.MTA2NA.NzIzMTU

made by the conferees. In opening the 1st charge, the writer says, "while the ink with which the conferees thought proper to subscribe their agreement, was hardly dry, -- Mr John Ross -- added such parts of sentences as I have included in brackets." A formidable charge! but the writer speedily furnishes an acquittal. "It is true" he says, "Mr John Ridge, from motives truly conciliatory & patriotic," -- -- "agreed that the additions should be made." "It was done" he also adds, "with the presumption that his associates would, for the sake of good understanding, waive the matter; which undoubtedly they would have done, if an infraction of a far more important nature, had not subsequently been committed upon the agreement by the other party." The 2d Charge, is thus vehemently introduced. "did he comply with all its essential provision? -- What right had he to add one to the number which had been agreed upon? What right had he to say that seventeen should be appointed, when the conferees, the proper representatives of the two parties, had settled on the number sixteen? Upon those violations, it," (the agreement or compromise), "became null and void." In his zeal to criminate Mr Ross, the writer seems to have assumed a false criterion, which led him to a false conclusion. He ascribes, to the conferees, attributes which they did not possess. They held no powers beyond those of a select committee, to prepare a certain matter of briefings for the consideration and action of the Council, subject to their confirmation, rejection or revision. When presented to Mr Ross, the paper in question was imperfect and immature, as appears upon the face of it. Neither Mr Ross nor the Counsel were committed to it. So far from its being, to the letter, binding on the Council, as it came out of the hand of the Conferees, it possessed no validity at all, until sanctioned by that body. The conferees having agreed on terms of remediation, Mr