The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1844-04-11
AND LOUISIANA"

Columbia.
"TEXAS AND LOUISIANA"
Under the above caption the Inielligencer
gives the following argument--a iair and legltl-
mate one so far as it has value-against the an
ncxation of Texas:
1t will certainly, they think, greatly dePrecia'e
the value Of all lands in Louisiana, Arkansas, and
Mississippi particularly the two former. 1t will they
saw he very injurious if destructive to the sugar
interest of their State that stale can be cultivated
to much greater advantage in Texas where both the
climate and soil more favorable than In Louisiana
and will interfere very much with the cotton interest
throughout all the Southern States, iii be not death
blow 10 the cotton planters of South Carolina and
Georgia. they will ascertain very promptly after The
annexation is carried into effect"
The first observation We make on the forego-
ing argument Of the lntelligencer. is that it is
an open and direct appeal to class of persons
TO oppose Texas, on no national objection, but
because it will be personally injurious to them /;
while yet il makes The chief sin of the friends of
annexation to be- that their interest prompts them
to advocate it,. A fine morality that of the In
telligencer, which makes it very patriotic in
those who oppose annexation from interested
motives, but infamy in those who advocate II,
who have an interest in securing IT. Besides,
did il never occur to the Inlellisencer that if it
would injure the sugar planters of one State, it
would benefit the sugar consumers OF twenty
FIVE States If the Intelligencer's argument be
good for any thing, where it would make one
convert TO itself, it would turn twenty against IT,
That is certainly one way Of carrying its point.
Let US examine The truth Of the argument Of
the Intelligencer upon the cotton interest If
cotton in Texas be raised by emigrant planters
from the present States, the diminution will be
nearly as great in the old States as will be the
increase in Texas, so that the aggregate crop
would not be materially larger; the old cotton
plantations would raise corn. But upon the
superstition that Texas be not annexed, what
then will be the state of the case Texas labor,
stimulated and fostered by British capital,
would soon raise as much cotton as does the
United States-which, by treaty with England,
could enter duty free-while an increasing tariff
on ours, would soon either exterminate cotton
from our land or limit the market for its sale TO
our own country, when our manufacturers would
have to purchase at a price necessary TO raise IT
on our worn out soil, while England would get
il cheap from the rich lands of Texas. Our
manufacturers could not then, even with the
present tariff, compete with the British manu-
facturer. We think it does not require pro-
phet TO fore,ell the downfall of both cotton plan
tiers and manufacturers, so soon as England
ehall hov nurfured rayao intn larUp nroIuc-
ton of cotton. And yet for the life Of il,
the lntelligencer cannot conceive that England
should want Texas, or a controlling influence
over her
II Texas be annexed, and ADDITIONAL not mi
grating, planters should raise cotton in Texas,
England would have 10 admit all under one
common duty, and the planters would still have
the home market exclusively To themselves
And if cotton can be raised in Texas cheaper
than the United States, why does the Intel
Iigencer wish to exclude our manufacturers from
purchasing at lower rates, as it would do by OPP
posing annexation
But, the truth is, these arguments of the In
telligencer are thrown out to catch gudgeons,
knowing full well, as it does, that if they have
their legitimate weight, they must make them
twenty opponents where ii would make one
friend.
The same nearly may be said of the sugar as
Of the cotton. If Texas can grow sugar, it
will increase the quantity and lower the price
all over the world, and thus equally affect the
planters Of Louisiana for, lower the price
abroad, and ours being higher than elsewhere,
il would pour in until it reached the common
level Foreign sugars come in under the pre-
sent tariff; if the price abroad falls, still more
would come in, and the larger importation would
lower prices.
And now we will add, that If Texas becom Is
an appendage Of England, Mexico, or continues
independent, the farmers OF Ohio, Kentucky,
Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, and Tennessee,
could not send their pork, beef, -four, beans,
&c. duty free; they would have tariff tax in
Texas to pay.
Our ship-owners would have heavy port du-
ties to pay they would not have the carving
trade Of the immense products of Texas. Our
plough-makers, dray-mak,rs cartmakers, car
riage-makers, harness makers, and steamboat
builders would be excluded. Thus the Intelli-
gencer, in "going TO the dea,br for the sugar of
Louisiana overlooks the interests of the States
above and Of the Atlantic ship-owninQ States.
and gives as its reason its great regard for the
sugar Of Louisiana, and its extreme desire to
purchase II at the highest price at which il can
be kept II the argument of the InlelIieencer