Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-04-23
RICHMOND:
FRIDAY MORNING. April o, 1904
ne President Of the United States and Mr.
Lo,c,ie

Louvre.
With the previous development, of tho controversy
between these dstins personaoes. our readers
are already acquainted II is one no less
'front.' the mysterious circumstances attending it, than
unfortunate iroin the heavy weight Of censure which
must ultimately devolve on some of the hph charac
ters concerned.
we this day communicate FROM the National In |
N"ss"cei' al anonymous communication, (signed
supposed 10 DC from the pen of Geo. Hay, Esq.
an" addressed to Mr. Lowrie, and MIR. Iowric's
answer thereto. The writer who Sims HIMSELF p.
evidently writes with full knowe of all the'cr-
cumstances of the case, and most probably under
the Immediate eye ana sanction of the President
himseif las the signature p. would seem to denote )
edo not altogether like the spirit in which this
communication is written. II certainly imp,cs n
full knowledge of the fact that letters had passed
between Gen. Jackson aud Mr. Monroe 70 the inn
port of what Mr.. Lowric had asserted. Itlooks too
''oe'' IKE disposition on the part of the writer to
extoft ifon Mr. Lowrie, the essentials OF his vindi-
catlon-and too much like a premcditatel and art
tul attempt to transfer the public Indignation from
MIR. Monroe who left an innocent man to persh for
the want OF that aid, which he only could render
him, to Mr.. Lowrie, for employing those means Of
vindcation, which accident had placed in his nos.
session.
Mr. Louvre IS asked by this anonymous writer
If copy of a letter from EIr Monroe 10 Gen
Jackson, be not part of the incontroyertble evil
Deuce to which he refers, proving his innocence
Why should such question be asked. The of5r-
NATIVE or the negative had nothing to do with Mr.
Monroes vndication. If MIR. Monroe had nerer
received any such letter, such Interrogation could
| never have been necessary, and Mr.. Lowrie might
safely have been left work up hill, in proving that
which never existed. If Mr.. Monroe had received
such letter, which he afterwards thought fit to de-
ny, or which he had forgotten, why is it asked Mr.
Lowrie to explain the nature of the evidence ,non
which he relied 1t could only have been to in.
duce Mr. Lowre TO explain not the letter ITSELF but
'he manner In which he became possessed Of it
not with an expectation of profiing the President
any thing, directly by the developement but with
| the hope thai the public Indignation would vent IT.
sell upon MIR. Lowre his friends for the ma nuer
IN which he they became possessed of the cores
rondence between Mr.. Monroe and Gen Jackson
The nterrogatories of P. to Mr Lowric, were there
fore insidious, tending to Withdraw the public at
tenton from the main question (Which is Col. Mon
roes having received or not, any letter froa Gen.
Jaekson) to one which is collateral, incidental and
comparatively, immateria.
The true question, on which the attention of the
American Public is fixed, and from which it will be
uNef'eo ny no MachIavehan arts, is did Ge;,. Jack
SON write any such letter, as the referred to IF
| so, did MIR. Monroe read the Same to Mr.. Iowre
and his colleague? In these two questions are in
VOWED the several capabilities Of General Jackson
Mr.. Monroe, and Mr.. Lowrie. If General Jackson
wrote such letter, advising the President to an
point two Federal Secretaries then Cen Jackson is
himself no better than Feterast and can never
the support of Republics for the Presiden-
cy II he wrote such letter to the President which
was read to Niessrs Lowrie and Fndlay for the JUS
thcatIon OF particular official act, then the Pres;
dent OF the United States in his subsequent denial
OF the fact has hecn guilty of shameful and dis
graceful dereliction of the truth from the CONSEQUENT
ces OF which, his high official character instead of
screening him. will only serve TO consgn him to the
deeper and bitterer damnation. If on The other
hand 1t shall be made to appear, that Gen. Jackson
containing such sentments-if it shall further an
pear that no letter purportng be from Cen ck-
son, and containing such sentiments was ever read
by the President of the United States to Mr. Lowrie
then MIR. Lowrie stands convicted before his coun-
try, of wifui and malicious falsehood. How stands
the evidence, as far as it is developed,
Let us bear in mind, that in 1921, Mr.. Lowrie ex-
planned the nomination of Mr. Irish as Marshall of
the Western District of Pennsylvania, to his const-
tuen's, by the policy which Col. Monroe had
determined to adopt, upon the recommendation Of
Gen. Jackson, to appoint two Federalists Cor half
Federasts) and hrlf Democrats. In 1894, when
Gen. Jackson is seriously brought before the coun-
try as its next Presidents this advice Of his to the
President, is brought up III judgment against him,
by men who still attached to the old Deniocra-
tic party of tie L. States. Mr.. kre,ner, Repre-
sentative of Pennsylvania, and friend of General
Jackson, Justly supposing that the prevalent runor
would operate to his prejudice makes his business
to call upon the President FOR the truth of the state
received, (aud of course communicated) any such
letter from General Jackson The controversy of
course, fluids lis way into the public newspapers-
Mr.. Lowric asserts that such letter was read to
! fnn by tue President, when Irish was appointed
Marshall of Pennsylvania. The President denies
having received or read such letter. Mr.. Lowrie
declares that it was read to him in the presence of
his colleague, Mr.. Finday Mr. Fiudlay (wbo il
seems, has Convenient sort of memory denies that