Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1849-09-13
, THE FAYETTE MEETING.

After Col. Benton spoke at Fayette,
The leaders opposed to him organized
meeting and adopted the following res
olu,ions:--
Resolved, /. That we disapprove the
views entertained by Col. Benton on
the subject of slavery, and regard his
appeal from the instructions of our last
legislature, as unprecedented in the his.
tory oftbe Republican party, and fatty
inconsistent with his former position as
to the right of the State legislature to
instruct her Senators in Congress.
2. That his alliance with abolitionisis
and "free soilers," while it gives lhom
encouragement in their war upon south
ern institutions, is gross breach of the
confidence reposed in him by the De.
mocracy Of Missouri, and q species of
ngratitude to the Democracy of the
nation which will never be forgiven
him. rr-
8. That we desire Col Benton i'm,
mediately to promise obedience 10 those
instructions, or resign his seat in the U.
S. Senate; believing any other course
violation of one of the fundamental
principles of the party, alike cherished
by wings and democrats. ..
q. That, the thanks of this meeting
be and are hereby rendered to Gen.
LEWIS CASS, of Michigan, for his
patriotic letter in defence of the Union
and the constitutional rights of the par
ties to the national compact.
The following is the letter sent by
DR.. Lowry to Col. Benton, but (which
he refused to touch, saying he did not
receive letters from man that deman-
ded an answer with q six barrel revolt
yer under his coat"
The Hon. Thomas H. Benton:
/. Were you or were you not dis
obeying the instructions of the Missou-
ri Legislature, when you voted to re-
cede from the Missouri Compromise?
See Congressional Globe, page 1919
August, ls4s.
2. Were you or not misrepresenting
: the wishes of your constituents, when
you voted with the abolitionists, Messrs.
Baldwin. BENTON, Clark, Davis OF
Massachusetts,, Hale and Upham, 10
give negroes the right of suffrage in
Oregon territory? See Congressional
Globe, page 1902, Aug. 25, ls4s.
8. Have you or have you not said,
that the last Legislature of Missouri
who instructed you to vote against the
Wilmot proviso were fools or knaves,
and by consequence ali those who I'M
+ dcrstandingly support those Resolutions
are fools or rosues also?
4. Did you or did you not say, in
private conversation, that the resolutions
above alluded to had an aim at the dis.
solution of the Union, and were trea.
sonable in their tendency, and that Pres.
ident Taylor ought to hang those who
sustained them, and that by Cd you
would assist him to do sol
5. Have you or have you not said. in
your Jefferson City speech, that, "it i:
absurd to deny 10 Congress the power
to legislate as it pleases upon the sub
ject af slavery in territories? Thereby
showing yourself to be in common par
lance, a Wilmot Provisosl!
6. Did or did you not assert in your
Jefferson City speech, that Mr.. Jefier
son was the writer of the Ordinance o.
1887, when in fact; if history be cor
rect, Nathan Dane of Massachusetts i.
y the real author of tina, Ordnance, anc
} he pressed it through Congress while
Mr.. Jefferson was in Francel
9 T.. Were yon or were you not il
f 1910, an advocate Of the states RICH
, doctrine, and prided yourself on being
the proiege of Nathaniel Macon anC
f John Randolph of Roanoke, &C., anc
/. you are now the advocate of consoli
r dated government, and the would be
0 leader Of your friends, the Wilmot pro
$ visois's and abolitionsts Of the North
d 8. Does the political history of the
n United States Of America give a par
s a!lel of any United States Senator, be
}, fore yourself so disgracefully denounc
!. ing the Legislature who elected him
0 as fools or knaues, and after addressing
D his constituents, contemptuously wall
:. off and refuse 10 hear his equals renl,