Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1858-06-07

subject is. how the Chicago Tlmes-under-
stood TO he under the influence Of Judge
Douplss-advised shall not pause to con-
I slider Gat question. | can only repeat what
is known perhaps to every man familiar with
Illinois politics, that that paper is under the
i,aueoce Of Judge Douglas. 1t is the organ
now, Of the Douglas wing of the Democracy,
10 that city. 1t is in its confidence; It is now
doing battle fast and furious 10 support OF
that interest, and AS | gather from the
papers-in hostility to the friends OF the Ad-
minstration. But let that pass.
The next question is, did the Chicago
Times contain such an article? You know
how difficult it is TO procure copies OF these
pa pers after the lapse of considerable time.
| made nv best endesvors to get hold of that
paper. but was unsuccessful for long time.
The gentleman, however, Mr.. Marshall, in
his speech, published an article from che
Chicago Times. of the 18th OF O;tober, dit
ferent from that which was ascribed to II
hy Mr. Calhoun. | know that that article
does not supported the allegation. But why
was that article selected? The gentleman
says in his speech that he selected 1t because
he understood that Mr.. Calhoun had given
the date of that paper as being the paper
containing it.
Mr.. MARSHALL, of Illinois. Let me state
to the gentleman-
Mr.. SMITH, Of Virginia. quote what you
say IN your speech.
Mr. MARSHALL, of Illinois. Let me state
the fact.
Mr.. SMITH, of Virginia. ] will state it
myself. The article was selected because,
a. the gentleman represents 10 his speech, 1t
appeared 10 the paper vi the date designa-
I'd by Mr. C,.hJun. Well, l believe MIR.
Calhoun dad designate such q date. lie spoke
from memory, however. lit spoke from III
formation as to the contents of paper pub.
llshUd last year; and the thing remained IN
that indefinite and uncertain shape up to q
recent hour, A short time ago, however,
received an Illinois paper. know that geo.
teman will scout. the authority, IS it Is q
Back Republican paper. received 1t, and
il furnished me, for the first time, With crit
icIsm on my course, and on the speech Of the
gentleman from Illinois, which aroused me
u this exposition.
Mr. KILGoRE. object to the gentleman
from Virginia reading from Black Republl-
can papers here.
Mr.. SMITH, of Virginia. | read from the
, Springfield illinois, State Journal of the
, 18th OF May, 1858. The editor says;
We give the FIRST paragraph from the Times S
. article:
.ln a speech delivered in the House OF Repre-
! sentatlyes by Mr.. William Smith, OF Virginia
otherwise called Extra Billy'-he is reported
as having said that tue mode adopted by Cal.
noun and.hIs Lecompton associates in not sub.
uniting the Lecompton Constitution TO vote
OF the people was adopted because il was sug.
: ! 4 b,. Times LIhIch
2 sed by Calhoun to express the opinion OF Judge
/ Douglas on that point
We did not meet with this statement BY Mr.
D Smith until we saw Il quoted in speech by MIR
I Marshall, of this State, who quoted II 10 brand
{ II as II deserved But having met 1t, we now
nave 10 state that il IS utterly destitute OF truth
, No article OF the kind ever appeared in the
. Chicago Times From the earliest meeting OF
> the Convention 10 lis adjournment, We always
assumed It 10 be an ascertained fact THAI the
Convention would submit the constitution and
the whole OF il, TO the people OF Kansas for re-
lection or approval
The Times. il will be seen, talks out in hat
denial OF this with an immense amount OF EN-
pAass.'
Tue editor of the Journal proceeds
1t may be iOTgellulness on the part OF the
Times, but IL is nevertheless lact that the or
. gan of Senator Douglas did, in the first place,
d. charge. by Mr.. Smith, come ont against a
general submission OF the Lccompton Constitu.
ton. we do not know anything about the let.
ter which Calhoun wrote 10 Douglas, though il
Is understood IN town here that such letter was
written Neither do We know anything about
the failure of Douglas TO respond 10 the plan 10
be pursued but IL IS fact, which the Chicago
Times cannot successfully contradict, that that
sheet, about that time dill publish such an edi-
tonaI Mr. Smith refers TO. The editorial
was OF such remarkable character that We cut
/; out and put tin our scrap-book for safe keep
ing. We nave the article before US now, and
ice following are paragraphs taken from it
We think the Convention that will frame
the new constitution IN Kansas will exhibit far
more regard Tor pubic tranquility and public
honesty, by conducting their proceedings with
out any reference 10 the Topeka adhsrents; and;
as they nave declared 1t shall never 20 into
operation IN the State, We think there is about
as much proprety IN submitting il TO their ap.
proval d. there would be in submitting il to the
approval OF the inhabitants Of the Feee Is.
lands
AS the adherents of the Topeka Conypn.
ton refused 10 partIcl pate IN the election of
delegates. and are sworn 10 resist the rev State
government when established they have no
right 10 D" Consulted IN Tue 10TH atlOn OF tnat
State government
IL will be Observed that the paper vindi-
Gates what ! stated ss u the course OF the
Chicago Times:
The gentleman emphaticalIy says:
The most amazing fact 10 reference 10 this
clumny IS that no such article as the one indI.
Gated by the honorable gentleman from Vir.
gInla has ever, at any time, appeared in the col.
umns OF the Chicago Times. This fact, at
least, II 1t existed could be- easily proven; and
DEFY the gentleman TO produce the evidence
II ne fails, which ne most assuredly will, the
charge IS not only shown 10 be false, but utter.
Iy destitute Of foundation or plauslbiIty from
the beginning.
To this | have only to say that, haviug no
personal knowledge myself, and acting ne
ce7sarl!y upon the information Of others, a.
the gentleman himself does, furnish a com
picte answer h the paragraph quoted, ia the
extracts have read.
Mr.. MARSHALL. of Illinois Does the gen.
tIemhn give the date Uf the Chicago Times 10
which that article appeared?
Mr.. SMITH, Of Virginia. Only as sta
ted
Mr.. MARSHALL, Of Illinois. Have you
given any date?
Mr. Smith, OF Virginia No, sir; only a,