The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1844-04-25
TEXAS AND MEXICO.


In the ouise, Of this article we will state a
few facts upon which, a. a basis, we propose 10
proye. that we have an undoubted right 10 make
the treaty with Texas, with or without The as
seat Of Mexico, and that both Adams and Clay,
il con sis,ent, must supporlit.
The leler Of Mr.. Clay to Mr.. Poinsett direct
ing him 10 eater into a treaty with Mexico Tor
Texas, is dated 25tb March, 1925. This was
about three years after the declaration OF indie
pendence by Mexico, while the Spanish armies
were still on her soil and in possession OF the
strongest of her forts, and with large portion
of her population in favor Of Spain, and about
twelve years before the acknowledgment of her
independence by Spain in 1887. On the 27'h
April, 1928. Mr.. Clay wrote his dispatches TO
Mr.. Everett, our Minister in Spain, to Try and
prevail with Spain TO cease her warfare, and to
acknowledge the Independence of her colonies,
as recovery was hopeless. Mexico enIertalns
the offer of treaty by the United States for Tex
as and claims sovereign right over her soil,
and proposes that each nation shall appoint
commissioners to examine he country and 10
arrange The boundary.
In October, 1925, Mr.. Everett says that Spain
expresses her determination never 10 yield the
sovereignty Of her colonies, and avows her abb
lily to recover them.
Texas declared her independence eight
years ago, and has continuously maintained II,
driving out the Mexcans as often as they have
attempted TO invade her. Her soil is unpollued
BY hostile tread. The inhabitants are unani-
NOUS in opposition TO Mexico. There is no al
tribute of sovereignty which they do not exer-
else.
In his despatch Of 9Th April, 1925, TO MIR.
Everett, Mr. Clay says of Spain: ''True wis
dom dictates that Spain, without INDUCING IN
unavailing regrets on account of what she has
irrelrievably lost, should employ The means OF
retaining what she may yet preserve from the
wreck Of her former POSSESSIONS" and he adds,
''the war on the continent (of America) is at an
end" This is said lwslve years before the ac-
acknowledgement of Mexican independence by
Spain.
1t is perfectly clear that Messrs. Adams
and Clay must either have deemed the annexa-
ton of Texas matter of the first and most
Intelligencer to take portion of the territory
of Mexico before her independence is acknow
lodged by Spain, would be fragrant violation
Of our treaty Of amity with Spain, and would
be an offence to her giving just cause of war
we say, therefore, with good reason, that Adams
and Clay must have judged the necessity Of an
nexa,ion urgent indeed TO induce them to incur
the hazard of an unjust war, or they deemed
the acknowledgment Of the independence Of
Mexico by Spain as matter mol material TO our
RICH, TO treat for Texas. Neither Mr.. Adams
nor Mr.. Clay supposed for one moment that II
was a violation of our treaty Of amity with
Spain, or Just cause of offence TO her.
Spain did not conceive the war at an end
but entertained a most confident expectation
that she would re-conquer the country.
On the 18th September, 1925, six months az
ter Mr.. Clay had directed treaty for the acqui-
sition Of Texas, our Minister in Spain, Mr. Ev-
eret, who had approached the Spanish court to
mediate for the acknowledgment of indepen-
denc,, says the Spanish Minister spoke with
mo delcacY or reserve"
Mr.. E. says
"Hc remarked repeatedly that the King would
never abandon his claim TO these bis ancient and
rightul possessions that the cause was good one,
and that however unfavorsbe the prospect might
appear at present, they had right 10 suppose that
they should In the end succeed
"Thst the party IN the colonies in favor of indie
pendence, though dominant and apparently unresisted
was not IN reality strong as was supposed that it
consisted Of busy and active, but IN reality feeble
minority that the mass Of good citizens, consttu-
al. a.
vor Of he King, and were only waiting for some
suitable occasion TO come out in their strength and
put down the insurgents"
From the foregoing we perceive the refusal of
Spain to acknowledge the independence of the
American Republics was based not only upon
her own ability TO re-subjugate them, but upon
still stronger reasonable would not abandon
her loyal subjects, HON she believed constituted
large majority, and were DESTROYS Of remain
ing under her Government.
The hope of Spain 10 recover Mexico was
much less desperate than tina, Of Mexico to
subjugate Texas. Mexico preIends not to have
friend 10 Texas, while Spain thought she had
u majority in Mexico. And yet Myssrs Adams
and Clay conce,ved the non acknow ledgment
by Spain Of Mexican independence no mpedi.
ment whatever to OUT taking possession of
Texas by a ursiy with Mexico, twelve years
before the acknowledgment Of her indepen-
dence by Spain.
How little Spain would have relished our ia
king Texas may be judged from the firm deter
minstion expressed in subsequent letter OF
Mr.. Everett, of 26rb October, 1925. According
tn Mr. Everett the Spanish Minis or said
"Ihc Ming would never abandon his rights; that
IL was matter Of conscience with him to transmit
his hereditary possessions 10 his successors that