Daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1859-1865, 1861-08-17

1t preSumabIS that In suCu an S
State of Delaware or Maryland coulo De
transferred without their assent. If not
true of them neither was it true OF the
State of Virginia. On the hypothesis that
, we were the legitimate government of Viz
ginia, could any compromise be made to
transfer Virginia without the consent OF
our government here!
They had been told that the people arc
clamorous for immediate action. He had
endcavored to find out if this was an i'm
aginary or Il real clamor. When people
are oppressed, or desire n grand object
through their Representatives, it has been
customary to present their petitions for
that purpose. Had q solitary petition
been offered here?
A MEMBER said some three or four had
been offered here, signed by some seven
hundred names.
Several members volunteered to give the
gentleman information as to the willing
ness of their constituents to sign such pc
titiOns.
Mr.. PoLsLEY resumed: Well, then, here
were seven hundred out of some $4,000,
who had petitioued them on this subject.
The Speaker followed at some length in
Il criticism upon the course of the Hon. w.
G. Brown, of Preston, for attempting, rs
he said, to influence members of the Legis-
lature to go for an immediate division.
lie had been told that Senator Johnson, of
Mo-, had expressed an opinion in favor of n
division nf this State, and that opinion was
used us an argument here. Who was Sem
ntor JOhnson2 He was a nephew of Ex-
| Gov Jos. johnson, of this State. Senator
johnson was found alongside of John G.
Breckinridge, and others like him, and was
secessionist, and gave that advice be-
cause, if acted upon, it would destroy
public confidence in this body and our
government here.
Mr.. CARLILE wished to say word in
justice to Senator johnson, but
| Mr. PoLsLEY declined to give way. He
| insisted that by the Union men of the coun-
try Senator Johnson was regarded as Sc
cessionist; and his proposition was the
very identical advice he would expect to
hear from every secessionist in the land
Let him inquire if there was a solitary
| Senator in Congress, or member OF the
! House of Representatives, who was in ia
vor of immediate action towards division
of this State who could be relied on as
sound and loyal. No, sir; all such had
advised them to adhere to the position they
had now assumed. They had now the sup
| port of public opinion, and let them main
! tain it. Mr. Polsley concluded without be-
| ing able, on account of i'll health, to finish
! his remarks.
Mr.. HUBBARD, of Ohio, followed, apollo
gising for succeeding Mr.. Polsley upon the
same side of the question. He went back
and reviewed the early steps taken in the
movement here innugurated, and argued
from the language of the call OF the first
| Convention, and that of the addresses of
| the Central Committee, and the resolution
of the first Convention, that 1T was not IN
augurated not for division of the State, but
re organization of Il government for the
whole State, and the support of the Gener-
al Government in putting down rebellion.
He alluded to the resolutions of Mr..
Farnsworth, declaring that the object OF
rc-orgunizing the government WAS to OBJ
tain the division of the State, which were
laid upon the table by n vote of some fifty
odd to seventeen. He criticised the course
of Mr. Lewis, of Harrison, in relation To
his former position upon this question,
and referred to a card that gentleman had
published denouucing the action of the
first Convention.
Mr. LEWIS said that the card referred to
would show that he was opposed to Il dis
! Indignation Of the State at that time, which
he understood the Convention to favor,
because he believed it would then have
been unconstitutional; but when the re-
organization of the whole State was sug-
ges:cd he saw that an object which he had
| long desired might he accomplished con-
stitutionaily, and he had more than once
expressed regret that he had at first mis-
understood the object of the movement.
Mr.. HUBBARD, resuming, said his ohjec-
ton to action now in the direction of
division was that it would embarrasS the
n Ir1ry
belliou, and if he did not believe this he
would make no objection whatever. He
wanted to know of gentlemen if the regu-
lar State government now in operation
here was destroyed how could the remaiu-
der of the State ever be restored to the
Union. The President of the United States
had said that this movement here was worth
more to the Government than an army with
banners. He regretted to have heard the
suggestion that upon the erection OF a new
State, and the fixing ofthe boundaries at the
Allegheny, our young men would rally TO
that barrier to defend us. Why, sir, what
would you have thought if the people
of Ohio had rallied to the Ohio river, aud
said: "Herc we will defend the UniOn."-
He wanted them not to stand still but to go
on until the loyal people of all the State,
and of all the South, should be liberated
from their present oppression. When this
had been done he was willing to go TOR n
division, but not till then He felt that he
was pledged to every Union man in Vir-
GINA to press forward their dcliverauce to
n final Uonsummation. 1t was not ones
ton of self interest, but of duty to the
whole country. He wanted them to real
ize that they were not a third party, but
they were part of the government, and
their highest duty was to the Constitution
of the United States. He regretted that it
had been doubted that the government
would not be successful in the contest
lie himself had no doubt. He knew of no
way to restore the Union except for the
loyal people of the seeded States to reor-
organize their State governments; and now
that they had inaugurnted this general
-