The Oxford intelligencer. (Oxford, Miss.) 1860-18??, 1861-04-10
n
''Gross Injustice. ;,


Under this head, in our last issue, we took
occasion to make few comments upon para
graph which had recently appeared in the edito-
rial columns Of the yicksburg Whig and in
which, as we conceived, great wrong had been
committed against one Of our citizens. We have
no taste for war Of words, and 1t was very far
from our purpose to provoke "a controversy"
with the Wing We held up to that journal
the wrong into which we complained that It had
been betrayed, in the hopethat the wrong would
be repaired. That hope has been disappointed.
\ The Wing has answered us ''after fashion"
and has affected disposition to do justice in the
premises, by accepting our denial of the truth
Of an absurd rumor, which found ready place
in its columns, imputing to ex-Seefetary Thomp-
son q gross malversation in office, and by an ex-
preston of its qualification upon learning that
/ the rumor was wholly without foundation but
it fails to withdraw or modify its declaration that
the letter Of Mr.. Buchanan was lin direct con-
tradiction' to a statement made by Mr. Thomp-
son. If this omission did not proceed from ac-
cidcnt, the Wing must be regarded as persisting
in its original declaration
But this is not all. Not only does the Wing
omit to do justice, when directly called upon to
do so, but 1t aggravates its former wrong by
committing fresh acts of injustice. It goes
long way out Of It's path in order to say that
''the united testimony of Mr.. Holt and Mr.. Blu
chanan go to prove that he (Mr. Thompson) new
er uttered a single manly protest against the pol
icy of reinforcing the Southern forts, until the
thunders Of popular indignation in the South
drove him from his comfortable seat in the Cab
met" Where this Testimony" is to be found,
we are at loss to know. We have carefully
perused the two published letters of Mr. Holt
and have been unable to discover any passage,
in either of them, justifying the language Of the
Wing. In the two letters of Mr.. Buchanan we
find nothing in point except the following In
his first letter, accepting the resignation Of Mr..
Thompson, he says--'You had been so emphatic
you wouldresign in consequence of my decision"
/ If Mr. Buchanan's Testimony" does not dis
prove the proposition in support of which it Is
adduced by the Whig we have very greatly
erred in our estimate Of the force and effect of
testimony.
The Wing protests against putting forward
Mr. Thompson as man who took prominent
part in the direction Of the secession movement.
Such was not the case" asserts the Wing
Doubtless, the Wing thinks it is right on this
point; but, possibly, the Wing may not possess
full information on the subject The soldiers of
defeated host can scarcely be presumed to
know any better than the victors, what credit
is due to the several individuals by whose united
efforts and counsels the result of the contest
was controlled. They are likely, indeed, to know
whose blows fell heaviest upon themselves, but
that is ALL They do not know In what minds
the plan of the battle was conceived nor upon
what brows the laurel should be placed. In
some matters, we admit, the Wing is excellent
and unquestionable authority, and, in such mat
ters we shall always be ready to defer to it
For instance, in regard to what was said, and
done, and planned, and hoped, and feared, by
and amongst the opponents of secession in Mis-
sispippi, hefnro tho State seeded, the Wing can
speak by authority, for it was not only admitted
to their councils, but it was ITSELF one of the
very chiefest of their counselors ;.butthe Wing,
in those days. did not enjoy the freedom of oar
camp and it is no discredit to it, therefore, that
it is ignorant of matters which were excluded
from the observation of outsiders" We as
signed to Mr.. Thompson a high position in the
secession ranks, because we knew-as possibly |
the Wing does not know-that he was entitled
to that position, by his services in the secession
cause We do not care, just now, to furnish |
the enemies Of our country with pretexts for
but for his efforts, coercion would have been at
tempted as soon as South Carolina passed her
ordinance Of secession and we should long ago |
have been plunged into general war.
When the Wing speaks of Mr. Thompson as
''cngng to his comfortable seat in the Cabinet"
and "cnging with the tenacity Of a horse-leech
to the lesh-p pots at Washington" we can only
suppose either that IL was giving vent to ebul-
lition of Immature, that it designed to imply
that the subject Of those ungenerous remarks
held on to his seat in the Cabinet in order that
he might continue to draw the salary annexed
thereto. Such an idea is simply preposterous.
Mr.. Thompson would best have promoted his
private interests by resigning, rather than by
retaining his office; for those interests had long
been suffering from his inability to bestow upon
them his personal attention. So long as Missis-
sippi remained in the Union, and so long as he
believed that he could serve his State in that
position, he was willing to sacrifice his private
interests by remaining in the Cabinet In that
position, he was enabled to serve the South and
his State, as, probably, no other man in the
country could have done. His services are known
to, and appreciated by the leading friends Of
secession throughout the South. He knew, Of
course. that he was exposing himself to miscon-
struction; but the man who, in 1851, was
dragged down by Union blood-hounds as a Sc
cessionist and never begged for quarter who
has been an open. earnest and lifelong champ-
on Of Southern and State Rights, can afford so
to expose himself for the public welfare. His
friends, the people, will take good care that nei-
Their misconstruction nor Misrepresentation shall
do him any harm
The Wing concludes its reply to us as follows:
1--WE are all alike sons of the same proud COM