Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1844-03-29
From the National IntelligcneoT.

The annexation of Texas to this Union, under
present circumstances, is opposed in our Judgment,
by host of considerations, of which it will not be
possible for us to-day more than to enumerate the
chief Before doing Which, however, we wish to
state that there is no one who more sincerely de-
sires the welfare and prosperity of the people who
compose the population of Texas than we do. We
would contribute to it in any way not incompatible
with the honor and the interest of the great COM
monweath within which our lot is cast. Desiring
to see the Republic of Texas Independent in fact
as it is in name, we would exert the power of this
Government to any extent which would not com
init the fame and the peace Of this country towards
that end. We would employ all the means of
counsel, persuasion, and cooperation with other
nations in friendly offices, to to her that du
rable peace and tranquility, which alone are want
ing to her growth into populous, productive, and
wealthy State among the nations of the earth
Our first objection to the annexation of Texas
is, that it cannot be accomplished without invol-
wing the country in war; too great price to pay
for any territorial acquisition whatever which the
National honor does not demand.
Our second objection il, that, far from demand.
ing this acquisition, the National honor forbds it.
So long war continues between Mexico and
Texas and solemn Treaty of Peace and Amity
exists between us and Mexico, we cannot, without
violating the sacred faith of treaties, undertake to
possess ourselves of the Territory to which Mexi-
co still maintains her right We have, it is true,
acknowledged the independence of Texas, as we
had right to do for certain international purposes
but that recognition did not extinguish or in any
manner affect the rights of Mexico upon Texas
The obligations of our Treaty with Mexico remain
untouched and Mexico would have the same right
to possess herself (if she could) of any State of
this Union, as the Government OF the United States
has to possess itself of Texas.
Our third great objection (which would be con-
elusive without the precedng) is, that the territory
IS ehA tAI Csa4A, IL Il
is Intimately more important that should people
and improve what have than to grasp after more,
especially when its acquisition would be inevitably
attended with discord and dissatisfaction 1t is far
more important to the happiness of the people of
the United States that they should enjoy in peace,
contentment, and harmony, what they already have,
than that they should place all those blessings at
hazard by this new experiment.
Our fourth objection is, that if the "annexation'
of Texas were in other respects desirable, one en-
tire third of this Union at least forbids the bans,
doubts the constitutional right to establish the con-
nexion, and declares its determination to resist it,
The proposition to annex or incorporate Foreign
Nation in this Gnion moreover, is entirely new,
and the authority to do it is solemnly questioned
This objection would have much less force had we
IN this case, instead of recognizing the indepen-
dence OF Texas, negotiated with Mexico, with OF
without the territory. We would not. merely to
acquire more land (of which we have already more
lnhn we WANT leopard Lne existence of the Union
which ought to be dearer to the heart of every A.
merican citizen than any consideration extraneous
to it
Filthy, we dread the beginning by the United
States OF system of acquisition of foreign terri
tory by conquest, (which as things stand the an
nexation of Texas would effectively be,) or even
by purchase Once begin it. and tohere will it end
Shall we eUer have territory enough for ambition
though we have enough for our wants?
With these brief hints we willingly relieve oul
readers from our own discourse, TO ask their atten.
ton to view of the ground heretofore occupied by
our Government on this subject, from which is now
proposed to depart. We have the more pleasure
in doing this, because it affords us the opportunity
Of giving due credit to the last Administration in re
gard to this matter, and particularly of doing JUS
tice to the patriotism and nice sense of honor Of
the Secretary Of State (now no more) under that
Administration, as displayed, in reference to this
question, in the extracts we shall make.
On the 4th of August 1887, few months after
the accession Of Mr., Van Buren, to the Presidency,
correspondence was opened with Mr.. Forsyth,
then Secretary Of State, by Gen. Memucan Hunt,
Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentary
of the Republic of Texas, in which the annexation
of Texas was formally proposed to this Govern
ment, and supported by train of argument quite
as cogent as any that can now be applied to sus-
tain ouch an application. The offer was declined,
as our readers know, by the Presidents and this