Richmond Enquirer

THE ENQUIRER.

Richmond, June 10.

THE WHIG, ALEXANDRIA GAZETTE, AND "RICHMOND JUNTO"

It is vain for the Whig to call in the aid of the Alexandria Gazette, to make the Democratic party responsible for the "dwarfing and dwindling of Virginia." We were formally invited to a "Trial by Record," as the lawyers say. We met the issue—produced our records, sustained our plea, that the Whigs, by their votes, were equally responsible with the Democrats, for the present condition of Virginia. But the Whig gets off upon the ground, that the Democrats had the "power" and therefore should be wholly responsible. It certainly cannot be said, that they had the "power" to prevent the Whigs from voting for a "progressive system," as the Gazette styles it. If their votes show, that they voted against such a system, how can the inference be avoided, that they deserve to be censured for keeping Virginia behind her sister States? There is no better mode of ascertaining the policy of an individual or a party, than by the examination of his or their special acts. The records show, that the Whigs have not, as a party, sustained a policy, which was to elevate Virginia. They are, therefore, responsible, as far as their influence and votes extend, for the retrograde movements of the State.

But the Whig and the Gazette ride over the records, and appeal, with triumphant tones, to the "Richmond Junto," as the monster which has oppressed Virginia for so many years. We shall not attempt to ward off Quixotic blows aimed at what we know to be a "phantom." Whenever these Whig journals shall think proper to charge the "leaders" in this city with specific acts, tending to keep down the Old Dominion, we may prepare to answer them. But, really, the cry of the "Richmond Junto" is so stale and thread-bare that it admits of no loop on which to hang an argument. It is such "stuff as dreams are made of," and has never been resorted to, but as a hob-goblin to frighten into the support of Whiggery the Western Democrats, who have been too intelligent to see through the linsy veil of Federalism.

But the Gazette, in a supplemental attack, dwells with much emphasis upon the fact, that the Democrats of Virginia have refused the Land Distribution money. It is not our purpose to unfold the "valid reasons" (and they are numerous) why Virginia has rejected, and, we hope, will continue to reject, this miserable pittance, which was unjustly raised, and which Congress has no power to appropriate. The Old Dominion is a little too proud to receive what does not belong to her. She regards her principles at too high a price, to be sold for "a mess of pottage."

The Gazette says, that nothing can be done towards improvement, unless we have the money, and points to the Land Fund as the source whence we can procure everything that we can desire. Really, this small mite of $100,000 is to be the golden egg, which is to furnish means, to educate all our children, build all our canals, roads, &c.! The Gazette must be a better manager than the Virginians, if it can effect so much good, upon so small a capital. Were the amount enough however, that would not alter the question. The money does not belong to us, and has been rightfully rejected.

The Gazette says: "We adduce this as an example of the general policy—the wise policy of the dominant party. That system is to secure power for a party—to secure office for certain favorites—and to keep the people in political vassalage to antiquated notions, and political prejudices. And in this way is the great State of Virginia shorn of its strength!"

This exposition will amuse our Democratic friends not a little. That the policy of the Democrats has been as selfish as is here charged, the archives of Virginia will utterly disprove. We rejoice that Virginia has remained true to the "antiquated notions and political prejudices," as the Gazette is pleased to style the principles of the Republican party. These principles were proclaimed by our fathers in the virtuous days of the Republic and will ever be cherished by Virginia. They have gradually extended over the Union, and experience has proved them to be the true, the safe policy.

So much for Federal affairs. In matters of State policy, the records show, that the Democrats have been as liberal and enlightened as the Whigs. On one point, we claim for them the highest credit. When the State was threatened with repudiation, the Democrats boldly assumed the lead in adopting necessary measures to maintain the honor and faith of Virginia.—The Whigs threw embarrassments in their path. On the hustings they denounced the "Loco Foco measure"—the good sense of the people triumphed. The law was sustained—the faith and honor of the State preserved inviolate. What is still more remarkable, the Whigs have since adopted the principles and most of the details of that "Loco Foco" law, which they so harshly denounced at the time. Here is some evidence of the wisdom and boldness of Democratic policy to prevent the good old State from retrograding.

But why have the Whig and the Gazette, in their anxiety for the improvement of Virginia, omitted to mention the Internal Improvement policy of the Democratic party? That party is in the majority, and if the Whigs in Virginia, thought proper to attack the Democrats, it is a poor way, indeed, in order to carry a measure, to denounce those who will have to vote upon it. If these Whig journals desire to give an impulse to the fortunes of Virginia, we would advise them to cease their attacks upon the policy of the Democratic party, and propose and advocate such measures as are calculated to effect the desired end. They certainly will fail, if they continue to assail the judgment of the people, they may do something. By appealing to the reason and the judgment and the motives of the dominant party.