Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1842-12-20
TO TIE EDITOR OF TIE E.N9UIRER.
RALEIGH, House of Commons, Dec. IL.

Dear Sir:
NV partial connection with Mr.. Brown, in the matter
Of Election of u s. Senator, demands from reply
10 a commune alton headed "North Carolina Election
in your paper of 18th December This reply propose
to make in a statement as succnct as possible accom-
panyng 18th the correspondence 10 which this state.
ment will relate.
Before proceeding this statement, deem i. due 10
myself to cay, that far personal preference was
concerned neither Of these gentlemen was my choce
and SO far as have acted for Mr. Brown, have done
so from the conviction that the he pursued in
the correspondence hereunto subjoined the only
one calculated TO relieve the party from the untortu
nate position in which il had been placed.
Very respectfully, d. X. McRAE.
Statement.
II is true as stated in the article headed "Norh Ca
rolina Election, "That caucus was called early IN
the second week of the session" But, for one, un-
hesitntngly declare, haze nerer been personally oP
peaied to by Mr. Br0icn TO uote for him; and am IN
struced to say, that when spoken TO upon The SUBJECT
he has never considered the Rayner Resolutions
disgrace, but only felt himself censured by them, an
left 10 the Democratic party to do him justice The
author Of the article alluded to neglects, IN giving hs
statement of caucus proceedings, TO inform the public
that there than one baoting; that upon each
succeeding balloting, Mr. Browns majority increased,
and that upon the 9TH balIong, MIR. Brown received
75, Mr.. Saunders j; and SO far my own personal
observation extends well the observation OF gen
emen, Mr. Brown not present IN that caucue on
the contrary, gentleman friend Of fr. Saunders,
proposed 10 invite the gentlemen in, cnd let them ex-
press their views. This proposition, opposed by friends
of Mr.. S, rejected Nor did hear that occa-
sion any friend of Mr.. Brown certainly not MIR. Is.
himse) t'nsist the nomination.; and IT any one had
so insisted, think | should have heard it. But am
instructed 10 saV that far from Mr. being present.
lie had expressly declined and authorized friend 10
withdraw his after the first ballot IT that should
be against him. If MIR. B. "had himself nominated,
know the fact but am authorized 10 say, that the
gentleman who nominated MIR Is. not solicited to
do So but did on his responsibility, because he
had understood in the ofthe preceding evening,
that the hope Of reconciliation 10 that had been
caucus be discharged from the further consideration
Of The subject.
] had, for Of my own, voted for neither Mr..
B nor Gen. S. in caucus; but the morning subse-
quent TO the second caucus, Mr. b. took me aside in
the lobby of the House. and understood, asked my
opinion the best TO pursue. without hesita
ton told him. thought the safety Of the party in the Ls
gisla,ure we'll in the State, depended upon The
tua withdrawal of the two candidates. and thus leaving
to the party to select upon whom it could unite
On the eve CT the same day. MIR b. called upon and
requested ME 10 bear TO Mr.. s. communication con-
tanning the proposition desired. This communication
lIbore TO MIR. S. During my interview with him, un
dcstood him TO express expectation Of being elect
ed BY Wing votes, and thereupon stated to him my
fears that such issue would be attended with
quences disastrous 10 the party, and have the effect Of
rendering him personally odious. To that communities
ton the part Of Mr. B., Mr. S. replied declining 10
accede 10 his proposition and sending 1t enclosed.
Believing that MIR. i. had used the only means in
his power 10 effect reconciliation, could no longer
withhold from him my support have transmitted the
correspondence appended 10 this statement with the de-
SIRE that in justice myself well Mr.. b., it may
be published. ID. X. McRAE.