Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1858-07-09

another attempt at satisfactory answer to The inter
rogatorss Of the EXAMINER"
The Examiner" restates s enquiries
"In article on Tuesday, we desired 10 know of
the 'EGquirer whether il be true that the organza
ton gotten up by Judge Douglas and his friends was
upon the principle of Incorporating hostility to
| the Ksnsas policy Of the Administration. which the
| Democracy of Virginia and Of the South endorsed
| and sustained in the most emphatic and cordial man
nerl lie 1t true that Judge Douglas and his friends
denounced, and still denouncs, the supporters OF the
Administration in Illinois In the most contemptuous
termsi Are they in the daily habit of applying the
term bogus to all Democrats of their State who are
not ready to attach themselves TO the Douglas organ
zation as against the gotten up by the supporters
! OF the Administration"
The organization which sustains Mr.. Douglas
in Illinois has not been lately "gotten up
1t is the regular organization of the Democracy
Of the State-the same which won the victory
in 1856. The great body of the Illinois Democ.
racy, of which this organization is the expo
neut have preferred the Kansas policy advocated by
Mr. Douglas to that recommended by the Admins
traton. They still maintain the same opinion; but 80
| tar from making this a ground Of 'uncompromising
hostility" they have declared their Intention TO
tain the Administration in its general governmental
policy. They will not retract the opinions which they
expressed on All issue of policy extinct; and, as
for the future territorial policy Of the party MIR.
Douglas has himself advocated the very policy re
commended by the President himself. The Demo
cracy of Virginia, so far as We can judge, has been
about equally divided on the question of Lecompton
or anti Lecompton; but both sides concur in the poll
cy of preserving intact the present organization OF
the party in the State and in the Union. The anti
Lecompton Democrats, both Of Virginia and OF Hi.
nois probably never will endorse the action of the
Lecomptou Convention. Nor do the interests of the
party require that they should do go, any more than
that the Lecompton Democrats should recant the
| sanction which they have accorded to the action Of
the same body. No recantation is necessary from
either side. They all agree to disagree on the e1
tinc ISSUE and il any additional srcls need be add
sd to the PLATFORM for the guidance OF future teT'
soria policy we have every indication that the party
will be ready to accept the recommendation contain
ed in the frst message of the President, and which
has reoeived the unequivoOal endorsement OF MIR.
Douglas.
lts not true, that Judge Douglas and his friends
| denounced and still denounce, the supporters OF the
| Administration in Illinois in the most contemptuous
terms" For Judge Douglas aud his friends are them
selves the snosrs aud most efficient supporters of the
Administration in Illinois Nor do we know OF Il
single instance in which Mr. Douglas and his friends
have denounced any man because Of his preference
tor the Kansas policy OF the President. We DO not
hesitate to say, that the men who were denounced
| nerted the dsnuncia;on. The men who started The
unfounded statement, that Mr.. Douglas had gone
over or would 90 over to the Black Republican par
ty-the men who deserted the regular organisation OF
the Illinois Democracy, to ee up an opposition ticket
which they knew could not be elected, and was ca
culated only TO throw the triumph into tbs hands ct
the Black Republican party-the men who ventufed,
fraudulently to misreprssert rhe views Of the Ad
mnstration in order to force certain office holdera TO
oppose Mr.. Douglas reelection, and thus virtually
10 co operate with the Black Republican psriy-a'l
,hsee have been properly described as "boters' anc
d,soroantsers." They are not the friends of the
Adminsir ation-thev following the very course
TO defeat the party of tho Administration and III
lighting against this discrgansing movement Mr.
Douglas pursuing the best line OF defeuce for The
Administration.
The Examiner" "believes" that Mr.. Douglas has
been more intimate with Black Republicans than
with Democrats, and that he and his colleagues in
he House have looded the State With Black Republi'
can documents When chsrge of this sort lie made 1t
is of course Difficult. to ba disproved But fortunately,
the burden of proof falls on Tue accuser' aud tie
Examiner" has produced no reliable testimony by
which 10 prove charges, which we have good rea-on
70 disbeleve We believe hst the editor OF the "E1-
.Ipiner" has been misled by his own observation, in
formation received from members OF different parties
and the "gviugs OUT Of newspaper correspondents.
We know that Judge Douglas has furnished tho pub.
ic with no indication of political aation with The
Black Republicans. We know how easy il is TO dis
tort the exchange of cvitiss which pass current at
all times among gentlemen however they may be Sc
uarated politically, into something of sinister import.
We know that it is very possible that Judge Douglas
fook care to supply his constituents with all the de-
bates against Lecompton, and that this legitimate use
Of weapons, furnished by an adversary, could easily
be represented by personal enemies as an attempt to
food the State OF Illinois with abolition documents
Judge Douglas may have done the very same thing
which many Lecompton politicians and newspapers
did at the same time in ths South as well as in the
North. If we are not mistaken, We have known
.yen the "Examiner" to publish a defence of Lee
compton extracted from a speech which denounced
the Dred Scott decision. We do not adduce this to
cast any censure upon our eotemporary, who was
earnestly occupied with the Lecompton side OF the
question: and cannot be held responsible for the SEN
tmen,s of those who concided with him from mo-
tves different from his own. But If the "Examlner
is permitted to extract Lecompton arguments from
one abolition speech, Judge Douglas may extract
anti. Lecompton arguments from another, and neither
oan be Justly charged, in consequence with encourag'
ing Black Republican doctrines.
The "Examiner" desires to know whether Judge
fiji a. l,t;1I that fhau
clearly in the right on the Lecompton question. 1t
,s of course to be presumed that they do since we
have seen no recantation on their part But they
are willing to meet the Leoompton men on the
ground of requiring no concession from either side
of an agreement to disagree as to the merits OF an
extinct issue.
The EXAMINER denies that any attempt has been
made to ostracise Mr.. Douglas; ana asserts that he
voluntarily left bis party on great measure. These
statements cannot be borne out by the facts OF the
case Attempts have been made to ostracse Judge
Douglas. He has been unjustly denounced "a
traitor to his party and Black Republican at heart
And the assertion that he left his party unjust TO
the whole body Of anti Lecompton Democrats as it
istoJudge Douglas. Judge Douglas never did leave
his party on any question.
With equal Justice with that accorded to Mr.. Doug
Ia, by the "E1smner.' it might be asserted by an
anti Leeompton paper that every Lecompton man
deserted his party The fact ia that the party was di-
vided on temporary issue. 1t was difference
among equas-not deserton on the part OF nferlorr
The right to decide authortativey that either divi
sion Of the party we're deserera from Its Standard be-
longs to no man on earth. and from the tone of The
article of the "Examiner' We are forced to believe
that our coemporsry has been betrayed into an appa
rent arrogance and presumption, aitoge,ner un~ar
rsutable and which must be unntentioual.
THE NEXT PRESIDENT.-The following gen.
emen have already been named 10 connee.lon ~,'n
tbs ne1t Presidency: Howell Cobb, Senator Bright,
Senator Hunter, Of Virginia, Senator Cameron, OF
Pepnsylvana. Speaker Orr, John sidell, senator