Page images
PDF
EPUB

Nays, 23; (20 from Slave States with Messrs. D LAWAP.K.-Louis McLane-1,

MAKYLAND.-Stephenson Archer, Thumas Bayly, Taylor of Ind., Edwards and Thomas of II.)

Thomas Culbreth, Joseph Kent, Peter Little, Raphael The Senate also voted not to recede froin its Neale, Samuel Ringgold, Samuel Smith, Henry R. Waramendment prohibiting Slavery west of Mis- field-9. souri, and north of 360 30', north Jatitude.

VIRGINIA.—Mark Alexander, William S. Archer, Philip

P. Barbour, William A. Burwell, John Floyd, Robert S. (For receding, 9 from Slave States, with Messrs. Garnett, James Johnson, James Jones, William McCoy, Noble and Taylor of Ind. : against it, 33—(22 Charles F. Mercer, Hugh Nelson, Thomas Nelson, Severo from Slave States, 11 from Free States.) The E Parker, Jas. Pindall, John Randolph, Ballard Smith,

Alexander Smyth, George F. Strother, Thomas Van remaining amendments of the Senate were Swearingen, George Tucker, John Tyler, Jared Williams then insisted on without division, and the -22. House notified accordingly.

NORTH CAROLINA.-Hutchins G. Burton, John CulpepThe bill was now returned to the House, Fisher, Thomas H. Hall, Charles Hooks, Thomas Settle,

per, William Davidson, Weldon N. Edwards, Charles which, on motion of Mr John W. Taylor of Jesse 'Slocumb, James 's. Smith, Felix Walker, Lewis N. Y, voted to insist on its disagreement to all Williams-12. but Sec. 9 of the Senate's amendments, by Yeas Erwin, William Lownd s, James McCreary, James Over

South CAROLINA.-Josiah Brevard, Elias Earle, James 97 to Nays 76: (all but a purely sectional vote : street, Chawes Pinckney, Eldred Simkins, Sterling Hugh Nelson of Va. voting with the North ; Tucker—9. Baldwin of Pa., Bloomfield of N. J., and Shaw Crawford, John A. Cuthbert, Robert R. Reid, William

GEORGIA.—Joel A. Abbot, Thomas W. Cobh, Joel of Mass., voting with the South).

Terrill--6.
Sec. 9, (the Senate's exclusion of Slavery ALABAMA.-John Crowell-1.

MISSISSIPPI.-John Rankin-1. from the Territory north and west of Missouri)

LOUISIANA.-Thomas Butler-1. was also rejected-Yeas 160; Nays, 14, (much

KENTUCKY-Richard C. Anderson, jr., William Brown, as before). The Senate thereupon (March 2nd) Benjamin Hardin, Alney McLean, Thomas Metcalf, Tunpassed the House's Missouri bill

, striking out stall Quarles, Geo. Robertson, David Trimble-8. ihe restriction of Slavery by Yeas 27 to Nays Cannon, John Cocke, Francis Jones, John Rhea—5.

TENNESSE".- Robert Allen, Henry H. Bryan, Newton 15, and adding without a division the exclusion

Total Yeas froin Slave Scates, 76 ; in all 90. of Slavery from the territory west and north of said State. Mr. Trimble again moved the ex- Nays— Against giving up the Restriction on clusion of Slavery from Arkansas also, but was

Slavery in Missouri : again voted down, Yeas, 12 ; Nays, 30.

New-HAMPSHIRK.-Joseph Buffum, jr., Josiah Butler, The Senate now asked a conference, which Clifton Clagett, Arthur Livermore, William Plumer, jr., the House granted without a division.

Nathaniel Upham-6.
The

MASSACHUSETTS (including Maine).–Benjamin Adams, Committee of Conference was composed of Samuel C. Allen, Joshua Cushman, Edward Dowse, WalMessrs. Thomas of Illinois, Pinkney of Maryland, ter Folger, jr., Timothy Fuller, Jonas Kendall, Martin and Barbour of Va. (all anti-restrictionists), on

Kinsley, Samuel Lathrop, Enoch Lincoln, Marcus Mor

ton, Jeremiah Nelson, James Parker, Zabdiel Sampson, the part of the Senate, and Messrs. Holmes of Nathaniel Silsbee, Ezekiel Whitman-16. Mass., Taylor of N. Y., Lowndes of S. C., RHODE ISLAND. - Nathaniel Hazard-1. Parker of Mass, and Kinsey of N. J., on the John Russ. Gideon Tomlinson--4.

CONNECTICUT.-Jonathan 0. Moseley, Elisha Phelps, part of the House. (Such constitution of the VERMONT.-Samuel C. Crafts, Rollin C. Mallary, Ezra Committee of Conference was in effect a sur Meech, Charles Rich, Mark Richards, William Strong–6. render of the Restriction on the part of the Clark, Jacob 11. De Witt, John D. Dickinson, John Fay,

New-YURK.-Nathaniel Allen, Caleb Baker, Robert House.) John Holmes of Mass., from this Como William D. Ford, Ezra'c. Gross, James Guyon, jr., mittee, in due time (March 2nd), reported that, | Aaron Hackley, jr., George Hall, Joseph S. Lyman, 1. The Senate should give up the combina- Robert Monell, Nathaniel Pitcher, Jonathan Richmond,

Randall S. Street, James Strong, John W. Taylor, Albert tion of Missouri in the same bill with Maine.

H. Tracy, Solomon Van Rensselear, Peter H. Wendover, 2. The House should abandon the attempt Silas Wood-22. to restrict Slavery in Missouri.

NEW-JERSZY.-Ephraim Bateman, John Linn, Henry 3. Both Houses should agree to pass

the

Southard-3.

PENNSYLVANIA.-Andrew Boden, William Darlington, Senate's separate Missouri bill, with Mr. George Dennison, Samuel Edwards, Thomas Forrest, Thomas's restriction or compromising proviso, Samuel Gross, Joseph Hemphill, Jacob Hibschman, excluding Slavery from all Territory north and Joseph Heister, Jacob Hostetter, William P. Maclay,

David Marchand, Robert Moore, Samuel Moore, John west of Missouri.

Murray, Thomas Patterson, Robert Philson, Thomas J. The report having been read, the first and Rogers, John Sergeant, Christian Tarr, James M. Wat most important question was put, viz:

lace-21.

0110.-Philemon Beecher, Henry Brush, John W. Will the House concur with the Senate in so much of Campbell, Samuel Herrick, Thomas R. Ross, John Sloane the said amendinents as proposes to strike from the fourth section of the Missouri) bill the provision prohib- INDIANA.- William Hendricks-1. Iting Slavery or involuntary servitude, in the contem- ILLINOIS. ---Daniel P. Cook-1. placed State, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes ?

Total, Nays, 87—all from Free States. On which question the Yeas and Nays wero (The members apparently absent on this injdeinanded, and were as follows:

portant division, were Henry W. Edwards of Yeas-Fur giving up Restrictions on Mis. Conn., Walter Case and Honorius Peck of N. Y. souri :

and John Condit of N. J., from the Free States ; MASSACHUSETTS. --Mark Langdon Hill, John Holmes, Walker of Ky., from the Slave States.

with Lemuel Sawyer of N. C., and David Jonathan Mason, Henry Shaw_4.

Mr. RHODE ISLAND.-Samuel Eddy-1.

Clay of Ky., being Speaker, did not vote.) CONNECTICUT.-Samuel A. Foot, James Stephens—%. This defeat broke the back of the Northern New-YORK – Henry Meigs, Henry R. Storrs-2. NEW.Jersky-Joseph Bloomfield, Charles Kinsey, Ber- resistance to receiving Missouri as a Slave aard Smith-3.

State. PENNSYLVANIA.—Henry Baldwin, David Fullerton--2 Mr. Taylor, of N. Y., now moved an amend. Total from Free-States 14.

ment, intended to include Arkansas Territor!

THE THIRD MISSOURI STRUGGLE.

EXTENSION OF MISSOCRI,

pass

ander the proposed Inhibition of Slavery west compromise, which were twice voted down by of Missouri; but this motion was cut off by the the Northern members, aided by John Randolph Previous Question, (which then cut off amend- and three others from the South, who would ments more rigorously, according to the rules bave Missouri admitted without condition or of the House, than it now does), and the House qualification. At last, Mr. Clay proposed a Joint proceeded to concur with the Senate in inserting Committee on this subject, to be chosen by balthe exclusion of Slavery from the territory lot--which the House agreed to by 101 to 56; kest and north of Missouri, instead of that just and Mr. Clay became its Chairman. By this stricken out by, 134 Yeas to 42 Nays, (the Nays Com tee, it was agreed that a solemn pledge being from the South). So the bill was passed should be required of the Legislature of Mis in the form indicated above; and the bill ad. souri that the Constitution of that State should mitting Maine as a State, (relieved, by a confer- not be construed to authorize the passage of ence, from the Missouri rider,) passed both any Act, and that no Act should be passed, Houses without a divison, on the following day. by which any of the citizens of either of the

Such was the virtual termination of the strug. States should be excluded from the enjoyment gle for the restriction of Slavery in Missouri, of the privileges and immunities to which they which was beaten by the plan of proffering in- are entitled under the Constitution of the United stead an exclusion of Slavery from all the then States.” The Joint Resolution, amended by federal territory west and north of that State. the addition of this proviso, passed the Honse It is unquestionable that, without this compromise by 86 Yeas to 82 Nays; the Senate concurred or equivalent, the Northern votes, which passed (Feb. 27th, 1821,) by 26 Yeas to 15 Nays-(all the bill, could not have been obtained for it. Northern but Macon, of N. C.); Missouri com

plied with the condition, and became an ac

cepted member of the Union. Thus closed the Though the acceptance of Missouri as a last stage of the fierce Missouri Controversy, State, with a Slave Constitution, was forever which for a time seemed to threaten - as so many settled by the votes just recorded, a new excite-other controversies have harmlessly threatened inent sprang up on her presenting herself to --the existence of the Union. Congress (Nov. 16, 1820),) with a State Constitution, framed on the 19th of July, containing the following resolutions :

The State of Missouri, as originally organized, The General Assembly shall have no power to

was bounded on the west by a line already laws, First, for the emancipation of slaves without the specified, which excluded a triangle west of consent of their owners, or without paying them, before said line, and between it and the Missouri, such emancipation, a full equivalent for such slaves so emancipated; and, Second, to prevent bona fide emi- which was found, in time, to be exceedingly grants to this State, or actual settlers therein, from fertile and desirable. It was free soil by the bringing from any of the United States, or from any of terms of the Missouri compact, and was also their Territories, such persons as may there be deemed to covered by Indian reservations, not to be be slaves, so long as any persons of the same description are allowed to be held as slaves by the laws of this state. removed without a concurrence of two-thirds

It shall be their duty, as soon as may be, to of the Senate. Messrs. Benton and Linn, Senapass such laws as may be necessary,

tors from Missouri, undertook the difficult task. First, to prevent free negroes and mulattoes from coming to, and settling in, this state, under any pretext of engineering through Congress a bill includ. whatever.

ing this triangle (large enough to form seven The North, still smarting under a sense of its Counties) withiu the State of Missouri; which defeat on the question of excluding Slavery from they effected. at the long session of 1835-6, 80 Missouri, regarded this as needlessly defiant, quietly as hardly to attract attention. The bill insulting, and inhuman, and the section last was first sent to the Senate's Committee on the quoted as palpably in violation of that clause Judiciary, where a favorable report was proof the Federal Constitution which gives to the cured from Mr. John M. Clayton, of Delaware, citizens of each State (which blacks are, in its Chairman ; and then it was floated through Beveral Free States), the rights of citizens in both Houses without encountering the perils of every State. A determined resistance to any a division. The requisite Indian treaties were such exclusion was manifested, and a portion likewise carried through the Senate; so Missouri of the Northern Members evinced a disposition became possessed of a large and desirable to renew the struggle against the further intro- accession of territory, which has since become duction of slaves into Missouri. Ai the first one of her most populous and wealthy sections, effort to carry her admission, the House voted devoted to the growing of hemp, tobacco, etc., it down-Yeas, 79; Nays, 93. A second at- and cultivated by slaves. This is the most protempt to admit her, on condition that she would Slavery section of the State, in which was expunge the obnoxious clause (last quoted) of originated, and was principally sustained, that her Constitution, was voted down still more de- series of inroads into Kansas, corruptious of cisively-Yeas, 6; Naye 146.

her ballot-boxes, and outrages upou her people, The House now rested, until a joint resolve, which earned for their authors the appellation admitting her with but a vague and ineffective of Border Rufians. qualification, came down from the Senate, where it was passed by a vote of 26 to 18—six Senators from Free States in the affirmative. Mr. The name of Texas was originally applied ra Clay, who had resigned in the recess, and been a Spanish possession or province, lying between succeeded, as Speaker, by John W. Taylor, of the Mississippi and the Rio Grande del Norte, New.York, dow appeared as the leader of the but not extending to either of these great rivere. Miss suri admissionists, and proposed terms of It was an appendage of the Viceroyalty of

THE ANNEXATION OF TEXAS.

ܪ

[ocr errors]

Mexico, but had very few civilized inhabitants ! other southwestern States, began to concentrate do'vn to the time of the separation of Mexico ! itself in Texas. The emigrants carried rifles from Spain. On two or three occasions, bands, many of them were accompanied by slaves; of French adventurers had landed on its coast, and it was well understood that they did not or entered it from the adjoining French colony intend to become Mexicans, much less to relinof Louisiana; but they had uniformly been quish their slaves. When Gen. Sam. Houston treated as intruders, and either destroyed or left Arkansas for Texas, in 1834-5, the Little inade prisoners by the Spanish military authori- Rock Journal, which announced his exodus and ties. No line had ever been drawn between destination, significantly added : “ We shall, the two colonies; but the traditional line be- doubtless, hear of his raising his flag there tween them, south of the Red River, ran some- shortly." That was a foregone conclusion. what within the limits of the present State of Of course, the new settlers in Texas did not Louisiana.

lack pretexts or provocations for such a step. When Louisiana was transferred by France to Mexico was then much as she is now, misthe United States, without specification of governed, turbulent, anarchical, and despotic. ooundaries, collisions of claims on this frontier The overthrow of her Federal Constitution by was apprehended. General Wilkinson, com- Santa Anna was one reason assigned for the manding the United States troops, moved gra- rebellion against her authority which broke out dually to the west; the Spanish commandant in in Texas. In 1835, her independence was Texas likewise drew toward the frontier, until declared ; in 1836, at the decisive battle of San they stood opposite each other across what was Jacinto, it was, by the rout and capture of the then tacitly settled as the boundary between the Mexican dictator, secured. This triumph was the two countries. This was never afterward i won by emigrants from this country almost disregarded.

exclusively; scarcely half a dozen of the old In 1819, Spain and the United States seemed Mexican inhabitants participating in the revoluon the verge of war. General Jackson had tion. Santa Anna, while a prisoner, under twice invaded Florida, on the assumption of restraint and apprehension, agreed to a peace complicity on the part of her rulers and people on the basis of the independence of Texas--a -tirst with our British, then with our savage covenant which he had no power, and probably enemies--and had finally overrun, and, in effect, no desire, to give effect to when restored to annexed it to the Union. Spain, on the other liberty. The Texans, pursuing their advantage, hand, had preyed upon our commerce during twice or thrice penetrated other Mexican prothe long wars in Europe, and honestly owed our vinces—Tamaulipas, Coahuila, etc., --and waved orerchants large sums for unjustifiable seizures their Lone-Star flag in defiance on the banks and spoliations. A negotiation for the settle of the Rio Grande del Norte; which position, mient of these differences was carried on at however, they were always compelled soon to Washington, between John Quincy Adams, Mr. abandon--once with severe loss. Their governMonroe's Secretary of State, and Don Onis, the ment, nevertheless, in reiterating their declaraSpanish embassador, in the course of which Mr. tion of independence, claimed the Rio Grande as Adams set up a claim, on the part of this their western boundary, from its source to its country, to Texas as a natural geographical mouth, including a large share of Tamaulipas, appendage not of Mexico, but of Louisiana. Coahuila, Durango, and by far the more imporThis claim, however, he eventually waived and tant and populous portion of New Mexico. And relinquished, in consideration of a cession of it was with this claim, expressly set forth in the Florida by Spain to this country-our govern- treaty, that President Tyler and his responsible ment agreeing, on its part, to pay the claims of advisers negotiated the first official project of our merchants for spoliations. Texas remained, annexation, which was submitted to the Senate, therefore, what it always had been-a depart- during the session of 1843-4, and rejected by a ment or province of Mexico, with a formal very decisive vote: only fifteen (mainly Southquit-claim thereto on the part of the United ern) senators voting to confirm it. Col. Benton, States.

and others, urged this aggressive claim of The natural advantages of this region in ( boundary, as affording abundant reason for the tiine attracted the attention of American adven- rejection of this treaty; but it is not known turers, and a sinall colony of Yankees was set that the Slavery aspect of the case attracted tled thereon, about 1819-20, by Moses Austin, especial attention in the Senate. The measure, of Connecticut. Other settlements followed bowever, had already been publicly eulogized Originally, grants of land in Texas were prayed by Gen. James Hamilton, of S. C., as calfor, and obtained of the Mexican Government, culated to "give a Gibraltar to the South," and on the assumption that the petitioners were had, on that ground, secured a very general Roman Catholics, persecuted in the United and ardent popularity throughout the SouthStates because of their religion, and anxious to West. And, more than a year previously, seve. find a refuge in some Catholic country. Thus ral northern members of Congress had united in all the early emigrants to Texas went pro- the following: fessedly as Catholics, no other religion being TO THE PEOPLE OF THE FREE STATES OF THE tolerated.

Slavery was abolished by Mexico soon after the consummation of her independence, when stituents and our country as members of the 27th Con

We, the undersigned, in closing our duties to our convery few slaves were, or ever had been, in Texas. gress, feel bound to call your attention, very briefly, to But, about 1834, some years after this event, a

the project, long entertained by a portion of the people quiet, but very general, and evidently con

of these United States, still pertinaciously adhered to,

and intended soon to be consummated : THK ANNEXATION certed, emigration, mainly from Tennessee and l or Texas to this Union. In the press of business inci

[ocr errors]

UNION.

*

*

*

*

[ocr errors]

lent to the last days of a session of Congress, we have the offections of her people are so closely entwined and so com not time, did we deem it necessary, to enter upon a pletely enfibred, and whose value is more highly appreciated, detailed statement of the reasons which force upon our

than ihat which we are now considering. minds the conviction that this project is by no means

“ It may not be improper here to remark that, during the abundoned : that a large portion of the country, inter- l last session of Congress, when a Senator from Mississippi proEsted in the continuance of Domestic Slavery and the posed the acknowledgment of Texan independence, it was Elave-trade in these United States, have solemnly and found, with a few exceptions, the members of that body rere inalterably determined that it shall be speedily car- ready to tuke ground upon it, as upon the subject of slavery ried into twer'ution, and that, by this admission of new

itself Slave Territory and Slave States, the undue ascend- lieving that these feelings influenced the New England Sena

“With all these facts before us, we do not hesitate in beency of the sture-holding power in the Government tors, but one voting in favor of the measure ; and, indeed, Mr. shall be secured and riveted beyond all redemp- Webster had been bold enough, in a public speech recen ly won !!

delivered in New York, to many thousand citizens, to declare That it was with these views and intentions that set that the reason that intluenced his opposition was his abhorVements were effected in the province, by citizens of the

rence of Slavery in the South, and that it might, in the event of United States, difficulties fomented with the Mexican

its recognition, become a slaveholding State. He also spoke

of the efforts making in favor of Abolition ; and that, being preGovernment, a revolt brought about, and an Indepen- dicated upon and aided by the powerful influence of religious dent Government declared, cannot now admit of a feeling, it would become irresistible and overwhelming. doubt; and that, hitherto, all attempts of Mexico to re

" This language, coming from so distinguished an individ nal duce her revolted province to obedience have proved as Mr. Webster, so fainiliar with the feelings of the North and unsuccessful, is to be attributed to the unlawful aid and

entertaining to high a respect for public sentiment in New assistance of designing and interested individuals in the misunderstood.

England, speaks so plainly the voice of the North as not to be United States, and the direct and indirect coöperation “We sincerely hope there is enough good sense and genuine of our own Government, with similur views, is not the love of country among our fellow-countrymen of the Northern less certain and demonstrable.

States, to secure us final justice on this subject ; yet we cannot The open and repeated enlistment of troops in several consider it safe or expedient for the people of the South to en States of this Union, in aid of the Texan Revolution; the such men as Webster, and others who countenance such dan

tirely disregard the efforts of the finishes, and the opinions of intrusion of an American Army, by order of the Presi- gerous doctrines. dent, far into the territory of the Mexican Government, The Northern States have no interests of their ourn which at a moment critical for the fate of the insurgents, under require any special safeguards for their defense, save only pretense of preventing Mexican soldiers from fomenting their domestic manufactures, and God knows they have Indian disturbances, but in reality in aid of, and acting liberal scale ; under which encouragement they have im

already received protection from Government on a most in singular concert and coincidence with, the army of the proved and tourished beyond example. The South has very Revolutionists; the entire neglect of our Government to peculiar interests to preserve : interesis already violently asadopt any efficient measures to prevent the most un- Bailed and boldly threatened. warrantable aggressions of bodies of our own citizens,

Your Committee are fully persuaded that this protection 10 enlisted, organized and officered within our own borders, her vest interests will be afforded by the annexation of Texas; and marched in arms and battle array upon the terri

un equipoise of influence in the hulls oj Cony, ess u ill le secured, tory, and against the inhabitants of a friendly govern

which will furnishi us a permunent quirunty of protection.ment, in aid of freebooters and insurgents, and the pre

The speech of Mr. Adams, exposing the whole system mature recognition of the Independence of Texas, by a

of duplicity and perfidy toward Mexico, had marked the snap vote, at the heel of a session of Congress, and that, conduct of our Government; and the emphatic expressions too, at the very session when President Jackson had, by

of opposition which began to come up from all parties in special Message, insisted that “the measure would

the Free States, however, for a time, nearly silenced the be contrary to the policy invariably observed by the

clamors of the South for annexation, and the people of United States in all similar cases;" would be marked

the North have been lulled into the belief that the powith great injustice to Mexico, and peculiarly liable to ject is rearly, if not wholly abandoned, and that, at the darkest suspicions, inasmuch as the Tequins were least, there is now no serious danger of its consummaulmost all emigrants from the United States, AND

tion SOUGHT THE RECOGNITION OF THEIR INDEPENDENCE WITH THE

Believing this to be a false and diingerous security; AVOWED PURPOSE OF OBTAINING THEIR ANNEXATION TO THE

that the project has never been abandoned a moment, UNITED STATES. These occurrences are too well known by its originators and abettors, but that it has been do and too fresh in the memory of all, to need more

ferred for a more favorable moment for its accomplish than a passing notice. These have become matters ment, we refer to a few evidences of more recent de of history. For further evidence upon all these and velopment upon which this opinion is founded. other important points, we refer to the memorable

The last Election of President of the Republic of Texas, speech of John Quincy Adams, delivered in the House of is understood to have turned, mainly, upon the question Representatives during the morning hour in June and

of annexation or no annexation, and the candidaie July, 1838, and to his address to his constituents, de

favorable to that measure was successful by an overlivered at Braintree, 17th September, 1842.

whelming majority. The sovereign States of Alabama, The open avowal of the Texans themselves—the fre. Tennessee, and Mississippi, have recently adopted Resoquent and anxious negotiations of our own Government lutions, some, if not all of thein, unanimously, in favor --the resolutions of various States of the Union-the

of annexation, and forwarded them to Congress. numerous declarations of members of Congress-the

The Hon. Henry A. Wise, a member of Congress frona tone of the Southern press-as well as the direct applica- when elected Vice-President, and who is understood to

the District in which our present Chief Magistrate resided tion of the Texan Government, make it impossible for be more intimately acquainted with the views and deany man to doubt, that ANNEXATION, and the formation of several new Slaveholding States, were originaliy the signs of the present administration than any other nempolicy and design of the Slaveholding States and the ber of Congress, most distinctly avowed his desire for, Executive of the Nation.

and expectation of annexation, at the last session of The same reference will show, very conclusively, that Congress. Among other things, he said, in a speech the particular objects of this new acquisition of Slave

delivered January 26, 1842: Territory were THE PERPETUATION OF SLAVERY AND THE “True, if Iowa be added on the one side, Florida will be CONTINUED ASCENDENCY OF THE SLAVE POWEER.

added on the o her. But there the equation must stop. Let The following extracts from a Report on that subject, gone-gone forever. The balance of interests is gone-the safe

one more Northern State be admitted, and the equilibrium is adopted by the Legislature of Mississippi. from a mass

guard of American property-of the American Constitutionof similar cvidence which might be adduced, will show of the American Union, vanished into thin air. This nust In with what views the annexation was then urged: the inevitable result, unless by a treoty with Mexico, THE SOUTH

CAN ADD MORE WEIGHT TO HER END OF THE LEVER? Let thic “But we hasten to suggest the importance of the annexation of Texas to this Republic upon grounds somewhat local in

South stop at the Sabine, (the eastern boundary of Texas,) while their complexion, but of an import infinitely grave and inter

the Norih may spread unchecked beyond the Rocky Mounesting to the people who inhabit the Southern portion of this gains AND THE SOUTHERN SCALE MUST KICK THE BEAN." Confederacy, where it is known that a species of domestic Finding difficulties, perhaps, in the way of a cessica by Slavery is tolerated and protected by law, whose existence is prohibited by the legal regulatiov s of oher States of this Con Treaty, in another speech delivered in April, 1842, on a federacy; which system of Slavery is held by all, who are

motion made by Mr. Linn, of New York, to stike out the familiarly acquainted with its practical etfects, to be of highly salary of the Minister to Mexico, on the ground that the beneficial influence to the country within whose limits it is per design of the EXECUTIVE, in making the appointment, miliel to exist.

was to accomplish the annexation of Texas, Mr. Wise "The Committee feel authorized to say that this system is said," he earnestly hoped and trusted that the President herished by our constituents as the very palladium of their prosperity and happiness, and whatever ignorant fanatics may

was as desirous (of annexation) as he was represented to elsewhere conjecture, the Committee are fully assured, upon

be. We may well suppose the President to be in favo" of ihe most diligent observation and reflection on the subject, that it, as eve:y wise statesman must be who is not governad he South does nwt possess within her limits a blessing with which' by fanaticism, o: local sectional prejudices.”

He said of Texas, that--

In conclusion he said: ". While she was, as a State, weak and almost powerless in "I see, therefore, no political necessity for the annexation resisting invasion, she was herself irresistible as an invading of Texas to the Union; no advantages to be derived from it; did a conquering power. She had but a sparse population, and objections to it of a strong, and, in my judgment, decisivo and neither men nor money of her own, to raise and equip an character. army for her own defense; but let her once raise the dag of ;

“I believe it to be for the interest and happiness of the foreign conquest-let her once proclaim a crusade against the whole Union, to remain as it is, without diminution and wiihuut rich States to the souih of her-and in a moment volunteers addition." would flock to her standard in crowds, from all the States in the greut valley of the Mixsissippi-men of enterprise and valor, be- To prevent the success of this nefarious project--to fore whom no Mexican troops could stand for an hour. They preserve from such gross violation the Constitution of our would leave their own lowns, arm themselves, and travel on country, adopted expressly " to secure the blessings of their own cost, and would come up in thousands, to plant the libarty," and not the perpetuation of Slavery-and to lone star of the Texan banner on the Mexican capitol. They would drive Santa Anna to the South, and in boundless wealth prevent the speedy and violent dissolution of the Union of captured towns, and rifled churches, and a lazy, vicious, / --We invite you to unite, without distinction of party, in and luxurious priesthood, would soon enable Texas, to pay her an immediate expression of your views on this subject, soldiery, and redeem her State debt, and push her victorious in such manner as you may deem best calculated to arms to the very shores of the Pacific. And would not all

answer the end proposed. this extend the bounds of Slavery? Yes, the result would be, that, before ano:her quarter of a century, the extension of John QUINCY ADAM3, NATHANIEL B. BORDEN, Slavery would not stop short of the Western Ocean. We had

SETH M. GATES,

Thomas C. CHITTENDEN, buu tuo ulternatives before us ; either to receive Texas into our

WILLIAM SLADE,

JOHN MATTOCKS, fraternity of States, and thus make her our oion, or to leave her to

WILLIAM B. CALHOUX, conquer Mexico, and become our most dangerous and formidlable

CHRISTOPHER MORGAN, riral.

JOSHUA R. GIDDINGS,

JOSHUA M. HOWARD, "To talk of restraining the people of the great Valley from SUKRLOCK J. ANDREWS, VICTORY BIRDSEYK, emigrating to join her armies, was all in vain ; and it was

HILAND HALL. equally vain to calculate on their defeat by any Mexican forces, aided by England or not. They had gone once already ; WASHINGTON, March Srd, 1843. il cas they that conquered Santa Anna at San Jacinto ; and Three-fourths of after winning that glorious field, had

[NOTE.—The above address was drawn up by Hon. Seth M. peaceably returned to their homes. But once set before them Gates, of New York, at the suggestion of John Quincy Adams, the conquest of the rich Mexican provinces, and you might as Well atiempt to stop the wind. This Government might send

and sent to members of Congress at their residences, after i's troops to the frontier, to turn them back, and they would the close of the session, for their signatures. Many more than run over them like a herd of buffalo.

the above approved heartily of its positions and objects, "Nothing could keep these booted loafers from rushing on, till they kicked the Spanish priests out of the temples they and would have signed it, but for its premature publica. profaued."

Nr: Wise proceeded to insist that a majority of the people of tion, through mistake. Mr. Winthrop, of Mass., was one of the United States were in favor of the annexation; at all these, with Gov. Briggs, of course ; Mr. Fillmore declined events, he would risk it with the Democracy of the North. signing it.)

“Sir," said Mr. Wise, “it is not only the duty of the Government to demand the liquidation of our claims, and the libera

The letters of Messrs. Clay and Van Buren, tion of our citizens, but to go further, and demand the non: taking ground against annexation, without the Invasion of Texas. Shall we sit still while the standard of insurrection is raised on our borders, and let a horde of slares, consent of Mexico, as an act of bad faith and and Indians and Mexicans roll up to the boundary line of Arlan: aggression, which would necessarily result in has and Louisiana? No. It is our duty at once to say to Nexico, If you strike Terar, you strike us ;' and if England, war, which appeared in the spring of 1844, s anding by should dare 10 intermeddle, and ask, Do you make slight allusions, if any, to the Slavery tike part with Texas P' his prompt answer should be,'' Yes, und against you.'

aspect of the case. In a later letter, Mr. Clay Swk, he would let gentlemen know, was the spirit of the whole declared that he did not oppose annexation on p?ople oj' the great valley of the West.

Several other members of Congress, in the same debate, account of Slavery, which he regarded as a expressed similar views and desires, and they are still temporary institution, which, therefore, ought more frequently expressed in conversation.

not to stand in the way of a permanent acquisi. The Hon. Thomas W. Gilmer, a member of Congress from Virginia, and formerly a 'Governor of that state, tion. And, though Mr. Clay's last letter on the numbered as one of the “Guard," and of course under subject, prior to the election of 1844, reiterated stood to be in the counsels of the Cabinet, in a letter and emphasized all his objections to annexation bearing date the 10th day of January last, originally designed as a private and confidential letter to a friend, under the existing circumstances, he did not ingives it as his deliberate opinion, after much examination clude the existence of Slavery. and reflection, that Texas WILL BE ANNEXED TO THE The defeat of Mr. Van Buren, at the BaltiUNION; and he enters into a specious argument, and presents a variety of reasons in favor oi the measure. He

more Nominating Convention-Mr. Polk being says, among other things :

selected in his stead, by a body which had been "Having acquired Louisiana and Florida, we have an in

supposed pledged to renominate the ex-Presi. teresi and a frontier on the Gulf of Mexico, and along our interior to the Pacific, which will not permit us to close our eyes, dent-excited considerable feeling, especially or fold our arms, with indifference to the events which a few among the Democrats of New-York. A number years may disclose in that quarter. We have already had one question of boundary with Texas; other questions must soon of their leaders united in a letter, termed the arise, under our revenue laws, and on other points of neces- “Secret Circular,” advising sary intercourse, which it will be difficult to adjust. The insti

their brethren, tuions of Texas, and her relations with other governments, are while they supported Polk and Dallas, to be yet in that condition which inclines her people (who are our oron careful to vote for candidates for Congress who countrymen,) to unite their destinies with ours. THIS MUST BE DONE SOON, OR NOT AT ALL. Tiere are numerous tribes of In- would set their faces as a flint against annexadians along both frontiers, which can easily become the cause or tion, which was signed by the instrument of border wars." None can be so blind noro, as not to know that the real GEORGE P. BARKER,

DAVID DUDLEY FIELD, design and object of the South is, to “ ADD NEW WEIGHT William C. BRYANT,

THEODORE SEDGWICK, TO HER END OF THE LEVER.” It was upon that ground J. W. EDMONDS,

Thomas W. TUCKER, that Mr. Webster placed his opposition, in his speech on

ISAAC TOWNSEND. that subject in New York, in March, 1837. In that speech, after stating that he sa iv insurmountable objections to

Silas Wright, then a Senator of the United the annexation of Texas, that the purchase of Louisiana States, and who, as such, had opposed the and Florida furnished no precedent for it, that the cases Tyler Treaty of Annexation, was now run were not parallel, and that no such policy or necessity for Governor, as the only man who could carry as led to that, required the annexation of Texas, he said: the State of New-York for Polk and Dallas. In

“Gentlemen, we all see, that by whomsoever possessed, Texas is likely to be a slaveholding country; and I frankly a democratic speech at Skaneateles, N. Y., Mr. avow my entire unwillingness to do anything which shala Wright had recently declared that he could extend of African on , or add other slaveholding States to the Union. When I say that I never consent to Annexation on any terms regard Slavery as in itself a great moral, social, and political evil, I only use langnaze which has been adopted by distin, which would give Slavery an advantage over guished men, themselves citizens of Slavrholling States. I Freedom. This sentiment was reiterated and suall do nothing, therefore, to favor or encourage its further | amplified in a great Convention of the Demo

« PreviousContinue »