Litchfield enquirer. [volume] (Litchfield, Conn.) 1829-current, 1832-06-07

| Mr. EdioT-In your paper Of The 9th May, which
hes just fallen under my observation, abiding 10 the
attack Of Major Heard upon Mr. Arnold, you make
the following remark:
"Eysn the Globe prOnouBces ths astnck upOn Mr..
ArHOld "disgraceful" probably from The mere CIR.
Jackson buIIies We wonder il there will not be
some Member Of Congress OfSuf6cient RerUe TO move
resolution that Heard be brought before the House
and be gently repriGded By the Speaker for this at
Now, sir, % the representative from this epuny,
Hon. J. w. Huntington, was the gentleman who in
roduced the resolution for the purpose of bringing
Gen. Houston before the House, and causing him to
be reprimanded by the Speaker, the only inference
can draw from the above remark 10, that you do not
approve Of his course in this matter-and Of conse-
quenes must take the liberty Of telling you that such
remarks from his prOGessed friends are calculated 10
do him serious injury. That such was your wish or
intentiOn cannot readily believe. Patio.
GIn reply 10 our correspondent we have but word
| Of remark. We answer candidy, we did not approve
Of the resolution Of Mr. Huntington. The Mouse had
after many days Of debate and investigation solemnly
declared that Gov. Houston had been guilty of gross
outrage and contempt towards that body by beating
Mr.. Sanberry for words uttered in debate After they
had SO declared, we did expect that some member
would have introduced resolution that he be impris-
oned during the session Of Congress; and il that, nor
one deprving him Of the privileges Of seat within
the bar Of the House allowed to former me bers Of
Congress,) could not be passed. that there friends
Of The constitution would have paused. aMd leli the
friends Of Houston to have moved that he be dischar
ged without any punishment. The school-boy play
Of bringing Gov. Houston before the Speaker TO be
told, what he already well knsw, that he had beaten
Mr.. S'anberry and by so doing had rendered himself
amenable to punishment, but that by having be-
fore been member Of that house, being man Of in-
leigence, and gallantry, and forth, he therefore
should be treated with lenity, was view OF the
case, indeed extremely iarccal and absurd And on
this account could not but regret that any member
from New-England should have introduced such a
resolution. We dislike 10 see our northern men COW.
ering before their naughty but chivaross southern
friends by such mk-andwater proceedings. II is the
very courses (as in the Of Heard Immediately
afterwards abundanty proved,l to invite insults and
attacks from every rufian about the city.
These remarks not made from any unfrieRdIy
feeling towards Mr.. Hunting,on-On the contrary, we
bear towards him the utmost respect and good will
but cannot nevertheless pass over such Gas we
ceive) strange proceeding withsut expressing our
disapproba,on. We know these southrons too well
to believe that 10 submit their bravado is the righ.
way 10 m eet them
In examining the catalogue Of members Of the late
Baltimore Convention, as published in the Washing
ton Globe, find the whole number TO be 344. How
many actually attended we do not know, but we re-
collect to have it stated in Of the newspa
pers that more than 300 were present. The number
OF delegates in several Ofhe states, appears have