Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1845-12-19
THE MILITARY INSTITUTE.

w
tice which has manifested itself in several ar'i-
Giles recently appearing in The Wing, IN relation
10 The proposed Military Institute al The ArmoIy
That paper has charged The friends oil The lnsti-
tule with forming coalition with the irlenas OF
the UNIVERSITY, in order that both might be sns-
tained by The Legislature. The bargain, as
charged, is lhi, The University is 10 receive "a
Presbyterian embarrassing" IN order 10 save Tue
$4,000: in consideration Of which, The Institute
is 10 be hepei through The Legislature ey Tue
friends of the University Nothing can be more
ridiculous In he FIRST place, the proposed change
at The Armory was brought forward years ago by
the same fast friends who now sustain II, ana 'e-
fore the idea of taking away The $4,000 from
the Universi,; was ever preached in the Legs
lalure Ii has always been advocated as an inde-
pendent measure, In the second place, II IS mol
true. that lie friends of The University, as such,
are favoraby disposed towards the Military In
slu,e; nor is il true that the friends of the Mill
tary Institute are generally The advocates OF the
| University Of Virginia We never heard the
two subjects connected, until the Wing lugged
them into its ponderous columns together.
But wLy use The term presbyterian white
washing" in this mallril Why aim its poisoned
arrows al Dr. Plumer, when that gentleman has
put his strong shoulders to the wheel in nd OF
The same great cause in which the Wing itself
has been sedulously engaged2 twas bad enough
in thar journal TO attack Dr. p, as II did, IN The
midst of high party excitement II IS worse, and
vel more remorseless, 10 single him out for lis We
nom, when he stands up as friend and coadJu-
Tor in grea, philanlhropic cause.
|, belongs not to our taste to search into The
probable motives Of those who opposed the Mill
larry institute in The Convention, as the Wing has
done, in regard 10 those who advocated il. We
think however, that we shall not be overS,eppns |
the bounds of proprety and decorum, when We |
state, that Mr. Ryland, the respected President
of Richmond College who first spoke againslthe
as his main objection 10 the
Military institute al The Armory, that il would |
injure some Of The younger colleges of the Slate,
which their friends had been conlendng against
many obstacles 10 build up. MIR. Janney, OF
Loudoun, distinguished member of the Society
Of Friends, who also opposed il, admitted, that
he might be impeled by The peculiar lenes OF his
sect in relation 10 the carrying OF arms, remark
ng, al The same lime, in his own quaint manner,
hat he did not see why those peace-nolions
should be confined TO The Society OF Friends
Mr.. Garland, The President Of Randolph Macon
College opposed ii upon religious grounds
Ills argument was distinguished Tor ability and
loquence.
But DR.. Plumer replied 10 the various argu-
nens against The Military Institute with over
covering force and ability; and we hope that he
rill prepare and present TO The public synopsis
# The views which be expressed. The idea that
Military Schools are inimical 10 religious and
moral teaching was combaled with great power
" Mr>srs. T. ]. Randolph and VIM. Nelson
Il York, as well as by DR.. Plumer They showed
hat fewer instances OF disordery conduct had
ccured a, Military than all other schools; that
ONE Of the most pious dvines and eminent
PREACHERS in the Union had been educated at
he West Point Military Academy; and that no
Instance OF duel or attempt al duel had occur
ed at The Military Institute al Lexington, whilst
ministers OF the Gospel were often called on to
,reach Capt nimmuci, being The only menu
yer Of the Committee on Military Schools present
turing the debate, (for the hour was late al nighD
made defence Of The proposition. He proved
he want OF military spirit in The country, and
howed tina, no youth was likely 10 become
worse citizen, because of knowledge of the nse
If arms And we may add, in confederation oi
his assertion that there is a want OF military sp-
ii in the country, that even here, in The city OF
Richmond, ii is with grea! difficulty that volun-
eer companies can be sustained. The company OF
,ayary has been disbanded, and The other old vo-
un,eer companies are far lower in point OF num-
,ers than they were when the city was inferior in
wealth and population 10 whatit now is.
Mr.. Maxwell, the ex-President OF Hamp.
len Sydney College opposed the scheme of the
institute in speech OF some length, which fell
upon a profoundly attentive audience. He resist
ed The idea OF training young men TO the use OF
arms tle was in favor Of "moral suaslon"
and philosophical tranquility" and he thought !
that military spirit in youth should rather be
checked than encouraged Gov. Mcdowell op- |
posed the Army institute on the ground that il |
was better TO build up that already existing al
Lexington than raise new one.
The vote upon the proposition was taken at
time when only so members Of the Convention
were present, and j, was lost by two votes. We
are constrained, however, 10 think, that this was
neither a test Of the sentiments OF the Convention
nor of tn. community. We might say more
abou, the stirring scenes Of The Convention, but
We for5ear Tor the present