Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1818-03-13

In
peuod OF time, as he can in a period ~
eight- mouths' And will il be pretended tbat
pr. Hare, who, we are credibiy informed has
deS'1eu ne assistance OF the mathematical pro.
fesSOriu his lectures in philOSOp ply, will he able
10 complete course OF lectures in thar sub.
Jrct. during the residue ct the session. From,
what can snch proposition have originated.
D"t eiTber troma consciousness his made
qnacy 10 tle task OF iPctutiny in this subject
at all, ORION conviction that he will not he
abie to denver a complete course of lectures ?
Ills appointment, and his acceptance Of the
Situation witch he now occupies, do not war
rdut as IN at,ribn,iRg his conduct TO the form
e' mouVe. Nothing then remains, but the sup
position OF the latter motive, that his condnct
mas i-Tocetded from conviction that he will
not he able 10 deliver "a complete course of lee
lures. Dr. Hare thinks, too, that some allow
ahce ought 10 he made for the labor and ex-
pence OF his conrSe. Admitting that Dr. Hare's
course viii he attended with extraordinary la.
Dor ana eXpence, granting that these will not
ne "hOwed Tor Dy the visitors, ought we, who
can reap only half the ordinary ADVANTAGES
IRON hts lectures be faxed TO payisr the ~ hole.
OF ihis labor aud to defray the whole of this
expense 7,-
we have ROW said emo gh, we think 10 con.
vince the most srepIIcai OF the correctness of
our sentiments. Ne.,ha.e shown we rink
thdt the act OF which We complaint roth an
ihJusuce aud an imposition" Ne repeat thai
~ was against the ACT lhat we remonstraied.
without any view to the author Am nro,g of
this, we need only refer Ia The cxuj.ua,io,,
presented TO Dr. Hare DIR. Hare ackno,y
hedges that this act rig,nated with him No,,,
we appeal to the most scrupulous 20 say. wine
Their this acknow led irivnt affords any Reason,
10 recall and regret the expression of our opi
mons. We appeal 10 the candid. 10 saw whether
Or. flares standing in society. cusht to no
tect hiin rom phraseology, 80 excpptionablc-
ought TO shield him from the iaprna,-e Of
'rrth. Or, whether, on the contrary this We
~ htandung IN society docs not FINNISH a strong
erJustitcation for reprobatn,r, in him con,,uct
which would be so severely censur, ii iu a man
oImiefiof staiion. We have been tauntinyiy
toiu ny Dr. Hare, that our expoStuiationS a.
gaiust the eXorbitailce of his fee uroccelied
entirely from regard to the money concern
ed. Or. harS announced 10 the students, the
morning after the reception of the remon-
STRANGE. his resolution somewhat to reduce his
tee, urging rs reason for this resolution thar
ne cuuiu not, he thought, use the exertions de-
manded by charge OF the whole fee with
out endansering his health and adding that
ne shouuaDate ms eXertiOns prOportioRailv 10
this reduction of his price Dr. Hare knoXvs
better than we the particular motive of fhis
act. Let us admit, that he has candidly stared
thiS motive. Let us cuncede that his conduct
was not intluenced bN our remunstrsuee aud
hope that, by this reduction he should sue
coed III hushbG our eXpostuatiOns we attend
his lectures without further objection. and he
thereby he enabled still 10 pocket fee 10
winch he Is not entitled. What is the inference
justly dedncble from This ACKNOWLEDGMENT
why, that for paltry sum from each nlember
OF his classes, DIR. Hare had once ser;o,'sIv
thought OF inuring-nay of enJangeriug his
HeaIin. WIN these observations We will spb.
mt 10 The decision OF "a ludcious aud an i'm
partial pnbic, who has been most governed in
this transaction, by "a regard" 10 principle-
whether we, OF whether this PHILOSOPHER has
most deServediy incurred the imputaiion of
SordIG.-WIth DIR. Hare we have done II q Xy,ll
now notice, more particularly, the conduct OF
DIR. Smith, which we regret 10 state has been
such as much 10 impair that respect which We
once entertained iot his character. He has
betrayed, we think, Throughout the Whole of
the recent transaction, rather an nncau6id sui.
rit. WHY are we again required TO disavowa.
ny intention 10 insult DIR. Hare isnot all such
Intention disavowed III the explanation offered
him And why has the president eAcrted him
self TO impress on our parents and guardians
as he had attempted 10 impress on ourselves
belief that il is to the phraS ologv in which
they are conched, and not 10 the expression of
our sentiments, he objects He cannot b. ip.
norant how absurd it had been TO require a re.
cantation of terms, without the sentiments
which they are intended TO convey. As tile
words, and not the sentiments conveyed by
them, were Objectionable Aocurdinyly o,Len
TO preclude all possibility of doubt, Dr. Smith
was asked whether such retraciiou wouId he
satisfactory, he replied, that, ia whatsoever
terms they were couched, the expression ofsnch
sentiments could not be tolerated
Il Committee in behaF of TIE
Suspended Students.
Nofe.-The length of the remonstraEce forbds us to
user it, We have, however, noticed every pat to which
the slightest objection has been waged. [com.
The question of internal improvement" is at
last brought up in the I'll. of X. There is sin
gu'ar cOiItraro ty III the views of the friends
of this measure. What says Mr.. Hopkinson
that the constitution gives the power tCifhous
the assent Of the stdtes and that such cences-
siOu might hereafter be productive OF dan
ger" MIR. LowndeS agreed with Mr. H. but
defended the propriety of retaining the words.
MIR. Mercer, as the assent of the states could
neither give ror impair any constitutional
right, hoped the words would be retained -
MIR. Clay deemed the power Absolutely vested
in Congress, but " did not consider any thing
yielded by exercising il under the assent of the
states" MIR. Tucker again snakes one step
short of the last gentleman-he was " inclin
ed TO believe that Congress had not this right
without the consent of the states" five a
dept the latitude of construction which these
gentlemen adopt Mr. HOpkinSOn seems to he
right; either the constitution gives the right
or it does not-ifit does give it, the assent o {
the states is not necessary if il does not alb
SOluteiy, where does IL give IL Nth the consent
of the states2 Is it does give ii absolutely il is
wrong to put III the a6sentOt tue states besides
lest II should give rise to a false idea; lest il
should lead others, dyes, future congresses
and the world at large, into the idea that this
assent WAS essential To the exercise of the DOW
er-indeed, MIR. Tucker coniesses that these
words were actually put in 10 convey that
very idea. II would be wrong, therefore
even in appearance thus TO impair the pow
er of the general government, if that pow.
were already complete. MIR. rs idea that
the assent of tie states would give the
power, is not only vague but in every sense
Of il erroneOus. Why wagner because how
many states must give their assent? is il
alI-three fOurIhS, two thirds, or only the state
OF states through Which tile road or canal runs?
1T these last only may give the right, then may
one or two states bring an act within the
sphere of the constitution, which that instru
menl says hts OF the whole only can-ihe rs
sent OF so many being necessary to amend the
constIution-in other words, to change the