Daily American telegraph., 1852-07-14
Gen. Scott and Gen. Jaok.on.

One of the partisan newspapers true to those
low instincts which, during Presidential cam
paigu, always set so many profgate pens at
work in eliminating the candidates, tells the
public that Gen. Scott is coWard, because he
refused challenge from Gen. jackson some time
after the war of 1872 We do not recollect the
facts in this case, if any such occurred, and do
not regard them as worthy of notice for the pur-
pose OF vindicatng Gen. Scott from the charge
Oh coward,ce! Nor do we offer single word in
condemnation of duelling, as the foundation Of
den. scotts defence; for those who now con-
aemn MN Tor this imputed refusal would have
oeen equally averse upon his acceptance Ma
terlal ior partisan SANDER is all that they seek.
But while disdaining to discuss the Question
whether duelling be right or wrong generally.
we will offer few words upon duelline in espe-
cial connexion with Gen. Scott, and upon the
proof of cowardice which is furnished by this
| imputed refusal
Gen. Scott entered the army from choice, and
| fought his way, in numerous bloody battles to
the commission and command of brigadier
general long before the war of 1872 was ended
And not till after Wilkinson and Hull and Hamp-
ton and Dearborn, and other :" old fogies which
the Revolution had left, had been cleared off
from the army, and their places in command sup
piled by Browne, Scott, Gaines Ripley, and other
| sprigs of "Young America" did said army BEGIN
| to meet with any success And after it did be-
gin, it went forth, like him who sat on the white
| horse with bow in his hand, "conquering and
| to conquer" And Col. Scott and Gen. Scott,
the hero of Lundy's Lane" and of many other
lanes where British bullets and bayonets were no
joke, had very considerable share in the very
hard fighting that achieved all this CONQUER
ing"
We aoonder if any body in the army in those
days ever dreamed Of cowardice in Captain Scott
or Colonel Scott, or General Scott? Guess not
Even the "original Scott men, Of the present
day, who have stuck to him most constantly and
faithfully from the beginning of his career-no
not career: nomination, we mean-couId not be
more enthusiastic in praise Of his gallantry than
were all men. of whatever party in those fighting
days. The "Fe leralists," who opposed the war,
We're unanimous in praising the chivalrous gal
| lantry OF this then young Colonel and General
while the " Republicans" who made and sus-
tanned said war, regarded him as real fire eater.
General Scott coward The assertion would
not have been quite safe in 1872, 1918, 1914,
and 1915, when something harder than words
was very frequent penalty for slandering
American officers, military or naval And If
Gen. Scott was q coward in the war of 1872, he
must have outgrown the infrmity afterwards, for
he certainly did not run away in Florida, and
gave himself numerous opportunities for smell
ing powder in Mexico. And General Scott did
not dare to g look General jackson in the eye 20
He looked the batteries of Vera Cruz, and Con-
treras, and Churubusco, and Cerro Gordo, and
Molina del Rey, and sundry other places, not
only in the eye, but in the mouth and as g fuss
| and feathers" make him a conspicuous mark, he
must have looked at some risk. A coward |!
Psha!! The poor things who make this charge
at this time of day are merely talking Of them
selves.
A good story is told in history of Marshal Tu-
renne. In 1874 he marched into that part Of
western Germany then called the Palatinate the
dominions of the Duke of Lorraine, Elector- Pala.
tine, and by command of his king, that bigoted,
debauched, and thoroughly selfish tyrant Louis
XIV, committed horrible devastation The Elec-
tor-Palatne, beholding from his Castle of Man.
helm two cities and twenty-five villages in flames,
was exasperated into sending a challenge to
Turenne The French General replied that he
never fought at the head of less than 90 600 men,
similar story is told of Cromwell, and of the
Duke of Vendome, and of Marshal Villars, and of
Prince Eugene, and of the Duke of Marlborough,
and we know not what other great commanders.
But such an answer to such an invitation would
have been just the thing for either of them, and
would be quite as good for our Marshal Threnns.
Was Gen. jackson fool for sending him a chal-
| lenge? As great fool as Gen. Scott would
have been for accepting it for as courage is the
only quality which the world regards as tested by
a duel, each of these heroes of many a we'll
fought field would have been fool to seek such
proof Would anybody have called "Old Hick-
ory" a coward for refusing to challenge sold
Fuss and Feathers ?" Bah
But general officer in command owes some
thing to bis country. Therefore while bound to
face the bullets of the enemy, he deserts his post
of duty by venturing his life in private quar-
rel In sending n challenge, General Jackson
disregarded this important consideration. In re-
fusing the challenge, General Scott observed it..
Which did the best ?-Pha. Ledger
Twelve children died at sea on board the Swe-
dish brip Swea arrived Mt New York on Sundav