Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1827-05-15
PRINTED asp PUBLISHED,
DAILY,
From the New York American.

T. -, which l. so openly made that they
Ill a;s,es,rd all the defects in General Jack
80. -, Il qualifications, and will, al all haz
.rds aid in eIeyating hun 10 the CHIEF maglstra-
nv for The mere purpose of putting down the
individuals com )osing the present admihis'ra-
tien Not hat they pretend that their SINE qua
no,s Of constitutional orthodoxy are, or viii be,
acknowledged by their new candidate; not that
he has abiured his tariff heresies, or the stu
more damnsbe plot Of" engineering the people
of,be United States ont Of their principles, oy
means Of internal improvement No: they
have pi.en ''iheir most sweet voices, In favor
Of 4 candidate who is equally he,erodox IN these
;,,,ortan, resDects with Mr. Adams: and still
they are uttering Shricks OF alarm al every turn,
4, the daring violations OF the constitution by
the administration in their ojects OF internal
improvements. In the same breath, they blow
no: upon Mr.. Adams for his principles in this
respect, and blow cold upon General Jackson,
who is supporter Of the self same principles
Was there ever such glazing and shameless ln-
consistency? Such weak and miserable at
tempt at apology for this, as late Richmond
Fnouirer contains. never remember 10 have
met With The editor SETS out with admitting
his Inconsistency in supporting General jack
son, and, as an apology for II, gives his brethren
of the tyne =" leave TO make the utmost oil IL!
Tina, is, If understand language, he admits his
unprincipled inconsistency, and, by way OF apo
logy. snaps his fingers in the face OF his aha
qonis,s Blu, art there not other parties to this
question with the editors oil the Enquirer, be-
sides The opponents whose taunis they seem 10
expec,9 What SAYS their own sense OF decency
and public opinion? Are they so infatuated as
no, 10 see tina, they are conyicung themselves,
no, only of gross Inconsistency, but oil the more
unpardonable offence of setung public sen,i-
. men, as.dsiiaasesus lhey admit tia, InsX ais
have opposed with all tseir torce. They admi,
tina, they opposed him for his arbitrary and I'M
constitutional conduct in the exercise, on differ
ent occasions, Of military power; and for the to-
tai deficiency Of his civil education Now
what reason, think you, do they give for tins
sudden change of opinion? Do they acknow-
ledge themselves u have been wrong in their
severe structures upon the past conduct Of their
candidate, or that he has been able TO repair
those " defects of civil education" Of which
they have still dared 10 speak? Oh no. they
absolutely pretend that though General Jack
son is No statesman, yet, as the present aGm-
nistration has also "forfeited all pretensons 10
the character of statesmen" why, gadzooks. it
is oaly six OF one and bali a-doZen oil the 9TH
er. Yesi such is the serious assertion, and
such The argument addressed by the able aud
ingenious and sober editor OF the Richmond
Enquirer, 10 the good ssnse and Calm reflection
Of the people OF Virginia. Nor is This Ill H
further asserts and argues, that, Mr.. Adams
is governed by Mr. Clay, why General Jackson
Can get some one equally able to govern him,
and so il matters not about his want of States
manship! This is no caricature, but literal
transcript Of the argument. When | first read
this part Of the labored manifesto Of that Jour
nal. paused in doubt whether il was in ended
for sportivc SALLY Of the EDITORS wit, or was
veritable effort of his reasoning faculty But it
is necessary TO look further into the assertions
he has sported, than into his arguments.
He asserts, then, in the first place, that the
administration has 'forfeited all pretensions TO
state smanship"--and the policy il has pursued
in regard TO the colonial ;rade' is the proof Of
this sweeping aud modest sentence But le,
the issue be upon this single point, il il so please
the Enquirer AS one Of the friends Of the Ad-
ministraiion, am content 10 rest il there
Now would ask, in all humility, what part Of
the Craftsmanship of the present admin SRA
ton is forfeited by the refusal Of Greai Britain
to treat upon this subject Was Mr.. Adams
or his Administration responsible for TIA, re-
fnsal! Because after all, this is the American
side Of the que stion, and this only. |, really
seems TO me, that there is most wilful per,
version Of the plain history Of the business, or
a most melancholy self delusion in The long
winded structures Of the opposition on this to.
pic. would merely ask any one OF the wisest
Of the opposition orators and essayisis who
have figured SO largely upon it, if, when il was
proposed to pass an act of Congress, accepting
the terms rendered BY the act Of Parliament, he
even dreamed for a moment that Great Britain
would re,ract the terms she had thus voluntari-
" held out iu the face Of the world? / would
enquire, whether, when 1t was proposed by the
administration 10 settle the terms Of this trade
BY convention, the keenest sighted prophet Of
them all predicted or foresaw that the identical
terms offered to US by the British parliament
would be revoked by the British Minister'S
They did not predict it; and they could not We
~ well foresee u-because all the world knows
thar this most extraordinary backing out Of the
British minister has arisen from change in
his policy and views, and not from any want Of