The National Intelligencer And Washington Advertiser

FOR THE NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER
Mr. SMITH,

An anonymous writer in your paper of Feb. 1st. has repeated his attack upon Mr. Tracy respecting document No. 8. which accompanied the President's message, and contains a statement of the business in the federal courts.

When Mr. Tracy is attacked by name, and in his official conduct is accused of "palpable errors," he claims the right of self defence; and if your press is open for the attack, he expects it will, a fortiori, admit the defence.

The President in his message, speaking of congress says, "and that they may be able to judge of the proportion which the institution bears to the business it has to perform, I have caused to be procured from the several States, and now lay before congress an exact statement of all the causes decided since the first establishment of the courts, and of those depending when additional courts and judges were brought in to their aid."

The two prominent points are, the causes decided, and those depending. Upon a cursory view of the document, Mr. Tracy discovered several important errors in both.

In the debate, he mentioned, Maryland as entirely omitted, and the causes in Tennessee, Virginia, and North-Carolina, as erroneously stated, to the amount of 5 or 600: and added, that there were errors also in the statements of New-York and Massachusetts. In your paper of the 25th January, an anonymous writer has given to these declarations of Mr. Tracy a flat denial, and further has made a bold assertion, that the omissions stated in the debate, were actually and visibly contained in the very pages of the document referred to by Mr. Tracy. In your paper of the 29th of January, by an exemplification of the document itself, it is shown that Mr. Tracy, had stated the mistakes correctly, and that in addition to them, the causes in the district of South-Carolina were erroneously stated.

This exemplification was too forcible to be flatly denied, even by this anonymous writer, yet, anxious to say the last word, has come forth in the paper of Feb. 1st. with some curious remarks, which excite pity rather than indignation.

His first remarks were derived, he says, from an examination in the secretary of State's office before it was undertaken to lay these documents before the public. As Mr. Tracy had nothing to guide him but the document itself, as laid before the public, and although this writer, in his remarks of the 25th of January, made a direct reference to the pages of the document, yet, nor he says, he was not guided by it at all. but by previous information, owing to his intimacy with the office of state; he is requested now to look at the document which has been undertaken to be laid before the public, and he will discern that Mr. Tracy was correct.

Mr. Tracy has neither been detected nor guilty of "palpable errors" with respect to Virginia and North Carolina; the errors are precisely as he stated them to be in the debate; he has set up no "new charge" against them; they are, (as at first alleged) manifest on the face of the document.

Maryland is entirely omitted, and Tennessee and New-York incorrect as to depending causes. Virginia, North-Carolina, Massachusetts and South-Carolina, are instances of error in respect to decided causes; and when it was discovered that there were many errors in the document, Mr. Tracy thought its authenticity was shaken, and that it became of no use as an "exact statement" even as to causes depending at the institution of the new courts. After being driven from every subterfuge, as to the correctness of the document No. 8, it is now acknowledged to be a little defective; but it is owing to a naughty clerk, and not to the President. Pray, sir, who has attributed these mistakes to the President? Not Mr. Tracy surely.

But this writer has made one marvelous discovery how to palliate mistakes, and that is to deduct one from another, and acknowledge only the balance. It will easily be seen that the mistakes in one state, if amended, can never rectify those in another, or have the smallest influence upon them.

It might possibly show, though in this case it does not, that there was no intention to deceive; but it will be remembered that no intentional error was charged upon any man. Let this writer beware, lest the document be in more peril from its defender than it can be from any assailant. The researches have already brought to light not only a little more than his balance of 100 suits, but a great deal more. This writer says, that this document states the number of depending causes in each district in exact conformity to the returns of clerks, and that care was bestowed upon this statement. How was Mr. Tracy to know all this? His means of knowledge must be derived from the document itself, and that he found apparently and really erroneous, both in respect to depending and decided causes; the only two points of use, for which it was produced by the President.

One word as to the errors being chargeable upon the President: The words of his message are, "I have caused to be procured and now lay before Congress, an exact statement, &c. The statement proves not to be "exact" but erroneous; was it some naughty clerk who penned this part of the message, and the President, being so hurried that he could not look over every word of it, thus permitted it to go forth? Such defenders are the worst of enemies, let the writer beware.

Feb. 5, 1802.