did not believe it himself is apparent unless he has lied and played the 
 hypocrite elsewhere. Did he believe this story when he held the conversation with 
 General Nash at Vergennes on his return from Washington, in which he attempted t 
 
23 
 
 est man vvc could'send from the StaiL-, and that he should use his inlluence lor my re- 
 eiccti.m' Whore was his sense of "duty to the the State" while he was using this 
 lanffuaTc'i Did he believe this vile story when li" proposod, while the senatorial elec- 
 tion was still pendinor, u, make me Chicl Justice! DA he -Wsh to place these <^lafenls 
 vroslralor and that " mind rendered powerless for good by an unrontroulable hnl.il ot 
 drinkin<r" at the head of (he j.idi.iary of the Slate! In short did he deem it '• a duty 
 to the Slate" to place an habitual drunkard on ild bench? 
 
 The reader will judge from this exhibition of the sincerity of this man and the credit 
 to be given to his statements. 
 
 But I cannot dismiss him without giving one more specimen of his "warm friend- 
 ehip" forme, and of his pretensions to the character of a gentleman. I have stated that 
 immediately upon his return from Washington he wrote me a letter. It is too precious 
 a morsel to be lost. 
 
 It commences with some remarks in rcijard to ihe vacancy then subsisting on the 
 bench of th-; Supreme court of the United States, — discusses some political topics and 
 proceeds as follows : — 
 
 •'The Ai;/A re:r,iril I enltTlain for you, leads mo to sn^^fsl one other thing of a prrsonnl 
 «« n.itiirr', nml I ir'pf* it will b<' ri-ci-ivt-il in the Hame Jrimdly freliit'T in which it is offered. 
 " From your naliirr> I know lliat you are Bubject to orcii.iiuiial drjjression of s//irils, and thrs 
 «' of course, hij tiiiihin<r ijoii virldiic/inhj, in a niensiire unfit.t you fur business. I observeil 
 «* somelhini' of llii* when with you, and I went to your room llie day I left to chut about it, 
 " but yon were out. You prr)bttbly have some reason t') complain of the cast of comiiiiltecs 
 «' in the Senate, and of some appirent lursliiicss. Hut what of tliaL^" No man ever gained 
 "anything of reputation or peace of mind, or power of doing good by submitting to this 
 "cursed nulaiiclioly. Knowing your powers of mind I know you can rise above it, and can 
 " Her down nil ihr sli-ih's and o/i> o.tUioiis thiit tiinj or rirulrij can inflict u/ion ijou. You don't 
 " want Mie to tell yoii thai your fame, your power as a public man, depend on the course you 
 " now take. It is now tlie tide of your fortune. .My aii.xiely for the Slate of Vermont, wwd 
 "/•"■ y" "•'' "'" "/ ''■* It is fit ft nrnnmrnls, impels me to nuike an appeal to you personally, 
 "til it you shake otT the poor spirit of melancholy, and put forth all your energies in the dia- 
 " chari'c of vour public duties. You arc now on the most eleval<d position in the nation, 
 " and vou have the power of sustaining yourself there. F'or God's sake don't, by giving waj 
 " to personal feelings cist yourself down. 1 am, &.C., Cii.vKi.ts Adams. 
 
 Such is the language addressed to m^ by this man after his return from Washington in 
 ISll. Let the reader compare it with tho letftr upon which I have commented — what ho 
 says tome with what he says of me,andif he can find a stronger instance of heartlc.-s duplicity 
 and shameless mendacity, let it be recorded as giving immortality to the man who in these 
 qualities transcends Charles .Adams. Some charitable persons have endeavored to e.^ccuse 
 him by the suggestion that he is partially insane; thus exhonorating hi.s heurt at the ex- 
 pense of his understanding. That there is dorangeinpot somewhere is not to be doubted. 
 Whatever may be the state of his intellect, there is an evident derangement of his moral 
 perceptions. At all events he has shown himself entitled to no credit, whatever may be 
 his statements. This is sufficient for my purpose and here I leave him. 
 
 I have now finished my e.\amination of those precious documents. I have but one or 
 two general remarks to make. One is, that these letters bear decisive infrin.«ic evidence 
 of the temper in whiclh they were written. There is an obvious efl'ort to give the highest 
 and worst coloring to every thing which might operate to my prejudice, while not a redeem- 
 ing feature is admitted in the whole picture. The other is, that there is e.\hibited a won- 
 derful avidity for reports, — hearsay, &c., which are pressed into the service of the writers, 
 as if it were not enough for a witness to state what ha knows ; — and this more perhaps 
 than anything else discovers the cloven foot, for, in any court of justice, — a witness who 
 discovered an anxiety to add to his testimony from such a source would be set down at once 
 as undeserving of credit. 
 
 I now submit the whole matter to th-; judcrment of my fellow citizens. Willi their de- 
 cision I shall be .satisfied. " SAMq|:L S. I'UELl'S. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 CIRCULAR 
 
 Addressed to the members of the Senate by Mr. Phelps, 
 to which the communications from them are responsive. 
 
 Cixr OF Washington, Dec. 19, 1844. 
 
 Gentlemen, — 
 
 A representation has gone abroad among my constituency, under circumstances which 
 require of me to notice it, that on the 27th day of August, 1842, the occasion of passing the 
 tariff bill, (now the existing law,) I, having "taken offence at some supposed slight or neg- 
 lect," (on the part of my associates in the Senate,) not only " used opprobrious language in 
 regard to them," but " declared, with oaths, tliat I would not vote on the bill" — i. e. the 
 tariff bill, — that "several Senators had made ineffectual elibrts," during the day, "to .sooilie 
 me," — that when the question on the bill was put,I was closeted in an ante-room of the senate* 
 Avith a Senator " who was endeavoring to persuade me to vote," — and that at last, after being 
 sent forj I came into the Senate while the Clerk was calling the yeas and nays — declined 
 to vote when my name Vv'as called in its order — and after the roll was called through, refu- 
 sing to vote until my name had been called twice, and finally voting with apparent reluc- 
 tance, which vote saved the bill by a majority of one ; — and that during the day, I acted 
 strangely, swearing that I would not vote upon the bill. 
 
 Will you do me the favor to state your recollection on the subject, and inform me wheth- 
 er, to your knowledge, I, on that day, or any other, refused to vote, or expressed a purpose 
 either to withhold my vote or to vote against the bill, — whether any persuasions were used 
 by any Senator to induce me to vote, — whether I was absent when the question was put — 
 and, in general, what was my course in regard to that measure, — whether, in short, you 
 discovered in my course any wavering or reluctance to discharge fully, promptly and cheer- 
 fully my duty to my constituency, which on that occason was understood on all hands to 
 be to vote for the bill- 
 Very respectfully, &c., SAMUEL. S. PHELPS. 
 
25 
 
 No. 1. 
 Hon. George Evans, of .Alaine. 
 
 Washington, Dcccml)er 21, 1844. 
 
 Hon. S. S. Phelps, — Dear Sir: I have received your note of 19 h instant, in which you 
 repeat certain reprcpentaiioiis that have been made to your constituency, respecting youi* 
 cournc of proceedings at tlio time the act of August, l*^rj, revising tl>e tantVof duties on 
 foreign imjwrts, was on its passage in the Senate ; and reijuesting me to state my recol- 
 lection of the circumstances, to which these representations have reference. 
 
 In reply, I very cliecrfully state, that I have no recollection or knowledge whatever, that 
 on that day or any other, when the bill was under considoration, you refused to vote upon 
 it, or threatened not to vole, or used any language indicating sucli intentions, or that any 
 efforts were made or deemed necessary, by any Senator, to soothe your feelings or to per- 
 Huade you to vote, or tJiat you was absent from the Senate at any time when a vote was 
 likely to be taken. Whothcr you voted at the first call of your name, or not, or whether 
 you was at that moment in your seat, I cannot say. Nothing is of more common occur- 
 rence, as you arc- well aware, than ih-^ temporary absence of Senators from their seats, 
 when .1 vote is about to be taken, who are still in attendance, and come in in season to be 
 recorded. Of thi.s, no complaint is maile ; and it is never understiwd to indicate, in the 
 Bmallost degree, any want of attention, or tardiness in the performance of duty. As Chair- 
 man of the ('ummittee on Finance, by whom the tariff art was reported to the Senate, it was 
 my business to watch its progress and to urge its passage. Some doubt was entertained 
 by many Senators whether it would finally pass. It was my duty, as f.ir as possible, to be 
 well informed in that respect, and to ascertain how many votes could bo relied upon in 
 its favor, and to take rare that it should not be pressed to a vote in iho absence of any of 
 those who were friendly to it. I invariably counted U})on your vote in its favor ; and never, 
 to my recollection, felt the slightest apprehension in regard to it If you had been absent 
 from the Senate, especially under circumstances indicating that you did not intend to vote, 
 it is scarcely possible that I should have been ignorant ot it ; and I am sure that I should 
 not have ventured upon pushing the tiuestiou lo a vote under such a state of things. I 
 knew the vote was to be a close one, and should have run no such hazard as that of taking 
 t'l •■ il question in the absence of any of those u|)<iii whose vote I counted. If anything 
 il Irom whirh an inference has been drawn by any person, that you did not intend 
 to voie for the bill, or that you voted reluctantly by the |)crsuasion of other Senators, it 
 ei'her was wholly unknown lo me at the time, or was of so trifling and unimportant a 
 < ; iracler as to have entirely escaped my memory, and lo which I could not then have at* 
 tached any consequence. 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 Vour obedient servant, (lEORGE EVANS, 
 
 No. '2. 
 
 Hon. RiFUs Choate, of Massachusetts. 
 
 Senate Chamber, December 30, 1844. 
 Hon. Mk. Phelps, Senator of the I'niled Slates — 
 
 Dear Sir: I received, a few days since, your letter of the 19th instant, in which yoii 
 state that a representation has gone abroad, accusing you of having e.xpressed adetermmai 
 lion not to vote lor the existing tariff", on the day of its passage — of being absent from your 
 seat, with the purpose of avoiding the vote ; and of declining, until the second call of your 
 name, to answer, after you had resumed your place; and in which you ask me to commu- 
 nicate my recollection upon the subject. "l do so with pleasure ; yet I can only say in a 
 word, that I have not the slightest remembrance of remarking, or suspecting, or hearing of 
 any disinclination or indifference on your part, towards the performance of that most import 
 tant duty. I recollect perfectly, the general occurrences of the day — the discussion — the 
 anxiety as to the issue ; and I particularly recollect that, in all the speculations which 1 heard 
 concerning the probable result, it was assumed as matter of certainly, and of course, that 
 
26 
 
 all the whig Senators from New England would vote for the bill. I never felt a moment's 
 doubt that such would be liie case. Certainly I discovered in yourself no indication of un- 
 willingness, fully, promptly and cheerfully to discharge your duty to your constituency and 
 to the country ; and I may add, that from what 1 knew of your settled opinions, and had ob- 
 served of your habitual coarse in the Senate, I should have been profoundly astonished to 
 have discovered, on such a day, or at any time, any such unwillingness. 
 I am very truly. 
 
 Your obedient servant, RUFUS CHOATE. 
 
 No. 3. 
 Hon. J. J. Crittenden, of Kentucky. 
 
 Washington, February 12, 1845. 
 My Dear Sir, — I regret that the pressure of other engagements should have so long 
 delayed my answer to your letter of the 19lh of December last, which, however, did not 
 reach me till long after" its date. I should not have permitted a moment's delay, if I had 
 supposed it would have been of any material coivsequenco to you. This explanation will, 
 1 trust, be a sufficient apology for me. In resjject to ihe inquiries contained in your let- 
 ter, I can only say, that 1 have no knowledge of any of the circumstances which you inform 
 me have been charged aoainst you, as imputations on your conduct as a Senator, in refer- 
 ence to the tariff bill of 1842. I have no recollection of any declaration or oath, by you, 
 that you would not vote for that bill, nor of your having used on the occasion any opprobri- 
 ous lano-uage in regard to your associates, in the Senate, nor of any persuasions iiaving 
 been necessary, or having been used, to induce you to vote for that bill. Nor iiave 1 any 
 recollection of your being absent when the bill was put to the vote, or of your delaying 
 your vote, or manifesting any reluctance or backwardness to give it. If any of these cir- 
 cumstances did occur, they were unobserved by me, or have been totally forgotten. The 
 interests and wishes of your constituents were understood to be in favor of that bill, and 
 you were regarded and confided in by all, I believe, as one of its friends. My recollections, 
 which are no doubt quite imperfect on the subject, will not enable me to speak more posi- 
 tively or particularly. 
 
 I have the honor to be. 
 
 With respect, &c., yours, &c., J. J. CRITTENDEN. 
 
 No. 4. 
 Hon. William Woodbridge, of Michigan. 
 
 \ am both surprised and grieved to learn that it has been imputed to the Hon. Mr. Phelps, 
 "Of the Senate of the United States, that he was hostile to the principles of the Tariti" law 
 of 1842. Havinii- been myself, present during the action of the Senate upon that law, I 
 am requested toltate my recollections of what occurred on the occasion, and especially, as 
 to whether Mr. Phelps, on the day of the passing of that law, or on any other day, refused 
 to vote in its favor, or expressed a purpose of either withholding ins vote, or ot voting aoainst 
 iti Whether any persuasions were used by any Senator, to induce him to vote .' Whe- 
 ther, he was absent when the question was put"! And in general, what was his course in 
 reo-ard to that measure 7 My recollections, on this subject, are neither minute, nor very 
 dis'tinct, I was myself opposed to that law, except, as a ineasnre nj lasl resort. In other 
 words I o-reatly preferred the plan ol a tariff, prepared and matured m the Senate Com- 
 mittee on' Manufactures, commonly called, "Mr. Simmons' IJill." I preferred it because 
 it assumed the "home valuation" as the standard by which to apporli.n duties in iicu ot 
 the "Foreio-u invoice,"— I preferred it because while it gave equal protection to all the 
 products, and manufactures of our country, (except those of iron, sugar and perhaps cottee,) 
 it at the same time preserved the "Land distribution Law,"— I preferred it for other rea- 
 
27 
 
 he policy of protecting tlif hnmr industry of the country, is to r/i? certainly, matter of much 
 surprise I aiif inrlucpd on the contrary to believe that the prevailing Fcntiment in the Sc- 
 iiato then was that Mr. Phelps was' dcsirona to carry that policy to an ultra extreme, 
 ami especially, ho far as rcirardefl what was deemed the jreat staple of Vermont. I particu- 
 larly recollect that, at some period dnrin;r th- proire-s of the Bill throiiph the Senate, a 
 proposition bein-r n.lvanced for varyinir the duty, by cither diminishin<T or increasinir it be- 
 yond tha staiida'rd finally settled in the bill, Mr. Phelos became much excited by the ap- 
 prehension, that his political associates, or at least some of them, were not disposed to pro- 
 vide in the Hill for ■prolccdnn pnmirrh, of the staple article of wool, and he urged with great 
 fervor, and ^'reat poirt^r loo, both tn the Senate and out of it, the justice, and the ncces. 
 sily of protecting sufftci-nlli/, that important pro<luct of the agriculture of his State; and I 
 should considcrlt altogether inconsistent, with the whole tenor of his course— to suppose, 
 that .Mr. I'holps could have proposed to himself to withhold his vote upon the final passage 
 of that bill, or to have voted against it, unless upon the obnoxious supposition that the 
 Senate should, r»/Msc rt//yrtir, and rcafnnnhle protecti.in, of that important product of his 
 State. Certainly, I know of no " persuasions used by any Senator" to induce that gentle- 
 man to vote for the bill. As to whether "he were in his place or not and voted upon the 
 final pn-siu"^ of the IMI," the Journal of the Senate happily furnishes testimony far more 
 conclusivethan the f.illilde memory of man. f'nder.-tainiKiir 'Itat the fate of tlin Hill would 
 probably be delcriuiiied tiy a single voir — deeply impressed liy the consiileratioii of tiir- itn- 
 portance of that vde, and earnc.><tly endeavoring to discover and to pursue the path of duty 
 for mijsrlf individually, I paid but little attention to the actions of others,— -and have no 
 "knf)wledlre, as to where, precisely, Mr. Phelps might have been when the Hnal question 
 was take"]. The Journal, I think must show. As to the zeal, and ability, and rminent 
 power with which Mr. Phelps has uniformerly advocated the policy of protecting the home 
 industry of the ciuntry, no qurstion will he mad: by any one who will take the trouble to 
 read his printed argument on that subject. 
 
 W>r. WnODBRIDGE. 
 
 Senate of the I'liited States, } 
 December 30th., 184 1. S 
 
 No. 5. 
 Hon. J. F. Simmons, of Rhode Island. 
 
 Washington, January 9th., 1845. 
 
 My Dear Sir: — In answer to your letter addressed to Mr.»Huntington and others, re- 
 questing that I should state my recollection of your course upon the bill imposing duties 
 upon im'ports, when before the Senate in August, 184-2, I have to say that I have no very 
 distinct recollection of what occurred on the day referred to, as applicable to your self, but 
 believe that if your course had been such as to bring in question your hearty support of 
 that measure, it c )uld not have failed to make an impression which would been retained 
 by me ; for not only myself but I believe all the friends of protection in the Senate, at all 
 times relied upon your co-operation, and support as confidently as upon any member of 
 the body. 
 
 I am faithfully yours, J. F. SIMMONS. 
 
 Hon. Samuel S. Phelps. 
 
28 
 
 No. 6. 
 Hon. N. P. Tallmadge, of Nevv York. 
 
 Madison, W. T. January 14, 1845. 
 
 Dear Sir: — Your letter asking my recollection of your course in the Senate otthe TJ. 
 S. on the Tariff bill of 184'2, was duly received and I lake the earliest opportunity to replv, 
 and I slate wilhuut hesitation, that I iiave no knowledge of your having expressed a pur- 
 pose either to vote against the bill, or to withhold your vote. I am not aware that y:)u eve. 
 doubted or wavered \n relation to it. There were some who expressed themselves in con- 
 sulfation against the passage of any bill without ihe "distribution clause," as it was called. 
 I am unable to say wliether you was one of that number. But I am quite sure, we had 
 not a more decided Tariff man in the Senate than yourself, and I am not aware of any in- 
 disposition or reluctance on your part to vote for the Bill when it came from the House. 
 In short, I have no recollection of anything in your conduct on that occasion, which tendd 
 to implicate your character as a public man, or evince any indisposition on your part, to 
 the faithful discharge of your public duty. 
 
 Very Truly Yours, N. P. TALLMADGE 
 
 Hon. S. S. Phelps. 
 
 No. 7. 
 Hon. A. S. Porter, of Michigan. 
 
 Washington, December 20th., 1844. 
 
 Dear Sir: — Having been of the number of whigs in the Senate, who, were most anx- 
 ious for the passage of the Tariff bill of 1842, (without reference to the land distribution 
 section, against which Mr. Tyler had opposed the insuperable barrier of the Veto), Ihave 
 a very distinct recollection of the obstacles to be overcome, in order to accomplish that ob- 
 ject. It is certainly matter of surprise to mo to learn that you have been suspected in 
 any quarter of a want of fidelity to that measure. The single and only danger that threat- 
 ened the bill, as is well known grew out of an unwillingness of a portion of the whigs, to 
 yield the land clause. It was to meet and overcome this, that the efforts of the friends of 
 the bill were directed. Nine whigs, where known to be against it. Not all of these how- 
 ever were so on account of the absence of the "Land Section." But there were two 
 others, who had indicated a purpose to vote against it, for that cause alone. The position 
 of these eleven gentlemen was well known, (as indeed was that, of every other meinbi 
 and it was therefore evident, that the measure must be lost, unless a portion of them wc 
 yield. Those two and those only did yield, and by their votes, togetlier with those of t; u 
 members of the opposite party we succeeded in carrying it by a majority of one. You w.r-re 
 always accounted one of the earliest and most reliable friends of the bill. Indeed I never 
 heard your position seriously questioned. I well remember however that when the y s 
 and nays, were being taken on the question of engrossment (as they always are in a 
 phabeti'cal order), you were not in your seat to respond. But I also well recollect, that 
 other members were out when their names were called. This practice is very comtr'>n, 
 pending a debate that has been long protracted. On such occasions it is not uncommon ior 
 nearly half the members, to be in the adjoining rooms, but always within the call of the 
 messengers of the House. The cause of your absence at the moment, I supposed to V 
 the same which operated on others, — an impatience to sit under what was deemed a wan 'a 
 consumption of time in debate, at that late day, in one of the longest sessions of Congro.ss 
 ever held. 1 have no knowledge whatever, of your having uttered a threat, that you would 
 either vote against the bill or withhold your vote, but as I sat next you, I had occasion 
 frequently toliotice Judications of much irritation on your part from the cause I have vain- 
 tioned. I do not believe this feeling was stronger with you than with many others, althou'ih 
 your outward manifestations may have been more apparent than theirs. There were m 
 circumstances of a minor character attending the progress of the bill in the Senate 
 which I have only a general recollection, that were well calculated to try the patienc- 
 those who from the first were the warmest friends of the protective policy. I know oi ' 
 one, who seemed to feel the severity of this test more than yourself. 
 
 Very Respectfully, Dear Sir, Your Obedient Servant. A. S. PORTEf 
 
 Hon. S. S. PHELjis. 
 
29 
 
 No. 8. 
 Messrs. Miller Sl Dayton, of New Jersey. 
 
 Senate Chamber, Jan. 6th, 1843. 
 r^ear Sir: — In answer to your note of the 19th ult., I have the honor to say that I have 
 no knowledfje ot your refusing to vote for, or e.\pre:i.<ing a purpose of either withholding 
 your vote, or^of voting against the tariff bill of 1342. I know you were present at the pass- 
 I'.iXO of the bill, acting in concert with its friends. There were some e,\pressions of dissat- 
 i-~ ution at the proloni.'ation of the debate, and you vith others, manifested impatience for 
 ilio tiifal vote to be taken, but 1 discovered no di6p»)siti()n on your part to vote against a 
 II. asure, of which I know you to be a warm and decided advocate and friend. 
 
 With much respect and esteem 
 
 1 remain yours, (See. 
 
 J. W. MILLER. 
 
 lion. Samuel S. I'iielps. 
 
 I concur, in the above. W.M. L. DAYTOX. 
 
 No. 9. 
 Hon. Richard H. Bayard, of Delaware. 
 
 Senate Chambeii, Jan. 7th, 1815. 
 
 Dear Sir :— In reply to your letter of the 19:h ult., I have the honor to state that I have 
 > recollection of any opposition on your part to the tariff act of 1842, nor of any e.\- 
 ossioiis of dissatisfaction by you in relation to it. On the contrary my impression is, 
 
 at the measure received your sincere and cordial .support. Yours truly. 
 
 Hon. S. I'liELis, U. S. Senator, Washington. 
 
 IIICII.MID II. BAYARD. 
 
 ^ No. 10. 
 
 Hon. Tho.mas Clayton, of Delaware. 
 
 Washington, Dec. 27th, 1844. 
 
 Dear Sir: — ^ Your note is before me requesting my recollection of the events of the 
 ovening on which the present taritT act of 1842 was passed, and you request me to state 
 the relative position of our seats in the senate. You and I sit at the same line of desks, 
 and there is but one intermediate seat between us. After a long and tedious discussion of 
 the tariff bill when iilmost every one had become wearied with the discussion and when all 
 wore anxious for the question, late in the evening Mr. Woodbridge rose to speak. Soon 
 after several members left their seats. Among these I remember Mr. Wright, Mr. Wil- 
 ims and yourself. Mr- Woodbridge spoke a much shorter time than was e.\pccted, and 
 a.s soon as he took his seat the question was put, and the roll was called. Mr. Wright and 
 Mr. Williams came in after the roll had been called through but before the result was an- 
 :.ounced by the chair, and at their request, their names, were called and they voted. When 
 you voted there was nothing in the manner of giving your vote which drew my attention. 
 It may be well to state the usage which prevails in the senate in reference to this matter 
 of voting. " When the roll is called and a member does not answer, after the roll has 
 been gone through the secretary never calls him again, Lu'. al his own request. I have never 
 seen this usage departed from, and it is founded on the obvious presumption, that the mem- 
 ber not having answered when the roll was called, declines to vote. Hence I infer, that 
 ahen you returned to your place your name must have been called at your own request. 
 
 During the whole discussion of this bill, I looked upon you as one of its warmest friends 
 1 neither knew, nor heard, anything of your unwillingness, to vote for it, nor of any efforts 
 
30 
 
 of others to prevail on you to do so. Your absence, when the roll was ordered to be called 
 rs accounted for, to n>e, by the fact that Mr. Woodbridge closed his remarks much earlier 
 than was expected and the question was put jnuch sooner than any one could have hoped 
 '^^- ' Very respectfully, 
 
 XT c, c, n T- CLAYTON. 
 
 Hon. S. S. Phelps. 
 
 No U. 
 Hon. A. S. White, of Indiana. 
 
 Washington, December 25, 1844. 
 Hon. S. S. Phelps, — Dear Sir : I very cheerfully comply with your request to state 
 what is my recollection of your deportment towards the tariff bill (now act) of 1842, during 
 its pendency in the Senate, though only a general impression remains in my mind. My 
 statement might be summed in a single word, to wit : that you were from first to last the 
 interested friend of the bill, as well as its able advocate. Any other manifestation on the 
 part of a Vermont Senator, whose seat adjoins my own in the Chamber, must have arrest- 
 ed my attention. Very likely you, who though you more frequently than myself engage 
 in debate, still like me, do occasionally grow impatient at that profusion of argument which 
 sometimes mars even the wisdom of the Senate, may have yielded to that feeling upon the 
 occasion of the final debate on the tariff bill, and tired of watching an ever-receding ques- 
 tion, may have momentarily absented yourself from the Chamben But that it was^for the 
 purpose of avoiding the vote, or that you required persuasion to induce you finally to vote 
 for the bill, could not, I am sure, have been believed by a single Senator. The tariff of 
 1842, almost the only trophy the whigs have wrested from a defective administration, is 
 a monument too finished and exquisite to have been carved by trembling or by reluctant 
 hands. Such were not those of either of the Senators whom Vermont, ever true, deputer^ 
 to do her part of that memorable work, 
 
 I am very respectfully, 
 
 Your obedient servant, A. S. WHI'i il 
 
 No. 12. 
 Hon. James Buchanan, of Pennsylvania. 
 
 Senate Chamber, 28th January, 1845, 
 
 Dear Sir, — I have received your note of this date, referring to a charge which you al- 
 lege has been made against you, relative to your course on the tariff' act of 1842, and 1 can 
 cheerfully state, that to my knowledge, no such occurrence took place, as that to which you 
 advert. I never doubted your friendship to that measure, nor heard that it was doubted, 
 until I received your note. 
 
 Yours very respectfully, JAMES BUCHANAN. 
 
 Hon. Samuel S. Phelps. 
 
 No. 13» 
 Hon. J. T. MoREHEAD, of Kentucky. 
 
 Washington, 31st Decen>ber, 1844. 
 My Dear Sir, — I take great pleasure in conforming with your request, to state my im- 
 pressions of your conduct and sentiments in respect to the tariff of 1842. I would remark, 
 in the first place, that I have no knowledge of any interposition on the part of the whigs of 
 
31 
 
 the Senate or of the 1 louse, the object of which wa« to induce you to vote lor tiiat bill, nor 
 do I know tint vou, at anv time, declared your purpose to oppose it. I was much in you' 
 company durmrr' the pcn.lenrv -ff bill of ISIvf, and so far from rejrardms you as oc- 
 
 cupy. n<' a doublful ,xx«i(.nn iM r ^ It, I believed you had the Mirccss ot it at heart, as 
 
 much as anv other member of Conjrcs.^ I am not disposed to conhiic mysclt to that par- 
 \icular bill. ' I have ever f. ' - • i devoted to the protective system, in all its details, and 
 eepcciaily watchlul of the of Vermont ; and I avail myself of this occasion to add, 
 
 that I consider your etrnrt.« m liie Senate on that subject, of signal benefit to the cause. 
 
 With irreal rc.-|)cci, I am, ^ 
 
 My dear «.r. your friend, J. T. Mt>Rfc:iIKAn. 
 
 Hon. S. .S. I'lCELid. 
 
 No. 11. 
 Hon. O. H. Smith, of Indiana. 
 
 IsniAMAroMs, (Ind.) December 27, 1814. 
 
 Df AU Sir. \'- ' ' 1 duly received, in which you inform 
 
 tnos (for the firwt i i . . i h.nl acted as a Senator in the pas- 
 
 najfo of the lanlF act ol Ir^iJ, in a way n to the friends of thai measure, and 
 
 danperous to the passape of the act, was n j ..o enemies uf your election. I do not 
 
 distinctly rocolli-ct all the circumstances and individual opinions relative to that measure, 
 while betoFP the Soiiatp ; but lli;s much I can s.iy, that I undorstiMKi yoii to be one of the 
 iirniesl of its friends, though you, like many of us, re^'relled to give up the distribution fea- 
 ture Af the first bill. I feel very confident that I never heard aiiythinc from you indicatinfj 
 anything' other than an honest desire to see that bill become a law ; and I feel also very con- 
 lindciit that you were not one of those who came in at the last hour to save tlio bill, but was 
 one of it« constant and tirin fricnds. 
 
 With sentiments of rejjard, 
 
 Vour obedient servant, ' > II SMITH. 
 
 Hon. SjiMfEL S. IMiF.i.rs. 
 
 No. 15. 
 Hon. William Sprague, of Rliode Island. 
 
 Provide.vce, (R. ].) December 31, 1814. 
 Hon. Sa>ilel S. I'iiEt.i's, — 
 
 Dear Sir : Vour communication of the 2'2d instant was duly received. I regret to heaV 
 that you was misrepresented on the occasion of youv re-election to the Senate of the United 
 States. I have no recollection of any act manifested by you in any way in rej^ard to the 
 tariff act of 1842, which could afford the slightest foundation for the charge which you in- 
 form me was made against you. I have no knowledge, therefore, of any declaration on your 
 part, that you would not vote for the bill, or of any remonstrances or persu3<!tons used, or 
 thought necessary, by n»e, or anybody else, to induce you to vote. IS'or am I aware of any 
 wavering hesitation or reluctance on your part, in the discharge of your duty, or of any pur- 
 pose maniiested by words or otherwise, to embarrass its passage. During the whole time 
 the bill was under consideration, you manifested a deep interest in its favor — gave it essen- 
 tial aid and assistance in perfecting its details, and at all times, as it appeared to me, a cor- 
 dial and hearty support. So far, therefore, as your whole course in regard to it came un- 
 der my observation, it was such as to merit the approbation of its most zealous friends in ev- 
 ery section of the country. 
 
 I am, sir, with great respect, 
 
 Vourob-dientser%an», WILLIAM SPRAGUE. 
 
32 
 
 No. 16. 
 Hon. Rettel Williams, of Maine. 
 
 Augusta, February 9tli., 1845. 
 
 Bear Sir: — On my return fr om Boston, I find your favor of the 1st instant, and am sur- 
 prised by its contents. On the occasion you refer to, I had made up my mind to vote for 
 the bill, (although I did not like it), if my vote was necessary to pass it. "in coming to this 
 conclusion I was compelled to leave my political friends, and do what seemed to me indis- 
 pelisible to the''preservp.tion of the government, and in thus acting, I was e.xcited by appeals, 
 from friends, and the intense interest of the question as I regarded it, and hence took but 
 little notice of the actions of others. I can only say, that in calculating the votes for the bill, 
 you were included, and it was understood, that unless I voted for it the bill could not pass, 
 and if I would so vote w'ith Wright and Buchanan it would pass. As your seat was dis- 
 tant from mine and among your political friends, I could not know what was said among 
 your friends, but I have no recollection that any doubt was entertained of your course, and 
 vote, on our side of the House. 
 
 I am very i-espectfully, 
 
 Your Obedient Servant. R. WILLIAMS. 
 
 Hon. S. S. Phelps. 
 
 No. 17. 
 Hon. Daniel Sturgeon, of Pennsylvania. 
 
 Senate Chamber, Jan. 28, 1845. 
 t)ear Sir : — I received your note of this date, and can truly say it is the first intimation 1 
 have had, that you were the lukewarm friend of the tariff act of 184'2. I was a close 
 observer of the action of the senators on the passage of that act, and so far from ._■ ■■'>f^r. 
 ingyou the reluctant supporter of the tariff act of 1842, I had reason to believe _ . .-n 
 friend and advocate. Yours respectfully, 
 
 DANIEL STURGEON. 
 
 No, 18. 
 Hon. Silas Wright, of New York. 
 
 Albany, Febuary, 17th, 1845. 
 
 My Dear Sir :— Your letter of the 31st ult., was received in due course of mail, but 
 official eno-agements, wholly beyond my control have compelled me to delay a reply until 
 this time." Vou are certainly not mistaken in assuming that my personal dispositions for- 
 wards you, are now as they ever have been during a very long acquaintance, such as to 
 make it a pleasure to me to perform any act of kindness towards you, and much more, to 
 do you justice in any matter whatevef. it. t a 
 
 Your seat in the senate chamber during the last session of that body, and I believe, du- 
 rino- the whole time you have held a seat in it, up to the close ol the last session, was m 
 front of mine, in the next tier of seats, and so near that we could conveniently converse 
 totrether sitting in our seats. I was in my place in the senate, more constantly than usual 
 on the day on which the question was taken upon the final passage of the taritt bill ot 
 1842. as my position in relation to that question made me a deeply interested spectator ot, 
 and partaker in, those proceedings. My previous attempts to obtain amendments to hat 
 bill, with the remarks made to sustain my motions to amend, had shown my dissatistaction 
 with many of the provisions of the bill, and failing to carry any material amendments, it 
 was with great difficulty that I brought my mind to the conclusion that, 1 could vote in its 
 favor. The considerations which infiuenced that conclusion, were stated to the senate, on 
 the day to which you refer, that of the final passage of the law. Durmg all my efforts to 
 
33 
 
 amend the bill, I very well recollect to have found you an active opponent, usually speak- 
 in", and always voting agaiiwt my niotionp, unless, as I think was the tact, you voted with 
 me to raise the duty upon coarse' wool. My recollection also is, that in the course of the 
 proceedings of the {Senate u|K)n the bill, you made an elaborate speech in its favor, going 
 much farther than 1 thought was sound or ri:rht, in favor of the policy of protection sepa- 
 rate from ( ' ' 'icd with prohibition, in both respects, as I 
 ihouwht, nu- "f the bill. Upon no occasion did I hear 
 you mtiuiate a «iis|Kwition either not to vote upon thi- |)ri.-:sage of the bill* or to vote againal 
 It, but on the contrary, I at ail timen considered you one of its most zealous advocates and 
 fricndri. Un the day of the final pas.-age of the bill, I have no recollections of having 
 hoard you intimate any m to d«'tcr "de its ] . either by withholding 
 ytnir vote or by voting a_ , and had T. -d from _. rom any ono else, that 
 there was any doubt about your vote, I think 1 should have recollected it, as my constant 
 impression during tl. * ' . that the fate of the bill depended upon a single vole, and 
 henro the peculiar i . I l»«It about my own vole. I certainly did not upon any 
 occasiors urge you or any oihrr - . to vole for the bill, and upon that day I do not 
 remember to have held any coiu . ..;. .i with you upon the subject, e.xccpt that you asked 
 me, sitting in my seat, how I should vole, and I replied that I should soon make a declara- 
 tion to llic Senate on that subject. My inference was, that you desired the passage of the 
 bill and wished to know how I should vote to enable you to determine whether or not it 
 would paiv*. As to the re|)ort of which you speak, about your hesitation in voting, when 
 your name was callod, I cannot speak, for this reason : Vou will recollect that the debate 
 upon the final passage was protracted to a late hour. I had become wearied, and the 
 chamber was crowded and warm* I had been expecting a termination of the debate for 
 some time, and ujwn the chair being addressed by a fresh speaker, I left my seat and 
 crossed the lobby into the southerly of the Secretary's rooms, where 1 took a seat by the 
 west window, fronting the avenue. I found Mr. Choate in the rof)m and passed a few words 
 With him, when he left. I had remained seated by the window, as it then appeared, and 
 now ap|»ears to me, but a few moiu'jnt.s when the younger Mr. Dasselt, one of the mes- 
 seni'ers of the Senate, came into the room in great li.i>ie and told me my name had been 
 called. I went as rapidly as |K>ssible to the chamber, but found that the list had been called 
 : ' , 'id requested the Secretary to call my name which was done and I then voted, 
 on is that one Senator, Mr. Williams, of .Maine, came in and directed his name 
 to ii>! ai <<l, alter me, though of this fact I will not br certain, (^(her than that, I did not 
 hear an) Senator's name called or any Senator give Ins vote, but I heard nothing at the 
 time, nor have I since, of your reluctance to vote, othe^than in a casual conversation with 
 .rue. Mr. r|>Jiam whom I met upon his journey to Washington in November 
 , ,nj mentioned the report.-;, about your conduct and vote, on the day of the i)assage 
 ill. I expressed to him my disbelief of the reports, founded upon the fact that I 
 vrr before heard a word about them, and I thought the occasion one when any such 
 facis as he said were reported to have been witnessed in your conduct and vole, would have 
 1 ■* !■ ilie subject ofc onversation in and about the SenateChamber. I have not theslight- 
 ■ tion of having noticed or heard, that you li:id taken otFence at any person dur- 
 day, and I am sure I d;d not hear you use opprobrious language or epithets, to- 
 V.. ..>..- .iuy one, upon that occasion, as nothing of the kind rests upon my memory. I be- 
 lieve 1 have answered as fully as I am able your enquiries, but if any further and more 
 specific call upon me shall be desirable, I hope you will consider yourself perfectly free to 
 make it. With great respect, I am truly yours, SILAS WRlGilT. 
 Hon. S. S. Phelfs ( 
 U. S. Senator. S 
 
 No. 19. 
 Hon. I. C. Bates, of Massachusetts. 
 
 Washington, December 24th., 1844. 
 ^[y Dear Sir: — I have no knowledge or recollection of any such occurrences, as those 
 to which you allude in your letter of the 19th instant, to the Hon. J. W. Huntington and 
 othefs of the Senate, and am with great respect, 
 
 Yours, I. C. BATES. 
 
 Hon. S. S. Phelps. 
 
34 
 
 No. 20. 
 Hon. Alexander Barrow, of Louisiana. 
 
 Senate Chamber, January 9th 1845. 
 Bear Sir: — In reply to your letter enquirino- of me whether I heard you use certain 
 intemperate expressioi;:^, concerning the Tariff act of '42, or witnessed violent and undig- 
 nified conduct on your part the day that the final vote in the Senate was taken on that 
 bill, I have to answer negatively. All that I remember concerning your conduct on the 
 important occasion reierred to, is the fact that when your name was first called, on the 
 final vote upon the T;irifr bill of 1842, that you were not at that time in the Senate Cham- 
 ber, but that you and my colleague Mr. Conrad, came into the Chamber before the result 
 of the vote was announced by the President of the Senate and that you then voted whe- 
 ther upon the first or second call of your name, I don't recollect. 
 
 I am very respectfully. Yours, &c. ALEXANDER BARROW-. 
 
 No. 21. 
 
 Hon. C. M. Conrad, of Louisiana. 
 
 » 
 
 New Orleans, December 2, 1844. 
 
 Hon. S. S. Phelps, — My Dear Sir : I received^ some time since, a letter from the Hon. 
 Mr. Siade of Vermont, ihe purport of which you can collect from the enclosed copy of my 
 answer to it. I did not think I was at liberty to send you a copy of his letter to me ; but 
 considered that justice required that I should transmit you a copy of my answer. I should 
 very much regret, if the incident referred to, should have been by any one so exaggerated, 
 or perverted, as to subject you to any unpleasant consequences. 
 I remain very sincerely^ 
 
 Your obedient servant, &c. &c., C. M. CONRAD . 
 
 New Orleans, November 30, 1844. 
 
 Hon. Mr. Slade, — Sir : I avail myself of the earliest leisure time I have had for some 
 ■time past, to reply toyour letter of the 11th ult., which reached this city during my tem- 
 porary absence. / cannot imagine how it should have become necessary to refer to a circum- 
 stance so very unimportant as the one you allude to; but as you say that it is necessary for 
 '^tlic vindication of your character, that I should relate what occurred on the occasion refer- 
 red to, I do not feel myself at liberty to decline your request. Instead of answesing seria- 
 tim the questions you pro])ound tome, I will succinctly narrate what transpired, taking care 
 that this narrative" shall embrace substantially an answer to each of your questions. The 
 HarifFbili, as you are well aware, encountered great difficulties in its passage, and the debate 
 on it in both Houses was long and somewhat tedious. On the day on which the final vote 
 was taken, the discussion had been protracted until a late hour, and the Senate having been 
 in uninterrupted session from 10 o'clock A.M., the patience, and even the physicel powers 
 of many me.mbers were nearly exhausted : Mr. Phelps?, in particular, seemed much annoyed 
 at the lo g continuance of the debate, and manifested groat displeasure whenever a mem- 
 ber would rise to speak. I had an opportunity of observing this, as his seat was near my 
 own. At a late hour, just as it was supposed the question was about being put, some mem- 
 ber (I think Mr. Calhoun) rose and addressed the Senate at considerable length. Mr. 
 Phelps suddenly rose from his seat, apparently much excited, and passed by me, observing 
 that he " would stay no longer," or words to that effect. He went into the small ante-cham- 
 ber, (where the hats of members are deposited,) and I followed him. Seeing him take his 
 hat and move towards the door leading out of the capitol, I endeavored to dissuade him from 
 going ; but he persisted in going. He proceeded down the stairs, and I followed him, until 
 we reached the open air, outside of the building. There ho stopt, and became much calm- 
 er; and after some little persuasion on my part, he consented to return ; and indeed, from 
 that moment, he seemed as anxious to get back in time to give his vote, as I was myself. 
 When we re-entered the Senate Ciiamber, the Secretary was calling the yeas and nays on 
 
the final paMfiaje of ihe bill. My impir^nion is, that both of oUr name- li.id hoon called wlioti 
 we cniororl. I am certain wiirwr had been ; but as it prcccdofl that of Mr. I'hcipe on the al- 
 
 ' ' • ' ?■-.>- jjjj,, |,p |.^,^p at the pmpor 
 
 ■■»"t V 'ion cnllcJ. I ilo not 
 think that Mr 1 i "^ua/ a.Wi ." on the ronlrar)', 
 
 I think, as I ha.- !, that our i . called in their reg- 
 
 ular order. Iffurt wc ci iid that hiti ntil ho rose and re- 
 
 quCMtc<! ' " • vo. I have 
 
 no rrc ^ - "f /h.id vo- 
 
 ted." It 1.x , however, that he may have done so. i walke-l up very cioac to tho 
 
 (.Mork'n do-h, .Ml- ii I asked hini to call my name, and it \» ptwsibic, therefore, that both the 
 .^<iT»'tnry ami mvM/>li niwik** in a low ton*' of voicp. Mr. IMielmi. on iho contrary, went, I 
 til . In the nome and 
 
 (• . . ...; ' . . rnbers of tholliiuyo 
 
 <>t i it would not bo at all i«nrpr >i .Mr. I'hcl|M "hould not have heard 
 
 \\\r \\\\ 'e. .\a to the " .Sir rin'lp^ takintj the course which render- 
 
 ed my' if> h-m necei'H.T id mure tlinn I can i:iidertake to say. My 
 
 intercoiirw'.' with Mr. i' i<t l>crn very itiijjht indof'd — scarcely .Tiiy out of the Senate, 
 
 and I am ihercforj* n</ ' with hi* Jn.. -••,.>,.,,(, ©r Inn |)onional poculiaritiofl, if ho has 
 
 any. I have alrv.idy i \ that he : very much pmvo'.fd at the conduct of 
 
 Home tncMi' " ' ■■''■■ on 
 
 the t>ill. I , . . . I hiq 
 
 ctiurfie ti) • which ho had owcr boon a* tnost Hirenuoua 
 
 HUP'"- ' •• iiury oxcilcmoDl acting upon .1 iii|H-raincnt |)crhapfl 
 
 ii.-»' 
 
 'I'lii.'MU .ir<' I. '.vifli this occur- 
 
 rence. Ak it I" • , , , : vl know not by. 
 
 whom, or for what purp'i«<o) in a manner calculated to prejudice Mr. I'heliw, I am gratified 
 that I waj4 not the ' •• ' ', ■ ' imo public. 
 
 I 
 
 ^ i*ervanl, C. M. CONU.\n. 
 
 Ki.ii Mr. Slaor, Monti*-.. ;.t. 
 
 Thinkin^j "it prf)j»cr that Mr. I'help* ithould be informed of what I have Haid in rc- 
 .(•i lu hun, I have transmitted to him atopy of thu letter. C. M. C. 
 
 No. 22. 
 Hon. W. P. M.\NGUM, of North Cnrolina. 
 
 Have been rcqucMted to state my recollections in regard to tho Hon. Mr. Phelps' course 
 ' : the di- 1. and at the close of the debate in 184'J. 
 
 ' " ' »••* '••"•,, . - ..ioajiurc did, a fast and steady supporter, 
 
 even t.> the verge of excessive zeal, of the principles of protection contained in that law. I 
 tLink I cannot be mi.staken in ^ ' •' amonirtho whifs of 
 
 iheSeiiat.-. In re^'ard to Ins h > , .; i .j-s dunn^r that long 
 
 icd very great, usetui, and extremely laborious and drudirmg duties, on the 
 ' ilevolution.iry Claims. 1 think there could have been no diver.'^ity of opinion 
 
 in regard to the extent and tho utility of these labors. .Mv official position brouuht me to an 
 intimate knowledge of iIioim. I ' m), and • .v. »t.rit !he Senate and'the country 
 
 owed hiin inuih^ f..r the ..l.i.-, ,i, and .~ ,, ry manner in which he discharged 
 
 tJiose duties. The nuwt of these laljors were closed before the end of the sprintr. During 
 the summer of l^l, Mr. I'helps perforr ' ' ' ,1 extremely u.seful duties upon sub". 
 
 jects coming trom the Commilleo of In . . .-.-pecially i'n regard to the vast inte- 
 
 re.-t- 'ig out of the Choctaw clainid. i tiave ionu' regarded those claims as the most 
 
 coin i, intricate and difficult, that could bo presented, and as enveloped and barricaded 
 
 by the most ingenious, and, I may, stupendous frauds, that I have witnessed in mv public 
 Jile. The severe labor and eminent abilitv which Mr. \\ brought to those question.^, and 
 the fearless manner in which he euccessfu'lly exposed tiiein, enhanced, I think, greatly bis 
 
36 
 
 reputation for legal ability and acumen, and also for a firm, unshrinking moral courao-e lu 
 the discharge of his senatorial duties. WILLIE P. MANGUM? 
 
 Washington City, February. 1845. 
 
 I am requested further to state whether at the time of the final vote on the Tariff Bill, 
 Mr. Phelps manifested any disinclination to vote for the bill. If he did, I have no know- 
 ledge of it. I knew at the time the precise state of the vote before it was given. Upon 
 the declaration of Governor Woodbridge that he would vote for it (at about I think the 
 time of lighting the candles), I knew it would pass by one majority, and in that estimate 
 tlie vote of Mr. Phelps, was included. So far from the idea having occurred to me (h-t- 
 he was likely to prove delinquent, I should have supposed it, as soon of any other Senr.tor 
 from INew England. 
 
 WILLIE P. MANGUM 
 
 No. 23. 
 Hon. Wm. D. Merrick, of Maryland. 
 
 Senate United States, January 7th., 1845. 
 My Dear Sir: — Your note making certain enquiries as to my recollection of your de- 
 meanor on the occasion of the passage by the Senate of the Tariff law of 1842, has I con- 
 fess occasioned me no little surprise, because it is the first intimation I have had rhat 
 there was supposed to be any thing peculiar, or objectionable in your conduct on that • •.- 
 easion. Had there been anything remarkable or peculiar in your conduct on the occasion 
 alluded to, it could not well, have escaped my notice, both because I took a very lively in- 
 terest in the proceedings on that important Bill, and because your seat in the Senate is i!i 
 close proximity to my own, and I have pleasure in saying in answer to your enquiries, l.iaL 
 I saw nothing in your conduct, nor did I hear any declarations or remarks from you in the 
 least degree irregular, or inconsistent, with the steady and consistent support it was well 
 understood by all you would and did give to the great measure then passed upon by iliS 
 Senate. 
 
 With very great respect, I am dear sir, 
 
 Your obedient servant, WM. D. MERRICi: 
 
 No. 24. 
 Hon. Wm. C. Rives, of Virginia. 
 
 Castle Hill, April 15th., 1845. 
 My Dear Sir : — I had the pleasure of receiving a day or two ago your letter dated the 
 2d instant, and avail myself of the first moment of leisure to reply to it. You inform me 
 that on the occasion of your re-election to the Senate, in October last, there were several 
 matters of charge put in circulation, respecting the manner in which you had perfornod 
 your official duties, and touching more particularly your conduct on the passage ol iiie 
 Tariff' act of 1842, — ^as that in consequence of some supposed slight on the part of some 
 of your associates, you had used opprobrious language in regard to them, declared with 
 oaflis that you would not vote fti the IJill, that you were absent from your seat, when rhe 
 question was put upon the passage of the Bill, that being sent for, you came in and then 
 declined to vote until your name had been called three limes. You desire me to state 
 whetlier, I iiave any knowledge or recollection of any of these circumstances or of there 
 being anything unusual in the manner of giving your vote, or in your course generally on 
 that important measure. I certainly have no knowledge or recollection, of any such o 'ciir- 
 rences, as those above mentioned, nor of any thing unusual or extraordinary in your man- 
 ner of voting or acting on the passage of the act of 1842, for the adjustment of the TarT. 
 The only tlungthat is impressed upon my memory, respecting your course upon the Tarifi", 
 is the very able speech you made against the repeal of the act of 1842, during the session 
 
37 
 
 of Confess before the last, and that,I shall always retain a lively '■^collection of,as well as 
 of the pleasant and fr.endly intercourse which subsisted between us during the period ot 
 our association in the public councils. 
 
 I remain my dear sir, with great respect ami best wishes, tjtvv«3 
 
 Truly and faithfully Your?, W. C RIVLfc>. 
 
 Samcel S. Phelps, Esg. 
 
 No. 25. 
 Hon. Wm. a. Graham, of North Carolina. 
 
 Raleigh N. C. April 16th., 1845. 
 7)ear .Sir.— Your letter of tha2d instant, was sent to my residence at Hillsboro, and 
 •lid not reach me until to day. You state that a communication was addressed to the 
 Whip Convention of Vermont, whon about to select a candidate lor the Senate in October 
 last, char^r'n-f in substance that when the Teritl'Bill of Aufrnst 184'J, was under consider- 
 ation in the Senate of the United States, you declared with oaths you would not vote lor 
 the Bill, that much effort was used to procure your sup|>ort to it, that you were absent 
 •when the cjucstion was put on the passage of thf Bill, and that after being sent for and 
 callfd in, you refused to vote until your name had been three times called, and ask for my 
 TecoUectiim as to the truth or falsehood of these several char^^os. In reply, I have to 
 state that I remember nothing going to substantialo any one of them. I know that many 
 Senators, (at least several) who finally voted for the Bill had determined when it came Irom 
 the Il*juse not to vote for it, (because the provi.-ion for the distribution of {he land pro- 
 ceeds, had been abandoned.) and that tliey ultimately yielded their objections and did vote 
 for it. But I have no remembrance of your being one of these. As to hesitation, when 
 called by the Secretary to vote, the only instance remaining in my remembrance is that of 
 one of the Senators from Maine, who did not vote until after the call had cea.sed (the pre- 
 sent) and who then went up to the Secretary's <ipsk, and ascertaining by casting up the 
 yeas and nays that his vote was required to pass the Bill, voted in its favor. I shall at alt 
 times be pleased to hear of your health and prosperity, and am, 
 Witli tlie kindest remembrances. 
 
 Your friend and servant W. A. (J RAH AM. 
 
 Hon. S. S. Phelps, ) 
 ^senator of IJ. S. \ 
 
 No. 26. 
 Hon. Wm. S. Archer, of Vimnia. 
 
 Washixgton, March L3th., 1845. 
 Dear Sir .• — Your letter addressed to several members of the Senate asking an expres- 
 sion ot their recollection, as regards circumstances of conduct imputed to you in connec- 
 tion with the passage c'" the existing tariff law in the Senate, has been duly considered. 
 I have to reply to your inquirj-, that I have not been able to summon any recollection to my 
 mmd of the circumstances to which you refer, so as to authorize me either to affirm their 
 ace uracy.or disaffirm it. I can only say.that nothing passed with me.as one of the Senators of 
 ot ttie " whig party," partaking of the character of the occurrences alluded to. 
 I am very respectfully, 
 
 Hon. Mr. Phelps. ^ °"' °''^'^''"' '"'"^^ ^- ®- ^^CHER. 
 
38 
 
 No. 27. 
 Hon. John Henderson, of Mississippi. ' 
 
 Senate Chamber U. S., January 20, 1845. 
 
 Dear SiK,— I have examined the matters set forth in the preceding paees. I was nresent 
 when the tanfFact of 1842 was passed, and now regret to confess tliat T felt myseircon- 
 strained to vote agamst it. I have no recollection whatever of the acts or conversation oc- 
 currmg m respect to yourself, as before detailed by yourself on this sheet. 
 
 Tj c « Respectfully yours, &c., JOHN HENDERSON. 
 
 Hon. bAMUEL S. Phelps. 
 
 [Endorsed on my letter to Hon. George Evans, the same answered by Mr. Evans above.] 
 
 No. 28. 
 Hon. John M. Berrien, of Georgia. 
 
 [This letter of Mr. Berrien is also endorsed upon the same letter with Mr. Henderson.] 
 
 Senate Chamber, 20th January, 1845. 
 
 Dear Sir, — I have no recollection of the facts and circumstances stated on the prece- 
 ding pages, or any others calculated to show your hostility to the tariff of 1842, when on its 
 passage. On the contrary, I considered you as one of its most decided advocates. My 
 own position was this : There were certain modifications which I desired to make of its 
 details, which had been recommended by the Committee of Finance, of which I was a mem- 
 ber, which were rejected in the Senate, not, as I understood, upon their merits, but from a 
 fear that if the bill were amended so as to render it necessary to send it back to the House 
 of Representatives, it would fail there. I did not approve this course, and these amend- 
 ments being thus rejected without regard to their merits, and one of them particularly af- 
 fecting the interests of my own constituents,! was compelled to vote against the bill. But be- 
 fore I did so, I stated to the two Senators from New Jersey, and to some others, my deter- 
 mination, if the bill was lost by my vote, instantly to move its reconsideration, when I ho- 
 ped to obtain a more favorable consideration of the amendments which had l.ef^i; rejected. 
 This was rendered unnecessary by a change of determination, avowed very shortly before 
 the vote was taken, by one of the Senators of Michigan. My position and tl.c responsibili- 
 ty, which in the event that I have stated I was about to assume, of moving its reconsiuera- 
 tion, made me a very attentive observer of the proceeding. I counted the votes, as I ex- 
 pected them to be given, and as they were in fact given, and always numbered you among 
 its advocates. It is an act of justice to you, to add, that I considered your ai^llment at the 
 last session as presenting so convincing a view of the propriety of protecting our domestic 
 industry, that I subscribed for a number of copies, and circulated them among my constitu- 
 ents. I am respectfully yours, JOHN MACPHERSON BERRIEN. 
 
 The Hon. Samuel S. Phelps, U- S. Senator. 
 
 No. 29. 
 Hon. J. W. Huntington, of Connecticut. 
 
 Norwich, April 15, 1845. 
 Dear Sir, — I have received your letter of the 3d instant. In reply to the inquiry you 
 make, whether I have any recollection of certain occurrences or circumstances which are 
 specified in your letter, and which you observe are brought as charges against you, and to 
 wich I now refer. I answer that I have no recollection that " on the day of the final pas- 
 sage of the tariff bill, August 27th, 1842, you had been offended at some supposed slight or 
 want of attention on the part, &c., and used opprobrious language in regard to them, and 
 
39 
 
 declared with oaths that you xcould not vote for the bilU (i- e. the tariff bill,) and '^«^ «f f^^J 
 
 Senators had made ine/ectual efforts to soothe you." Nor have I any recollection "that 
 
 you was absent from your seat when the question was put, was sent for, a"^,,*-^';™'"^;"' 
 
 Siscd to vote unfl your name had been called three Itmes." Nor do I recollect that I 
 
 was informed that Mr. Conrad, of Louisiana, " «-i5 endeavoring to persuade you to vote up- 
 
 on that bill " If any such occurrences, as are stated above, took place, and I knew, or heard 
 
 of them, thev h;.vo rscajK^d my recollection. I do remember that -n one occasion, when it 
 
 was expected that a vote would, or mifrht sm.n br t.kon up^.n what I deemed an miportant 
 
 nu...stioii; I did n..t see you in the Senate Chamber, and I believe I mquired of some Senator 
 
 (perhaps your colleacrue, (Jov. Crafts,) where you was, or I observed you should be sent 
 
 for ; but I do not now recollect what that quesli-.n was. Some time has eapscd since the 
 
 tariff act was passed, and occurrences may have taken place connected with it. of which 1 
 
 know nothing, or which I do not now recollect I have endeavored, however, to reply to 
 
 your inquiry as to the- matters mentioned in your letter, and to which I have rctcrred in my 
 
 foregoing answer, as far as I am able to reply to them. 
 
 Very re.spectfully. tnrvpivrrnv 
 
 Your obedient .servant, J. \\ . IlLIS llAt.lU.\. 
 
 Hod. S. S. Phklps. 
 
 No. 30. 
 Hon. Samuel C. Crafts, of Vermont. 
 
 [Copy of By communication to the committrr. Messrs. Sabin, .Mortran, and Camp.] 
 Oenti.f.men : Ajjrceably to your request, that I would stale all the facts within my 
 knvwiedge, resfiectrng certain reports in circulation injurious to the character of Honorable 
 Samuel S. IMielps. &.C., I present the following statement: From the latter part of April, 
 1842, to the close of the '27th Congress, 1 was associated with Judge I'holps in the Senate 
 of the United States, and for about seven months of that time, I was at VVashington and in 
 daily intercourse with him. For a few days, on mv lirst arrival at Washington, I took 
 lodgings at the same boardinj-house with Judge I'helps, and occupied the same room with 
 h.iu. Thi-> bnarding-housc was situated in Tenii-ylvania .Avenue, and preferring a more 
 rry locatmi. during the summ.T month.*, after tarrying there sonjc eight or ten days, I re- 
 moved ui\ i dgings to Capitol Hill; and within two or lliree weeks liierenfter. Judge Phelps 
 I:'- I his lixlgiiigs to the vicinity of mine, nnd continued there through the summer. 
 
 I v him daily in ihc Senate, but generally every day, either at his (juarters, or 
 
 The .same intercourse continued also through the winter session. I have been 
 -: ; lar. to show what were my opp^jrtunitics to become acquainted with his general 
 conduct, 6lc. F'.xcepting about ten or twelve days in the latter part of July, or beginning 
 of August, 194*J, his health was good, and his attendance in the Senate, and on the commit- 
 tees, was as regular as that of any other uiembf-r whatever. During the ten or twelve 
 days above e,xcepted, Judge I'helps was very unwell — was confined to his bed six or seven 
 days of that time, and under the care of Dr. Sewall. He was not only very unwell, but 
 very low-spirited. During this sickness, I saw him everyday. It was during this time 
 that the present tariff bill was under discussion in the Senate, and Judge Phelps had been 
 unable to resume his seat in the Senate, but a day or two before the question was taken on 
 that bill, and even then but a short time each day. Judge Phelps had assured ine that he 
 would endeavor to be present and vote on the passage of the said bill ; for it was understood 
 that without his vote, the bill could not pass the Senate. As Judge Phelps did not appear 
 for some little time after the Senate had called up the said bill,' some of the members 
 came to me and wished me to go for him, and j)orsuade him to take his seat. I informed 
 them that he had promised to be there, and if he did not appear before the vote was called, 
 I would go for him. But he soon after appeared, and voted for the bill.* I state this trans- 
 action more particularly, as I have heard that it has been represented that Judge I'helps 
 
 • Gov. Crafts has confounded ih.,- bill which parsed on the 5th of August, commonlv called the 'little tariff,' with 
 the pre«ent law, which was passed on the aTth. What he stales here, occurred oi'i the 5th, when 1 was unwell, 
 and not on the 27ih, when it appears from all the testimony that I was present during the day. The error however 
 IS no' imporUnt. The material question is, whether the occurrcnn's stated by Mr. Slado took place. If they did it 
 » 4a4:cely potsible that Gov. Crafts should have been ignoram of them. ' 
 
40 
 
 had been disposed to withhold his vote, and it was only by the extraordinary exertions of 
 some of the other Senators that he did attend. 
 
 While I was at Washington, I never saw Judge Plielps drink but one solitary glass of 
 wine, and no distilled spirits at all. I never saw him when I supposed he had been usino- 
 any ; nor do I believe hCj^was in the habit of using spirits privately, during the time I was 
 at Washington. That his intercourse with the Senators was civil and courteous ; and that 
 to my knowledge he had many firm friends in the Senate. 
 I am, gentlemen. 
 
 Very respectfully yours, Sx\MUEL C. CRAFTS.^ J 
 
 No 31. 
 Hon. Samuel C. Ckafts, of Vermont, 
 
 Ckaftsbury, December 23, 1844. 
 Hon. Samuel S. Phelps, — Dear Sir: Your favor of the 9th instant has been duly re- 
 ceived, and I take great pleasure in complying with your request. I fortunately kept a 
 copy of my communication to the committee of the Senate, and of course am enabled to 
 give you the particulars of that statement (a_copy of which is enclosed). Upon its delivery, 
 I requested the committee, when they had read it, to return it to me : this, however was 
 never done. When I attended the whig convention, I did it at the request of a member 
 who also introduced me to the convention. I was requested to inform the meeting what I 
 had observed in relation to your general conduct, while I was at Washington. J replied, 
 that having given a statement in writing, which I presumed had been laid before the con- 
 vention, I would prefer to answer such inquiries as any gentleman present might be dispo- 
 sed to make. I was then asked whether you answered to the first call of your name, on 
 the passage of the tarifi' bill. I gave it as my impression that you did: that I .-^aw yo' 
 when you came into the Senate, and that you were in your seat wlien you an- wered. I 
 was then informed that Governor Slade had said that he was present when the \ote of the 
 Senate was taken, and when your name was called ; and that your name had been called 
 three times before you ansvv'ered. I replied that if Governor Slade was in Lhe Senate 
 it Chamber at the time, and was positive that such was the case, it might have been so; but 
 was my impression that you answered the first time your name was called after you had taken 
 your seat. I stated, that to my knowledge, you had manifested as sincere a desire for the 
 passag-e of an effective protective tariff, as any other member of our delegation. That du- 
 ring the discussion of the tariff in the House of Representatives, we had frequent meetings 
 for the purpose of securing adequate protection on wool, and that you were present at all 
 our meetings, and that our exertions were effectual so far as very materially to increase the 
 amount of protection contained in the bill as reported. I was tl>en asked whether f (■-.iild 
 see you distinctly from my seat. I then explained the location of our seats in tiie oenaie 
 Chamber, and showing that there was nothing to prevent my seeing and hearing you dis- 
 tinctly. Mr. Hale afterwards stated to the meeting, that he was in the gallery at the time 
 the vote was taken — saw you and Mr. Conrad came into the Senate, and was very positive 
 you answered at the first call of your name. I was asked why I had solicited you to leave 
 Brown's, and seek other quarters. I informed them, that on my arrival at Washington, I 
 found you temporarily boarding there, — that it was not your i.ntention to tarry there during 
 the hot weather, — that we had together examined several boarding-houses on Capitol Hill, 
 but found none where we could both be accommodated to our minds, at tlie same house, or 
 we should have immediately left the Avenue. It was not that 1 saw anything to create a 
 suspicion that you frequented the bar, for I saw nothing ; but that 1 thought the Hil!> be- 
 ing more airy, would be more healthy than the Avenue, during the summer months. I was 
 then asked whether I had any knowledge of your using wine or spirituous liquors freely. I 
 answered that 1 had never, except on one occasion, seen you drink either wine or spirits, 
 and that was on a visit to the steam-frigate Missouri. After having been shown the ship, 
 the captain invited us to the cabin, and asked us to take a glass of wine with hiin ; — that 
 you took one glass, and I believe no more. I, also stated that soon after my arrival at Wash- 
 ington, you were invited to dine with Lord Ashburlon, where, to my knowledge, (having 
 
41 
 
 dined there afterwards,) wine was drank very freely. That you returned in gr id 
 ecasion, free from any apparent excitement, and gave ine a particular account of the com| m- 
 ny, the dinner, and the topics ot conversation. I informed the convention, as there h d 
 been many different statenientfl made, I was perfectly willing, if requested, to repeat these 
 same Blatcinents under oath. I do not recollect all the questions proposed ; but the above 
 contains the substance of them. ^ 
 
 I remam very sincerely, 
 
 Your friend, &c., SAMUEL C. CRAFTS. 
 
 No. 32. 
 Michael Larm:r, Door-keeper of the Senate. 
 
 Washington, February 1, 1845. 
 
 Sib, — In answer to your communication of this date, in which you desire me to state, 
 "whether I wa.s door-kopf)or at the lime of the passa^'e of the taritTact of 1842, and to state 
 what my recollection of that transaction is," I have to say, I did keep the door at the south 
 entrance to the Senate Chamber, at the time alluded to, and recollect distinctly that you 
 were in your place in the Senate during the greater part of the day. During the evening, 
 you passed out the south entrance two or three times, observing that it was so warm in the 
 Chamber that you wished to go out mto the air. (Jn coming into the Chamber on one occa- 
 sion, it was thought the vote was about to be taken mm the final passage of the bill; but it 
 was not, and the ilisciission was continued, ^'ou then came out of the Chamber, Hiid re- 
 marked, that "you were tired ot the discussion, and would go." Imnicdiately after you 
 left the C^hamber, the Hon. Mr. VVoodbridge rose to address the Senate, and after he con- 
 cluded his speech, the question was called for, and the yeas and nays demanded. Mr. Slade, 
 of the House of U'jpresontatives, came to the dfK)r whoro I was .standinir, and asked me if 1 
 I -cen .Mr. l'li»-lps jiass out. I told him that he (Mr. I'helps) had passed out a few min- 
 ^. - before. Mr. Conrad came to the door immediately after, and asked where Mr. Phelps 
 was. I made the same reply to him that 1 made to Mr. Slade. He immediately passed out 
 the door, and in about five minutes Mr. Conrail and yourself returned to the Chamber, and 
 gave your votes lor the passage ot the bill. Mr. Slade is mistaken if he supposes that I in- 
 loriiied him that Mr. Conrad of Louisiana was in an ante-room, eitdnainring to persuade you 
 *'. roir. Mr. Slade is also mistaken when he says that 1 iniormed him that Mr. Conrad and 
 \[r. Phelps had leli the ante-room and gone to another part of the Capitol, and thai he sent 
 nie in pursuit of them— that I found them, and they returned. I did not go in pursuit of 
 oil ; it was Mr. Conrad who went for you, as I have before observed. 
 The above is a true statement of what occurred on the night of the passage of the tariff 
 of 1H42, as far as you were concerned. 
 
 iion. S. S. Phelps. 
 
 Respectfully yours, MICHAEL LARNER. 
 
 No. 33. 
 L. H. Machen, Clerk of the Senate. 
 
 Office of the Secretary of the Senate, 1 
 .February 6th, 1845. \ 
 
 Sir,— In reply to your note, requesting me to state the circumstances, to the best of mv 
 recollection, attending the calling the yeas and nays on the passage of the tariff act of 1842, 
 and especially as to an alleged hesitation or refusal to answer to your name when called 
 1 nave to state — ' 
 
 1st. That although I find, upon a reference to the original list of aves and noes, taken 
 worl".T.7""r' ^he^"^t"^"'^",'l '° '^^ tariff bill, the 27th of August, 1842. that they 
 ^vJr ,ttl ^ and recorded by me, I have no recollection of any unusua.circurastance what- 
 ever attending the transaction. 
 
42 
 
 2d. That in the performance of my official duties, as a Clerk in the office of the Secretary 
 of the Senate, I have been in the habit for several years past, of taking minutes of the pro- 
 ceeding of the Senate in their legislative capacity, making out the journal of the Senate 
 for the revision of the Secretary, and calling the names of the Senators, whenever the votes 
 have been taken in a legislative session, by ayes and noes, that I know of no member of the 
 Senate who has answered with mere promptness or distinctness to the call when made, 
 than yourself; and that your position on the floor is nearly in front of the Secretary's tabic, 
 I have no difficulty whatever in hearing and recording your vote. 
 
 3d. That in calling the names of Senators, I have considered it proper, when no re- 
 sponse has been made, or heard, to call the second time except in cases of known sickness 
 or absence, when the name is called but once. After the call is over, the state of the vote 
 is ascertained, and the List is handed to the Presiding Officer, of the Senate, who announ- 
 ces the result. Should any Senator, desire to vote after his name has been once passed, 
 he rises in his place, addresses the President of the Senate, or requests the Secretary to 
 call his name. But it has not been the practice in the Senate for the Secretary or any 
 one acting in his stead, to repeat the call of any Senator, after the names, have been passed 
 over in Alphabetical order unless the Senator himself should .so request. The duty of the 
 Secretary ends, when the call has been made, the votes counted, and the list handed to 
 the presiding officer, and it would be regarded, I presume as an official impropriety if he 
 endeavored by repeated calls to increase the aggregate vote of either the one side or the 
 other; and this impropriety would be the more reprehensible, and glaring, m proportion 
 to the importance of the subject, and as the affirmative and negative votes, approached an 
 
 equal division. 
 
 I have the honor to be, 
 
 Your obedient servant. L. H. MACHEN. 
 
 Hon. Samuel S. Phelps. 
 
 No. 34. 
 Mr. Cbaston to Governor Slade. 
 
 Newport, October 23, 1844. 
 
 Dear Sir: I have yours of the 18th instant, requesting me to staie my recollection o 
 
 calling on you in relation to the vote of Senator Phelps on the Tarifl^ question. 
 
 I verv well recollect that on the day of the final passage of the Tariff act of 1842, m the 
 Senate, 1 had a conversation with Judge Phelps in the Senate Chamber ai=d was surprised 
 to hear him declare that he would not vote for the bill and that it would be lost. 1 did not 
 believe.he would vote against it or even withhold his vote and yet I felt alarmed for the fate 
 of the bill from the emphatic manner in which he spoke of withhold-- ., .. >, r.o^ 1 nnme- 
 d ately called on you at Mr. Spriggs and stated what had passed between Judge Phelps 
 and myself, and requested vou to go to the Senate Chamber and see him. You went irn-^ 
 mediately to the Senate Chamber, Ind found that Mr. Phe ps was not in his seat, but learn- 
 ed that he waswith one of the Senators in the ante-ro.,m. Whde the Secretary was calln g 
 the ayes and nayes on the bill, Judae Phelps came into the Senate and voted tor the bil 
 and h pas' ed bygone majority ;-whether he answered at the first call of his name or not 
 I cannot distinctly recollect^ ^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^_ ^ ^ CRANSTON. 
 
 Extract of a Letter from Mr. Cranton to S. S. Phelps, dated 
 
 December 15th, 1844. 
 
 " In answer I have to say that all I have said or written in relation to your vote on the 
 Tariff bill of 1842, is contained in my letter to Gov. Slade (a copy ol which I herewith en 
 close you )n answer to his letter to me, dated October 18th., 1844. in which he appeals 
 
 LB 019 
 
to me to confirm or deny what he had sUted in rpMtion t.ob^ n|^!Lrrc of thi 
 only to add, and I do it with pleasure, that oj^n »cc^nfrh(Jfltc or since 
 ever see or hear anything in your conducylfut indi^'d ^flcelinfj of host 
 
 43 
 
 4rc of the tariff. I hpve 
 since tliat day, di 1 I 
 _ ihty or even in- 
 
 difff'rencc towards tFiat it niea-^uro, hut on th ■ onirary on all other occasions you 
 
 artucared as anxiouM for .-hs ax any .ith<>r inouu.or." 
 
 ' ^ I am, dtc. R. B. CRANSTOX. 
 
 Jfott. A* to what Mr. Sl&do ' learned' it ii cTidcnt Mr. Cranaton know nothing, except 
 
 what hr derived from Mr. Sladc himM-lf There it nothing else in the letter except my 
 supposed derlaration to Mr. C, which is given naked and unconnected with anything which 
 might wrvc to explain it, — and testimony of an isolated tlfclaration without the conversation 
 which led to or followed, it is never regarded aa satisfactory. When Mr. C. comes to consider 
 that this declaration is utterly inconsistent, as he says, both with my previous and subse- 
 quent conduct — that he had no sooner got Mr. Slade there than I came in and voted for the bill 
 of my own accord without any conference with Mr. Shi'le, and when he comes to learn that 
 not a word was ulteri d or thought ncc^^ssary by any one to persuade mc to vole for it, — that 
 all this story of my being closeted with Mr Conrad is a mistake, and that no member of the 
 Senate ever heard of my threats to withhold my vole, he will be satistied, I think, that he 
 mislotjk my meaning altogether in what he heard, and that he has done nif injustice, not 
 only in his premature and haely representation of the story, but still greater in putting the 
 ■tory into such ears 
 
 List of Ayes and Noes on the Passage of the Tariflf Act, August 
 
 27lh, 1842. 
 
 Ay»s.— Messrs. Barrow, Bates, Bayard, Buchanan,* Choate, Conrad, Craff.s Crittenden, 
 Dayton, Kvann, Huntinpton, Miller, Morehoad, Phelps, Porter, Simmons, Smith, of la., 
 Sprague, Sturgeon,* Tallmadge, White. Williams.* Woodbridge, Wright.* '24. 
 
 AW5. — Messrs. Allen, Archer.t Baghy, Benton, Berrion,t Calhoun, Clavton,t Cufhl ert, 
 FjU.mi, r,raham,f Hpiidervon.f King. I.iim. .Mangmn.t .\ferrick,t Pre8ton,t'Rive8,t Sev.er, 
 Smith of Conn., Tappan, Walker, WiKxlbury, Voung. '2:3. 
 
 ■0«moer«U. t Whip. 
 
\ 
 
 ■<• 
 
i