CORRESPONDENCE.[SINCEthe decease of the distinguished subject of these memoirs, several of his letters (some of which were never intended for the public eye) have found their way into the newspapers. As a laudable curiosity exists to know the general style of his correspondence, a few letters are subjoined, which will afford a pretty correct idea of the easy and familiar manner of his intercourse with personal friends. The unreserved manner in which he expresses his opinions upon topics which were commanding attention at the time, may be regarded as peculiarly one of his prominent characteristics, and one, too, which few individuals in political life seem anxious to emulate.—The first three letters were addressed to Robert Walsh,Jr.,Esq., formerly editor of theNational Gazette, but of late years the Paris correspondent of the New YorkJournal of Commerce, in which paper they originally appeared.]“WASHINGTON,6thSeptember, 1817.“MYDEARSIR: Having seen the second volume of the Register atMr.D. Brent’s, I was about to inquire at the book-stores for it, when a copy was left at my house, I did not know how, until I received your obliging favor of the29thulto. Although it found me engaged in an interesting course of reading, I did not hesitate to interrupt the progress of my studies, to peruse your introductory discourse.“I was much gratified in perceiving that you had undertaken the vindication of the captors of Andre, from the most indiscreet and unfounded attack ofCol.Talmage. Rarely, if ever, whilst presiding in theH.ofR., was I so much shocked as when he made it. It was so unnecessary, so unjust, and, I thought, was so much the result of a wish, on the part of the accuser, to announcehisparticipation in the concern of which he spoke. I really felt so transported with indignation, on the occasion, that I found myself, at one time, involuntarily rising from the Speaker’s chair, in defence of those injured men. I then wished that congress would guard against the unfavorable inference, which the future historian might possibly draw, from a rejection of their petition, by allowing them the solicited augmentation of their pensions; and I still regret it was not done.“I do not agree with all that you have said respecting the famous Compensation Act. The form was always objectionable with me, and I still think the per diem mode preferable. In England, formerly, the members of theH.of Commons receivedwages, (that was the technical term applied to the allowance to the members,) which were paid by the boroughs,&c., that elected them. When the countryhad increased in wealth, and Parliament had obtained greater political importance, opulent men offered to serve, without pay, and then the receipt of wages was gradually discontinued and finally abolished. In that country, of small territorial extent, where the aristocratic feature of the government and the consequent entails which exist on estates, will always keep up large fortunes, there never can be any considerable inconvenience in attending Parliament. But, you know, to attend that body is in fact, with the mass of the members, to be present only three or four times every session, when the great questions come up. Generally throughout the session there are not more than from fifty to one hundred members in attendance. But even in England, formerly so great, occasionally, was the reluctance to submit to the inconvenience of attending Parliament, that instances have occurred of compulsory attendance.“Every thing is otherwise here. We have happily no aristocracy, and no device for keeping estates in the possession of the same family for any length of time. The powerful operation of our statutes of distribution scatters the accumulated wealth of industry or of avarice. Fortunes are small, in the general, and will always continue so, whilst our present institutions exist. Our territory is of immense extent. The consequence is that he who happens to be a member of congress from a great distance, has to make vast and often ruinous sacrifices. Our government is yet in its infancy, and the novelty of the situation, the great excitement of the times, and other causes may have prevented us heretofore from experiencing much difficulty in getting competent members to serve. Young, however, as we are, and short as has been my service in the public councils, I have seen some of the most valuable members quitting the body, from their inability to sustain the weight of those sacrifices. And in process of time I apprehend this mischief will be more and more felt. Even now there are few, if any instances, of members dedicating their lives to the duties of legislation. Members stay a year or two, curiosity is satisfied, the novelty wears off; expensive habits are brought or are acquired; their affairs at home are neglected; their fortunes are wasting away, and they are compelled to retire. There are no sacrifices too great for one to make, when necessary, for his country.“You say that the competition would be too much if the compensation were high. Every demagogue would aspire to the honor. Our form of government, however, supposes a competence on the part of the electors to discriminate and to choose. And depend upon it that, in the general, in any such common scrambling as you suppose, talents and virtue will prevail. To suppose that they would not, is to arraign our system. But if there be danger arising from too much competition, the result of high pay, is there not on the other hand, equal or greater danger from insufficient competition, the result of inadequate pay? I confess that I would much rather see every man in the congressional district, aspiring to the honor ofrepresenting it, than to see such an arrangement of the pay, that only one or two persons could face the expense and sacrifice incident to a seat.“Do you not press the subject of Bonaparte too far? Fallen and captive, has he not some claim upon the magnanimity not only of his conquerors, but, during his imprisonment, upon cotemporary authors also? England has shown him none. All posterity will, I think, condemn her surrender of him to the allies, and her concurrence in his exile toSt.Helena. Chatham, or Fox, or even Pitt, would have permitted him, as he desired, to remain in England. Is it not to be apprehended that any animadversions upon him, at the present time, will indirectly conduce to sanction the principles of legitimacy and the conduct of the allies?“I ought to apologize for the unintended length of my letter. I do not often turn over the first side of the paper, and can only say that my having offended, in this instance, has proceeded from the respect and consideration in which you are held by“Yours, faithfully and cordially,“H. CLAY.“R. WALSH,JR.,ESQ.”[CONFIDENTIAL.]“WASHINGTON,18thFeb. ’25.“DEARSIR: I thank you for your prompt attention to the paragraph which I sent you, and for your friendly letter.“You did not like my Kremer Card. I was not surprised, but hear me. I was assailed from all quarters. The cannon of every man who would now, or four or eight years hence, be President, (except that ofMr.A.,) was directed against me. I heard it all, and saw every movement. I should have disregarded it, whilst the attack assumed the ordinary form of anonymous or even editorial commentary. But when a person was so far designated as to be elected to be amemberof theH.ofR.belonging to thePennsylvaniadelegation, it assumed a tangible shape. A crisis arose in my poor affairs. Silence and criminality would have been the same. And it seemed to me that I was called upon to take a step even of apparent rashness. I ought to have omitted the last sentence in the Card; but as to the rest, I yet approve of it. And still the reason, the philosophy, the religion of no man more decidedly condemns duelling than, I hope I may say, mine does. The corrective of that pernicious practice must be found in communities, not in individuals, at least in such humble ones as I am. When the public shall cease to stamp with dishonor the man who tamely submits to injurious imputations, duels will cease. I hope the sequel of that affair was more satisfactory to the northern public.“I have consented to go into the department of state, after much deliberation. They will abuse me for it. They would have abused me more if I had declined it. I shall carry into it zeal and industryonly. The other departments which are vacant byMr.Calhoun’s election to theV. P., andMr.Crawford’s retirement, remain to be filled, but I am not at liberty to indicate their probable incumbents.“An opposition is threatened; but there is no danger of any, unless the course of the Administration shall furnish just occasion for it, which we shall strive to prevent. What is now threatened, is the offspring of chagrin and disappointment. What will they oppose? If we go right, that will not, is it to be hoped, make them go wrong. An impartial trial and a just verdict are all that is demanded, and that the country will render, whatever the hopes of faction may inspire.“I am, with great regard,“Faithfully yours,“H. CLAY.“ROBERTWALSH,JR.,ESQ.”“WASHINGTON,25thApril, 1836.“DEARSIR: I duly received your favor of the18thinst.You do me the favor to desire an adequate notion of my services and views whilst I was in the department of state. I regret that the bad state of my health, and my various public duties here oblige me to be very brief.“Besides the discharge of the current duties of the office, I negotiated various treaties. Some of these (those for example with Austria and Mexico) were agreed upon, but not actually signed, and were subsequently concluded in the name of the succeeding administration.“In the treaty with Central America was first introduced the great principle, that the national and foreign vessels should be equally allowed to introduce into their respective countries merchandize without regard to itsorigin. The principle had been adopted in the convention with England of 1815, negotiated byMessrs.Adams, Gallatin and me, of permitting the vessels of the two countries to import the productions of thetwo countries, on terms of entire equality; but it was restricted to the productions ofG. B.and the U. S. It did not admit of an English vessel importing into the U. S. the produce of any country other thanG. B., norvice versa. By the treaty with Central America, which I negotiated, on the contrary, an American vessel may carry into its ports the produce of any country of the four quarters of the world, on the same terms as it can be imported by a national vessel, andvice versa. This has been a model treaty, which has been followed in several treaties afterwards negotiated.“My instructions toMr.Brown on our claims against France cost me much labor, and were favorably thought of by others.“But my great work was the preparation of the instructions intended for our commissioners who were to meet first at Panama and afterwards at Tacubaya. If you could take the trouble to read them, you would obtain a better conception of my views than any I can now give you, as to the liberal basis on which the commerce of theworld should be placed. I there argue and endeavor to have established the principle thatprivateproperty on the ocean shall enjoy the same safety and protection to which it is entitled on land. And all the maritime principles in favor of free trade, against spurious blockades,&c., for which we had so long and so earnestly contended, are sought to be established at the proposed congress.“These instructions are almost exclusively my sole work. Without consulting any body particularly, I engaged in their preparation, and afterwards submitted the draft of them to the President and his Cabinet. They run into about eighty pages of manuscript, and I do not think that the alterations which, on the scrutiny of these gentlemen, they underwent, amounted altogether to one page; and these related chiefly to the projected connexion between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. I was disposed to go a little farther than my colleagues.“The relations in which I stood to the Diplomatic Corps, during the whole ofMr.Adams’s administration, and to every member of it, were of the most cordial and friendly character. It was impossible, I think, that business could have been transacted more satisfactorily to all parties. I have reason to believe, that up to this moment, the members of that corps who were associated with me, retain lively recollections of our amicable feelings and intercourse.“I will not dwell on this subject: but must refer you, for any deficiencies, to my public acts and the transactions of the day.“I will add that I introduced into the Department, as vacancies from time to time occurred, (I created none) some most accomplished assistants, several of whom were found to be so necessary that they escaped the general proscription.“I think it very probable that your feelings towards me have been sometimes misunderstood and misrepresented. Certainly, in our personal intercourse, I never discovered any evidence of hostility or prejudice. Candor obliges me to say that I have sometimes seen in your paper what I thought bore testimony of an inimical spirit; but your frank assurance now convinces me that I was mistaken. We have been in the midst, during these late years, of the most exciting scenes in our public affairs. I do not much underrate the power which I was opposing—certainly not its disastrous tendency. I felt that I was struggling for the country, for its civil liberty, its institutions, its prosperity, its value. I felt that I had a good title to the support of all honorable and intelligent men. Perhaps I have been sometimes too sensitive, when I thought that support was not yielded, and have censured too hastily when I supposed a measure of zeal in the public cause was not displayed by others equal to my own. With best wishes for your health and prosperity, I am“Your friend and obedient servant,“H. CLAY.“R. WALSH,ESQ.”[The following private letter was written to several political friends in the state of New York, who wrote toMr.Clay in 1844 on the subject of emancipating his slaves. They expressed their high admiration of his character, their pleasure on learning that he had given freedom to his man Charles, and their desire that he would extend the same boon to all those who still remained on his hands. He replied as follows:]ASHLAND, 8Jan., 1845.Gentlemen,—I have perused your friendly letter in the spirit in which it was written. I am glad that the emancipation of my servant Charles, meets your approbation. A degree of publicity has been given to the fact, which I neither expected nor desired. I am not in the habit of making any parade of my domestic transactions, but since you have adverted to one of them, I will say that I had previously emancipated Charles’ mother and sister, and acquiesced in his father’s voluntary abandonment of my service, who lives with his wife near me. Charles continues to reside with me, and the effect of his freedom is no other than that of substituting fixed wages, which I now pay to him, for the occasional allowances and gratuities which I gave him.You express a wish that I would emancipate the residue of my slaves. Of these more than half are utterly incapable of supporting themselves, from infancy, old age, or helplessness. They are in families. What would they do if I were to send them forth on the world? Such a measure would be extremely cruel instead of humane. Our law does not admit of emancipation, without security being given that the freed slave shall not be a public charge.In truth, gentlemen, the question of my emancipating the slaves yet remaining with me, evolves many considerations of duty, relation and locality, of which, without meaning any disrespect to you, I think you are hardly competent to judge. At all events, I, who alone am responsible to the world, to God, and to my conscience, must reserve to myself the exclusive judgment.I firmly believe that the cause of the extinction of negro slavery, far from being advanced, has been retarded by the agitation of the subject at the North. This remark is not intended for those who, like you, are moved by benevolent impulses, and do not seek to gratify personal or political ambition.I am, with great respect,Your friend and obedient servant,H. CLAY.
[SINCEthe decease of the distinguished subject of these memoirs, several of his letters (some of which were never intended for the public eye) have found their way into the newspapers. As a laudable curiosity exists to know the general style of his correspondence, a few letters are subjoined, which will afford a pretty correct idea of the easy and familiar manner of his intercourse with personal friends. The unreserved manner in which he expresses his opinions upon topics which were commanding attention at the time, may be regarded as peculiarly one of his prominent characteristics, and one, too, which few individuals in political life seem anxious to emulate.—The first three letters were addressed to Robert Walsh,Jr.,Esq., formerly editor of theNational Gazette, but of late years the Paris correspondent of the New YorkJournal of Commerce, in which paper they originally appeared.]
“WASHINGTON,6thSeptember, 1817.
“MYDEARSIR: Having seen the second volume of the Register atMr.D. Brent’s, I was about to inquire at the book-stores for it, when a copy was left at my house, I did not know how, until I received your obliging favor of the29thulto. Although it found me engaged in an interesting course of reading, I did not hesitate to interrupt the progress of my studies, to peruse your introductory discourse.
“I was much gratified in perceiving that you had undertaken the vindication of the captors of Andre, from the most indiscreet and unfounded attack ofCol.Talmage. Rarely, if ever, whilst presiding in theH.ofR., was I so much shocked as when he made it. It was so unnecessary, so unjust, and, I thought, was so much the result of a wish, on the part of the accuser, to announcehisparticipation in the concern of which he spoke. I really felt so transported with indignation, on the occasion, that I found myself, at one time, involuntarily rising from the Speaker’s chair, in defence of those injured men. I then wished that congress would guard against the unfavorable inference, which the future historian might possibly draw, from a rejection of their petition, by allowing them the solicited augmentation of their pensions; and I still regret it was not done.
“I do not agree with all that you have said respecting the famous Compensation Act. The form was always objectionable with me, and I still think the per diem mode preferable. In England, formerly, the members of theH.of Commons receivedwages, (that was the technical term applied to the allowance to the members,) which were paid by the boroughs,&c., that elected them. When the countryhad increased in wealth, and Parliament had obtained greater political importance, opulent men offered to serve, without pay, and then the receipt of wages was gradually discontinued and finally abolished. In that country, of small territorial extent, where the aristocratic feature of the government and the consequent entails which exist on estates, will always keep up large fortunes, there never can be any considerable inconvenience in attending Parliament. But, you know, to attend that body is in fact, with the mass of the members, to be present only three or four times every session, when the great questions come up. Generally throughout the session there are not more than from fifty to one hundred members in attendance. But even in England, formerly so great, occasionally, was the reluctance to submit to the inconvenience of attending Parliament, that instances have occurred of compulsory attendance.
“Every thing is otherwise here. We have happily no aristocracy, and no device for keeping estates in the possession of the same family for any length of time. The powerful operation of our statutes of distribution scatters the accumulated wealth of industry or of avarice. Fortunes are small, in the general, and will always continue so, whilst our present institutions exist. Our territory is of immense extent. The consequence is that he who happens to be a member of congress from a great distance, has to make vast and often ruinous sacrifices. Our government is yet in its infancy, and the novelty of the situation, the great excitement of the times, and other causes may have prevented us heretofore from experiencing much difficulty in getting competent members to serve. Young, however, as we are, and short as has been my service in the public councils, I have seen some of the most valuable members quitting the body, from their inability to sustain the weight of those sacrifices. And in process of time I apprehend this mischief will be more and more felt. Even now there are few, if any instances, of members dedicating their lives to the duties of legislation. Members stay a year or two, curiosity is satisfied, the novelty wears off; expensive habits are brought or are acquired; their affairs at home are neglected; their fortunes are wasting away, and they are compelled to retire. There are no sacrifices too great for one to make, when necessary, for his country.
“You say that the competition would be too much if the compensation were high. Every demagogue would aspire to the honor. Our form of government, however, supposes a competence on the part of the electors to discriminate and to choose. And depend upon it that, in the general, in any such common scrambling as you suppose, talents and virtue will prevail. To suppose that they would not, is to arraign our system. But if there be danger arising from too much competition, the result of high pay, is there not on the other hand, equal or greater danger from insufficient competition, the result of inadequate pay? I confess that I would much rather see every man in the congressional district, aspiring to the honor ofrepresenting it, than to see such an arrangement of the pay, that only one or two persons could face the expense and sacrifice incident to a seat.
“Do you not press the subject of Bonaparte too far? Fallen and captive, has he not some claim upon the magnanimity not only of his conquerors, but, during his imprisonment, upon cotemporary authors also? England has shown him none. All posterity will, I think, condemn her surrender of him to the allies, and her concurrence in his exile toSt.Helena. Chatham, or Fox, or even Pitt, would have permitted him, as he desired, to remain in England. Is it not to be apprehended that any animadversions upon him, at the present time, will indirectly conduce to sanction the principles of legitimacy and the conduct of the allies?
“I ought to apologize for the unintended length of my letter. I do not often turn over the first side of the paper, and can only say that my having offended, in this instance, has proceeded from the respect and consideration in which you are held by
“Yours, faithfully and cordially,
“H. CLAY.
“R. WALSH,JR.,ESQ.”
[CONFIDENTIAL.]
“WASHINGTON,18thFeb. ’25.
“DEARSIR: I thank you for your prompt attention to the paragraph which I sent you, and for your friendly letter.
“You did not like my Kremer Card. I was not surprised, but hear me. I was assailed from all quarters. The cannon of every man who would now, or four or eight years hence, be President, (except that ofMr.A.,) was directed against me. I heard it all, and saw every movement. I should have disregarded it, whilst the attack assumed the ordinary form of anonymous or even editorial commentary. But when a person was so far designated as to be elected to be amemberof theH.ofR.belonging to thePennsylvaniadelegation, it assumed a tangible shape. A crisis arose in my poor affairs. Silence and criminality would have been the same. And it seemed to me that I was called upon to take a step even of apparent rashness. I ought to have omitted the last sentence in the Card; but as to the rest, I yet approve of it. And still the reason, the philosophy, the religion of no man more decidedly condemns duelling than, I hope I may say, mine does. The corrective of that pernicious practice must be found in communities, not in individuals, at least in such humble ones as I am. When the public shall cease to stamp with dishonor the man who tamely submits to injurious imputations, duels will cease. I hope the sequel of that affair was more satisfactory to the northern public.
“I have consented to go into the department of state, after much deliberation. They will abuse me for it. They would have abused me more if I had declined it. I shall carry into it zeal and industryonly. The other departments which are vacant byMr.Calhoun’s election to theV. P., andMr.Crawford’s retirement, remain to be filled, but I am not at liberty to indicate their probable incumbents.
“An opposition is threatened; but there is no danger of any, unless the course of the Administration shall furnish just occasion for it, which we shall strive to prevent. What is now threatened, is the offspring of chagrin and disappointment. What will they oppose? If we go right, that will not, is it to be hoped, make them go wrong. An impartial trial and a just verdict are all that is demanded, and that the country will render, whatever the hopes of faction may inspire.
“I am, with great regard,
“Faithfully yours,
“H. CLAY.
“ROBERTWALSH,JR.,ESQ.”
“WASHINGTON,25thApril, 1836.
“DEARSIR: I duly received your favor of the18thinst.You do me the favor to desire an adequate notion of my services and views whilst I was in the department of state. I regret that the bad state of my health, and my various public duties here oblige me to be very brief.
“Besides the discharge of the current duties of the office, I negotiated various treaties. Some of these (those for example with Austria and Mexico) were agreed upon, but not actually signed, and were subsequently concluded in the name of the succeeding administration.
“In the treaty with Central America was first introduced the great principle, that the national and foreign vessels should be equally allowed to introduce into their respective countries merchandize without regard to itsorigin. The principle had been adopted in the convention with England of 1815, negotiated byMessrs.Adams, Gallatin and me, of permitting the vessels of the two countries to import the productions of thetwo countries, on terms of entire equality; but it was restricted to the productions ofG. B.and the U. S. It did not admit of an English vessel importing into the U. S. the produce of any country other thanG. B., norvice versa. By the treaty with Central America, which I negotiated, on the contrary, an American vessel may carry into its ports the produce of any country of the four quarters of the world, on the same terms as it can be imported by a national vessel, andvice versa. This has been a model treaty, which has been followed in several treaties afterwards negotiated.
“My instructions toMr.Brown on our claims against France cost me much labor, and were favorably thought of by others.
“But my great work was the preparation of the instructions intended for our commissioners who were to meet first at Panama and afterwards at Tacubaya. If you could take the trouble to read them, you would obtain a better conception of my views than any I can now give you, as to the liberal basis on which the commerce of theworld should be placed. I there argue and endeavor to have established the principle thatprivateproperty on the ocean shall enjoy the same safety and protection to which it is entitled on land. And all the maritime principles in favor of free trade, against spurious blockades,&c., for which we had so long and so earnestly contended, are sought to be established at the proposed congress.
“These instructions are almost exclusively my sole work. Without consulting any body particularly, I engaged in their preparation, and afterwards submitted the draft of them to the President and his Cabinet. They run into about eighty pages of manuscript, and I do not think that the alterations which, on the scrutiny of these gentlemen, they underwent, amounted altogether to one page; and these related chiefly to the projected connexion between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. I was disposed to go a little farther than my colleagues.
“The relations in which I stood to the Diplomatic Corps, during the whole ofMr.Adams’s administration, and to every member of it, were of the most cordial and friendly character. It was impossible, I think, that business could have been transacted more satisfactorily to all parties. I have reason to believe, that up to this moment, the members of that corps who were associated with me, retain lively recollections of our amicable feelings and intercourse.
“I will not dwell on this subject: but must refer you, for any deficiencies, to my public acts and the transactions of the day.
“I will add that I introduced into the Department, as vacancies from time to time occurred, (I created none) some most accomplished assistants, several of whom were found to be so necessary that they escaped the general proscription.
“I think it very probable that your feelings towards me have been sometimes misunderstood and misrepresented. Certainly, in our personal intercourse, I never discovered any evidence of hostility or prejudice. Candor obliges me to say that I have sometimes seen in your paper what I thought bore testimony of an inimical spirit; but your frank assurance now convinces me that I was mistaken. We have been in the midst, during these late years, of the most exciting scenes in our public affairs. I do not much underrate the power which I was opposing—certainly not its disastrous tendency. I felt that I was struggling for the country, for its civil liberty, its institutions, its prosperity, its value. I felt that I had a good title to the support of all honorable and intelligent men. Perhaps I have been sometimes too sensitive, when I thought that support was not yielded, and have censured too hastily when I supposed a measure of zeal in the public cause was not displayed by others equal to my own. With best wishes for your health and prosperity, I am
“Your friend and obedient servant,
“H. CLAY.
“R. WALSH,ESQ.”
[The following private letter was written to several political friends in the state of New York, who wrote toMr.Clay in 1844 on the subject of emancipating his slaves. They expressed their high admiration of his character, their pleasure on learning that he had given freedom to his man Charles, and their desire that he would extend the same boon to all those who still remained on his hands. He replied as follows:]
ASHLAND, 8Jan., 1845.
Gentlemen,—I have perused your friendly letter in the spirit in which it was written. I am glad that the emancipation of my servant Charles, meets your approbation. A degree of publicity has been given to the fact, which I neither expected nor desired. I am not in the habit of making any parade of my domestic transactions, but since you have adverted to one of them, I will say that I had previously emancipated Charles’ mother and sister, and acquiesced in his father’s voluntary abandonment of my service, who lives with his wife near me. Charles continues to reside with me, and the effect of his freedom is no other than that of substituting fixed wages, which I now pay to him, for the occasional allowances and gratuities which I gave him.
You express a wish that I would emancipate the residue of my slaves. Of these more than half are utterly incapable of supporting themselves, from infancy, old age, or helplessness. They are in families. What would they do if I were to send them forth on the world? Such a measure would be extremely cruel instead of humane. Our law does not admit of emancipation, without security being given that the freed slave shall not be a public charge.
In truth, gentlemen, the question of my emancipating the slaves yet remaining with me, evolves many considerations of duty, relation and locality, of which, without meaning any disrespect to you, I think you are hardly competent to judge. At all events, I, who alone am responsible to the world, to God, and to my conscience, must reserve to myself the exclusive judgment.
I firmly believe that the cause of the extinction of negro slavery, far from being advanced, has been retarded by the agitation of the subject at the North. This remark is not intended for those who, like you, are moved by benevolent impulses, and do not seek to gratify personal or political ambition.
I am, with great respect,
Your friend and obedient servant,
H. CLAY.