Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1860-05-17
THE BALTIMORE CONVENTION.
BALTIMORE, May 8.

other candidate. Mr.. Bell is second. The
contest between them is animated. Mr.
Mclean will have some votes, but all ide;
Of nominating him or any one else, with
references 10 the Chicago Convention is a.
dopted.
Two.thirds Of New York delegation are
for Mr.. Houston. They are for Mr.. Ev'
erett for Vice President. The Pennsylva
MIA delegation is divided between Bell and
Houston. So is the South generally, Ken
lucky being unanimously for Houston. II
is predicted that he will be nominated at
an early stage Of the balloting. No body
is for Bolts. The attempt 10 bring him for
ward, failed.
10 80, P. M.-The friends Of Bell and
Mclean are encouraged by diversions from
Mr.. Houston, whose supporters are some
what alarmed at the Platform Committee
having unanimously agreed To report the
Union, the Constitution, and the Enforce
naent Of The Laws as Platform. II is ex-
pec,ed that the Convention will be satisfied
with This.
BALTIMORE, May 10.
The Convention met at 10 o'clock. The
Chair presented letter from Judge Cham
bersi CT Maryland expressing regret at mol
being nble TO attend, and hoping that a wise
and patriotic result would be attained also
telegram from w. c. Hayes Fouck, Of
New York, arguing the Constitution and
WashingtOn's Farewell Address as suf.
fcient platform.
On calling the roll, delegates appeared
frnr 10 II,
were not represented yesterday.
Mr.. Ingersoll reported from the Com
mittee on Business the result Of their de.
hberaiions, which he said was character.
lied by great unanimiiy and patriotism
The report says that
WHEREAS, Experience has demonstra.
ted that all platforms adopted by political
parties have the effect 10 mislead, and to
cause political divisions, thus encourage.
ing geographical and sectional parties
therefore
RESOLVED, Tha. both patriotism and du-
ty required that they should recognize No
policy or principles but those resting on
the broad foundation Of the Constitution OF
the country, the union Of The States, and
the enforcement of the laws-lGreat up
plause and cheers and that as represen-
tatives OF The Constitutional and Union par
~. and Of the country, they pledge them
selves TO nsintain, protect and defend these
principles, thus sffording security OF home
and abroad and secure the blessings Of lib
erty 10 themselves and postsrity.
Adopted by exclamation. They reported
another resolution that each State should
determine for itself the mods Of voting,
whether by unit or Otherwise. This ex.
ecited considerable discussion, the minori,ies
Of delegations cOntending that its adoption
would place them at the mercy oftHe ma
joriiies, and thus s;ihs the expression Of
Their individual preferences.
Mr.. Warner of Massachusetts,, said he
came here 10 express The sentiments Of his
constituents. The resolution reported from
the committee was one of the bold party
tricks 10 place the minorities under con-
troll OF The maorilies. II his State had in
structed him for particular man, he would
obey the instruction.; but none such had
been given, and he desired that the dele
gates should vote in their Individual capaci.
iy.
Mr.. Pierce, Of Maryland denied that The
committee had any intention Of perpetra.
ting party tricks. 1t was mere question
of expediency. He thought there was 10
intention TO smother The voice of the minor.
lily. In his own delegation ii has been de.
termined that every vote should be allowed
10 indicate its preference.
Mr.. Partridge, of Miss, sustained the
report Of the committee. The question
was whether the delegations should deter.
mine how the voting was 70 be done, or
whether the Convention would do their
best 10 leave i! 10 the delegations.
Mr.. Moorhead, of N. C., wanted each
district 10 have IFS vote, whether for Mr..
Houston or FOR Mr.. Somebody else, A
voice-"Bsll,' Applau<s.1
Mr.. Moorhead, should say Graham.
(applauss.) Mr.. Moorhsad continued adj
vocaiing The voting by districts. aud opprs-
ing any attempt 10 silence the voice OF mi
norilies.
Mr.. Stevens Of New York. offered an a.
mendnent that each delegation be entitled
TO one vote.
Mr.. johnson offered al amendment that
each district be entitled 10 one vote.
Mr.. Cnnegys. OF Delaware, said his
State had q Congressional districts, and
the adoption of that resolution would de-
prive that State Of Two votes.
Mr.. Hill Of Georgia, advocated The reso-
luton Of the Committee.
Mr.. Brooks, Of New York, denied That
be had any intention 10 siihe the voice Of ,
minorities. He offered the previous ques.
zion on the resolution of ths Committee.
that each State at large and each district be
entitled 10 one vote.
MIR. Watson offered osa proviso tha, no S
delegate be deprived Of his individual vote &
without his consent. I
Mr.. Brooks accepted this amendment,
and withdrew his provso. {
]. A. Rockwell, of Connecticut, opposed a
allowing States not fully represented 10 cast
the entire vote for districts that were not
represented. (
Mr.. Mur,hy, of New York, offered a. {
a substitute, that each State be entitled 10