Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1844-11-01

The following is from the Pulaski Tennessee
Courier-being part of an interesting account Of a
meeting held in that town, on the goth September
last.
The meeting ives convened principally TO receive
the report of committee appointed for special
service some weeks previous. That Committee
consisted of Seren gentlemen, and the object of
their appointment was to submit certain resolutions,
with accompanying questions concerning his opn
ions prominent subjects in issue before the
country, to JAMES K. Polk. and to request answers
from him upon them. AT meeting by which the
Committee was appointed, preamble was adopted
setting forth the answers which Mr. Polk had pre-
yiousy given to the same questions, in which he
declared himself opposed to Protective Tariff, IN
fhror of "immediate annexation" &c; that his
letter to ]. T. Kane, of Pennsylvania, had been in
terpreted in various sections of the country a.
vowing an opposite opinion; that his views on the
subject of annexation, were not clearly understood
by the people and that it was of the utmost i'm
portance to all who intend to vote at the coming
election, perfectly to understand the position and
sentiments of the persons for whom their votes are
solicited In view of all the circumstances set
forth in this preamble, the meeting passed the fol
lowing resoutons-
Resolved, That the Chairman appoint commit
tee of seven persons, respectfully to address let
ter to Gov. Polk, enclose him copy of this pre-
amble and resolutions, and solicit early reply,
without reference to his former addresses and
speeches, to the following Undergraduates, to wit
/. Are you in favor of the Tariff Act of 1912?
g If you are in favor of its repeal and the re-.
establishment of the Act of 1889, commonly called
the Compromise Act?
g. If not in favor of said Act of 1912, nor of its
repeal and the re-establshment of said Act of
1888, are you in favor of notifications of said Act
J of 1912? If so, what notifications, in your opn-
ion should be made on the present duties upon the
following articles, to wit: Brown Sugar. Hemp,
Iron in bars and bolts, rolled and not rolled, and in
| pigs, Muskets and Rifles, Coal, Fur, Wool and
Wool hats, Shoes and Boots, ready made Clothing,
Coarse Domestics, Blankets and Salt
| 4. Are you in favor Of Tea and Coffee remain
ing free articles, should duty, and what duty,
be imposed upon them?
5 In your letter to j. X. Kane, of Philadelphia,
do you intend to be understood as in favor of dis
elimination for revenue or for protection
g. You have said that you were in favor of the
| Immediate annexation of Texas to the United
tons OF the Treaty made at Washington for that
purpose, and rejected by the Senate !?
z. If not, are you in favor Of the bill introduced
by Mr.. Benton into the Senate for the same pur-
pose
6. If not in favor of either are you in favor OF
providing at the time Of the annexation of Texas,
in whatever mode may be selected for the admis.
sion of the States thereafter to be formed out of the
territory of Texas, into the Union with slaves, if
they desire to be so admitted? Or would you be
in favor of leaving that an open question, to be set
tied by Congress when such States might petition
for admission?
ResOlred That said committee select some sulta'