Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1839-03-14
To tie Editors Of the I~'trs,n,an.

10 Inc Editors 81 me btrRln,dn.
Of your paper OF the 4,h inst, my attention was Al
tracfcd by q lengthy editorial. vindie a,ing the eours
pursued by The Wings ofthe Legislature, in reyar
10 the Senatorial election. My object 10 not to repl,
to your which with ali due Difference t,
you! better Judg,nen,) appears moro specious thar
solid" but. merely TO ash a few questions, for the sak,
Of information.
You say that Mr.. Roane was elected to the Senate
oy wing votes-"asiaken BY the Wings as q .ehoic.
OF e'"s.' Were there not, only two parties in tn,
state. then. Messrs. Editors! And the Wings be
Jog IN a minority. was not the election ola Wh,g
Senator lmpracticablel Are there not three partie,
IN our present Legislature. and are the Wings not in
a decided plurality, Then, have the Wings voted
for MIR. Rives .. under precisely similar circumstan-
ccs ?"
You likewise say that "if,he Wing. had rallied
on one OF then own patty, Tor several successful bal.
lots, the Conservatives would have been dishearten-
ed, and would have supported Mr.. Mason, a. on seye
raj ballots, three Of them did,"
The wish Of the Wings is 10 strengthen their par
~. by n union with the Conservatives. That is
their avowcd object. Nov, il the Wings are more
odiOus to the Conservatives than the Democrats
,fthey preferred John Y. Mason to Chapman John.
son, does II not show that it is impossible TO effect a
union with them on honorable terms that they
would sooner JOIN their old allies again! Are not
the Wings making the most shameful condescenion-
are they not acting beneath their dignity, in couriing
an alliance aciM men aoho spurn them?
When II was ascertained that there was M much
probability OF the election Of Mr.. Johnson. as Of Mr..
Rives after the Wings had supported the latte, on
almost every ballot. If he were no, their first choice,
why did they not vote for Mr.. Johnson on every sue
cecding ballot "
When Mr.. Watkins and other Democrats, nvoweJ
their inteniion to vote for Mr.. Johnson. and Mr..
Bolts called upon the Wings to sustain him, instead
ofdolng so, about a mo,eiy Of them voted for Mr..
Kives' Did not that most clearly show that Mr..
kiVes was the first choice OF that moiety, and that
they were determined to elect him., or to prevent an
election altogether! II The Wings had unanimous
" supported Mr.. Johnson on that ballot, with the aid
OF The Democrats who voted tor him, he might have
been elected. Did no, the Wigs therefore, proven,
an election from being made!
1t is said that a Wing candidate evidently was out
OF the question and that The contest was between
Rivcs and Mason. Can this assertion be predicated
on any other ground than that the Democrats were TO
remain hrni IN Httr position, the Conservatives in both
houses numbering only litle corporal's squad
were TO adhere 10 their candidate. but the Wings ha-
wing a uecided plurality, were to abandon their posi-
uon' u sacrifice then principles and to support Mr..
hivcs Is II not the grossest absurdiiy TO say that
the contest was solely between Rives and Mason,
when the Wings were greatly superior in plumbers
to eilher OF the other parties? Is it not meant that
General Bayly and Others. who refused to sacrifice
principle BY sustaining Mr.. Rives, should be dubbed
81 Impracicables." aud other epi,heis worthy only
oil those with whom they originated, should be arpi,-
ed to them !! Do not these Impracticables." de-
serve the thanks, the gratitude. the applause Of every
rue Wing, for their firm, honest and independent
course
1t is said hat Riyes is a prosecuted man, and
that the sympalhies OF the Wings should be excited
II his behalf. Should no. this sympathy rather be
bestowed upon MIR. Calhoun, who has heretofore
stood up with the Wings in opposition to the en-
cioaclments of Power ?-Who differs with them
upon one subject only, aud compared to whom in
point OF talents, WIN. c.. Rives is nothing more than
a Liii,putian. Should they not besiow their sym
patty upon Mr.. Calhoun, who is siandered, abused
and bttied by his Wing brethren, than TO cherish IN
their bosoms WIN. c. Rives !-au uugraleful viper,
ready Ms soon as fesusItated, to strike at the very
trend whO nourished him.
hope, Messrs. Editors, that YOU will give these
queries an insertion in your paper, together with
your answers. | lliink that The Wings of the Lee
gIslatuie, were under the same obligations TO their
constituents. to support a Wing, that the Conserva-
tives were under, TO support Rives. Therefore, |
can give my vote for no one who voted for Rives ;
and there are Others who have made he same resolve.
A WING FROM PRINCIPLE,
NOT FROM POLICY"
REPLY.
We did not expect to convince, by our arguments.
whether specious or solid, those who were prc-de,er-
mined not to be convinced. Of the ~proprie,y of the
election, under The circumstances, Of Mr.. Rives by
Wing votes. We do not expect TO do so now,
lhougli we shall reply 10 the writer Of the foregoing,
lest he might haply suppose either that We designed
to treat his essays with contempt, or that we quailed
under the power Of his logic.
/. In answer TO our correspondents first query,
we remark, that there are in fact four, instead OF
thee parties in the present Legisla,ure-that is to say,
each Of tho two great parties is itself divided, a
Spartan band" being attached to one, and a For
lorn Hope 10 the other. But il Mr.. Rives had not
been a candidate, or If he had been driven from the
field in the outse, by the pertinacious refusal Of the
Wings 10 vote for him, and by that circumstance
the range Of choice had been narrowed down be-
tween john Tyler and John Y. Mason, then pre-
existing af1inilies, as we'll as the last Springs pledges,
would have united the vote of the Sub-Treasufy
men and Conservatives in favor Of the latter, Just as
the Wings, of whatever shade of opinion. would, by
the like caus es, have been united in favor Of the for
mer gentleman. And, as the Administration party
consolidated, o%utnumber the Wing parry, consolida-
ted, Judge Mason would have been elected. This
is. we humbiy think, a sufficient reply TO all the fun
merry and fiddle PADDLE about the Wings having a
" plurality ofvotes' on first ballot-for this plurality
was practically of no benefit to them, excep. to ena-
able them to decide. if they had been unanimous, the
contest, between the two gentlemen nominated by the
two wings Of the Administrator par,y-just as when
they did not have a plurality in 1886, they succeed
ed, by acting in cooperation with a larger portion
Of the Administration party, disafec,ed TO the eau