Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1828-01-08

considered thu: Mr. Coles enquiry related oii-
~ TO Mr.. Jcfiersons opinions of Cen Jackson indi-
virtually, Without reference 10 the comparative es,i-
nation in which he held him as the competitor of
MIR. Adams. Under this impressions nv answer
was restricted 10 the subject OF interrogation and
was contcnted 10 state what was required of me
with regard 20 Mr.. Jefferson opinions OF Gen ac
sou as candidate for the presidency al the last e.
lection. In illustration OF these opinions then ex-
pressed by MIR. Jefferson. stated the only remark
oil his which remembered with sufficient psccis-
you 70 quote in his own langGage--an expression
MiitS Indicated ALARM or The =, durability OF the
Republic, but which was made more in nirt,i than
sadness With respect 20 the chief subject of cnqui-
ry containedin Mir. Coles letter knew nothing,
anu therefore said notting-p reSuming that my 81
lehce would be certain guarantee AGAINST any at
tempt TO apply my state nlcnt Ia purpose for which
IL Was by no means adopted. The conversation of
which spoke to Mr.. Coles took place as inform
Gu num- some time previous TO ;o last Presidential
election, which fact thought uc;erst 10 dstin-
guish the opinions of MIR. Jefferson AT that time
from those ascribed TO him by Mr. Coles at u la
ter period Had Mr.. Coles desired il, / should
have been equally explicit the cpiI.ioni
which Mr. jefferson AZ the same time x,,r,,sse of
Mr.. Adams. should hSyc stated what MIR Coles
might not have been 80 eager 20 publish, that while
ar. Jefferson spoke thus in Jest OF General Jack
sons elevation 10 the Presidency, he seriously
deprecated the eleciioii oltir. Adams az an evil
porlcndn, most calinisous con 3cqu c.lccs 10 the
country. ! never heard Mr.. jefferson speak OF
the relative merits nj General Jackson and Mr. A
Dams as statesmen though III sting; their
rpccuvc qualifications with those OF Sir. Crawford
lac greatly disparaged hoth and Gid not hesitate TO
avow Il decided preference OF the latter gentleman.
he spoke OF Mr.. \. the federal candidate, whose
election would he the ilcaus of restoring The ynasty
OF u.s. as whose earliest & strongest pred;lec-
tionslad been imb5ed il the high school OF Ultra
Federalism; whose political principles however artlul
iy disguised, had undergone change BY his pre-
tended apostacy. lie regarded Mr.. Adams as a
learned rather ihan wise man-asa politician more
roneous theories, with little OF the practical afi-
ty OF statesman. Mr.. Jefferson often said that the
contest should be confined 70 only two candidates,
Mr.. Crawford and Mr.. Adans-that the people
might the better discriminate between the only po-
iticai distinctions which it involved On the oc-
ca,ion which elected the remark, 10 which Mr.
Coles and the other friends of rIr. Adams have at
tacned 80 much Importance, Mr.. jefferson spoke of
All The other candidates contrasted with Mr..
Crawford, 10 whom they were all postponed IN his
estimation. His opinions as expressed TO me- only
contemplated the existing state OF things, and his
disapprObaion OF Gen. jackson and Mr. Adams
anu aborrence of the latter, being urged only as
evidence o.; his preference OF third candidate.
Thus much have deemed il necessary TO state
III justice 20 myself and others. | would feian
have avoided the unpleasant task had that alterna-
1--WE remained TO after the very partial eXpo,i-
non OF Mr. Coles. That gentleman should have
been conscious that his statement Of Mr. Jetfer-
sons opinions rs detailed 10 hin in August 1925
ing as II does 10 different opncus expressed under
different circumstances, at the distance of wears
and induced by causes and considerations which
subsequently, ceased 10 operate. He should have
been aware, moreover, that the public will not lone
deliberate, when their decision peces3arily invoi-
YES either misapprehenson on his part or an I'M
consistency on the part of Mr.. Jefferson. 1t was
needless to have referred to for proof that Mr.
Jefferson was opposed TO both Mr.. Adams and Gen
jackson prior TO the last election. If Mr.. Coles
statement OF his opinion in 1925, is confirmed BY
this tac-then Is II abundantly substanfated by the
concurring testimony OF thousands. Ii it needs
other confirmation, Mr. Coles will seek in vain for
it i'll the expression contained in my letter. This
gentleman has not challenged proof, 10 the oppi-
MON OF Mr.. Jefferson prior TO the last election bat
he would quote that opinion, uttered as it was in
the same breath which denounced Mr.. Adams as
tending very remotely to strengthen the probability
OF hs statement. 1t will require something more
than the mere dictum OF any Twins, man Ia Liscre-
dit the established fact OF Mr.. Jeiterson's prefer
ence OF Jack,on since the election OF MIR Adams
am not the apologist nor yet the accusor OF an
man. though claim the privilege of resclling nv
own statements from misrepresentation, especially
when they are misrepresented 10 tine prejudice of
others. Ii Is not for to exc out the scant Inea-
sure of probability which belongs to the a;sertcn-
OF othcrs-whiie the tenor OF Mr. Jel1erson's life
and opinions, and the peerless reputation which
survives him, defy the vain effort 10 prove him in
consistent IL there be any subject in tho ever
uctuatng affairs of life, ON which the sentiments
OF the most steadfast may be allowed TO vary it Is
found Ill the comparative qualifications of men fo
oiice-bccause these variations are occa-ioucl iv
the changes incident to man himself regarded a.
he must be through the fallacious medium of his
own conduct But, there is no need for this in
dulgence in the present instance Mr.. JcifeI son
only preferred Gen. Jackson To Mr.. Adams when
by the current Of events he called TO choose
between the two. This opinion involved no incon-
siStency on his part, however conleinptuously he
may have spoken OF either--as a preference i'm
plies comparison, and compaIi Oh only regards the
objects between whom a selection must be made
THOMAS w. GiLMER.