Lynchburg daily Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1852-1861, 1854-07-28

sCavf1.r

ply to recent comments OF the W mig. attehp's
under the above caption defence of Judge Cas-
kie's course in Congress, in opposing appropria-
tons for purposes Of internal Improvement, and
axers;nr himself at The same time 10 procure an
appropriation of $4,000 for the Improvement of
James River We publish the defence in FULL
As specimen of curiiling. ws claim for IL pre-
eminence over any thing that has appeared OF
late. even in the columns of the Enquirer IL
says:
The Wig affects to be very much perplexed
by the course of the Representative from this
District on the River and Harbor Bill. Ii seems.
from the statement ef the Whig. which we VIII
assume TO be correct that although inimical to
the policy Of Federal Expenditure on schemes OF
local Improvement, and whilst opposing the pas
sage of the River a Harhor Bill. Judge Caskie OK
erfrd himself and with success, 10 procure an
appropriation of s5O00o for the improvement Of
the navigation of the James. Such conduct is,in
tho opinion of the Wing. equvooal inconsistent
and unmanly.
Now. in point fact, the conduct q rep
resentatiye was not only logical and consistent,
but under the circumstances perfectly Just and
proper.
Judge Caskio may regard the policy Of federal
appropriations to works Of internal improvement
as unconstitutional and nexpedent; but does II
follow that when such appropriations are resolved
upon by Congress, he cannot exert himself to
have them fairly and equally distributed On
the contrary. is ii not his daiy te aid in render
ing an obnoxious enactment as little mischIcvous
as possible For illustration. take this hypoh-
etical case a man represents an interest IN an
estate. The court DEGREES division Cd the es-
tate /: but the representative neither thinks that
any distribution should be made, nor approves
the principles Of distribution set forth by the
court Must he, therefore, refuse 10 exert him
selfto procure an equitable division, decline 10
accept any share whatsoever Judge Caskic
represents the interest of his constituency III
the common treasury of the tates,which he CON
tends shof Id not be squandered ON works of in
tarnal Improvement. Bnt Congress resolves to
make appropriations for the Improvement OF
Rivers and llarbors, and like faithful represen-
tative he exerts himself to reduce the inequality
of the appropriations. and to procure something
like the just share of his eonstituonts-protest-
ing all the while against policy which he thus
strives to render less odions and mschieyous.--
Is there anything contradictory or inconsistent
in this
Now, candid reader, be you Wing or Democrat,
do we not truly characterize the above as mas.
terpiece Of most shallow sophistryf Wholly un-
able to vindicate the course of Judge Caskie by
any argument consistent with the principles con
fessed to be held by that gentleman,the Enquirer
resorts 10 illustration, and seeks to justify when
If there wereany analogy between its hypothe
lical case and the passage of the River ~ Harbor
Bill the most that should be-rlaimcd for him is
that the circumstances in which he was placed
afford some palliation of his conduct Judge
Caskie regards the policy of federal appropra-
tons TO works of internal improvement not mere
ly inexpedicntn--for then he might both
readily and properly yield his mere opinion, MS
there is ne other mode than by the Judgment of a
majority by which the expedency of given
measure or rule of policy may be determined,
but he holds ii to be unconstitutional Ia other
words, Judge Caskie believes that Congress, in
the passage of the River & Harbor Bill, has been
guilty of violation of that fun lamentn law
from which il not only derives all its powers, but
TO which alone it is indebted for an existence; and
yet, with the salyo of protest, he is willing to
participate in the fruits of this wrongful and in
iquitous act. Judge Caskie and his brethren
find themselves in possession Of the funds of
his we althy relative. Uncle Samuel--entrasted to
their hands, es he well understands for certain
specified objects. A proposition is originated,
and finds favor with majority of those who have
the property in custodyto dvest ii from its right
full use and to apply it to the individual aggran-
dizement of the custodiers. Judge Csskie ex-
amines the proposition; looks Go the writing fur
nished for his instruction and guidance finds no
authority fer the proposed measure declares his
conviction that il Is wrongful and unauthorized
but il unable to change the iniqatous purpose
of his brethren. Indeed, they satisfy him that
the larceny will be committed any how, and that
they mean TO take as much money as they de-
sire. Forthwith the Judge begins to reason with
himself He says a know my duty,it is true I;
] know This scheme of embezzement is wrong in
morals and forbidden by law; but my brethren
are determined TO take TO themselves part of
this fund, in despite of my convictions. 1t was
committed to the common custody of all. !
have just the control over it, (Which is Just
none at ally that is enjoyed by any one of them.
meant to act honestly, but they would not; and
90 will take my share too. Bat in order to
make my course logical and to produce perfect
consistency between good purpose and Il bad
acf, I'll Just put on record what should have been
done with this money, if my advice had been
needed whereby the world, while it sees that
have snned, may yet excuse me for it-because
Ihape sinned against both light and knowledge
If the ground upon which the Judge relies in
the conclusion of the foregoing soliloquy for his
Justification by the public be good in morals, then
the Enquirer has succeeded in indicating his
conduct from every thing "equvocal and unman-
. ly.' But If it be bad then we submit that the
attempted yindicston is a failure But how
long has 1t been since the Enquirer was wont
thus to reason! 1t has been but few years
Al. A.. Il L.