The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1809-03-17

49, SStNiC ltdNS
esther inferred. froal this being he =. first
o%.fence.' that no such natural appetite
le:isted! Coming from the worthy and tile
wise, such expressions would have givel,
me pain. But 1T is the discernment, not the
derangement of the head, the Virtue not the
maligmty of the heart, that gives them their
force. Coming from you, Sir, such expires
siois as " depraNity," u natural aIpetit,
Tor taisci.nod and wee" can excite no other
emotions than Indifference or piJy.
Hou have SAID, that YOU .~'intended" no
sarcasm for the profession" Of i school
master. The woiia, SIR, will Judge OF the
caado~1' ut THIS declaration. IL is but one
proof OF the sftirif IN which your whole letter
IS written. G-r EcGc Hercules. Alter ha-
wing protested against "sch.oimaster cor
rection after approaching me with wieid-
ing the rod OF a p~edagosue editor;" you
are no" sly enough to assert, that you meant
NO reproach AGAINST the profession, which |
pursued. n sophis,n Is 100 gross to de-
serve even the name OF Ingenuity. Fam hap
Ply, however 20 see You reduced TO the ne
cessity or making this recautation. Improves
mat the Profession OF a schoolmastcr is rot
covered with those reproaches anG pseiudic-
es' which the mere man Il the world is apt
70 indulge. l. proves, that there is a
weight OF character and influence around il,
ne.ors whlch even Your prejddiccs are CON
pciied to profess II reluctant homage.
1oArqdibote upon the WORD" betray," is
exactly suited to your taien.j. The man
VINO at any great emergency should desert
the honorable capse, which ne has espoused,
would as efeCtualiy 6etray his friends, as
ho that discioses their dishonorabie secrets.
Vas 1t not Arnold, who sought to betray the
fatriots OF the Revolution? And if YOU were
TO begin to suspect your friends" because
our own "poiitics axe unsteady" and end
win deserving their standard, at a moment
when they had placed 4 confidence in your
eXertions, would not my anonymous cores
pondent have seen the fuihiuent of his pro-
phecys Bu1 now these approximations are
past. L he republicans viii never again re-
po'e CONFIDENCE enough III you 10 lest your
energies or Your virtues.
| have not appealed to 90 style, as the test
OF truth.' | defy you to produce a single
expression justifying this assertion. And
Dir, 1t would perhaps DC just as impoiitic i'll
me 20 appeal co that standard, is for you to
so back to the still more favoritc tesc of Ri
d'cule. While ing saudy beads" would
=" dazzle the eye OF ignorance, perhaps
your tonceits and graceful obscurities might
excite the laughter of the critic.
But by what kind of right, sir. do you pre-
tcAd to institute n mock & comic dialogue be-
tween us! 1t was really a very unfair spe-
LSiN' vi pay. IT Was CdiCulaNCu TO give all
the game into your own hands. You might
thus put whatever words you pleased into my
own mouth, and assume any that suited your
own fancy. You might make the argument
pear with all its might against me-whiist
you might SO %contrive the cast of the dia-
ioguc, as to appear the absolute Lord of
the Ascendant" Well, sir, be it so. But
since YOU have been so liberal to yourself,
%iH you permit me to supply a few of
those omissions which you have so gene
rously assigned 10 me?
In the first place then, I would have been
pp2ite enougf. to have denied the fact, that
g some thousands" had interpreted your
"Private griefs" into " the disappointment
OF getting an Office" Not one man within
my knowledge has ever placed this construc-
tior, npon 1t, and therefore what in~ducement
had ! "to remove this Impression ?" But
ho7o couiG such an Interpretation have been
put upon it? The distribution of public oific-
es was not in the hands of Mr.. Madison. And
ho7vtilen could youhavc conceived any resent
unents against him?
should have denied another of Your facts /;
that had ever declared "your having said
that Mr. Madison was no Republican in
PrInciP'e'-was a " private grief" For
what purpose did / mention this declaration
at all: Not because it was one of those
" grieis which You entertained, bit as a
fro9fofthc little good zviH which Won felt, for
MIN. Wonderful sophist that you are You
dared not meet the allegation in the face. You
were too conscious of the correctness of my
own IMPRESSIONS, On this subject, to denv
them-and therefore you attempt to run off
the discussion upon q miserable quibble on
words, or still more miserable metaphors
such as the turning ola cup of water into
the RaPpahannock river 1.-THE biemishes of
a dlamond-or the deformities of a clod."
No, YOU dared not meet the allegation boldly.
assert from the most iudubitable evidence,
thar you haUe made the declaration, that
" M. Madison was no republican in prin-
cip'e."-Al Ycur sophistries and ~conceitS
cannot evade this fact.
Your remarks as to Mr.. John Randolph
are distinguished by the same spirit of eva.
sios. stated NV imtresSi2n to have been,
that when Mr.. Randolph had begun u hy
on from the administration, YOU dissuaded
him from an attack on Mr.. Jefferson, but rot,
upon Mr.. Madison. Did TVS fact dcfaoa
strate any goodzviU to Mr.. Mldisons And
how do Won meet this allegation? Vfhv, mat
Mr.. Randolph had disclosed his eun.ity to
Mr.. M. before You happened at Washing
ton on a law suit" Had he Disclosed il enc
quivocalty, ( without the least chance Of ar
resting it? Did you make any forts thcn to
d'Sslade him from a prosecution Of extcnSi-
ON OF his hostilitics! The inference is that
Won did not and nv impression drawn
from good sources. was and is now. that