Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1829-04-07

resulted as follows:
i Warwick, York, CleJles Civ Eenrfco ana R;4b-
inond for Mr.. Nrholas.
! James City, for Judge temple
TN the nth ballet, tlidge SeGple heipn IL and
alone, in nominations; Doct Corhin nomiuuted- Col
knrweii Bassett when The following result Of the
: Votes was reported:
Charles Cir, Jamss City and York. fir duire
Semple.
Warwick, 1reprco sad gicimoud, for Col Bassett.
| The sixth ballot resHliGd as the filth had done
! The seventh ballot was like tie fifth and sixth
Al!cdorts To elect Judge Sernpe, having thus pro-
i vcd fruitess, he was Reluctantly withdrawn bv his
ifeni'--ana Gel. Robert " cand!sh was nominated
I by Mr.. James kcu,ple un'r in his s,ead-L,oI. NC
cand''sh who had ,.arninated Judge Semple, cnnsm-
ting, oil consultation with ill.,, Jdncs Civ lclepatiup
! to withdraw him.
Che eighth and us bai,ss WAS then rast and the
! following was reported KS the resrit:
I Warwick, York, Janas Crilv, i,cntico and ricf-
nend, iar Col. 2a-sett.
Charles City, Blank.
80 that .oia Marshall Of Ricinpnd, John Tyler Of
Charles City, Philip Norho,ne Nicholas of Rich
mpDd and Burwell iassrtt of games City, ware se-
iected by the Convention the tour individuals to he
accommodated to the people OF the third SENATORIAL
district, for election to the State Cois enron co-
Der mkt.
A committee consisting Of Col. Robert McCsnd-
lAh, Richard Coke, iunr, aud Doct Robert p Wal
ie., then appointed to prepare suitable address
to the people OF the district in support OF the nomna
tons agreed upon and to superintcnd the pilhcaon
tneFeo as well as OF the proceedings OF the ConyRn
ton.
Vote. Of thanks to the President and Secrc,ate,
were then unanimously passed, AMI the Convontpn,
at about p. ". adjourned. a GITiXENli
we we're ArrnGl with ole observation in The NJ
dress OF the Committee ofthe Williamsburg ConrG-
flvn, signed by ''Bobcrt McCanGlish, and Robert p
Weller. After adverting TO tic objeesion made %
Llat mode fropJuatioa en- c,ccunt Of the very pat
tcia concurrence of the District in It, they say
Same OF those who have denounced tie mcctun at
williamsburg, IS anii-rcpablican md diciatoral,
have been themselves guilty crle same error (f in
deed It be an error They have uctnally Proceeded
to nominate four parsons TO represent them in Con-
rention, and recommended them TO the rest of the
District. and have promised support their elcc>
ticu, by a.. honorable menus"
ltseems strange, that any mind should be incapa-
ole OF discriminating between act of the people
themselves, IN their primary, sovereign character
and an act performed by the representatives of q
small portion ofthat people. The sum and substance
o! the objection to these District Conventions is
that wherever it is possible for the people to act fos
Themselves, they ought to be permitted to Do it, and
II certainly Is very equivocal compliment to them
Tor certain nanber of individuals to interfere and
that of selecting their own representatives. Bot
when was it ever heard, before the discovery was
made by Mcssrs. McCaaGsh and Waller that it was
''ani-repubhcan" or "dictatorial," for the people
themselves to meet in their primary capacity, and
designate the in6 f!ras whom Msy prefer TO sErye
theTns True, the Iceficg at Richmond did not con-
tain all Tie people, but portion only. But when
was there ever meeting of an entire electoral COM
Hunity? The Of the whole IS only to be learn
ed by asccrtainng the wishes of the several parts,
and if every county and city of shc District foloy-
my the example OF Richmond Ind nominated candj-
dates for itself, we should have found ont whom the
people of The District preferred, without the trouble
that the gentlemen Of the williamsburg Convention
SO kindly pnt themselves 10. But surely, the {il-
liahlsbnrg Committee cannot be saricus in Iikeung
the character of the meeting Of the people of Rich
nond to that ofthc late Caurasat Williamsburg; nor
can it be necessary TO any farther raDs to estab-
lish the distinction.
The Comfpittec farther observe, that those who
expressed the sentiment hostile to the Convention
Richmond: were but a small part ofthe city. The
meeting seas certainly but small part of the city
compared to the whole population; yet it was q
large and respectable meeting, and gave n,terunce
when it disapproved the Convention ut Williams
burg, we really believe, to the sentiment Of out Of
/ 10 Of this whole Community. "Fhlc (ptoceeds
Messrs. McCandsll and Wallerl those WHO objected
to 1t, (thc meeting at williamsburg represented hui
one city in the dist rict Rchmond and as we are in
formed but small portion of that the members ir
the meeting represented the city, and five coun-
Tres fthe District, which composed three fourths
its whole population"
There Is small mistake in this statcment.--
The gentleman who attended Mt Williamsburg
as the representative from Richmond, did mol
represent the people Of Richmond; nor dH
the delegates from Henrico, represent the peo-
pie Of Ucnrico. This we imagine, is evident from
Mr. Shepherds (wlIo was one Of the q omp sbt,o.
mg; for THAT gentleman promising that be
! 4 L.. 81. -,