The mountain sentinel. [volume] (Ebensburg, Pa.) 1844-1853, 1852-07-15

Scott in terms highly insulting to brother Of
icer, with whom he had been terms of init
macy. OF the language of General Scott, Gen.
Jackson was informed by anonymous letter
from New York, and he made a respectful call
upon Gen. Scott for an explanation. The reply
Of Gen Scott, appears from the annexed let
ter, was insulting and opprobious. This letter
we have never in print, but to it Gen. Jack
son replied as follows:
GEN. JACKSON TO GEN SCOTT
Head Quarters, Division Of the South,
NASHVILLE, Dec. 3, 1917.
SIR Il have been absent from this place
considerable time, rendering the last friendly
Office L could, to particular friend, whose eyes
1 closed on the Goth ult. Owing to this, your
letter of the 4th October was not received until
the lst instant.
Upon the receipt of the anonymous commu-
cation made me from New York. fastened to
lay it before you: that course was suggested to
me by the respect felt for you and
soldier, and that you might have it in your pow
er TO answer how far you have been guilty of so
base and inexcusable conduct. Independent of
the services you had rendered your country, the
circumstances of your wearing the badge and
insignia of soldier, led to the conclusion that
l was addressing gentleman. With those feel
ings you were written to, and had idea been
for moment entertained that you could have
descended from the high and dignifed character
of major general of the United States, and used
language opproprous and insolent you
have done, rest assured L should have viewed
you as rather too contemplate to have had any
converse with you the subject. If you have
lived in the world thus long in the entire igno-
rance of the obligations and duties which honor
impose, you are indeed past the time of hear
ing and surely he must be ignorant of them,
who seems so little to understand their infu-
ence
Pray, sir, does your recollection, serve, in what
school of philosophy you were taught that to,a
letter inquring into the nature of supposed
injury, and clothed in language decorous and
unexceptionable, an answer should be given,
couched in pompous insolence and bullying
preston ? l had hoped that what charged
upon you by my anonymous correspondent, was
unfounded 1 had hoped from the belief that
General Scott was a soldier and gentleman
6ut ,ehen those statements doubly confirmed by
his o,cn ecords, it becomes a matter of inquiry
how far an honorable feeling can reconcile them
to himself; or longer set up claim to that char
acter. Are you ignorant sir that had my or
der, at which your refined judgment is so
! tremely touched, been made the subject of in
! quiry, you might from your standing, not your
| character, been constituted one of my judges
I How very improper, then, was it, thus situated,
and without knowledge of any of the attend
ant circumstances, for you to have preudged the
whole matter. This, at different times, and in the
circle of your friends, you could do and yet
had been arraigned, and you detailed as one
of my judges, aeith the design Of assassin lurk
ing under far exterior, you would have ap-
preached the holy sanctuary of justice Is
conduct like this congenial with that hi gh sense
of dignity which should be seated in soldiers
bosom Is it due from brother to assail in
the dark, the reputation of another, and stab
him in a moment when he cannot expect 1t L
might insult an honorable with questions
such as these, but shall not expect that they
will harrow up one who must be dead to all
those feelings which are characteristics of a
gentleman.
In terms as polite as l was capable Of
ting, asked you if my informant had stated
truly, II you were the autner OF the puDucaJlOn
and remarks charged against you, and to what
extent ; reference to your letter, without any
comment of mine, will inform how far you have
pursued similar course how little of the
gentleman and how much of the hectoring bull
ly you have manifested Ifnothing else would,
the epaulets which grace your shoulders, should
have dictated a different course, and have adj
monished you that, however small may have
been your respect for another, respect for your
self should have fought you the necessity of
replying, at least mildly, to the inquiries l sug-
gested and more especially should you have
done this, when your own constructions must
have fixed you as guilty of the abominable crime
of detraction-of slandering, and behind his
back, brother officer. But not content with
answering to what was proposed, your orer'ceen-
ing raniy has led you to make an offering of
your advice.
Believe me- sir, it is not in my power to rem
der you my thanks l think too highly OF my
self to suppose that stand at all IN need OF
your admontions and too lightly of you to
appreciate them as useful. For good advice
am always thankfnl but never fail to spurn 1t
when know it to flow from an incompetent and
corrupt source the breast where base and gull