Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1844-10-24
PLY puts an end a, once, to oil speculation on the

! ASHLAND, July !, 1911
Nv Dear Sir: received and thank You Tor
your friendly letter. aud the copy OF thc monitor;
You have JUS Is conceived my meaning Wheh !
referred in my Texas letter, 10 coEsidefahle ana
respectable portion of the Coafeder0cn. And you
Min, have strengthened your construction Of the
paragraph by reference 10 the TACT, 'iiai al TIC
date of nv letter. The States OF Ohio, Vermont
and Massachusetts had. almost unanimously, de-
clared against anncxalion the Legislature OF
Georgia had declined 10 recommend H. ana o'hef
States were believed 10 be adverse TO The measure
As TO the idea OF my counting The AboiitionlslS, IL
is perfectly absurd. No man in The Cnl'cd states
has been half so much abused by them as nave
been.
consider the Union great political partner
ship; and that new members ought not to be ad-
miticd into the concern al the imminent hazard
of lis dissolution Personally | could have no
objection TO the annexation OF Texas; but Ger
tainly would he unwilling 10 see The existing
Union dissolved or seriously JeoparGed Tor lie
sake Of acquiring Texas II any one desire 10
know the leading and paramount object oil my ny,
public life, the preservation ol this Union VII!
furnish him The key.
From developments being made in South Ca
rolina il is perfectly manifest, that parry exists
in thai State seeking a dissolution OF The Union,
and Tor that purpose employing The prclext oil
the rejection OF MIR Tyler's abomnablc treaty.
South Carolina, being surrounded by slave
States. would in the event OF dissolution OF
the Union suffer only comparative crIls; but II
is Otherwise with Kentucky. She has The eoun-
daIy of the Ohio extending hve hundred mics on
three free States. What would her condition
be in the event otlhe greatest calamity that could
be fall this nation!
In Kentucky. the Texas question will do the
Wing canse no prejudice. am glad Ia perceive,
in The proceedings OF the Clay Club OF Tu>cdIoo-
So. a similar belief expressed as To Alabama. IL
was bubble. blown up by Mr. Tyler, in the
most objectionable manner. for sinister purposes,
and lis bursting has injured nobody but Mr. van
/ Buren,.
Retaining an agreeable recollection OF the plea
sure which derived from forming yonrac1ualht-
anee las, spring. remain your 'rlehh ana Que
diem, servant, II. CLAY.
STEPHEN f. MILLER, Esq, Tuscaloosa; Ala.
MANIFESTO III-Or, Second i'abGma Lc'lcr.
/ ASHLAND, 27th July, 1911.
Ccn.lemcn have received your favor inform
inr me Ina, nv views as disclosed in ny letter
I from Raleigh on The question ot the Annexation
( OF Texas are nisconceived, il mol misFepfcsenl-
! ci. in Your quarter; and that il is supposed that
/ have changed my opinion from what II was in
/ 1919. | enieayorcd ID express myself in tina, lei
! Ter as explicitly rs | could. and ] do rot think
now. that it can be fairly misin,crpretcd
/ In 1919. when | addressed The House OF Rep
I reseclatives. the Executive had negotiated the
treaty with Spain, Ivy which Texas was coded to
| thai mower. but Congress had not then given any
sanction 10 the ccssion. believe now and |
thought then. that the trcaiy-making power Is not
| competent withou, the concurrence OF Congress,
| To code away any territory belonging the United
States. But Congress, by repeated acts, suisse
Cucnly manifested its appreciation Of The treaty:
! and these acts rendered il as valid and obligatory
upon the United States as if Congress had given
/ It's assent prior 10 the conclusion OF the treaty.
| AT tina, period OF 1910 Texas as claimed BY Us,
| was Unpcoplcd. No hostile incur>icns had been
made into il, by citizens OF the United States. In
1925 and 1897, there were but few inhabitants OF
Texas, consisting of some co'onislS. planted there
under The authority of Mexico.
Atnei;her Of the three periods above mentioned,
! had any State or section in this Union manifest
cd any opposition 10 Texas composing pant OF
it, Il has been said. that MIR Adams's admins
,ration offered TO negotiate with Mexico for Tex
as Notwithstanding tie existence OF war be-
tween Spain and Mexico, and that il could not,
therefore have believed that the acquisition oI
! Texas. nj that time world have involved the L
States in war with Spain Hence, il is argued.
tina, the ratification OF The late ticaiy could rot
have compromised our peace.
Mr. Adams thought il desirable to obtain Tex
as Two foreign powers claimed 1t. Mexico
was in possession. and Spain was doing nothing
TO assert ana enforce her claim. Her representa-
tive had even gone 80 far as 10 s,ipnla,e in q
Convention. 10 acknowledge the Independence OF
Mexico although that Convention was not raii-
fed ~ Spain.
Mr.. Adams had right 10 authorize tie ncgo-
iaiion of treaty for the acquisition ol Texas
with both or either of the powers claiming ii. II
was natural that he should begin with tina, power
/ = L Ia, q h.fi
interposed no obstacle She had made no dccla-
ration. that she would regard the acquisition OF
Texas as an act ofwar. In point OF fact, no o"er-
turc was fornall, made 10 Mexico 10 purchase
Texas. no negotiation was opened no treaty was
concluded II q negotiation had commenced, or
if a treaty had been signed. and Spain had pio-
tested the prudent and cautious policy which cha
rac,crizcd Mr. Adams's administration, wond
undoubtedly have prompted him 10 quiet Spain.
and accommodate The matter, previous To the an
ncxa,ion Of Texas 10 the u. States, and without
plnnging them in war with Spain. How totally
different are all the circumstances under which
with Mr.. Adamss authority, authorized The
overture To Mexico from those which attended
the recent treaty Of Mr.. Tyler!
So far from Mexico being silent, she repeatedly
and solemnlv declared, that she would consider
annexation as war with her. Texas was nc
longer an unnhabiied country Ii had been
WTcS,cd from the uol!lnCH Oh MEXICO DIV cltiIcilS
many Of whom wen; armed from tho L. States
The war between Mexico and Texas had not
been terminated hv any treaty al peace. Mr.
TYLER noi cnlv did not consult Mexico, but he
announced that her assent 10 the annexation was
altogether unnecessary; as he proceeded 10 con-
cludc n treaty. embracing large extent Of terri
tory and numerous population, not compre-
hended in the Texas which The u. States ccdcd 10
Spain in 1919.
In the mean time too, powerful opposition
had arisen in the United States against the an
nexaton Of Texas to them. Several States had
declared through their Legislatures, against it,
and others, il not whole sections Of the Union
were believed TO be adverse 10 il. This was the
opposition To the measure, 10 which, in my Ra-
leigh letter, ] alluded, when spoke of a "consi-
dcrablc and respectable portion OF the Coafrdcra-
cH" | did not refer 10 persons, but to States or
sections.
Under such circumstances, could not but re-
gard the annexation of Texas al this time, as
compromising The honor Of my country, involv-
ing il in war in which the sympahics of all
Chrisiendom would hc against US and cndanger-
ing the integrity Of the Union. ! thought then,
and still believe tina! national Gshonor, foreign
war and distraction and division al home were
too great sacrifices 10 make for the acquisition OF
| Texas.
But, gentlemen, You are DESTROYS OF knowing
by what policy would Re guided, in the event OF
my election as Chief Magistrate of the United
States, in reference 10 The question Of the annex
alton OF Texas DO not think it right to an.
nouncc in advance what will be The course Of a
future Administration in respect 10 a question
with foreign power. have, however. no hcsi-
tation in saying, thatfar from having any per
Sona objection 10 the annexation Of Texas, |
should he glad 10 see it--wiihout dshouor, with
on, war, with the common consent OF the Union,
and upon just aud fair terms.
| do not think that The subject OF slavery
ought 10 affect The question: one way or the other.
Whether Texas bc independent or Incorporated
in the United States, do moi believe ii will pro-
long or shorten the duration of that institution
1t is destined 10 become extinct, at some distant
day, in my opinion, by the operation OF the inev-
table laws OF population. 1t would be unwise to
refuse permanent acquisition, which will eS-
] ~ lanu The nlnhn renlaiiLS accnIini Of 3