Virginia free press. (Charlestown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1832-1916, 1844-07-18
NO.s IS.


ed 10 political strength III Soaihern Is.
: nasors begin BY msking tbiss CONCESSION,
I there must be some show III ason on
that side. And is Il 10 be suaposed Thai
; ne members fom The non-slaveholdfus
States WHY lAd the points! AS I'd The
MISSOURI compromise, THE obvious renIv
which viii be made will BE-. that Iii
conpFomise was made With feferences n
the territory which was then sncIaded Il
The Union, and mol 10 future Acquisitions
BY purchase or conquest.
In case otsuch d division. shall We hava
galnedany thing bv having hoh sIavehoId-
Ing STATES Of the Union on CUP soo,awes,.
efn berfer instead 81 a foreign nousyiave.
holding Slase | decidedly prefer ihe
- fsusfof il is not 10 be denied lSal our
"a iitiie more than kun, ana ID mare less
than kind" often commit outfases apon
our rights which would not be submitted
TO from foreign Power; and. besides If
nou.slave States of The Union were
established there, we should have NE dan
gerous element III political ana party leefa'
ing, which would 40, exist id The case of
foreign non-slavebolding State. But
the real:ques,ion' Is not between Texas,
foreign non. slayehold:ng State, and Texas
divided into an eqnalnumber Of slapehold~
] Ing. and non-slaveholding States OF the u
MON but i j. between Texas thus divi-
ded, Il admitted into the Unidl, and Tex
as, 4 otannexed, an undivided slavetold.
ing cppp,ry. My life upon il, TexaswilT
not consent; Eve per cent. other pepuIa-
lion can never be brought 10 consent 10
the abolition Of slavery And we should
thus hare slaveholding Republic on our
border with similar institutions ana inter-
tests. and which must from necessity Be.
our friend aud ally. ant, which would serve
as break%ater between US and our DOR.
slavehulding neighbor. and would guard
our fror,ier: 10 use iamiliarillustration
enjoying oil the advantage which do
1 with my neig hbor whose farm joins mine.
while be has 10 keep up ihe'fence. which
/ nevertheless protects my crop as much as
itdoes bis own. Bulfitis really Intend
ed that sll lhes States to be created oul Of
Texas ire TO be admitted as slaveholding
States, Why was il not 50 stipulated ia The
treat " why was il not thus NOMINATED
! 10 iheshond rs Was il intended 10 steal a
march on The non siayeholding States-to
be silent now upon that point. and hereaf-
terto iusis, upon il III so. itshould have
been remembered that in the body which
mnst decide tina. question The non-sIave-
holding States have the majority. IN
i solemnly declare that, 10 a recent
visit 10 the North. have seen 30 single
man who was willing 10 receive Texas. d.
vlded3 into staveholdIng States into tte I
presses. which advoraie tlieSmeasufe have
| seen single one which does SO on the
ground Of its giving security 10 the insti-
/ ,utionEof slavery. / believe that ills al.
most upiverssliy advocated hy the lew at
| The North who are in favor Of The mea.
sure upon exactly opposite gfounds. viii
any leading politician Of the North come
oul and say that be Is 10 favor Of dividing
Texas iniothree or fourslave States andre
ceiying rem as such intothe Gnioh, VIII
Mr.. Buchanan OF Pennsylvania, saytso3 T !.
am DOT 70 be frightened from my propfie-
~" by the fear Of Texas fofming some
alliance with England dssdvsntageous to
our interest. This an old story Gene
| ralH Hunt, as the Texian Minister, held out
The same idea more thanseven years ago.
| Why has Sheh an alliance never been en-
tered iHto3 Surely Texas has stood in
more need of il than she does now. I
have known hesitaiing swain led 10 the
altar BY bis irlsdy, threatening him that
| i he did moi marry her she would marry
some one else One scarcely knows how
10 meet this phantom, for il il perpetual
/. " changing its shape. First il was, that,
f if we did pot receive Texas. she would
throw herself into the arms Of England
as colony or dependency. Then again
ii was that England was to guaranty tie
Independence Of Texas upon. the coBdi-
1 lion Of the abolition Of slavery; and the
last vefsionis.I hat England isto.interpose
lorciblv, il need be-, and PVT an end to
war. without any condition al. ito abolition.
As tothe two first versions. England has !
over and over again disclaimed any SUCH ;
purpose, and ! know no similar instance
in her whole history Of her condescend-
] ing to. repeat disclaimer once already
made and not credited. England is not
Lshe country 10 do mean aud sneaking
thing. "A wrong and an arrogant oneshe-
may do. cbut that s'old and naughty pa-
Ftion is incapable OF deliberate. islsehood'
and | must say. IN this. connection, iba. I
\ can see no justification for ihe Jealousy
and yitupeIa;ionEof England which il so
common with a certain class of polIti.
Il Clans.
believe thar there is country in the
a vorll with which il is so much The inter-
est. and therefore the.policy,of England
10 cultivate friendly relations a. with the
4 UnmfI States. We consume nearly one
i fourth oitheproduciions Of English labor.
This bond oi interest IS enought butthere
Il are others (of moi less force in language,
r flaws, .ace andfree Institutions; for, with
The exception Of our own country, there
!. i nof other where all The securities Ct ns:.
saie ~ hts and all he guarantees Of pubic
aIiiberiy ase so numerous and perfect as ia
) EogI.nd. It. is not'upoE be NAT England
: looks with jealousy. but uEon HE po Ker-
} fol despotisms Of the north Of Europe
AID is contest with them, contest be-
, tween uulimitsa monarchy ard Tie reps
: resenialiss principle, sac looks 10 % as
+! allies. moi as enemies. That England
2 desires The Independence and prosperity
! lof Texas. I do Bot doubt, Do we differ
Q withiher in this, or shall We quarrel with
her "a this acconnis II isspsr:sctly nat,