Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1858-08-31
THE RICHMOND ENQUIRER.
>~C~~~-<>~~->~~~-~0>,-~>- -~>-~-N>~~>~~-N~-~~-N~-
BY RlTCHIE. DUNNAVANr TYLER WISE
TUESDAY MORNING, August 81, 1856
MIR. LErCnER AND TUE .ENoUIRER."

beove to be ths beat interests Of The Democrat
party 10 the state, 10 express decided opposition
to tbs nomination of the Hon. John Lecher tor g ~
ernor, We did not e1pact to escape the anmadvrr
sions of little cotere Of politicians who have show
themselves over Jealous during the last eightee
month"; III att. mpts to sst aside the clams o oil "ht
a.pirsnis by means Of ovslstrained representation
concerning Mr.. Lstcbrrs alleged superiority o par
| ty claims and personal popularity. But We Old n"
expect that mere independent expression oi an hon
cat opinion would suhjso' us to vhcaions like ihos
! Contained in The following article taken from th'
barbour Jeffsr sonian'
THE ENQUIRER ON LETCHER.
The course OF the Enquirer with reference to ions
LErcHER is, 10 our mind AL unwarrantcd one While
not the spologis OF LErcHER. the advocate
him. any other man. for the nomination MS the Demo
cratic candidate for Governor yet do think thu
Enquirer 10 JUSTIFIED In the remarkable course has seei
MT To from the first mention o the nsno o LRrci
Err In connection with the nomination for Governor The
Enquirer il directly hy every nsinuation posi-
ble len its influence damn JOHN LETcHER in the esi
mson of the Democracy OF the State at the same mt
protests that il does desire 10 express preference
for any of the Democrats spoken OF for Go
vernon Yet the ENQUIRER is lavish of It's cuogies OF
almost every other, Mr.. LETcHsR; but not WORD
do for him His past servces-his devotion to the
South when the storms tanstcsm shook the country
from centre to circumference are all orgouen put ON
the contrary the columns uf the Enquirer have been
MS spleen LKTcHER; aud what 10 still more remarks
Bile, not communication has. appeared In that pa
per advocating his nomination. This cannot be because
Mr. LRrcHER has triendstor, beyond doubt, be has
many in the state We would greatly prefer that the
Enquirer should throw aside its mask, and de
clare It's intention OF defeating Mr. LE1cHER This
course think would be more consistent with the past
character OF that paper
If the Enquirer has any persoun eud with Mr. LYTcH
has up the cudgel for any ether behind the
screen, with il, we cannot think the present
coursc OF the Enquirer alone dictated by desire "
promote the harmony of the Democratic party There is
no one In this section of country foolish suppose
moment. that JoHS LErcHE, 10 not devoted TO
the interess Of the South either OF the editors oil the
Enquirer, although the Junior Editors may be Ant'-Le
compton Democrats.
We have no acquaintance whatever With the editor
OF the "Jefersoniau aud while we are conscious oi
having done nothing to provoke hm,we are altogether
At loss to account for the motives which have IN
duced the foregoing tissue of Misrepresentation and
abuse. We shall pot pause to seek the moIve-but il
is due to the responsibility which have assumed III
public journalists to rsiute the slander.
II ia first charged that "the Enquirer il not direct
y has by every insiuuaon possible, lent its influence
to damn ohm Leicher in the estimation OF the Democ
racy of the State" Now we challenge our accuse'
to point to single instance in which We have resorteo
TO insnuation TO the avoidance Of open statement
ton of singls statement Of fact which ID not onl!
true but acknowledged TO be true by mr. Le'cher
own friends. or of any expression OF opinion even
which candid man can reproach with The appearance
of dishonesty. Finally, We challenge the produchor
of sentence employed in editorial columns "hcf
eau bs construed into disrespect towards Mr. Letcher
| Our course has been open and straightforward.-
! Mr.. Lstcher's name was urged upon the party TO
g.ther with the names of other gentlemen at ieas
several of whom hls equals in mental capacity
| and cultivation and craftsmanship; who have ooht
fully as much as he has done for the Democratic cause
aud who have certainly done much more for tho viIi-
dic.on Of the institution of slavery and hs pro'ec'
on of s,ave property. Such being the case, 1t wa'
N adj. public that within the last eleven years Mr
I..tcher WAS not only svowed emsnciPationIst
hut that hs approved the policy even of drawing
dividing lne between Eastern and Western Fnginlt
for the sake of abol-hing slavery West oi the Blue
Ridge, in case It could not bs abolished Throughout
the State; that he acted on this policy TO the extent
voting for an emanc pationist Wing against Demo
cratic candidate fur Legislative office; that all ths
was done at the very period wheu The Stale OF Nir-
yinis wss driven by abolition auaticism to pass las
extremity resolutions for the protection OF saVe pro-
psrty. Under these circumstances, while avowed'J
recognising the sincerity of Mr.. Lscher's subsequen
and his devotion to the principles OF ths
Democratic party, while svowing our readiness to
advocate his election in case he should become the
nominee of the party We felt obliged to inss on the
policy of nominating some other candidate whose
an,sceden,s on the slavery question could not be EN-
plcysd by the opposition to the injury OF the Demo
cratic party. Such is the full extent to when w
have gone in opposition to Mr. Letcher's nomination
No candid msu will pretend that ii merits the accu'
sstioos which our oottmporary has applied TO ou'
| conduct.
That we have failed 10 lavish eulogies" on Mr.
Letcher is true. We did not deem 1t either necessa
y or appropriate to do so at iims ~hsn we hell-V'
that bis nomination for Governor would prove an ID
| iury TO the Democratic cause. We have done MIR.
Ls,cher no Injustice 10 Withholding high wrough
| eulopies at this time We know -of no moral oblaa
ton i,npendent on US to euogize any man whatever
We are in tho habit Of bsstowng eulogy- not in eve
~ instance in which it may be merited-but when
| ever we believe that come good object may be al
tanned ty the expression of appreciation. Certain
| We will not indulge in excess OF eulogy when we De
li.vs may work injury to the cause OF our party
Even il a failure 10 "lsvish euloey on every RSp'
rant for the nomination is to be cassed among delir
oueucss, we sse no resson why we should be select
sd for rebuke among more asgilious offenders. W
ara the least Of sinners in this respect.
Tbs "Jeffsrsonian" admits that We have eulougise
| s,m,st syery other asprant. Now, we can point L
.veral newspapers in the State, which have indse'
,uf;oently euloeizsd Mr. Letcher, but have altoge
/ r. TnOa
sosy.r; nav, soma of them have abstsined from
defending another prominent aspirant tor Inc Guoer
uatorial nomination against the moet unjust lmputa
| tions of the opposition.
| We did not commence this article with the inten
tion of induiging In ironical pleasantly; but really
| ia impossbe TO treat with serious consideration
charge like that which called upon To ans" er
The charge that we have permitted correspondent
10 uss our columns for the purpose OF dlscouraenI
Mr.. Letcher's nomination is perfectly true. Ina
| tbese correspondents have been numerous, Is ale'
true. That they are as good Democrats as MIR
I.e,cher or even the editor OF the "Jeierson'an'
also trus. We bsve their names in our possession
aud can fully vouch for the fact. II impeaohed io
permitting them public expression oi opin'on '"
plead that VIZ have humbly deemed u not ony ou
right, but our duty, to enable every good Denoera
70 express an opinion every party issue. IL 'ne'
have succeeded in demonstrating our expressed oplh
ion that there are many Democrats throughout 'nt
State who entertain serious objections to the nomi
nation 10 high office Of a recent convert IRON eu'a"
cipa,ionism, this can hardly be imputed 10 us as
fault.
The next charge in, Olives something more serious
to wit: that mot even a communication has appear
cd in the Enquirer" advocating Mr.. Lstchef nou'
iuation." and the insinua,ion is added III manne
not 10 be mistaken, that wehave either suppressed
| refused to receive communications favorable 10 "r
Letcher's nomination. Not only Is this insinua'o'
uumauy, but both the insinuation and the s'atemeh
which preoedes it, from hst TO last are utterly untrue
We have published Communications urging Mr.
i.,daad haan IA