Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-03-12
RICHMOND:
FRIDAY MORNING. MARCH l2, 1924.

|
ADAMS AND CRAWFORD IN NETWORK.
In the Enquirer OF Tuesday, a letter appeared,
dated at Washington on the 9th instant, giving a
statement OF the parties in the Legislature of New
| YORK. We believed at the time from previous well
founded accounts that we had seen, that the writer
was either mistaken himseelf or willing to lead o.
theirs into error. We re-publish from the Albany
Advertiser, another statement, which, we presume,
VIII satisfy the most incredulous the true re-
aiive strength of all TIE Candidates in the Lecisla-
ture OF that State.The passage or rejection of the
Electoral law cannot materially affect the final re-
suit. We admit that the determination of the Sc
nate to refuse passing a law which was loudly de-
manded by the people, aud which had met the sane
ton OF great majority of the popular branch of
the Legislature, seemed favorable to Mr. Crawford
and adverse to his rivals. We admit further, that
tins rejection was induced by the superior popularity
oil Mr.. Crawford III the Senate of New ork and by
the fears of his friends in that BODY to trust the elcc
ton to the people. But if this proves that his inte
rest was the best in that branch of the Legislature
does not the passage Of the bill by the House of De-
egates, equally prove that he was less popular with
them If, as his friends assert he is the most popu
lar Candidate in the State at large, why should his
advocates i'll the Legislature, be so unwilling to trust
ms late with the people? The truth is that the
most popular branch of the New York Legislatures
is adverse to Mr. Crawford whilst the Senate is in
cned to support hin-and this explains the willing
ness of the first to change the law prescribing the
mode of choosing Electors, because they foresaw
fbntf t,af~ -, n
the atn'o,tsnSness of the last 10 in the mca-
sure, because they equally foresaw, that it would
operate to the benifit of his opponents.
But if the electoral law is not changed and the
Electors are chosen formerly, directly by the Le
gslature, although the adherence the old system
would strengthen MIR. Crawfords chances, i, vat
could not elect him. His superiority in the Senate
would be countcr5alanced by Mr.. Adams superio-
my III Tue other House; and eccting by ballot he
WHO mustered the greatest number fro. botl, Houses
would get the votes of the State We do not per-
ccive that the rejection of the electoral law by the
Senate of New York. affords matter of triumph to
the supporters Of Mr.. Crawford, or that it proves
any thing but that he had more friends than either
| of the other Candidates in that body.
| The contest in New-York has narrowed down IN
! contest between Adams and Crawford. The other
Candidates out of the question. MIR. wfsrd has
there no popularity of his own, buoyed up by fac
| ton, Of which MIR. Van Buren, is the head His PROS
poets aye identified in that State with that intiiydu
al. Ills certainly very Improbable, that with such
| resources he can make successful head against n
Candidate who is supported by the great body of
the people, and the steady of public opinion
| IL has always appeared singular TO us, why New
York should be expected to support Mr.. Crawford
That State can have no of attachment to his
person, and his political labors have certainly not
been successful and brilliant enough to overcome
her more obvious and natural attachments. Rely
upon it, she will ultimately settle down on that in
dividual, who independent OF his equal or SUI erior
! qualifications, has the additional merit of havi,s
| been born north of the Potomac.
! The statement to which we have already refer
red our readers, is from the Albany Advertiser edi
| ted on the ground, and which would not hazard
statement which would be subject to immediate
correction.