Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1844-08-09
MR.. CLAY ON NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS..

MR.. CLAY ON NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS..
1t has been strenuousy urged by some persons,
that Mr. Clay would go for annexation in case
bare majority of the country should be in favor of
it. His first letter could not with any sort of fair
ness be.so construed, and to settle the matter he
has written a second letter, which leaves no room
for misconstruction lie holds, with former Leg
islaturc of Vermont, that the Union is partner
ship in which the States are members and he be-
lleves that new partners to the firm should mol be
admitted without the common consent. Thus, in
his first letter he said
al do not think that Texas ought to be received
into the Union, as integral part of it, in decided
opposition to the wishes Of considerable and res
pectabe portion of the Confcderacy."
Mr.. Clay was asked whether he did not mean by
this language that the decided dissent of portion
of the States should be bar to annexation He
answers in the affirm atlve and goes to show that
he had the States of Ohio, Velmont and lIasSdchu-
sells, in mind when he wrote the passage; so we
come to this definite pont-Mr Clay would not
consent to annexation if three States should be OPP
posed to it. Why not Because the States did not
bind themselves, when they entered the Union, to
admit new partner from foreign territory they
did not bind themselves to submit such a question
even to Congress or to a majority of the States.-
The power of each State is as complete nor to re-
fuse such partnership as it was in the first place
to refuse to come into the Union at ALL 1t follows,
then, that if Texas is forced upon us, Vermont or
any other State is absolved from the Union if she
chooses to be--the Union with Texas is not the
one she joined. The consequence of annexation
is therefore virtual, and probably actual, diSsol-
ton Of The Union--the greatest of calamities, in
Mr.. Clay's view; and this is his reason for not as
senting to annexation, so long as Vermont Ohio,
and Massachusetts, shall refuse their consent. The
humbug that Mr. Clay will consent to annexation,
if Congress should agree to it, is now completely
exploded.
My DEAR SrR--I received and thank you for
your friendly letter, and the copy of the Monitor
You have Justly conceived my meaning, when
referred in my Texas letter TO a considerable, and
respectable portion of the ContederacD And you
might have strengthened your construction of the
paragraph by reference to the fact that at the date
of my letter, the States of Ohio, Vermont and Mas
sachusetts had, almost unanimously, declared a.
ganst annexation; the Legislature of Georgia
had declined to recommend it, and other States
were believed to be opposed to the measure. As
to the idea of my counting the abolitonists, it is
perfectly absurd. No man in the United States
has been half as much abused by them as have
been.
consider the Union as a great political partner
ship; and that new members ought not to be ad
United into the concern at the imminent hazard Of
its dissolution. Personally, could have no obiec.
ton to the annexation Of Texas; but certainly
would be unwilling to see the existing Union dis
solved seriously jeoparded for the sake of acqur
ing Texas. If any one desires to know the
leading and paramount object of my public life
the preservation of this Union will furnish him the
| key.
From Developments now being made in Soutl
Carolina, it is perfectly manifest that party exists
in that State seeking dissolution of the Union
and for that purpose employing the pretext of the
rejection of Mr. Tyler's abominable treaty. Soutl
Carolina, being surrounded by slave States would
in the event of dissolution of the Union, suffer
only comparative evils; but it is otherwise witt
Kentucky. She has the boundary of the Ohio, ex
tending five hundred miles on three free States
What would her condition be in the event of the
greatest calamity that could befall this nation?
In Kentucky the Texas question will do the
Wing cause no prejudice. | am glad to perceive
in the proceedings ofthe Clay Club of Tuscaloosa
a similar belief expressed as to Alabama. 1t was
bubble, blown up by Mr.. Tyler in the most excep
tonable manner for sinister purposes and its burst
ing has injured nobody but Mr.. Van Buren,.
Retaining an agreeable recollection of the plea
sure which derived from forming your acquaint
ance last spring, remain,
Your friend and obt serv't,
STEPHEN +. MILLER, Esq.
Tuscaloosa. Ala {