The Sun.
London, England, 1841-09-13 00:00:00

THE UNITED STATES AND

TEXA

So much nttention has been paid in the City to the
question respecting the northern boundary of the
United States, that the southern boundary seems

scarcely to have awakened the interest it deserves,
which is the more remarkable, as the question con-
cerning the annexation of Texas to the United
States is one of very high commercial importance, and
may ultimately involve even the existence of the protec-
tive American tariff. When the Texans were wil-
ling to annex their territory they met with refusal
from the United States, chiefly, if not entirely,
through northern influence, for the manufacturing
party of the north, knowing their agricultural fel-
low-citizens of the south were opposed to the pro-
tective system, feared an increase of votes from
the south in Congress, which would weaken, if
no: defeat, the high tariff system. The offer • %%as
therefore rejected, and by this very rejection the ma-
nufacturing interests have found they hese placed them-
selves in such a false position, that the tendency of
affairs i 3 more against the existence of the high tariff
than if Texas had actually been annexed, for while in
the latter case they would merely have had a section of
their own Legislature against them, which they might
have driven to some compromise, by concessions to the
details of a tariff, they now find a formidable neighbour,
whose territory runs along a line of frontier, and who
is determined to have no tariff at all, as soon as the
state of the revenue will permit. Hence it is not to
be wondered at that the proposed annexation, which
was at first rejected, is now regarded not altogether
unfavourably, and some of the United States Journals
have evidently been in favour _ of the scheme, which,
though frustrated, at the only time, perhaps, when it
was really possible to carry it out, has for upwards of
40 years been a project with the statesmen of the
United States.

To show the history of this desire for the annexation
of Texas, it is necessary to go back as far as the year
1800, when Mr. Pinckney and Mr. Munroe, the Pleni-
potentiaries of the United States, acting under the in-
structions of Mr. Madison, then Secretary of State to
Mr. Jefferson, addressed a letter, dated the '2Bth of Ja-
nuary, to M. Cavallos. the Spanish Secretary of State,
in which they say, " We have the honour to .present
your Excellency a paper on this subject, which, we pre-
sume. proves in the most satisfactory manner that the
boundaries of that province (meaning Louisiana), as
established by the treaties referred to, are the River
Perdido to the east, and the Rio Bravo to the west.

•
The facts and principles which justify this conclu-
sion arc so satisfactory to our Government as to sa-
tisfy us that the United States have not a better
right to the Island of New Orleans under the cession
referred to than to have the whole district of territory

which is above described." Tnis was an effort to ob-
tain Texas, and on the 12th of March, 181 S, Mr.
Adams, then Secretary of State, in a letter to Don

Onis, the Spanish Minister, repels the suggestion of

any doubt that Texas belonged to the United States.
He said :—" You know, Sir, and your own notes furnish
themselves the most decisiv3 evidence, that France,

while she hell the colony of Louisiana, never did coo
eider the Mississippi the western boundary of that pro.
vince. She always claimed the territory which you
call Texas, as being within the limits and forming
a part of Louisiana." However, on the 22d of Fe-
bruary, 1819, the United States, to prevent the trans-
fer of the Florida to a foreign Power in the general di-
lapidation of the Spanish monarchy, agreed to recog-
nise by a treaty with Spain the boundary of the Sabine
River, under which Texas became a part of the Re-
public of Mexico.
Although this recognition has taken pl ice there
was a strong feeling in the Un ted States not to
abandon the claim, and the possession of Texas by
Mexino had scarcely been settled, when Mr. Clay, in
the House of Representatives, introduced a resolu-
tion—" That the equivalent proposed to be given
by Spain for that part of Louisiana west of the S thine
was inadequate, and that it would be inexpedient to
make a transfer o it." On the elevation of Mr. Adams
to the Presidency, almost his first act was an attempt
to recover Texas, and on the 26th of .March, 1825,
Mr. Clay, then Secretary of State, instructed the
American Minister in Mexico that the boundary
was too near the United States ; that a change was
desirable ; and informed him that the President
wished him to sound the Mexican Government on the
subject, further instructing him to offer $1,000,000
far the whole country to the Rio del Norte. In
1831 a preliminary convention for the purchase of
the country for $5.000,000 was actually concluded,
but this was cancalled before it could he ratified.
President Jackson had previously attempted to ob-
tain it for $4,000,000, and even $5,000,000, by a
negotiation, which failed. In 1832, after the battle of
San Jacinto had compelled the separation of Texas
from Mexico, the Texan Government proposed to join
the Union. This offer, as before stated, was declined,
under the influence of an impression that the
southern portion of the Union would be rendered too
powerful, and it is a singular fact that Mr. Adams,
Rho had been anxious to purchase Texas, now headed
the party who refused to accept it gratis.
This one act of rejection stands in singular contrast
with a line of policy pursued unremittingly for upwards
of 40 years to obtain Texas, sometimes by virtue of
alleged right, sometimes by way of purchase, the rise
in the offers of the purchase-money showing the in-
creasing anxiety to obtain the territory. fleece
the rejection had rather the appearance of a pa-
roxysm than of a deliberate act, and the United
States are now beginning to reflect with regret
on the chance of making an acquisition which they
so gratuitously threw away. The leading party in
Texas are strongly against all notion of annexation,
and regard the previous refusal of their offer as a
fortunate escape. Should Texas adhere to her in-
tention of doing away with customs' dues altogether,
as soon as she can supply her revenues from another
source, it would probably be for the int-rest of com-
mercial Europe that an annexation should never take
place, as an independent State with no tariff at all
would be the most formidable check possible against
the demands by a neighbour for a high tariff. A. letter
in an American paper, which calls attention to the im-
portance of its annexation, makes the possibility of war
with England an argument. This is only an illustra-
tion of what may be gati.ered from the general state of
the question, that the tendency of an annexation party
in Texas (if such there be) would be less towards the
maintenance of peaceful relations with European na-
tions than that of the party who advocate the inde-
pendence of the infant republic.—Timcs.