Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1807-05-16

the proposed advice has been submitted,
and w.tA great Difference to their brethren
who are or 4 contrary opinion, they are
bound, TO declare their conviction, that
such procedure as that now insisted OF,
would be III the highest degree unjust and
improper: They never can consent, with
out SUFFICIENT cause, 10 dismiss with igno-
miny from the public service, faithful and
mcritorious officers, who from the institu-
tion OF the Public Guard, to the happening
oil the melancholy event which produced
this enquiry, have increasingly deserved
and received the good opinion of their fell
low citizens generally, and the perfect
appreciation of those, to whom the laws
had conhded the superintendance and con-
trci over their conduct.
The proofs and the circumstances to
which the attention of the Council has been
directed, do not in the opinion of the UNI
dersigned, by any means warrant the in
fcrences which are drawn to the prejudice
of those officers.
10 refer particularly to every part of
the evidence, and to every circumstance,
in support of the opinion given by the UNDER
signed, would be tedious rs il is believed
to be unnecessary: 1t is believed 20 be un-
necessary, because the circumstances are
generally known, and the evidence will be
published at large. The undersigned will
then Content themselves, with statement
OF the few facts, which to them appear to
be incontrovcrtibly established, and which
constitute the foundation upon which their
opinion has been tormcu. These are,
First That although the orders of the
5th May, 1902, are only proven to have
been once read to the Public Guard while
OH parade yet there is abundant proof to
shew, that ia substance, those orders acre
.ctten, very often reEe0ted blythe comBian-
ding officer TO IRE soldiers Of that coyhs,
onfubic harade, and that it was the regu-
lar practice ofthat officer, uto7a haradS, 10
direct his orderly sergeant, TO instruct the
new recruits in all the duties Of soldier.
Secondiy-That the officers, but parti-
cularly the commandment of the Guard, in
visiting the different posts, frequently IN
structed the sentinels as to their duties i'm
that character, and that the instructions SO
given were lii conformity to tie said or
ders OF lAay 1902.
Thirdly-That no evidence adduccd,
proves that the sentinel, who was the un-
fortunate author of the catastrophe so uni
versally regretted, was at the happening
of that event inebria.ed, nor is there any
testimony, establishing the fact (whatever
might have been some years before the
misconduct ofthat sentlneD that at the pc
rlod of his re-inlistmcnt, he was notoriouly
a drunkard.
Fourthly-Thate every ChiefMagistrate,
under whose authority and superintendance
the Public Guard have been exercised IN
all their duties, has uniformly cxtolled the
conduct of the officers in question, and has
In Sf'eciaL manner, approved and hrais-
ed the extraordinary vigilance, activity,
and good conduct of the Comnlandant of the
said Guard. And
Lastly-1hat the Commandment of the
Guard Immediately arrested and deliver
ed over to the civil authority the sentinel
aforesaid.
For these causes, the undersigned obev-
ing he dictates of their best judgment, ac-
quit the officers arraigned before them, of
the guilt which has been attributed 20 them.
On the contrary, performing q duty which
they owe to themselves. to those gentlemen
& to the public, they hesitate not to declare
1T rs their opinion, that instead ofcensure,
those gentlemen as relates to their official
conduct generally, merit the public appro-
baton. This particular opinion, has no
relation to the tragical event, which Attic
ted the whole people of Richmond, for in
that event those officers had no agency.
IL is deemed unnecessary, to lay particu-
lar stress on the following circumstances.
l.-That the orders of May 1902, rave to
the sentinels of the Public Guard (as the
service necessarily requircd) authority,
in particular cases to exercise a discreet
on, whether in such cases they OUGHT or
ought not to fire.
2.-That the sentinel did, in an audible
voice, hail three times before he fred.
3.-That the event occurred, when a fire
had actually broken out in the city; an
evidence ofperil, which of all others, has
for some years past been considered the
most alarming.
4.-That the path leading by the Bar
racks, is not the accustomed way, used
by the inhabitants of Richmond, either
by night or by day, and that the dark
ness of the night, might have rendered
1t impossible for the sentinel, to distin-
glish the color of the deceased. And
Lastly.-That the decedent, did not re-
ceive the fatal wound, till at the point
of the bayonet.
An allusion is made to the foregoing cir
cumstances, not because they are by the
undersigned, supposed to be essentially
connec with the vindication of the Off
GERS; (who have their good opinion) but,
because the subject may be variously con-
tempIated, by different persons, and upon
that account Gas all the proceedings are
20 be published it is proper, that the whole
.rI -.