Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1828-1831, 1830-10-18
FoR THE VINO.
To the Editors of III. Enquirer.

Clifton, October 10, 1885,
had foreseen my exclusion from the columns of the
Enquirer, and so said, my expose ntained in the
N. lntelgenccr OF the 25th uliimo; but, | could not
have foreseen, could have supposed that added
to this exclusion would be found, in the columns of
your paper, mvtiiatei statement of what I wished
to pnosh. by which mutilaton, am made to saw by
fair inference, what never did saw nor intended TO
say, and | feel well justified now, in saying that,
yonr mutilotion designed, believe, to do me
further injury. shall be amongst the last to
complain cf the latitude of the press though it NAV
be my misfortune to be the victim let il be free in
the fullest of the word; what | think have
right to complain of suppression Of defensrs mat
ter, after base and groundess assault upon chnrac-
ter, wantony and wIckedy made by others, and Sec
onded by yourselves In the ENQUIRER of the Let
inst will be found he following article, quoted from
the United States Telegraph. mo % abuse. DO
l"f1ult and deception The Collector of Petersburg
va, J. Robertson, was represented TO be very OBJ
''noXious to the people. He had for some tim. re-
"ported large to be suit, and considerable
"balance retained in his hands. After his removal
cit was ascertained that most The bonds reported by
Thin To be in suit had actually been paid, and tina,
che default S24,857 81 This article in the
columns Of the Enquirer, but continuance of
the saDe course towards me, manifested, by hume
rous, previously published, false, and scandalons
squibbs thought that had submitted to all with
something ike Christian fo'bearancc, and tbatit was
tim9 to check If could, the currency, which you
were giving to fatsehosd, and Misunderstanding
ly forwarded to you, short piece refutation Of
the strongest features, contained i'm the dsprsce FIJI
article, which you rcpublished from the Telegraph
If your paper had been free, the piece would readily
have found place IN your columns yet you did not
choose TO publish It, your duty to reject it.. But
you have chosen different course, alike new often
sive, and culpabe. In your paper Of the I2th inst.
you say, "we must decline publishing the communl-
cation ofthe FIX Collector Of Petersburg we have
no wish 10 embark this paper IN what would turn
10 be unpleasant and very useless contr0yersy.'
Between whom this controversy to be, if
at all Certainly between others :hon the author
Of the black Hst, and myself And why did you not
think ofths controversy At rhe time you inserted the
offensive article in the Enquirer Although you have
long acted the principle that "aH Is fair in poh-
lies" yet was not aware that you willing TO
apply tho same principle, in practice. 10 mcrnls -
Thore was however, dagger Of controversy, for,
after answering the article, was done Bot after
saying tbot you declined publishing my communion
ton, you 90 on 10 publish much Of il it pleased
you to do, and in form too calculated TO make IT
appear quite n different hing from what it is Tho
refuaon Of that part Of the quotation from the black
list. which charges me with reporting bonds in suit,
which after removal, we're ascertaned to have been
mostly paid the COMMUNICATION which you refused
10 publish asserts "Tat circular had been receiUed
from The TreasUry Department, commanding The Col
iecors in their subseqent toeekty returns, 10 report al
Donds not paid on he day n ting due, to be in sui;
though in truth, they might not be, and that had
never. during my continuance IN office, reported bm
Jingle bld sut, tshict ms gerDavds paid and en-