Richmond Enquirer

To the Editors of the Enquirer.

I perceive that certain of the northern prints complain, that a spirit is manifested in Virginia unfriendly to the present administration, and that efforts are made to elect persons who are supposed to be hostile to it. It is stated too, to be improper to anticipate objections, and that it will be time enough to complain when some practical grievance is experienced. To these persons I would reply, that it is strange, when an overwhelming majority of Virginia, manifested by its vote that they had not political confidence in Mr. J. Q. Adams, that it should be supposed, that this same Virginia should feel any very romantic, or fond anticipations in favor of the course he will pursue. The opposition to Mr. Adams was not geographical. As Lord Chatham said of Lord Bute: We did not enquire whether he was rocked in the cradle on this or that side of the Tweed. We were not opposed to him on account of the country where he was born, but "because the man of that country held sentiments incompatible with freedom." That the friends of Mr. Adams, that those who assisted to elect him, should take his measures upon trust, and determine beforehand to support him, may be consistent, but their condition cannot be very enviable, when they are constrained to call on those who opposed his election to take this course. No description of persons will oppose measures, merely because they originate with Mr. Adams. Both the President and the members of Congress, are the servants of the people, and the people will decide upon public measures as they may affect their interests, without considering their effect on the personal or political interests of these servants, or with which of them, they originate. This is the course which every honest man will pursue. This is all that the friends of Mr. Adams have a right to ask of those who used their best exertions to keep him out of office. When you come to speak of confidence, it is a different affair, confidence has been said to be a plant of slow growth. Unwavering confidence, even in men of our choice is unwise; in persons whose principles we have every reason to distrust, it would be folly, madness. But are there not strong reasons not only against extending this confidence beforehand to Mr. Adams, but why we should watch his measures with unceasing vigilance and place in all posts, in which resistance can be made if needful, men of tried and approved principles and talents?

The predictions of the Republicans have been verified. Mr. Adams has openly and publicly proclaimed, that his interpretations of the constitution as to the powers of the General Government are precisely those which the Republican party always declared would produce a revolution in the government, and lead eventually to despotism. With this undisguised and solemn notice from Mr. Adams, can he expect those who consider his principles as incompatible with the very existence of the constitution, to bestow their confidence on him, or determine a priori to support his measures?-- Can it be expected that no precautionary measures should be adopted, by endeavoring to elect persons in whom confidence is reposed? But it is said it will be time enough when any measure is adopted to carry into effect the principles we oppose. Are there not many of those measures actually in train? But if they are not, are we to wait patiently until the blow is struck, when we know that such principles are avowed, and such plans in preparation, are we obliged to wait for the overt act of violation of the constitution?

If an individual in private life, was threatened with personal violence; if he was told that his house was to be assailed and his family ill treated, would he fold his arms, and wait until the attack was made? or would he not rather prepare beforehand, summon his approved friends around him, and be ready for the defence of all that is dear and valuable?

MUTIUS.
We should not be astonished if Mutius were next told that Virginia must not send a Senator to Washington, because he is a decided friend to State Rights--that she must not do what she thinks right; lest the man of her choice should unfortunately not harmonize with Mr. Adams. Let her do right; follow her own conscience, and this very plain dilemma presents itself. If Mr. A. thinks with her, he will not be injured by a strong ally from Virginia---if his principles differ from hers, she will want a strong man, not to help him, but to help herself.