Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1853-11-10
GLASGOW, MISSOURI.
Thursday Morning, November 10, 1858
Senator Atchison-Nebraska.

SENATOR AlCHlsoH 81 pune III A1SAhs'o" VII
Monday last, and is to speak in Fayette |
next Monday, pursuant to invitation of {
some of the democracy of this county.
Mr.. Atchison, we presume, is on his way
10 Washington, and is speaking along to
give his followers the cue, as TO how to
de port themselves this winter. He has
been speaking during the summer to his
immediate constituents, and has mainly con-
fined himself 10 two subjects: the Pacific
Railroad, and the settlement Of Nebraska
Territory. Indeed, he was specially invi-
ted to speak on these subjects, because his
"soundness" was suspected. On the Paci-
fc Road question, he seems TO have given
better satisfaction to his friends in the
Platte country, than on the settlement of
Nebraska.
On the latter question, he has involved
himself in some inconsistencies which look
rather awkward, and which we have not
seen explained in any Of the reports of his
speeches.
During the last session of Congress 1--WE
believe) there was bill passed the House
Of Representatives for the organization Of
Nebraska Territory. 1t was kept back in
the Senate at the instigation of Atchison, as
is charged, until the closing night of the
session, when it was brought forward, and
he urged its adoption. The bill was known
as Halls bill, and simply provided an or
b gauic law for the territory, leaving slavery,
and other subjects to be arranged by the in
habitants Of the Territory. 1t is asserted
that Atchison was really opposed TO this bill,
and kept it back to so late an hour that it
was impossible to pass it, and knowing this
impossibilty, he pretended to favor the bill
and urged its passage.
Now, it seems the Honorable Senator
views have undergone change He does
not think the Territory open for settlement
at all, and is opposed to any organization or
settlement, until the Missouri Compromise
is repealed. He has backed square out
from his speech delivered in the Senate, just
at the close of the session, when he declared
a willingness to vote for Halls bill, (Which
did not touch the slavery question: and
also his willingness to abide by the MIS-
souri, Compromise. He will doubtless ex-
plain this on Monday.
Meantime, as he is giving tone to public
(Anti- Benton) sentiment, we commend to
his attention the following article from the
"Howard County Banner" of the 9th ult.-
The Banner" we presume, speaks the
Anti sentiment in this section, however
distasteful it may prove to Senator Atchi-
son. With the remark that we do not sup,
pose the writer had Senator A. in his mind's
eye when he indited the profound fact con.
tanned in the closing lines, we give the en-
tire article from the paper Of the date above
referred TO:
SETTLEMENT OF NEBRAsKA.-A careful
review of the federal policy in regard to
territorial organization leads us to the be.
lief that the general government will favor
the immediate settlement Of the Nebraska
Territory with due respect to the Indian
reservations. The act OF Congress of 1907
has been treated by Congress itself as
nullity and it is for all practical purposes a:
absolutely dead letter as the Connecticut
blue laws. Whatever opinions we have ex'
pressed inconsistent with the above we claim
the privilege of retracting.
We set out with the broad declaration that
a large portion of every territory organized
by Congress has been at the time of such
organic .tion and for long period afterwards
occupied by Indians-that the federal gov
ernment has repeatedly organized territories
without reference to the Indian title. w,
would ask what was the case in Utah ant
what is still the condition Of the lands with
in that territory. We think we are safe il
saving that the Indian title has not yet beef
extinguished 10 any part Of the lands therein
A u. States surveyor has never run lin
or laid off an acre of the public lands in Uta
and vet it is occupied and cultivated by tn
Mormons with the consent of Congress
although government has been given t
the territory, not solitary land Office ha
been opened within it. The same is tn
case with regard to California, though it ha
large Indian population. In the case
mentioned, the Federal Government has nc
even protected the Indians, no lands hav
been respected as resting place for them
and they have not a spot that they can ca
their own. The same is to great exten
the case in New Mexico, Oregon an
Washington Territories.
Nebraska can be occupied and organise
into Territory without the same iniustic
to the Indians that has been done IN the &C
enpation Of Utah and California. by treat