Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1857-10-27
THE ROCKINGHAM RESOLUTIONS-ANO-
TIER APPEAL TO MIR. HUNTER.

In another column our readers will find series of
resolutions adopted few days ago in formal meet
ing, by the ever vgilant and unsduterated Democ.
racy Of Rockingham. 1t will be seen that they en-.
dorse and applaud the Administration 80 far has
gone with hearty good will, declaring that they
ind in it everything to admire and nothing to con
demn." 1t will also be observed that they take
strong ground in favor of the submission of the Con-
stitution of Kansas to the bona de inhabitants OF the
territory, for ratification or rejection. And Mr..
Hunter ia respectfully requested to respond to these
resolutions with the assurance that should be endorse
them, he will receive the support of the Senator and
delegates from that district and county, for his re-
election. A committee was appointed to forward
copy Of the resolutions to him. And we cannot
but hope that We shall soon have the pleasure
OF hearing fromhim again. In his late letter to Hon.
Shelton F. Leake, we will not say that the interroga-
tories of the Enquirer altogether untouched,
but they far from being either explicitly sstis
factory answered. Indeed the principal point upon
which we most anxious TO be informed, is utterly
disregarded. But Mr.. Hunter processes not to have
answered the Enquirer" And we willingly agree
with him, that he has not; although he Gays the ques.
tions put to him by Mr. Leake are sin substance near.
ly the same" with those propounded to him by our.
selves 1t may be that the omission on the part Of
his interrogation of the direct inquiry TO his
demnaou or approval of the factious course of the
malconents is that which justihes the Senator in the
use Of the qualifying adverb he has employed.
Mr.. Lsakes interrogatories were nearly the same
with those of the Enquirer" told. There is
notice in Mr. Hunters answers of any such question:
as that to which we have just REFERRED and which
really involves the essence Of the issue between the
Senator and ourselves. AS there is no response, it
s to be presumed there such nterrogatory sub
mitted in Mr.. Leskes letter. and therefore, we must
again insist on declaration from Senator Hunter,
either Of his approval reprobston of the course Of
the disaffected Democrats, who have been assailing
the Administration. We have no hesitation in renew
ing our assurances to the Senstor that We have ap-
peaed to him in no spirit of menace or unkindness.
And we Indignantly dscaim the imputation of ever
having threatened him, unless indeed the alternative
of opposition and perhaps defeat, which we have held
up TO him, in the event Of his ine1orabe resolution
to remain silent the subject of his intended atti'
tude towards the Administration is admissible of such
an Interpretation. If the tone or language of the
Enquirer has been harsh enough to imply a
threat it was the result of that sternness which is
necessary in the discharge of delicate and disagree
able duty rather than any desire to coerce or offend.
Our remonstrances against the significant silence OF
Senator Hunter, have been are still, and shall CONT
nue. to be- respectful and dgni6ed, but pointed and
hrm.
We have never submitted any interrogstory to Mr
Hunter, in spirit either of evaporation or displea
sure. 1t Is true We have persisted and We mesu still
to persist, in calling upon him for an unreserved
svowal of his views with reference to the policy pur
sued by the utrasts in their opposition to Mr. Bue
: hanan. But the Enquirer" has not been provoked
into sarcasm upon the Senator, nor has 1t ever de-
scended from that dignity due to itself as we'll as to
him. Until the appearance of his letter to Mr. Leake
Mr. Hunters silence was unbroken. We were pro-
pounding interrogstories to him constantly, but We
received no answer. And even now that he has al
last favored the public with letter touching his atti.
tude towards the Administration, be takes especial
pains to state that he has not answered the questions
of the Enquirer, because They were accompanied
with threats, or what were 90 considered" We are
nevertheless still determined to press our inquiries
upop him, with the utmost csmuess and respect
And as We readily remove the Senator'S objection to
answering u.s. by dieclaining any intention to nmi'
date him by threats, may Of course, expect him
to honor US with an explicit and direct response
We regret that the Senator'S letter is 80 evasIve,
souivocal and unsatisfactory. 1t may be, however
that he has answered fully and freely the interroga
tories of Mr.. Leake, as they we're submitted to him.
But the Rockingham resolutions in which there ia
certainly not the slightest sembanoe of threat, OF
what may he "so considered" place before him. the
proper question in unnstsksble TERMS and leave nc
room for any other answer than direct denial OF
unequlvooal assertion OF his sympathy with the op
ponents of the Administration. 1t is there held, that
in Mr.. Buchanans policy, $50 far ss it has been de
veloped, there ia everything to admire and nothing
to condemn" 1t ia also distinctly stated that in obe
dence to the spirit and letter Of the Nebraska kansa
act, the Constitution OF Kansas should be submitted
to the people for ratification or rejection.
On this point, however, Mr.. Hunter has already an
swered in bis letter to Mr.. Leake and his views ar
directly in antagonism to the Rockingham Democra
cy But we are not disposed to be cspous or exsctng
nor are We desrous Of rendering the reelection o
the Senator uncertain, unless We constrained by
sense of duty to the Democratic party TO raise ou
voice against it. And, therefore, in consideration
his services, his ability and his incumbency, VI
|
inp his opinion that it would be right in the Conven
tion If the members Of that body think proper, not
submit the Constitution to the epeople-providedh ne vi
declare determination not to enter either direct
or indirectly, by his acquiescence or his act' int
q any attack that may be made upon the Admlnistra
tion, regarding the course Of the Convention or c
Congress in relation TO the Constitution of Kansas
The principal point on which we are anxious to b
enlightened by Mr.. Hunter, is not whether he ap
, proves the course Of Governor Walker or not, bu
whether he condemns the doctrines of the disunior
lists and their pseudo Democratic conrereS not whe
ther he "hopes" or "e1pects" "to support Mr.. Buc
bsnsn's Administration in the MAN," but whethe
he approves the policy it has far pursued, and whe
ther he will cooperate with, or war against the Ultra
in any such assaults have already been made up
on it. There numbers of unswerving Democrats il
Virginia. who while they do not accord to Governo
Walker their unqualified appreciation, are neverthe
less true to the Administration, and opposed to the
course of its assailants. Ia Mr. Hunter one of hos
faithful Democratic Let him answer in the afhrma
8 tive; and the Enquirer" will counenance no oppo
sition to bis return to the Senate. Can the apologst
Of Mr. Hunter In Virginia object to such sentiment
Can the Senator himself ask more of US! We ap
peal to the Democracy of the State, confident O
their commendation Of our proposition.
Mr. Hunters letter not only fails to inform the pub
lie that he does not sympathizs with the fre.ester
and fsctonists, but, by omittng an answer on ths
important point it leaves the suspicion upon the Sen
ator still stronger. 1t may be, as we have said ha
Mr.. Leake did not directly interrogate him as t
his approval or disapproval Of the rebeious conduc
of the macontents; and, therefore, we again re
spectfuy request him to say whether be is with then
or against them. If the Senator's selfrespect sti
restraints him from answering the Enquirer" d
rectIy, LEI, him write again to Mr.. Lsake, or (
any other gentleman, and request publication {
his letter. 1t will answer our purpose as vel