Diary of Charles Francis Adams, volume 6
1835-06-23
Not being satisfied with my new draught of No. 3 I began to write it over again but desisted to go to the Office. The first number of the Appeal from the new to the old Whigs was published this morning in both the Advocate and the Centinel. In the latter with a counteracting Commentary on the part of the Editor, which only betrays his utter incompetency to deal with the subject. On the whole, so far I am satisfied.1
164Home where I wrote as fast as I could for the purpose of getting the Article done, but I could not succeed, before dinner time came and Mr. Hallett with it. He seemed far more awkward than I had expected and it satisfies me of the origin of all his radical tendencies.
We left town shortly after dinner and spent the Afternoon at Quincy in conversation with my father. The subject of general politics. And some little reference to the probable effect of my numbers. My father is still impressed with an idea that Mr. Webster must be drawn out, but I think silence is the word. We returned home so late that it was nearly ten o’clock before I reached my study.
CFA’s “An Appeal from the New to the Old Whigs,” which is an historical examination and denial of the constitutionality of Webster’s position on the Executive Patronage Bill, and which he signed “A Whig of the Old School,” was published in eight installments, virtually simultaneously, in the Columbian Centinel and the Daily Advocate. In the Centinel: No. 1, 23 June, p. 2, cols. 3–4, with editorial comment, col. 1; No. 2, 30 June, p. 2, cols. 3–4, with comment, col. 1; No. 3, 14 July, p. 2, cols. 4–6, with comment, col. 1; No. 4, 17 July, p. 2, cols. 4–5; No. 5, signed “A Whig Antimason,” 21 July, p. 2, cols. 3–4, with comment, col. 2; No. 6, 28 July, p. 2, cols. 4–5, with comment, col. 1; No. 7, 31 July, p. 2, cols. 3–4; No. 8, 5 Aug., p. 2, cols. 1–2. In the Advocate: No. 1, 23 June, p. 2, cols. 1–2; No. 2, 30 June, p. 2, cols. 1–2; No. 3, 7 July, p. 2, cols. 1–3, with comment, col. 4; No. 4, 17 July, p. 2, cols. 1–3, with comment, “most forcible paper ... closely logical, and wholly unanswerable,” col. 3; No. 5, 21 July, p. 2, cols. 1–3; No. 6, 28 July, p. 2, cols. 1–2; No. 7, 31 July, p. 2, cols. 1–3; No. 8, 4 Aug., p. 2, cols. 1–3, with comment, col. 3.
The series was also carried in at least two other Massachusetts antimasonic newspapers: We, the People in Bridgewater, “at the request of a number of our subscribers,” beginning with the issue of 17 July and continuing on each Friday thereafter through 4 Sept.; and the weekly Concord Freeman, commencing on 8 Aug. and continuing through 19 September.
The attention won by what was CFA’s major literary effort to date led him to publish the whole as a pamphlet, using the same title and indication of authorship (Boston: Russell, Odiorne & Co., 1835; see below, entries for 17 Aug.–30 Sept.
passim). Following the appearance of the pamphlet, the Washington Globe reprinted the full text; see below, entry for 26 October.