The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1858-02-18
washington and Hamilton.

In another column the reader will lind a
couple of articles the ore u communication to
the Boston Courier, the other leader in the
Richmond Wig, ON the much vexed question of
the authorship of Washington's letters and
papers. We have reason to know that the
former is from the pen of very distinguished
state. man, a surviving member of the old fcde-
raj party, now residing in Philadelphia, who,
from his recollections and associations, was
well qualified to form Judgment on the mat
ter in dispute, and whose opinions are there
fore entitled to respect. 1t will be perceived
that without denying that the wording Of
Washington's letters was Hamilton's he takes
the ground that the ideas were invariably
Washngton's: that Hamilton, in short, filled the
station of confidential secretary, who is en-
trusted not merely with the cal!igraphy of his
employers Office, but also with the conversion
of his thoughts into words
The article in the Wing. without possessing
equal claims to authority, or adding any new
facts to those which are already under dis
cussion, may be presumed to express the gene
raj sentiment of Virginia, and, for that matter,
of a large section Of the whole country, in fiat
rejection of the claim set up for Alexander
Hamilton by his son. The Richmond editor,
who, by the way in subsequent arti-
Gle compares Washington with Timoleon,
Brutus, and other heroes of antiquity, and sets
him far above all of them, is Indignantly
severe upon the indiscreet parizanship which
seeks, at this late day, to exalt Hamilton at the
expense of the man whom above all others the
nation delights to honor. He even goes so far
as to assert that Hamilton's claims to a share of
the authorship of the Farewell Address (Which
have been usually conceded by all parties) are
utterly unfcuuded and ridiculous.
So the controversy goes on. Here partisan
of Washington, there friend Of Hamilton adds
fact or an argument: and ii seems for a time
as though all our historical "reminiscences were
going to be shaken.
On reflection, however, it will soon be dis
ccrned that this modern controversy, however
curious and interesting, cannot well lead to auy
real or practical result. The character Of
Washington-whethe real or unreal-is histo
rically fixed. He is canOnized and unchange.
able. He is definite parsonage, with decided
features, and perfectly well ascertained charac-
teristics, in the mind of every person who has
been educated in this country. We have all OF
us grown up with clear and positive impress
sion concerning him, juss as we have concern
ing Alexander the Great, Cesar, and Napoleon
Bonaparte. And it may well be questioned
whether any. evidence however strong would
suffice to alter that received impression con-
corning the one or concerning the others There
are certain opiniOnswbi people will not change.
The ripest scholarship and the purest sin
cerity have, within the past few years, been
enlisted in the task of vindicatiDg the charac-
tiers of Nero and Bloody Queen Mary of Eng
land; but, however full the information of the
indicators, and however plausible their argu-
ments. the public still continue to and will ever
believe that Nero was a cruel ruffian, and Queen
Mary bloody minded fanatic. So it will be
with the Washington Hamilton controversy
Mr.. John c. Hamilton may pile testimony upon
testimony, and reason upon reason, but the pub
lie will take no more notice Of his witnesses and
bis arguments than OF the idle wind, and will GO
on believing in the conventional Washington
just as if no such person as John G. Hamilton
had ever existed, or as if he had never done that
dangerous thing-written book
AS the several volumes Of Mr.. Hamilton s
work appear, il is likely that the controversy
will be periodically revived, aud that the cru
dite will he exercised al regular intervals The
question may possibly take rank permanently
among those curious and interesting problems
which serve 10 exercise the wits and torture the
intellecis Of juvenile debating societies, as for
nstance-whether Brutus did right in killing
Caesar &c. But beyond helping the sale of the
work. and proving u pecuniary godscnd to The
publishers, we know Of no practical result
which can flow from the publication of these
new memoirs of Alexander Hamilton. Ger.
tanly. If intended to lower Washington, they
will fail in the ir aim.