Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1840-1842, 1841-03-31
CITY DEIEGATE


A writer under the signature Of "Fair PLAY" IN
your paper Of Monday last. informs the public that
she "prme mover IN the business" of suggesting
Mr. Taylor ms proper person TO represent the city
in the next Legislature, twas friend to- and would
have voted for MIR Daniel in preference to Mr. Stan
ard" This IS stated, It is alleged, with the view
Of correcting an impression upon the public mind,
that the movement originated with the friends Of Mr.
Stanard, and was conceived rather IN spirit Of OPP
position 10 Mr. Daniel than with the desire to sui
serve the public interests. The writer considers il
very unchartable ITO suppose that the gentlemen
cot whose solicitation Mr. Taylor conserted 10
"serve were actuated nv no other motives than
"those Of personal hostility to Mr. Daniel" Il
would be, perhaps enoughto say in reply to this ar.
ucle that u IS total nisrs presentation Of the ass,r
ton made by Mr.. DIS friends. No one haseyer alleg
ed that all the individuals who have united in the call
upon Mr. Taylor, were solely actuited by feelings
Of hostility To Mr. Daniel. Mr.. -. would have
been truly Unfortunate u, with the desire ne hos
ever manifested 10 conciliaie the good opinion of
his feIlow-citlzens, he had drawn upon himself the
hostility Of 30 respectable number OF them. No
friend Of Mr.. ID. could ever have been guilty Of
the folly n making charge at once 90 dorogo.
try 10 him, and unjust to his opponents. All
that has been said is that the personal opponents
Of Mr.. Daniel have been The most aelfps and
Efficient agents in bringing out Mr.. Taylor
and that some Of them we're believed u be inhuen-
red by feelings Of personal hostility to Mr. y. Now
this Is perfectly consistent with the tfict that fhn
prime mover In the business" would have preferred
Mr. Daniel 10 Mr.. Sttnard. That he was 6i,nd
Of Mr. Daniel, is utterly denied. " such had been
the relation in which he stood to MIR. ID. II he had
really and oofdialiy desired his election, is il con-
ceivable ihd without any communication with him.
or consultation with his friends, he would have Ia.
ken such efficient means TO defeat his cleeton1 ~
Mr. DIS frionds we're all Of this character he might
we'll eKcsim, with the Great Frederick, Save me
from my friends and ! will take care Of my ene-
Uiesin
But this attempt 10 divert the public mind from
the true character Of the present controversy, by
presenting false issue Tor lie consideration, will
prove unsuocessful. lf"Fair Play" really desires
70 give the public correct information 10 the
character Of the present opposition TO Mr. DAME,
LEI him tell us who IL was, who FIRST nominated Mr
SaDard in opposition 10 him, then Mr. Peasants
then Mr. Lancaster, and finally, who have been
most active 10 urging Me- Taylor's claims upon the
community Who was the individual who eircu-
lated a paper p'edgng tho voters 10 support Mr.
/ Taylor, Il he would consent 70 serve, and what
we're his personal relations towards Mr. Daniel 2
When he shall have answered these questions, and
Il shall appear that the same individuals were not
/ active IN oil these movements, or that they were
| all q them sol6ly actualed by the.audabe and pa
trIoic motive Of obtaining the services Of the Dell
cgato who could best represent the city, then may
Il nc said with some show Of truth, that personal
bostilIty TO Me- ID. has no place IN the mHves Of
Those who now 20 reIentlessly oppose him. 8.