Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-07-13

icustJ tomuittttu ltt Sdtt oEteI ftu uOt
venlured 10 make one Of these imputed often
css u subject of accusation but has confined
his charges exclusively To matters subsequent
to the libel, aud produdd by the libel Itself
! On my departure frviu ThOmpsvus Island,
about the 18th August, by Capt. Porter's own
declarations, we separatedin entire anity. 1
say not.,ios, at this time. Of his COMPLIMENTS
Try note. But, by his own declaration, On
oath, before this Court, he +" sincerely wished
fto make me hts friend y and " bore with
me his kind wishes at our separation" And,
on my part, notwithstanding the deadly ma
lice he ascribes to me, he has not been able IL
fix an me one unkind expression, one hostile
measure, one act or word injurious to him.
though he has endearersd to draw them from
| that confidential Intercourse with my family
and brother officers, where he must haze fUuod
them, had ever entertained such feeling and
opinion towards him.
As to the publication in the Herald, on the
Sth of September, which furnishes the subject
of The first specification. in the second charge,
whatever may be its offensive passages, they
could afford no Justification. l am no way
responsible for them. For not only is there
no proof that authorized the passages com
planned Of but there is the most distinct, un-
questionable, and uncontradicted testimony of
the editor, Mr.. Broughton, that they were
published, not only without my consent, but
without my knowledge. Eveu as to the parts
admitted by Capt. Porter to be innocent, it has
been proved that did not volunteer to pub
lish them, but yieided to The solicitations Of the
printer for their insertOy.
| Captain Porter, however, endeavors to de-.
rive another imputation against me from this
publication. He says, in the first specification
of the second charge, that should have con-
tradicted it. Had the attack in the Herald
been ever so gross and direct, what obligation
| was under to make his vindcation To de-
| fend the reputation of brother officer from
| unmerited reproach, is an Office of generosity
and feeling, which | hope shall never be I'M
willing TO perform. But it is of that class of
duties, the performance of which must be left
to spontaneous disposition, and the omission
| to do SO can never be considered the ground
work OLA prosecution and, of all men living,
Captain Porter was the last who had n right
| to expect il from me. For not only has he
forfeited all claims on my generosity by his un.
m.r'ted libel, but, by a strange Inconsistency
| at this very trial, has declared himself absolved
from all obligations Of correcting the injuries
| that he had done me, even after he was aware
OF the injustice, On the single ground that his
name was not signed To the libel, though it was
published by his direction.
| But even this pretext Of complaint is with
Out foundation. For it is distinctly in proof,
| that, on the morning that publication appear
ed, being about 10 leave Norfolk forW ashing-
ton, 1 sent message 10 the printer, pointing
| out the inaccuracy, and requesting its correc-
tion. Neither j, nor any one else, perceived
| IN 1t any imputation on Captain Porter but
perceived II 10 he an inaccuracy, and wished
| II 10 be corrected. And of all this il is dis
tincily proved, not only by Captain Sinclair,
but by Captain Porter himself, he was fully
informed long before my arrest. Even in his
letter To the editor Of the Georgian, he acqui,s
me on this head, although he has since made
IL the SUBJECT OF charge against me.
But this publication of the 10th of Novem.
Der, Is made the foundation Of the fourth spe-
clficatlon of the second charge, in these words
and by falsely declaring in the Herald, that
ne never made reluctant apology and pub
iIcly recalling il, after he had obtained all The
advantages resulting from reluctant apology
| made TO me-"
In this transaction, the mingled pride and
anger OF Captain Porter have obscured his
judgment, usually so correct. Now, If this
specihcation were true, how would il support
the charge BY what process of logic could
the facts that had falsely denied, that ! had
made a reluctant apology, or had recalled it,
aner attaining lis advantages, support the
charge il is intended to sustain ? Such con-
duet might inderd prove me 10 be very base
and cowardly but surely would not support
the charge, that had used +" base means for
defamlng his character"
But wholly deny every matter Of this spe-
ciiication never did make a reluctant apol-
ogy to Captain Porter, nor have | ever re-
iracted The apology l did make. did make
an apology To Captain Porter, not reluctantly,
Du' spontaneously from no craven fear of his
| power no sycnphantc wish for his favor :;
Dnt the honest conviction that had misun-
| derstood MS motives, and done Injustice to his
measures. Ioade it from the sentiment,
"hich nope no false pride will ever exijD-
6uish IN my heart, that he who is most ready
to atone an unnteaiionaI wrong, will. not be
less ready to resist injustice, and pi,y anv
man, Ut any there bel whose Judgment and
heart are SO vitiated, as to mistake the frank
and candid acknowledgement which an hon
est mind takes pleasure 10 profTerng, for the
| calculating baseness which seeks safety in il.
| nomiDy, and purchases security by dishonor.
Ihe facts are all before you. Believing that
Captain Porter had made difference between
The accommodation IN my favor, and thai,
given TO other officers, | frankly applied to
INN ON the subject in 40 temper of insubor-
dination in no language of rebuke; in no
tone of suppllca,lon but in the respectful and
candid language which it BELTS an inferior TO
use TO his superior, when he means TO remon-
strate.
Do not believe | am An advocate for insu-
bordIDaiiOn. IL one expression of that cha
racter can be found in my letter, merit pun
ishment, and will patiently iDdure it. That
DID not take up this impression without APP
parent foundation, the letter given 10 Leuten-
ant Rose, will prove. And where may an
ohcer hope TO obtain redress, if not from his