Richmond Enquirer

to sink into the grave. Awful and mysterious they? When were they organized? By the invention of a pseudo-Virginian, which was some time since published and contradicted. Proofs were then called for: but no proofs were produced—for the plainest reason in the world, because no proof existed; it was an idle spectre, conjured up by some idle person to quiz the credulous Editor of the Albany Daily Advertiser.—It is as silly as the idea that 'attempts will be made to preserve 'the Virginia Line, unbroken."

THE ARMORY—Again!

It was not our intention to bring up this subject again, but for some crude remarks in the N. York Courier. The Federal Prints, it seems, will not let Virginia rest in peace; but they must bring her down to the degraded level of the Hartford Convention. It will not do, Gentlemen—The Hartford Convention will be "damned to everlasting infamy:" while Virginia soars above all the attacks of her envenomed opponents.

One word only as to Mr. Randolph on this occasion. The whole discussion began in remarks which fell from him—We must, therefore, glance at the explanation he has given. He has intimated, that the Armory was built to resist the Federal Administration, if necessary: that cases might occur to make it so; and cites, as an instance, the project which was on foot, during the struggle in the House of Representatives on the eve of Mr. Jefferson's election. Certainly, we can conceive cases, in which the tyranny may become so galling as to justify resistance—when, (to use the words of our Declaration of Independence,) "a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security." But, under such a government as this, where the power of changing their officers is in the hands of the People, the usurpation must be gross beyond any example we have seen—the design must be written in sun-beams. No such case has yet occurred—and such a resort has never been necessary. The greatest abuses we have witnessed, have been remedied by the right of election—The Federal Administration, has been calmly dismissed, with their train of Alien and Sedition Laws, by the voice of the People.—Let the speculative question of resistance—let the propriety of providing arms for such contingencies, be as they may, Mr. Randolph is incorrect in point of fact. We have already shown, by reference to our records, what were the circumstances under which the Armory was erected; that since the Revolutionary War, we have been solicitous to obtain arms for our militia; that we had procured a supply through Mr. Jefferson, while Minister to Paris; and that we had made contracts with Swann of Boston, to import others from Europe; and that they were so difficult to get, and so indifferent when obtained, as only to increase our anxiety to make them for ourselves: that we also had an Arsenal at the Point of Fork, to make them; but, that this was so wretchedly conducted, as finally to induce the Legislature, on a deliberate investigation, to put down that Arsenal, and bring the manufactory of arms to Richmond, under the eye of the Executive.—The necessary steps were ordered to be taken, to obtain the ground, &c. &c. before the 1st of January, 1807—before Mr. Adams came into power, before the Alien and Sedition Laws were passed, before those obnoxious steps were taken, at which so many hearts trembled for the liberties of their country. In point of fact, therefore, we conceive Mr. Randolph to have been mistaken.

But how much more, the N. Y. Courier, which mistakes not only the fact itself, but misrepresents the obvious meaning of Mr. Randolph.

1st. As to the fact—The Courier says, that "it was Mr. Adams's Administration the only one that has not come from that unassuming State, (Virginia,) that was marked for destruction; that it was not to defend the Constitution, for which such preparation was made; but it was the supremacy of the State that they were so anxious about."—Is this man mad, or does he think Virginia is so? Does he suppose, that this State, which has been so remarkable for order, would have flown to arms to resist Mr. Adams, because he was not a Virginian, without a single ally to assist us, the whole country in fact against us? when the fact is, that we never took up arms against him; that we never squinted at civil war, when even the Constitution was trampled under foot by Alien and Sedition Laws: we then held no Hartford Convention: no inflammatory language escaped us: but, instead of treason and the sword, we offered a calm and dignified exposition of the mistakes of our rulers, which has not been answered, because it was unanswerable? The truth is, as we have proved, the Armory was not built to put down Adams's Administration; because the resolution had been taken to erect it before his administration commenced.

2d. As to Mr. Randolph's speech—Most grossly is it misrepresented in the Courier in the following statement: "It was not to defend the Constitution, for which such preparation was made, but it was the supremacy of the state that they were so anxious about. If any person can doubt of the correctness of this remark, let him examine one of Mr. Randolph's speeches on this subject, in which he alludes to the struggle in the House of Representatives relative to the election of President, when Jefferson and Burr were the rival candidates. Those two men had an equal number of votes, and it was the duty of the House, by the Constitution, to decide which of them should take the chair. 'At that day,' said Mr. Randolph, 'the constitution itself was put to hazard, rather than relinquish the long enjoyed sweets of power, when the sun rose upon this house, balloting through the night, and through successive days, for a chief magistrate—Had we not, said he, the promise of Burr's brigade, and of the arms at Harper's Ferry, which he engaged to secure, in case of an attempt to set up a pageant under colour of law, and supersede the public will, after defeating the election by the pertinacious abuse, under the pretence of exercise of constitutional right, to support one of the persons returned by artifice whom they professed to abhor.'"

Nothing more nor less than this. The Hon. of Representatives, had the constitutional duty to perform of deciding between two men, who

A paper lately edited by Mr. Gardenier, a man of wit and talents; now, by a Mr. Dwight, Secretary to the infamous Hartford Convention.