Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1828-1831, 1830-07-20
Rtr1boototrU eZahi
NILES KING, ESQ.
TUESDAY MORNING, JUI-, 20.

n
derto Mr. Kings defence, which, before our readers
are called upon to examine, we beg leave to direct
to'r attention to the following article from the Nor
folk Herald, from unknown but vigorous and Gle
giant pen It clinchcs that Defence and as far as the
charges contained in the 4th Auditors first report
ore concerned, to our apprehension, renders Mr.
Kings vndicaton complete, in connection with re-
ply to the remarks Of the Enquirer. published in
the same paper, and which we shall republsh to.mor
row.
Inc 9TH Auditor 10 probably Of the same opinion Us
he has raked up fresh, charges against Mr.. King in
the relonder, and brought them up q corps de re-
serve to the aid of his routed troops AS in fairness
bound. shall republish this ,eioinder Mt an early
day. nothing doubling, that Mr. King will hive il in
his power to refute tine new, rs trirmphantly MS he
did the old In substance, they are, that Mr. King
connived at d.. Watkins regulations bv accen,in,
drafts improperly drawn ny him when he was 9TH
Auditor Be il remembered that Pauldinr the Ma
w Agent at New York, aud Harris at Boston, were
accused Of the thing but eypainod their tr,,s
actions to the public satisfaction and we orcsume q,
that Of the President, Paudng is still in Office and
Harris was not removed for l2 months after.
Every fresh development proves, that King v,.
removed in pet, and that his delinquency wus an
after thought to justify the step to the nation Whv
were not the drafts of Or. Watkins embraced in
Kendalfs first Report, Because at that time the
9TH Auditor had discovered nothing connected with
them, which he thought could be twisted to Mr.
Kings disadvantage From the character of that
report, can any man think, that knowing any thin,
or suspecting any thing which connected KIM with
DR. Watkins, he would not eagerly have pressed il
into the service His report fails to satisfy the pub
hc'-Mr King answers it triumphan,y-and then
Tor the first time the anna ole Fourth Auditor so,s
70 work to see if he cannot by some means. associ
ate mr. King In the public Imagination with Dr.
=" ADKINS. Does not this prove that Mr. KING WINS
removed Tor some unavowed motive to rrat,fv the
spite OF the Secretary of the Navy or the patriotic
longing OF Mr.. Kings successor for Office and that
men the Navy Department went to work 20 ius, if,
the removal by charging him with DELINQUENCY,
Vhot has occurred at another place CITIZENS the
conclusion. The Collector ut Petersburg is removed
"A deficit dscovered-and credit assumed to the
Administration for the detection and removal Of pee
nators. Yet we understand the fact to be- tina, the
Government did not dream of Robertson's defalca-
ton at the time of his rcmovnl-hat was dicovercd
entireiy by the sagacity OF his successor, Mr. Nc
lndoc-whereupon tho whole credit was given to tho
Idol, and this gser discovery assigned as the cause
Tor an event which had already occurred. This
shows clearly, that Robertson indeed properly
remoVcd-but that prescription, not knowledge of
his delinquency. caused the removal
In the same way, if Mr. King is convicted pccu
laon or Of connivancc at pcculation, all men will
agree that his removal was just and proper But it
Is presumption in his favor, by proving that The nd
2'nntrdtion hare private motiUe to disgrace him
TO show that his pretended delinquency was a disco
very posterior to his removal IF they convict him.
they stand not only justified, but gather lauros for
their vgilance-if they fail, his removal stands a
monument of their yrannical punishment of the free
dom of opinion. Their interest to convict him is
therefore papable, and herein we have clue to their
remarkable dislike of having his accounts sci tied in
Court OF Justice, for which Mr.. King has repeat
cdy asked No: they prefer TO judge the matter for
themsevcs--to leave II with Amos Kendall, to play
the triangular part of Judge, Jury and Advocate Ii
Dir King owes the Government money, why has not
the Government sued him? He is known 10 be able
to pay. What reason be assigned for this repng
nance, but that they are unwilling to meet the sitting
and cross examinations Of Counsel the exhibition OF
proof and the verdict of twelve impartial men3 At
present, they can carry pari2ans at least with them
they can say, lwhatevor they Mink) "Wc have mad
good our charges" This after decision in a Court
of Justice, they might not be able 10 say and they
wariy decline the experiment.
We do not know, and never saw Mr. King TO our
knowledge. What we say cannot be therefore, die.
tated by personal fcelng-nor by policy for i, can
subscryo end ofpocy, tax tho part of public
offender. II springs entirely, and CAN spring from
no other motive, but the belief mistaken possibly
but tho result of laborous examination of all In,
documents, and comparison of all the circuns ances
that he is tho victim Of State policy, sacrifice tc
the new rnonarchicul, and despcable principle, o.
deprving American citizens Of office for the indepon
dent exercise of opinion and suffrage 1t is not "sym
pathy with deiaulters" charged by tho minons o
dcspotsm but sympathy for the inbred those a, least
whom VIC believe injured, that has enlisted US IN The
controversy.
Such are our impressions; but we shall coninue
las VIC began to lay all tho documents before the
reader and rive him fair opportuni,y oc c,r,,, 1 :.