Richmond Enquirer

The Norfolk Herald candidly admits that the result of the Caucus on last Monday "more than fulfills the promise" of this paper. The estimate which the Herald gives us of the state of parties in the Va. Legislature, is, we suspect, incorrect. Mr. Crawford has a larger majority than the estimate allows him.

We think ourselves also bound to state that one conclusion to which we had arrived, is not correct. We presumed from the acquiescence of all but four members of the Caucus, that the other 15 were in favor of a Caucus. We have since understood that there were at least 15 gentlemen present who were dissatisfied with the proceedings. We have ascertained that there were 15, because so many had affixed their names to a protest. We should have stated this fact before, if we had not supposed the Protest would have been published, and would best speak for itself.

We also stated, that there was one member in town not sick, but not present at this meeting, who was a friend to a Caucus and to W. H. Crawford. We have since ascertained that there were at least three other Republicans in town, in favor of Crawford, who would not attend the Caucus. A 5th Republican who is favourable to both, was sick in bed.

The Philadelphia Franklin Gazette of the 9th (which reached us last night) contains a Circular signed at Washington by 14 out of 20 Democratic members from Pennsylvania, assigning their reasons for considering it "equally inexpedient and improper for them) at this time, as republican representatives of Pennsylvania, to attend any partial meeting or caucus of members of congress to nominate candidates for the Presidency, and Vice Presidency of the U. S."—in order that their "constituents may be fully informed upon this subject, in time to devise some mode of nomination that might be generally acquiesced in."