Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1844-08-02
ANNEXATION-MOR NIISREPRESENTA
TIONS CORRECTEO

In answer TO the Patriot we last week showed
that at the South the Locofocos treat annexation as
strictly party question: stalking its decision upon
the result of the Presidential election; and even
that those Of the Wings, who are favorable to the
measure, consider Mr.. Clay as opposed to it-as
not to be roconciled to it, except in obedience to
the will of the people OF the country-anl, in the
case Of Mr. Lyons, that Annexation is to be sacr-
feed by them in preference to sacrificing their
Wing principles. We then promised to correct
other misrepresentation, and we now intend to re-
deem that promise.
The Patriot argues at some length to make its
readers believe that Annexation was not the con.
trolling question in the Locoloco National Conven.
tlon-thc main cause Of the defeat of Mr. Van Blu
rem, and of the nomination of Mr.. Polk; and to
impress this false view upon the people, it asserts
that the nomination was offered to Mr.. Wright, with
knowledge that he was opposed to annexation
Mr.. Wright is for annexation now but no matter
In reply we shall prove, by Locqfoco authority that
those positions of the Patriot are entirely Unbound
ed.
First we call Thomas II. Benton to the stand
In letter to Gen. Van Antwerp of Missouri, dated
June 3, 1914, Mr. Benton stigmatzes the defeat of
Mr.. Van Buren, the result of an intrigue to which,
however, he says Messrs. Polk and Dallas were not
pnvy, and he then goes on as follows:
The 7eras Treaty, which contaminated this intrigue oas
nothing but tic faai act in long conspiracy, rhoh dc sacrifice
Of Martin paa Basa had been preeoasy agreed and the
nomination Of Mr. Wright proves it for his opinions, and those
fatal would have been fatal to tho other Besides Mr..
Van Buren, right, and whenever Texas is admitted will
huge to be done in the manner pointed out by him"
This shows that it was Teras which defeated Mr..
Van Buren,, clearly enough; and mark, if you
please, that the nomination of Mr.. Wright is ad-
duced by Mr.. Benton as proof to show that this
question lcas mainly instrumental in defeating Mr..
Van Buren,, while the Patriot urges the same fact
to prove that it not But the Patriot will find
itself answered still more to the point by the next
witness. We call up the editor of the Illinois
State Register, who was member of the Locofoco
National Convention and speaks ca cathedral In
reply to this part of Mr. Bentons letter. the editor
of the Register says:
"The remark Of Benton that the Texas treuy was the
final in the conspiracy which consummaed the intrigue,
understand Il i not sheer nonsense sounds
rons Texas had contributed defeat then we should
have @ h% 5 'gt S SS faT hETTh
majority OF The remark of Col Benton in re
Sr nSth@g II was NOT known tho Convention lat Mr.
Wright was opposed Texas trouty If 1T HAD BEEN
MIR WRIGIIT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN NOMINATED
We hazard nothing in saying this"
We thus place member Of the Convention, ant
Locofoco editor, IN direct contradiction to The Pat
riot Let our neighbor tell, If can, to whomt till
utter Misrepresentation is to be charged let the
people of Vermont know whether it is they who are
to be duped and deceived, or whether tits theil
brethren of Illinois. Another fact may aid ou
readers in deciding this question of veracity; a
any rate it will show that the Annexation question
did most emphatically control the nomination O
George NJ. Dallas for Vice President. On the frs
ballot for Vice President after Mr.. Wright hat
declined, the result was as follows
Mr.. Fairfield of Maine, 81
Woodbury. of n. H., So
COss of Michigan, 80
Johnson of Kentucky, &c ,..,p
Stewart of Pennsylvania, ana 23ouoni
0FSDallaS Of Pennsybdhsa,us od13 .9telS
Marcy of New YorI, sa'l'i'm 81 oaol