Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1828-1831, 1830-03-16

minority had to submit to the convention in
the event that their opposition to that now before
the people, had been successful, remains mistaken;
as is my conviction, that, in such event, the former
would have received the sanction Of large majority
Of that body.
But why enter farther into the discussion Of these
questions?--The convention has passed away: their
act is before the peoples and although prefer the
basis OF representation which they rejected to that
which they have recommended, I do not hesitate in
preferrng their constitution Of state government
that under which We live.-One thing have long
settled, never to quarrel with Others especially
with my friends, for mere differences OF opinion; and
to allow to oil men the freedom Of thought and
action, which claim for myself
lam, sir. respectfully,
Your obedient servant.
c. L. MERCER.
Mr. MERGERS first Letter to the Editors of the Wash
ingtonian.
wAsnrSoroS, 70. C.) Feb. 18th, 1880.
Mr.. MCINTYRE,
Editor of the Washntonian.
BEAR SIR-Not having seen q number Of your
paper for considerable period. am able only from
the representation given me of late paragraph in it,
to correct the msconceptioni into which its author
who is. as yet unknown 10 me, has certainly fallen.
understand that am represented to have spoken,
since my return here harshy and dsrespectfuily Of
the conduct of two gentlemen, who were members Of
the late convention, at Richmond; Of them. my
colleague ~ Henderson, between whom and myself
there has existed, for more than five years.
an uninterrupted intercourse Of affection; the other,
Mr.. John II. Cooke. Of Wnchester, whom have init
matey known, and highly esteemed, from his boy
hood, for he is much my junior in years.
II is also, am informed, distinctly intimated in the
same paragraph, that represented Sir. Marshall, the
Chief Justice of the United States concurrine 10 the
unfavorable sentiment, which am supposed TO have
expressed, at the conduct of these gentlemen
Now. sir, nothing can be more Inconsistent with my
sentiments towards the friends have mentioned from
opinion, my votes in the convention have shewn,
than to mpeach the purity the patriotism of their
motives, and hasten, more especially 20 say that
have not heard their names mentioned by tho Chief
Justice. since returned here, nor ever heard him
speak disrespectfully of them any where.
The author ofthe paragraph in question: has stated
his own differences from facts which it ia not neces-
sary that should here state, but which were used
by me in explaining the motives Of my course in the
Convention.
SO unwilling have been to enter into any contro-
versy in regard to the constitution submitted by the
convention to the people, for their ratification or
rejection, that have had very few Conversations and
written private letter. respecting it, nor authorized
line in relation to it, to be published in my behalf
BY giving place to this letter in your next Wash
ingtonan, you will do my friends and myself the JUS
tice to which we are entitled, and oblige-Yours,
respectfully, C. T. MERCER.
The Editors ofthe WashiDgtonian 10 Colonel Mercer
LEEsDuRG, Feb 22d, 1880.
Sir,-Wc received, on Saturday, communication
from you, through Mr. Henderson, the object of which
is the denial of certain charges represented you to
nave recetly appeared IN the w aShngtonian.-Froui
the paragraph enclosed, you viii discover its contents
have been grossly misrepresented to you.-No publ
cation has appeared in this paper, charging or even
intimang, that you have spoken 'harshly or disre-
specially" of any member of the late convention.
we have thought it due to you to communicate
these facts previous TO the publication Of your COM
munca,ion, as we view it totally foreign to the sub
stance of this paragraph, well in answer to
charges never made. Wednesdays return mail can
bring any farther correspondence.
The information in the enclosed paragraph, we
have from the most substantial sources and our in.
fornants are now ready to qualify les comuunca-
ton from you to them, If necessary, but which we
feel satisfied Will not be so.
Very respectfully, c. c. e. r. MCINTYRE.
Certificate of John II. Monroe and John Thomas
Mr.. Monroe asked Col. Mercer how he liked the
new constitution.-Col NJ. said, il was not such an
he liked but he thought it better than the old
one, and the people he thought had better adopt it,
Mr. Monroe replied that he would no, himselfvote
for it, that he would take DR. Henderson at his frs,
propositionHe was for the white basis and nothing
else.
Col. Mercer then observed, that he believed, that
it the West had held out they would have gotten
conversation with Judge Marshall, who said that il
the west had held out, they would have got what they
asked for.-No name was mentioned by either Of the
parties except as above stated
JOHN II. MONROE,
JOHN THOMAS.
Mr.. MERGERS second letter to the Editors Of the
Washingtonan.
WASHINGTON, Feb'y 25th, 1880.
The Editors Of the Wdsttngtonian.
Gcntlemen,--Since my letter of tho t8th instant
LII