-Caveat Lector-
Treason in America -- From Aaron Burr to Averell Harriman
ANTON CHAITKIN (C)1984
New Benjamin Franklin House
P. O. Box 20551
New York, New York 10023
ISBN 0-933488-32-7
--[7]--
PART II
The True History of the Civil War
-7-
How Boston's Brahmins Sought to Destroy the United States
In the spring of 1808, the future President of the United States, Senator
John Quincy Adams of Massachusetts, held an urgent and confidential meeting
with President Thomas Jefferson. Adams's message was that members of his own
party the New England Federalists, were engaged in a plot to bring about a
secession of the states of New England from the United States.(1)
Reduced to the most essential points, what Senator Adams revealed to
President Jefferson was the following: A group of leading merchant and
banking families of the Federalist Party in New England called the Essex
Junto, was working in close collaboration with agents of the British Secret
Intelligence Service (SIS) operating out of Boston. in their effort to bring
about an early secession these treasonous plotters were playing upon the
discontent caused by the President's total embargo against all foreign trade.
Adams advised the President to change the terms of the foreign-trade embargo,
to limit the prohibition on foreign trade only to trade with Britain and
France. It had been the naval forces of Britain and France which had been
preying among U. S. shipping. Jefferson accepted Adams's advice. The advice
successfully weakened the secessionists' organizing efforts for the moment.
This incident leads us directly to the true causes of the great civil war
which destroyed a half-million American lives during 1861-1865, equal to the
combined total U.S. deaths in World Wars I and II.
In the series of chapters composing the present, second section of our report
on Treason in America, we focus our attention on those leading New England
families which gave us such institutions as the Bank of Boston and such
notable figures as William and McGeorge Bundy today. We document the leading
features of their plot to destroy the United States, a plot which we trace
here from their effort to elect the traitor Aaron Burr President of the
United States, in 1800, into their role in creating the Confederacy from the
inside during the 1850s, in close collaboration with Britain's Lord
Palmerston and the British Secret Intelligence Service.
The general flavor of the New England plotters' outlook is shown by examining
sections of the correspondence among some of the leading members of the plot
during the years 1803-1804, four years before Senator Adams's report to
President Jefferson.
At the time Senator Adams delivered that report, leading members of the Essex
Junto were known to have included the following prominent personalities:
Massachusetts Senator George Cabot; the recently deceased Judge John Lowell
(ancestor of the Bundys) and his son, John ("The Rebel") Lowell; former
Secretary of State Timothy Pickering; merchant Stephen Higginson;
Massachusetts Supreme Court Justice Theophilus Parsons; and Aaron Burr's
brother-in-law, Judge Tapping Reeve of Litchfield, Connecticut. The
name"EssexJunto"wasderived from the fact that all of the leading plotters,
except Judge Reeve, were born north of Boston, in Essex County,
Massachusetts. It is from the correspondence of George Cabot, Timothy
Pickering, and Judge Reeve, that the following self-damning statements of the
plotters are taken.
George Cabot to Timothy Pickering, February 14, 1804:
At the same time that I do not desire a separation at this moment, I add that
it is not practicable without intervention of some cause which should be very
generally felt and distinctly understood as chargeable to the misconduct of
our southern masters . . . the essential alteration which may in the future
be made to amend our form of government will be the consequences of only a
great suffering, or the immediate effects of violence.... Separation will be
unavoidable, when our loyalty to the union is generally perceived to be the
instrument of debasement and impoverishment. If a separation should, by and
by, be produced by suffering, I think it might be accompanied by important
ameliorations of our theories.(2)
A picture of the fellow-plotter to whom George Cabot wrote those observations
is provided by excerpts from two items Timothy Pickering's correspondence.
The first is addressed one Richard Peters, and is dated December 24, 1803:
Although the end of all our Revolutionary labors and expectations is
disappointment, and all our fond hopes of republican happiness are vanity,
and the real patriots of '76 are overwhelmed by modern pretenders to that
character, I will not yet despair: I would rather anticipate a new
confederacy, exempt from the corrupt and corrupting influence of the
aristocratic Democrats of the South. There will be— and our children at
farthest will see it—a separation. The white and the black population will
mark the boundary. The British Provinces, even with the assent of Britain,
will become members of the Northern confederacy. . . "(3)
and, the second, to George Cabot, dated January 29, 1804:
I do not believe in the practicability of a long-continued union. A Northern
confederacy would unite congenial characters, and present a fairer prospect
of public happiness; while the Southern States, having similarity of habits,
might be left "to manage their affairs in their own way." . . . I greatly
doubt whether prudence should suffer the connection to continue much
longer.... But when and how is a separation to be effected? . . . If . . .
Federalism is crumbling away in New England, there is not time to be lost . .
. Its last refuge is New England; and immediate exertion, perhaps, its only
hope. It must begin in Massachusetts. The proposition would be welcomed in
Connecticut; and could we doubt of New Hampshire? But New York must be
associated; and how is her concurrence to be obtained? She must be made the
centre of the confederacy. Vermont and New Jersey would follow of course, and
Rhode Island of necessity. Who can be consulted, and who will take the
lead?(4)
>From the correspondence of plotter Tapping Reeve, to Connecticut Senator
Uriah Tracy, on February 7, 1804:
I have seen many of our friends; and all that I have seen, and most that I
have heard from, believe that we must separate, and that this is the most
favorable moment. The difficulty is, How is this to be accomplished?(5)
The immediate origin of this conspiracy, the Essex Junto, had been the
organizing activities of a topmost British SIS intelligence operative, Sir
John Robison, during the years 1796-1797. Robison, long a British spy and
diplomat in the Russian part of SIS's service, had been promoted to high rank
at the Edinburgh office of SIS, from whence he had been deployed to conduct
operations on the ground inside the United States. Although, as we shall see,
the kernel of the conspiracy had been New England partners of the Aaron Burr
network dating from the outbreak of the War of 1776- 1783--New England
families closely tied to the pro-British Tories during that war—it was
Robison's activities which aided most in crystallizing such treasonous
potentialities into the plot concocted during 1796-1797. From then, to the
present day, the family traditions and financial connections of those circles
have been intimately associated with the British Secret Intelligence Service
(SIS), and to the British East India Company and its spin-offs. Every step
taken by the traitors was taken in concert with Britain, and frequently also
in collaboration with powerful financier families of Venice, as well as such
Swiss families as the Mallet, de Neuflize, and Schlumberger.
The Eastern Establishment
Apart from these families whose names are still well-known today, the
terrible war of 1861-1865 was brought into being by other traitors, whose
names are generally unknown today, but who include nonetheless prominent
national figures of the United States in their time. These included men such
as John Slidell, the political boss of Louisiana, who was an important but
clandestine architect of the war.
Although this report is based on primary documents from the pens of the
principal figures of each part of the period covered, the truth of this
matter is systematically avoided in popular and university accounts of our
nation's history. What we are reporting is the actual history of the United
States during these periods, not the forgeries bought and paid for after the
fact by later generations of the guilty families, nor the fraudulent history
of the United States manufactured by such as Charles A. Beard, Walter
Lippmann, and Arthur Schlesinger.
We wish to stress once again, at this point, that what we are reporting is
not merely the truth about decisive aspects of the past history of our
nation. The same general philosophical world-out-look expressed by the
traitorous plotters of the 1776-1861 period, is the ruling philosophy of such
institutions as the famous New York Council on Foreign Relations today. The
plottings and projects today may be different than those of more than a
hundred years ago, but the philosophy governing the choice of such policies
and objectives remains, in all essentials, the same. The important fact is
not purely and simply that the families of those traitors of then are
dominant in the ranks of ruling families of our Eastern Establishment today.
The connection is not merely biological; in the greater part, these families
have transmitted the philosophical outlook under the treasonous projects of
the past into the mental life of their heirs of the present.
Not only is our Eastern Establishment of today a continuation of the
philosophical outlook of the traitors Burr and the "Essex Junto" of then, by
and large. These families and the new families, such as the Morgans and
Harrimans, recruited to enlarge their ranks since, have had a persistently
erosive influence upon our national institutions over the entire period since
the War of 1776-1783. Our government, our political parties, prevailing
policies in matters of law, our educational system, our news-media, our
public entertainments, and in general prevailing currents of popular opinion,
have all been cumulatively influenced by such erosive influence of this
powerful grouping within our national life. To understand what we as a nation
so often do to damage ourselves, we must understand this powerful grouping,
its origins, its philosophical outlook, its traditions, and its history.
The account we give is therefore shocking, but true, and also necessary and
long overdue.
We resume the account, picking up the thread in Boston, in the year 1800. In
the presidential election of that year, the Essex Junto, as part of the
British plots centered around Aaron Burr, had witnessed near-success of the
effort to make Aaron Burr President of the United States. Although Burr was
the vice-presidential running-mate of the Republican (Democratic-Republican
predecessor of the Democratic Party) Thomas Jefferson, the plotters had
rigged the election to the purpose of making Burr, not Jefferson, the elected
President. The plot had been foiled almost single-handedly by Alexander
Hamilton. Hamilton deplored Jefferson's policies, but regarded him as no
traitor, and vowed it a matter of the national security of the republic that
Jefferson, not Burr, be awarded the victory.
This defeat of Burr's ambition led into the events of 18031804, concerning
which John Quincy Adams wrote of "the design of certain leaders of the
Federal Party to effect a dissolution of the Union, and the establishment of
a Northern confederacy. This design had been formed in the winter of
1803-1804.... That project . . . had gone to the length of fixing upon a
military leader for its execution.... "(6) The central feature of the
plotting referenced in cited correspondence of the plotters themselves, was
to secure Burr's election as the Governor of the State of New York. Burr
would then set up a breakaway Northern confederacy of New York, New Jersey,
the New England states, and, if possible, also Pennsylvania. Hamilton again
intervened, by wrecking Burr's reputation, and pamphleteering to expose the
threat to the Union. When Burr lost the election, he challenged Hamilton to
the famous duel, and killed him.
The new plottings of the Essex Junto in 1807-1808 were dampened when John
Quincy Adams exposed his fellow-Federalists to President Jefferson.. It was
only a delay. More treason was soon to come.
Britain escalated its war on U.S. commerce, seizing U.S. ships and taking
thousands of U.S. sailors as virtual British slaves. The election of the
"warhawks," Kentucky's Henry Clay and South Carolina's John Calhoun, in 1812,
enabled the patriots of the nation to force a war against Britain upon the
most-reluctant administration of President Madison. The powerful, Jacobin
figure of the Swiss, Albert Gallatin, within the administration, was de facto
a British Secret Intelligence agent, as he showed himself at many points
during the war itself. President Madison's wife, Dolly, had been a
hand-picked selection of Aaron Burr, himself. It was the newly elected Henry
Clay, promptly made Speaker of the House of Representatives, who forced the
prosecution of the war on a most-reluctant administration, and the small, but
able U. S. Navy which swept the mammoth British sea power from much of the
Atlantic Ocean, securing the Malvinas Islands to the future nation of
Argentina, and forcing the British to make peace in 1815.
For about two years, beginning with the Declaration of War on June 12, 1812,
the Essex Junto shamelessly, publicly sabotaged the war-effort of the United
States. They blocked recruitment and deployment of troops, they threatened
those who purchased U. S. government bonds, while raising funds for, and
smuggling money and war-materiel to the enemy forces operating in Canada.
President Madison alluded to the treasonous antics of the Boston gang in his
Second Inaugural Address of March 4, 1813. In this address, he attacked the
intrigues of "British commanders": "Now we find them, in further contempt of
the modes of honorable warfare, supplying the place of a conquering force by
attempts to disorganize our political society, to dismember our confederated
Republic."(7)
The Essex Junto was busily engaged with its British masters once again. They
corroborated the President's cautious allusion during the course of 1814. The
Junto called for a convention to be held at Hartford, Connecticut, where the
"grievances" of the New England states might be crystallized into forceful
anti-governrnent acts on a regionwide, or "sectional" basis.
Before this Hartford Convention could be convened, Philadelphia's Mathew
Carey dropped a political bomb on the Junto, with the first publication of a
book entitled The Olive Branch. Carey was a leading figure of the early
history of our republic. An Irish republican fleeing British dogs, he arrived
in Paris during the War of 1776-1783 to enter into a close collaboration with
Dr. Benjamin Franklin. He settled in Philadelphia, promoting Franklin's
scientific and technological projects there, and becoming a leading figure of
the IJ.S. secret-intelligence service, as well as the leading U. S. economist
of the post-1815 period. Carey's The Olive Branch proposed bipartisan action
by the patriots of both parties, and detailed with cruel and elaborated
accuracy the treasonous activities of the Boston crowd, among others.
For the moment, Carey's book sent the traitors scuttling into quiet corners.
The Hartford Convention occurred, in December 1814, but the northern
secessionist movement was thoroughly discredited. The Convention, chaired by
George Cabot, held only secret sessions. The inconsequential resolutions
published by the Convention were disregarded, as the war ended weeks later.
Thereafter, popular opinion of the United States everywhere equated the
Hartford Convention with treason, until the 1830s Nullification Movement in
South Carolina revived the Hartford Convention as a source of precedent for
new efforts to destroy the Union.
The letters referenced above were later published by John Quincy Adams's
grandson, Henry Adams, during the 1870s, in his Documents Relating to New
England Federalism. Although this collection was edited by a Henry Adams who
was himself a notorious anglophile, at political odds with his famous
grandfather, that editing does not conceal what is most essential. The
documentation shows the persistence of the disunion project, over the span of
a decade. It shouts also that this treason was not caused by any sectional
special interest of some part of the nation, nor for any reason of domestic
issues at all. The inspiration and guidance of the plot was not American in
origin. The plotters were determined to stop the American experiment in
constitutional federal government.
What were the plotters' motives? Why did they commit themselves to so
blatantly treasonous an enterprise? We shall come to that matter in due
course within the report. George Cabot provides a hint in his cited letter to
Timothy Pickering of February 14, 1804:
All the evils you describe and many more are to be apprehended; but I greatly
fear that a separation would beno remedy, because *the source of them is in
the political theories of our country and in ourselves*.... *We are
democratic altogether;* and I hold democracy, in its natural operation, to be
the *government of the worst*. . . . At the same time that I do not desire a
separation at this moment, I add that *it is not practicable* without
intervention of some cause which should be very generally felt and distinctly
understood as chargeable to the misconduct of our southern masters.... If no
man in New England could vote for legislators who was not possessed in his
own right of two thousand dollars value in land, we could do something
better; but neither this nor other material improvement can be made by fair
consent of the people. I incline to the opinion that the essential
alterations which may in future be made to amend our form of government will
be the consequences only of great suffering, or the immediate effects of
violence....(8) [Emphasis in original.]
To round out the state of mind of the plotters of 1803-1804, the following
passage of a letter from Stephen Higginson to Timothy Pickering on March 17,
1804 suffices:
It would be imprudent even to discuss the question, we must wait the effects
of still greater outrage and insult from those in power before we prepare for
the only measure which can save the New England States from the snares of
Virginia . . . without some favorable events, the democrats will succeed
another year, and we shall be revolutionized, and the other States will
follow.(9)
The state of mind reflected in this correspondence, most notably the features
of the George Cabot item whose key passages are noted above, for that reason,
is best appreciated by reference to Sir John Robison's Proofs of a
Conspiracy, 1797, [Roads End - This is one ‘fact’ that I, myself, am checking
on, It is my understanding that , that John Robinson(author of Proofs) was a
professor in Scotland, If this is true and they are one in the same, it makes
for a very interesting stew pot.Hmmmm?] later republished with enthusiastic
endorsement by the John Birch Society(10) in the 1960s. In modern language,
Robison "brainwashed" President John Adams and many others, into believing
that the French government of Lazare Carnot, which had crushed the Jacobins,
was complicit in conduiting the Jacobin insurrections of Albert Gallatin et
al. into the United States. In fact, the British, together with the
suppressed Jesuits and the Swiss bankers allied to London, had created and
directed the Jacobins. By aid of the lying information as to the foreign
source of the Jacobin insurrections inside the U.S.A., Robison et al. were
able to crystallize the anti-democratic tendencies among the New England
crowd, to the effect which Cabot's letter above echoes most clearly. In
consequence, the Essex Junto became the foremost backers of the same Gallatin
as a member of the Jefferson and Madison cabinets! Sic transit gloria Boston.
Over the interval between those letters of 1804 and the 1813-1814 period, the
process leading toward the Newburyport plotting of the 1861 breakup of the
Union took clearer form in the correspondence of the plotters. The plan which
was to emerge during the 1840s and 1850s was only a hint by 1813-1814, but
the hint is there. Consider these passages from a letter of Timothy
Pickering, dated July 4, 1813, to George Logan:
If the Southern States should ever open their eyes to see that their real
interest is closely connected with that of the other Atlantic States, and, by
a union with them in apportioning the public burdens, lay an equitable share
of them on the Western States, that moment the latter will declare off, take
to themselves the Western lands, and leave the enormous war debt they have
occasioned on the shoulders of the Atlantic States.... if I should reach
fourscore years, I may survive the present Union. Entertaining that opinion,
I cannot think, of course, that a separation at this time would be an evil.
On the contrary, I believe an immediate separation would be a real blessing
to the "good old thirteen states." . . . I throw out this idea for the
consideration of yourself and [name edited out], to whom I request you to
mention it. "(11)
The idea of conspiring with elements of the "Southern States" to arrange a
dissolution of the Union out of common, if skewed self-interests in such an
outcome, was beginning to emerge in the thinking of the plotters at this
point in their search for a dissolution of the republic. It would not be
until the Scottish Rite Freemasonry, which had taken over Boston, in
opposition to Franklin's Free and Accepted Freemasonry, spread deeply
throughout the southern states, that the working basis for such a plot could
emerge as a well-defined proposition. The impulse in that direction was,
however, already there.
The last in this sampling of treasonous plotters' correspondence is something
shaken out of McGeorge Bundy's family tree. It is a passage from a letter,
dated December 3, 1814, from John Lowell, nicknamed "The Rebel," to Timothy
Pickering. The writer of the following passage was the son of Judge John
Lowell, and the chief public spokesman of the Essex Junto's anti-war movment
of the 1812-1814 war with Britain, the "Peace Party," and the author of the
pamphlets issued on behalf of that "Peace Party"—the Tom Hayden of 1814, so
to speak. He was also the leading spokesman for disunion ideology at Harvard
University, and performed the same specialized role in that curious Boston
concoction called the Unitarian Church:
. . . On the subject of the Convention at Hartford . . . my feelings ... I
perceive, are very similar to yours.... I gave great offense during the
sitting of our legislature by openly opposing the calling [of] a convention .
. . until I explained my reasons, which were that I was convinced that the
convention would not go far enough, and that the first measure ought to be to
recommend to the States to pass laws to prevent our resources in men and
money to be withdrawn.
In short, to prohibit support from the States for conduct of an openly
declared war of the United States against a mortal adversary! The
letter-writer continues:
. . .The people en masse will act in six or twelve months more....
People . . . pretend to fear a civil war, if we assert our rights.... The
wrath of the Southern States ... is too ludicrous to require an answer. Under
the best circumstances, it would be a pretty arduous undertaking for all the
Southern states to attempt the conquest of New England; but reduced as they
now are to indigence, it would be more than Quixotic.
What a satire it is that the moment the British take possession of any part
of our country, and relieve it from the yoke of its own government, its
inhabitants are happy and grow rich! Its lands rise in value, every species
of property is enhanced in price, and the people deprecate the prospect of
being relieved by their own government. Yet such is the fact in the two lower
counties of this State.
Let no man fear the discontents of our own people. They will hail such events
as blessings. (12)
Before tracing the relevant events which were to follow the abortive Hartford
Convention, we review some of the principal characters of the treasonous
circle we have now broadly defined. We shall review summarily the matter of
the curiously gothic community called Newburyport and the quality of that
fabled species known around the world as the "Boston Brahmins."
pps. 95-108
--(notes)--
1. Documents Relating to New England Federalism See also Young, Andrew
M., The American Statesman(2l: A Political{H1story . ., published by N.C.
Miller, New Yolk, I862; pp. 431-458. Young demonstrates (p. 431-439)
that a forgery of Thomas Jefferson's views was produced after his death,
to injure John Quincy Adams' reputation,. to protect the Boston traitors,
and perhaps most important, to falsely impute to Jefferson anti-Union views.
2. Documents Relating to New England Federalism, pp. 346-349.
3. ibid. D. 338.
4. ibid, pp. 338-342.
5. ibid, pp. 342-343.
6. ibid, pp. 52, 56.
7. Inaugural Addresses of the Presidents of the United States, House Document
91-142; United States Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C. 1969. n.
27.
8. See footnote 2.
9. Documents Relating to New England Federalism, p. 361.
10. Robison, John, Proofs of a Conspiracy, 1798 edition printed by George
Forman, New York, reprinted by Western Islands, Belmont Massachusetts. Thomas
Jefferson, in his retirement, roundly contradicted the Robison thesis by
saying that the British ran the ("left-wing") anarchists in the French
Revolution, and were running the Boston ("right-wing") insurrectionists in
the period of the War of 1812:
"The foreigner gained time to anarchise by gold the government he could not
overthrow by arms, to crush in their own councils the genuine republicans, by
the fraternal embraces of exaggerated and hired pretenders, and to turn the
machine of Jacobinism from the change to the destruction of order; and in the
end, the limited monarchy [the republicans] had secured was exchanged for the
unprincipled and bloody tyranny of Robespierre.... "
The British have hoped more in their Hartford Convention. Their fears of
republican France being now done away, they are directed to republican
America, and they are playing the same game for disorganization here which
they played in your country. The Marats, the Dantons, and Robespierres of
Massachusetts are in the same pay, under the same orders, and making the same
efforts to anarchise us, that their prototypes in France did there.
"—Jefferson to the Marquis de Lafayette, Feb. 14, 1815, The Writings of
Thomas Jefferson, Vol. X1V. pp. 246-251.
11. Documents Relating to New England Federalism, p. 391.
12. ibid, p 410 ff.
--cont--
Aloha, He'Ping,
Om, Shalom, Salaam.
Em Hotep, Peace Be,
Omnia Bona Bonis,
All My Relations.
Adieu, Adios, Aloha.
Amen.
Roads End
Kris
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
