Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1825-08-16
RIc1NToMD, AUGUST ls.
FOR THE E.v1QUIRER.

the signature of Confederate SIGNATURE which
| had certainly intended TO have put to the notice
OF the Card of Mason of 70 but which was omit
&C.! y ..:2, not printed in your paper with that
notice, been called to leave home pressing bust
ness, am constrained write but a yer, brief re-
Ply 10 Masons cool and dispassionate considera-
i!on oil what he Is pleased To style "apologies"
tor the Staunton meeting Il do not much regret that
my leisure is 30 abridged, for two reasons; one,
that there is little contained in Masons considera-
ton oil apologies, which had never been made;
and the other, that where he CHANGED TO use an arg-
meat appropriate TO the real subject embraced in the
discussion, he either has been will be answered
rby some ADLER disputant.
| lire lrst subject he has proposed, (and he as
sumes the right shape the discussion as he plesses
after Introducing what topic he pleases,) is, the
principle OF the scheme of the projected Stanton
Meeting. From the regular division of this subject
In the commencement OF his conside, afisn, had
hoped FOR regular discussion OF il; but this hope
was disappointed, Tor the very next para... phi
which is quite long one, is Il consideration of
the principle OF the proposed meeting AT Staunton
but Is reply TO charge as Mason says, made
against him. OF pervertng the meaning of the Lou
doun Address. truer charge never was made :;
and the very of the charge parta>ng of the
nature OF fac,, 1t was difficult charge to meet !:
and so Mason has found it. The Object of the wri-
tiers OF signers OF that Address is expressed to be-
TO devise fdicfW and erpedic5lt means TO procure
the call OF convention, and 10 - sound appeal
so loud and audible TO the next General Assembly,
as To procure just respect TO their rights
! Nothing can be more accordant to the desires of
the friends OF that Address than the pretended de-
sire OF Mason, 60 that the whole matter OF the Adj
dress be considered in one view" and nothing can
be clearer than that Mason has perverted its spirit
and its language. The means are TO be iatcful and
erpedient yet Mason accuses them of advising
irregular proceedings.
The force oil the appeal 10 be made is evidently
placed by the writers of the Address, in the fact,
that the expression of the wish for convention is
TO be, by iGtCfuL and erpedieRt means, ascertain
ed TO be, the wish of majority IF the people.
The whole proceeding from beginning to the end is
10 be based on the supposed fact, in the first in
stance, and on the aScertaiHed fact, afterwards,
that g the majority of the community, who are de-
clared by the Bill OF Rights (written by Mason
OF '76, but abused by his pseudo admrer of
1923, TO have right 10 reform, alter, or abolish
- their constitution in such manner, shall be
judged most conducive to the public veal, right
declared TO be, indubitabie, no!ienaJie and IN
defe0Si6Ie." Yet the commentary OF Mason on
this Address Is, that in effect, its object is 10 orer-
GICe the General Assembly, that it was inteuded
PeTenptOriiy 10 dictate TO the supreme constituted
authorities OF the country, that it expresses % an
lntmation that Its advocates would not proceed to
eItren'ities," &c. unhesitatngiy pronounce Ma
sons commentary the Address 10 be perverse
eraggeration of the expressed intention and spi-
rit OF it, He may charge what motives he p.eases
to the writers OF 1t, but that he has charged their
production with advice dangerous and unjusifable,
every candid reader must, once, perceive and
acknowledge.
Mason cannot clearly understand, whether the
advocates OF the Loudoun Address were 50 divided
in their own minds, whether 10 accomplish their
object oil calling Convention, through the inter
vention OF The Legislature, in open opposition
TO its authority.
His inability is obviously superinduced; for every
where else, and by every person who has read it,
1t is Understood at once, that ii advises respectful
application 10 the Legislature, TO pay Just respect
to tie rights Of what it takes for granted will be
shewn to be the ,oW of a majority of the commu-
nifty. ii this will be fairly and peaceably made
known, and ii a compliance with this will be de-
manded, can any man In his right reason say, that
this would be 10 OUerGlUe the Legislature? If that
body have any thing to do with the question of
Convention or no invention, is not the know
ledge of the will of the majority of the people on
a subject which they never delegated any right to
the Legislature 10 legislate about, binding on it:
Who is he, who shall deny this right? Let him
avow himself and Z" have not 10 quote Mason
hmseit) the least apprehension that he could with
stand the public Indignation, one moment Real
ly when Mason talks about the doubt, whether the
integrity oil the state is to 6epTeSerUed, or its dis
memberment 10 be accomplished, after the calm
ness and good which the great body of the
people who have moved in this matter have exhi-
bi,ed; with knowledge OF the men who are taking
the lead in this business with just recollection sf
the temperance which has distinguished our
fellow citizens he, yes, he in particular is most
truly and aptly styled Glaym;st.
Happy Shenandoah; thou hast escaped the an
imadversion OF Mason; Inflated Loudoun; thou
hast drawn a seer from his grave to pronounce to
I Il Al.
organized association ~ 1t will be well, If he
does not cut thee of he has done thy honored SER
want - from the benefit OF penitence''s
The opinion OF Mason respecting the construc-
ton OF the clause of the Bill of Rights, which adj
vises frequent recurrence to Fundamental princi-
pies, Is rational to a certain degree When the adj
vice OF that clause Is applicable 10 the constituted
authorities, it certainly means that frequent re-
currence to Fundamental principles. tina, is, to the
legis egum, constitution, would he et sauary
influence, and il may be safe to admit, that when il
IS applied TO the people, it means that they too
should frequently remember the principles therein
declared and established. But does Mason serious
y believe that the author authors of that clause
supposed that the constitution drawn up in the in
fancy of the republic, in the midst of war and con-
fusion, and in the first moments of independence,
would never need alteration or amendment? Ifthis
absurd supposition be discarded, what may not what
does not appear more probable, than that il advises
recurrence to the fundamental principles therein
declared, that government should be instituted for
the common benefit, protection and security Of the
peoples the very purpose Of makingi complete
y answer this grand fundamental design this con-
structon is fortified by the strong and remarkable
passage which follows the clause just qouied, ''hat
when any government shall be found inadequate
or contrary 10 these purposes, majority OF the
community hath indubitable, unaensble and in
deeasible right to alter, &c.' It is most obvious
that tie Trainer trainers Of the Bill Of Rights, did
think Il possible that the Government or Consiitu-