l
P.\.PERS OF MIRAllEAU BUONAP.ARTE UlIAR 33 for an appointment should any more than an others be exempted from examination. He lives in a Republican Government where the conduct and principles of every candidate for important stations have to under- go public scrutiny. None are too high or too powerful to escape it, and whilst it is courted by the good and wise, it is viewed with terror only by the umrorthy. If he was not able to stand the test, he ought not to have been a candidate. But his objection to our investigating his pretensions is extreordinary indeed, and displays so little of that goo<l sense which ,ve are disposed to award him, that we cannot help believing that at the time of penning it his mind must have been clouded by his passions. He thinks that we ought not to "have taken surh a liberty with an individual about whom we know nothing per- sonally." True we haYe no personal acquaintance with him, nor can we e,·er desire any w1til a very material reformation takes place in his temper as a man and his doctrine as a politician. But our per- ceptions are quite too obtuse to discover how an acquaintance with a man's figure and features is at all necessary in deciding on his literary, moral & political qualifications for office. Such knowledge it appears to us would be as useless as a. square and compass in determining the merits of a poetical performance. Now if personal appearance was the es::-ential requisite in a President of a college, we should be very un- suitable judges to decide on his claims, for we are free to confess that we have not the slightest idea of his altitude or rotundity, nor can we tell whether in his general looks he mostly resembles Vulcan or Adonis. 'l'he great stress which the gentleman lays upon our want of informa- tion on this point seems to carry the idea that he is blessed with a most delightful exterior, and chooses to rest his claims to preferment on that ground. Possibly it may be his gre[a]test recommendation. We have never extended our inquiries concerning him beyond his char- acter, and we contend that we may know something of a man's prin- ciples and nothing of his physiognomy. Benedict Arnold we never saw, yet ·know him as a traitor to his country, and although we may know nothing of the person of William T. Brantly, we know enough of him to justify our opposition to his receiving the appointment of Presi- dent of Franklin College. We were opposed to his succeeding Dr. ·wacldel in our University, because we had understood that he was a Federalist during the last War. He has not thought proper in his letter to deny the charge. As an instance of his violence as a partisan we stated that he arraigned the Revd. :Mr. :Mosely a babtist preacher before the church for fighting in defence of his country. In reply to this he says in substance, that he never dicl so arraign :Mr. Mosely but only disputed with him the propriety of his conduct. ,v ithout putting ourselves to any trouble to investigate the matter we are willing to admit that he neither at- !empted to silence or expel l\Ir. ·l\losely and that we hnve been wrongl_y impressed in this regard. It is however an immaterial circumstance, and does not diminish in the least his offence against patriotism. He may neYer have attempted to punish h·im for fighting; but it is all sufficient for his condemnation that he disapproved of the performance of such service. That there mny be no mistake upon this point we will introduce a part of the letter. "The conversation whieh occurred betwixt himself and me hacl respect only to the propriety of a minister
Powered by FlippingBook