Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1858-05-27
Accepting the Republicans Issue.

Accepting the Republicans Issue.
The journal Of Commerce" nationa
organ, printed ct Kansas City, Missouri
and edited by a Federal office holder, &C
eept, the Republicans Emancipation is'ue
as follows:-
But to return TO the pretext-the danger
Of selecting free soiler from this district.
We see that the ST. Louis Republican ha.
announced that "emancipation is 10 be the
issue" Where did that Journal get the
news?-for SO far as we know, the thing
has not been heard of in Jackson, Cass
Saline, Johnson, or any other county in this
district, save Lafayette, and we do not be-
lieve that any one out Of the meeting that
passed the resolution above, ever heard Of
it. We have noticed that the Republican
ha, been making this issue, but we deny It's
authority 10 dictate issues to the democratic
party of Missouri. We repudia,e the con-
Germ, not only as an enemy to the democrat
10 party, but as an enemy 10 everything but
Itself--as hostile 10 western Missouri in lis
policy, and as pesiilent in its influence upon
the democratic party. There is no such is
sue as emancipation in Missouri, outside Of
St. LOUIS land if the Republican is anxious
TO fight emancipatiOnists, why did it sup
port an avowed one for mayor of that city
but q short month ago? The democracy are
certaiEly at poor pass, if they must go to
the organ of Luther NJ. Kennett, the Know
Nothing, and George E. Taylor, the eman-
cipationist, 10 receive instruction as TO is.
sues. We warn the democracy against its
wlles. As long ago as the winter of 1856
II, we took occasion 10 enter our protest a.
gaInst the Republican, as not being entitled
TO democratic confidence, and we have had
abundant cause 10 renew our protest since.
II is doing more than any other paper in
Missouri 10 force the question of emancipa-
tion before the people of the State. Where
Is there candidate that stands on that plat
form? Where is the convention that has
made it question? Where is the press
that has made the issue? No candidate,
no convention, no press, outside Of ST.
Louis-and there at the last election we
find the Republican supporting an emanci-
pntionist for the first office in the city. Yet
in the face Of all this it has the impudence,
the efirontery and the venality TO tell the
people "they must accept the ISSUE" If
this is to be 80, will the Republican furnish
us the candidates, the platforms, the resolu-
tions, ETC., to make the canvass. We have
none in this part of the State, nor can they
be heard from.
In later number, the journal Of Com
merce" throws in q little more grape,
thus
II would be certainly, fine arrangement,
if the St. Louis Republican and its clique,
could SO far hoodwink the people of Missou-
II, as TO induce them to forget the grea, and
vital questions embraced in the Democratic
policy, and allow it TO fill the Legislature
and the Congressional Delegation with its
partizans. What glorious time that would
be for bank, stock jobbing and corporation
corruption. The great Democratic party
OF Missouri would then be demoraized and
broken up-the impossible barrier to the
Treasury would then be removed, and the
State be placed at the mercy of most I'M
scrupulous set of plunderers. The eternal
and internal "nigger," is now at rest in
Missouri, and the fangs have been extract
ed from this poisonous reptile in the nation
and are we TO become SO infatuated as
10 bring this question on ourselves, merely
10 crafty set of men who are of no sort Of
in peaceable and quiet state
Of public feeling. Or must we lash our
selves into fury over question that has
no practical existence. Out of ST. Louis, !
here is not press, not a candidate, not
public meeting that has ever preached this
question Of emancipation. What then, are
we to fight, and who must we fight9 What
IS The use Of swearing we will no, emanci.
pate, when nobody is asking US to do So
Or in other words, what is the use of the
people of Missouri making fools of them
selves? In the year of our Lord, 1858,
We know of but two emnncipationists, who |
lave been candidates for Office. Both were
running for the Office of Mayor Of ST. Louis
the Democrat supported one, and the Re- !
publican the other, and we are content TO
ct them occupy that position without dis
urbance from the balance Of the State
Only let the balance alone.