Staunton vindicator and general advertiser. (Staunton, Augusta County, Va.) 1858-1860, 1859-08-05
From the Charlottesville Jeffersonisn
se BY REQUEST.

From the Charlottesville Jefersonian
ii BY REQUEST.
Bishop Johns on Mr. Jefferson.
dMessrs. Editors II beg leave to call
the attention Of your readers to the follow
ing article taken from the Richmond Ex
aminer, which Irequest you to publish in
Your next issue. How long will it be be-
fore the character Of great and good man.
will cease to be the mark at which petty
political cnmity and priestly intolerance will
aim their pointless shafts?
Mr.. Jefferson was q propounder Of new
theories in government, and an originator
of new doctrines in politics, Let these the
cries and these doctrines be free to criti-
cisu, come whence it may.
But in religion he was not only no prop
agandist, but carefully avoided all public
expression Of his opinions, thinking and re-
peatedly saying that in this matter, every
man should be left perfectly free and uu-
biased, to the decisions Of his own judg-
ment It does seem strange then. that the
author Of the act for religious tolerance in
Virginia should not be allowed that small
quantum offreedom in private opinion, which
is hardly to be denied to the humblest secta-
~. It is to be hoped for the sake Of ordi-
nary christian charity, that this will be the
last time that it will be necessary to direct
attention to wanton repetition of SANDER
Gus assaults, that were; first made in the
heat of political controversy, that have laid
dormant for querter of century, and
which the whole life IF the man, spread O.
pen, as it has been in an unusual manner,
to public scrutiny, contradicts. It is right
and proper. coming from whatever source
they may, that these assaults should be re-
buked and exposed in their true light.
Bishop Johns has recently favored the
world with biographical sketch Of the late
Prof, Fl. A. Washington. II my Lord
Bishop had confined himself strictly to his
theme, he would never have heard from me,
as doubt if, under any circumstances, he
will hear from any other reader. Possibly
I might have smiled at the passage in which,
with some rhetorical ostentation, he displays
his ignorance Of the great popular heart and
Of the character Of stump speaking in Vir-
GINA, but should have set it down as the
result of his altogether different walk oflife.
Indeed, I would have had no opportunity
to exhibit even that much indulgence, for [
should most probably have never heard Of
this performance at all, and most certainly
should not have read it, had not friend in
formed ale, in advance Of its publication.
that it was to contain an attack GU Mr. JET
ferson. Thai, at least, | acas curious to
see, and so read the pamphlet as soon as
l could find copy. The attack occurs at
page Is, where, speaking of Mr. Washing
toms appointment by the President to ar
range and prepare for the press those pa
pers Of Mr. Jefferson which had not been
used in his grandson's edition Of the Me-
moir and Correspondence, be has seen fit to
employ the following language?
Contact with the dregs ofthe correspon-
dence of that eminent statesman but un-
scrupulous politician and less than question
able moralist, a Spartan policy might COM
mend 1t would be hazarding nothing to
say, that such was the manner of its indu-
ence on Mr.. Washington. He finished the
distasteful task with fidelity, indeed, but
with diminished admiration for the political
character, and aversion for the moral views
Of Mr.. Jefferson"
The word 'questionablc" signifies doubt
full and suspicious. What is meant, in eth
er case, by moralist less than doubtful, or
less than suspicious, I leave to be gathered
by those who admire Gas l do not) the rheto-
rio Of Bishop Johns. And they may also
ascertain, if they can, the relation Of the
word "such" in the sentence that follows.
and thereby show the correct grammatical
structure Of the clause. For my part, l
humbly confess that can see neither sense
nor grammer in it, But something else
do see, and take leave to call public atten-
ton to it. see that his reverence was wri-
ting in passion, which appears to have
been excited by the name Of Mr. Jefferson.
In the biography Of friend it is natural
and allowable that the fervor Of the writer
should advance his style to strains of eulogy
but it cannot be conceded that this fervor
shall degenerate into angry assaults on 9th
ers; still less that it shall authorize him to
embroil the dead by improper or unwarran-
table disclosures Of their opinions, or it may
be, by Misrepresentation Of them But
this privilege Bishop Johns has usurped in
the case before US, and has undertaken to
engage Mr.. Washington in contest with
those who will not permit his opinion, even
when approvingly quoted by Bishop Johns.
to detract from Mr.. Jeferson's character,
except upon distinct and precisely stated
grounds What those grounds may have
been in this case, the public is not informed
All we know is, that Mr.. Washington did
not choose to present them. Nor, in saying
that Mr.. Washington had finished the dis
tasteful task with diminished admiration for
the political character, and aversion for the
moral views Of MIR Jefferson" is it stated
how great his admiration had been in the
commencement, nor by what sum it bad
been diminished. nor what were the moral
views" which had averted Mr.. Washington
shall not note a word Of disrespect
against Mr. Washington myself, but it is
quite plain that Bishop Johns has not been
very "scrupulous7 in protecting the honor
Of his departed friend. Directly or Indirect
ly, Mr.. Washington solicits the appoint
ment to edit the papers in question All
who know anything about such matters. and
about the comparative obscurity Of Mr..
Washington. must believe that The APP
pointment must have contemplated the ac-
QUESTION of certain kinds of knowledge
which, for reasons that apply in all cases OF
r,r;x,oto ,,,ou,nrioc r. would no imnronnr RI