Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1852-09-30

its existence We'd with each other in their
devotion and strict adherence to the doc
trines contained in them. In this State
whatever may have been done or said by
one party against the other, both have al
ways stood shoulder to shoulder, and acted
together with the Republicans, and against
the Federalists, whenever the Federal Gov
ernment attempted to encroaeh upon the re-
served rights of the States, or upon her IN
stitutions, recognized by the Constitution.
During the memorable discussion in Con-
gress on the Missouri question, the federal
party were all against Missouri and in fa-
vor of restriction; and the Republicans in
and out of Congress with few exceptions
for us. All, every body here, then denied
the power, and sided with the republicans.
Whe could be found at that day is assert the
doctrine that Congress had the constitution
al power to pass the resolution? Such
politician could not then be found in the
State.
Ipresume no one has forgotten the ex-
citement created in the slaveholding States
by the pres entation of abolition petitions by
Adams and others i'll congress and pressing
that body to receive and act upon them as
other petitions? Congress then refused 10
receive and act upon them, upon the ground
that the petitioners were asking congress to
do an unconstitutional act by invading the
constitutional rights of the South. Who
amongst us then of any party, appreciated
the course of Mr.. Adams? Not one. The
federalsts and fanatics of the north and east
were clamorous for the right of petition on
that as upon all other subjects, and contend
ed that such petitions ought to be respect
fully received and acted upon as other petit
tions, and amongst those who so thought
was General Scott, as we learn by his own
letter. Again in 1888 and 1910, when
Gov. Seward, being then Governor of New
York, was refusing to deliver up slaves es-
capped to New York upon the ground of
his higher law authority and which he yet
asserts, how did Missouri act? She acted
as she always acted on that subject, by pas
sing at the session of 1888 and also in 1910,
a set of resolutions asserting the rights of
the State, and repeling the idea of aggres-
sion upon those rights in most decided Ian
guage; to these resolutions all parties
. agreed. The were not thought to contain
notification, but to contain the true doc
trine.
Wnen the Wilmot provso was pressed
in Congress and the rights Of the citizens Of
the Slaveholding States threatened Missou-
+ ri, to be consistent with herself, and to as.
sert and keep alive great cardinal princi.
pie of all republicans before that day. and tc
instruct her Senators in Congress to act il
such manner as to keep the most secure
the institutions of our own State, passed
the Jackson resolutions;- soon after thei
passage, for the first time in the history o.
: Missouri, the doctrines they contained were
o denied, and their friends and supporters as
sailed and denounced as nullifers.
: They contain no doctrine or sentiment no
v found in the Virginia and Kentucky resolu
It tions, or in the resolutions of our own State
= passed in 1888 and 1910, so far as relate
l. to resistance to the act of the federal gov
i ernment, and yet they are assailed and de
n nounced as containing the doctrine of nulli
i fication. And we already hear their repea
% threatened in certain quarters by certai
t, politicians, Notwithstanding both politics
S parties in this State are pledged to abid
o the compromise as fnality, and to discour
: tenance the further agitation of the SLAYER
: question in any form whatever.
N If such an attempt is made, every reput
i lican of all parties ought, and think wi
n resist it,--every consideration Of consiSter
! cy and self-respect requires it. By repeal
~ ing these resolutions we again stir the wa
ters of bitter strife-place the State of Mis-
p souri, in false position before her siste
of StateS-because by repeating the Jackso
ID resolutions we repudiate the doctrine of tn
N Virginia resolutions, which no one callin
IN himself republican, wishes to do. Ever
- consideration, in my judgment requires til,
,r their repeal should be resisted by every tru
in republican.
to There are other subjects of vital impol
tance now engaging the public mind, but III
,e want of time and the extended length {
t, this communication, admonshes me to fol
ID bear further remarks. / am, gentleman
in respectfully,
of Your fellow-citizen,
Ill JOHN b. CLARK.
~ E5Mrs. Prewett, of the Yazoo Whig,