The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1842-06-25
THE NEW YORK EVENING POST
PRESIDENT TYLER-PRESIDEN
JACKSON--PRESIDENT VAN Bu-

JACkSON--PRESlDE VAN d.
Rem
We always anticipate both pleasure and pro-
ening Post and therefore quite often select 1t
from the pile of exchanges for priority Of peru :
sal. To eulogize the general style of It's edito-
rtas would be supererogatory,pu opinion hav-
ing long since precluded the necessity OF ex-
pressing complimentary sentiment concerning
them. We have learned to value its candor as
well as to respect its talents.
In an article which appeared in that paper
of Wednesday last, we find one Of the few
instances which have given us reason to
suppose that it occasionally may yield to
a powerful temptation to reduce it from
its customary directness of candor. What
that temptation was we do not pretend to con-
lecture, but that some temptation existed, and
that its allLrements have been successful, we
feel but little doubt. Frank advice to a
foe is always suspicious. An assumption
of frankness in advising the Wing ma
jority in Congress how they should have
treated President Tyler, we find in the ar
ticle to which we have referred. What was the
object to be gained by its specious pretensions
of friendly advice We leave the labor of con-
lecture to those who pretend to more shrewd-
ness than we can boast, or to the improved can
dor of the writer, to expound the mystery of his
own creation His obscurity Of purpose puz
zles US; and we are equally perplexed by the
difficulties of his philosophy.
He pretends to read easily and 10 explicae
distinctly all the pecularities of the Presi-
dents mental and moral character. We
have found men, wiser than the editor
Of the Post, mistaken in the perusal
of character-especially when political or
personal bias had operated to mslead. 1t is
unnecessary TO quote. his language infinitely
But we would ask, if persons pretending to
equal profundity in their insight into cha
racter, had not denounced General Jack
son for imbecility obstinacy and igno-
rance. Were we inclined to go against the
proverb that ''bygones should be bygones," we
could quote from papers of past times, passages
assailing Presidents at different periods with
language as smoothly insulting as that which
the Post employs. Relort is out of the question.
1
To rake up old political vituperation is disagree
able. We are unwilling to inform the rising
generation that the names now so highly re-
spected for integrity and patriotism, were once
assailed with the same harshness of vitupera-
ton and the same slyness ofcalumny, which now
dis6gure the public press. Wewill not go beyon
recent "reminiscences, and to them we have re-
ferred in mentioning the name of Gen. Jackson.
They said he was incapable of thinking for him
SELF and consequently was the tool of the de-
signing politicians about him that he was blind
ly hasty in his decisions and obstinate in his adhe
renee to them that he was 50 deficient in educa-
ton as to be unable to write decent sentence in
his own vernacnlar, or even tospell the most COM
mon English words. These and other charges
of weakness and ignor against General
Jackson were made and reiterated by papers
whose talent was undispuled Yet General
Jackson was respected by the People-was re-
elected by the People. Was Mr.. Van Buren,
ever charged with ignorance? What was his
fate?