Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1844-12-28

Texlan authorities very Justly thought bound them
in honor TO decline the negotiation pressed upon
them by the Executive of the United States. The
whole paragraph of the Letter Of our Secretary Of
State Of January 49, 1874, in which this advice is
given, is sufficiently curious and important to de-
serve insertion here:
The pending negotiation wiM Merico ought
( mol 10 present any difficulty, unless Texas is pre-
/ pared TO 60 back again under the dominion of that
+ Power. AS it is certain that she will not consent
I TO this under any possible circumstances the re-
: suit of that negotiation cannot affect unlavorably
the proposition of annexation to this country. If
/. Mexico should acknowledge the independence Of
= Texas, then Texas will have an madispaed right
to dispose of herself as she pleases and if Mex
leo shall refuse that acknowledgment, Texas will
= the more need THE PROTECTION Dhich the United
x States noto offers. She can require nothing more,
in this last event, than Hdtthe United States shall
take upon themselves the adjustment Of her diff
: cmties Nth Merico"
We will not pause, in our immediate purpose, to
comment upon the two important admissions in this
paragraph, besides that of knowledge of the ex-
sting armistice. We cannot, however, refrain from
stating them, follows: First, that until Mexico
shall have acknowledged the independence Of Texas,
herself: and, secondly, that the Executive knew
thai the United States must in the event of annexa-
tioI, take upon themselves the adjustment of g the
difficulties with Mexico What these difficult
ties y would be, the Government had been assured
mare than four months before, by the Mexican
Government, through our Minister at Mexico, in
these words: "The Mexican Government will con-
sder equivalent to declaration of war against
tie Mexican Republic the passage of act for the
Incorporation of Texas with the territory of the
United States, "a consequence which, indeed, the
Executive of the United States, under the last Adj
mi1istration had, our readers know, declared to
be-. necessarily involved - in the act Of annexa-
tioa," so long as Texas remained at war whilst
the United States were at peace with her adversary
TO return, however, .he humanity of the pro-
posed annexation" Over-persuadeo y, his Gov
erlment the authorities of Texas did so far dlsi
gard the armistice to enter into the negotiation,
of which the Treaty" was the result-which
Treaty was concluded with the certainty OF a wal
with Mexico if it should be ratified, whilst the ar
mistce disregarded by Texas in view of that treaty
was still in existence, and negotiations for peace stll
pending. Witness the following extract from Let
ter from Mr.. MURPHY, Charge d'Aflaires il
Texas, to the Secretary of State of Texas, dated
April ~, 1874:
:" Mexico is not in a condition, If Il ,cas her pre-
sent purpose, TO move hostilities against Texas
and no such Increment can be reasonably appre-
hended. Mr.. Jones is well advised, 6y The off.
cidi report of the Teas commissioners, who
have lately adjourned their negotiations with the
| commissioners of Mexico to a distant day, that
the armistice heretofore proclaimed by this Cor
ernmeu bet,ceen Teas and Merico is get n fill
| force, and ,ciH continue, by cypress agreement
until they meet again TO resume negotiations.
Long before that time arrive, the great question
of annexation will doubtless be settled &c.
II thus appears that, SO far from having been i'm.
PEELED by the elevated motive of pure humanity
in which ambition and mere worldly influences had
no part, to seduce Texas into the making of
treaty of immediate annexation, for the purpose o.
putting q stop TO a Udr, attended,, the Presi
dent says, "by circumstances revolving to humanity,
the whole scope and effect of the intervention O
the Executive of the United States was to PUT
STOP TO PEACE, which in fact temporarily existed
| between Mexico and Texas from before the begin
ming till after the end of the negotiation of tn,
! Treaty, and would undoubtedly have been now il
Il EXISTENCE, III not HHdny out lOT our III
| reference.
/ This plain statement scatters to the winds til,
plea of Humanity, by which, in addition to that 0
| Necessity, the Executive, re-afirming the right o
the United States to annex Texas without regard Il
the wishes of Mexico, undertakes to Justify it
original and its renewed attempt to substitute itsel
for Texas in the difficulties which exist between
that Government and Mexico.
i We have thus, we think, irresistibly established
that, upon either or all of the grounds of Right, 0
Necessity, or of Humanity the claim set up by thu
Executive, upon the part of this Government, t
annex Texas to the Union, in the manner proposed
is utterly indefensibe.
| We have already said that these allegations mus
destroy each other. Had we any Right at all sub
stantial, how should the extreme, the dire argument
of Necessity have been the first used to give color
to our aggressive proceedings! How should RICH
subsst, in defiance of treaties alternating all claim
of Constitutions interposing nsuperable bars! How
| should we, at our pleasure, be able, by a sort o.
legerdemain, to recover what has been often and
so solemnly renowned under the most sacred forms
by which nation can bind itselfl
IL we have rights as against Mexico, why did we
so often, and up to the very moment when the in
trigue for this treaty was set at work, repeat the
pledge of neutrality, which pledge is conclusive
admission that zoe haze no right as against either
Of the parties!
4 NJ n L