Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1856-02-28
Missouri Members Their Course on the
Election Of Speaker Mr. Lindley's
~ Position. o..
respcnece Of The Times.
wAsHIsoros, February 8, 1856


ring the long and arduous contest for a
Speaker Of the House Of Representatives.
may say with perfect confidence, that hey
arc popular and influential, and always alive
no, only to,hc interests of their constituents,
but 10 those of the country at large. They
are TO be relied upon in all conflicts with
sec,ionalism.
have heard several efforts of your i'm
mediate representative, the Hon. JAMES ].
LrsDLrr, and have been pleased with HIS
manly and independent course. l have
now before me his speech defending his po-
sitiOn in regard TO the Speakership, deliver
ed under the trammels Of the ten minutes
rule and all the disadvantages Of an excited
and restless House. His reasons for sus-
tanning MFR FULLER, instead of RICHARD
SON or Banks, ought to be conclusive to all
candid minds. Both of the latter were in
the position Of sectional men; the triumph Of
either was sectional triumph, and this Mr..
LlEDLrY endeavored to avoid by taking a
gentleman who stood firmly on National
grornds--one who supported the compro-
mise Of 1850, and who is against renewal
Of slavery agitation in any shape or FORM
In MIR. FuLLER's speech defending his po-
sition, he takes the true view of the subject.
He declares that, as slavery existed before
the constitution, it now extets independent
Of that instrument. TWAS however, so far
recognized by it as to make it an element of
political power in the Representative. He
therefore holds that, in the absence Of ex-
press authority, Congress has no right to
legislate upon the subject Of slavery. You
will see Mr.. FULLER's opinions at greater
length quoted in Mr.. Lindley's Speech
Whilst Mr.. Lindley thus sustained a true
national man for speaker-one in all respects
highly qualified for the position-he was not
willing TO endorse the Administration by
voting for its candidate, especially as Mr..
Richardson's opinion in regard TO the pow
ers of Congress over slavery were by no
means clearly defined. Mr.. R. had voted
for the Wilmot Proyiso, and Mr.. Fuller
had not. His record in this respect was
decidedly better than Mr.. Richardson's
The latter distinctly says, in reply to Mr..
Zoicoffer's question, 81 voted repeatedly
sto extend the same line (the Missouri line
West TO the Pacific Ocean. When | gave
those votes did no believe then, nor do
'believe noig, that violated the Constitution
of the United States. II you have power
under the Constitution, TO exclude SLAYER,
from half of territory, think you have
power to exclude from all, though such an
exercise would be unjust and wrong"
MIR. Fullerf in regard to this subjec
says:-"I hold, in the absence of expires.
authority, that Congress las no constitu
'iional right to legislate upon the subject o
slavery. Neither has the Ter.
'ritorial Legislature, in my judgement, any
right to legislate upon that subject, except
so far as it may be necessary 10 protect tht
citizens of the Territory in the enjoyment
of their property, and that in Pursuance o
Its original law as established by Congres
'sional legislation"
Here we have the respective position.
Of the two candidates: Fuller denying III,
right to exclude slavery in the Teroitory
and Richardson admitting that he not onl,
had voted for the Wilmot Proviso in al, bu
that he would have done SO again in 1850 i
necessary. Surely, as Northern man
with such sentiments as Mr.. Fuller avowet
it might rather have been expected tina
Southern men would have gone TO him rathe
than to Richardson, who may now take bacl
some Of lis words, but cannot repudiat,
his lastrecOrd. The South can judge whicl
Of the two ought to be trusted.
The Democracy, by their perversenes
exhibited disposition rather to see Banks
elected than any caucus nominees. They re
fused to aid in the election of Gov. Smith,
tried Democrat from Va, when within thei
reach; and finally enough Of them voted fo
plurality rule 10 carry it, when it was evil
dent that the result would enure 10 The ben
eft of the Abolitionists.
When brought to decide between cand
dates Thus situated, the constituents of Mr.
Lindley cannot fail to perceive that he made
the proper selection.
Nor could he consistently support Tn
Administration on account OF vacilatinl
policy on this subject. II was not simpl!
on account of the indefinite phrascology o
the Nebraska bill which allowed of one in
depreciation at the North and another at til
South, (well understood 10 be in accordance
with Executive policy, )but i. was its inter
'neddling in tie New YoOk struggle--ant
its temporizing policy in appointments t
ofT,oa o;xtipo fha Eraa Goilars Tho ,ksaf,e, !,