Richmond Enquirer

Public Sentiment in Georgia.—it will be seen by the annexed extracts of letters, that the candidates for popular favor in Georgia, are, for the most part, disclaiming nullification with very little ceremony. " The circular of the Committee of the meeting in Richmond County, addressed to the candidates for Congress, calls on them to say "what are their sentiments in regard to nullification." The Augusta Courier of the 29th ult., contains the replies of six of the gentlemen so addressed, all of which except one are unfavorable to "the rightful remedy." Thomas Glascock answers, "I am decidedly opposed to the doctrine, considering it neither a rightful, peaceful, nor constitutional mode of relieving ourselves from a protective Tariff." Valentine Walker replies, "I am opposed to the doctrine in all its aspects, and cannot consider it either as an efficient, peaceful or constitutional remedy for the unequal bearing of the Tariff law on Southern interests." Henry Mealing says, "I am not a Nullifier, I am opposed to nullification, because I think it neither a proper, nor an effectual remedy. I consider it quite as unconstitutional as the law which is complained of, and two wrongs cannot make a right." Charles Eaton Haynes remarks, "I do not believe nullification to be either a peaceful or efficient remedy against oppression of the Tariff, and I am entirely opposed to it." G. W. Owens observes, "I am no nullifier." Indeed, from the different interpretations of those who are advocates of the doctrine of nullification, it is a matter of no little difficulty, to ascertain what is the precise definition they affix to the term. It is a text upon which each Nullifier makes his own commentary. Of this, however, I am satisfied, that it is neither a constitutional nor peaceful mode of obtaining redress—the inevitable consequence of its adoption is a separation of our Union, and civil war is its natural result." A. B. Longstreet is the only one of the six who gives any countenance to the political heresy, but even he, as if in anticipation of the popular will, expresses his readiness to abandon it. This is his language: "I can only say for the present, that I believe nullification to be the proper mode of resistance to the Tariff; at the same time, I am ready to relinquish it for any other mode which may unite the people of Georgia."

Since writing the above, we have seen in the Georgia Courier of the 31st ult. the following additional reply to the Richmond Committee of Correspondence.

Augusta, August 30.

Gentlemen:—Your address made in performance of a duty imposed on you by Resolutions adopted at a late meeting of our fellow-citizens in this place, on the 18th inst. has this day been received, and it is with pleasure I reply; and assure them through you, that I am opposed to nullification; and whilst I consider the Tariff unequal, unjust and oppressive, I have no idea that it is the proper remedy to afford us relief, but on the contrary, if ever attempted to be enforced, would involve us in the most serious difficulties with the General Government, without effecting the object we desire.

Respectfully your fellow citizen,

A. RHODES.

Cumming, King, Slaughter, &c.

The reply of Thomas W. Harris denounces Nullification in the strongest terms.—Daniel Newnan approves of the Convention of Milledgeville, but is opposed to a Southern Convention where they "would have to encounter the wiles of a 'magician' and the projects of high Tariff, constitutional Tariff, and protestando men—opposes the act of '32 as much as the tariff act of '28; yet "bad as it is, would acquiesce in the present Tariff for a few years longer, rather than weaken the Union," provided the Tariff could be gradually, and in a short time, reduced to a proper revenue standard.—Judge Clayton replies at length—We will if possible, republish his letter. He goes for a State Convention; would declare the Tariff law unconstitutional, and therefore null and void—and he would notify the General Government of this fact—and he would announce to them, if the law was not so modified within the limits of Georgia, on or before the last day of the 1st session of the next Congress, that is in the year 1834, as to lay a revenue duty only, which should be adequate to the just wants of the government, then "this State would be no longer a member of the Union."

The following laconic letter appears in the last Georgia Courier:

"To the Public.—The time calls for the explicit avowal of the political sentiments of every man, who is up for public office. I am not ashamed of mine. I am in plain terms a Union Man—a native born citizen—a friend of Andrew Jackson, and I disclaim all disorganizing Clubs, as alike hurtful to private independence and public safety. For Andrew Jackson for President, I go the whole hog, tail, bristles and all. Old Virginia, and the Union for ever!

WM. TALLIAFERRO."