Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-05-11
TO THE EDITORS OF THE INou,ern-

Gen. ANDREW JACKSON.

| = -
RICHMOND, MAY II, 1894.
TO THE EDITORS OF THE ENQUIRER.
| w shington City, Nav s,h 1924.
The issue between Mr. Low rte. the Presi-
dent and Mr. Hay. has been fairly mad. up,
ictH not say met, and is now before the pub
TIC. Gen. jackson has thought proper to come
out with an explanation il 1t can be SD called !;
and unless greatly mistake the bubble mind,
Judging from the impression made here, think
Mr.. L"wrie's assertion stands unimpeached,
even upon his own statement, although evil
DENLY Intended to invadate il. 1t does in
tact, and IN truth, suhstaa,iate the declaration
20 the fullest extent, while it sets out by pro-
c'aim'ng both expressions alleged, alike I'M
founded. TITS in vain To cavil about terms when
substance IS the issue, and no one, under the
circumstances, would he held down tn critical
exactness in point of language Put the ques-
tion as you will, and Lowre must stand justi-
fled before an impartial world wish could
say as much Tor another distinguished individ-
uai, who is strongly implicated, if not crmi-
mated, IN this matter. That such letter, l
mean IN substance, was written, is fully shewn
ny lien. Jacksons own state,ncnt--that such
a one was read, cannot be questioned, without
discaralng The respectable testimony that has
been exhibited. Whether private and CONT
DENTAL correspondence has been violated, rs an
|
selves, and why are they withheld from pub
LEGATION They are out of the possession of
the President, and from the delicate situation
IN which he is placed, standing in the relation
which he does towards The country, justice
requires that they should be made known. 1t
Is due to the homer Of the alton, that the pub
lie should judge how far the correspondence
was private aud confidential, and whether the
President abused that confidence, by the use
he made of The one in question:
"WRETClED SUBTERFuGE"---iLou rie's Letter.
The "po, is thickeringrhc rapidly shift
ine aud new daily coming ON the stage This
day We usher personeges less than Mr. Monroe, and
Cen Jackson 10 tile view af the curious specaior-Tbe
whole correspondence is promsed-and let il come for
who will now he with the paraplae sketch
or the CLOSES which exhibited before us?
tue original leersihey will best speak for themselves
We are not pleased at the figure which Gen. Jackson
now cuts before the publis We did expect
man like him. We inclined believe from the en-
ergy Of all his that he above board :"
man, who, as he declares OF himself had "no Dispositions
either disguise suppress" OF the "senimens lie
feels" We did suppose that he the last the
face of this earth, who would soop bubble upon any
. interesting question.
But read his last Mr. Kreme what nesse does
he employ! What wretched play upon words VIVA.
subtleies Of special pleading Where you only
prove the substance of the facts but The identical words
themselves laid down. Could any have expected
that on any question of this nav any question
which he has discussed the county cour, bar
Gen would have re,orted to sucb an ,,pe
den?
We pass for tbs present questions between te
President and himself Were letters of isis private
eonfdeaai Shoud the President have shewn them TO any
"hepnrticnlariy in the nttenpt justly appointment,
wheh he had right TO make in the due exercise OF his
constitutional authority Has Presden, really denied
thnt e read letter aI"? does he reconcile
this denia with e statements Lowre and Fndlay ard
Laeock aud Roberts, and others! How does reconcile
the tone OF his reply in 1916 with his attempt in 1919 TO
bolster up his appointment by the precps Ger.
Jackson Why does he refuse to follow the Generals ad
vice at period and yet another shield himself be.
bind that advice! Why does he now lavish such
praises upon the Generals letter of in reply ~
| IL he refutes the principles of that very letter!
We likewise pass for the present, the questions
of fact as between Mr. Lowrie and the General and be-
tween Mr.. LOwrie and Mr. Krrmer. Did Mr. Lowrie at
FIRST use the expressions OF to republicans
lists! Did he employ il because he considered il subj
sanally SYNONYMOUS with the recommendation TO form
his cabinet from the leading parties the c.unryn
Or The expression inadvertently used! Or has Mr. Low
re been aroitly shifting his ground sal, his own parti
cular purposes Mr. L. is fH able defend imseif-and
il we judge from the past will be able defend him
| self to the satisfaction Of the pablo.
We pass over these questions TO examine the sephisca
grounds on which Gen Jackson has placed his denial of
Mr. Lowries statements He denies both of the
ascribed to Mr. l." No such letter written by
The contrary he makes out Sd statement in tie let
ter which he lays before the public the gst Of which
Is be found in this last stroke Of his pescn ;
viz. " my advice was, select men Of probi
ty, virtue and talents, ueifho,t regard 10 pnrfy'
Very well! where is the mighty difference between this
and The second statement which he fatty denies
these in truth contrary he says TO each other
We began TO suspect that we bad hitherto mistaken the
meaning OF OF the words in the English
language. Contrary But johnson tells us that Con.
trarv, is contradictory; not simply different, NOT alike
but repugnhu, thai destroys or districts the
Would the advice have been really repugnaut TO the
advising The Pssden, form his Cabinet from the f.po
great sadg tis IF the oourtyy"Suppose him the ne 1t
day hear The friend advising him TO select men Of
Probiy, virtue and taients phout regard pary-wbat
would this think Would he reproacI, his
friend with Inconsistency would he see In fact that IL
was the very advice Could be possibly raise any
question about ' And IL qbbler should do il what
wosd this uusophsGcated man say TO hi Might he no,
truly sayi Why, sir, you splitting hairs You are
drawing distractions without the least difference II WIN
select your dsntereed friends both families do Won
substantially select them Without Yerard 10 Cap;, p
and IL there be any shade difference IL n
slight that tits worth dispung about, In the ebt
that you put this natter indeed that is whether my friend
is republican AMI whether he dsposed TO call the f
ralss isto the highest seats of power it is almost dispute
about wordst is The old story of cds dun and fox eSe
dee the expressions substantially the same bopgb II
there shade Of difference between them The last ;s
rather libers to The icderass than the otbern Ifmy
fr;., lat. FOL 10.