The Charlotte journal. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1835-1851, 1844-10-04

his property was secure, anu COFh~df"s al
n distance. none more devoted TO the cause
Than he. but when CorHrdtiis came, when
his estate was 10 be sequestered, he bent
The knee, he took protection, aud was, or
meanly seemed TO be, brlbed SUBJECT.
To consider this conduct as Ioryism,
Mr.. HAYWOOD thinks the judgment merely
of modern Wings, but the certificates pub.
6shed bv him, as well as those published
BY the Wing Press, shew that The same
oninion of his conduct was formed by Rev
oiutionary Wings. Aadre,r Eifiofte swears
that the one opinion of that day was that
Ezekiel Polk was Tory, aud was 10
heart and deed an enemy 10 his Country.
William McCodrd aud Nathan Orr swear
that they always heard him branded with
being Tory during the Revolution"
John BrOlea swears, that he learnt from
the Old Soldiers that Ezekiel Polk was
Tory, and that he took British protection,
and that all the people considered his lak.
inc protection as rank Toryism MS If he
had been fighting against The country.
Dan AID rander swears, that he has re-
peatedly heard his father relate TO himself
and others, that he was one OF the men
that took Ezekiel Polk 10 Guiliord as q
t Tory prisoner, and that when his brother,
, Col. Thomas Polk, knew he was there, he
+ said, damn him, do not want to see him,
/ put him with the other Tories Aud Tho
mas Alexander swears, that he was one oil
; Ezekiel Polk s company-that when Lord
CORVALLIS erected his head quarters in
Charlotte, Ezekiel Polk went in aud took
British protecliun-and that one Jack Bar
nett having learned that Polk had gone TO
Charlotte TO avail himself Of British pro-
lection, determined TO way-lay him as he
returned and XIII him And this witness
further swears, that he wns in the war aud
personally knew these facts 10 be true
And even Mr.. liaywood's witness, Dan
iel Alexander states, that 'somo Wings
, were so exceedingly Jealous as to consider
/, the act of taking protection (by Ezekiel
j Polk) as traitorous,' and he also rcmem-
+. hers Ezekiel Polk came into the camp with
# Jack Barnett, aud il was said Barnett had
u taken him prisoner, but Mr.. Alexander
c considered ii loke-a very singular Joke
n by the wny-and he also remembers that
I after the War, objections were made TO
. Iia heing Sheriff on account Of his having
G taken British prUsovs,~~' II seems, then.
&c that so Far from the Wings Of the prcseul
IT day being singular in deeming Ezekiel
(. Folks conduct equivalent TO toryism, that
N opinion harmonlzcs remarkably with their
he brother Wings OF the Revolution. Indeed
D. what other opinion could be formed Whai
is but party coulddeem such an act otherwise
a. than highly discredliable, which tho mer
n. cy might forgive, justice must pronounct
IS a crime Il is useless to prolong discus
is sion on the subject. 1t may be brought e
very simple test. 1t depends upon thu
to nature Of that allegiance, which a ci,izei
he owes to his country and soldier TO hi
standard. Suppose tina, when Ezekiel Poll
,r. was called upon to take the oath Of allegi
N, ance TO his country, he had proposed t
x. swear that he would be faithful to her, an
&C. serve faithfully under her standard at al
Us hazards, except the loss Of his property
but that when that was 10 danger, he mus
ily 20 over TO the enemy and take British
,r. protection, and act while the danger Taste,
in. as q British subject. Would such an oall
'cs have been received Would not the OK
ut ccption be considered as timely provis'
an to authorize future treason Would not
he brave and honorable man have felt insult
= ed, If such an alternative had been otlerr,
nd to him Yet, this exception describes III
ls very condnc, which Ezekiel Polk pursued
il If it was right so to art, it could not b
wrong to say when he took The oath, tina
let he would so act. And If every man feel.
it MS feel he must, that such qualifica'io
ny upon an oath Of allegiance would be dar
Nc, gcrous TO the country and disgracelul {
)lk the citizen, ii could only be because III
nd conduct Of Ezekiel Polk was dl.cIediabl
it and frditorous. But what is Tcryism, br
~ Treason to the country in The War of III
Revolution Hence, the difference in III
- judgment passed upon his conduct by III
MS Wings and the Democrats, depends on lh
en- difference between those parties respective
&C. ~ in their notions Of allegiance. The la
- ter hold, (if Mr.. II. correctly cxpounds lhei
90 doctlne) tacit exception in tina. obig'
est tinn, by which citizen is allowed 10 leny
ivo his country, and soldier his standard, whe
&c. this il necessary 10 SIRE his pro- crfy. w
ur- hold the obligation 70 be universal ia IFS r.
s n qulrements, and that the citizen and soldiC
m, is bound TO adhere to his country, thong
c a he should thereby lose all that he has
Of Hence they Justify, and re condemn Ezc
of kicl Polk. Let the Freemen and Patriot
r. Of North Carolina determine which is righl
ed, To them wc cheer(uIly submit The question
ih To dlscrcdit the charge Of Tory ism al
nv legged against Ezekiel Polk, Mr. Ilaywoo
ef, oilers Two arguments, which may be short
Tx, y disposed Of The first is this He pull
r., fishes Ezekiel Folks commission as secon
o- captain IN the Regiment Of Rangers, date
Ike 18th June, 1913, and states that his CON
my pany formed a part Of Col. Thompson's Re
sg- glment which received the thanks Of Cor
ith gress IN Jnly, l716; and urges the com
70. mission and the vote Of thanks as full ey
rk- dence, that Ezekiel Polk was not Tory
The Whether his company indeed formed PAL
rst Of Col. rs Regiment we know not, bat