The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1874-01-22

though not TO Mir. stuart. We pub
lished MI. SrUART's article on the 25th OF
December, 1885, and we well no"
careful we were iii the choice of our words 'r
of comment. Nevertheless, we pronounced
his TO be anansuerable arguments. by
the .vay. we afterwards, to wit, on the 18TH
OF January, gave the proceeding the name
of the "NeW Movement" The Wing pup
lished Mr.. SrUART's article the same day that
we did. II both the Whigand the Dispa1ch
had opposed and denounced the proposition,
it would. under the circumstances then ex-
listing, have necessarily failed. Perhaps
either paper could have killed it. General
LEE could have killed It. Other leading
men In Virginia might have killed it. we
make these remarks asindcatiDg that whilst
the honor of proposing a new departure be-
longs to Mr.. STUART, the movement " hlch re-
suited vas not exactly what he proposed
and therefore that many persons are III d1-
fercnt degrees entitled to share in the honor
of having been instrumental in relieving
Virginia from the distressed condition in
which she lay in 1865. MIR. STUART's propo-
sition was as follows:
"Now for the mode of carrying these
ideas into practical effect. This Is subject
by no means free from difficulty, and the
time for ction il short. We cannot get up
another convention to form new constitu-
ton. But constitution derives its validity
not from the body which frames and pre-
nares It, but from its ratification by the votes
Of the people, II the Legislature Of State
were to Instructive Court Of Appeals, in
stead of a convention, to frame a copstitu-
ton to be voted on by the people it would
be competent for them to do so and such
z constitution, if ratified by the popular
vote, would be just as valid and obligatory
rs II the same had been framed by conyen.
ton assembled in the usual form.
.'To avoid unnecessary delay, let the Ex-
ecutiYe Committee, in the interval between
the present time and the LIST of February,
take the Constitution of 1850 and the pro-
posed constitution of 1861, and from the
two select the better provisions, emitting
the word white and all other provisions
that would be in conflict with universal
suffrage and universal amnesty ana thus
frame complete constitution"
Mr.. SUART proposed further that two gen.
tlemen from each congressional district
should meet in Richmond on the 1st Of Feb
rnary TO agree upon constitution TO De
submitted TO Congress. And he added:
"Let this constitution embody The ,tniUer- |
sdl-Sufraqe and unipersGt -anaeSty PROPOSE |
lion in ats broadest terms, and negro ehgi0,l- |
ity to boot."
Itrequired bold man and statesman to
make this last proposition at the time Mr..
STUART made 1t. This was the basis of the
new movement. This the feature that made |
it success.
We suggested the 18th day Of January as
tie day for the meeting. But 1t was finally |
held on the 31st of December, 1868, and the |
1st of January, 1859. Mr.. STUART presided,
and explained why he had invited the con-
ference. Both the editor-in- chief Of the DIS
patch and the assistant editor were, like
SAUL under different circumstances, "pres-
ent aud consenting."' So that We know
whereof we affirm.
Here is our cautious endorsement of Mr..
sTUART's letter:
Firm, the Dispatch Of December rs, 1861
The letter of our correspondent "SeneX."
one of the most distinguished statesmen in
the Valley OF Virginia, which appears else
where in this paper,is worthy the serious
consideration OF our people. His statement
Of the difficulties Of our situation, of the i'm
possibility of avoiding negro suffrage, and of
the possibility of escaping other and worse
evils, and the reasons he gives for advising
the people of Virginia to agree upon the
platform OF universal amnesty and univer.
sal suffrage" commend themselves to ou,
mind as unans,perable arguments. We dis
like the proposal to render negroes eligible
to Office yet we are willing to concede that
eren that Is infnitely to be preferred to hetl
Bdme Underwood Constitutions But with
all proper Difference we suggest that the plan
proposed by "Senexn Is Incomplete, "a
&C Institution framed in the manner suggest
ed weu.d never be accepted by Congress as!
the work Of the people of Virginia.
Y Weproposed that new constitution and |
the UsDERwooD constitution should be voted |
upon as competing propositions. Every
body knows hat the UNDERweoD constitution |
was submitted in parts as the result of the
labors Of " us ALL We also argued from
facts stated that the day named for the meet |
ing was too far of, and proposed january
18th.
Let US say for ourselves that 1t required q |
bold paper to utter at that time the words
which are placed In italics in the extract !
last above given.
Mr. STUART presided over the meeting.
he explained its object. He appointed on
the 31st December the. committee which Re.
ported on the LIST Of January-the next day.
He was made chairman Of this committee by
vote of the meeting. He wrote the report
made. BY this committee January 1st, and
which was adopted by the meeting. And
he was chairman Of the committee Of nine
that went 70 Washington. The Others were
Joan B. BALDWIN, j. l.. MARYE, Jr., w. Il.
suTHERI1A, JAMES .NEEsos, WYspuAx Ros.
sarses, J. F. JOHNSON, j. r. STATUTES, and
w. L. 0wN.i So ss "a
But We did not intend TO go into: this his
tory when We began to write this article
We stop; satisfied, however, that our Sd con
trlbuiton will be found interesting.
TO Me Editors Of TIE DispotcA
Geniienlen, - there hss s6een so munh
misrepresentation. from various squa5feff
the origin shd history az thcs soHaeeengs
which Eas hsld jn Richmo N Isl HI M of
Deuember, lS68, which ap1oiuteA tha ,sS
mittee OF Nine. q ana Co., r bykS vi. s -
movement = which led q 10
~ onr State C01sti 4
III TIA State 10 n son.
ffksintd hy q q D. aIysell rs
well IS Of regard nj Y :sats gnlsecS2sao
pHhllsh q fnii GtaiS6 ~ ~ SS1e fAefee 0ghs