Southport telegraph. [volume] (Southport, W.T. [i.e. Kenosha, Wis.]) 1840-1850, 1844-05-14
THE TELEGRAPH.
SOUTHPORT, TUESDAY, NAY II. 1914.


Mr.. VAN buren, AND ANNExATIoN.-Mr.
Van Buren's letter on the subject Of the an
nexation OF Texas, has made IFS appearance
il was written in reply 10 the following in
terrogations addressed TO him by w. III.
Hammitt, delegate TO the Baltimore Con
yenton. First, the constitnionalay, and
second, the crpedieacy of the immediate
annexation Of Texas to the United States.
We regret that it is not in our power TO
present this document entire TO our readers
lis length precludes the possibility, inasmuch
as It's insertion would require some eight or
nine columns Of our paper. 1t is an able
and dlspassionate exposition of the views of
its distinguished author, and is sufficiently
explicit to satisfy all, except those who are
determined not to be satisfied. The Ma
tional lntelligencer, an uncompromising po-
lltlcal enemy of Mr.. Van Buren,, remarks
respecting this letter, that his views are ex-
pressed "agaiast annexation, under present
circumstances, with force and direcmess far
exceeding those which we remember in any
state paper from his hands," We can only
give brief glance at some of the remarks
contained in the letter. On the constitu-
tionality of admitting Texas into the Union
Mr.. Van Buren's letter is full and con clu-
s;ve. On this point, the opinions of many Of
The trainers Of the Constitution, with regard
to the admission of new states without the
limits of the United States, are quoted
He argues from the constitution itself. and
by the precedents of the acquisition of Lou
isania and Florida, that the constitutional
power to annex new territory to the United
States is unquestionable. Among the var-
arguments with which he fortifies this posi-
ton, is that Mr.. Clay himself when Secre-
tary of State under Mr.. Adams, authorized
the negotiation Of treaty with Mexico, by
which the admission of Texas into the Uni
on was TO be accomplished, notwithstanding
it might have been Sin decided opposition
to the wishes of considerable and respect
able portion of the confodoracy."
Upon the subject of expcdicncy, Mr.. Van
Buren, is equally explicit He regards the
immediate annexation of Texas to be incr-
ptdient, for the reason that it is naj"st; and
in support of this position he gives full
history of our present and past relations with
Mexico, and states the obligation which the
law Of nations imposes upon us, to observe
neutrality, while Texas and Mexico are in a
state of hosiiIitics. Our obligation as a
government, and our moral responsibility as
people, arc enforced in manner which can
but commend itself to the good sense and
intelligence of the American people He
considers the simple question of honor and
right, TO be the only principle which should
govern the decision of the question in lis
present attitude; annexation is not JUS,
therefore it IL bot crpcsticnt, is the rcasona-
bic conclusion of Mr.. Van Buren,s argu-
ment.
In the event of certain contingencies in
which anncxation might be proper, Mr.. Van
Buren, expresses himself fully and uncquv-
ocally; and. he indicates with precision the
course he would pursue, should he be in a
situation requiring his action in the matter,
in the event of these contingencies. We
shall probably remark further on this letter
hereafter.