The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1844-08-29
MR.. CLAY AND TEXAS.

y
the charge Of Inconsistency brought against those who
are opposed TO the alton Of Texas now but
earnestly in favor of IT, under precisely similar
circumstances, when they believed that their own
person Il interests would be advanced by the mea
sure 1t has been frankly avowed by one Of he dis
tingushed statesmen obnoxious to this charge, that
10 explain It would require him so be writing a
book MIR. Clay after some months of deliberatien
and study, attempts to dispose of the subject in a
comparatively briefi letter Compelled 10 say some
thing on the subject, he is evidently conscious that
the less he says the better
We required only this letter of Mr.. Clay to be full
ly convinced that this charge must re upon his name
as long his shall live in the memories OF the
People of this country and justly expose his motives
TO the obloquy which he has attempted 10 fasten up
on Mr. Tyler for the negotiation of the late treaty,
flo has mol succeeded IN framing even respectable
piece Of sophis,ry, or decent county court argu-
IN Mt.
In the first place he preends to misunderstood and
msrepr. sens the object of the friends of alton
in appealing to- and quoting from, his speech Of 1919
Their object was not TO show that he believed the
cession Of Texas Spain illegal, but that he be-
lieved it to be in the very highest degree ne1pedi-
ent derogatory to the di nifty well as TO the wis
dom Of the Government, and personally disgraceiul
to Mr. Adams, the negoatjr OF the treat Of cession.
Bnl we w,ll pass over, at present. point which IS
quite subordinate and immaterial and which Mr..
Clay mus, have introduced merely TO distract the at
tenton of his readers.
The main question is, whether cession from
he ,hI in lie Law ~
the cession which Messrs. Adams and Clay sought to
procure from Mexico during the Administration of
the first named gentleman. We quote from Mr..
CIays letter all that bears upon this question, and
quest our reades to pay close attention to his argu-
ments and assertions;
sit has been said that Mr.. Adams administration
offering to negotiate with Mexico for Texas, n t.
outstanding lie existence OF a war between Spain
and Mexico, and that could not therefore have be-
lievcd Il al the acquisition of Texas, at that time,
would have involved The United States in war with
Spain. Hence il is argued that the ratification OF
the late treaty could not have compromised our
peace.
.Mr Adams thought it desirable to obtain Texas.
Two foreign powers claimed it. Mexch was in pos
session, and Spain doing nothing To assert and
enforce her clai n. Her representative had even
gone far as TO supulate, IN a convention, 10 ac-
knowledge the independence Of Mexico, although
that convention not ratified by Spain.
''Mr. Adams had right to authorize the egltia-
ton OF treaty for the acquisition of Texas with
both or either OF The powers claiming IT, IL was
natural that he should begin with that power which
had the possession Of Texas. Spain had Interposed
no obstacle. She had made no declaration that she
would regard the acquisition of Texas act Of
war. Ia point OF fact, no overture was formally
made to Mexico to purchase Texas, no negotiation
opened, no treaty was concl died. IL negotia
LaI. I'D k.an at.,r nod
and SPAN had protested, the prudent and cautious
policy which charac, erised DIR. Adams adminstra-
lion would undoubtedly have prompted him TO quiet
Spain, and accommodate The matter previous 10 the
annexation OF Texas TO the United States and with
out pIungng them IN a war wi b Spain"
The assertion that "Spain was doing nothing to
assert and enforce her claim" insinuaton of a
falsebood, or what lawyers call Wggesto taisi-not
less culpabe but merely less bold, than direct vo-
la,ion Of truth. II MIR Clay has condescended TO
alton, he must be aware that point more
clearly established particularly by Mr. Walker, in
his speech OF May 20lh, LAST Than that the most
vigorous and pow rfu effort of Spain TO her
lost colonies made subsequent 10 the attempt by
Mr.. Adams to procure a cession of Texas from
Mexico and il is well known that the independence
Of Mexico not recognised by Spain until after
Texas had declared and achieved her independence
"1he threatens att ude Of Spain" was even sug-
gesied by MIR. Van Buren,, when Secretary Of State
TO our minister in Mexico an argument TO b. used
to induce he Mexican Government TO make tn,
cession. Mr. Ciays own memory, unless its n
dillon he more suitable TO his advanced age than Il
his pretensops 10 The Presidency, might have fur
nished him with more accurate recollectons thar
he pretends to have Of prominent public events, OF
our own continent, occurring at the time when h,
was in the prime Of his public life
1t may be literally true that at the precise momen
when Mr. Adams contemplated procuring the cessor
from Mexico, Spain was doing n,thing TO asser
and enforce her claim" There are always inter
missions in war, and genera Iy interval, longer Of
shorter, between the close Of campaign and TN
opening Of another: but at the time of which MIR
Clay speaks the Government o. Spain notorious !,
had not merely the will aud the intention, but q
many believed and feared, the ability to re-establisl
her dominion over Mexico.
But how was IL with regard TO Mexico and Texas
when the negotiation Of the late treaty Of onnexa
ton was uDdertsken' "For eight years" TO quot
the language # Mir. Webster to Bocanegra, en-
hostile foot had f. und rcst' within the territory
Texas. Whatever the intentions Of the Govern
ment Of Mexico may have been, as to a re conquest
they never ore manifest by any act. No on
had, or has, the remo,est expectation that TerO
will ever again become part Of Mexico; and III
right Of MEXICO to the soil Ct Texas il any rgi
whatever exists one Of those meaphorical abstra,
tons 10 which MIR. Clay has always protested P,
culiar anipalhy.
But, continues Mr.. Clay, "spain had interpoe
no obsisolc She had made no declaration that st
would regard the acquisition Of Texas as an act
war; This, again Is the insinuation of IA sehoo'
Why did she interpose no obstacle' Because,
we are Immediately informed "in point Of fac
no overture was formally made TO Mexico to pu