, 1864-06-11
The radical delegation from Missouri pre-
pared paper to present to the Convention,
which concludea AZ follows:

The radical delegation from Missouri pre-
pared paper to present to the Convention,
~ hlch concludes AZ follows:
"We are firmly Impressed that 1t is the sctt!ed
conviction Of tho people no represent, TIA. they
and the entire unconditional Union elem ent Of the
Southern States have had from the South no ials
t,anal advisers; that the parsons from taeir aec-
tion OF country who have held that re1ssfon arc
1ess in sympathy with tten than With their enc
as misfortune for which the President was not
primarily respoHsible the Eeenlt has been degree
81 :nju.tice Il the hands Of the National E1ecuye
ating. THEY arc persuaded that tho chief respon-
sibilitJ for .ths v1ungs they hare endured resta
@ ssaud Eve ssa a Se
r1ss and freedom, but who hava In tact been the
sss as ape s .aSee SO
thote We represent, that wa doubt not We would
BE- jnstined IN asking some assurance from tais
msy be in Its power TO bring about cabinet re-
form in the particular alluded to al condition to
I've W Woala. thertfo.e, say in aayance, from
desire to deal in perfect c1udor, that while We
cnme to urce The claims Of no favorable candidate
ton and harmony among Union men, that wo uure'
eervedly dccaEc onr &c idiness to support any nan
| or men, who n,ay be pnt In nomination BY tats
ha,e Ia a'1 Been conterdns.' Va must insist upoa
| uIeipg Cpun the Convention. IN Case Of our aQr
mission that It take eteps with rcisrence to sn:h
| reform. We esy this now because tue opposing
| delegation, being made up ofths supporters and
ra,t{zans Of the Cabinet members Eeferred;to. the
! Two delegations ara propeIy TO- be recaFueh as
representatives ofdytrse policies; one coaserya-
tive reactsonary, and altita practical bearings,
IA Tie of an p8sa & b &c Fsd
ical men cye1ywhere The course Of this conVen-
tiop. OF the admission Of one delegation and the
rejection Of the other, will necessarily, and as we
believe Hshtfully, be Interpreted ~ its decision
between those policies.
ave 60 not complain thst this should be tho
ror shrink from the position in which 1t places
ue, believing ~ ra do, that lbs issue involved IL
one OF such gravity as to demand tho careful con.
stderatiop and dednita dtclston OF Convention
vbIch proposea the selection o. I eandtdat- whom
Upion men are to support fos The Ohiel Mas1atsa-
cy Of the nation, and tnat me eanuiuatg ~ stso 70
xh1ch nolfcY be should sustain and the friends Of
whirh f. ehould support. VIC are frank, there.
fn7e ia say thtt ve arc willing to accept the ground
tales ~ The Convention upon tho question q GU.
.du1t son OF exclusion ae to It's position with fct
erenee to ths policies rsiesa ,.ee snd "a enfn r.
doubtless, Will be tho conettost4on p'aceo oa w
actIon bT tho country At large-.
I've Tould farther declare In advance that "
! esnnnt consent to accept seats, or Ia any way di
| yi3e fhe representation Of MAsocn with tho CON
testing dslegstion which IepIeasnts: as 70 osneyc
w;t3 11 thn h, 'Coposthead 'DerScraey, and whose
r,oner nj, ~ X therr still. The difference ID one
- pa h.Tn aid aboyc. Of principle a. we'll as Q
| no,ieT of rcu. Il ia the dlfe1encs between prog
| rrrss grI rra ction. between freedom a1u shTeEJ
between uncordaooA loyal J ana an e1s7 tolers
The issue, In our Judgment, itsone WHICH me1lfs
| darfaJon