Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1860-06-07
Senator Green and Gen. Clark on the
Charleston Convention.

lowing remarks Of senators in reference TO
my course as member of the Charleston
Convention, which renders it necessary, in
my judgement, for me 10 make an expla-
natien in regard 10 what did and said
concerning the majority and minority plat
forms, and the reasons that controlled me:
.. Mr.. Pugh. "The majority that reported
the platform was composed Of seventeen
delegates from seventeen States. In the
first place, Maryland and Missouri did not
endorse the action of their committee men.
Mr.. Green. That brings me up.
Mr.. Pugh. Wait moment. | am
going 10 tell you something about Missou-
ri. When the second majority report was
read, the committee man from Missouri
rose and said that, if he should get an op-
psrtunity, he would move TO strike out the
third resolution declaring Congress should
protect property in the Territories; end he
further stated that Missouri prefer
red the minority report. Ibelieve that is
the very language he used. fnot, can
be corrected.
Mr.. Green. l will correct the senator.
General Clark, who was that spokesman,
did say that he did no, desire the third res
olution, because he thought the nthe- reso
lulIons went far enough, and came 10 the
measure Of the Missouri resolutions.
wish 10 read The Missouri resolutions, so
that the senator may see what Missouri
instructed.
- Mr.. Pugh. cannot give way 10 have
the Missouri resolutions read thought
you were going toread Gen. Clark's speech
Mr.. Green. Not at all. You state that
Missouri was divided. Iwant 10 show thai
Missouri was not divided, except by de-
lection of the delegates.
MIR. Pugh. So the senator may call it.
Mr.. Green. When this resolution wa,
passed, ard after the delegates were APP
pointed, it became o matter of surprise thai
certain men had got in who had not beer
democrats for ten years. They got up ant
pledged themselves; and said: Your res.
elution is instruction enough; do not instruc
for any persons; we will vote for mob rdy
unless he endorses this resolution" Here
is:
ResoIre3, That tbs democratic party o.
Missouri hold these cardinal principles or
the subject Of Slavery in the Territory; l.
That Congress has no power TO abolish sin.
very in any Territory; 2. That The Terrific
rial legislature has no power 10 abolish
slavery in any Territory, nor 10 prohibit in
PRODUCTION of slaves therein, nor any power
TO exclude slavery lhsrefrom by unlriendly
legislation, nor any power 10 destroy oil
impair the right Of property in slaves BY
any legislation whatever"
That was the doctrine of Missouri; snt
her representatives,, il they departed from it
departed from their duty.
Mr.. Pugh. Nilsson may take he
delegates in hand at her own convenience
Have no lime for that just now. Ii have
missiated what General Clark said, should
be very happy TO be corrected; because hi
was at q great distance from me, and it wa,
reported 10 me afterwards by others more
distinctly even than heard: but | under
stood him 10 say that, if he had an oppor-
tunity, he would move 10. strike that reso-
luton cut. and that Missouri, as the mat
ter then stood, preferred the minority plat
form. He was her man on the committee.
At all events, one-haf her delegation were
against the majority platform, and ene-hall
of Maryland"
Mr. Pugh is in error in asserting that
ever SAID | preferred the minority plat
form or report of the committee on resolu-
tions in that Convention. said precisely
the reverse. What did say was: ''That
asI voted for the majority report as Sc
ries in committee, in preference to the MI
nority report, reserviDg 10 myself in com
mittee, the right 10 object TO the third res
olutien on The subject of protection. This
did in Convention, remarking at The time
that, while preferred the majority TO the
minority report as series, l, nevertheless
did not give the third resolution in the ma
jority report my hearth sanction, and that
i'll got an opportunity, l would move to
strike out, or ask separate vote on it,
do not distinctly remember my words, but
am sure here give the substance Of what
said IN tha. connection.
further stated ''that a majority Of the
Missouri delegation prefsrred on that sub.
iect i. e. protection) the resolutions IN tbs
minority report"
speak from memory, not having ever
seen report of my remarks; but am sure
] give the substance, il not the words.
could not have expressed myself as
Mr.. Pugh says he understood ne, for vo-
ted against both minority reports in Con
vention, as did my colleague, Mr.. Craig
making in the Missouri delegation major
lily against both minority reports. The vote
of Missouri on the minority report was five
against to four for them, whatsver may bt
the report as published: Of this am GER
tain, and SO is Mr.. Craig, with whom have
Consulted, that the foregoing ISL substance
what | said in Convention, as set forth.
1t is proper / should state that my opposi-
tion 10 the third resolution was not because
l doubted the power of Congress to protect
slaves as well as other property in the Ter
. ritories, or wherever else its constitutional
power extended, but it was because |
deemed it an impoliiic and unnecessary res.
olution in the platform in addition TO the
other resolution, which were ample in my
judgement, and went the full length that
Missouri had gone in her platform on that
subject; as one of her representatives