Page images
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

NORTH CAROLINA.-Hutchins G. Burton, John Culpepper. William Davidson, Weldon N. Edwards, Charles Fisher, Thomas H. Hall, Charles Hooks, Thomas Settle, Jesse Slocumb, James

S. Smith, Felix Walker, Lewis Williams-12.
SOUTH CAROLINA. Josiah Brevard, Elias
Earle, James Ervin, William Lowndes, James
McCreary, James Overstreet, Charles Pinckney,
Eldred Simkins, Sterling Tucker-9.
GEORGIA. Joel A. Abbott, Thomas W. Cobb,
Joel Crawford, John A. Cuthbert, Robert R.
Reid, William Terrell-6.

ALABAMA.-John Crowell-1.
MISSISSIPPI.-John Rankin-1.
LOUISIANA.-Thomas Butler-1.

KENTUCKY-Richard C. Anderson, jr., William Brown, Benjamin Hardin, Alney McLean, Thomas Metcalf, Tunstall Quarles, Geo. Robertson, David Trimble-8.

TENNESSEE. Robert Allen, Henry H. Bryan,

Newton Cannon, John Cocke, Francis Jones,

John Rhea 5.

Total Yeas from Slave States 76; in all 90. NAYS--Against giving up the Restriction

on Slavery in Missouri:

NEW HAMPSHIRE. Joseph Buffum, jr., Josiah Butler, Clifton Clagett, Arthur Livermore, William Plumer, jr., Nathaniel Upham....6.

MASSACHUSETTS (including Maine)....Benjamin Adams. Samuel C. Allen, Joshua Cushman, Edward Dowse, Walter Folger, jr., Timothy Fuller, Jonas Kendall, Martin Kinsley, Samuel Lathrop, Enoch Lincoln, Marcus Morton, Jeremiah Nelson, James Parker, Zabdiel Sampson, Nathaniel Sils bee, Ezekiel Whitman_16.

RHODE ISLAND. Nathaniel Hazard_1. CONNECTICUT Jonathan O. Moseley, Elisha Phelps. John Russ, Gideon Tomlinson__4.

VERMONT. Samuel C. Crafts, Rollin C. Mallary, Ezra Meech, Charles Rich, Mark Richards, William Strong-6.

NEW YORK. Nathaniel Allen, Caleb Baker, Robert Clark, Jacob H. De Witt, John D. Dick inson, John Fay, William D. Ford, Ezra C. Gross, James Guyon, jr., Aaron Hackley, jr., George Hall, Joseph S. Lyman, Robert Monell, Nathaniel Pitcher, Jonathan Richmond, Randall S. Street, James Strong, John W. Taylor, Albert H. Tracy, Solomon Van Rensselaer, Peter H. Wen

dover, Silas Wood_22.

[blocks in formation]

with Lemuel Sawyer of N. C., and David Walker of Ky., from the Slave States. Mr. Clay of Ky., being Speaker, did not vote.]

This defeat broke the back of the Northern resistance to receiving Missouri as a Slave State.

Mr. Taylor, of N. Y., now moved an amendment, intended to include Arkansas Territory under the proposed Inhibition of Slavery West of Missouri; but this motion was cut off by the Previous Question (which then cut off amendments more rigorously, according to the rules of the House, than it now does), and the House proceeded to concur with the Senate in inserting the exclusion of Slavery from the Territory West and North of Missouri, instead of that just stricken out by 134 Yeas to 42 Nays, (the Nays being from the South). So the bill was passed in the form indicated above; and the bill admitting Maine as a State, (relieved, by a conference, from the Missouri rider,) passed both Houses without a division, on the following day.

Such was the virtual termination of the struggle for the restriction of Slavery in Missouri, which was beaten by the plan of proffering instead an exclusion of Slavery from all the then Federal Territory West and North of that State. It is unquestionable that, without this compromise or equivalent, the Northern votes, which passed the bill, could not have been obtained for it.

VIII.

THE THIRD MISSOURI STRUGGLE.

THOUGH the acceptance of Missouri as a State, with a Slave Constitution, was forever settled by the votes just recorded, a new excitement sprang up on her presenting herself to Congress (Nov. 16, 1820), with a State Constitution, framed on the 19th of July, containing the following resolutions :

"The General Assembly shall have no power to pass laws, First, for the emancipation of slaves

without the consent of their owners, or without paying them, before such emancipation, a full equivalent for such Slaves so emancipated; and, Second, to prevent bona fide emigrants to this State, or actual settlers therein, from bringing from any of the United States, or from any of deemed to be Slaves, so long as any persons of their Territories, such persons as may there be the same description are allowed to be held as Slaves by the laws of this State.

*

* *It shall be their duty, as soon as may be, to pass such laws as may be necessary, from coming to, and settling in, this State, under "First, to prevent free negroes and mulattoes any pretext whatever."

The North, still smarting under a sense of its defeat on the question of excluding Slavery from Missouri, regarded this as needlessly defiant, insulting, and inhuman, and the last quoted as palpably in violation of that clause of the Federal Constitution which gives to the citizens of each State (which blacks are, in

several Free States,) the rights of citizens in every State. A determined resistance to any such exclusion was manifested, and a portion of the Northern Members evinced a disposition to renew the struggle against the further introduction of Slaves into Missouri. At the first effort to carry her admission, the House voted it down-Yeas, 79; Nays, 93. A second attempt to admit her, on condition she would expunge the obnoxious clause (last quoted) of her Constitution, was voted down still more decisively-Yeas, 6; Nays, 146.

The House now rested, until a joint resolve, admitting her with but a vague and ineffective qualification, came down from the Senate, where it was passed by a vote of 26 to 18six Senators from Free States in the affirmative. Mr. Clay, who had resigned in the recess, and been succeeded, as Speaker, by John W. Taylor, of New York, now appeared as the leader of the Missouri admissionists, and proposed terms of compromise, which were twice voted down by the Northern Members, aided by John Randolph and three others from the South, who would have Missouri admitted without condition or qualification. At last, Mr. Clay proposed a Joint Committee on this subject, to be chosen by ballot-which the House agreed to by 101 to 55; and Mr. Clay became its Chairman. By this Committee it was agreed, that a solemn pledge should be required of the Legislature of Missouri, that the Constitution of that State should not be construed to authorize the passage of any Act, and that no Act should be passed, " by which any of the citizens of either of the States should be excluded from the enjoyment of the privileges and immunities to which they are entitled under the Constitution of the United States." The Joint Resolution, amended by the addition of this proviso, passed the House by 86 Yeas to 82 Nays; the Senate concurred (Feb. 27th, 1821,) by 26 Yeas to 15 Nays(all Northern but Macon, of N. C.) Missouri complied with the condition, and became an accepted member of the Union. Thus closed the last stage of the fierce Missouri Controversy, which for a time seemed to threaten-as so many other controversies have harmlessly threatened—the existence of the Union.

IX.

EXTENSION OF MISSOURI.

THE State of Missouri, as originally organized, was bounded on the West by a line already specified, which excluded a triangle West of said line, and between it and the Missouri, which was found, in time, to be exceedingly fertile and desirable. It was free soil by the terms of the Missouri compact, and was also covered by Indian reservations, not to be removed without a concurrence of two-thirds of the Senate. Messrs. Benton and Linn, senators from Missouri,

undertook the difficult task of engineering through Congress a bill including this triangle (large enough to form seven Counties) within the State of Missouri; which they effected, at the long Session of 1835-6, so quietly as hardly to attract attention. The bill was first sent to the Senate's Committee on the Judiciary, where a favorable report was procured from Mr. John M. Clayton, of Delaware, its Chairman; and then it was floated through both Houses without encountering the perils of a division. The requisite Indian treaties were likewise carried through the Senate; so Missouri became possessed of a large and desirable accession of territory, which has since become one of her most populous and wealthy sections, devoted to the growing of hemp, tobacco, etc., and cultivated by Slaves. This is the most pro-Slavery section of the State, in which was originated, and has been principally sustained, that series of inroads into Kansas, corruptions of her ballot-boxes, and outrages upon her people, which have earned for their authors the appellation of Border Ruffians.

X.

THE ANNEXATION OF TEXAS.

THE name of Texas was originally applied to a Spanish possession or province, lying between the Mississippi and the Rio Grande del Norte, but not extending to either of these great rivers. It was an appendage of the Viceroyalty of 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 made prisoners by the Spanish military authorities. 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.

The etymology of Natchitoches, a city of Louisiana on the Red River, several miles within the present boundary of that State, attests its claims to a Spanish origin.

When Louisiana was transferred by France to the United States, without specification of boundaries, 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 frontiers, until they stood opposite cach other across what was then tacitly settled as the boundary between 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 assump

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 frag ir 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, never

tion of complicity on the part of her rulers | independence was declared; in 1836, at the 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 mer-theless, in reiterating their declaration of inchants 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 naturally 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 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 Rock Journal, which announced his exodus 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

dependence, 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 1843-44, 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.

We, the undersigned, in closing our duties to our constituents and our country as members of the 27th 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 incident 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, interested in the continuance of Domestic Slavery and solemnly and unalterably determined: that it the Slave Trade in these United States, have shall be speedily carried into execution; and that, by this admission of new Slave Territory and

Slave States, the undue ascendancy of the Slave holding power in the Government shall be secured and riveted beyond all redemption !!

That it was with these views and intentions that settlements were effected in the Province, by citizens of the United States, difficulties fomented with the Mexican Government, a revolt brought about, and an Independent 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 co-operation of our own Government, with similar views, is not the less certain and demonstrable.

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 President, 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 unwarrantable aggressions of bodies of our own citizens, enlisted, organized and officered within our own borders, and marched in arms and battle array upon the territory, and against the inhabitants of a friendly government, in aid of freebooters and insurgents, and the premature 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 U. 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, delivered 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 references will show, very conclusively, that the particular objects of this new acquisition of Slave Territory, were THE PERPETUATION OF SLAVERY AND THE CONTINUED

ASCENDANCY OF THE SLAVE POWER.

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

"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 nfinitely grave and interesting to the people who in

habit 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 who are familiarly acquainted with its practical ef Confederacy; which system of Slavery is held by all, fects, to be of highly beneficial influence to the country within whose limits it is permitted 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 the South does not possess within her limits a blessing with which the affections of her people are so closely entwined and so completely erfibred, and whose value is more highly appreciated, than that which we are now considering.

+

*

ring the last session of Congress, when a Senator from "It may not be improper here to remark, that duMississippi proposed the acknowledgment of Texian 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 meain a public speech recently delivered in New York, to sure; and, indeed, Mr. Webster has been bold enough, many thousand citizens. to declare that the reason that influenced his opposition was his abhorrence to 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; erful influence of religious feeling, it would become and that being predicated upon, and aided by the powirresistible and overwhelming.

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 trymen of the Northern States, to secure us final jusand genuine love of country among our fellow-countice on this subject; yet we cannot consider it safe or expedient for the people of the South to entirely disregard the efforts of the fanatics, and the opinions of such men as Webster, and others who countenance such dangerous doctrines.

"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 already received protection from Government on a most liberal scale; under which encouragement they have improved and flourished beyond example. The South has very peculiar interests to preserve: interests already violently assailed and boldly threatened.

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

The speech of Mr. Adams, exposing the whole system of duplicity and perfidy toward Mexico, had marked the conduct of our Government; and the emphatic expressions of opposition which began to come up from all parties in 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 project is nearly, 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 deferred for a more favorable moment for its accomplishment, 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 annex. ation, and the candidate favorable to that measure was successful by an overwhelming majority,

[ocr errors]

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 Hon. HENRY A. WISE, a member of Congress from the District in which our present Chief Magistrate resided 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 safeguard of American property--of the American Constitution-of the Ameri can Union, vanished into thin air. This must be 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 Mountains, AND THE SOUTHERN SCALE MUST KICK THE BEAM!"

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 N. Y., 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 Presi dent 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 states. man 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 Mississippimen 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 the 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 its 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 profaned."

Mr. W. proceeded to insist that a majority of the people of the United States were in favor of the an

nexation; at all events, he would risk it with the De mocracy of the North.

"Sir." said Mr. W., "it is not only the duty of the Government to demand the liquidation of our claims, and demand the non-invasion of Texas. Shall we sit and the liberation of our citizens, but to go further, still while the standard of insurrection is raised on our borders, and let a horde of slaves, and Indians, and Mexicans roll up to the boundary line of Arkansas and Louisiana? No. It is our duty at once to say to Mexico, If you strike Texas, you strike us; and if England, standing by, should dare to intermeddle, and ask, Do you take part with Texas?' his prompt answer should be, • Yes, and against you.'

[ocr errors]

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. THO's 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 spacious argument, and presents a variety of reasons in favor of the measure. He says, among other things:

WASHINGTON, Jan. 10th, 1843.

"DEAR SIR-You ask if I have expressed the opinion, that Texas would be annexed to the United States. I answer, yes; and this opinion has not been adopted without reflection, or without a careful obser vation of causes, which I believe are rapidly bringing about this result. I do not know how far these causes have made the same impression on others; but I am persuaded that the time is not distant when they will be felt in all their force. The excitement which you apprehend, may arise; but it will be temporary, and in the end, salutary."

He dodges the Constitutional objections as follows:

"I am, as you know, a strict constructionist of the mit the force of mere precedent to establish authority powers of our federal Government; and I do not adunder written constitutions. The power conferred by the Constitution over our foreign relations, and the repeated acquisitions of territory under it, seem to me to leave this question open as one of expediency." subject of Slavery. This is indeed a subject of extreme "But you anticipate objections with regard to the delicacy, but it is one on which the annexation of Texthought that the proposition would endanger our as will have the most salutary influence. Some have Union. I am of a different opinion. I believe it will bring about a better understanding of our relative rights and obligations."

In conclusion, he says:

"Having acquired Louisiana and Florida, we have an interest and a frontier on the Gulf of Mexico, and along our 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 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. Our own population is pressing onward to the Pacific. No power can restrain it. The pioneer from our Atlantic seaboard will soon kindle his fires, and erect his cabin, beyond the Rocky Mountains, and on the Gulf of California. If Mahomed comes not to the mountain, the mountain will go to Mahomed. Every year adds new difficulties to our progress, as natural and as

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »