Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1849-03-29
The Union Of The Dist inst. saws


''Ihe fillmore Patriot speaks Of what the Union
said Uree days after NIr. Poli iuanguaIed" and
refers 10 the work that kept the Senate in session
in 1915" Here is anachronsm. The "Unon''
was not in existence three days after the inauguration
during the extra Senate nor had lis editor the most
distant idea Of living in Washingon.''
The Baltimore Patriot says, in response
1--WE found the extract in the Iynchbnrg Virgnln,
credited to the Union, stated. The Virginan
will doubt be able explain 10 what Sled the er
ror"
And ore say, that copied The alleged extract from
the Union of the 7th March, 1915 from the columns Of
the Richmond Wh5-Hirh suspicion at The time, that
the Globe the paper which ought have been cred
tied
But the mistake is quite mma eria The Elitor Of
the Union will not deny that tha sentiment of the
tract his own and that the columns Of the Enquirer
at that time edited BY him, abJunled with similar ar
ces. Prescription was first sysrenatzad by Jackson
twenty years ago. lie made pretty thorough work and
left Mr.. Van Buren, but little to do Mr. Polk set the
axe at work agaia, and far The employees Wash
lngon concerned removed more than old Hickory
Now, to test the views Of the editor of the Union and
Enquirer, we ask they produce d Single paragraph,
Of their pennng, cndrmnatoy Of this bloody work Of
cutting Of heads. as they style removals from DC
fc"2 We challenge their files fr tlrrntl yams back for
tie production IF single lin which can b, construed
into dislike depreciation of ha proscrptve system
If secretly their feelings revoled at (which is not i'm
ProbahIe-then We're they entirely the thrs III party
as to fear to raise their voices in remonsrance The
whining Of the Union and Enquirer over the few reno
walls which have been made is in view Of the past
Of these journals when their party in the ascendent
as we have already said well calculated to move laugh
ter or indignation according to the temperament of the
reader.
Since the foregoing written, our eye has rested
upon article in the Union headed .Proscrptlnn 2
which, setting out BY vindca.ng Mr. Buchanan from
the lmpuiaon OF renewing from off for opinions sake
s1ys that he durng the VIII le period Of His service IS
Secretary Estate, removed only two persons for political
reasons" We presume of course, the Union means
Clerks in his Department. The article winds up as
follows
''We have stated thus much in defence Of the course
pursued by the late Secretary Of State and thnse under
his anhorty and the statement precludes the ne
cessy Of any argument. The facts relative 10 this
branch OF the public service be taken as sample of
the conduct Of all the heads Of departments during Mr.
Folks administration. Mr. Poh's administrator ,ras
not proscrptre and if General Taylor chooses to fas
fly his pedGes he avail hm,el If the plea that
~ - " 80 ~ 'c minus uhu iOo"tio ibI IL IS I'LL
true in point Of fact.''
There is hariihood Of assertion in this paragraph
which borders the sublime. list of more than one
hundred and fifty persons removed from office in the va
rous Departments at Washington. during Mr.. PoIk's
administration, has been published. The fact Of their
election from office is denied The Union itself can
deny it, and yet the of Nj Buchanan who dis
missed two persons for political reasons is alleged as
fair sample Of he conduc, Of all the heads he Depart
menlsi Surely this is meant for pleasantly. We are
strengthened in the impression that the late organ clad
to be freed from the rammels of official gravity is ndu-
glng in a sly Ike when we read. "MR POI.K'S AID
MINISTRATlON WAS NOT descriptive -
If the Union be serous-if 1t really does think the late
administration was not proscrpve-we should like to
be favored with It's ideas Of what proScrpve admins
ratlon would be Removal from office, for opinions
sake, is but one phase Of prescription. " e must not
rely upon the genealogical strength of the word. A man
may be debarred from office for holding Political opinions
which, if in office, would insure his election. He is
therefore, not less prescribed han he victim Of the
guillotne" Mr.. Polk during his fur years his eject
ed hundreds Of Wings from otice His best friends can
alege against him the amable weakness Of appoint
ing Wings to office.
10 another article of the same Union we read ":
"The same New Bedford Mercury is polite enough to
speak of 1.-THE proscrptive oco-foco organ the Wash
ngton Union" VIII it permit to say, that no man
has better right to speak upon this subject than our
selves Notwithstanding the Wings Of Virginia are in
possession of most of the best offices in the State we al
ways resisted the doctrine Of prescription and since we
nave been in Washington, (neary four years we defy
any man 10 say that iniereIed to prescribe a
Wing"
We know many Democrats who, like the Editor Of
the Union, far the State Government is concerned
have always resisted the doctrine of " and
vet, with strange inconsistency in the besowaI Of the
patronage of the Federal Government ADOPT to the full
extent, the spols doctrine This paragraph is airot, in
deed jesuiticll. The New Bedford Mercury had refer
ence 10 the Of the Union prescription by the
Federal Government The Editor falls back for his de.
fence upon his while Slate organ-and refers to
his in Washington only far as 10 deny that he
lever nterlered to prescribe Wing" The Mercury
meant, BY calling the Mon "proscrptive loco foco or
gam, that it has al all times sirenuDusy defended the
system of removal from office for opinions sake-or at
least, Tefrantd all times from raising demonstrating
voice. We repeat challenge for the production of
single paragraph taken from the editorial columns Of the
Enquirer for twenty years, Of the Union since it came
into existence, which, in the fantest, the oenes the
most deprecaury manner hints dislike or condemnation
Of prescription. for single expression Of sympathy
| FIR any one Of its victims.