There is a large and respectable portion of the Whig party (much larger than is generally supposed, I am, from indubitable evidence, induced to believe), not only in this county, but in Goochland and Hanover, who consider this question of paramount importance, so much so as to induce them to hesitate in casting their vote for a candidate unconditionally and "unqualifiedly" opposed to them on this important measure. Indeed I have, on several occasions, heard gentlemen of considerable influence, who have uniformly cooperated zealously with the Whig party, and who consistently advocate and support its prominent measures, declare that the vital importance of this subject to the particular interests of the Southern portion of this Confederacy, and the dependence arising from our peculiar institutions, under the present aspect of political affairs, for support and balance of power, has induced them to waver in their allegiance to their party, and produced in their minds a condition of doubt and uncertainty as favorable to the success of the opposite party as injurious to the prospects and organization of our own. This is the prolific source of the numerous calls for a convention for the purpose of selecting a suitable candidate to represent this congressional district, and not "individual attachments," as represented by the Whig. I believe that an answer favorable to the views of those gentlemen will insure your re-election without the least difficulty, and an adverse one will detach a "segment of a larger vote" than the nomination of either Rhodes, Daniel, Lyons, or Fleming, with you in the field. For myself, individually, though ardently in favor of this measure, I shall unhesitatingly yield a cheerful vote to the man who has battled so gloriously in defense of our cause; who has stood forth the fearless champion of our invaded rights; who, alike unseduced by the blandishments of pow er as unappalled by its frowns, has ever exposed its corruptions; who has, with chivalrous courage, unheeding the siren songs of place or office, lifted the veil that concealed the traitor, and exposed him in all his hideous deformity to the astonished gaze of a deluded people, and defied his impotent rage, be the response what it may. But why may not a Whig, without divesting himself of his party allegiance, without worshiping Baal, without being expelled from his political church, without yielding the cherished opinions of a lifetime on those subjects so dear to his heart, which he has ever been and will ever be proud to maintain-yes, why may he not favor the annexation of Texas to this Union? The fact of the purchase of Louisiana by Mr. Jefferson did not detract from his republicanism. May we not have a national bank and a tariff as well with Texas as without it? But verbum sap. Excuse the liberty I have taken, for I can assure you that nothing but an earnest zeal in your behalf, and a deep interest in the ensuing contest, would have induced me thus to trespass on your time and patience. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, Half Sink, December 23, 1844. MY DEAR SIR,-Your letter of the 19th instant has remained unanswered until this time, first, because my mind. and time since I received it have both been closely occupied in private matters which could not be neglected, and secondly, because, when I did answer it, I desired to do so at some length, not only that my views on that subject might not be misunderstood by any one voter of the district, but because my vanity (it may be) induced me to indulge the hope that when I presented all my objections to the scheme of the po litical, as well as the land and scrip stock-jobbers, for the annexation of Texas to the United States, they might not be without their influence in bringing your own mind to a different conclusion from that to which it seems to have arrived. In anticipation of presenting myself once again as a candidate for Congress, I not only recognize your right, but the right of every (even the humblest) voter in the district to know my opinions on this as on all other subjects upon which, as their representative, I might be called on to act; and, although the opinions I entertain relative to the Texas question might endanger my election, I can with conscientious truth declare that, if I were now a candidate for the highest office known to our institutions, and the result turned upon that question alone, I would not withhold my opposition to the measure to insure my success. I believe, not only as a matter of honesty, but of policy, that there is but one path for a public as well as a private man to tread, and that is, one of straightforward integrity and independence; for if he be honest in his views, however mistaken they may be, he can at least, at all times, give such reasons for his course as will satisfy all who are interested of the purity of his purpose; which, with a generous constituency, will cover a multitude of errors in which the heart does not participate. I have no prejudices and no interests to consult, and no feeling other than that derived from a desire to discharge my duty faithfully to my country; but I believe the success of that measure would prove ruinous to the best interests of the present states, particularly the Southern States, hazardous to the Union, and dangerous as a precedent, without one single benefit resulting from it. With these preliminary remarks, I proceed, then, to answer your inquiry, by declaring myself unconditionally, un qualifiedly, and unalterably opposed, not only to the Texas treaty, but to Mr. Benton's bill, Mr. M'Duffie's joint resolution, or any other scheme of annexation of the United States with Texas or any other foreign power that has been or can be devised; and I rejoice to have been the first in the United States, in public discussion, to have taken a decided stand against it, even before the treaty was concluded, my reasons for which I will endeavor to give as briefly as possible, so as to make myself intelligible. It must be admitted by all to be a question of the most delicate, interesting, and important nature, differing from all others that can arise during the term for which the comingin administration will be in power-not only involving the honor of the nation and the integrity of the Union, but, unlike the questions of Tariff, Distribution, or Currency, which may be settled to-day and unsettled to-morrow, as they may prove pernicious or beneficial, it is perpetual and unalterable when it is once settled. It becomes us, therefore, as a people (I will not say as a Southern people, because as yet we are, as I hope we shall ever continue to be one people, and as we must be, when wise counsels prevail and wicked men no longer bear sway), to look to this question in all its aspects and bearings before we conclude hastily upon it; and, while it is by no means my strongest objection, yet I take up first the question of expediency. In the first place, I prefer this Union as it is, and as it has been handed down to us, and as we were expected to hand it down "as a rich legacy unto our issue," to any other and all others that can be formed; and it is enough for me to know that, if the Texas scheme did not have its origin with, it has found in its negotiators and chief advocates only the interested land and scrip holders and political tradesmen, who have avowed, and daily do avow their anxious desire for a dissolution of our glorious Union, and to believe at the same time, as I do, that a dissolution would prove the first fruit of annexation. Can any observing or reflecting man have read the correspondence of the negotiator of the treaty, Mr. John Catiline Calhoun-as he was once characterized by the Globe and Inquirer for his supposed dark designs upon the Union, a suspicion from which he has to this very day never relieved himself, and which his State of South Carolina openly boasts -without being inevitably led to this conclusion? Look to his correspondence during the last spring with Mr. Pakenham, the British minister, the representative of a government known to be hostile to black slavery in all its aspects (I use the term black slavery, because I think there is less freedom, comfort, and happiness among their white. laborers or operatives than among our slaves, for whom they manifest so much sympathy), in which he opens, and thereby invites a correspondence on that delicate subject, which he has been clamorous in claiming to be purely a domestic question with which we could allow no interference. He not only opens a correspondence with Mr. Pakenham, which, to his credit be it said, he had the good sense and wisdom to decline, but in it he based the whole object of the treaty upon the ground of the extension and perpetuation of slavery; and while in one breath he declared that Texas was a sovereign and independent power over which Mexico had no claim and could exert no authority, either de facto or de jure, he in the next, even on the day after the negotiation of the treaty, dispatched a special envoy to Mexico to purchase her claims on Texas, and at the same instant of time the Executive threatened Mexico with vengeance and war if she should dare to attempt, during the pendency of the treaty, the recovery of her acknowledged |