Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1842-02-26
To the Hon. Judge UPsHuR.

RICHMOND, February ii, lS42.
Dear Sir: have just received your letter ofthe 9Th
instant in which you ask me, in reference to the pend
ing issue between Mr. Bolts and YOURSELF say what
opportunities have had of knowing your opinions in
regard 10 the value Of our Union, and what under.
stand them TO be-
My acquaintance with you began, believe, abou,
the year 1890 You then of the Judges OF the
General Court of Virginia, and young member OF
the Bar Of this city. resided at the time, and con-
tnued TO do for FIVE years afterwards IN the family
of gentleman with whom you were upon terms OF
great intimacy and friendship, and at whose house you
alwavs stald when you came 10 Richmond to attend
the General Court, which sat here twice year
During this period l occasionally attended the Court
of Charles City, and more recently that of Williams
burg, both of which you presided Upon these occa
sions intercourse free, and familiar as was
natural between persons of different ages and sua.
lions in life. | have frequently heard you express
your opinions upon subjects OF Federal politics. and
have been present upon many occasions, when the doc
tne of Notification Secession Abolition, and other ex
citing pics of the day were the subjects OF your CONVEX
sation with others Upon some of these occasions |
myself took part in the conversations others OF them
was merely silent auditor Of what was said. can
pretend TO detail, with accuracy, what was sad by
YOU of these Conversations but Of this feel
fdent that nothing was said which induced to be-
leve for moment that you in favor OF an imne
date, unconditional dissolution of the Union. Had such
sentiment ever been uttered by you in my presence,
or indeed any thing which bore the slightest affinity to
such sentiment, am sure should not have forgot.
ten it; for, having always entertained the opinion my
self that the essential liberties of this people deende
more upon the preservation Of the union Of the States
than upon any earthly thing, should have regarded
that man little better than fool or mailman who
could entertain the opinion that any state Of things
had vet arisen in the progress OF the Government
which could make il desirable expedlent TO dissolve
it. 1t is true, always considered you what is called
a State rights man of the very sirctcst Sect and
have sometimes heard you, in the heat of discussion,
push the doctrines of State sovereignty and State
in,erposton beyond what believed 10 be their true
limits | we'll recollect that in the controversy which
arose between the General Government and South Gu
rona upon the subject of the tariff laws, you took sides
with the latter; and have strong impression that
have heard You declare, upon more occasions than one
that rather than the principles of General Jack
ron Proclamation carried into practice and became the
established and recognised principles of the Govern
ment, you would the Union dissolved But did
not understand you entertaining the opinion that
these principles had become ever would become the
principles Of the Government; and the declaration
see med TO me be made merely 10 evnce the strength
Of your conviction of their dangerous character and
tendency. Generally, however, when | have heard
you conversng upon the subject OF the South Carolina
controversy you were combating the idea, which was
hen frequently advanced, that Mobilization, if pacti'
,ally applied, would produce dissolution of the
Union BY rendering its government powerless and Ills
.w, imperative. You maintained, on the contrary,