Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1858-06-29

gushed leader OF the party, So We made ths bss, s
renee the nature OF the case as We understood i, o,d
admit.
"The South" Gays the 'Enquirer" sbouId "Lsvs
employed the authority of which it boasts to procure
al least Suspension Of the public Judgment" And
20 We would II THE South" had permitted Us. As
soon as we Jaw the first ntnation from The "Whr,'
10 which "Ihe South" replied on the 22d wa were
aware that the "Whig" did not have the pampbl.t.
but was publishing certain extracts that appeared in
New York paper and We would have sought reliable
information, but THE South" of the o2d came ont
with dat denial that "Mr. Letcher had never written
aslge word againsi the rights interest of slavery
fhis, we thought was certainly authoritative, but il
turns out "The South" hed no reliable informstou
but had merely guessed. We we're very much disap
pointed that "Tbe South" should not bays been halter
informed. Had "The South" asked a suspension of
public Judgment until Information could be obtained
II would have bs,ter served the interest of Mr. Lsrch
er' tnan taxing its ingenuity TO rams excuse. that
"would mt hold water"
"Ihe South says 1--WE (the Enquirer) have relus ed
10 offer any conjcctrai explanations This ia true We
have not and never will offer "conjscural explaus.
t'ons they are never reliable, and as long ss We con-
trolthe Enquirer" shall avoid 'conjecturoJ ,rn,,s
nnf'o"s"-We opine that Mr.. Letcher does not desirs
his defence 10 rest on the conectural explanations Of
lne oouth' We would propose to "The South" TO
aoanuon lis "conjectural explanations" and allow
MIR. Letcher to make bis own defence He il An shIa
man, straightforward and honest and capable Of sv
ing good reasons for his actions. Wa vsntura tho
assertion that John Letcher makes better defence
ian Tha H..
his cause is lamentabIy weak.
"fhe South does the Enquirer" Injustice in ths
following paragraph:
but we must own ourselves at loss TO reconci.
this declaration OF confidence in Mr. Letcher with
Inc opinion that bis osIce is still greater than that
committed by Mr.. Summers. II is for tho Dsn,oc
racyy OF The Tenth Legion to respond TO the charge
implied In The assertion mat the man whom thew de-
lght 10 nonor guilty of greater offence than that
"nc, CAUSED Mr. Summers TO be rejacted by the
people OF Virginia. Every impartial person viii MI
low that 1t is not quite bad TO attach one nama IN
an address upon tbs development of the great r-
sources OF Western Virginia. even though The an
thor afterwards alter it into anti slavery pamphlet
as ~ 1ne authorty OF an official position an
a'ehPl ~ overthrow the institutions Of lhe Slate"
The paragraph in our editorial to which tIe
above extract Id reply reads as follows:
while we have no mstrust for Mr.. I,stcbsr's
having defeated MIR. Summers, because in 1882 H..
hoated with the torrent that almost swept slavery
from its moorngs in Virginia, it will not do TO excuse
ana pallIae the stil GREATER offence OF Mr. Le,cher in
lS47." =, ''"e' VI
"1hs StW greater 2gcAcc" was .approping an
ebullon OF such Incorporate spirit and mischi.yous
effect which appeared In "The South" Of the 9th,
the day before our editorial appeared The South"
made the charge agalnt Mr.. Letcher "stll greater
offence" and not the Enquirer"
Since writing the above, the Lynchburg Republi |
can and the Staun,on indicator have reached US -.
In Them We hnd some eresting statements in refer |
ence to the letter of Mr.. Ruffner We annex the fol
lowing extracts:
From the Lynchburg Republican,
We have no apology 10 make tor this letter or n.
complimentary terms in which il endorses the PERM
ccoas Vews Of Rutfner: But. in no, lar 81 go '.'2
cher's connection With il is conr-rn> Tina u no.
Sn. In-, ms nErp. bern brought mp ~
Judgment against Mr.. Lstcher. When he frst be-
came candidate for Congress- anon after the occur
renee under consideration the whole matter mh-
public by hs enemies, but they abandoned II ~
the most miserable Hb'rtons. bur recollection OF h-
explanation il briefly ths Nr. L'tchsr's name 'onS
appointed 10 hs letter BIZ Of The SigRrrs 'cjth0u'
hH knoniedge consent He afterwards d-cIaim-d
any sympathy With Or enhancement OF the letter or
address This, we repeat, s onr recollection oI ia"
explanation Of iha matter at the time, and which :"
efecualy killed nf his enemies that the whole matter
Was DGonlnently qua-hed and has never been
heard Of from that day ia this, although Mr.. l.. ha+
been constantly before the people in the very county
and district in which the alleged fin was committed
II we are wrong ID this explanation, We shall be-
prompt to correct it the moment we convinced OF
the error. Of ole thing, however, out recollection 10
entirely disHct, aud that is, that Mr.. Leichsrs 'T-
Pandtton k1ted he charge and satisfied has tr'ends
From the Staunton Vindcator.
The Richmond Wing il terribly exercised about an
address delivered in Lexington. some years ago. ty
Rev. Henry Ruffner in which it s ssid, the Rev.
gentleman spoke rather disparagngly Of slavery, and
that John Letcher endorsed the sentiments. We have
not copy of that address before us and cannot now
sraak Of iis contents bat recUect MIR. Lstchers con
recrion with the matter to be this: The address
spoken Of WAS regarded great literary effort and
Mr. Lscher, and many Other persons, OF both pot
cal parties, signed note requesting tha puohcatloh
Of the address; when the address mads iis appear
ance in pamphlet form, the suthor had made such
important changes iu it as go to vary tho original
meaning, that Mr.. Letcher actually refused to pay
his proportion OF The expenses OF the printing oi the
address, and thus terminated his connection with the
matter. Ii this information is Of any services TO ;he
"Whg" he can make such use of it HI he thinks pro-
per. We hope the "Whig" may be able to procure
a copy oi this address, and when commenting upon
il remember not to forget this explanation Now thai
the name OF Mr.. Letcher is prominently mentioned
every exeron either TO compass his defeat before
q nominating Convention or before the people-with
no candidate Of their own their policy Will oe 10
create schisms in the Democratic party, and hence
We counsel 'uuion, concession harmony among our
party friends There is sounder Southern man
in the Union than John Lstcher, and any effort 10
attach duplicity to him will recoil upon its authors
TIE soUTH-sIDE DEMOCRAT AND Mr.. LETCHER.
The South.Side Democrat Of Friday, interrogates
us thus:
"Does our cotsmporsry mean that MIR. Letcher
defence from the charge Of aboltionm to rest on
the real character of DR.. Ruffnsrs speecbesf'
We answer, that The Enquirer" has made no
'charge of abolitionsm" against Mr.. Letcher, but
that the opposition journals are urging with very
great power very ugly letter to which the name OF
John Letcher is signed, and that Mr. Letcher must
''rcst' his defence on the best circumstances oi
which the nature of the charge will admit.
Agsin-the democrat interrogates us:
"Does our contemporary mean that no disclaimer,
explanation or excuse, csI justify the declaration
that Mr.. Letcher's name was by accident, courtety
or indiscreon attached to document which did not
meet his APPRECIATION
We answer, that Mr.. Lstcher's "disciamer, expla'
nation or excuse must satisfy the people of Virgil
MIA that his name appears to the letter "by accident
The Democracy have denied 10 Mr.. Summers the
plea of "indiscretion for his speech in 1892 we
waged upon Mr.. Summers war for that speech that
forbds any excuse on the plea of "indiscretion" be
ing allowed Mr.. Letcher. The excuse OF "couresy
will never be satisfactory; the abolition OF slavery IN
Western Virginia, and the infamous denunciation oil
the Ruffuer pamphlet are subjects too important fol
any man TO be 'courteOus" upon. At any rate the
psops of Virginia will not agree to make Mr. Letch
or Governor if be alleges "courLesy" as the only e1
cuse for the endorsement he is charged with having
| given to this infamous pamphlet.
Again, the democrat ssks us:
Does the Enquirer. mean 10 cay under any cir