Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1829-06-12
9sect1teto Sa1tDsN.
FRIDAY, MORNING, JUNE IL, 1929.

\
wonted affected style of Johnsonian rotundity, as.
sumcs much credit for its silence upon DR.. Watkins
case, while it was yet before judicial tribunal
We entirely approve its sentiments this Subject
and we wish that the worthy editor had displayed
equal beraIity In his general reflections upon the
case. Having stated the he is pleased to say
En- disce-Fhese frauds wefe Irrpca,ed under the
noses OF the late administration, than eighteen months
before icv were put of office and yet they passed either
unnoced or unhsededbv these vilan, and honest guardians
OF tie public interests ie month eapses
after ter successors iio power aud the pecaon
rnvcled, and the perpetraOr brought bcnc the tribunal OF
justice to answer for his denguenccs Tie escape under
the detect OF law and havc with him the sympa,lcs OF those
WHOSE CONSCIOUSNESS OF similar cuq,rnies would place them
III PGt dt'c'o, but IN Zorro conceiG he guilty., and viii
stand as perpetual monument for point her slow
is with MS general demurrer before that have INDUCED
in these remarks the tina, trying him setting on
tins side the Potomac, he would be favored with lodging IN
This is liberality and forbcarance with ven
geance' Er disco: in other words, what Wat
kns has done, that all have done, according to the
most Christian logic of the Advocate. Can the Ad-
| vocate In truth, mean what he says, Did lie mean
to say that because DR.. Watkins was defaultcr,
ergo, all who held office under the late admnistra-
ton, or all that have been removed by Gen. Jackson
are equally criminal? Does he mean, that Watkins
guilt whatever be its degree, is vicafious and n-
wolves the guilt of all oiIice4hoders whatsoever or
that it either has reflected or can or ought or will
reflect, suspicion crimality upon any man or men,
/ having no agency in its perpetration? Did Gen.
treston's or Mr.. Bakers dapidation of the State
treasury, reflect discredit criminality upon the
other Officers ofthe State Government, or ought it
| so to have done? And ifWatkins and others of e.
qualify unsupported previous character have abused
the trust reposcd in them, ought it to enure to the
defamation and injury Of men who had no official
connexion WITH or controul over them and their acts?
We have been alive from the first, to tho nsiious
and nhuman efforts making, to give political drec-
ton and inhncnceto the case of DR.. Watkins, but
we never did l7tghle that paper possessed ofso
mono urablc reputation the Charlottesville Advo
cate--guided generally with SO much more fairness
and good feeling than characterize the mass Of
its conductors, and whose Editor we understand to
i bea gentleman tinctured with humane letters would
lend Its countenance to attempt equally unfounded
in good sense and reason, and malignant in purpose
We have Duff Green broadly assuming the
ground that the guilt of the entire Administration
must be inferred front the guilt of Watkins and his
echo lntAfs city fascinating, what he wanted Green's
ruian holiness to assertbut We did not expert the
sound sense and repued generosity of the Editor of
the Advocate to participate in purpose as void Of
/ illogical support as ofliberaty five were disposed
to appreciate either the understanding or the good
feeling ofthe Advocate too highly, the circumstance
ought at least to give credit to the sincerity of our
surprise at his course.
Nor is it fair deduction, against the purity or
vigilance OF the late Administration, is no argu-
nent either to prove their want of industry in dotec-
ting, or their want of duty in exposing DIR. Walking
frauds, that the discovery of these frauds was not
made until Gen. Jackson came into the Administra
ton Suspicion must precede investigations and it ia
very sufficient for the non detection of Wat
kins practices by the late Administration that thew
were not suspected to exist. Had such suspicion
existed and had the Administration felt every desire
10 skrccn and to save Watkns--had they even pos
sessed these feelings warmly as to be willing to
sacrifice their public duty to their induIgence-sti
SeJshneSs, that principle which their enemies impu-
ted 10 them the Of all then actions, and
conceding them for the sake of argument to be cap
able of no higher and nober principle of action
SeLsbaesssclf intis have led them to the exposure
and punishment of Watkins, as matter of necessary
safety and protection to thenselves;sas they could
not bot know, that the detection by their successors
would reflect dscredit upon their vigilance, OF at any
rates, lie used to effect that object Assigning then
the worst possible motives to the late Aduinistr,
ton; reasoning upon their conduct as their enc
mics always took pleasure in reasoning upon it. bv
attrbuting the basest motives which could have pro-
duced the effect t is ret Scquitr frornthe prem
ses that they wanted either the honesty or the vigil
lance to lay open Watkins conduct to the public eye,
Having confidence in Dr. Watkins, ne investigation
of the state Of his accounts instituted nor do we
understand that the face of the books themselves,
showed the diversion Of the public money TO his pri-
vate use.
When Gen. Jackson came into Office, he entered
foil Of suspicion, 'fet fegned, against his prede-
ccssos and their assistants; and whether bis suspicion
was real or foisned only having professcd TO enter