The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1852-09-01

Some Of the Locofoco papers are
copyingIa portion of the correspon-
dence Of Scott and jackson, in rela-
ton to a personal dificulty--very alb
urdlyTendeavoring to impute cosodrd-
ice to the former. We commend to
their attention the following brief and
unbiased statement of the case from
the last volume of Hildreth's History
just published. MIR. Hildrcth is
not a Wing, and his testimony may be
regarded asssimpartial
Jackson seemed, indeed, to hold the
articles of war, the War Department
itself, in fact, all authority except his
own will and pleasure, in very sover-
eign contempt. Two years before,
dissatisfied at orders sent directly from
the War Department to certain off
GERS under his command, without pas
sing through him, he had issued a gen
eral order april q, 1910 severely
consuming this proceeding, and forbid
ding any officer under his command to
obey such orders. The Var Depart
ment, at that moment without a head,
tamely submitted to this insult /; but
fthe affair naturally enough became a
subject of discussion among military
men, and General Scott, at a dinner
table, expressed the opinion, certainly
not ill-founded, that Jackson's general
order was mutinous in its character,
'amounting to a reprimand of the pres
idcnt and commander-in-chief, from
whom all the orders of the War De
partmcnt theoretically came. Some
anonymous busy-body having commu-
nicated to Jackson this dinnertablc
opinion of SCOTS, he wrote to Scott
to enquire ifthe story was true. Scott
replied in very courteous but manly
terms, avowing the opinion, and giving
his reasons for it /; to which Jackson
sent an insolent and insulting reply.
apparently intended to provoke 9
challenge. Scott answered, in term;
as gentlemanly as Jackson's had beer
rude, that, as q duel did not seem nee
cssary to settle the question of tht
courage of either Of them, he mus
decline being drawn into a persona
quarrel. Notwithstanding Il regula.
ton of the War Department forbid
ding publications relative to transac
tons between officers Of a private anc
personal nature, manuscript copies 0
this correspondence, except Scott
last letter, were circulated by Jack
sons friends during his northern tour
as proof that Scott was cowcd. Their
might be some donbt whether the let
ter of the regulation extended to man
uscript publication !; and as the de
partment did not venture to call Jack
son to account, Scott was driven. i
sclf-defence, to a circulation, also il
manuscript, Of the whole correspond
ence, which, however. soon found 1t
way to the newspapers.
So far, in the eyes of all civilizc,
persons, Scott had altogether the hes
of it. But unfortunately, in his las
letter, he had dropped suspicion tina
the anonymous information to Jackso
came from De Witt Clinton. 1t wa
conjectured that Clinton would b
very willing to foment a quarrel be
tween Jackson and the War Depart
ment, in hopes of securing Jackson
support for himself at the next presi
dental election. Indeed, during Jacl
sons visit to New York, some compli
ments passed between them not a lit
Ntle alarming to the Tammany men an.
other portions of the Virginia dynasty
AS soon as SCOTS letter appeared
Clinton Indignantly denied the impu
tation, and Scott made the best rctrea
possible under the circumstances, by
prompt and manly retraction.