Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1842-07-15
Distribution and he Compr,

DiSfTibN!iDU " ~ CNHIftUHst 81
We are not bound 10 stand Sponsors for Mr. Tyler.
We do not mean TO v,ndlcate the Uniform consistency
of his political life But III" tw" evidences, when are
quoted by the Baltimore Pair!ut of tie 1th Instant,
against hun on the Veto now bef,re tie Public, directly
contradict the proposition which they are adduced TO
sustain. /; was our misfortune 10 d's!er w''!i Mr.. ~.
Ter in many of the positions, which he assumed IN his
Report and Speech Of le3a, and in his Views OF lslJ-
Blu, he was at all times, 10th in 81 and 40, opposed 10
D distribution, so long as II should disturb Vie Iomp'o'
mise Act OF ~.
What is the first evidence produced by the b. Pa'Ti-
OF? A letter from Mr.. Tyler Of Oct. II, Ism, written
al Williamsburg, to Mr.. Robinson, n leading nlanntic-
turcr of P~ll,sbutg. And what does tina. letter say:
my opinions were fully expressed nj 81 ciaIrvilr' am g, al,
Steubrn'ilr. M both places, m regard I" ne Paes'"n' " n ~
are our opiniun- rs 10 Ia TaIil' aa-w eud, l.ai ! nIS me-
ror Of sustaining fhe Can proinvo bill; That II tolninrd TIE lrin
oipic ri Irlroacii"n; The mcinrn' The d",y a'taiam II. nli..,nni:
which forced mp the protection e. iaianii. IL y hs wa ''iniSdieht
To 80 per ccLt.: That the chance which Il ,iircud ~ ne place %.
valuation. ana the moce oi ps! tnrri, was liil' 'tla, ~ u: nrm
Ia IL OF 81 per cent; and that With . rcssata1 ul Tie war upon
Ike currency which had para: zed the Industry O: it country, /
was >angGine in trc hep ani ne belief that lToslfin! "''ii" u c
speedily rtst"Ic.: That IN err"rI 81 2itt mas, w"hia '"he 'e'h<
tie sai-s ~ re public !"nd' ".'"rr TIE Sta''s, aud IN a"s q, .h,
m. the revenue ty dutr' on inpors, in Opposition 'oa rcs"f ! u
nnproiuruye 10 tie treasury, aud expensive in the collection"
Language canno. he palmer. He twas IN favor of
sustaining the Compromise b,li'-and 'n tonneLton
rHk his, lie was in favor &c Distribution. But the
vetoed Tariff bill cIashed, instead Of sustaining the
Compromise bi!l-nnd MenJore, MIR. tt not n0c in
e. vor of Distribution.
What is the second proof; MIR. Gcgsin's speech of
the 10th nit. in the llau.e Of Representatives on the
Acting Presidents Veto. Ia this speech Mr. G"ge'n
qnoies certain extracts from DIR. Tylers Report OF
lr3o-a!l Of which are upset, hy hat ~ q. calls III
general ia salvo Or prnviso, that he iMt - had no
with to disturb the Compromise act The resolution
containing this salvo is thrown into a notf 10 MIR. G.s
specch-andi it runs in the foliowin. uneq~vccal phrase:
Res0lreJ, n~eeerts3e.s, That, by the i"rc."i,s resolutions ur-
rins The distribution III he n. c'eds OF the >''rs "i .s r.l"iie
lands, this General Assembly Gc,h not mean. II any event, to IN
fringe ar disturb The aci of C"n.tc,>, passed III u o. March,
lssi, far the settlement of the Itarlr. curnino,iy called the Com
PR lni>r =ci-ba, on ue erntGr., II aesbg he'arts and ret"toes
Rat hr sad Compromise Get >h"id Ls h'dsG:rfd GHd "rs0'ate-
Ayes -, noes 35-Mr u Ter in the ?airmaL'r.'
The Compromise act is TO be he'd ''sacIeJ aid lnvio.
la,e"-ond yet he is called nlo" 70 sign a bill which
Violate lis spirit and clashes with ls principle
For the life OF us, NE cannot understand thu suicidal
logic Of MIR. Gogg.n, or OF his Squire Of The Baltimore
Patriot.