Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1830-03-16


as my conviction. that, in such event, the former
would have received the sanction of large majority
of that body. 3
But why enter farther into the discussion of these
questions.--The convention has passed away: their
act is before the people; and, although prefer the
basis of representation which they rejected to that
which they have recommended, do not hesitate in
preerrng their constitution of state government to
that under which we live.-One thing have long
settled quarrel with Others more especially
with my friends, for mere differences of opinion; and
to allow to all men the same freedom of thought and
action, which claim for myself.
lam, sir, respectfully,
Your obedent servant,
C. T. MERCER.
Mr.. MERGERS first Letter to the Editors of the Wash
lngtOnlan.
WAsHINdroN, %. c. Feb 10th, 1880.
Mr.. McINTYRE,
Editor of the Washintonian
DEAR SIR-Not having seen a number of your
paper for considerable period, am able only from
the representation given of late paragraph in it,
to correct the misconception: into which its author
who 49, as yet, unknown TO me, has certainly fallen
understand that am represented to have spoken,
since my here harshly and dsrespec,fully of
the conduct of two gentlemen, who were members of
the late convention, at Rchmond one of them nv
colleague, MIR. Henderson, between whom and myself
there has existed, for than ye-and-twenty years.
an uninterrupted intercourse of affection; the other,
Mr.. John r. Cooke, OF Wnchestef, whom have init
mately known, and highly esteemed, from his. boy
hood for he is much my junior in years.
1t is also, am informed distinctly inmated in the
same paragraph, that represented Mr.. Marshall, the
Chief Justice of the United States concurrine the
uTfavorabe 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
whom, two important questions differed in
opinion, as my votes in the convention have shewp
than to impeach the purity the patriotism of their
motives, and hasten, more especially 10 say, that
have not heard their names mentioned by the Chief
Justice. sncel returned here, nor ever heard him
speak dsrespectfully of them any where.
The author of the paragraph in question has stated
his own differences from facts which it is 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 Ibeen to enter into anv contro
versy in regard 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 t,nor authorized
one line in relation to it, to be published in nv behalf
BY giving place to this letter in your next Wash
ngonian, you will do my friends and myself the Jus.
tice to which entitled, and oblige-Yours
respectfully, c. H. MERCER.
The Editors ofthe Wasliingtonan TO Colonel Mercer
LEEsBURG, Feb 22d, 1880.
Strive received, on Saturday, communication
from you through MIR. Henderson, the object of which
is the denial Of certain charges represented to Won TO
have rccety appeared in the Westinghouse
the paragraph enclosed you will discover its contents
have been grossly misrepresented to you.-No publ
cation has appeared IN this paper, charging even
ntmating, that you have spoken ''harshly disrc-
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
municaion, view it totally foreign to the SUBJ
stance of this paragraph, well IN answer to
charges made. Wednesdays return mail can
bring US any farther correspondence.
The information III the enclosed PARAGRAPH we
have from the most substantial Sources and our in
fornants ready to qualify to it's commhnica-
ton from you to them, if necessary, but which we
feel satisfied will not be
Very respectfully, C. C. g. r. MCINTYRE.
Certificate of John II. Monroe and John Thomas.
Mr.. Monroe asked Col Mercer how he liked the
new constitution. NJ. said, it was not such an
one be 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 not himself vote
for it, that he would take Mr.. Henderson his first
proposition He for the white basis, and nothing
! else.
| Col. Mercer then Observed that he believed that
| if the West had held out they would have gotten
what they wanted.--Col. NJ. said that he bad had a
conversation with Judge Marshall, who said that i
the west had held they would have got what the,
asked for.-No name was mentioned by either Of the
parties, except as above stated
| JOHN II. MONROE,
JOHN THOMAS.
! Dir. MERGERS second letter 10 the Editors of the
Washingtonan.
l. WAsBINGToN, Feb'y 25th, 1880.
u - 81