The Democratic sentinel and Harrison County farmer. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1851-1852, 1852-08-04
olthstal6lmens of your OvO early puodic.

rufut tuHpi pitance Win YOUR own request Z
be recalled. which you now denominate youl
dismissal, l NAV be obliged to strip it OF the
embellishments yoa have ingenionsy
thrown around it; though, in doing this, you
may be deprived Of much upon whith you
depend to sustain your claim to lie consider
ed aPersecuted man.
As early as juno you begged to be recall
led. You allege that this application wa.
s''rebnkingly declined" This is not saving
the exact thing. The rplv to your request
vas, 'that it would be decided with exclu.
sive Fefferecne to the public good" When
that shall render Il proper in his Tthe Presi.
dents opinion to withdraw you from vour
present command his determination to do So
will be made Known to YOU" This was not
q den,%i Dat suspension Of present action
accompanied with an assurance Of future nc
ton on the subject. Your request was st'll
pending; regard to the public good then
stood in the war Of the immediate gratifica-
ton OF your wishes; but the President prom
lsed to act defnihvelv On the question when
that obsticle should be removed. Judging
from the stale of things at the headquarters
of the army in January, heconclu1e1 That it
was removed and he ought no longer 10 re-
4uire Of You reluctant service as romman-
ding general. This certainly cannot be cal
Ted persecution or punishment. do not
deem it proper to comment on the state of
things at the headquarters Of the army, to
which allusion is made in the letter granting
your request nor to express nm opinion as to
the share of responsibility thereof, which rest
upon yourself or others; that matter is, TO a
considerable extent. involved in 'he irves'i
cations before the court Of inquiry now sit
ting in Mexico Your reQueet to he recall
led. thus ultimately granted. was profaccl
with imaginary complaints which could not
be passed without notice. nor noticed with
out exposing their groundlessness. if thc
exposition has given offence, vou car blame
only yourself for introducing complaints so
entirely uufouoded.
The croEning outrage, as YOU regard it,
is the simple fact that YOU, and "thc three
arrested officers, "are all to be placed 'ogeth-
sT before the same coUrt-the innocent and
the guitv--the accuser and the accused: the
Judge and his prisoners are dealt with alike.
''Most impartial iusticeP' Won excIaim
And why is it not impartial justice? On
what ground OF right cen you claim 70 have
your case Disseminated from theirs? II is
true. you have assumed to bepthcir Judge.
and bave pronounced them guilty, and COM
plain and rcpine chat the laws of the country
do not allow vou their accusor. to institute
a court to register your decree. But You are
not their righttul Judge, although they were
your prisoners. Before that court you all
s'tanf on the same level. and all have equal
rights. Though you may have the scf-satis-
flying conviction that you are innocent and
they arc guilty, the government could act
upon no such presumption. BY becoming
an accuSer, you did notp)ace yourself beyond
the reach of being accused; unless YOU are
clothed with the immunity of fdespotir power
and can claim the benefit Of the maxim 'that
the King can do no wrong" know not why
your conduct, when made the su iect of
charges, may not be investigated by 3 court
of inquiry; nor can perceive what other orI
betterright you have to complain of and ar
raGn the government, than the other Off
GERS whom you have accused. and whose
cases, with yours, were referred to the same
court. If yours is hard case, theirs il not
less SO. If you can rightfuy complain 1flI
persecution by the government, so con they, !
;-,;th equal justice, and an equal claim to
public sy .~'na!hy'
The charges a,r&insty OIL did not cmanatc
from the government, nor did they relate to
~ matter in which it could feel any nccHiiar
interest. Not believing it impossible for yo1
to do wrong, or that you were exempt from
all responsibility for whatever you might
have done, the government deemed it prop |
81, when charges were preferred against you.
coming from q source entitled to respect. 10
cause them to be investigated. AS the usu-
al and mildcst mode of proceeding, ;hey
were referred to a court Of inquiry. Ualilj
you can show that you enjoy the transcen
dental privilege to have your official conduct
exempt from all examination in any form
whatever, you have no cause to complain Of
the course taken in regard to the charges
against you.
If your extraordinary pre;ensons are to
derive any support from your distinguished
services in the field, you ought to be mindful
that the three accused officers put under ar
rest by you have like claims for distinguish
ed services On the pages Of impartial his
tory their names and their gallant deeds
must appear with yours: and no monopolizmg
claims, seeking "malignant exclusions" at
the expense Of the ''truth of history viii
be permitted to rob them oftheir fair share
of the glory won by our gallant army while
under your command
With your assault upon the character of
your "eratic brother shall not interned
die; but must repcl your charge that hcI
has been favoured for being a political de-
serter to ''he true .tttiM" for "signalzingI
his apostaey by acceptable den mciation of1
one to whom he had formerly professed
land not without cause the highest obliga.
tons" The reasons for not sendlrg your
charges against Brevet Major General Worth
to the court of inquiry, are set forth in my
letter of the 18th Of January. lrcgret that
they ar. SO entirely unsatisfactory to you,
but am consoed with the assurance that
they are in othera quarters more tavorabIy
received. The errors of your commentary
on my letter have risen from your misoppre-
pensions of the text. The principle there
laid down is ofvital importance to subordi-
nate officers, and in no respect impairs the
rights or the authority of those iu chief com
tnand. AS the principles which you az
Faign are the creatures of your own fancy,
and have no eountenance or support from