Page images
PDF
EPUB

other southwestern States, began to concentrate itself in Texas. The emigrants carried rifles many of them were accompanied by slaves; and it was well understood that they did not intend to become Mexicans, much less to relinquish their slaves. When Gen. Sam. Houston left Arkansas for Texas, in 1834-5, the Little

Mexico, but had very few civilized inhabitants down to the time of the separation of Mexico from Spain. On two or three occasions, bands of French adventurers had landed on its coast, or entered it from the adjoining French colony of Louisiana; but they had uniformly been treated as intruders, and either destroyed or mnade prisoners by the Spanish military authori-Rock Journal, which announced his exodus and ties. No line had ever been drawn between the two colonies; but the traditional line between them, south of the Red River, ran somewhat within the limits of the present State of Louisiana.

When Louisiana was transferred by France to the United States, without specification of Doundaries, collisions of claims on this frontier was apprehended. General Wilkinson, commanding the United States troops, moved gradually to the west; the Spanish commandant in Texas likewise drew toward the frontier, until | they stood opposite each other across what was then tacitly settled as the boundary between the the two countries. This was never afterward disregarded.

In 1819, Spain and the United States seemed on the verge of war. General Jackson had twice invaded Florida, on the assumption of complicity on the part of her rulers and people -first with our British, then with our savage enemies and had finally overrun, and, in effect, annexed it to the Union. Spain, on the other hand, had preyed upon our commerce during the long wars in Europe, and honestly owed our merchants large sums for unjustifiable seizures and spoliations. A negotiation for the settlement of these differences was carried on at Washington, between John Quincy Adams, Mr. Monroe's Secretary of State, and Don Onis, the Spanish embassador, in the course of which Mr. Adams set up a claim, on the part of this country, to Texas as a natural geographical appendage not of Mexico, but of Louisiana. This claim, however, he eventually waived and relinquished, in consideration of a cession of Florida by Spain to this country-our government agreeing, on its part, to pay the claims of our merchants for spoliations. Texas remained, therefore, what it always had been-a department or province of Mexico, with a formal quit-claim thereto on the part of the United

States.

The natural advantages of this region in time attracted the attention of American adventurers, and a small colony of Yankees was settled thereon, about 1819-20, by Moses Austin, of Connecticut. Other settlements followed. Originally, grants of land in Texas were prayed for, and obtained of the Mexican Government, on the assumption that the petitioners were Roman Catholics, persecuted in the United States because of their religion, and anxious to find a refuge in some Catholic country. Thus all the early emigrants to Texas went professedly as Catholics, no other religion being

tolerated.

Slavery was abolished by Mexico soon after the consummation of her independence, when very few slaves were, or ever had been, in Texas. But, about 1834, some years after this event, a quiet, but very general, and evidently concerted, emigration, mainly from Tennessee and

destination, significantly added: "We shall, doubtless, hear of his raising his flag there shortly." That was a foregone conclusion.

Of course, the new settlers in Texas did not lack pretexts or provocations for such a step. Mexico was then much as she is now, misgoverned, turbulent, anarchical, and despotic. The overthrow of her Federal Constitution by Santa Anna was one reason assigned for the rebellion against her authority which broke out in Texas. In 1835, her independence was declared; in 1836, at the decisive battle of San Jacinto, it was, by the rout and capture of the Mexican dictator, secured. This triumph was won by emigrants from this country almost exclusively; scarcely half a dozen of the old Mexican inhabitants participating in the revolution. Santa Anna, while a prisoner, under restraint and apprehension, agreed to a peace on the basis of the independence of Texas--a covenant which he had no power, and probably no desire, to give effect to when restored to liberty. The Texans, pursuing their advantage, twice or thrice penetrated other Mexican provinces-Tamaulipas, Coahuila, etc.,--and waved their Lone-Star flag in defiance on the banks of the Rio Grande del Norte; which position, however, they were always compelled soon to abandon--once with severe loss. Their government, nevertheless, in reiterating their declaration of independence, claimed the Rio Grande as their western boundary, from its source to its mouth, including a large share of Tamaulipas, Coahuila, Durango, and by far the more important and populous portion of New Mexico. And it was with this claim, expressly set forth in the treaty, that President Tyler and his responsible advisers negotiated the first official project of annexation, which was submitted to the Senate, during the session of 1843-4, and rejected by a very decisive vote: only fifteen (mainly Southern) senators voting to confirm it. Col. Benton, and others, urged this aggressive claim of boundary, as affording abundant reason for the rejection of this treaty; but it is not known that the Slavery aspect of the case attracted especial attention in the Senate. The measure, however, had already been publicly eulogized by Gen. James Hamilton, of S. C., as calculated to "give a Gibraltar to the South," and had, on that ground, secured a very general and ardent popularity throughout the SouthWest. And, more than a year previously, several northern members of Congress had united in the following:

TO THE PEOPLE OF THE FREE STATES OF THE

UNION.

stituents and our country as members of the 27th ConWe, the undersigned, in closing our duties to our congress, feel bound to call your attention, very briefly, to the project, long entertained by a portion of the people of these United States, still pertinaciously adhered to, and intended soon to be consummated: THE ANNEXATION OF TEXAS TO THIS UNION. In the press of business inci

[ocr errors]

dent to the last days of a session of Congress, we have not time, did we deem it necessary, to enter upon a detailed statement of the reasons which force upon our minds the conviction that this project is by no means abandoned: that a large portion of the country, interisted in the continuance of Domestic Slavery and the Slave-trade in these United States, have solemnly and enalterably determined that it shall be speedily carried into execution; and that, by this admission of new Slave Territory and Slave States, the undue ascendency of the Slure-holding power in the Government shall be secured and riveted beyond all redempKon!!

That it was with these views and intentions that set

[blocks in formation]

"It may not be improper here to remark that, during the last session of Congress, when a Senator from Mississippi proposed the acknowledgment of Texan independence, it was found, with a few exceptions, the members of that body were ready to take ground upon it, as upon the subject of Slavery itself.

With all these facts before us, we do not hesitate in believing that these feelings influenced the New England Senators, but one voting in favor of the measure; and, indeed, Mr. Webster had been bold enough, in a public speech recen ly delivered in New-York, to many thousand citizens, to declare that the reason that influenced his opposition was his abhorrence of Slavery in the South, and that it might, in the event of its recognition, become a slaveholding State. He also spoke of the efforts making in favor of Abolition; and that, being prefeeling, it would become irresistible and overwhelming.

lements were effected in the province, by citizens of the United States, difficulties fomented with the Mexican Government, 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 doubt; and that, hitherto, all attempts of Mexico to reduce her revolted province to obedience have proved unsuccessful, is to be attributed to the unlawful aid and assistance of designing and interested individuals in the United States, and the direct and indirect coöperation of our own Government, with similar views, is not the less certain and demonstrable.

"This language, coming from so distinguished an individual as Mr. Webster, so familiar with the feelings of the North and entertaining so high a respect for public sentiment in New England, speaks so plainly the voice of the North as not to be misunderstood.

"We sincerely hope there is enough good sense and genuine love of country among our fellow-countrymen of the Northern States, to secure us final justice on this subject; yet we cannot consider it safe or expedient for the people of the South to entirely disregard the efforts of the fades, and the opinions of such men as Webster, and others who countenance such danPresi-gerous doctrines.

The open and repeated enlistment of troops in several
States of this Union, in aid of the Texan Revolution; the
intrusion of an American Army, by order of the
dent, far into the territory of the Mexican Government,
at a moment critical for the fate of the insurgents, under
pretense of preventing Mexican soldiers from fomenting
Indian disturbances, but in reality in aid of, and acting
in singular concert and coincidence with, the army of the
Revolutionists; the entire neglect of our Government to
adopt any efficient measures to prevent the most un-
warrantable aggressions of bodies of our own citizens,
enlisted, organized and officered within our own borders,
and marched in arms and battle array upon the terri-
tory, and against the inhabitants of a friendly govern-
ment, in aid of freebooters and insurgents, and the pre-
mature recognition of the Independence of Texas, by a
snap vote, at the heel of a session of Congress, and that,
too, at the very session when President Jackson had, by
special Message, insisted that "the measure would
be contrary to the policy invariably observed by the
United States in all similar cases;" would be marked
with great injustice to Mexico, and peculiarly liable to
the darkest suspicions, inasmuch as the Texans were
almost all emigrants from the United States, AND

SOUGHT THE RECOGNITION OF THEIR INDEPENDENCE WITH THE
AVOWED PURPOSE OF OBTAINING THEIR ANNEXATION TO THE

UNITED STATES. These occurrences are too well known
and too fresh in the memory of all, to need more
than a passing notice. These have become matters
of history. For further evidence upon all these and
other important points, we refer to the memorable
speech of John Quincy Adams, delivered in the House of
Representatives during the morning hour in June and
July, 1838, and to his address to his constituents, de-
livered at Braintree, 17th September, 1842.

The open avowal of the Texans themselves-the frequent and anxious negotiations of our own Government

the resolutions of various States of the Union-the

numerous declarations of members of Congress-the tone of the Southern press-as well as the direct application of the Texan Government, make it impossible for any man to doubt, that ANNEXATION, and the formation of several new Slaveholding States, were originally the policy and design of the Slaveholding States and the

Executive of the Nation.

The same reference will show, very conclusively, that the particular objects of this new acquisition of Slave Territory were THE PERPETUATION OF SLAVERY AND THE CONTINUED ASCENDENCY OF THE SLAVE POWEER.

The following extracts from a Report on that subject, adopted by the Legislature of Mississippi. from a mass of similar evidence which might be adduced, will show with what views the annexation was then urged:

"The Northern States have no interests of their own which require any special safeguards for their defense, save only their domestic manufactures; and God knows they have liberal scale; under which encouragement they have imalready received protection from Government on a most proved and flourished beyond example. The South has very peculiar interests to preserve interests already violently assailed and boldly threatened.

her best interests will be afforded by the annexation of Texas; "Your Committee are fully persuaded that this protection to an equipoise of influence in the halls of Congress will be secured, which will furnish us a permanent guaranty of protection."

The speech of Mr. Adams, exposing the whole system of duplicity and perfidy toward Mexico, had marked the of opposition which began to come up from all parties in conduct of our Government; and the emphatic expressions the Free States, however, for a time, nearly silenced the clamors of the South for annexation, and the people of the North have been lulled into the belief that the p.oject is rearly, if not wholly abandoned, and that, at least, there is now no serious danger of its consummation.

Believing this to be a false and dangerous security; that the project has never been abandoned a moment, by its originators and abettors, but that it has been de ferred for a more favorable moment for its accomplish ment, we refer to a few evidences of more recent development upon which this opinion is founded.

The last Election of President of the Republic of Texas, is understood to have turned, mainly, upon the question of annexation or no annexation, and the candidate favorable to that measure was successful by an overwhelming majority. The sovereign States of Alabama, Tennessee, and Mississippi, have recently adopted Resolutions, some, if not all of them, unanimously, in favor of annexation, and forwarded them to Congress. the District in which our present Chief Magistrate resided The Hon. Henry A. Wise, a member of Congress fron when elected Vice-President, and who is understood to be more intimately acquainted with the views and designs of the present administration than any other member of Congress, most distinctly avowed his desire for, and expectation of annexation, at the last session of Congress. Among other things, he said, in a speech delivered January 26, 1842:

"True, if Iowa be added on the one side, Florida will be
added on the other. But there the equation must stop. Let
one more Northern State be admitted, and the equilibrium is
gone-gone forever. The balance of interests is gone-the safe-
guard of American property of the American Constitution
of the American Union, vanished into thin air. This must b
the inevitable result, unless by a treaty with Mexico, THE SOUTH
CAN ADD MORE WEIGHT TO HER END OF THE LEVER? Let the
South stop at the Sabine, (the eastern boundary of Texas,) while
the North may spread unchecked beyond the Rocky Moun-

"But we hasten to suggest the importance of the annexation
of Texas to this Republic upon grounds somewhat local in
their complexion, but of an import infinitely grave and inter-tains AND THE SOUTHERN SCALE MUST KICK THE BEAM."
esting to the people who inhabit the Southern portion of this
Confederacy, where it is known that a species of domestic
Slavery is tolerated and protected by law, whose existence is
prohibited by the legal regulations of other States of this Con-
federacy; which system of Slavery is held by all, who are
familiarly acquainted with its practical effects, to be of highly
beneficial influence to the country within whose limits it is per-

milied to exist.

"The Committee feel authorized to say that this system is cherished by our constituents as the very palladium of their prosperity and happiness, and whatever ignorant fanatics may elsewhere conjecture, the Committee are fully assured, upon the most diligent observation and reflection on the subject, that he South does not possess within her limits a blessing with which

Finding difficulties, perhaps, in the way of a cession by Treaty, in another speech delivered in April, 1842, on a motion made by Mr. Linn, of New-York, to strike out the salary of the Minister to Mexico, on the ground that the design of the EXECUTIVE, in making the appointment, was to accomplish the annexation of Texas, Mr. Wise said, "he earnestly hoped and trusted that the President was as desirous (of annexation) as he was represented to be. We may well suppose the President to be in favor of it, as every wise statesman must be who is not governed by fanaticism, or local sectional prejudices."

He said of Texas, that--"While she was, as a State, weak and almost powerless in resisting invasion, she was herself irresistible as an invading and a conquering power. She had but a sparse population, and neither men nor money of her own, to raise and equip an army for her own defense; but let her once raise the flag of foreign conquest-let her once proclaim a crusade against the rich States to the south of her-and in a moment volunteers would flock to her standard in crowds, from all the States in the great valley of the Mississippi-men of enterprise and valor, before whom no Mexican troops could stand for an hour. They would leave their own towns, arm themselves, and travel on their own cost, and would come up in thousands, to plant the lone star of the Texan banner on the Mexican capitol. They would drive Santa Anna to the South, and in boundless wealth of captured towns, and rifled churches, and a lazy, vicious, and luxurious priesthood, would soon enable Texas, to pay her soldiery, and redeem her State debt, and push her victorious arms to the very shores of the Pacific. And would not all this extend the bounds of Slavery? Yes, the result would be, that, before another quarter of a century, the extension of Slavery would not stop short of the Western Ocean. We had but two alternatives before us; either to receive Texas into our fraternity of States, and thus make her our own, or to leave her to conquer Mexico, and become our most dangerous and formidable rival.

"To talk of restraining the people of the great Valley from emigrating to join her armies, was all in vain; and it was equally vain to calculate on their defeat by any Mexican forces, aided by England or not. They had gone once already; it was they that conquered Santa Anna at San Jacinto; and three-fourths of them, after winning that glorious field, had peaceably returned to their homes. But once set before them the conquest of the rich Mexican provinces, and you might as well attempt to stop the wind. This Government might send i's troops to the frontier, to turn them back, and they would run over them like a herd of buffalo.

"Nothing could keep these booted loafers from rushing on, till they kicked the Spanish priests out of the temples they profaued."

Mr. Wise proceeded to insist that a majority of the people of the United States were in favor of the annexation; at all events, he would risk it with the Democracy of the North. "Sir," said Mr. Wise, it is not only the duty of the Government to demand the liquidation of our claims, and the libera

tion of our citizens, but to go further, and demand the nonsurrection is raised on our borders, and let a horde of slaves, and Indians and Mexicans roll up to the boundary line of Arkan sas and Louisiana? No. It is our duty at once to say to Mexico, If you strike Texas, you strike us; and if England, sanding by, should dare to intermeddle, and ask, 'Do you take part with Texas ?' his prompt answer should be, Yes, und ugainst you.'

invasion of Texas. Shall we sit still while the standard of in

Such, he would let gentlemen know, was the spirit of the whole people of the great valley of the West." Several other members of Congress, in the same debate, expressed similar views and desires, and they are still more frequently expressed in conversation.

The Hon. Thomas W. Gilmer, a member of Congress from Virginia, and formerly a Governor of that State, numbered as one of the "Guard," and of course understood to be in the counsels of the Cabinet, in a letter bearing date the 10th day of January last, originally designed as a private and confidential letter to a friend, gives it as his deliberate opinion, after much examination

and reflection, that TEXAS WILL BE ANNEXED TO THE UNION; and he enters into a specious argument, and presents a variety of reasons in favor of the measure. He says, among other things:

Having acquired Louisiana and Florida, we have an interior to the Pacific, which will not permit us to close our eyes, or fold our arms, with indifference to the events which a few years may disclose in that quarter. We have already had one question of boundary with Texas; other questions must soon arise, under our revenue laws, and on other points of necessary intercourse, which it will be difficult to adjust. The institutions of Texas, and her relations with other governments, are yet in that condition which inclines her people (who are our own countrymen,) to unite their destinies with ours. THIS MUST BE DONE SOON, OR NOT AT ALL. There are numerous tribes of Indians along both frontiers, which can easily become the cause or the instrument of border wars."

terest and a frontier on the Gulf of Mexico, and along our in

None can be so blind now, as not to know that the real design and object of the South is, to "ADD NEW WEIGHT TO HER END OF THE LEVER." It was upon that ground that Mr. Webster placed his opposition, in his speech on that subject in New-York, in March, 1837. In that speech, after stating that he saw insurmountable objections to the annexation of Texas, that the purchase of Louisiana and Florida furnished no precedent for it, that the cases were not parallel, and that no such policy or necessity as led to that, required the annexation of Texas, he said: "Gentlemen, we all see, that by whomsoever possessed, Texas is likely to be a slaveholding country; and I frankly avow my entire unwillingness to do anything which shall extend the Slavery of the African race on this continent, or add other slaveholding States to the Union. When I say that I regard Slavery as in itself a great moral, social, and political

evil, I only use language which has been adopted by distinguished men, themselves citizens of Slaveholding States. I shall do nothing, therefore, to favor or encourage its further

Rxtension."

In conclusion he said:

"I see, therefore, no political necessity for the annexation of Texas to the Union; no advantages to be derived from it; and objections to it of a strong, and, in my judgment, decisive character.

"I believe it to be for the interest and happiness of the whole Union, to remain as it is, without diminution and without addition."

To prevent the success of this nefarious project--to preserve from such gross violation the Constitution of our country, adopted expressly "to secure the blessings of liberty," and not the perpetuation of Slavery-and to prevent the speedy and violent dissolution of the Union --we invite you to unite, without distinction of party, in an immediate expression of your views on this subject, in such manner as you may deem best calculated to answer the end proposed.

[blocks in formation]

WASHINGTON, March 3rd, 1848.

[NOTE.-The above address was drawn up by Hon. Seth M. Gates, of New-York, at the suggestion of John Quincy Adams, and sent to members of Congress at their residences, after the close of the session, for their signatures. Many more thar the above approved heartily of its positions and objects, and would have signed it, but for its premature publication, through mistake. Mr. Winthrop, of Mass., was one of these, with Gov. Briggs, of course; Mr. Fillmore declined signing it.]

The letters of Messrs. Clay and Van Buren, taking ground against annexation, without the consent of Mexico, as an act of bad faith and aggression, which would necessarily result in war, which appeared in the spring of 1844, make slight allusions, if any, to the Slavery aspect of the case. In a later letter, Mr. Clay declared that he did not oppose annexation on account of Slavery, which he regarded as a temporary institution, which, therefore, ought not to stand in the way of a permanent acquisition. And, though Mr. Clay's last letter on the subject, prior to the election of 1844, reiterated and emphasized all his objections to annexation under the existing circumstances, he did not include the existence of Slavery.

The defeat of Mr. Van Buren, at the Baltimore Nominating Convention-Mr. Polk being selected in his stead, by a body which had been supposed pledged to renominate the ex-President-excited considerable feeling, especially among the Democrats of New-York. A number of their leaders united in a letter, termed the "Secret Circular," advising their brethren, while they supported Polk and Dallas, to be careful to vote for candidates for Congress who would set their faces as a flint against annexation, which was signed by

GEORGE P. BARKER, WILLIAM C. Bryant, J. W. EDMONDS,

DAVID DUDLEY FIELD,
THEODORE SEDGWICK,
THOMAS W. TUCKER,
ISAAC TOWNSEND.

Silas Wright, then a Senator of the United States, and who, as such, had opposed the Tyler Treaty of Annexation, was now rua for Governor, as the only man who could carry the State of New-York for Polk and Dallas. In a democratic speech at Skaneateles, N. Y., Mr. Wright had recently declared that he could never consent to Annexation on any terms which would give Slavery an advantage over Freedom. This sentiment was reiterated and amplified in a great Convention of the Demo

eracy, which met at Herkimer, in the autumn of in the consummation of this grand scheme, which Eng this year.

The contest proceeded with great earnestness throughout the Free States, the supporters of Polk and of Birney (the Abolition candidate for President), fully agreeing in the assertion that Mr. Clay's position was equally favorable to Annexation with Mr. Polk's. Mr. Birney in a letter published on the eve of the Election, declared that he regarded Mr. Clay's election as more favorable to Annexation than Mr. Polk's, because, while equally inclined to fortify and extend Slavery, he possessed more ability to influence Congress in its favor.

Before this time, but as yet withheld from, and unknown to, the public, Mr. Calhoun, now President Tyler's Secretary of State, and an early and powerful advocate of Annexation, had addressed to Hon. Wm. R. King, our Embassador at Paris, an official dispatch from which we make the following extracts:

MR. CALHOUN TO MR. KING.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, August 12, 1844. [ SIR-I have laid your dispatch, No. 1, before the President, who instructs me to make known to you that he has read it with much pleasure, especially the portion which relates to your cordial reception by the King, and his assurance of friendly feel.ngs toward the United States. The President, in pa ticular, highly appreciates the declaration of the King, that in no event, would any steps be taken by his government in the slightest degree hostile, or which would give to the United States just cause of complaint. It was the more gratifying from the fact, that our previous information was calculated to make the impression that the government of France was prepared to unite with Great Bitain in a joint protest against the annexation of Texas, and a joint effort to induce her Gove nment to withdraw the proposition to annex, on condition that Mexico should be made to acknowledge her independence. He is happy to infer from your dispatch that the information, so far as it relates to France, is in all probability without foundation. You did not go fu ther than you ought, in assuring the King that the object of Annexation would be pursued with unabated vigor, and in g.ving your opinion that a decided majority of the American people were in its favor, and that it would certainly be annexed at no distant day. I feel confident that your anticipation will be fully realized at no d stant period.

Every day will tend to weaken that combination of political causes which led to the opposition of the measure, and to strengthen the conviction that it was not only expedient, but just and necessary.

But to descend to particulars: it is certain that while England, like France, desires the independence of Texas, with the view to commercial connections, it is not less so that one of the leading motives of England for desiring it, is the hope that, though her diplomacy and influence, Negro Slavery may be abolished there, and ultimately, by consequence, in the United States and throughout the whole of this continent. That its ultimate abolition throughout the entire continent is an object

ardently desired by her, we have decisive proofs in the declaration of the Earl of Aberdeen, delivered to this Department, and of which you will find a copy among the documents transmitted to Congress with the Texan treaty. That she desires its abolition in Texas, and has used her influence and diplomacy to effect it there, the same document, with the correspondence of this Department with Mr. Packenham, also to be found among the documents, furnishes proof not less conclusive. That

one of the objects of abolishing it there is to facilitate its abolition in the United Ltates, and throughout the continent, is manifest from the declaration of the Abolition party and societies both in this country and in England. In fact, there is good reason to believe that the scheme of abolishing it in Texas, with a view to its abolition in the United States, and over the continent, originated with the prominent members of the party in the United States; and was first broached by them in the (so called) World's Convention, held in London in the year 1840, and through its agency brought to the notice of the British Government.

Now, I hold, not only that France can have no interest

land hopes to accomplish through Texas, if she can defeat the Annexation, but that her interests, and those of all the Continental powers of Europe are directly and deeply opposed to it.

The election of James K. Polk as President, and George M. Dallas as Vice-President, (Nov. 1844) having virtually settled, affirmatively, the question of annexing Texas, the XXVIIIth Congress commenced its second session at Washington, on the 2d of December, 1844-Mr. John Tyler being still acting President up to the end of the Congress, March 4th following.

Dec. 19.-Mr John B. Weller, (then member from Ohio) by leave, introduced a joint resolution, No. 51, providing for the annexation of Texas to the United States, which he moved to the Committee of the Whole.

Mr. E. S. Hamlin, of Ohio, moved a reference of said resolve to a Committee of one from each State, with instructions to report

Whether the annexation of Texas would not extend and perpetuate Slavery in the Slave States, and also, the internal Slave-trade; and whether the United States Government has any Constitutional power over Slavery in the States, either to perpetuate it there, or to do it away.

The question on commitment was insisted upon, and first taken-Yeas, 109 (Democrats); Nays, 61 (Whigs); whereupon it was held that Mr. Hamlin's amendment was defeated, and the original proposition alone committed.

January 10th, 1845.-Mr. John P. Hale, of New-Hampshire, (then a Democratic Representative, now a Republican Senator) proposed the following as an amendment to any act or resolve contemplating the annexation of Texas to this Union:

Provided, That immediately after the question of boundary between the United States of America and Mexico shall have been definitively settled by the two Governments, and before any State formed out of the Territory of Texas shall be admitted into the Union, the said Te.ritory of Texas shall be divided as follows, to wit: beginning at a point on the Gulf of Mexico, midway between the Northern and Southern boundaries thereof on the coast; and thence by a line running in a Northwesterly direction to the extreme boundary thereof, so as to divide the same as nearly as possible into two equal parts, and in that portion of said Territory lying South and West of the line to be run as aforesaid, there shall be neither Slavery nor involuntary servitude, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.

And provided further, That this provision shall be considered as a compact between the people of the United States and the people of the said Territory, and forever remain unalterable, unless by the consent of three-fourths of the States of the Union.

Mr. Hale asked a suspension of the rules, to enable him to offer it now, and have it printed and committed. Refused-Yeas, 92 (not two thirds); Nays, 81.

Yeas-All the Whigs* and most of the Democrats from the Free States, with Messrs. Duncan L. Clinch and Alexander H. Stephens, of Georgia, and George W. Summers, of Virginia.

Nays-All the members from Slave States, except the above, with the following from Free States:

MAINE.-Sheppard Cary-1.

NEW-HAMPSHIRE.-Edmund Burke, Moses Norris, jr.-2. NEW-YORK.-James G. Clinton, Selah B. Strong-2. PENNSYLVANIA.-James Black, Richard Brodhead, H. D. Foster, Joseph R. Ingersoll, Michael H. Jenks-5. ОнIо.-Joseph J. McDowell-1.

INDIANA.-Wm. J. Brown, J. W. Davis, John Pettit-3.

Except the two here given in Italics.

ILLINOIS.-Orlando B. Ficklin, Joseph P. Hoge, Robert | aforesaid was agreed to-Yeas, 118; Nuys,

Smith-3.

Total Democrats from Free States, 17.

December 12th.-Mr. C. J. Ingersoll, of Pennsylvania, from the Committee on Foreign Affairs, reported a Joint Resolution for annexing Texas to the Union, which was committed and discussed in Committee of the Whole from time to time, through the next month.

January 7th.-Mr. J. P. Hale presented resolves of the Legislature of New-Hampshire, thoroughly in favor of Annexation, and silent on the subject of Slavery, except as follows:

Resolved, That we agree with Mr. Clay, that the reannexation of Texas will add more Free than Slave States to the Union; and that it would be unwise to refuse a permanent acquisition, which will exist as long as the globe remains, on account of a temporary institution. January 13th.-Mr. Cave Johnson, of Tennessee, moved that all further debate on this subject be closed at 2 P.M. on Thursday next. Carried-Yeas, 136; Nays, 57; (nearly all the Nays from Slave States.)

January 25th.—The debate, after an extension of time, was at length brought to a close,

and the Joint Resolution taken out of Committee, and reported to the House in the following form; (that portion relating to Slavery, having been added in Committee, on motion of Mr. Milton Brown, (Whig) of Tennessee:

Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives in Congress assembled, That Congress doth consent that the Territory properly included within, and rightfully belonging to, the Republic of Texas, may be erected into a new State, to be called the State of Texas, with a republican form of Government, to be adopted by the people of said Republic, by deputies in Convention assembled, with the consent of the existing Government, in order that the same may be admitted as one of the States of this Union.

2. And be it further resolved, That the foregoing consent of Congress is given upon the following conditions, and with the following guaranties, to wit:

First. Said State to be formed, subject to the adjustment by this Government of all questions of boundary that may arise with other governments; and the Constitution thereof, with the proper evidence of its adoption by the people of said Republic of Texas, shall be transmitted to the President of the United States, to be laid before Congress for its final action, on or before the 1st day of January, 1846.

Second. Said State, when admitted into the Union, after ceding to the United States all public edifices,fortifications, barracks, ports and harbors, navy and navyyards, docks, magazines, arms, armaments, and all other property and means pe taining to the public defense, belonging to the said Republic of Texas, shall retain all the public funds, debts, taxes, and dues of every kind which may belong to, or be due or owing said Republic; and shall also retain all the vacant and unappropriated lands lying within its limits, to be applied to the payment of debts and liabilities of said Republic of Texas; and the residue of said lands, after discharging said debts and liabilities, to be disposed of as said State may direct:

but in no event are said debts and liabilities to become a charge upon the United States.

Third. New States of convenient size, not exceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas, and having sufficient population,may hereafter, by the consent of said State, be formed out of the Territory thereof,

101.

Yeas-114 Democrats, and Messrs. Milton and Duncan L. Clinch, and Alexander H Brown, of Tennessee; James Dellet, of Alabama; Stephens, of Georgia, (4) Southern Whigs. with all from Slave States, but the four just Nays-all the Whigs present from Free States named; with the following Democrats from Free States:

MAINE. Robert P. Dunlap, Hannibal Hamlin-2.
VERMONT.-Paul Dillinghai, jr.-1.
NEW-HAMPSHIRE.-John P. Hale-1.
CONNECTICUT.-George S. Catlin-1.
NEW-YORK-Joseph H. Anderson, Charles S. Benton,
Jeremiah E. Carey, Amasa Dana, Richard D. Davis,
Byram Green, Preston King, Smith M. Purdy, George
Rathbun, Orville Robinson, David L. Seymour, Lemuel
Stetson-12.
ОнIO.-Jасоb Brinckerhoff, William C. McCauslen,
Joseph Morris, Henry St. John-4.

.23.

MICHIGAN. James B. Hunt, Robert McClelland-2.
Total Democrats from Free States,...
Total Whigs from Free and Slave States,....78.
tion to a third reading forthwith--Yeas, 120;
The House then ordered the whole proposi-
Nays, 97--and passed it, Yeas, 120; Nays, 98.

and all the Democrats from Free States, except
Yeas-all the Democrats from Slave States,
as above; with Messrs. Duncan L. Clinch, Mil-
ton Brown, James Dellet, Willoughby Newton,
and Alexander H. Stephens of Georgia, (now
of Virginia, (who therefrom turned Democrat),
Democrat), from Slave States.

those from Slave States except as above; with Nays all the Whigs from Free States; all 23 Democrats from Free States.

So the resolve passed the House, and was sent to the Senate for concurrence.

In Senate, several attempts to originate action in favor of Annexation were made at this session, but nothing came of them.

February 24th.-The joint resolution aforesaid from the House was taken up for consideration by 30 Yeas to 11 Nays (all Northern Whigs). On the 27th, Mr. Walker, of Wisconsin, moved to add an alternative proposition, effecting the meditated end. contemplating negotiation as the means of

Mr. Foster, (Whig) of Tennessee, proposed be formed out of that portion of the present Territory of That the State of Texas, and such other States as may Texas, lying south of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, commonly known as the Missouri Compromise line, shall be admitted into the Union with or without Slavery, as the people of each State, so hereafter asking admission, may desire.

On which the question was taken. Yeas, (all Whigs but 3) 18; Nays, 34.

Various amendments were proposed and voted down. Among them, Mr. Foster, of Tenn., moved an express stipulation that Slavery should be tolerated in all States formed out of the Territory of Texas, south of the Missouri line Rejected-Yeas, 16 (Southern

which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of the Federal Constitution. And such States as may be of 36° 30'. formed out of that portion of said Territory, lying south Whigs, and Sevier, of Arkansas); Nays, 33. of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, commonly known as the Missouri Compromise line, shall be Mr. Miller, of N. J., moved that the existence of Slaadmitted into the Union, with, or without Slavery, as the very be forever prohibited in the northern and northwestpeople of each State asking admission may desire; andern part of said Territory, west of the 100th degree of in such State or States as shall be formed out of said latitude west from Greenwich, so as to divide, as equally Territory, north of said Missouri Compromise line, as may be, the whole of the annexed country between Slavery or involuntary servitude (except for crime) shali Slaveholding and Non-Slaveholding States. be prohibited.

Mr. Cave Johnson, of Tennessee, moved the previous question, which the House secondedYeas, 113; Nays, 106-and then the amendment

Yeas, 11; all Northern Whigs, except Mr. Crittenden, Ky. Nays, 33.

The vote in the Senate on the joint resolution for Annexation stood, Yeas, 26, all Demo

« PreviousContinue »