Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1804-06-20

if in the great delicacy, and tender friend.
4y forbeacaacr, OF this very liberal and can.
did By-Staoder, he should have hereafter
TO behold full display of these things, in
al. The magni.iceace q, their real I1lanY OF
character, he viii then be SO chdrliabiy
good also, as 10 remember, what very wise
anu able advocates OF such chafac)ers, have
thus raked them up f;0m the ashes III those
family vaul.s, where it would nc better for
some Others IS welt as the author of the
Ghost of Fame and Americanus, that their
labors Should have been forever i'll silence
buried.
But, waving all this very Improbable
and embarrassing part OF the subject for
the present, come next 10 the main Oh
Jects of the BY SANDERS publication ;
from which, I make no doubt, AIr. Plea
SAINTS, you think you have been too long
and 100 infinitely detained already. In
the commencement; of this part OF his pub
lication, he says much about the ".talSe-
hood and malice" OF the statement in the
Washington Federailst; but in all this |
beg you to observe, he contents himself
with general assertions. He does not con.
descend to mention one specific error,
whereby the writer Of that statement might
have been enabled 10 deny, or even &C
know edge and CORE 4 il: bat goes on to
make new statement of his own, from
facts, in some instances existing IN other
cau.es, but for the most part which have
an existence 40 where bul in the most pre-
meditaled and papahle design to deceive,
InIslead or confuse the public attention, TO
public and penal prosecution, which he
calls an entire private affair and, 10 give
1t which appearance, he blends it with two
private suits III Chancery, not yet decid-
ed.
That those two cases and the penal &C
ton stili pending against Sneed, for sell
ing the land in dispute TO Johnson, were
not made a part OF that first statement,
will readily be acknowledged and "the
imprepreiy of provoking discussion in
any case existing before a court of Iustice,"
mentioned by the author, gave them what
ought TO have been, not only a suflicien
reason, but proper example. Inas much.
however, as it is highly improper in the
friends OF ore party in Court, and that too
AN Influential and powerful party, to en-
deavor to prejudice the public mind, or ia
terest the feelings of such court OF i were
possible to enlist such feelings by The
coarsest daupings Of fldttery) against the
most entirely helpless and fliendless, pr
waite individuals; IT becomes the duty oil
every honest and impartial man TO lend
his aid i'll warding off, IN time, such pre-
medt2tcd and improperly conducted ef
forts, 10 destroy such individuals. Lug
ged thus then, into those actions in chan
Gerry, which this mighty BY Stander makes
the bu!wark of his great champions bril-
llanl merits, in this very noble endeavor
TO ruin two of his poor and ignorant neigh
bors let us examine a little what is to be
extracted from these sources.
In the first place, the BY -Stander tells
us, that the 100 acres OF land in dispute,
was Z" sold by Peter Jefferson, the father
of the plaintiff, to James Spiers ;" and
goes on TO insmuate that the tile had been
withheld by the plaintiff, contrary to his
fathers will, on account of the non. pay
ment Of The purchase money: whereas,
the fact is, the miserable spot, then scarce.
~ rth any thing, was universally under
stot to have been free gift TO Ja.ses
Spiers by old Mr.. Jefferson, who it is not
denied, but admitted, was a benevolent,
worthy and neighborly man; such one
as would not himself have taken SO mise
Fable an advantage OF two iatligent per.
sons for 80 Dal'ry an obiect." But even
admitting the land 10 have been a pur
chase, every body but so superlat,vely able
and profound lawyer, as the by SANDER
himself would have SUPPOSED, that the
clause itself in old Mr.. JeTcsson's will,
of so long standing, would have exone-
rated Spiers and his heirs, at iea5t by This
time, from a charge OF that sort, without
an a6tuei couhteraclng and attested oh
legation from under his hand aud seal -
Alter so barelaced a mIs,at-ment in O
material point, what IS TO be expected
from such very candid, impartial and
disiDterested a corrector of errors, when
ever he travels out Of the actual tcstimo
ny in his case and endeavors TO move on
the vecy uncertain and slippery ground
Of his, or his Interested informer's, own
bare assertions Nevertheless, we find the
whole ofthe residue OF his hope gul, and very
correct statement, made up from ore OF
the parties own narratlons in the cause
and ia two other material points, his po-
= -