I more valued than that of General Jackson. * * * * * * * * * I owe it to my character to make another observation.  Had I ever known, or even suspected, that General Jackson believed I had been sent to him by Mr. Clay or his friends, I should immediately have corrected his erroneous impression, and thus prevented the necessity for this most unpleasant explanation. * * * * * * * I had no authority from Mr. Clay, or his friends, to propose any terms to General Jackson in relation to their votes, nor did I ever make any such proposition.”

This statement fully and triumphantly exonerated Mr. Clay, Mr. Adams, and their friends, from the charge of “bargain” and “corruption,” which had been so boldly made and widely disseminated.  The only witness ever brought upon the stand to support such an allegation, asserted, in a manner the most positive and decisive, the entire innocence of the parties implicated.

That Mr. Clay, in throwing his influence in behalf of Mr. Adams, was but following out a resolution formed long before he had any opportunity of communication with Mr. Adams or his friends, on the subject, is proved by the following extract of a letter from a gentleman in Lexington, Ky., to the editors of the National Intelligencer, dated March 21, 1825:—­

“At different times, before Mr. Clay left this place for Washington, last fall, I had conversations with him on the subject of the choice of a President by the House of Representatives.  In all of them, he expressed himself as having long before decided in favor of Mr. Adams, in case the contest should lie between that gentleman and General Jackson.  My last interview with him was, I think, the day before his departure, when he was still more explicit, as it was then certain that the election would be transferred to that tribunal, and highly probable that he would not be among the number returned.  In the course of this conversation, I took occasion to express my sentiments with respect to the delicate and difficult circumstances under which he would be placed.  He remarked that I could not more fully apprehend them than he did himself; but that nothing should deter him from the duty of giving his vote; and that no state of things could arise that would justify him in preferring General Jackson to Mr. Adams, or induce him to support the former.  So decisive, indeed, were his declarations on this subject, that had he voted otherwise than he did, I should have been compelled to regard him as deserving that species of censure which has been cast upon him for constantly adhering to an early and deliberate resolution.”

It was thought, by some of Mr. Clay’s friends, that he erred in judgment in accepting the office of Secretary of State, as it would tend to strengthen his enemies in their efforts to fix upon him the charge of corruption.  Among those entertaining this opinion was Mr. Crawford, himself one of the three presidential candidates returned to the House of Representatives.  In a letter to Mr. Clay he says:—­