Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1851-04-24
GEN. CLARK'S ADDRESS.


mns this morning TO tho address Of General {
lark 10 his constituents, which wo publish
his request. But whilst we have consen.
ed to publish this document, as an act Of
ourtesy 10 It's suthor, and from willing,
Tess 10 allow all parties fair hearing
Trough our columns, we are not TO be I'M
Ierslood as endorsing lis positions, and least
If all such portions Of it as animsdvert upon
he conduct Of Senator Geyer.
The grardmcn Of The charge against MI
Ieyer is, that his letter 10 MI. Allen, oil ST.
Charles, which was read and published pen
ling the Senatorial election, was Inconsistent
with his subsequent letters TO Mr.. Broad |
head and TO tie editor Of this paper, in which
Mr.. Geyer avowcd himself as utterly oppos
ed to making the eonstituonalily or uncon>
stiutionalily OF the Wilmol pIoviso, test,
OF Wing orthodoxy. 1t is charged by Gen.
Clark that from the letter TO Mr.. Allen, it
was family deducbIe that Mr. Geyer favored
such TEST that his letter was so under
stood and acted upon by some wings and by
all the Democrats who voted for him. That
except for this understanding, those wings
and Democrats who so understood his pc
siion, would not have voted for him; and in
which event be could not have been elected.
That Mr.. Geyer and those who were espe
cialy in his confidence, had reason TO know
that Gen. CLARK aud those who concurred in
his views, and especially the Anti Benton
party, voted for him under The belief that he
favored the "Iesl, and that, therefore, Mr.
Geyer and his friends (raudulently concealed
his opinions on that subject. with a view TO
secure his election, by practising deception
upon the Ant>Benton party and upon Gen.
Clark and those who concutred with him on
that question. This we believe, is fair
and foil statement Of the substance Of the
charge, and it comes over q responsible
signature and from tangible source, we are
gralGed 10 have 50 fair sn opportunity to
reply 10 ii. Indeed, we have for some time
desired to see the imputatons upon Mr.
Geyer and his wing supporters in the Leg
stature, assume a tangible and definite form,
instead Of the lbellous rawlings Of the North
East Reporter, the Howard County Banner,
the Hannibal Courier, and their anonymous
correspondents.
At the first step towards rsluling these
calumnies, we publish this morning the let.
ter from Mr.. Allen 10 Mr.. Geyer, and re,
publish, entire, the letter from Mr.. Geyer to
Mr.. Allen, which is the basis Of the charge
|, hiss becn ALLEGED in certain quarters. that
ponion NJ Ills letter was Gsudplentlv
supnressed ard that only rarbled extracts
from il were reod 10 the Joint Session and
nublished. The fist part of the letter was
M, read n the Joipi Session. because il con,
ia ned nothing Of importance on the ques>
tio,s 4, issue. All of il. beginning with
the sentence. There is known 10 exist
amongst the wings" &C., was read and
published. 1t was only the portion prece>
ding that sentence which was not read to
the Joint session, and is now published for
the first tiine.y But the entire letter was
read by General Clark, c. F. Jackson and
many others, both wings and Democrats,
we believe, before or pending the Senatorial
election. There was no effort on the part
OF Mr.. Allen, or any friend Of Mr.. Geyer's,
so lar as we know, TO conceal the contents
OF the letter; on the contrary, it was written
by Mr.. Geyer Tor the purpose Of removing
any doub, there might be on the minds Of
pbJ ii'SH'SS' uS w NC Nt'"'Oh' vi NV euO
jeCls referred to. lie knew that many wings,
perhaps a majority OF them differed from him
as 10 the constlIutionalty Of the Wilmot
proviso. lie did mol know but that some oil
those who dissented from his views might
attach more importance TO the subject than
he did himself and desiring the support o.
no one under any misrepresentation Of hi:
position, he addressed tie letter 10 Mr.
Allen, for the purpose Of removing any sucI
doubt,
Bl, Gen. CLARK assumes that it was larl,
&c be inferred from this letter, that Mr. Gey.
or favored the ",es,,' and AYERS that he and
others so understood it. If any one eilhel
Wig or Democrat, so understood it, it wa
only because 'phe wish was father to the
thought" The entire letter is now before tn,
public. and we challenge the most ingenious
sophisl to draw any such reasonable deduc.