The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1808-03-18

spirits of the storm. to the sovereign ,,rccti
IN, would be an abuse of confidence, Il pitrh
~ ingratitude and perfdy, OF which VIC trust
mat our infant republic has, as yet, no exam
lplcs.
| But, aciuitting You of this mons,rous phil,
now are VIC to overlook the indiscrction. the
1oi'y, the petulance, the inconsistency of
your conduct: AS one Of the people, take
leaVe to ask you why you have thought it ne
cessary thus to sound the f,cSin of alarm
4 III our cars: Is 1t that there has been some.
great anu naSitious crime committed? some
act "in direct hos ility TO the PRINCIPLES of
the constitutions" some gross assumption
OF power not delegated b: the people :" some
attempt to produce an undue bias in the
ensuing election OF President and Nce-Prc-
sldeft is 1t that hred with virtuous intIip-
nation at this conduct, YOU deem il your duty
to denounce 1t at our tribunal /, Thus Won
would have us to believe but how can w,.
oeheVe 1t, When we know that YOU your-
selves have done and arc now doing the ye-
ry things which you denonnce? You arrairp
the late Caucus at Washington: but have
not you yourselves, or at least the most dis
nnguished among yon, been members of
tcaucnSseS on the very same occasion Were
lou not members of n caucus fer this very
purpose in the presidential e!ectioh of l>v0>
on cannot deny it; you dare not deny it,
| Wnen it was found that there was an equal
diNislon in the electoral votes between MIR.
Jefferson and A. Burr, we're Won not fire.
qucnty, nay almost perpetually IN caucus for
the purpose of devising means to ensure the
ultimate election OF him whom YOU believed
the choice OF the peoplcs We're Won not. a.
gafn', IN caucus fer the presidential election
which took place in the wear 1906 These
are factsof public notorietv. You do not do
nv them. Nay you admit that caucuses
shave heretofore been CUSTOMARY - Your
consciences admonshed YOU of the lnconsis-
tenc'es Into which you were plung;ng & you
attempt to excuse yourselves These meet
ings you say "Jfnot JUSTIFIED, were hai-
hafsa by the necessity of the union - No
sb filing in the ranks, gentlemen. A caucus
is right or wrong in principle if wrong.
nottingham make it right If the caucus Of
1908 was " in direct hostility with the prin-
ciples OF the constitution - 1T was" gross
assumption ofpowernot dele aged BIZ the PEG
pie; ;" the caucuses ofwhich You we're mem
oers, were equally "in direct hostility with
the constitution ;" were equally * gross as
SYMPTOMS OF power not delegated by the peo,
pie tor the constitution has undergone no
change in this respect. 1t gave no more
caucusing power in 1s0o-4, than it gives IN
1908. Out Of your own mouths, then. you
are condemned ''wherein vie Judge others,
We condemn yourselves for We that Judge,
do the same things"
But this Is rot al--You declare with the
soiemnLty OF protest, which you make in
your .officia, and sworne characters AS mem
oers OF Congress, that, in your ohinion eau
Gus is :. IN direct hostility with the consttu-
ton ret, you yourselves have been guilty
II this hostility. Are you aware, gentlemen.
of the abyss into which you have thrown
yourselves? Ware YOU not in 1904 bound
! 6ty Your official oaths to support the constitu-
ton !; and have YOU not deliberately and re-
peatedly done an act, which, m:your judg-
ment, violates that constitution? Whether
a caucus, IN reality, violates the constitution
J p; not Is in this part of the enquiry, inmate
TIA. yo7t 6elicUe that it does So you have
nevertheless done the deed at the bar of
conscience, therefore, you are equally as gull
yof a breach of your oath, as if Your OPT
mon were correct: For "to him that esteem
ethany thing TO be uncleau, to him it is un-
Dean With what face then dare you come
to our bar to arraign others? IT is the hon
orable Office Of states evidence, ofinfarrr,ers.
that you court. With what face dare you.
who are demonstrably and confessedly gull
~, to arraign others who are innocent, at
least, In intention, Tor aught that appears TO
the contrary? For it does not appear that
they deem a caucus breach of tile constitua
ton the liberal ard fair conclusion from tho
tact OF their having been in caucus, is, that
1leE uecm IL correct. we had drawn the
same conclusion in your favour but you
have taken the aims to disc,aim that
conclusion, by declaring that you knew you
were Infringing the constitution, and de-
Hberately SHINING against the light of know
ledge Do you suppose the people of the u
States so blnd that these palpable and damn
ing facts will escape their observation, You
seem to suppose it but you shall find Your
selves mistaken Away, then, with YOUR
Shilling paIliatiors: in the opinion Of plain
and honest people, tkere is not upon earth a
circumstance Which can paliate a voluntary,
conscious, All acknowledged breach of an
oath.
fBu, most unfortunately for you, the palliat-
ing circumstances on which you rely, to-
screen yourselves, are incorrect in point of
fact In the election of 1905, the federalists
did not "present formidable phalanx -
for the election Of 1901 had proved, if not
their annihilation, at least, their total impo-
tenCe. In the election of 1905, then, there
was no conflict between federal and republi-
can inhuence.G) Nor at that election was it
necessary to hold a caucus 'to prevent their
placing, by intrigue. federal vice-president
in the presidential chair - because the "a
mendment of the constitution which guards
against that dangerhad then taken place
These are your palliating circumstances
circumstances, which are not true in p ipt Of
feet and which, if they were true, would
form no palliations Of your offence. Such
fine visupdg which chc,cP t,Ie .