Alexandria gazette & daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1817-1822, 1822-03-05

Mason (p. sos. 3i3, Mr. Grayson (p. 3O6
sos, and Mr.. Henry (p. 3i0) were decid-
ed opponents ofthe part OF the constitu-
ton OF the United States, under which this
District has been formed.
No greater weight is due to the argu-
ment which derives moral duty that evils
should be tolerated from the supposition
tina, they have been voluntarily incurred.
Had the consent to the cession OF Alexand
ria ascribed to its delegates been actually,
given, it might, though conscientious, have
been wrong. But in truth these gentlemen
| merely assented to the Constitution oil tine
United States. Al that time Virginia had
passed no law ceting Alexandria to the
Union, and am unable TO understand any
thing like prophetick consent to such
law. II our delegates had consented TO the
! cession, should still contend that they
fell into political errour, and demonstrate
lis extent by appealing to experience.
How far the cession OF what is now Alex
andria County TO Virginia, was voluntary
| on the part Of its inhabitants is disclosed
| in the second number of Virginiensis,
published in the Alexandra Herald OF the
18th ofFebruary.
The positions first alluded to are follow
ed by another, which resembles them in
F! its inaccuracy both oil argument and fact.
The people of Alexandra are supposed to
| have uniformly and decidedly opposed re-
| PROCESSION, whenever such measure has
been submitted to their consideration. OF
| ''the numerous and respectable town meet.
'ng" which is stated 70 have occurred a.
bout twelve years ago, in consequence OF
Mr.. Dawsons motion, have been enabled
to gather but scanty information, as we
are referred to no authority with which
| ian Alexandrian' account of j, can he
| compared, | am, though confident OF his
yeracity, disposed to Glstrust his memory
| That meeting is said to have ''unanimous
Iy demonstrated to Congress in decided &
| strong language against the measure" The
unanimity OF the remonstrance would not
| be surprising it, as am told, the me citing
| consisted OF only nineteen pslsons; and as
| to the remonstrance itself, careful search
| of the records of the House of Representa-.
tives has not enabled me TO find it. The
officer who assisted my examination, was
OF opinion that no such remohstrance or
petition had ever been presented II is
| well known how regularly all commune.
cations to Congress are filed & how care
fully they are preserved. That some
meeting on this subject occurred there is
no doubt: but until more positive evidence
| OF its numbers and responsibility is pro-
duced, than the impression OF an indivi-
dual, | necessarily acquiesCe in the infor-
| nation which have cited As to the sub
sequent meeting arising from the recon-
mendation Of the "Grand Jury stepping
out Of the line q their appropriate duty"
refer you to the Alexandra Gazette of
| December II, 1878, and OF December l5,
1918. IEe paper Of the latter day records
the proceedings OF the town meeting which
| assembled on the day before it, and you
will observe tbat the people instead of de-
Gliding with unanimous voice against re-
PROCESSION, only decided that it was mex
pedient TO act at that time on the recon.
mendation of the Grand jury, and that ?
local Government IN the District was also
inexpedient 1t is very true that this
meeting WAS called to consider the cues.
ton OF retrocession 1t is also true that a
decision on' this >ubjec, did not occur in
consequence Of circumstances which will
not, unless obliged, more distinctly alude
70. Blu if 'an Alexandrisn'>" statenen MS
| IN regard to these meetings were strictly
accurate, do they prove any turpitude or
| folly IN our dong now what we refused to
! do then. IL human reason receding to
! that stage OF its rudeness, when time was
supposed to sanctity erTour, and every at
! tempt at imprOvemt nj TO indicate dan
gerous and iaciious temper.
The argument on the subject OF 'taxa-
ton without representa- non" though it COR
rectly distinguishes our condition relative
to Congress, from the condition of the A.
merican Colonies relatively TO the British
| Parliament, still totters under the heavy
objection, that we are liable to taxation &
are consttutionally excluded from represen-
| tston. There is a portentous simiiiude or
| identity between the political evie which
we submit TO. & that which our toreiatbers
would not submit to. As 10 the doctrine
thu the people of be District are practi
csily Represented by the whole Congress
| notice It in the language of the great and
good Lord Chatham. 1.-THE idea of Uir-
'funl representation IS The most conteaapn.
"bie that eper entered into the head of man
At does not deserve serious refufattoa )"
| itbss also been urged that representation
in Congress would give US no influence IN
that body Without invoking the very
elements OF all republican poliiicks, to
shew the radical vice of such doctrine,
| and its alarming tendency let us recollect
the numerous instances OF is practical
Observation-Disclosures where individual
exertion has produced the most importan
political results be latest 4. most Clio