Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1832-10-09

The editor of the n y American. in hi, poncr Of
thursday asks OF us information concerning letter said
TO nave been written by Mr. Van Buren, from Washington
IN ISIS, TO the late Mr. Lemuel Smith, OF New York and
certain other members of legislature urging the nom
nation OF General Jackson to the Presidency and init
mates mat he "m"y be tempted peradvenure, to coniec
urc what the tenor OF that letter was" As Mr. Smith
clcd IN New York. and his executors the ed
Tor coud not seriously suppose that had any iniorma
ton concerning his private papers he had no RIGHT to
suppose, from any thing had DONE that if such pa
pCrs had, by accident any less questionable means
en- into our hands, that could ever be tempicd o
spread them before the public" The object of the editor
Is evidently quite wide Of desire obtain nformation
his article wears double aspect being partly apoloq etc
Tor an act which he has been "empted TO perpetrae
and serving also eeer ascertain the state of pub
nc sonment IN relation to deed Of which he seems
TO DC uhwiihng to be guilty without hacker That
weed OF this city, and the worthy co-Iaborers with
the American may throw themselves into the scale with
'e auhor OF temptation Is rendered highly probable from
me specimens we have often had of coalition morals: but
%ssne s me Editor 9Ri2p he 6ae6er or %ct
worthy oil being preserved for the benefit of all such &c
may nave job on hand which needs the contrivanc C
some sort oil apology. n give il i'm his own words
was letter written by public man TO nubc M ~
PuOhc Ouslness-and therefore ia no lust sense IN he
private document In other words letter from
senator III congress TO one members of a state
Legislature, declaring preference amono he
W Ti9 presidency; Is not private document"
" III inc editor t9rnIsh with a lille more .iuC,rn,
nc,,, D. ''i !oI nc hohce We have taken of his re-
eS" ray let US have your opinion whether every lei
Ci ~ my man holding an office, to another man in
umIoe' - therefore Pu6itc ''document?" And who
er 'eiter IN favor OF of the candidates for the pro
sGohcy' Is letter con public busness?' Or womI eucL
Ieier paTlake either or less of the character IF
PuoG document on account OF the situation of the per
son VINO wrote or received ii: Suppose letter was
;" '"Lch dS' ny Mr. Clay, then Senator in Con-
gIess' 10 te late Mr. Maynard, then Senator in this
A. W ue purpose OF bringing about the abandonment
VI VT VT ana The accession OF the An-masons to the
cause oil Mr. Clay, would that letter be public docn
m NhG I"d some person in rummaging the papers of
me oead' 'ld hands upon it, could the editor be "tcnnte
per adventure to conjecture what the tenor of that et,c
In turn, owe pause for areply" Whether am, sro,,
Ie'er was written by Mr. v b. az is supposed Inv thS
con, we are Of course unable say:but knowing how
strongly MI " b. felt that the welfare of the coun,ry
depended upon the of Gen. Jackson we cannot
question that he wrote many of his friends ON the b
JooS; among whom there no doubt "pubc men, a.
Wen as private citizens And if Mr. King either as o,
cd ag sen torf to Mr. Smith otherwise has possess
Ieave the tempted and the fempter TO settle The .,o;T
OF giving it to the public between them.
mas written any letter, public or private which he or bi
Jea' 10 see IN print matter how much its puhli-
Of M Sy hvove an act OF personal dishonor ON the part
VI the cullOF oil the Anne ricau auJL ie