Constitutional Whig

TO THE EDITORS OF THE WHIG.

In conversation some days since with a very intelligent gentleman in the service of the State, I was forcibly struck with the views expressed by him in relation to the Armory, the public Arms and the erection of Arsenals--and beg a place for the subject in your columns, premising that I have no interest directly or indirectly in the matter, and only desire respectfully to present it to the consideration of the General Assembly. Besides the Armory in this city, which is now used as a depot for Arms, and as barracks for the Public Guard, the State has an Arsenal at Lexington, and it is contemplated to build another very soon. Proposals are made, or about to be made, for leasing or purchasing the Armory, (which is at present of little value to the State,) with a view to convert it into a manufacturing establishment. This would doubtless preserve the building from decay, whilst it would yield a good rent to the Commonwealth. But that which seems to me to deserve particular attention at this time, is the doubtful policy of dispersing the public Arms over the State at places which in all probability will never be the theatre of war, or near it; and having the militia when called into service loaded with them upon a march of some 150 or 200 miles, supposing the points of defence to be as during the late war, upon tide water.

Most of the militia who were called into service at that time, rendezvoused at Richmond--then the only depot for arms--there received them and marched to their stations. If there had then been another depot, Warrenton in Fauquier, or some other place in that section of the State, would have been as good as any, perhaps the best; whilst an Arsenal at Lexington would have been entirely useless. But if, as it is expected, the waters of the Chesapeake can, in the event of another war, be protected by the fortifications and navy of the United States, no provision for the defence of that part of our territory bordering upon it, need be made by the State. A new Arsenal will cost the State in ground and buildings, not less perhaps than $20,000; and it will require a permanent military Guard, the annual expense of which (judging by the appropriations for the Guard at Lexington) will be little if any, short of $4,000.

A large proportion of the public Arms must always remain at Richmond; and should the Armory be leased or sold, an Arsenal at this place, with barracks for the public Guard, must be erected. Would it not therefore, be better at once to build these Barracks, and in connexion with them an Arsenal to contain all the public Arms except the 3000 stand at Lexington? I am assured that such an Arsenal and Barracks would not cost more here, than a new Arsenal at another place; and that the public Guard will be fully sufficient for the protection of the whole. This would save the expense of $20,000 before mentioned. The Commonwealth owns ground at the Penitentiary, and I believe upon the Canal, and if in time of war, Richmond should be in danger of invasion, the Arms could in a few hours be removed in boats, beyond the reach of an enemy.

A SUBSCRIBER.

[Communicated through the Post Office.]