Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-07-15


Of the court to enfuice his answer; and would
remind YOU by what mnrliiyins means he had
escaped its txcrtinn. But l triumph not in
his modification. respect his rank, aud the
naval service. In spite uf his unnrri,ed per-
secuiion, remember his m-ri,orioms actions,
and will urge, on that account, nothing against
him of which man of honor can complain.
But may be permitted TO say, that by his
own confession, these complimentary words
were originally, sratuitousiy bestowed; and
1t II we're even true, that on the next day, l
purchased 4" their continuance, at the price of
an apology" at least had no rtAson to doubt,
that they were continued as sincerely as they
had been at first granted by one, who wish.
I'd to make me his FRIEND" aud who, in the
adjustment Oft trihrg and monetary misun-
Outstanding, (which he never wished to hear
oi again." gave me the right hand of reconcil-
ation and good will.
But the short and unfortunate publication Of
the 18th December, has other sins To answer
for. The passage, "as there appears 10 be
still mysterious policy IN keeping hack the
name of the author, that my want Of rank
seems TO forbid my penetrat,ng," has been
seized on, as the foundation of the second spe-
ciiica'ion the second charge.
Gentlemen, | pray your attention TO the
phraseology Of this specification. may c..-
What does it mean' Ii any thing, certainly
to convey the IDA, that | might have received
personal satisfaction from Captain Porter, il |
had asked it. But may be mistaken : for
this Is guardedly expressed by the terms,
when no such difficulty was known TO exist.n
Ii such he its meaning, however, il is for this
court ~ determine, how far 1t cpmports with
The discipline of the Navy, to bring junior
officer 10 Il court martial, for not havtng choi-
tehgtd ms superior, in the very teeth Of the
ticies Of wal? doubt much il the junior OIL
GERS will be- the frst To- complain of this new
Irgalati"n Of naval discipline. AS TO myself.
should have been better satisfied, il the hint
had been given me be ore my arrest. At least
it would have appriz,d me of my danger of
| being punished for mol challenging my superb
| or officer /; aud left me chance Of averting
the mischiefs Of arrest, fur this unknown mis-
demeanor.
But | said in this publication, that there
was mysterious policy in keeping back the
name OF the author - and that this mputa-
| ton of mystery is treated as crime, against
captain Porter. And is there no mystery a.
bout IL? That Captain Porter is the author
every one has long believed, and now knows !;
and nothing surprizes me SO much as the mys.
leriSus policy which still attempts to keep
back his name. And among the Inconsistent
nothing is more remarkable than the course
pursued in relation To the authorship of that
| anony NOUS libel. In the outset, tie inquiries
To Captain Sinclair aud Lieut.. Tatnall, prupos-
ed by Captain Porter himself, assumed that
captain Porter was the author; and endea-
vored IN prove, that the fact was known TO
me. That was done, IN the hope that my re-
| marks, addressed Ia the ANONYMOUS writer
and not TO Captain Porter, might take the
character Of high treason against his dignity !;
| because knew him to he the author, and lie.
Yelled my shot at him, while affecting to fire
I at the anonymous libeller. All this failed, how.
eve; and II Is little remarkable, that no one
among the many witnesses, till the testimony
ct The editor comes in, ceuld expressly prove
| iis authorship; and even no himself had SO
little disposition to claim the honors Of j., that
after having inpliedly conceded il in twenty
instances, in the course Of his examination. he
al last was surprised al the detection, and
seemed 10 imagine that ii WAS only by a law
| trap" that the author had been caught.
And in his correspondence with the editor
OF The Georgian. though called on to give the
authors name, he very adIoiily maintained the
my sterious policy" and instead of giving
himself up as the author, evaded the applica-
ton by saying Lieut.. X cannot be ignorant
who the author is. and you-nay refer him to
have already said, sirs, that / intended
my publication Of the 10th December to have
been my last notice of the Georgian, or its au-
thor; and It certainly would have been so, but
| tor captain Porter himself. The moment he
saw that publication, his mind, fertile 10 expe-
uien's OF annoyance, conceived the scheme of
converting that very publication into means
OF degrading me-. p. Wilson, his clerk, was
selected as the instrument Of this new attack :
and, on the 18th December, certificate. die
lated by Captain Porter, was signed by will
sou, aud placed in the possession Of Captain
Porter. The object of that certificate Though
IN m'Ider terms) was to impute to me the
forgery which forms the first charge of this
prosecution, and to subject me TO the reproach
conveyed by the fourth specification of the
second charge. Bnt il is impossible to com.
pare The charges with that certificate wi,hou,
detecting, in the similarity ofexpressions, and
the intrinsic evidence which the style affords,
that they were coined in the same mint, and
moulded of the same materials thoHgh one
bears the arms and superscription of captain
10 the navy, and the other the humble effigy
Of captains clerk
Armed With this certificate, Captain Porter
came TO Norfolk, aud, in the very face of the
recent order Of the Secretary of the NAVY,
which was then scarcely dry in direct con-
tempt Oftbat order Ian extract from which
AFTER my arrest, he was pleased To send me,
| with 4 declaration that he had copformed To-
IFS letter and spirit, in making degrading pro
posaI to me through AIr. Hambleton; i YES.
sirs, in the open defiance Of that order, did ne
put into circulation among the officers, as is
proved by alr. HambleioD, this certificate of
7. Wilson, intended to destroy my reputation.
In how mauy other channels these certificates
| Uay have been circulated know not One