The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1844-03-22
TExAs-THE INTELLIGENCER.

THINGS cHAKIrr.--fag usft"
rEyAs-THE INTELLIGENCER
One Of the chief objections 10 the admission
ofT,xss. which the lntelligencer urges, is that
this country is already too large.
To This assertion Of the mere opinion OF The
Intelligence, we oppose Others Of perhaps
equal authority Mr.. Adams did not think 1t
too large when he opposed the cession of this
great and fertile country. Mr.. Clay did not
think il TOO large when he denounced the uea-
Nv. which was to disnherit our posterty OF so
glorious patrimony.
Messrs Adams and Clay did not consider 1t
TOO large when they sought, by treaty, TO recov-
er this fair, but lost portion OF our territory; they
were consislent--they opposed its cession-
they seized the first opportunity TO recover pos
session.
General Jackson did not think our country
already too large, when he sought TO annex
Texas to this country. We have every reason
to suppose he is of the same opinion still
We have no reason TO suppose Mr.. Clay Is
opposed to annexing Texas to this Union. 1t
may soon be shown why we have no reason 10
suppose it,
Mr.. Adams does not object on the ground Of
the country being too large. Thus we have
this array of authority against the ipse dixit OF
the InteIligencer. To which is due the greater
Difference, let our readers judge.
That the home or domestic trade is, beyond
all comparison, the most desirable to nation,
is an axiom long since settled. Is II then the
part of wisdom 10 reject, not for ourselves only,
but for our posterty also, the vast and ever
swelling trade of so fertile a land, because
some persons choose TO indulge theory
that a large territory cannot exist under
one Government. 1t will be quite time
enough to acknowledge this asserted the
ory when it shall become reality,
rather the moment il becomes real il will work
its own cure, and I" sufficient unto the day, is
the evil thereof" If we could secure the exclu-
sive trade of Texas as an independent State, we
should not reap benefits such as we would if it
were Incorporated into The Union. Her policy
might not allow it. We might have 10 enter into
rivalry with other nations. Already we have
seen that in her early infancy her trade with us
amounted toa million and half Of dollars, which,
under rivalry of foreign nations, has, in her ad-
vancing youth, dwindled down 10 about one hun
dred and fifty thousand dollars. The necessary
frontier expenses between the two nations, would
be greater than the profit of trade. The intertra-
ding as one nation, and the mutual interchange
of personal courtesy which would annually be
made, would form link Of perpetual strength
unknown TO the nations of antiquity.
Those who Judge by the records of history Of
the discord and decay of large extended en-
pires, overlook entirely the controlling circum-
stances connected with the cases. While trade
was sparse, and the communication was only
at distant intervals the different provinces
were as completely alien in everything which
can secure attachment, or cause a cement, as
if they were separate nations; indeed, much
worse-for partial laws oppressed some, and
gave TO other portions of the country invidious
advantages, while in other cases they were dis
tant appendages upon which were quauered
the rapacous needy.
There is no instance on record of equal
rights and privileges extending throughout
land, however large, which did not secure it
against internal disruption. The only cause
for separation is where one party is denied equal
rights it seeks them by separation. Nopary in
the full enjoymen, of equal rights erer can seek
TO diminish its advantages by diminishing its
power, and converting friends into rivals, if not
into enemies. The question Of country being
too large cannot be discussed at the present day
without eliciting the clearest demonstrations
tina, the bonds of union are of a very different
texture from those of former nations, which
burst at every pressure.