Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1847-04-16

plete surrender 10 tnelr cnCIodeh
Southern rigbts7 The South, in her ieg'sla'i''
assemblies and public meetings. have aiii.mee
the constitutional right of allcilizens oil Inc on'
ted States 10 take their property, oil every ue-
scription, whether the same be slaves, or IN any
other form, in all the territory which Is No" wiz
in The boundaries of the nation, South oil 'o-'o'
North latitude, and into all the territory WHICH
may be thereafter acquired South Of that l'ne'-
Now, Mr.. Bolts, instead OF presenting 'h's a's''
men, Of The South 10 those i'll The NORM WIZ
would interfere with our Constitutional ''Sn'''
surrendcrs The whole ground, encourages the
North 10 adhere TO It's demands, and humDly as
sr,os !, ,ba, The South does not desire any more
territory
gu, we have no room 10 dwell upon the many
suh,erfuoes and far-telched arguments 10 wh'en
the gentleman resorts His address VIII SPEAK
tor itself and satisfy any candid man that we
h.ve no, misrepresenled him. We ask paricu-
lar attention 10 the fact, that MIR. Bolts does mol
deny the position we have assigned 10 him. we
aid that "he refuses 10 come out plainly and ur-
eouyocally upon the subject. He will not say
that no man in favor Of the WilmoI proviso shall
receive his support for The Presidency. Are
we no, fully justified by his own words, which
we quote2
81 expect TO vote for the candidate Of The Wing
parry. against any and all The candidates oi me
Locoioco party, and mil glue no ptedss Aa' DH'
deprive me OF hss p',pllesc."
As to The question Mr. Bolts so lriumphantly
puts 10 us, We can say that we have a'reaoy an
swered H. We repeat what we said yesterday,
as embracing not only our own opinions, but
those OF the Democrats Of the State: III has
been tavorile item OF policy with many Wings
10 assail The Democratic party on that subject,
and to charge them with willingness 10 support
man for the Presidency who was in favor oil II,
(ihe Wilmol Proviso.) This charge has been ut.
erly refuled and denied by our public men
throughout Virginia. No enc belonging 10 tH
Democratic party is q candidate for Congress, Dho
does mol repudiate The idea Of supporting W"no'
prouiso man for President
The extraneous mailer introduced by Mr.
Bolts about The Union aud the Charleston Mer-
curry is utterly out Of place, and introduced only,
10 myslity his own position The Union can
take care OF itself; and we pass il over with The
simple remark, that the Mercury has essentially
misrcpresented The Union.
We have thus fully proved our position, and
we again ash The Voters OF This District, is Mr.
Bots the man whom you would select as the
mos, faithful 10 your interests and the most eff
cienl in your servicei
We should be glad 10 have more space 10 re-
view the extraordinary course OF Mr.. Bolts and
his "lrusly squire" OF The Wing, upon the policy
OF refusing to admit single foot OF Mexican
soil as indemnify Tor wrongs sustained at hel
hands The Wing treats as ''co,Lllsss" any pledge
from q Southern man not TO vote for one who
is in favor OF The Wimo, Proviso-end with
MIR. Bots, repeats lha. the only way 10 make that
provsu dead letter is to refuse The admission OF
more territory under treaty of peace with Me1i-
co. And has Il come 10 this, thai, in order 10
conciale the unjust claims Of the North, We
shall yield 10 their demands and end the war
without receiving single dollar or single acre
Of land, which has been acquired by Southern
blood and treasure Would not this place the
nation in most disglaceiul and ridiculous posi-
lion? Millions are spent, thousands OF lives are
lost, and, forsooth, al The bidding OF those who
would violate the constitutional rights Of the
South, no indemnify is 10 be secured! We have
no time even 10 refer 10 the immense advantages
to our own commerce and that OF The world,
which might he secured in The way OF III
demniiy. Bu nj, say these gentlemen,
The Moth will not assent 10 il. aud we must here
fore abandon all idea OF indemnity. Let us Weld
TO the North upon Ibis vital question: as these gen.
tlemen suggest, and her eEcroachmenis upon
c~-.l.-- -:~L.. e,:;i s,-,lc- c~r,;rre TIL.
true and The safe plan is tor The South 10 stand mp
firmly and unledly for lair share oflhe terrific.
ny which may lie acquired by way Of indemnify,
and there will he found patriotism and wisdom
enough 10 scl!le The question hereafter. II is,
however, poor way TO secure The respect OF The
North, for the Wing candidate Of The Meropoli-
tan District and the leading Wing organ OF Viz
gina ro denounce as "stupid" The Dist Rule, which
prevented the reception Of Abolition petitions,
and to acccde 10 the demands OF the North, by re-
fusing, in advance, to admit territory which the
Wimo proviso men say shall not be admitted,
unless il b. free territory!
We have bu, single word as 10 Mr. Bots
vote against the Tariff Of 42 from his hatred 10
President Tyler, though he admits that he was
warmly in lis favor. He says in The beginning, 81
never did vote against The Tariff bill Of 1922
vet in the end OF his article he says
"And upon its final passage it stood lo4 10 l02
and among the noes were d good and true Tariff
Wings, including Mr.. JOHN @. ADAMS and JoHs
M. Boris, and might also add William l.. Cog
gin and George w. Summers"
|, is true that he voted for The same bill with
the distribution clause annexed-but this was
not the bill which became law, because
il was vetoed BY Mr. Tyler When the dislri-
button clause was stricken out, and The bill
passed. which was superseded by the Tariff OF
1886, Mr.. Bolts voted against II. Strange, then.
that Mr.. Bolts so "emphatically" should declare
1912. Mr.. Leake proved it by the record and
MIR. Bolts himself admits that he voted against
the bill OF l842, which became fsv, and which
was vaunted as the GLORIOUS fruit Of he Wing
victory Of lS40" Will Mr.. Bous deny lha, he
voted against the Tariff act OF 1912, which was
repealed by the Tariff Of l8461 He cannot
surely, because the records are plain. Why did
he not then acknowledge the corn" without
such attempts al mystihcation7 We repeat EN-.
phalically, that Mr.. Lcake prored al that he said
about VI. Bolts vote against The 1ar.G act Of
ls42.
Richard s. Coke, Esq, an eminent Whic law
yer Of Washington, comes out with letter in
the Union, in which he reviews "Lone Star"
Pendleton's speech, published by two Wing pa
pers here,) and shows that Mr.. P.'s attempt 10 de
sroy the validity OF the claims OF our citizens