Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1840-1842, 1842-03-30
Ven, neic. l ieonG.rI

lithat liberal. candid, and en shtened old gen.
teman, who has been at the head Of the Enquirer
for the last halfcentury is in earnest, and If not
II he expects to be believed, whcn he says that he
can't understand how 'our RepTessn attire" c.n CEN
sure MIR Gddings, and defend Nj Ad,ms!
Now, one question | wish tn submit. Il was
proposed TO censure MIR Adams Tor presenting
petition. the object OF which he dsapp-oved and so
expressed himself At ;he time, ana "our Represen-
ta've" defended him on the ground that the right
ol petition, which he had always advocated. was
too sacred to be assailed-and that, however he
might differ with MIR Adams rs to the Obligation TO
present petitions emansting from elsewhere than
his own District, yet MIR Adams was diseharsing
what he held to be constitutional and eonscien-
tious obligation.
In the other case, Mr. Giddings, with the bitter.
ness Of a fendish Abolitonist, and in the wicked
ness OF his own heart, introduces series OF resolu-
tons, uncalIed for and unnecessary, applicable TO
no question before the House, in which, among
other thngs IN the language OF our Representative
first resolution, he justies and defends mu,ny and
murder, instigates instruction among our NEGROES.
and invites to reasonable leagues, those who NAV
he disposed to levy war gainst the United States
and our Representative, whose constituents were
the owners Of the proper on board the Creole,
which sailed from the port Of Richmond, submits n
resolution OF condemnation, which is adopted by n
vote OF l25 TO 69-and among the 125. &c votes from
the FREQ Siates-nnd the Richmond Enquirer a. ks,
"What arc we 10 think Of our Representative
who can draw ir.bread,h distinction between
the course Of MIR Adams and that OF Mr. Ciddings-
can vindicate the and denouncc the Other?
The question wish to submit, is this: Does
not the Editor Of the Enquirer either manifest gross
stupidity, or grosser suppression Of truth ifnot a
suggestion Of ialsehood1 Our Representative bar
done what 1t was his duty TO do; and what he has
always said he would do-susta the North in oil
her Just rights, particularly IT, the right of petition
but II ever an attempt was mad, in Congress, to
put IN practice the designs Of the Abolitionists,
thu; he would be among the foremost to resist IT,
Let his course bo conirnsted witt that Of those who
hive ever ngitu,ed the question when no danger
was near, and who have inglorcusly shrunk from
the responsibility in the hour Of need Look TO the
records and see ifthere any one from Vireinin.
who took part with Mr. G. ddngs in his efforts TO
arrest the passage Of the resolutions, and then re
fused TO vote for or against them. What could our
Representative do. that would satisfy Mr. Richie 7
Is Mr. II. so entirely victim TO party prejudice
nnd rnncour, to be unable to see any good thing
IN political opponent7 DO tho bitter and vim
dietve assertions and fauit-hndings which he ever
lavishes so profusely all the public acts Of our
Representative, indicate personal malignity, in
manner too plain to escape observation md does
he expect his own party to condemn Mr. Bolts, for
his zeal in protecting their rgl IT, TO crafty the
personal venom Of tho Enquirer
Every member Of Congress from tho slave States.
sustained Mr. Bous' resolution, except three
Ncssrs. Pope and Understood, VI Ky, and Wise.
Of Virginia.
The urnnimty OF the People will 10 still greater
IN sustaining this act nj least.