Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1828-1831, 1830-02-19

but that his friends had hnThen ma move. 10 on
this object he threatens. to do WHAT To remove Mr. Green
probably from the Office which he ls!-And 10 this
con or Madison ever soop to such petty Is this
the course OF man. who aspires 10 DO the champion Of
party " not the Chief Magistrate Of a nsion' Ths'
iechaond Enquirer.
The foregoing, Mcssrs Editors is from your pa-
per Of the 9th inst. and, with all due Difference
tinnk you have not viewed the subject in it's true
light.
In the 6rst place, tho succnct history Of il here
given by you omts some circumstance which, to
toe. seem material a. to this, the reader will judge
from the Following enumeration. In the person of
tho individual buff Green, centre, as every one
Knows, the two dignitics of Editor oi the Teegraph
dDd PrAfer 10 0te Seaaie q The Editor of tho Tel
exfaph gives to the world. a statement IN regard TO
certain speech delivered by Daniel Webster on the
door Of the Senate; which statement Daniel Web
ster land IN this knowledge and belief lie is not SOL
Nary) knocs TO be ttse, and beiieres 10 be toiliy
false. B From his seat in the Senate Daniel Web
SER gives notice. that. the occurrence Of such
dnct, he will propose TO the Senate some mcasure in
relation to It, 4. The very next number of the Tel
eHrapn re'teratrs the statement; offers piece of
miserable sophistiy IN ITS justification and hurls def
snce at this mernbor of the u. Senate. Then and
D,t III then. mark! for here is hiatus in Your his
toy which ieaves upon the reader the impression of
humanity vacilation in Nj. Webstcr,) Daniel Web
ster enters upon the course which gave notice he
would pursue; having for it's object TO strp
Tuf Green OF one of the aforesaid dignitics-yiz:
that of Printer to tho Senate
Now, will not pretend to determine whether
there be. or lie not, "petty and unmnnly spite" in
DIR. Webster's bosom, towards Duff Green; but ]
Will call upon you candidly TO say whether according
70 your rules of logic, the inference that ther IL such
feeling, be deducibe from the fregolnr occurren-
,;,s' and, should you answer me; conne yourselves
y ynu plense, TO the issue between us. Do not for
the pdrpose OF showing that there causes ade-
auate TO the production Of ''unmanly Spite or man
~ resentment; resort the food of abuse Involving
probably, nurnbeoss other misrepresentation which
Tire Telegraph hos with the obvious view of dstrac-
fr,.v lie H., al.
ged in pouring upon Daniel Webster ever sine. The
above occurrence. These causes whatever they
may be, are not germdne to the question. You pro-
nounce the measures proposed by Mr.. Webster to be
Tlear indica tons of "a petty and unmanly spi.e:"
shy that. 10 my mind, they Indications of no such
thing If you reply at ali; reply TO this point
In some previous remarks upon the same subject,
So1 draw distinction between Duff Green Editor
Of he Telegraph, and Duff Green Printer 10 he
Stnufe. In theory, the distinction Is sound; and
would have 1t in p7'dctice for the purpose of
screening Duff Green, but for onds somewhat more
important. consider 1t to be most important, to the
qilet and harmonious operation of our government
1nd To the HONESTY or PRrss, at the Seat of
Government, that there should be insurmorntable
harrier between the two capacities Such barrier
Is, perhaps more practically important than some of
those which arc erected by the Constitutions and
should rejoice TO a constitutional provision for
bidding that any one, anywse concerned or interested
In editing or publishing paper, be employed as prn-
Ter to Congress- But, viewed in connection with the
PARTY practices Which have unfortunate ely grown up-
Unfortunately, though perhaps from. the nature of
man, inevitably; but for some preventive such "a
have adverted to--viewed in connection with those
practices, say, the distinction does appear 20 me
altogether falacions; totally without meaning. In
VIVA, capacity was i'll put the question in truth and
candor-that Duff Green was elected Printer tn tho
Senate? Was it in his NATURAL or in his official Gu
Paoity' WAIST as DUFF Green or as the Editor md
i1uohsher 9fthe Telegraph What cause was it,
that determined his election, instead Of that of some
either man or is this the work of chance for which
there Is no assignahle cause?
No! gentlemen it is not to be disguised !, is no,
paF Green; 1t Is the Editor and Publisher of The
It!esrd7od, who was elected printer to the Senate
IL is as little to be dsg"cd, that, in practical point
0f view, these two offices, when united in the same
person, do act and react upon another 1bat the
Uice of Printer 10 the Senate does facilitate aud
ilnte the publication of the Telegraph; and that il
60cs mpart to the publisher of the Telegraph nun
6t-ohcia II not regularly official, characters il does
aix to the statements of that paper as to what 90
ours in the Senate, the quasi if not the formal On
dorsement OF the Senate
jfthen, a wanonly false statement Isl under this
sanction sent lorth to the people, does it, does it
not, behove the SENATE OF THE u. s. TO Withdraw
that sanction! Let VIRGINIANs answer and even
should they answer in the negative-which do not
however, apprehend-still does the question remain
vheher proposition, on the par; ofrhe slandered in
diVldual, that the Senate should thus aot, he sul-
eicn ground Tor impu.lng to him "petty and unnuu
1y spte'"
The question, whether the statement really be
talee, is not at all involved in the above anv more
n - t"e q"Csioi' NHether ~ clerk IN the u. y.
Bank, have really forged notes ofthat Bank? is in
VOWED in the question, whether such conduct de-
nrands his expuIslon or the other question: whether
proposition oil the part OF ono of the Bank Direc-
tons, to cxpel him on that ground warrants the i'm
rutatlon upon that Director, of pety and unrnanlv
Fpitc?" That question is u question of Gicf, which
inc Editors OF the Enquirer have no right to pre-
fudge; more especially upon the assertion of the &C
cised. And, surprising this question of fact TO be
either assumed or decided in favor of the accused
stl! would thus ground justify the impuation
OF petty spite" TO Daniel Webster than It would TO
fhc Bank Director. Before this lmpntation could
with any justice or fairness, be cast it would have to
be decided whether Daniel Webster conscentiouslv
believes himself to have been grossly and wilfully
uisrcpresented? That he docs SO believe, am salts
fled. | knOIo that he was msreprescmted / am
ready to Soear that he was. Just as ready as !
should be, in an accusation against the Richmond
Enquirer for disseminating the most prohigate mmo-
faIy, TO swear that in oil the things ever read in
that paper there was nothing to Justify the accuse