Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1858-08-31
THE RICHMOND ENQUIRER.
TUESDAY MORNING AUGUST 81, 1855
NIX. EYrcHtR EVERY OTHER DEMOCRA.
TIC ASPlRANT

NIX. EErcHtRr EVERY OTHER DEMOcRA.
TIC ASPlRANT.
The above issue is now fully made up. '1hr
South 4ounsel for the piaintiff-,he Enquirer
counsel for the defendants. The case was opened by
the counsel for the plaintiff" in Saturdays South
Ours it 10 true, is a numerous clienoy, and among
the plumber of life long service in The cau'
of the Democratic party; men who, at no portion oil
their public lives, uttered word or entertained
sentiment hostile to Virginia or the institution OF slave
ry; and yet, Notwithstanding their previous good con
duct their unimpsached Democracy, their unaterao'e
devotion to slavery, "The South" urges the nomlna
ton of Mr.. Letcher over any Of them It's true' the
position. IA counssl for the defendants" was tx
pected of us-it 10 speciality we have always hied'
The interest of the rho party regardless OF rewards
to individuals, has been our time'honored policy.
We have sought the triumph of the party without re-
gard to honoring psrtizans; leaving individuals to
reap, In the conviction Of the honest discharge OF
duty, The rscompense OF reward Our present posi-
ton, therefore. eIcites the eurprise only OF "The
South and other solely Leicher organs. Though
"solitary and alone we fight the battle for fair
aud legitimate expression Of popular opinion as re-
coarse, with firm conviction that ours will be the
victory.
THE learned counsel for the plaintiff would argue
that " II 10 undeniable that John Lstcher has been
pursued with an unkindness and injustice by mem
bers Of his party, for which there ls no pars'ie
in the political history Of Virginia" Granting, for
eake of the argument" that the above extract Id
tact. We reply, that it cannot be urged against on
clients for not one OF the .. Democratic aspirants
have uttered an expression of any kind whatever
against Mr. Letcher. But 10 it fact that any "mem'
bsrs Of his own party" have pursued" Mr.. Lecher
with unkindness and injustice 1t true that many,
yes very many "inembers Of his own party have
expressed disappointment and dissatisfaction at find
ing 20 good Democrat, and one now 80 reliable on
slavery, eleven years ago endorsing aud asking for
the publication of what 1.-The South" has stated to
bs an stroclous libel the social system Of Il o
South" Is this unkindness and injustjcs 2" fit P,
hiss not 'tbe counsel for the plaintiff been guilty Ct
the very same "unkindness and injustice T. ITO
South" of the oath of June said:
"Unspesksbe, then, ia our surprise TO find per-
son of Mr.. Letchers good sense aud sound principles
approving Gp sbutoD of such Incorporate spirit aud
lnlschievous effect. IL is = piece Of folly Tor which
t.fcdti0n."
We submit if any member of the party has pursued
Mr.. Lecher with "unkindness and injustice" that il
does not do for "The South" to complain.
Bat lie it "unkindness and injustice" to Mr.. Letoher
for members of the party to canvass the avaabites
Of candidates 10 1t 'unkindness and injustice" to
Mr. Letcher for Democratic TO urge, before the nons'na
on that there are facts 10 the past life Of Mr. Letcher
that will greatly weaken bis availability as the capd
date, and strengthen the efforts of the Opposition =
Is it "unkindness and injustice" to Mr.. Letcher to
council and advise the party that his nomination i'll
destroy the most effective weapon Of our party against
the acknowledged candidate of the Opposition the
Hon. George w. Summers Ia il "unkindness al
iuusiice to Mr.. Letcher to convince the party that
With Mr.. Letcher 40 the Democratic candidate and
Mr. Summers az the Opposition candidate, the parties
will stand on equal footing, 80 far as the slavery i'd
sao is concerned-that by such nomination We pre-
sent candidate with record no better on slavery
than Mr.. Summers We cannot see what 'unk, d
ness and injustice" is done Mr.. Letcher IN presenting
respectfully these views. And what more hos b' Ell
done Has the private character of Mr.. Le:chsr
been sssailed! Has his Democracy been impaached!
In no instance that have seen, hss any objection
been urged against Mr.. Lstcher except that growing
out Of the Ruffner pamphlet.
But to return TO the opening argument OF the "ooun
eel for the plaintiff The South says: "liithert" II
has been thought an honorable obligation among the
Democracy of the State to extend the utmost induf
gence to an associate respectable character and po-
sition" Has it come to this that the par excellence
slavery journal of Richmond urges responsibility OF
.nhl
to extend "the utmost indulgence" to expression Of an.
Il slav-ry sentiments Why in june 1.-THE South"
acknowledged honorable obligation 10 extend the
utmost indulgence to Mr.. Lsoher, for that journal
denounced his connection with the Rufuer pamphlet
as piece Of folly for which it would not venture an
apology much less justification" II "fhe South =
would then neither opoiogise for, nor Just1y Mr..
Letcher's conduct, how can that journs' now "pead
the utmost ind gence Tor that which two months ago
it Enthusiastically condemned
Butte recur to the argument" THE South" Gays
Heretofore Democratic papers have sstesmeditd sort
of duty to abstain from any structures on the leaders
OF the party except 10 that would admit neither
OF .ilenoe nor spologeto explanations" How long
has the heretofore beenl "rhe South" two msnths
ago did not "abstsin" from strictures' upon Mr..
Letcber for, We have already shown, that jour- al
"dsmned with something worse than faint praise"
Mr.. Letchers views in lS47.
Now, The South" may urge that iis own "strc.
tures" on Mr.. Lstcher, were made before his eIpla
natory letter was received; but this excuse caDoot
avail for after the letter had been received and pub
shed. that journal reiterated the same 'strctures"
in reply to a charge aga.-: tbs South" made by
Petersburg correspondent OF the Enquirer" Of jus
Trying Mr.. Letcher's approval of the Ruffner ad-
dress."
So "rhe South" two months sgo did not esteem il
ga sort Of duty to abstain from any STRUCTURES The
le ,aers of the party" and caanot object 10 others
following "the footsteps of their usrlous predece-
sor."
II to prefer any other Democrat TO Mr. Letcber is
"unkindness and injustice" to the favorite OF "Ite
South" would submit that that journal has been
guilty Of wholesale unkindness and injustice to every
other Democratic aspirsut." 1.-The South" is an im.
partial Lieutenant Governor paper; it can nd oand-
dates in every hoe and corner Of the State but Dir.
L-lcher ia the only name THE South" can zee in
'emplating the succession. II we have done Gun
kudness aud injustice" to Mr.. Lecher, We at least
pead kindness and justice to every other Democratic
ssprant Willis The South" reversing our postioi
does the greatest kindness and justice to Mr. Ischer
but by Ignoring che claims Of every other Democratic
asp aut does "upkindness and injustice" to legion
of the best Democrats in the Union.
We now approach part of the argument more
pungent and pithy. than the portion hitherto *
amined by After Portraying the very extreme
docil,y and aniability Of Mr. Ls,cher's friends
after telling them that they have exhibited a pa
tisncs approaching pusilsnimi,y," "Ths south
says: Though emitten again and again, they havs
not once returned the blow. Against none Of ms
competitors have they uttered q word of reproach or
accusation. From none of his competitors have
they dstractsd anything, either of fictitious or we'll