The Portsmouth inquirer. [volume] (Portsmouth, O. [Ohio]) 1849-1855, 1852-07-30
Our New York Correspondence.
New YoRK, July 20.

Our New York Correspondence.
| New YoRK, July 20.
Meesrs Editors:
i The Wbig journals throughout the coun-
try, perceive, are bent upon making some
capital for Gen. Scott, out of his LEGGED re-
fusal to accept challenge from Gen. jack
son, and they are addressing such appeals TO
the community, as the following, from the
New York Times Of Yesterday
"If the fact that Scott did not fight duel
makes as many friends for him as MIR. Clay
earned enemies by fighting one, the General
is pretty sure of an election. Those who
abandoned Clay on any such ground, are now,
Tor the same reason, bound to support Scott.
Will they do it"
Now, at the risk of tresspassingat greater
length upon your columns than may be con-.
rsenient, I propose TO give the true record Of
The controversy between Scott and Jackson;
and let the reader then answer the question
Of the Times
In 1857, Gen. Jackson was in command of
the Southern Military Department Of the Uni
led States; and as such commanding officer,
he deemed his duty TO issue certain order,
which experience proved to be expedient and
necessary. Gen. Scott was then stationed at
New York; and, jealous of the overshadow-
ing glory of the Hero of New Orleans, he
ridiculed Jackson's order, on several occa-
sions. An anonJ nous correspondent sent a
letter to Jackson, reporting what Scott had
said. ia ckson enclosed copy of this letter
to Scott and respectfully requested an expla-
nation. Scott replied very insolently and
thereupon Old Hickory wrote to him Sc
we're letter, from which the following is an
extract:-
"NAsHytLLE, Dec 3, 1917.
"ln terms as polite as was capable of
writing, asked you if my informant had
stated uuly?-if you were the author of the
publication and remarks charged against you
and TO what extent? A reference 10 your
letter, without any comment Of mine, will
inform you how little Of the gentleman, and
how much Of the hectori'lg bully, you have
manifested. If nothing else would the ep-
auettes which grace your shoulders. should
have dictated different course. and should
have admonished you, that however small
may have been your respects for another. res
pect for yourself should have taught you the
necessity of replying at least mildly, to the
inquiries | suggested; and more especially
should you have done this, when your own
conviction must have fixed you as guilty of
the abominabe crime Of detraction--of SLAM
dering, behind his back. brother oficer.-
But, not conten. with answering what was
proposed, you overweening vanity has led
you 10 make an offering of your advice.
4 u n
"For what have said, offer no apology;
you have deserved it all, and more, were it
necessary, TO say more. | will barely re-
mark; in conclusion, that if you feel yourself
aggieeved at what is here said, any commu-
nication from you will reach me safely at
this place. Your ob't servant,
ANDREW JACKSON.
To this missive Scott did not retort, until
the I'd, of January following, when he replied
in long letter, from which the Whig pa
pers, concealing the rest Of the story, repub-
lish the subjoined extract
"Iregret that cannot accept the chal-
lenge you offer me. Perhaps may be re-
strained from wishing 10 level pistol at the
breast of fellow being, in private combat,
by sense Of religion; but, lest this motive
should excite the ridIcude of gentlemen OF
liberal habits ofthinking and acting, | beg
leave to add, that decline the honor of your
invitation from patriotic scruples.
Your obedient servant,
WINFIELD SCOTT"
Niles Register Of April 10th, 1919, COM
menting on this correspondence, says
"The foregoing letter has been epresented
as challenge, and the reply TO ita non ac-
ceptance-on the ground of religious scru-
pies. The double lalsehood will not escape
the reader, although it be true that Gen.
Scott, in playful humor, chose to treat the
letter as challenge. Gen. Scott, whenever
he shall think it necessary, will be as free to
defend his reputation against calumny, as he
would be TO slay robber who should attempt
his life on the highway. He knows of no
code of morals which would disarm him, in
either case; nor does the promise, in his reply
TO Gen. Jackson's letter; for, as that was
made without consideration, SO may it be
withdrawn without explanation or apology."I
Niies's Register was then edited BY man
personally devoted 10 Gen. Scott; and the:e is
the best reason 10 believe that the passage
here quoted was revised and sanctioned by
Gen. Scott himself What share ofcredit he
can,claim for not fighting Gen. jackson, your
intelligent and candid readers may be safely
Ieftto judge. bH0~ '' at@
Governor Clinton most Indignantly feE
PEELED the insinuation Of Gen. Scott, that he
vas the author Of the anonymous letter to
Gen, Jackson, and he publisheda card TO the
public, in which be saids-A
II consider il proper 10 declare that have
had no agency or participation in writing,
debating, OF ifstigating anonymous letter
whatever to Gen. Jackson that am entire
lily ignorant of the author--atld that the i,ti.
Imation of Gtn. Scott is totally and u,q,tali.
edlyfa Sc, to all intents, and in all respects.
lis declaration Is made from motives OF res
,,oct fnr n,,hiio oosr.on a,,l ,.rt T.. 49,. -