The Arkansas banner., 1844-05-15

they would perceive the advancing prosperi- ty of Texas, and their own decline. would also feel, that. the region with which they were united had placed them in this position, and subjected them to these disasters by the refusal of remuneration. Whatever the re- suit may be, no true friend of tRe Union can desire to subject it to such hazards; and this alone ought to be conclusive argument m favor of the remuneration of Texas. One of three results is certain to follow from the refusal of remuneration lst. The separa- ton of the South and Southwest from the North, and their reuaion with Texas. Or, 2d. The total overthrow of the tariff Or, Sd. A system of unbounded smuggling through Texas into the West, and Southwest. Accompanying the last result, would be a disregard of the laws, and an utter demorali- zation of the whole country, practical re- peal of the tariff, and loss of the revenues which it supplies, and a necessary resort to direct taxation to support the government.
 Asa commercial dependency, Texas would be almost as much under the control of Eng land, as Ii she were a colony of England :;
 and in the event of war between that nation and this, the interests of Texas would all be on the side of England. It would be the in- terest of Texas, in the event of such war, to aid England to seize New Orleans, or at least ill blockading the mouth of the Nissis- sippi, so as to exclude the cotton of the West from foreign market, and leave to Teras almost the entire monopoly. Eycn.T Texas were neutral, certainly our power would not be as strong in the gulf for the defence of No,r n,l1 If
 sppi, as If we owned and commanded all the streams which emptied into it-as if their people were our countrymen, and all the rivers and harbors and coast of Texas were our own. We should be weaker, then, with out Texas. even if she remained neutral ; but have shown 1t would be her interest to exclude our cotton from foreign markets, and to cooperate with England for that ptlr- pose. But if she did remain neutral, could she preserve, or would England respect, her neutrality Without any army, ships, or forts, no one will pretend that her neutral position could be maintained; and England could enter any of her streams or harbors, and take possession of any of her soil at pleasure. Would she do so in the event ol a war with America Let the events of the last war anWser the question. Then, within sight of Valparaiso, within the waters of neutral Spain, she captured the Essex, after a sanguinary and glorious defence This was as complete violation of the neutral rights of Spain, under the law of nations, as if she had entered upon her soil to -molest us. Al Fayal, Porto Praya, and Tunis, she captured other American vessels, within the harbors and under the guns of the forts Of neutral powers; and, indeed, as to neutral ships and goods, and all the maritime rights of neutral nations, sic acted the part of the outlaw and buccaneer, rather than of a eiyi- lized kingdom and violated the neutral rights of all the world. Nor were her rlaWless acts confined 10 the coasts and harbors of neutral powers, but extended also to an actual use and occupation of their soil. During the last war, Spain was at peace with Eng land and America; but England, in open yo- laton of the neutral rights of Spain, seized upon portion of Florida, (then a Spanish territory,9 whence she illuminated her ineen- diary appeals to the slaves for a sefYile m- surrection and massacre; and commenced, at Pensacola, her first preparations for the at tack of New Orleans. And such precisely, would be the conduct of Great Britain, in the event of another war with America She would land suddenly at any point of the coast of Texas, and move along the Sabine, in the Territory of Texas, 10 the great Bend, where 1t approaches within one hundred miles of the Mississippi and the intermediate terri tory being but thnly settled, she could ad- vance rapidly across, seize the passage of the
 Mississippi, and cut off all communication
 from above, and descend upon New Orleans
 Or she might proceed little further, through the territory of Texas to Red river, the south ern bank of which Is within the limits of Texas, and equip her expedition; then by water descend the Red river, exciting ser vile instruction, and seize themouth of Red River. All these movements she might and would make through Texas. In this way she would seize and lortily her position on the Mississippi, and New Orleans must fall, if cut of from all communication from above. But, even fshe only retained the single point on the Mississippi, it would as enectually command it's outlet, and arrest it's commerce ascending or descending, as if possessed of New Orleans Whatever point she seized on
 there she would entrench and foriify, and
 tens of thousands of lives, and hundreds of millions of dollars would be required in dri- wing her from this position. All this would
 be prevented by the remuneration of Texas. The Sabine and Red river would then be all our own, and no such movement could be made for the seizure of the Mississippi. Nor should il be forgotten, that. when she reach ed the Red River, and at naygable point upon its southern bank ill Texas, there she would meet sixty thousand Indian warriors of our own. and half as many of Texas, whom her gold, and her inrigues and prom ises, would, as they always have done, incite
 to the work of death and desolaton If we
 desire 10 know what she would do under such circumstances, let us look back to Hampton and the Raisin, and they will an swer the question. If for no other reason, the fact that for many hundred miles you
 have placed these Indians on the borders of