Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-09-07
THE NEW YORK TRIBUNE AND
JARED SPARKS.

We have frequently had occasion to advert
to the miserable and unprincipled schemes to
which the Abolitionists resort in order to boil
ster up their rotten cause. The latest, and
probably the worst, instance of this baseness
which we have been called upon to record, is
the attempt made by the New York Tribune
to malign the character of Washington, and TO
attribute to him sentiments which be never
expressed. The plain statement Of the case is
this: The Tribune, as will be recollected by
many of its readers, in the issue of July 2lst,
published an alleged extract from a letter Of
General Washington to Tobias Lear, in the
following words:
"Besdes these, have another motive which
makes me earnestly wish for these ,hings; it
is, indeed, more powerful than all the rest,
namely, to hbera,e a certain species of pro-
perty which possess, very repugnantly TO my
own feelings, but which imperious necessity
compels, until can substitute some other ex-
ped;ent by which expenses, not in my power to
avoid, however well may be disposed TO Go
it,) can be betrayed"
On being Intercepted by the Petersburg Ia
teliiqencer as to the authority upon which such
a statement was made, the Tribune refers to
Jared Sparks the well known editor Of the
Writings Of Washington, and states that u
6oppeis 10 knoio' that the original letter was
in the possession Of that gentleman; at the same
time expressing surprise and assuming honest
indignation that the letter should have been so
mutilated in publication as not TO contain the
above extract. The esponse Ct Mr.. Sparks to
this charge is conclusive, and convicts the 7ti.
buas Of having inserted this alleged extract
without authority. He states that no such Ian
puapc is used in the Letter Book Of Washing
ton where the letter is fairly copied, and from
which the letter contained in his work is pub
lished.
Now, the first remark we have 10 make about
this controversy is, to express our surprise at
the Tribune having in its possession letter Of
Washington, written exactly sixty years ago, and
which has never been brought to light before.
From what source did the Tribune get the ex-
tract which il now with such a flourish publishes
to the world? Was il from the original letter ?
The Tribune is estopped from any such defence
as this by the assertion contained in its own
columns that the original is in the possession
Of Mr.. Sparks, and from the testimony Of that
gentleman, the summoned witness Of the 7Ii
bune that the letter in his possession contained
no such language as that attributed TO il by the
Tribune. He asserts, moreover, that what the
Tribune processes "to knop" is not true for
that the published letter was not taken from
the original but from washington's own copy
contained in bis letter book.
The only escape for the Tribune in thii
awkward dilemma into which it has thrust itself
! is in the sacriligious charge that Washington
himself failed TO make correct copy Of hi
letter. And even il il avails itself Of such
, position, it destroys the only effect that tn,
publication could have by assuming that Wash
} ington, who is quoted as conclusive authority
, has been guilty Of the moral delinquency o
; making an unfair copy Of his own letter. /
may well be that immaterial variances ma
: occur between the copy and the original letter
3 but that a man should exclude from the cop
J. so important paragraph as that quoted b
J. the Tribune, would subject him to the just cor
l. demnation Of all good men.
8 There is thus nothing left for il, but this