Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1832-03-06


Monument fund.- may object its application to the
erection OF monument at Mount Vernon, shall receive
funled0
Mr. Roane opposed the amendment He regretted that
pii should be pressed upon the House for the erection
OF monument TO George Washington which c6nld moi
unanimous sanction But he could
pan proposed inthis BILL The fund as created
Tor announcer object, and the Legislature had right TO
toueh ~ that fund were applied TO this purpose, no in
divdua subscriber would forward withdraw his
subscription however he might be displeased appo-
pauon On these grounds he forced OPPOSE the bill
NJ Carer OF Il. w. had stated yesterday that the sub
sc1bers to the fund would be consulted The objection
othe Dill at that time that the fund was to be ap-
phed without the consent Of the subscribers The bin
had been sent back TO the Committee and that objection
had been obvatcd by the insertion clause which en-
aoea .ne subscribers If they were dissatisfied with the
application oil the fund 10 The object of this BILL to receive
back their subscriptions. He thought this ought TO salts
~ the most queamsh otbosc who opposed the appropra
ton oil the fund He did expect any bill TO pass no-
of the House.
Mr. Rutherford opposed the amendment on the ground
that the ilure OF the subscribers to withdraw their re-
specve donations, would he evidence of their willing
ness that the Washington Monument Fund should be d.
verted from the object for which il was originally sub
scriDcu. The express assent of majority of the sub.
scribers should be obtained before the Legislature should
a,tempt'o make any other disposition of IT, than that ORR
glnaiiy intended. Various considerations would operate
TO prevent the subscribers from withdrawing their sub
scptons even though opposed the APPROPRIATION of the
Sna IN i1e manner proposed by the Bill The passage
oil the Dill, with the proposed amendments would operae
IN Tact TO withdraw the fund from object for which
was subscribed and defeat the wishes of those who de-
sreu TO see monument erected TO the memory of WASH
ngton, at the seatof Governments He thouyLt II dc
Die that there should be much unanimv on question
like this. The object should be ACCOMPLISHED bv c S,,a
QUITO the common Treasury lie had no doubt the House
would pass bill, appopriatiDg the money out of The
reasury, with great Immunity, and that il would meet
the cordial appreciation OF their constituents The citizens
oil Richmond had subscribed $500 of the fund and thev
were naturally DESTROYS of erecting here Monument TO
washington me sum was at present small; but form
ed nucleus which, in fifty years, compund interest
would become sufficient for the purpose lie was con-
vnced that many OF those, who would withdraw their
subscriptions as provided by the amendment would bc
dissatisfied with its proposed application.
Mr. Brodnax should dcplore, with the gentleman from,
Hanover that The bill should pass the House unani-
mousy But II II did not, the fault with those who
friendly TO the bill. 1t was true that the monumen,
und ought to be applied according the intentions of the
subscribers, possible Butwa not possible TO obtain from,
them an affirmative assent or dissent. The bill appro
priaed that fund nearly the original object as posbIc
ana contained provision which the subscribers if
you 40 not agree TO the appropriation OF the fund YOU can
withdraw your moneys and it you do not withdraw IT, we
VIII take as indicative of your consent to the bill RE
did not doubt that the people the hospabe city, Of Rich
mond were DESTROYS that il should be ornamented nv
monument TO Washington. But they did not alone sub
scribe TO the fund II was contributed to by citizens of
every section oil the State, and their wishes also ongh TO
be consulted If the citizens of Richmond desired H. thew
might withdraw their share of the subscription Gentle.
men seemed 10 tnk That the consent of the subscribers
must ne gwen anlrmatvely But they i'm error. A
negative consent equally satisfactory and was i'm fact
The only one that could easily be obtained IT. after being
nothed that they could Withdraw their subscrinons tc
tailed to do so, they would fairly be considered as acou
escing in the application of the fund 1t was am old may
i'm, that silence gives consent and in one of The mos, in
terestng contracts in mans life silence was considered
as binding as though the obligation had been entered into
under hand and seal. ~ w
Mr. Bryce OF G. had yesterday been in favor of
hitting the bil-but the amendment now renorted moi
MS views, and he perfectly agreed with the gentleman
rom Dnwdde that ought 10 satisfy all parties Mr. b.
khe" something oil the monument fund, he had some
agency In ITS collection. And he knew that although
Richmond was then thought OF the site of the mon-
inen the erection of monument here was not the main
object AT that time il supposed that the remains Of
washington would be removed TO Richmond But as that
cannot be done, there was no doubt that il was in
enueu 10 erect monument somewhere, and as the bill
provided me'hod by which the subscribers could U dis
could he thought, be objection to the bill If the i,i
Zens oil Richmond who had subscribed So 600 IN tho G,nJ
% 70 appy the fund proposed they
onghtto be permitted so 10 do. If on the contrary ,ey
were desirous of Withdrawing their portion they were
enabled to do by this BILL which he hoped would pass
Mr. Rutherford in reply said the Legislature possessed
no right TO divert this fund which was DESIGNED for o
enc object AS TO the remark of the gentleman from
% WIN regard to It's design he CMr RI had seen
Yea mat the monument should be erected near the capitol
In The city OF Richmond.
Mr. Newton believed the gentleman from Richmond
was IN error to the object of the fund 4 G,r,nar
resolution OF the Legislature the subject stated hat
" "ds raseu 10 erect monument the remains of
"aShington-and Richmond was mentioned because il
was then supposed that the would be removed to
s place But as that removal could not take place be-
cause The proprietor of Mount Vernon refuses to permit if
o question was whether the monument had better be
erected over the remains of Washington erected
i"Iy 10 the original design.
The amendment was then agreed 10 Aves 90 Mo-.
not couned-and the bill amended was ordered o bc
engrossed. ~ '''" " NC
The joint order of the day for the election of Pr;,ci
pa Engineer was taken up, and on motion OF Mr. Sum
mcrs' was postponed TO Saturday next MESSAGE was
subsequently received from the Senate concurringin be
postponement. " ''e
Oi motion OF Mr. Rutherford leave was piven to bn,r
III Dill TO incorporate the Bell Isle ManuG,ctrin CON-
pany IN the county of Henrico. p ~
The engrossed bill TO an act TO incorporatc o
,"u.on and Potomac Rail Road Company passed March
~, 1871, was read third time.
Mr. Cabell moved lay the bill on the tobc s,,,o
tndt IL ought to be deferred until the James River Riil
SHOULD nave been acted upon. Considerable debate en-
sSueu IN which The motion sustained by Messrs
CrocNet campbell OF Dr. Cabell, Wilson of Dr. and Sum
mers, and opposed by Messrs McCue. Brooke and NJ
on when the motion TO lay the table was agreed 70
oh mouon OF Mr.. Morris, the House adjourned
m .MondGy March s.
me senate have passed the bills-concc rninr John G.
hudic-o amend an act passed January 9th 1910 CON
corning Charestown in Jefferson couny-and for the
hel OF James Cand Sarah Luck. Also with anendmnns
the Dis authorising the North western Bank of Viro
me establish an office ofdeposit in the county of Monosa
na-ah aet concerning the county of Norhampton-5nd
Incorporating the Barboursville Toll Bridge COMPANY -
Amendments agreed to.
on motion OF Mr. Moncure, the following resolution oC
the COMMITTEE OF Courts of Justice was taken up:
HeSoiUed, As the opinion of this committee that u,c
Penon OF Robert CroPp and Elizabeth Cropp of Stat
d county string That in August last they married.
he being the nephew, and she the widow of John Cram
deceased and both at that time ignorant OF the law proi
DhS such connection, and praying the passage ola ,
lagalizing their marriage-be rejected.
MIR. Moncure moved thar the report of the committee
pc reversed observing that similar case THAT of Jamcs
Luck and his wifc) had been decided fSvorabIo ~ t
days since. Mr. BrOdnax opposed the motion ,ybicb
was further debated by Messrs. Marshall CbandIcr