author of their Declaration and Protest, had left America, when he knew that he was probably secured from challenge concerning the untruthfulness of whatever he should write, in that reply -- neither Samuel Seabury nor Luke Babcock had written anything concerning the political questions of that period ; 1 it was not thought they would do so; and there was no other person, in Westchester-eounty, whose pen promised trouble to the new-made leader, no matter how much that peculiar failing which had made his family conspicuous, throughout the Colony, 2 should be manifested in whatever he should write.

The relative merits of the two papers, the Declaration and Protest and the reply, will be very readily seen, by every careful reader. The author of the latter was very profuse in his very general charge of " falsities contained in this representation ; " but he failed to specify, even a single instance in which the former had presented an untruth ; and every one will perceive that he did not except, from the general impeachment, even those portions of the Declaration and Protest which agreed, in their recital of facts, with his own statement of those facts, contained in the official report of the proceedings of that Meeting, at the White Plains, written over his own signature, on the afternoon of the day on which the Meeting was held, and subsequently presented by him, to the Provincial Convention, as the Credentials through which he and his associates were admitted to seats in that body, as, nominally, a delegation from Westchester-county -- if the recital contained in the one was untruthful, therefore, the similar recital contained in the other was, necessarily, quite as untrustworthy as the other. He also impeached the " de- "cency" of what the Declaration and Protest contained ; but, again, he failed to specify in what their " indecency " consisted.