Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1829-10-17

Governor BY the people, was thrown out some days
ago, by tie. We ulderstandit WILDE brxught for
ward again. ss@es5s
Our limits wilnotpcrmit notice to-da " what
has been done by tile Judiciary Committee (of which
Cen Marshall is Ciiorman) or that of the Bill of
Rights. &C. (of which RIr Taylor of Chesterfield.
IS Chairman,) We shah do so in our next We
regret much the impossbility of presenting TO tho
reader, the interesting debates which are every dav
occurring before the Committees. But the thing, is
impossible. The great paper i'm London, six feet by
nye would not contain them What dinil,ishes the
regret however, is that the same ground vii; he
gone over again IN Convention, when the reader
will more likely complain of surtait than atarvuton
Oa''selres--Ue ale not much in the habit or .,o,
t,ng Of ourselves, and we have on more than one oc
casloh expressed disgust at the vau;iy whc!,
prompted some ofour contemporaries to offend 5elca
icy, by publishing the compliments paid them bv
Others. In committing this same offence by pub
isi1na5 the annexed observations from the Iynch
burg sirginian we have this apology-that tleg ir-
nish dlsnterested evidence in exculpatian OF the
motives winch origin lily hIence aud have car,tin-
ued to inhuenc the Senior Editor of this paper il, his
support OF the call Ola Convention. Some have been
fno enough to say, that these motives Were per
sonai, and looked no farther than lis liberation from
the disabilities Oft statute, which ne had been
tuhate enough to incur. Had this bee.. so-nad his
lrs and only mo.iye been to extricate himself from
those disabilities, and to retrieve his birth right the
privileges and imn,unities granted by the Coneti,
tuition alike to every citizen of the Repuhc-had it
been his object. to win for himself and Others the
restoration of rights of which they had been uncon
stutionally deSpoticelly, and puritanicuy deprived
--had his views been limited to thisYe are not an
prised that they could have been iustv condemned or
. assailed may be no hardship TO those who have
no expectations wishes, to be disseised OF the ca
pacty to hold Office but it IS hardship TO be cpr-
we'd OF that which all others posses which our an
cesors secured for all, and by those who had no law
iu power to divest of it. The evidence of the
tirgnian shows that support of a Convention
was anterior TO the time when any personal motives
existed to sway US, which was not beicIe tie fall Of
1928 So much for that
as to the printing ofthe Convention as our smooth
contemporary said somewhat similar occa sion
'we can live without it, We nsver crinrea for
Eor lGtterly expected it. AID we had therefore no dis
appointments encounter, the pag worse dis.
appointment, the consciousness of fawninn and self
abasement thrown away. We never supported the
cause OF the Convention in tation or hope of
reward; though on the contrary the zeal which we
manifested IN its support, originating in early and
sincere conviction Gifts utility and necessity has de-
prIved US of extensive patronage in the tide water
country OF Virginia In the admission which, one
side charges reproach the other as compliment,
that this paper has contributed in the smallest degree
to the calling of the convention our sel.lc.e finds
ample qualifications; for REGARD we are content-
ed to find it in the increased prosperity spring and
ola VIII
Qucnces of that auspcious event.
Fran the Lauctbarg r7re,iaina Of Oct ~
CoSvENTioN.--We publish this morning, the pro-
cecdings OF this body to the 18th nst.fa stcst date
received from Richmond The two first days pro
cecdngs laid before 1nanyof our readers in an
extra sheet last Fridays but many papers had been
circulated before they We're received, we'll as be-
; cause we wish to preserve a connected record of
them on our files, we give place to them this morn
ing
We shall make no remark Oh the proceedings of
that body at present, except with regard the APP
pointment of its Printer. We have never known an
act OF more gross injustice, than the choice of Mr.
Ritcilie to the exclusion of Mr.. Peasants. 1t is an
ascertained fact that considerable majority of the
members of the Convention friendly long since,
TO the call OF that they had done,
the great and pressing necessity of some change In
the fundamental law of the Commonwealth. In the
selection OF its officers, then, they should have acted
with some hte reference at least, the cii,ns Of
the candidates 1t IS believed and Think the fact
will be cheerfuly conceded, by every original friend
OF the cal Of q Convention, that to John II. Pleas
ants, more than to any other man in the Com
rnonwealth is owing, that that body is nor in
sion. True is that public opinion was swiftly
tending TO tie same point from the operation Of co
ses which every day gained fresh strength and Which
would, Of Themselves, ultimately have produced the
same result. Years, however, would have rolled BY
and perhaps the present generation would have pass
Ell away before this great event would have been
consummated, but for the boldness with which Mr..
Peasants pointed out the abuses Of which the pre-
sent Constitution is necessarily productive and the
zeal and ardor with which ne attacked and subdued
the preiudices which warped so many judgments -
The writer Of this paragraph knows that so early as
the year 1891, when there had been for a number of
years previously, dead silence the subject pro-
duced by the Legislative quacLeTy of 1915, (which