The voice of freedom. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1839-1848, 1844-04-11


will show that an arrangement with Spain
in 1920, to give effect 10 our claim that
Louisiana embraced within its limits what
is now Texas, would have been, then,
what "anneGation" would be moac, then |
will admit he propriely of calling for
documentary evidence" Until this is
done, | must answer your question" Is
not Henry Clay as much in favor of the
annexation Of Texas as was Andrew Jack
son!" in the negative, and call upon you,
in turn, for evidence that he IS. Thus far
you rest on presumption, which, you will
allow me to say is altogether TOO slight for
such upersructure.
AS you rely on presumption, l will take
the liberty to say that think the pre-
sumptons are the other way - and that
they are not slight ones - for the follow.
lng reasons:-- First,
Because the great body of the wing party
in the free States are decidedly hostile to
annexation" 1t is perfectly manifest
that no power Of party can ever bring them
INTO the measure. Is Mr. Clay going in
the face Of this sentiment, 10 throw him.
self into the Texas movements | say,
emphatcaly-No,
2. Because the leading Wing papers
in the free States have taken strong ground
against ii. | may mention among them,
the Boston Atlas, Boston Daily Adyertis
err, Boston Mercantile Journal, N. Haven
Herald, N. Y. Commercial Adv, N. Y.
American, N. Y. Express, The Tribune,
Albany Ev Jour-, Albany Daily Advertis-
er, North American, and U. S. Gazette,
PhiladeIp hia. add all the Wing papers
in our own State indeed, might say the
whole northern Wing press, with scalce
an exception.
8. Because, even in the slave holding
States, there are strong manifestations of
The Wing press against annexation. A.
mong the most important is the NATION
AL lNTELLIGENCER which circulates thro
the whole country, south as well as north.
1t is most decided against the project
And there is the Potomack Advocate, an
extract from which happens to be now be-
fore me, which is equally decided. The
RICHMOND WIG, the leading Wing pa
per in Virginia, says, annexation should
not be thought Of withOut The consent Of
The mhole family. ] must quote a para.
graph from that paper. The italics are
the editors.
$50 immense, so critical, so awful a
'quesion (says the editor) as the annexa.
'tlon OF new Empire to the old, ought
10 have been submitted to the people, and
the whole people, in their ca!mest and
most collected mood. Nothing respect
ing it should have been attempted with
OUT the previous ascertained tOiU Of The
people. That will, when so much was
at stake, should have been the will, not
of a doubtful and equivocal majority,
but of a clear, decided and unSecti0naL
majority. The northern States should
have been asked how this annexation of
new empire squared with the ideas of
perpetuating the Union as it stood. So
'ol the middle States SO the s;ern,.and
southern. All The family should have
been consulted, fairly, honestly, candidIy,
'and in the spirit which dictate the great
American Conlederacy. Sectional feel.
ing, political cap.trap, and aspirations,
party interests of every kind, should have
been excluded from all share in the de.
termination OF question before which,
: in our humble conception, a war with
3 England, or with France dwindles into
comparative lnslgulficance
Then 60 west OF the mountains. see
in the paper Of yours now before me, an
article from the Louisville Journal KEN
rucXy) zone OF the most influential pa
pers in tie ~est," as says the introduction
20 the article which says the same in
reduction, speaks ort boldly, mantulIy,
and in a voice of warning against an,
neXaton.
Aud then there is the bold stand taken
by C4ssius N. Clay decided supporter
OF Henry Clay against annexation, in
lcatlng not ony his sentiments. but the
undoubted sentiments of large portion Of
the people of Kentucky. Is Henry Clay
going for annexation, with his Kentucky
friends even divided upon The subject?
a. Because the great, leading purpose