Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1859-04-05

that Mr. Letcher entertained "deep-seated
hostility to slavery, slave-holding communities
and slave owners" "Oh Consistency, thou art
indeed jewel ~
Saturday we had occasion to expose onc #
the Opposition press in its present affected dis
trust Of Mr.. Lctcher. The Lexington Ca
zettc' was one of the Opposition papers that
rallied to the support Of the advocates Of Mr..
: Letchcrs nomination, with particular force,
prior TO his nomination; and peculiar empha-
sis was laid upon the assurance, given by the
Gazette that "the Wigs PREFER him Uohn
LctchcrJ to Any OTHER DEMOCRAT, because they
believe him TO be an HONEST MAN, who looks TO
the good of the country and because THEY KNOW
HIN TO RE rSIarEACHaBLE in his DEVOTION TO
VIRGINIA and HER INSTITUTIONS"
1t was such rallying to his support, and such
assurances held ont BY the Opposition press,
that strengthened the advocates Of Mr. Lctch.
ers nomination, and contributed no little to
securing his nomination. The impression Was
made, that the nomination Of Mr. Ietcher
would be acqucsced in nv the entire 0ppos.
ton, because the Lexington Gazette" said
SLAVERY rSrEKEs1>," and that m err of good
feeling would be inauguratcd in Virginia, lean
inc TO the consolidation of the whole South
into one homogeneous party, true to her inter
est and firm in her defence With the excep
ton of the Richmond Wing" sc cannot now
call to mind one single Wing or American
newspaper, in Virginia, that did not warmly
espouse the cause Of Mr. Lctcher's nomination
against us-and many Of them indnlgc1 in
structures mpusnins our motives and at,r.
buting sclfi,hncsS and personal hostility to our
opposition.
The Richmond "Whig' is, indeed, an cxcep-
ton. At no time did that paper abate op-
position TO Mr.. Letchcr's nomination but
this is the only exception that we can
now recall. Long after the publication of
the Ruilner pamphlet, and the discussion that
grew ont Of its reproduction by the "Whig"
the papers Of the Opposition party defended
Mr.. Letchcr and aSsailed US This "liazcttc"
was one Of the chief advocates OF Mr. I.ctchcr's
nomination. and more than once was that pa
per insianccd to us as evidence that there was
nothing in Mr. I.ctchcr's record hostile to
slavery. The friends of Mr.. LetcEcr contendrd
that the Gazette would never advocate his
nomination If the charge could he sustained
and. in Petersburg. we were assured that no
Opposition candidate wOnd be run if John
Letcher WAS nominated. We never trusted the
assurances OF the Opposition; we never relied
an their promises, and we opposed. to the bit
ter end. n nomination that VIC did not approve
No sooner had that Convention adjourned than
the .rord of rommand, the or,ier to rally, was
issued from the "Whig." and these very papers
began to obey its mandates, and to falsify their
previous words; and now we find the Lexins
ton Gazette using all its endeayors to prove
that John Lctcher entertalns "hostility 10
shrsry, to s,apbol'ing communities, and u
slnrc-oiea.rs.
The Gazette must now take one or the
other horn of the following dilemma: Either
the Gazette" knowing John Letcher to enter
tain "hostility to slavery. slave-holdins com
munitieS, and slavc-owners," and to be CON
victed of the charges" We preferred against
him, stated that which was not true, when it
said he was true to Virginia and her institu-
tons" and true to the pro-saycry interests
or, if John Lctcher was, in September, thus
sound The conclusions Of the reasoning Of the
"tazetle in March, 1859, arc nonsense.
The editor of the Gazette cannot plead igno-
rance Of Mr.. Lctchcr's record. The Ruffncr
Pamphlet was spoken, written and printed in
Lexington The convention spccca was made
by his own representative; and he could not
be ignorant of the sentiments it contained. The
congressional record was that Of his own rep
rcscntativc in Congress. Mr.. Lctchcr was n
Democrat, and opposed to the editor OF the
"GaZctte," and if he did entertain hostility
to slavery, slave-holding communities. and
save-owners," and was convict Of the
charges" We preferred, the editor Of the ga
zettc" was bound, As an honest man, as lover
Of Virginia, rs true friend TO the institutions
Of his State, to have sounded the alarm, and
had Mr.. Letcher nnsted from his responsible
place in Congress The editor Of the ga
zctte, OF course, has never voted for Mr.. Letch'
er; for knowing him TO entertain hostility
TO slavery, Slavc-holding communities. slave
owners" and 10 be convict of the charges
we preferred, he certainly never endorsed him
with his vote, and he can easily publish the
certificate of the clerk OF the County Court OF
Rockbridgc, that he voted against Mr. Letchet
whenever that gentleman was candidate for
Congress. We never saw the editor Of the
Gazette" and do not know that he ever voted
in Lexington: but il he did he can easily pro-
ducc the certificate that he voted against Mr..
I.ctchcr.
Bu, if he has voted for John Lctcher, will
he publish the clerks certificate as evidence
that he him self knowingly voted for man
hostile to slavery, slave-holdins communities
and slaye.owners." and that the editor has en-
dorsed by his vote such an Abolitonst.-
Let us have certificate as to how Mr.. Al
phonso Smith, editor of the Lexington Gazette,