Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1846-02-23
LEGISLATURE.

In The House OF Delegates on the lin feOiu, !,
ary, The question being on the reconsidera'io' =
The vote, indefinitely postponins The bl TOT 'ue
,eos;,,n n he James River and kanawha Cahai
10 Buchanan, &c, !iscussion took Plare "
tween Messrs. Bowden and Layne, OF whch 'ne
following report in the Times is iuileT 'na' 'A'
sketch published by us
Mr. BowDex opposed the inoiion.con'eh " rs
that the House had given clear indicauon VI IA
determination to do nothing Tor ms cdna', an :.
that lis friends ought to have been satishe, ~ -
lie borcd none .roui vote for Reconsideration,
who would not vote for an appropriation 70 ,ne
improvement He hoped il would D. fesaiueua.
lest question in this light. lie wanted 10 enum
why he motion 10 reconsider was maae.h t .Hs
resignation of Mr. CABsLL had induced u. ri's
friends ought 10 be more chary oil his ieennss
Than 10 lake sch step. But Mr.. CAsELL was
not alone responsible Tor The management - '"s
COMPANY. The directors associated with him shared
with him in the blame of mismana9eneh'; ae
wanted 10 sec whether The Directors would chanse
The line OF poicy-and he wanted some Sualduee
Of What policy would be pursued by ms successoi
Had he any guarantee OF what system ne %oulu
pursue2 Hc discaimed any hostility 10 the James
River Company or 10 Mr.. CAsELL; PERSONALLY nc
had high regard for his talents and his VIRTUES
bu,. win the gentleman from Amelia, regarded
him as not possessing the peculiar suaiicSanons
10 fix him for The Office Of President ne sup-
posed bin would be offered as substitute lot lhe
one postponed, auhorising loan win Inc guar
antce oflhe State. He would much prefer loan
Al once on The bonds OF the State Bnl, he repea-
led he could not consent TO appropriation uhlii ne
knew something OF The policy 10 be pursued ny
the Company.
Mr.. LaYNE expressed some surprise al tne
course OF MIR. Bowden, after conversation hau
with him, in which he bad stalled thai ne thouSh.
The work could never get along while in the hanos
of The present managers-ihat IL there were
change in lbe management OF The Company, Whiie
he could moi under any circumstances Vole an alD.
preparation to the work, he would mol vote against
The friends Of The improvement:
Mr.. Bowpes acknowledged the tru'h OF tne
statement; bu said thai be did mol consioei mf.
Cabels resignation change 10 me aan,. ,,.a
ZION OF the Company. He had expressly stated so
to-day and, while he considered Mr.. CabelPsreslg-
nation very strong indication OF a charge 10 The
views and policy OF The company, uniil ne saw
some evidence Of what that policy was 10 be, he
could moi wave his opposition 10 measures Tor ala
10 The company He took exception iothe pro-
priely OF the repetition of private conversation
in he Hail. while he acquitted Mr.. Layne OF any
disposiiit 10 do ANYTHING he thought improper
or unjust. He added, that when the conversation
took place, he knew nothing ofany purpose 10 en-.
deaver 10 procure the resignation OF MIR. Cabell,
and had no idea that anything Ne said was lo BE-
USED yah that view.
MIR. LAYNe could see no improperly in repea.
ting conversation on the subject OF internal I'M
movements, where no injunction 10 secrssY had
been imposed Heacquilted MIR. Bowden OF any
knowledge of efforts 10 procure The resignation Of
Mr.. Cabell al the time OF The conversation.