A letter to the author of the pamphlet called An answer [sic] to the…A letter to the author of the pamphlet called An answeer [sic] to the…

In Page 58, you charge us with treating you in a most unjust and injurious Manner, in those Words in our Defence, Indeed they proposed that the Association should be called together at Springfield. when they came up, to give them their Reasons, &c. And then saying this upon it, But this, in our Judgment, would have made an odd Appearance, for our Association to be called together from all Parts of the County to appear before them, to give an Account of ourselves to them, submitting our own Conduct as well as Mr Breck's Case to their Judgment. All the Representation that we here make of what you did is in these Words, Indeed they proposed that the Association should be called together when they came up to give them their Reasons, &c And what follows is plainly expressed, not as what you said, but as of our Sense what our complying with your Proposal would be in effect; and we think still that our Sense of the Matter was right, not withstanding your Letter's being writ in respectful Terms, which we don't deny. We say nothing of your writing in an assuming Way as you express, nor do we in any wise represent you as so writing, unless giving an Account of our Sense (not of the Way of proposing) but of the Thing proposed, be to represent you as writing in an assuming Way: The Thing proposed might be assuming, tho' not the Way of proposing; you might have said you would rise up before the hoary Head, and used many other respectful Terms, if you had writ to Mr. Williams of Hatfield to come down to Springfield to do the meanest Office for you: But we think our Sense of your Proposal was right; if we had answered your Desire we must have come to you not as being Judges ourselves, but to appear before them that were so; you did not propose that we should have any Hand in the Judgment; and therefore what could we have to do, who had ourselves been before concerned in the Case, and had had it referred to us, and had acted and taken some Steps as Judges in it, but only to give an Account of Things relating to the Case before you as the final Judges? And this, whatever soft Terms you may put it in, would have been in effect to appear before ⟨p. 51⟩you, submitting our own Conduct to your Judgment: How is it possible it should be otherwise?

In Page 58, you charge us with treating you in a most unjust and injurious Manner, in those Words in our Defence, Indeed they proposed that the Association should be called together at Springfield. when they came up, to give them their Reasons, &c. And then saying this upon it, But this, in our Judgment, would have made an odd Appearance, for our Association to be called together from all Parts of the County to appear before them, to give an Account of ourselves to them, submitting our own Conduct as well as Mr Breck's Case to their Judgment. All the Representation that we here make of what you did is in these Words, Indeed they propos'd that the Association should be called together when they came up to give them their Reasons, &c And what follows is plainly expressed, not as what you said, but as of our Sense what our complying with your Proposal would be in effect; and we think still that our Sense of the Matter was right, not withstanding your Letter's being writ in respectful Terms, which we don't deny. We say nothing of your writing in an assuming Way as you express, nor do we in any wise represent you as so writing, unless giving an Account of our Sense (not of the Way of proposing) but of the Thing proposed, be to represent you as writing in an assuming Way: The Thing proposed might be assuming, tho' not the Way of proposing; you might have said you would rise up before the hoary Head, and used many other respectful Terms, if you had writ to Mr. Williams of Hatfield to come down to Springfield to do the meanest Office for you: But we think our Sense of your Proposal was right; if we had answered your Desire we must have come to you not as being Judges ourselves, but to appear before them that were so; you did not propose that we should have any Hand in the Judgment; and therefore what could we have to do, who had ourselves been before concerned in the Case, and had had it referred to us, and had acted and taken some Steps as Judges in it, but only to give an Account of Things relating to the Case before you as the final Judges? And this, whatever soft Terms you may put it in, would have been in effect to appear before