Daily American telegraph. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1851-1852, 1852-08-04
from the Louisville Courier.


General Scott and his Revtlers-A Par-
allel-The Locofocos OF 1895 and 1861.
There are some Democrats who pursue an open
and manly course towards their political oppo-
nents, and who scorn to use vulgar or abusive
language respecting General Scott-who dispar-
age and condemn the scurrillous course pursued
by many of the locofoco journals in their defama-
ton and detraction of the character, both civil
and military, of the illustrious hero but, unfor-
tunately, there are others of different disposition,
who heap the vilest epithets upon him, and seek
his private family concerns to make matters of
accusation-who live upon SANDER, and are more
| gratifed when they can send their venomed shafts
into the family circle.
This kind of traducton is nothing new; it was
so in the days of Gen. WASHINGTON who, al
| though beloved and respected more universally
than any other of his time, yet had his Will
! fers and traducers-and those, too, who, like
the defamers of Gen. SCoTT, endeavored, by ca
Illuminating publications, to deprive him Of the
| honor of his glorious military achievements.
| In 1896, WASHINGTON was charged by base ca
lumniators rs having the "n0miaat rank" of
"commander-in-chief," but not so in fact that
this "nominal rank" THREW UPON HIM THE
LUsTRE OF THE ACTIONS WHICH CAPTURED BUR-
GoYNE, THE BRITISH GENERAL, AND RECOVERED
THE SOUTHERN STATES, and made him appear the
soul and centre Of all the military operations in
the army of the North or South"
Such, and even more charges, were promul-
gated by the opponents of Gen. Washington t.
sully his fair fame, and to tarnish the bright es
cutcheon of his military renown.
/ To let our readers more fully understand til,
matter, and the appliances which were then usec
against Gen. Washington, we subjoin the follow
| ing:
man who had many supporters, who had
defenders, who had been the friend of Washing
ton, and whom Washington had befriended, wrote
Of him rs follows, in 1896, and his pamphlet was
widely read, widely circulated, and by an oppo-
stion party widely commended and approved:
"Mr Washington had the nominal rank OF
ommander-in-chef but lie was not so in fact.
He had only separate command. lie had no
control over, or direction of, the army to the
Northward, under Gates, that captured Burgoyne,
nor Of that TO the South, under Greene that re-
covered the Southern States. The nominal rank,
however, of Commander-in- Chief, seemed TO
throw upon him the lustre of the actions, and to
make him appear as the soul and centre Of all
the military operations in America.
| "He commenced his command in June, l17J,
during the time the Massachusetts, army lay he
fore Boston, and after the affair Of Bunker Hill
The commencement Of his command was the
commencement Of inactivity. There was n spir
at Concord and Bunker Hill which his presenc,
stiAed into cold defence. He was accountabl,
for the losses and misfortunes that marked tn,
gloomy campaign of l776. His positions taker
were either islands or necks of land. In tn,
former the enemy, by the aid Of their ships coulC
bring their whole force against part of Genera
| Washington's as in the affair of Long Island
and in the latter he might be shut mp rs in the
bottom of bag. This had nearly been the case
at New York, and it was so in part il would
have been the case at Fort Lee If General Greene
had not moved precipitately off, leaving every
thing behind and by gaining Hackensack bridge
got out of the bag of Bergen Neck. No wonder
we see so much pusanimity in the President
when we see so little enterprise in the General -
| With this garing piece Of depravty on record
this yillanous yillifcation Of Gen. Washington
staring US in the face, can we be much surprised
that there should he in these times men who will
do all they can and use every endeavor TO SLAM
der, abuse, and traduce Gen. Scott.
Now in 1852, as Gen. Scott is before the peo-
pie for the highest office in the Union, the loco
foco prints, with few exceptions, in all quarters,
from Maine to California, endeayor, from day to
day, not only to disparage his personal qualities,
\ but even deny his claims to eminent military re-
nown. As did the slanderers of Washington, in
1896, charge that he was not entitled to the many
glorious achievements Of the revolutionary
struggle" so do the slanderous locofoco partisan
prints now charge that Scott is not entitled to
the renown of the many glorious and brilliant
victories acquired by our arms in the war of
1872 49, and Ia, rs well rs that of the heroic,
noble and splendid victories in the recent war
in Mexico.
He never "planned the attack on Lundy's
Lane, nor does he deserve the honor Of the vic
tory" say these traducers Of the iustrious Scott
while others actually charge him with coward
ice" and "dodgng" bullets on the field of battle ,
In 1914 Scott was universally hailed throughout
the country by the people as the hero Of Chip
newa and Bridgcwater, (Lundy : Lane J now he
Is denounced, vllifed, and sandered, as not de-
serving the "hOnor Of those victories The
same vile examinations were made against Gen
Washington in 1896, relative TO the eclat Of the
many brilliant deeds of the Revolution. We're q
man "as pure as snow and chaste as ice, he
should not 'scape calumny;" and this is the prin-
ciple which actuates these ocofoco slanderers and
traducers of our country's greatest hero, General
| Scott.