Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1843-04-14

TO THE EDITORS Of TIE ENQUIRER.
Gentlemen: perceive in the Wing OF yesterday an
article, which hope you Will Indulge me briefly to
ce Among o,he. remarks, the Wing says, "Why
were Messrs. Muaford and Allen proscrbed' not for
their politics, but because it understood that they
would not obey the instructions OF the people. We
ask of the Enquirer, If that was not good and su.i
cent reason? How does the editor of that print
Gle 1t with his Democracy, that he voted for ticket
which denies the right OF instructions Tell il not IN
Cath, that the who has made much noise about
the right of instruction, voted for who refused to
obey the wishes of the people and who is abusing
the people because they chose to elect others who would
execute their will
Whether have been prescribed or not, | mean not
TO enquireit is sufficient for know that the peo-
pie do not desire my services But the Wing has fall
into an erro, with regard to my sentiments and
course upon the right OF instruction. In situation
OF nv life have ever denied that right refused TO
obey instructions when given. II might have known
my upon tina; subject, It they had taken the
Bile TO enquire. | am gratified that others have been
elected TO perform duty which would have given
pain, for have yet voted 10 Of office
who believed had discharged its duties faith.
fully.
As have taken the trouble TO make this statement
in sheer Justice 10 myself, will make other remark
At The time Mr. Bosher first elected the Office Of
Collector vacant There were eleven candidates
How other Democrats voted do not know because the
vote was by ballot; but this know, there were six
balotings On the first five ballots voted each time
]
Ben Sheppard, he whom the Wing truly represents as
"a whose character is adorned with every virtue
GA the sixth ballot | voted for Ar. Bosher aud
have not regretted that vote yet There were thirteen
members of the council presentnine Wings and four
Democrats. G.. w. MUNFORD
4 ne,c Budget Of Blnadsrs!
We would have suffered The Richmond Wing to have
escaped animadversion, this OCCASION if It had not
done gross injustice TO ourselves and msrepresented
The facts of the No wonder 1t Is attempting to
back out from the position it hadi assumed. 1t begins
10 find the shoe pinch Ii begun BY introducing pro-
scrption into our City Councils, and hunting down
the collector. 1t raised The hue and cry through all
its can-and now, when the work is done, and MIR
James Bosher is to be ostracsed, has CALLED so ma
ny liberal men, that II begins to find it losing game
and is willing TO change It's position. This violence
has injured The Of Mr. B,.ts and the Wing comes
forward to soften the matter by CLOSES, and
to abate the prejudces which it has so ubsurdy ex-
cited
In the first place, it is not true that we have been
the friends Of prescription. Oar friends know us
better. We have never been lis advocates in the ad
mnis,ration of the General Government-and though
at moment were the martyrs to Wing proscrip.
ton, in own person, yet we scorn to indulge the
vnJictive spirit of retaliation. We appeal to our
friends, who familiar with course during
the last years, during the late session. some Of
whom have complained OF our forbearance Most
amusing, indeed, is it to hear the Wing com.
mend its own moderation. What paper more re
joced some years ago, in the removal Of two Demo-
Gratis from Office What paper was II that threatened
two Of the police officers OF Richmond with removal
who in lc4O were in the habit Of visiting the Demo-
cratic Association ? The Wing What paper vvshed,
but ,ac other day, TO give sop to Darby The
Wing. What paper harked the bull dogs Of
proscr pton in the Spring of l5l and never raised
murmur against the 200 removals Of Granger Oh :!
this same most moderate and liberal organ.
| In the second place, it is not true, that "voed
for ticket lat the Ward election) that denied the
right of instruction." Such question entered
lnlo heads until after We had made out ticket
and handed il the recording officer whose clerk was
in the of registering it, when by SANDER silly OBJ
served "What, do you vote For Mr.. Allen, who denies
the right of ins,ruction-and says he will not
turn on, Mr. Boshers" We from the remark,
made in the presence of SO many Wings that perhaps
some iue capital was 10 be made oil the thing, and,
therefore, we replied at once, that when we made on,
our ticket, did no! know what were Mr.. Allen S
opinions, and not certain OF them al that
ment We since understand, that the Wing has mis-
represented Mr.. Aliens we'll as MI Muniords OPT
nions-that Mr.. Alien acknowledges the right of in
stuction and that if reelected, though ne would not
have voted to remove Mr. Bosher, yet he would have
resigned. The obligation Of instruction Isl 10 obey or
10 resign.
| Nor is it true, as now queried by the Wing that a
majority Of Democrats in town voted 10! Wight-nor
even "a large portion of them. dozen might have
voted the Wight ticket or, at the most, as friend
snres US, not than twenty-and certainly not as
many as the liberal Wings who set their faces agans,
this Wild plan Of proscripve retaliation Nor is i,
true, that every Democrat orig inaly voted for Bo.
sher-nor that ''ihe Democrats then made i, party
question" Ask any of the Council, and he can
tell the Wing better Col. Munfords card shows that
it is not co. l'n, enough. The Wing has played a
losing game in the business, and all lis misreprescnta-
tons cannot redeem its error
Are these random statements Of, the Richmond Wing
made in the character of poliica parzans holding IL
fair play avail ourselves of all honorable advana
get the weatherguage Of our opponents, even If they
should prove to be our best personal frendsas the
Norfolk Herald of Wednesday morning holds it right
TO do
NJ We are requested to state, that Mr.. Francis e.
IL Il fori he nnd