Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1832-06-05
"Justi,ia" from Amherst, in our next.
70 TIE EDlToRs OF 7HE EN.o IN

GENrLEMEN:-l have this nroment looked into the En-
qurer oil date the 29, and observe that you have made
an gorgeous nsake IN giving account of the proceed
ings oil the Virginia Delegation Of the Baltimore Con
venton You say that a resolution vas adopted i'm sub
convention oil The Virginia Delegates. with only two
tnfee dssen'iens 10 Mr. Barbour first and case
ms failure, then TO concur in the nomination of Mr. Van
Buren, or any other candidate who might be the avorte
oil The majority OF the Convention.
As amember OF the Virginia Delegation in the Ba.
more Conventional must ask TO be permitted through YOUR
correct this errorthis incorrect of
The facts in relation TO the proceedings OF the Virginia
Delegation in their sub.conveution.
On Monday evening" tho Convention adjourned 10 meet
The next morning believe) 10 o'clock after first dc
ermlmng that the Delegates from eacl State should APP
point one OF their number constitute committee 10
devise and agree upon the rules which should the
convention In It's proceedings. Ii the a.
Delegation thathey would be expected assemble in Mr.
Archers room, at Bezhooyer's Hotel at o'clock p NJ
inc meeting oil these delegates took place according the
anunciaton and Gen. Mccoy appointed a, the mem.
Der OF The Committee FROM Delegation Immediately
alter, Mr. T. " Daniel called TO the chair and we
LOOK up the subject oil voting for a person who we
thought ought to be recommended to the friends of the
Administration suitable person for the Office of Vice
PRESIDENT 1t was seen that tho proper would be
Tor The Delegation OF each State to decide among the IN
selves to whom they wou give their support The first
question brought 10 the notice of this meeting applying 10
the subject of its vote, was whether we shoId vote 1er
capita or by Congressional Discts-Acr it was decided
that The vote should be per CAPITA the meeting was adj
dressed IN support OF the nomination of Mr. Van Buren,.
1t was contenGed that lie the strongest interest and
would get more general support throughout the Union
than any OF the distinguished individuals OF party
whose claims had been brought
That II we pressed any other candidate, should lose
the election before the peoples would devove upon the
Senate that Sergeant would lie preferred by that body
ana get ITS support in opposition any other person who
might 80 there as his competitor. That division among
ourselves would lead deieat would give victory TO our
enemy. 1t would wrest the election from the people
Wefe we should endeavor TO retain Failing
before the people, defeat Inevitable. Splitting and
dividing between and among different candidates must
lead TO this result That the nomination of Van Buren,
would more certainly unite the party than that of any
other was admitted that Judge Barbour and Jude
smith OF s. C., as politicians, accorded exactly with
ue virginia doctrines than did Mr. Van Buren,. That
either one OF those gentlemen would be highly
TO the speakers and doubt Virginia. but neither
them united so much popularity as Mr. Van Buren,, and
mat policy required us TO sustain him in the nomination
His qualifications undoubted; he was statesman of
the first ORDER and heightened devoted patriot Although
he did not agree with Virginia the subject of the Ia
nm yet he was with us on the subject of Internal I'm
provemens He denied the right TO the Federal Govern
meht 10 make roads and canals in the different States He
was moderate Tariff man, by no means ultra. He
was not lattudinous in his construction of the Federal
Compact, but imbued with the Vginia learning in re-
laton TO State Rights and Federal power-The meeting
was invoked TO sacrifice individual preferences on the
altar OF the common cause-to harmonic and unite upon
hm whose standing the best surety of success and
Martin Van Buren, 1t was insisted was that man. Ii was
urged that the choice narrowed down between Mar
TIN Van Buren, and John Sergeant If we would mot oo
ior van Duren we should have pamed upon John Ser
gean who was wide and bold atudinarian, giving to
The Federal Government much power as TO threaten ms
win consultations as would deprive the States their
sovereign characters who is in the foremost rank of the
advocates OF burhensome and overwhelming Tariff
Several spoke in favor of nominatinv Judge Bar
bour, and some followed in support of MIR Van Rnrnn
wien was proposed by member that we should first
vote Tor Judge Barbour and in the falling 10 get
hun nominated by the Convention, would then vote for
an buen or some other person who might be sustained
by the majority This proposition was objected TO- he
cause ut was said, if really thought under all circuu
stances we ought TO 90 for tile nomination OF Mr. Van
buren, we ought 10 do so in the first instance Again
voting IN the first instance for Judge Barbour might
courage his friends in Virginia OF the other States
to persist in pressing him forward as candatoonr ranks
wound then be divided, and should be overthroyn in
the contest However, this proposition was reduced TO
writing in the form of resolution and tho vote upon IL
Stood huS-For it 49, against 30. Very different from
the understanding to which you have arrived according TO
what heretofore adverted to- There is no doubt but if
there had been no proposition for compromise that MIR
IAN Buren would have gotten the OF Virginia on the
hrst ballot But many of his friends in our deeeaon
agreed 10 vote for Mr. Barbour in the first instance In
der mat there might be unanmity among in the final
result In concurring in and approving of the nomina-
hon oil Mr.. Van Buren,, there only two three dis
senIens among the Virginia Deegates-and his doubt
not has led you into the mistake you have blended the
first vote with the final one
MEMBER OF THE LATE BALTIMoRK
CONVENTION FROM VIRGINIA