New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1854-08-22
Commander Hollins.

Any one who dispassionately considers the
history of the Greytown affair and the oonnec-
ton of Commander Hollins Herewith, must, we
think, conclude that not only is that officer free
from any responsibility in the matter of the
destruction of that town Of huts, but should be
acquitted of all blame in the premises. But,
with stupidity altogether unaccountable, and,
because it inficts personal wrong, altogether
inexcusable, many papers claiming respectable
ty seem to find it impossible to separate Com
mander Hollins from any obloquy they may
choose to attach to this act, in which he was but
the executive instrument 1t is unnecessary to
refer to the published documents touching the
origin and progress of this affair to show that
the instructions Of Commander Hollins fully au-
thorized his course; the very fact that the Ad-
'ministration does not disayow the act but Shout
ders the responsibility itself, is sufficient tc
convince any one that the abuse aud ridicule &c
freely poured upon him are entirely undeserved
1t is hard indeed that, because he happened tc
be selected to perform this, no doubt to him
disagreeable task, and performed it in strict
compliance with the orders he had received, he
should now be assailed by his countrymen as il
he alone were responsible for an act with the
origin and merits of which he had nothing what
ever to do 1t seems very hard too that the
very first time an experienced, and no doubt
valuable officer, should be brought directly into
public notice, it should be to receive severe and
unjust censure for performing a task which he
could not avoid without mourning whatever dis
honor attaches to disobedience of orders.
The latest attack upon him is of sort the
most novel and unexpected. The New York
Times, in abiding to the correspondence be-
tween Commander Hollins and the commander Of
the British vessel Bermuda, in effect styles the
former braggart and bully, while the latter
is made to appear most discreet and polished
officer and gentleman. Lieut.. Jolley certainly
did upon that occasion act the part of discreet
officer, and we have no doubt he is polished
gentleman; we have searched in vain through
the note of Commander Hollins for any express
sion or sentiment that should stamp him as any
thing less. His reply was gentle though firm,
mild but determined, and was unquestionably a
very proper reply, whether Lieut. Jolley and
the New York Times think so or not.
The Times is wonderfully oblivious to the
thousand examples of arrogance and assump-
tion with which British naval and military
gentlemen have favored our own, and takes the
ground that because the British commander
had the weaker force, Commander Hollins COM
mitted an objectionable breach of courtesy in
not making meek and submissive reply to the
protest, whether he intended to respect it or not
We are of opinion, however, that Commander
Hollins and his reputation will survive all the
reproaches, taunts and ridicule that may be
directed against him in consequence of his
connection with the quarrel between the free
city of Greytown and the Republic of the United
States. The writer's who have abused him most
severely eannot show that he has done any
thing more or less than his duty, unless they
contend that he had a higher duty than to obey
orders