another purpose than to express these feelings, vis. that of ascertaining whether or not I respected her rights. This I learned, not from the tenor of her conversation, but from her own declaration, made by her attorney to the Referees. In consequence of her disingenuity, I wholly mistook the design of her interview, as she has since explained it. I supposed it was merely to obtain my consent that she should proceed with her abridgment. No other impression I am certain was left on my mind, by the conversation that passed. She may honestly think differently from this; but I as honestly think as I do. It is one of those cases in which each must be permitted to judge for himself, without imputing blame to the other. I indeed thought her question, at the time, a very needless one. I had no control over her publications. I wished none. But as she asked the question, and pressed it, I could not in civility avoid answering it as I did, and as I supposed to her satisfaction. Wholly unconscious that I had infringed her rights, or wounded her feelings, I answered her insidious question according to its obvious meaning, and with feelings entirely friendly.

5. My letter to Miss A. of the 26th Sept. 1804, a garbled extract from which is very unfairly introduced before the public in the reply, and which has been the standing theme of complaint against me ever since it was written, will, I apprehend, be found to be a harmless weapon. The reader is referred to the letter itself, in its place, to the remarks annexed, and to my letter to Miss A. of the 31st Jan. 1814.

6. I am charged with "persecuting" Miss A. as in other respects, so also with my "letters." From which side the charge of persecution ought to come, the reader will be able to judge, after examining the following documents.

7. A clause in an explanation of the award of the Referees, is taken from its proper connections, and exhibited in an imposing form, for the purpose of pre-occupying the public mind on this part of the controversy. The documents on this subject will be found in their place and order, and I confidently appeal to them for my vindication against the heavy charge of having neglected honourably to fulfil an award made by Referees "all of my own choice."

8. Dr. M. says Miss A. "cannot allege any unreasonable opposition, on my part, to an accommodation." I do allege, and expect to exhibit abundant evidence, that she has manifested such opposition, and that this "unreasonable" conduct in her has been the cause of all the "persecution," of which she complains, as having suffered from my letters. Her offer by Mr. Savage" to accept any thing," even "a single dollar," as a compensation from me, will be explained in its place. It was not difficult to see through the artifice of this offer.

* See Mr. Channing's statement to the Referees, immediately preceding their Award.

9. Miss A. complains that she is not "suffered" by me "to live in peace." I am not the troubler of her peace. Had she not permitted herself to be made an instrument to assail my reputation, to disturb my peace, to hinder my usefulness, and to be used as a shield to my real antagonists, I should never have interrupted her peace. She herself is in fault for all that she has suffered, now suffers, or may hereafter suffer, from this needless controversy. For evidence to prove the correctness of these declarations, I refer, with confidence, to the documents in this pamphlet.

10. 1" affect," she says, "to throw on her friends the blame of her conduct." This is not correct. I have rather divided it between them. Before I discovered her letter to Mr. SHAW, I probably laid a greater proportion of the blame in this affair on her friends, than was just. Since this discovery, I have endeavoured to proportion it equitably between them. But on this point I shall have no controversy with Miss A. She may assume it all, if she pleases, and can bear it. She must not censure me, after this, for loading her with it. The public in due time will place it where it ought to lie.

11. The passage quoted from my letter of 31st of Jan. last, and misapplied, will make the impression I intended, when read in its connection. This garbling work may aid an indefensible cause for a little season; but it always proves bad policy in the end.

12. The remarks in the last note in her reply, in reference to her letter to Mr. SHAW, are noticed and answered in my Remarks, which follow the extract from that letter, p. 23.

I close these Remarks with the following communication, which was prepared for the Centinel, but being adjudged more suitable for the pamphlet, than for the newspaper, seeing the controversy, by agreement, was not there to be continued, it was replaced by the shorter notice, which appeared in the Centinel of March 12,

1814.

TO THE PUBLIC.

In the last Centinel, is a “REPLY," to my "Appeal," in the preceding paper, which, though it bears the signature of Miss HANNAH ADAMS, I charitably hope breathes not her spirit. I here make no answer. The Centinel has wisely shut its columns against a further discussion of the topics embraced in this controversy. This discussion, by mutual understanding, is now to assume a "pamphlet form." The character of the "Reply," however, and particularly the name, under which it appears, will, I trust, permit me to state, and you to insert, consistently with your pledge, (a space of equal length being allowed to Miss A. to reply,) that the public ought to be apprized, and distinctly to bear in mind, in order to enable them duly to estimate its importance, that this controversy is with Miss ADAMS only in appearance, as she has suffered herself to be "dragged before the public," as a

shield to certain individuals, acting under the influence of a party; who, with a spirit not to be envied; with a sort of benevolence and sympathy for a "feeble woman," not very creditable to men, who claim exclusive excellence of character; and from an ingenious, though not original policy,† have placed her in front of their ranks, to deter from attack; or that she should unavoidably receive wounds, which might be converted to their own advantage. It is far from my desire or design to injure Miss A. in her reputation, or her rights, or interest; I trust I duly respect them all. But if she will yield herself to protect my real assailants, and lend her name to their public attacks on my character, she must not complain, if, in making my necessary defence against them, she should receive wounds. It will, I trust, fully appear, that I have wished to spare her, but she would not perHer character and sex are doubtless to be respected; but if she would escape censure, she must have so much independence and self respect, as not to lend herself to my concealed assailants, to be used against me.

mit me.

I expect to prove, to the satisfaction of fair minds, (others no evidence will convince,) that the real grounds of controversy between Miss ADAMS and myself, are altogether disproportioned to the effects, which we have witnessed: we are constrained, therefore, to look for some other causes, hitherto concealed from the public at large, in order to account for these effects. These causes (in order to exonerate Miss ADAMS from suffering for the sins of others, and to dismiss her from the field of controversy with as little injury as possible, for I really wish her well,) I intend to develop in a pamphlet, which is already in the press, and will soon be before the public.

Miss ADAMS will excuse me, if I decline her offered partnership in this publication. I prefer taking the responsibility and risk on myself. I wish not to subject her to any diminution in her means of support, I will readily admit a "short," or a long answer to my letter of 31st. Jan. last, and any other communications, of decent length and character, which she, or her advocates, may think proper to send, either for the purpose of criminating me, or of vindicating Miss ADAMS. I wish nothing concealed from the public, which has any proper bearing on this *controversy.

Charlestown, March 7th, 1814.

J. MORSE.

*No reflection, not the most distant, is here intended, on those who subscribed to Miss A's. annuity, as numbers doubtless did, from the most commendable motives of Christian sympathy and benevolence. The remark is limited to the few individuals, who were abusing this sympathy and benevolence, to subserve their sinister purposes against me.

† Cambyses, in an attack on Pelusium, “invented the following stratagem. Being informed, that the whole garrison consisted of Egyptians, he placed in front of his army a great number of cats, dogs, sheep and other animals, which were looked upon as sacred by that nation; and then attacked the city by storm. The soldiers of the garrison, not daring either to fling a dart, or shoot an arrow that way, for fear of hitting some of those animals, Cambyses became master of the place without opposition." Rollin's Ancient History, vol. ii. p. 283, Etheridge's Edition, 1807.

CHRONOLOGICAL DETAIL, &c.

I SHALL now lay before the Reader, in chronological order, such facts and occurrences, as have a bearing on this controversy, and as may enable him to form a correct judgment of its

The Compendious History was published the beginning of September, 1804, in the manner stated in my Appeal. It was well received by the public; and by that portion of it particularly, which is now most active in using it to injure my reputation. Accordingly, it was reviewed in the "Literary Miscellany," periodical work published at Cambridge, and conducted by some of the officers of the College, and several of the Clergy of Boston, particular friends to Miss ADAMS. This Review appeared in the No. for July, 1805, ten months after our history was published. The following are extracts from this Review.

"In a country, where education and reading are diffused through all ranks, the responsibility of an author is raised, and the importance of works, prepared for general and common use, is greatly increased. It cannot then be denied, that in New-England, where every man may read, elementary works and those designed for schools, academies, and private families, sustain a high and distinguished rank. They are the manuals of our youth; and the impressions, received at this early period, are as important as life itself. We cannot here refrain from deprecating the evils, which have already arisen through the prevalence of catchpenny grammars and other school books, whose authors are greedy of gain, or mere novices in the elements they profess to teach.

"The preface of the work, now under review, permits us to hope better things. A large proportion of the work was compiled several years since for the supplement to DOBSON's edition of the Encyclopedia, and inserted under the article New-England. This article our authors have been induced to revise, enlarge, and publish in its present form, for more general benefit. They say in their preface, "We have endeavoured faithfully to bring into view the most operative causes, near and more remote, which led to the settlement of New England, with the impelling motives of the immediate agents in this bold enterprise, and to trace the steps by which she has risen to her present distinguished rank in the political, literary, and commercial world. To render the work interesting to youth, we have laboured to clothe our ideas in plain, familiar language, and to blend entertainment with instruction."

"They inform us, that many manuscripts, as well as printed volumes, have been consulted, and their essence leisurely condensed into this little work. On this last circumstance the merits of so brief a history, embracing so long a period, must principally depend."

After examining its contents in detail, the Reviewers add: "We have thus presented our readers a concise view of the work. We think it cannot fail of becoming very useful in academies and families. To possess the information it contains, is important to every one; and perhaps no history of its size contains so much. It will be seen that the religious features of our ancestors are more copiously and distinctly marked, than any others. Our authors could not well avoid this; for religion was the order of the day. It engrossed the whole attention; every other passion and object was rendered subservient. They have portrayed the eminent virtues and the peculiar imperfections of our forefathers with historic truth and filial affection. No disguise appears; no colouring is used. The style in general is plain and concise; the language simple, and, though sometimes figurative, sufficiently familiar. Having been originally written for a more extensive work, it undoubtedly sustains a higher rank, than it otherwise would."

Let it be observed, that this Review was published nine months after the date of my letter to Miss ADAMS, which makes so prominent an article in her Reply,-after her complaining letter to Mr. SHAW,-after she had completed her abridgment of her Summary History,* and with the knowledge of at least some of the clergy and literary laymen, who were acquainted with the plans, and with the complaints of Miss ADAMS; and yet, strange to tell, there is not in the whole Review, an intimation of improper interference with Miss ADAMS, or of any thing dishonourable on the part of Dr. PARISH and myself!

Three months only after the foregoing favourable review of this History appeared, another, written, as I was informed, by a Clergyman of Boston, now no more, and over whose ashes I would lightly tread, appeared in the Anthology, in a very different style and spirit. †

On this review the following "Remarks" were immediately made and sent to the Editor of the Anthology, and after remaining with him two months, were very reluctantly published in a manner and with a spirit, which, for a reason already suggested, I forbear to characterize.

TO THE REVIEWERS OF THE COMPENDIOUS HISTORY OF NEW

Gentlemen,

ENGLAND.

We should not trouble you with any remarks on your review of our work, did we not deem it necessary to counteract injuri

* It was published in July, 1805.

†Those, who have opportunity, are requested to read this review, and my remarks on it, with the interlarded reflections of the Reviewers. Anthology, vol. ii. p. 541.

and 670.