The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1843-11-30

This writer might probably differ with US, and
attempt to prove that the danger would be suih
parks, and by being careful never 10 entrust The
torch 10 any one who was more ihan two-ihlrds
drunk. We should hardly argue the question.
Aud if the opponents Of the annexation Of Tex
as are all prepared, as this writer seems 10 be,
honestly to acknowledge that it is the design Of
Great Britain TO colQnize Texas, and that one
of the main objects and necessary results Of her
colonization Of il will be the abolition Of slave
ry, The field of argument on the Texas question
will be very much abridged, and the dispute
soon settled.
"Bul how would it better the case" con-
tinues the writer, "to annex Texas 10 the Uni
ted States, and continue her slavery2 Would
not her population of slave holders and slaves
come in contact with the free population of
Mexico" The People of the South are album
dainty willing to encounter all the dangers like
" to result from contact with the free popula.
ton of Mexico. They would infinitely prefer
that, to the success of The intrigues Of the pow
erful government Of Great Britain with nation
composed of our own brethren, speaking the
gence and spirit of enterprise. To convert them
into enemies, TO free their slaves and place them
in situation readily to communicate with our
slave population, would expose US to the most
obvious and imminent danger. But Mexico,
with her debased and mungrel population, nomi-
nally free, but 10 reality more ensiaved and OPP
pressed than our Southern negroes, would have
farmore reason than US 10 dread the consequ.n-
ces Of too close neighborhuod.
We venture to assert that the effect of the
annexation Of Texas, in mercy opening ''a
glorious market" for slaves, and encouraging the
breeding Of them, has never entered into the
calculations of any Southern man. Specu a.
lion on contingent profits is not so quick ,willed
in the South. The object Of the Southern Peo-
pie is selfpreservalion, and not commercial
gains of any kind. The writer saws that the
South would care little " for her agricultural in
teress, while she could have such market for
slaves" This shows strange degree Of igno-
rance. The agricultural interest which is para
mount every where throughout the country,
could hardly be neglected with safety in the
South, which has neither commerce nor manu-
lectures. 1t would be much more plausible
obj, cton, TO urge in he South that the annexa-
ton Of Texas would tend to drain il of its capt.
tai aud laboring population, and thus diminish
the value Of land. 81
As 10 the remuneration Of Texas 10 Mexico,
an insuperabe difficulty in the way OF it would
be decided obj ction on he part of The People
OF Texas to hat measure Would the write,
have US assist M xicn, would he have US
quietly look on while other nations assisted her,
in reconquering her fo,ner province2 This
would be asking rather too much, at last from
Southern patience.
The right Of Mexico 10 Texas cannot be ad
United by US, who have recognised he iadepen
dence Of Texas, nor contend,d for by the Bri
tish Government, which has done the same
1t i, not necessary Tor Us, therefore. TO Obtain
The consent, either OF Mexico or of Gfeat Bri-
tain. TO the annexation of Texas TO this country.
Texas is an independent State, and she may do
with her territory what she pleases Ii she
choo .es to make il a theatre for The operations
of the British Government against slavery in
this country, il VIII not, perhaps, be dirccl in
fraction OF tile law OF atons; but il would be
a blow so obviously directed against the wei
fare, integrity and existence of our Union as 10
authorize a resort TO The great law Of sci preser-
valion, and justify us in effrc ing the ann xa-
tUn even without "the consent Of Texas her
SELF" and Obtaining as good tile us The Span
iards, through whom The Mexicans claim, had TO
the empire of the Aztecs, The domnions OF
unfortunate Montezuma.