Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1833-05-16
ASSAULT ON THE PRESIDENT.

The following articie, trom ti'e N'S"'""
Wing, has already excited so much attention.
and is likely to attract so much more, that we
are induced to publish it. 1t will be observed,
that it bear. hard upon the public meeting recent
ly held in our town, as, indeed, do other artl-
eies in the same paper and other papers in Vir.
rinia. Whatever may be generally thought Oi
the sentiments contained in the article below,
from the Wing, all must admit that it is written
in the best style Of the editor Of that paper
with warmth, eloquence, aud Independence.
Every account goes to refrte the reckless state.
ment Of the Glube, that the assnt was ADVISED
and contested, that il was instgated by the pub
,ca,ioos in the IT, States Telegraph, and Alex
,ndr;a Gazette, and that Mr.. Randolph had his
conGelerates ready to aid In hrs rescue and es-
cape. 81 ,mar,
that the President was justified by his const'tu'
tiopal discretion and the state OF the iacts' I'D
summariiy dismissns Mr.. Randolph, notwith,
STANDING the Court Of Enquiry had exoperated
him Tro,o all intention Of fraud or wrong towards
the Gcvernment--what can justify the terms IN
which he passed sentence? What are these
termss Let them be read and adjudged. In the
neoultimate clause of his letter OF dlsmIssl0n,
addressed TO The Secretary Of The Navy, the Ere
sident says:
"In the opinion Of the President. the facts
which aDpear in this case, and the conduct OF LIT.
Randolph throue hout the investigation, prove
him to be unworthy the Naval service OF this
Republic. and an unfit associate for those sons oil
chivaIry, integrity aud honor, who adorn our Ma
Wv. The Secretary of the Navy is therefore d.
rected to dismiss Lieut.. Robert .B. Randolph
from the Naval service Of the United States"
Where was the necessity, or the apology, tor
this severity aud harshness OF reproach, in pas
sing sentence Of punishment What Judge
since Scrogss and Jeiries, has thought II disnif'
ed. or right, or humane, or in good taste, to IN
suit and abuse those upon whom they we're cal
led to pronounce condemnation! Where did the
President find warrant in the genius oil American
Institutions, for tempering the administration OF
Justice, Gf it was justice?l with vile contumeiy
and personal detracton? Was 1t not punish
nent enough for deiaulter OF $4,000, Ut he was
defaulter y to be stricken from that roll OF CHI
yaIry where his name had been quartered for %
wears? To forfeit the glory acquired against the
enemies of his country To lose the profession
TO which his youth was devoted, and upon which
his support depended? To GO to his grave with
this stigma, and to carry the capkering con-
sciousness in his bosom that he deserved 1t, or
else that he was destined to live and die, the
victim Of injustice which he could not resist, anu
of innocence which he could not make appears--
Surely this was punishment which ought to
have suficed to appease the malignity OF mend.
But it did not suffice to appease the vindictiVe'
mesa of Andrew Jackson-no. we will not say
,ha,-much as We abominate him politically, we
acouit him Of all else in this matter, but suffering
himself to become the tool ut another's malign'ty
1.-The victor Of Orleans, must be incapable of the
base and cowardly littleness OF tramp!ing on
the feelings Of falling man--it did not suffice
to appease the vengeance OF the crew, who to the
misfortune OF the country, and the degradation
OF his own fame, surround Gen. Jackson, and
control his conduct-that crew, more designing
than Jesuits, more cunning and vindictve than
the Eunuchs Of the lpaer Empire. General
Jackson in the language Of 6attery, is styled the
Second Washington. and IN his address at Fred
ericksburg, himself bashfully hints at the justice
Of the comparison. Let Us suppose Udsh1ngton
to have been called in the discharge Of the duties
of his station, to the performance Of the act to
which have had reference. Would he have
jisregarded the finding Of Court Of Euquirys-
Would he have issued the law from Ills own
breast, when the laws Of the country had provi-
ded a tribunal? But ieeming it his duty to have
done so. would he have couched the award Of his
sense Of public duty, in terms Of studied insult
and reproach9 Would he not rather have avow-
cd the pain it cost him? Looking at RandolPh's
long and brilliant career Of public service would
he not have striven to alleviate the blow which 1t
was his duty to inilic,a Would he not have
sought to soothe, rather than embitter wounded,
once gallant aud honorable spirit, it now that OF
a man who had unpardonably offended? He
would. Washington and Jackson!-blistered
be the tongue Of the sycophant and slave, who
first associated them in cOmpariso6.
Let rs take another view. Why should Gen.
Jackson be so unsparing aud vindictive towards
Robert Randolph, granting what we do not be-
lievs, that he Is premedi,ated defauiterl How
ancient is his horror of defau'tersf His Prem.
er pos defaulter for SI1O,OO0-will It be de-.
niedi WIN. B. Lewis. bis groom Of the stole.
pa, .defauiter-~ill it be- denedf His horror
then is not to default, to breach OF trust in the
abstract, or he would never have taken the one
to hi, Cabinet, or the other TO his bosom. Wat.
kias vas q defaalter ADD justly punishable
,.>.<slosslv nuniahed. WhVf Be-