Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1828-07-12

fore David Campbell, JOHN OVERTON.
and Samuel Powell, Esqrs. Judges o the
SUPERIOR court, &c. IL the letter, the writer
saws: "From the record it might be inferred
tina, possessed minute information OF The cir
cums,ances of the case, this is not the fact, FIR
my recollection only enables me 10 say thai Inc
defendant made out complete Jpslihca'ion.
II would seem, from this, that the writer, not
withstanding the inerpola,ed w, is the same
den ical John Overton, alias "Judge OOerfon,
who Figures at the head OF the white ~ashih8
committee, and who stands cousnicupus as the
principal certificate man in the affair OF Rooards
and his wife. Mr.. Overton thus narra'es the
transaction:
"Samuel Jackson then lived in Nashville, on
a street now called Market street Gen jack
son, in the ordinary pursuit Of his business, was
passing Samuel Jat kson's door, walking with a
cane Which had a sword in it, not unusual even
in these days but much more so then, without
having any cause 10 suspect that Sam. Jackson
had any intention of making an attack on him.
so it was, that as the General passed the
door, Sam. Jackson, ,cho ,UaS unseen, ana
without any PREVIOUS INTlMATloN,
threv q large rock at The head fthe Gene
raj, ,ohich, afa had struck him as intend
ed, from its size and form, must haze put
an end to his existence. Upon this large
stone or rock being discharged without effect,
Sam Jackson instantly stopped down 10 PICK
up another, always at hand in this city OF rocks,
and in the attitude ofthrowing the second stone,
the General made thrust at or towards nm,
with his drawn sword; which he had scarcely
time to ex:r,cate from his cane. Inc cane
Dierced loose coat that SIM. Jackson had
on, BUT NOT HIS FLESH, which Caused
him TO drop his rock and close in with the
General. who threw away the sword and cane,
and violent scuff1e ensued; which, however,
was soon put an end to by the bvstanders; all
that was done was in an instant, except The pro-
srcu,ion. from which Sam: Jackson, the prose-
cutor derived no credit. Felix Grundy, ESQ.,
of Nashville, was one Of the counsel, and no
doubt recoec,s all The circumstances parllcu'
Iarly."
Felix Grundy, who is here referred to, is the
same Felix Grundy, who has also made some
figure as a certificate man for Gen. Jackson, IN
,esppc, TO the Generals accusation "f perjury
ae ainst the Legislature of Tennessee. Mr..
Grundy, as early as 22d Of May, 1928, had made
his statement, addrr ,seI in the form OF letter
o Mr. Daniel Graham, Secretary of State.
JoHN T. LYLE, Esq. # this city, upon
| recen, v,si' To Nashville, obtained copy OF
Mr.. Grundy's statement, and forwarded il to
the National Republican for publication: Mr..
Grundy states the matter thus:
"It was proved by some Of them, who were
under, God 10 b. respectable and impartial that
the pqrties commenced an an imated and
,Durno conversation in the street IN Nash
uiLle-tha, the first personal violence offered by
| either was that Of Samuel JAG kson throwing a
stone, with grea: violence a, General Jackson;
tina, while he was in the act OF throwing ano-
Their, General Jackson dre,0 spea, from
his cane and WOUNDED HIM IN THE
SIDE. The weight Of The impartial testimony
made the above state of the Gaze; and ] well
remember the counsel for General Jackson put
his defence entirely upon the ground OF the JUS
itiable and necessary course ot his conduct,
growing out of the violent and dangerous at
tack made nn him by man OF Spirit and su-
perior bodily powess.-On that g ound he was
acquitted 0y very intelligent jury"
The reader must observe that these two sto
ries do not al all correspond in their principal
facts According to Overton's story. there
was no previous atercation, and Gen. Jackson
had no ''cause to suspect that Samuel Jack-
son had any intention of nauking an attack
upon him. -3ul "as the G"n'ral passed the
door, 5. Jackson, who WAS UNSEEN, and
without any previous intimniion, threD a
large rock,' &c. This statement is contra
dicted by Felix Grundy "ho saws, "the parties
commenced an animated and U0rna co"ver-
satiore in the street. If this be so, Andrew
| Jackson must have "SEEN" SamI JAG k,oH,
and must have "sEEN" enough to give "cause
to suspect" The attack. Both The witnesses
cannot speak he truth.
Again. Overtop says "the CANE pierced
q Lo1se coat that Samuel Jackson had on,
But NOT HIS FLESH" Felix Grundy
saws, General Jackson dreW SPE.7R
from his cane, and WOUNDED HIM IN THE
SIDE"
Here is another Aat contradiction. Overton
says ",he CANE pierced loose coat, BUT NOT
HIS FLE,H" Grundy says General JAG ksnn
dre,o SPEAR and WOUNDED HIM IN
lTtE SlDl.." According TO one, CANE only