Western statesman. (Carrollton, Miss.) 1844-1845, 1844-07-06
ANNEXATION
IrNn IIlII. wv

syoag of obs 81 lis West lhdA l'lH''F
~hIeh ~ ~oull h. also ff.,licio ehap''l'' ~
the ldhni. .t.t....,,s.
ale. .,tb M, liirnd i1h NJ 100 fHHNsNl
lar,t. ss iha pfupnfif ~ De a.ffl lNf ~
sn,es ~ IA Jared fliIi hs bed hfffi i'ft
! 80 "a tas h hil lhs aHl alNhgHIH p
,sl,l, l. az b. ditlafns uls dliIff 81 30 =.
g. III psifmsf, hs lslt h'ni,s.h .N'"''
~ co. dai.sf ~ ihs s'lff IL f'Na 49,
b,ts sifaafIy ~ afrfpi, HfinR (" haH, nv y
t,d e.saf bsai. aHi r RFi ha'Hial '''lsi
,issilts il.st siisf n.s fafs1 Hfia ai'l
100 H.. ls fsali defls ilism ~ i1fH Hsf
N. ,.t,,stis aLai i8ld h.f l.1dfhip feH Wl'l
4. ss,sfaf tftff fs aHifH my ffli1af :"
,.,, ,t,a.a4 II yoI 40 ygu WiI tf fpi T" nf
go q ,,,...s..l sll rinifl.ill iafY ple- HltA.
e,ty a Il, ihli ihs flshif, real p' tfflH.Ifl
|,Itts ssosstf.ah al Tess. ifom ihe FfafflfNl
100 ts tl.s m8lt NOISY ta'fm.. H ttf F''t
essI ssf have h1i turb fnen1 70 whIfp'f
III tlsifs4ft. Dot to atismpt ~ aff'fn anJ f'i.
cons 10 ibg0f Of ihs measure. Hhil afll Nv
sf peulstlfy aBI contradiction fnd a,s'i'l.
ts, aasbt have been avoided .f1feely s9nl
tsg have a9fefd entirely ln ODE reasons lhey
have atsi coed lof bgInF iu favor 81 lle meas
.ets. We might have expected Che President
ssd t,t Secretary Of suie, Who negotiated ihf
t,sstJ to have affeed but 10 j. Dot 90. The
pfss,dsnt in bis message 10 i.e senate, Trans
pitieg ibe treaty, presents an extended view
of tbe question and argues ihai % woalI BEN
eff al pafti III ihe United States iu 100 emit
nent deafse that IL would even open nn eS'
iens,ye market iof tie beef and pork ol ihe
wesi
The secretary distinctly ayows, thai The
treaty was made to head John Boil, who bad
his eve upon the negroes IN Texas
Gcnl Jackson who IS military man, takes
n military view Of il; aud Is Of opinion that
oar frontier IS too near home ergo wc ought
to have Texas.
Genl. Cas- 4 beg pardon for having written
that no two agreed)says che is OF Genl. JACK.
sons opinion"
Mr. Senator Walker, among other reasons,
puts il upon the ground Of the right OF the
Texan, secured 10 them by the treaty with
France in lS03-to be admitted into the I'm.
ion as citizens of the United States.
The las, high ground is also assumed by Gen.
Hamilton, quasi citizen Of Texas, in a speech
lately made at Savannah, Georgia.
Distinguished jurst of our own state, late
" made speech at Winchester, decidedly in
| favor of immediate annexation on the ground
that "the fanatics and abolitionist Of the North
we're opposed TO IT,
Acknowledgment jurist chancellor Bib
of Louisville, Kentucky takes pretty much
the same ground with Genl. Hamilton, carry
inc il however much farther. He argues that
from the commencement of the revolution to
1.-THE battle of San Jacinto which sealed the in
dependence of Texas, she has been fighting
the battles of the United States, and that we
are bound to indemnify Them for all their loss
es and expenceS incurred during the war !!
Some are in favor oft because it will ex-
tend our peculiar Institutions. Mr.. lngerSol,
chairman OF the committee on foreign rela-
tons in the House of Representatives, is in ia
vor of it, because its annexation would put an
end to savery-slavery would die an easy
death if we had possession of Texas,
| Some of It's advocates say Texas is poor
that the people have been worn out by con-
tinual military exertions-that they are bone
of our bone, and flesh of our flesh; and there.
fore we should have parental care of them.
However, to the credit of Texas, be it said,
that they have not been guilty Oft the consum-
mate folly of claiming to be an integral part
of the United States; or that we are under
any treaty obligations to receive them.
During all the difficulties and troubles OF
that young "lone star" Republic, pariently in
1887, when she made through her minister
General Hunt, TO Mr.. Van Buren's admins
tration, propositions for annexation, she did
not even hint, that her people had settled the
country under the faith of being protected by
the United States. Such suggestion then,
would have been looked upon as the quintes-
sence of folly and impudence. 1t has been
left for our own politicians, in dying effort
for power, to stump up this fallacious ground.
Admit the fact to be, that the boundary of
Louisiana extended to the del Norte, what
obligation was imposed upon the United States
by the treaty with France, in regard to the
country and people? Was the United States
bound to keep it forever, and coIonize it with
her people Or had not the United States the
undoubted right to cede it, to foreign power,
as was done by the treaty OF 1919. | shall
not enter into an argument upon the question.
II is sufficient at this day to saw that from the