Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up free
Editorial
April 1, 1830
Daily Richmond Whig
Richmond, Virginia
What is this article about?
The Richmond Whig editorial criticizes President Jackson's nominations, noting Senate confirmation of Samuel Swartwout as New York Collector despite his Burr ties, but rejection of J.P. Decatur and Mr. Cushman due to their roles in election violence. It argues this shows Jackson's unfitness and use of office for partisan rewards.
OCR Quality
95%
Excellent
Full Text
Richmond Whig.
THURSDAY MORNING, APRIL 1, 1830.
Swartwout, the Collector of New York, has been confirmed, after, it is supposed, an arduous scrutiny and struggle. The opinion prevails that he was saved by Tariff and probably Opposition votes, having proved himself an active officer in enforcing Tariff regulations. One of the New York Senators, (Mr. Dudley) and possibly the other, were stated to be hostile. Believing that the President was as much concerned with Burr as Swartwout, it strikes us that if the one is sufficiently purified to wear the robes of the first magistracy, the other may be considered worthy of a Collectorship. The Camel, as Mr. Barton says, having been swallowed with "complacency," it were ridiculous to strain at the gnat.
But the Senate have read another rebuke to the President, in the rejection of Mr. J. P. Decatur as Collector of Portsmouth, and Mr. Cushman as U. States' Attorney for N. Hampshire. Decatur was the leader in the burning of Mr. Bartlett's effigy at the N. Hampshire Presidential election. That was no doubt an argument for rewarding him. What must be the character of appointments, which a Jackson majority refuse to confirm? What must be the fitness of the man for the Presidency, who is so ignorant of character, or so resolved to reward his tools at public expense, as to make nominations, which the most devoted of parties cannot reconcile it to their oaths and consciences to approve?
Could stronger evidence of unfitness be asked? Will any man pretend, that he has not furnished irrefragible proof of his incompetency, and justified all that was predicted of his incapacity? Happy would it be for his historical reputation, if the egregious impropriety of many of his appointments, could be successfully traced to sheer ignorance; but a thousand facts proclaim that his heart is more in fault than his head; and that acting upon the one principle, of rewarding the instruments of his unhappy success, he has used the Presidential Office as a private fund, and done wrong with his eyes open. See the letter from Washington.
THURSDAY MORNING, APRIL 1, 1830.
Swartwout, the Collector of New York, has been confirmed, after, it is supposed, an arduous scrutiny and struggle. The opinion prevails that he was saved by Tariff and probably Opposition votes, having proved himself an active officer in enforcing Tariff regulations. One of the New York Senators, (Mr. Dudley) and possibly the other, were stated to be hostile. Believing that the President was as much concerned with Burr as Swartwout, it strikes us that if the one is sufficiently purified to wear the robes of the first magistracy, the other may be considered worthy of a Collectorship. The Camel, as Mr. Barton says, having been swallowed with "complacency," it were ridiculous to strain at the gnat.
But the Senate have read another rebuke to the President, in the rejection of Mr. J. P. Decatur as Collector of Portsmouth, and Mr. Cushman as U. States' Attorney for N. Hampshire. Decatur was the leader in the burning of Mr. Bartlett's effigy at the N. Hampshire Presidential election. That was no doubt an argument for rewarding him. What must be the character of appointments, which a Jackson majority refuse to confirm? What must be the fitness of the man for the Presidency, who is so ignorant of character, or so resolved to reward his tools at public expense, as to make nominations, which the most devoted of parties cannot reconcile it to their oaths and consciences to approve?
Could stronger evidence of unfitness be asked? Will any man pretend, that he has not furnished irrefragible proof of his incompetency, and justified all that was predicted of his incapacity? Happy would it be for his historical reputation, if the egregious impropriety of many of his appointments, could be successfully traced to sheer ignorance; but a thousand facts proclaim that his heart is more in fault than his head; and that acting upon the one principle, of rewarding the instruments of his unhappy success, he has used the Presidential Office as a private fund, and done wrong with his eyes open. See the letter from Washington.
What sub-type of article is it?
Partisan Politics
Economic Policy
What keywords are associated?
Jackson Appointments
Senate Confirmations
Political Patronage
Tariff Enforcement
Presidential Unfitness
What entities or persons were involved?
Swartwout
President Jackson
Mr. Dudley
Mr. J. P. Decatur
Mr. Cushman
Burr
Mr. Barton
Editorial Details
Primary Topic
Criticism Of President Jackson's Political Appointments And Senate Rejections
Stance / Tone
Strongly Critical Of Jackson's Fitness And Partisan Patronage
Key Figures
Swartwout
President Jackson
Mr. Dudley
Mr. J. P. Decatur
Mr. Cushman
Burr
Mr. Barton
Key Arguments
Swartwout Confirmed Despite Burr Association, Aided By Tariff Enforcement Record
Senate Rejects Decatur And Cushman For Involvement In Election Effigy Burning
Jackson's Nominations Reveal Ignorance Or Deliberate Rewarding Of Partisan Tools
Evidence Of Presidential Unfitness And Misuse Of Office For Personal Gain