Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1849-06-05

break up leaving every thing In CONFUSION anu
disorder. Our sentiments are so well presenter
in the remarks of Senator lsbell, who, under Inc
pressing force of circumstances, felt bound 10 puf-
sue the course he did, that We content ourselves
with referring to what he said, in another column.
Let the members now 90 10 work and prompt
ly and vigorously YET carefully complete The Coae
Al the Fauquier Springs every thing Will DC ar
ranged for their convenience, and they WIZ nave
NO excuse for mol finishing the great business be
fore them.
aTHE TIE VOTE QUESTION" AND "kioH-
MOND TINES"
The Times" Of The % instant has an af1lCie
upon this subject which does gross inusIice %
the chairman OF tax joint cOmm'tlee on ies''''"
We had felt il 10 be our duij % condemn "e
protracled discussion which rad taken place III
the house upon the question whether shefin
should give The casting vote in case OF ne
Ia our judgment il was matter oil sma'i iuiPoi-
lance compared with the great questions upon
which the legislature had convened TO act ana
we feared II so much time were occupied IN Us
discussion, the session would be prolonged De.
yond all reasonable limit. We did net suppose
that any one was so blind as not 10 perceive VINO
was responsible ior the discussion, anc therefore
we attached blame where il belonged The
question was raised by Mr.. Scott (and OF this no
one complained), BY stating his objections to Inc
election law, and then moving 10 commit the
whole subject to the committee for courts. MI.
Moncure did mol al all complain OF the oblec-
lions bu, regretted that they were not made a!
an earlier date, and opposed the reference 10 the
committee of courts because that course, IN MS
opinion, would have been most unfortunate
precedent, and fruitful OF Inconvenience and de-
Law. He invited Mr. Scot. TO propose his amend
ments, and the House would no doubt, II they
were proper, concur with him and adopt them.
II is trne that Mr.. Moncure did oppose the
changes that were subsequently made by The
House, because, as he stated, it was ha-
xardous to make changes, where they were
not very important, as it might render necessa-
~ other changes, then unforeseen, and, il not
attended to, would make The Code inconsistent
with itself And the wisdom of MIR. Moncure's
course is shown by the history OF the debaie
af noise The House sXaa 95"'SdSii
doubt, by Mr. Sco,,s proposition, that that gentle
man was compelled to ask that his own amend
ment, with the whole subject should be passed
BY, to enable him 10 get out oil tue very
difficulty which his course had caused
We think the truth OF this remark was
abundantly shown in the progress OF amend
ment, upon this subject and we are IN
clined to think that the House, after hav-
ing adopted The amendments proposed by Mr.
Scott. would willingly have gone back 10 the
report as il came from the committee. But as
to the merit Of the questions discussed, we have
now nothing to say; it is to the following re-
marks of the "Tines' that we wish to call al
tention: Since the somewhat protracted de-
bate in the House has been commented upon, ~
q way to throw censure My on one oil The
gentlemen who engaged in il, we deem It right
to say, that, IN our opinion, the delay com
planned of has been in great part due 10 the
bearing Of the Chairman Of The Conmittse on
Revision, whose remarks, when Mr. Scott first
prepared his amendments, manifested strong
jealousy of permitting any alteration what
ever of the committees production, and were
altogether in a tone of SO much emphasis and
apparen, e1ci,eincni A. - make reply unavoida-
ble.''
Now We submit, lha. no one who heard the
Chairman OF the committee Of Revision, or who
has the slightest acquaintance with him, will hesi-
,ate TO say, that the above chargc is unjust II IS
perfectly natural that gentleman who has devo-
ted four or five months, day and Might in The mos
selt-sacri6cng and patriotic spirit 10 The revision
OF the Code, should manifest deep and sincere
interes, in the form which il should finally take.
But so far from exhibiting any strong Jealousy
OF permitting any alteration in the committees
production" when he submitted the report 20 The
House, he invited amendments, and in no instance
where they have been made AMI had even a
seeming propriety, has he opposed them. 10 tie
instance where he did oppose (aswe have before
stately his opposition was chiefly 10 The mode in
which it was proposed TO consider amendments,
j. e. in separate committees Of the House, rather
than in the House.
But the "Times" speaks OF The clearing OF
tho Chairman OF the Committee on Revision
we dSn III Oil StuSSihyJ "hoN "oS 'oS'S -
this 10 condemn7 We were not only struck
9th The peculiar proPriety q his bearing on
that occasion, but expressed ourselves IN terms
OF hien admiration OF IL, on the evening oil
che discussion; and We confess our amazeinenl
n the article Of the Times" To every one
who knows The soitness and kindness OF Mr.. |
Moncure's manner, his courtesy 10 all, the pa
thence and difference he has shown ia SO many |
instances 10 all witt whom he has come ia con.
tactic the many warm friends he has made |
during his career here-we appeal from The un.
Just charge made agains, one Of the most courle-
ous and talented men in Virginia. We do not,
hesitate, therefore, 10 repeat again, that, in our
opinion the 'Times" has done Mir. Moncure |
grea, injustice, and oush, TO feel disposed TO make
the "snssnde honorable" But, leaving this, the
"Times" touches upon another subject, that we
had long since dismissed, and which we did no'
desire to allude 10 again. II endeavors TO soolhe
the feelings Of Mr. Scou Tor his defeat in the re- /
cent election, and TO ascribe every other than
the true cause for that defeat. IL says:
"Mr. Scott remained in Richmond, at the ses.
sions OF the Committee, and thus lost his cleo
ton, when, had he returned 10 his county, it can
not be doubt ed he would have been reelected"
Now We are informed that Mr.. Scott, did 20 10
his county on Al least two public occasions, and
addressed his fellow-cizens; that he issued also
q circular 10 his constituents, which was sent 10
every part Of the county. Ii is thought by some
that bis absence from The county, GO tar from
working TO bis prejudice, lid him great service,
BY enabling him TO avoid many exciting county
questions Il is also said that, Tor the las three
or four county elections, when Mr.. Scott has been
elected he was absent on election day. Bu!, if
bis absence is the csuseof his defeat, how is j,