The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1852-04-19
1h the Editor Of Me Republic:

To the Editor Of The Republic
The editorial article Of the Republic, published
on Tuesday last, relative to the late appointment
of cadet from New Jersey, is OF such character
as to demand some notice from me.
The object of the article is to contradict certain
statements, copied in the Republic, made by cor
respondent OF the Boston AAds. My name is freely
used by both writer's, and statements re made re.
latiye to my conduct which are either not true
msreprescnted.
Although seldom trouble myself about news
paper articles, yet the present is Of such high
authority that feel it due to myself and to my
constituents to make this communication.
Both the articles referred to present the appoint
ment by the President of cadet for New Jer-
scy question simply between my colleague,
Commodore Stockton, and myscli-whether my
son his relation should receive the Executive
favor. The truth OF the case admits OF no such
false issue.
NV con was not candidate for a cadetship at
the time the President considered the applications
from New Jersey; and had been informed
that the President had, stated in the Repu5-
lie, directed the name Of my son TO be placed
among those of the appointees. ! should have
promptly declined the appointment, and recon-
Inended another candidate from New Jersey.
never received the slightest intimation that the
President disposed to give cadetship to New
Jersey until was informed, as hereinafter stated,
that it was promised to my colleague.
The Republic has published to the world that my
sons name did not appear on the list OF applicants
for cadeships prepared and submitted to the Secre-
tary of War; that there recommendation
for his appointment; that the President directed
the name of my son to be placed among those OF
the appoinrees and then rejected him, upon ''thc
obvious improperly of comforting two such APP
pointments in the same year on the Sons OF mem
Der Of Congress"
Yet the editor of the Republic knew that was
altogether ignorant of these strange and contra
dctory proceedings, and that their publication un-
explained would expose me to the charge of having
neglected the claims Of all the other applicants
from New Jersey in order to get my own son ap,
pointed. do not suppose that the editor intended
this injustice towards me; yet such would nave
been the result if his article had remained unan
swered by me.
Ss to that ,se son of mine has bee"
On the 10th of January last, the Hon. George
II Brown, the Wing Representative Of the district
in which reside, at my request, very kindly re,
commended my son for admission into the Naval
School. there being vacancy, and no other can
didatc from New Jersey; and the Secretary OF the
Navy afterwards granted the appointment
Since then have not asked the President. nor
the Secretary of War; to appoint my other son to
the army; but, the contrary, purposcly alb
stained from making any such request
II was therefore altogether unnecessary for the
reference to my case, "of the obvious improperly
of comforting two such appointments in the same
year the coma Of a member of Congress" Such
lmproprieties may have been committed IN dis
posing Of the public patronage, but 1t was mani
fest injustice to iInplicate me in any such pracuce
have not, neither have the Wings OF New Jcr-
sey, made any complaint against the President Tor
not giving to my son cadetship. MY son could
never have had any higher claim for his favor
than the of other Jerseynen; but In the pres
ent case. he had no claim whateverj he was not
even all applicant.
Neither have aught to cay against the conduct
of nv worthy colleague in this matter; he has acted
openly and honorably. He asked for the appoint
snent as personal favor, and obtained it. ibid not
request il for my son. but did desire IL lot others'
whom thou CHIT had higher and stronger claims
upon the patronage of the Executive than the
nominee OF my colleague. The President thought
other wise, and granted the favor to my colleague
The true issue, therefore, raised in the present
case is between the nominee Of the President and
the other applicants from New Jersey. Inc ques
ton is, whether their claims have been properly
considered. From my knowledge oil the matter 1
fee! bound to say that, in my opinion, they were
not so considered But these appointments are
within the sole discretion Of the Executive, should
not have felt il my duty TO call in question the
proprety Of this appointment, had not the hepo6ie
by the tenor and tone of its remarks, compelled
me to defend myself and the other Wing Repre-
sentatives from New Jersey against the charge OF
neglect of duty towards our constituents which 10
clearly implied in'thosc remarks.
In making this defence, will confne myself to
a simple narration OF iacts:
In the lnst Con yress the whole delegation from
New Jersey, with one exception, were wing
They received, during both sessions, applications
from their State for appointments to cadetships'
Thcsc applications were communicated TO the De-
partment Among others, my sons name was,
at my request, submitted by my friend and late
colleague, Judge Dayton. In the winter OF 1901
Il called on the Precedent; spoke TO him upon the
subi,ct Of a cadctship for New Jersey, and named
INV con 10 him; and formed that, owing to the
of tal d
the increase of applications for the OF deceased
officers casioned by the Mexican war, be did not
think it would be in his power, that year, to give
New Jersey appointment. was satisned win
This answer and made no further claims upon him
during the last Congress. In December last again
called on the PRECEDENT upon the came subject, and
he gave me, in substance, the came reply After
this said and wrote to my friends who had en-
trusted me with applications for a cadetship, that
there was little hope Of obtaining an appoint
ment from The President during this year. but that,
urge the consideration of their claims upon the
President. No such opportunity was offered me,
or to any Wing, 10 my knowledge, in or out OF
Congress, from New Jersey, until was informed
by the Secretary of War, on the 18th OF March
last that the President had made up his mind to
give the appointment to the nominee OF my col
league.
Ths information given to me under the fol-
lowing circumstances:
On the 18th Of March last ] returned to the city,
after a weeks absence visit to my family,
and found upon my table the following notes
"WAR DEPARTMgsT, March 10, 1852.
"sn: The Secretary of War desires me to shy
that be will be pleased TO see you at the Depart
Inent to morrow.
VERY respectfully, your obedient servant,
(signed) JOHN POTTS.
"Hon. J. w. MILLER"
| never received note from the Secretary OF
War Of the character stated in the Republic. "to
inquire IL this were the same con whom the Presi-
dent had selected for the cadeship."
Immediately upon reading the above note, on
the morning Of the 10Th Of March, ] called at the
Department of War, when the Secretary informed
inc Il give the substance OF the conversaton) that
the President had desired 20 give the appointment
of cadetship for New Jersey to my con, but
that. as his name did not appear upon the list OF
candidatcs. aud IL also having been represented
TO the President that the same son or another bad
lately been appointed to the navy, the Prosl.
dcut md concluded 30 appoint young Bayard,
Who had been recommended and urged by my
colleague. Commodore Stockton. The Secro-
tary alec said, that as had not this year men
toned the name of my TO him, and his name
not appearing upon the lst Of candidates, he sup
posed tina, | did not desire the appointment. J
stated To the Secretary that he was right in this
conclusion. That, although my con bad been