constituting a part of the dominions of Spain in America, lying west or southwest of Louisiana.

“ And be it further resolved by the authority aforesaid, That the Governor of this State be requested to transmit a copy of the foregoing preamble and resolve, under the great seal of this State, to the President of the United States; also, that he transmit one copy thereof, authenticated in manner aforesaid, to the President of the Senate of the United States, with the respectful request of this Legislature that the same may be laid before the Senate; also, that he transmit one copy thereof to the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States, authenticated in like manner, with the respectful request of this Legislature that the same may be laid before the House of Representatives; and, also, that he transmit to each of our Senators and Representatives in Congress one copy thereof, each, together with the report adopted by this Legislature, and which accompanies said preamble and resolves."

Mr. ADAMS inquired of the Clerk if these resolutions had been entered upon the Journal of the House in their proper place?

[The Clerk was not prepared at the moment to answer, but would examine and ascertain the fact.]

Mr. ADAMS proceeded. He said he was aware that the reading and commenting on these resolutions might prove tedious to the House; but he hoped honorable members would take into consideration the fact, that they had not before been treated with the respect that such papers deserved, and, moreover, it was his wish that the Legislatures of these different States might know that, though late in the day, their resolutions upon this subject had been presented to the House, and that they had been read on that floor, and that the Committee on Foreign Affairs had come forward with the declaration that they had not thought it worth while to look into them; no, "not into a single one of them," as one of the gentlemen of that committee [Mr. LEGARE] had expressly avowed. Mr. ADAMS then announced that he should next allude to the presentation of the legislative resolutions of the State of Alabama, when

The CHAIR announced that the hour for morning business had elapsed, and

Mr. ADAMS suspended his remarks.

THURSDAY, JUNE 21, 1838.

The report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs in relation to Texas being again under consideration as the unfinished business of the morning hour

Mr. ADAMS rose, and said: When the morning hour expired yesterday, I was presenting to the House, as a motive for the recommitment of the memorials and resolutions on the subject of the annexation of Texas to this Union to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, to whom they were formerly committed, but who had not taken them into consideration, certain resolutions adopted by the Legislatures of several States on that subject. I read several of those resolutions, or caused them to be read by the Clerk. The necessity of doing this I considered as imposed upon myself as a duty, that at least it might appear that those resolutions had received some consideration by this House, how little soever they might have received from the committee to whom they were sent.

I had proceeded through the States whose Legislatures had adopted resolutions on this subject, until I had come to resolutions of the Legislature of the State of Alabama, the reading of which closed the consideration of the matter yesterday morning.

Joint preamble and resolutions of the General Assembly of the State of Alabama, in favor of the annexation of Texas to the United States of America.

"The General Assembly of the State of Alabama have witnessed, with feelings of deep mortification, the course pursued by a few citizens of the United States in opposition to the admission of the Republic of Texas into the Federal Union.

66

Professing, as we ever have, friendship for civil liberty, and a devotion to the holy cause of freedom in every clime, it was to have been hoped that no voice would be heard among us, to rebuke an application from Texas for admission into this boasted asylum from oppression. Our ports have been ever open to the exile or emigrant from the eastern hemisphere; invitations and inducements have been extended to all whose interest or inclination led them to our shores; and no one has ever thought of denying comfort and protection to all who have fled from tyranny in that quarter, and sought succor and shelter beneath the extended wings of our national eagle. By this policy many of the enslaved but worthy and magnanimous sons of Ireland, of France, and of Poland, have been enabled to reach our borders, and, 'redeemed, regenerated, and disenthralled,' to tread our consecrated soil with the firm and elastic step of conscious freedom. With these glaring facts in view, why, it may be demanded, should we reject an overture for similar privileges, coming from the West? Should the circumstance that the Texians come not as mendicants at our feet; that they can bring with them their lands, and habitations, and correct principles, change our policy? We presume not. It is true that these advantages should not impel us to a course different from what we would adopt if they did not exist; for whatever may be the magic influence of interest in ordinary cases, it is admitted that its injunctions should be powerless on the present occasion. But the circumstance is alluded to for the purpose of showing that, although it should weigh but as the dust in the balance in determining the present question, yet that it should have as little influence against as in favor of the conclusion to which we arrive. And, as far as it can be brought to bear upon the question in a constitutional or political point of view, precedents are not wanting, if justice could require or yield to precedent, which will sustain fully the advocates of the annexation of Texas. We refer to the acquisition of Louisiana, during the Administration of Mr. Jefferson, and to the still more recent annexation of Florida, during the Administration of Mr. Monroe. The inhabitants of those countries were not admitted into the Union at their own solicitation, but without their formal consent; they were purchased of their royal and imperial masters with our common treasure, and, together with their soil, their religion, their language, their household gods, were brought within the pale of our General Government. How different, in many respects, is the case with the Republic of Texas! Upon the unanimous application of her brave and chivalrous citizens, who may be said to be 'bone of our bone, and flesh of our flesh,' she seeks, without money and without price,' from us, to obtain shelter and protection under the ample folds of our federal banner. Is there, in the whole length and breadth of our land, a friend of liberty, a lover of justice, or even a mere philanthropist, who can hesitate for one mo ment in the decision of this question?

"There are some, it is to be apprehended and regretted, who view this subject alone through the dim and deceptive medium of sectional party feelings. We cannot consent to be influenced by such sordid and circumscribed motives. And such a view is the more to be deplored, because of its inevitable tendency to blind the honest, to pervert the innate sympathies of their nature for the worst of purposes, and, by introducing extraneous matters into an otherwise simple question, to lead the minds of many unsuspecting persons to the contemplation of false issues. For example, many well-meaning but misinformed females of some of our sister States, whose hearts are thrillingly alive and enthusiastic upon another subject, on false premises, as we know, are induced to believe that the present question is identical with that, and that, if Texas should be admitted into the Union, all their hopes in favor of universal emancipation will become, as they really are, the mere waking reveries of their abused or distempered imaginations. But were considerations of expediency to become the only test on this grave and important question, it is not perceived that such a view of the present subject should reverse the policy we propose. Looking to the most exalted aim, in a mere point of expediency, which can possess the bosom of an American patriot and statesman, the preservation through all time of constitutional union-the

only permanent palladium of civil liberty and domestic tranquillity-the annexation of
Texas appears every way desirable to every portion of our country. The solid and
everlasting foundation on which our political fathers sought to establish justice, to
insure domestic peace, to form a perfect union of our States, and to perpetuate the
blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity, was a well-regulated balance
of governmental and territorial power. Since the formation of the Constitution, the
Northeast, the North, and the Northwest, have increased more rapidly in numerical
power of States and population than the South and Southwest. It needs but a glance
at the map to satisfy the most superficial observer that an over-balance is produced by
the extreme Northeast, which, as regards territory, would be happily corrected and
counter-balanced by the annexation of Texas. And when it is recollected, too, that
the very territory which it is now proposed to acquire was once within the scope of a
just claim of our General Government, extending to the Rio del Norte, and that it
was bartered for a mess of porridge by a prime-mover of the present opposition to its
reacquisition, there remains no pretext for a subterfuge, under which the adversaries
of annexation can hope to disguise the covert designs which, there is much reason to
fear, prompted the exchange of our claims in Texas for the unappropriated portions of
Florida, consisting mainly of barren sands and poisonous everglades.

It may
be apprehended by some that there is danger, in negotiating with Texas on
this subject, of involving our General Government in a conflict of arms with Mexico.
We cannot perceive how it is possible, upon correct principles, that such a result can
ensue; and we presume every patriot who entertains a proper respect for himself and
his country will be ready to exclaim that, however much such a conflict is, at all
times, to be regretted, yet, if it should be urged upon us, contrary to the eternal prin-
ciples of right and justice, let it come! let it come!

"But it may not be amiss to examine, for a moment, on what foundation such ap-
prehensions repose.
Texas is not only independent by declaration, but she is sove-
reign and independent in substance and in fact; and, as far as can be judged from her
past history or present condition, and the quiescent course of Mexico towards her for
the last twenty months, there exists not the slighest ground to fear that her independ-
ence is not permanent. Is there any substantial reason, then, why we should not
treat with the Republic of Texas as a sovereign and independent nation of the earth?
Should we delicately consult the mere stubbornness of Mexico in this matter? Must
we stand as idle spectators of her froward imitation of Old Spain, in refusing to rec-
ognise the independence of her revolted colonies, lest she visit upon us the vengeance
which she has attempted in vain to inflict upon Texas? If this be a duty of neu-
trality, then it appears clear that an equal obligation exists to refrain from any nego-
tiation with a revolted colony until the mother country acknowledges her independ-
ence. Such a course, however, is contrary to the invariable custom of nations.
Indeed, the previous course of our own Government, under almost precisely similar
circumstances, has been in accordance with the course for which we contend. Before
Spain had recognised the independence of Mexico herself, and while the latter was
far from settled in the exercise of her assumed sovereignty, a negotiation for the pur-
chase of her territory to the Rio del Norte was urged upon her through Mr. Clay,
then Secretary of State, under the Administration of the younger Adams. Where
then were the constitutional objections to the annexation of Texas? The same poli-
cy was pursued and brought almost to consummation under the Administration of
President Jackson. Wherefore now such extreme delicacy on the subject of our for-
eign relations?

"But as it is upon the substance of this important subject that we desire to be dis-
tinctly understood at present; therefore,

"1. Be it resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of Alabama in General Assembly convened, That the overture on the part of the Republic of Texas, for annexation to the United States of America, ought to be met by the federal authorities in the most friendly manner, and should be accepted as soon as it can be done without a violation of our honor as a nation, or any principle of international law.

"2. And be it further resolved, That our Senators in Congress be instructed, and our Representatives requested, to urge and sustain the foregoing views on all proper occasions.

"3. And be it further resolved, That the Governor of this State be requested:

transmit, as early as practicable, a copy of the foregoing preamble and resolutions to each of our Senators and Representatives in Congress, a copy to the Governor of each State of the Union, with a request that it be laid before the Legislature of his State, and a copy to the President of the United States."

The observations I shall think it proper to make on these resolutions may with propriety be preceded by an explanation of some expressions I employed on the preceding day, which, as I have since learned, were not fully understood.

I stated, when speaking of the manner in which the memorials, petitions, and resolutions on the subject of Texas had been treated, that the Committee on Foreign Affairs was not the committee to which I should have been desirous that they should be referred; and in assigning the reasons why I did not wish them sent to this committee-the most important committee of this House-and for every member of which I have great personal respect, I stated that it was in consequence of the composition of that committee, in both points of view, both as to the sectional question of party as between the North and the South, and also as between the Administration and the Opposition. And in reference to the second branch of the observation, I said that the committee contained "six and a half" members who were to be considered as friends of the Administration, and the remainder were supposed to belong to the Opposition. I have understood since that some of the members of the House had doubts as to what was intended by the expression "six and a half," as thus applied.

I will now state, by way of explanation, that I considered six of the members of that committee as what I should call devoted friends of the Administration-as toe-the-mark gentlemen-gentlemen who considered that obedience, implicit obedience to what are called in certain quarters the "usages of the democratic party," required the sacrifice, on almost every occasion, of their own private and personal opinions to the views and opinions and purposes of a majority of this House.

But the committee contained one member [Mr. LEGARE] who considered himself, and was considered by his friends, and, I believe, by the House generally, as a friend and supporter of the Administration in general cases, but as possessing and professing a personal independence of spirit, which left him at liberty to oppose the Administration on some of the most important questions which are ever presented to this House. That was what I meant by saying that there were six and a half friends of the Administration on that committee-nothing more and nothing less. I referred to the personal disposition of one member as to party and party questions coming before this House. As to the other members of the committee, I do not know but my estimate may be in some degree incorrect. There is another member I have classed as among the devoted friends of the Administration and faithful to the usages of the democratic party, but who, it is possible, may not be willing to avow himself so far a party man; and possibly I may be justified in referring to that gentleman on this particular question: I mean the Representative from Michigan, [Mr. CRARY.] I say on this question, because the Legislature of Michigan is one of those which have protested against the admission of Texas into this Union. I do not know but that every vote he has at any time given, having any bearing on this subject, has been strictly in conformity with the views expressed by the Legislature of his

own State. If so, he can explain for himself, and state his own views, and let the House and the country know how far he does agree with the Legislature of his State. Because I have, by an inference which, perhaps, will not be admitted by all the members of this House, considered the annexation of Texas as being, and as intended to be, an Administration measure, I trust, before 1 release the House from the tedious task I am at this moment inflicting upon it, that I shall assign some reasons for this inference. I say that it is strictly an Administration measure, intended so to be, so that, should public opinion ever favor it, the Administration may take advantage of the fact. If the Representative from Michigan agrees in views with the Legislature of his own State, I shall be happy to hear him say so, and to say it explicitly. And, would to Heaven I had the privilege of polling every member of the House at this moment on that subject! Then there would be none of this obfuscation, of this mystification, which must ever continue as long as the House closes its doors against all discussion of the subject. I shall be happy to hear the Delegate from Michigan declare his political creed, and that as clearly, as explicitly, as earnestly as the Legislature has done of that State whose People he represents on this floor.

I was considering the great importance of the resolutions of the State Legislatures; and in what I said I had reference as well to the resolutions of States which desire the annexation as of those who are opposed to it. Of Legislatures of this description there are three, I think. The first I shall notice is the Legislature of Alabama. She has advanced a number of considerations deserving of the fullest attention, examination, and scrutiny, and of refutation, so far as they are capable of being refuted. To do so would, in my opinion, be among the duties of the Committee on Foreign Affairs; and will be of any committee to which the resolutions, memorials, and petitions on the general subject may be referred. For I do not disguise to myself the desperate condition of the resolution of my colleague, [Mr. CUSHING,] after what has taken place in this House. But I beg members of this House to consider that if they shall ultimately-as I suppose they will-cut short this discussion by calling the previous question, or by laying it on the table, they will not thereby escape the same question at the next session. If I shall have being and breath, I here promise them that the question shall be brought up again; whether it will be under more favorable auspices is for time alone to disclose. I do not think it possible that even this Congress can persevere in closing its doors against all discussion. I do not, cannot think that is possible. But if this Congress do so, and if, after seeing what the feeling of the People of the United States is respecting the gag they have put on this House, and on their own mouths, that act shall by them be repeated, I entertain the hope that another Congress is at no great distance, when we shall hear nothing of the gag, or of a resolution first to receive, and then not to consider, but to lay on the table, memorials or petitions from the People on any subject whatever. There is a reform for the People of the United States to effect. I thank Heaven there is reason to conclude they are seriously thinking of it at this time.

I will spare the House from reading and commenting at length upon the arguments in the preamble of the resolutions from Alabama. I will send only one short passage to the Clerk's table, which I will thank him