Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1829-09-28
THE VBRGINIAN.
LYNCHBURG. SEPT. rs, 1929.


Ctdneety Coan.-We are authorized. by
Chancellor Taylor, to shy, that he will " on the
18th Oct. with he continued blessing of God
open court in Lynchburg, snd stay until every
thing is done"
Convention This august body will assemble
on this day week We shall lay before our
readers, with the utmost expedition, the Pro-
ceeG,ngs, as they reach us ; with as many OF the
SPEECHES as We ,an m AXE room for
What are the committee appointed by the
non freehoidbrs doirg with their Memorial
dudt nhernm partem. - Attempts at de
fence Of Maj. Barry against the charges of be-
ing delanter 10 the government. aud of hav-
ing sold public Office for his private emolu.
ment, have reached US from two distant points,
Washington city and Kpntucky-both Of which
we Law before our readers. thar they may be
enabled to make up a fair verdict between the
accuser and the accused. We snail ACCOMPANY
them VIII very brief commentary.
| lst II appears, by the defence Sc up in III
U. s. Telegraph. thar when Nj. Fowler was
Superseded by Hlr. lickIin Qhe individual to
whom il is alleged Maj Barry sold the blank
commission) as p s'masier at Lexington. he
(Fowler) was defaulter in the sum Of sic
1863 %, of which sum S6.s13 81 wese due on
bond ola datr prlnr IN thai which Maj B
became security. The Telegraph, then, admits
that So, 900 So Of FowIer's defalca accrued
after Maj. Barry's liability commenced and
we take il for granted, rs ihe lawyers say, that
| the III Of the qucs ion i. not The amount ofthe
deiaication but, is he defnutttr : The admis-
sion of the Telegraph that IL IS, is all that need
b. asked. Yet, il NAV not be amiss 10 observe
that the Post Office Department decided thai
Fowler's last bond, 90 which Aaj Barr was a
surety, couers The aehoie defaication--and it cor
rectly so decided !; for, the words OF the bond
| given when il was known that Fowler was = d..
ftulier to a large amount, show that il was IL
tended by all parties, 10 be " additional seeu-
3ity' for the payment Of the amount then d.
| 10 the government as well as wha: mis- hi her.
principal. Under Maj. Barry's administration
| If the Department, however. this decision will
doubtless be reversed seeing how materially thn
| reversal will affect his pocket Fowpr's " di.
rrr,on.p TO the Postmaster General. on thi,
subject. are worth no more than a blank piece
Of psper
Cd. Its completely begging the question,
to draw Mr.. Clays name into this controversy
But. no man can be surprixed a, it, when il is
recollected tina, whenever any act Of yiIlainy
has been fastened upon either of the member Of
the present administration, (Burr's conspiracy :,
fol instance they have attempted 10 evade the
charge against themselves, by alleging the same
thing against Mr., Clay-as if MIR. Claws guilt
made the'n innocent. A thief at the bar of
Justice had as we'll contend that hs ought not
| 10 be punished, because here we've other rogues
beside himself But how is Mr.. Clay a deiaul-
,er' Why. says the Telegraph. because h. is
! he executor oil James Morrison who was secu-
rty on FoYiers first bond Was there ever
such unparalleled effrontery' Look, for mo-
'nent, al the logic of the Telegraph Il says
that MIR. Clay isa drfaulter, because he is the
erecttor Of the security on Fowlers first bond,
Notwithstanding the security had himself been
released from all liability by the Postmaster &c
neral, who rightly considered that the second
bond was designed by all the parties to il, 10
cancel the first And yet. il contends that Mr..
Barry il not adeianIter, although he was himself
a security that Fowler would pay certain sums
OF money TO the 7. .. Department, as they
came into his hands, and which he has failed to
paw. by upwards of S300oi!.
Sd. Il is admitted that blank commission
for the Lexington Pos, Office was sent TO Mr.
Clay year or two preceding Mr. Barry's re.
ception of similar document. But. in This
there was no guilt lie returned il 10 The posr
master General, unused What did Mai. Barry
do, undr similar circumstances Ii il allie.
ged against him, and is not denied by himself.
(for !; is evident that the writer Of the defence
in the Telegraph is no Other than Mai By that
he sold The commission 10 Mr. fiekiinJo $4,000,
and pm The nOneyn his Own purse Is there no
difference between the two cases
4th. 1t is true, that, although the Postmaster
General does not DEFY the charge Of the sale
and purchase of the commission. Mr. FickIin
does In this denial. Mr. F. may have hoe,
ae'u"'ed by two motives. In the first place, if
Maj Barry was criminal in selling the commits.
| sion, he was alike criminal in buy;,o ,a :,
was not expected that he would testify agains,
himself: q, 2dly, is net tax on the inacipa.
ton 10 suppose that Mr.. Ficklis was e,,;o,s
to manifest his loyalty to the "powers tina, he -
lest he might be numbered among the victims
OF hooesperf'an " reform The kentuck ian
declares that the statement nov made by Flick
lin is directly at variance with those forme,I.
made by him, as can and will be incou,rover,i