But this is not all.  A citizen has been found willing, under his own name, to espouse the argument of the French writers.  Of the validity of the statements presented by this gentleman (Mr. Leavitt Harris, of New Jersey), or of the force of his reasoning, I shall say nothing here, for his letter and our answers will sufficiently speak for themselves.  The administration party, however, have thought the statements of Mr. Harris of sufficient importance to be published in a separate number of their literary organ, La Revue Britannique, and to dwell upon it in all their political organs, as the production of an American who has been intrusted by his government with high diplomatic missions, and who, consequently, is better authority than an unhonoured citizen like myself, who have no claims to attention beyond those I can assemble in my argument.[28] The odds, as you will perceive, are greatly against me; for, in these countries, the public know little of the details of government, and it gives a high sanction to testimony of this nature to be able to say it comes from one, who is, or has been, connected with an administration.  Standing as I do, therefore, contradicted by the alleged opinion (true or false) of Mr. Rives, and by this statement of Mr. Harris, you will readily conceive that my situation here is not of the most pleasant nature.  Unsalaried and untrusted by my own Government, opposed, in appearance at least, by its agents, I am thrown, for the vindication of truth, completely on my own resources, so far as any American succour has been furnished; and am reduced to the narrow consolation of making this simple record of the facts, which, possibly, at some future day, may answer the purpose of an humble protest in favour of the right.

[Footnote 28:  The French writers, to make the most of their witness, exaggerated a little; for, at that time, Mr. Harris had never filled any higher diplomatic station than that of one left charge des affaires of the legation at St. Petersburg, during the absence of Mr. Adams at Ghent.  Shortly after the publication of this letter, however, he was appointed by the President and the Senate of the United States of America to represent it at the King of the French, as if expressly to give value to his testimony.]

This controversy has, at least, served to remove the mask from this Government, on the subject of its disposition towards America and her institutions.  To that pretended feeling I have never been even momentarily a dupe; but, failing of arguments—­for no talents or ingenuity, after all, can make the wrong the right—­most of the writers on the other side of the question have endeavoured to enliven their logic with abuse.  I do not remember anything, in the palmy days of the Quarterly Review, that more completely descended to low and childish vituperation than some of the recent attacks on America.  Much of what has been written is unmitigated fraud, that