The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1838-11-07
THE MADISONIAN.
REPLY TO SENATOR WALL.

after detailing the conspicuous part taken by
General Wall, during the election at Burling-
ton, N. j., stated g" the spectacle was hui
initiating one"
Under date Of the 18th, General Wall adj
dressed letter to the editor OF the same pa
per, in which he charged him with giving
circulation to a malignant falsehood"; and
pronounced the author Of the letter ga delibe-
rate liar" and cowardly caiumniaior" and
he called on the editor to publish his name
And he added:
You have endorsed his falsehood, aud must
share In his nfamy If You do relieve Yourself by
publishing his name. cannot believe that any man
"whoist all times entitled TO the fullest possible
credit ever wrote that letter. but f you will publish
his name, whatever may have been his credit here
tofore, such is the nooriety Of the falsehood of his
charges, hereafter in the streets OF Burlington he
will be an object for "the slow and moving finger of
scorn" TO point at Ifyou do no, give his name, you
by your endorsement must stand In his place"
The Globe, Of the ID inst, published the
letter Of General Wall, at length and, in an
article in the same paper headed " The GAME
OF THE DESPERATE" called attention to it,
Gas exposing the minor frauds at the polls"
General Wall has found person to take the
responsibility of avowing himself the author
Of the letter who was stigmalised as above by
him, in the person Of Mr.. w. R. Allen, of
Burlington; whose letter we copy from the
Newark Advertiser OF that gentleman we
have not the slightest knowledge Blu, there is
fairness and calmness evinced in his letter
hat a n,
irmness Of purpose in it that all must ad-
mire.
The Globe has published and circulated the
bone; will it publish and follow i, with the
antidote9 Believing it will not, and being the
advocates of fairness, truth and justice, we
contribute our mite by publishing it.
To the Editor the Ne,oark DAILY A dper,iscr-
SR-Your paper Of the Oath instant contains a
letter from Gen. Wall, which imposes ON me duty
painful and unexpected. But the respect due as web
TO my own character as to that of others who are i'm
Plicaled, compels Inc to give an explanation, and
TO vindcate myself from his aspersions against the
writer OF an extract Of a letter from Burlington"
lavow myself to have been the writer of that " ex-
tract, under these circumstances. letter was re-
celved by me the evening OF The first day of the
election from muua! friend in Newark, in which
many inquiries were made as 10 the probable results
and other matters connected with the contest. A
reply was written early on the following morning
from which the extract In question was taken
Both letters were private and friendly epises The
publication of any part Of my reply was not aniic-
pated, and had been consulted should have OBJ
jeeted. II was with regret. the publication day or
Two subsequent met my eye.
Gen. Wall, high official funclionary, certainly
cannot take exceptions 10 the right and proprety Of
any one privately animadverting either by letter or
conversation, on any public display he may make
ON great public occasion 1t is a right inherent
in the very nature Of our insiitu ions, and which
he from his professions should be the last 10 call in
question; and right, may add for his Informal
lion which has been exercised both here and else
where 10 an extent he lle suspects.
Gen. Wall and myself are near neighbors. A
friendly feeling Cat least on my part,) has always
existed between us and hence | can truly say la
ment having unwittingly been instrumental in dis
neighbor ! would conciliate and respect him,
cannot be blind to his public acts. The manner in
which he deports himself as one OF the highest re-
personalities of the State sovereignty and the pro-
digious influence his example may exert on the in
fammable materials Of which a portion Of society,
unhappily, is at present composed were the conSi-
derations, and not feelings Of personal unkindness,
which prompted me to pen the "exlrac" in ques-
tion.
II is not my design, however, TO apologize either
for myself or others. Since the 'exlracl" has seen
The light, 1t now becomes me to vndicae lis cor
rectness. said Gen Wall "menaced the judges,
and BY his inmidations procured the liberty of vot-
ing for one who beyond all question had no legal
right" He has made garbled statement of a case
will state 1t correctly, corroborated BY others
present.-Baker came TO the table in company with
friend, and offered his vote. He was asked if he
had been resident OF the county for the last twelve
months. He said he had. He was asked if he had
not been away part of the time. He replied he
had been away about five MONTHS but that he went
with the intention of returning. Other questions
were put TO him and his friend but nothing more
was elected, except that his friend said that he (Ba-
kerr had told him on leaving Burlington that he
intended to return The judges decided he had lost
his residence BY his absence, and not entitled to
vote. Baker left the table and went to another part
OF The room, where Gen. Wall was sitting who then
rose and brought Baker to the table again. and said
with much warmth, Offer your vote again and let
Inc Judges reject II at their peril and turning to the
Judges, IL you do not receive the voc will prose-
cute you"
IhIs was said before any person was sworn in
loud and threatening tone as soon as they had fairly
reached the table. Some contention then occurred
as 10 further hearing, and the answering Of evil
dence, in which Gen. Wall took part Bakers
friend was finally sworn and testified as related
above 10 the fact of Bakers absence-ot his commu-
nication to him his (Bakers) intention of returning,
&c.-and further, that he (Baker) was a journeyman
shoemaker, without famiy-had worked in Phila-
delPhia during his absence from Burlington-had
quit his employer in Burlington voluntarily at time
when he would have given him empoyment-had
left some things" in Burlington while absent and
when pressed TO tell what they were hcsiiated-be
knew OF no clothes, but finally said he had eft "a
long stick and shoe bor.'
II is not necessary TO repeat all that passed the
vote was taken, and l again that /" Gen. Wall,
By his Areats procured the liberty Of poiing for one
rho had no legal right" The vote was once reject
ed and Baker had retired, but was brought forward
again By Gen, Wall who assumed the whole respon-
sblty. Hs told the man to offer his vote lie told
the Judges 10 reject it at their peril and H threaten
edto prosecute them if they did not receive il.
But ne said nothing like Bakers having an &C.
H.. I,l.. ,~f q