Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1844-09-09
EI4sxs- =. ssx{M
SsI:x::sasESs1,s 60
rtle zpmchbmr1 Tir0iMiaM.
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 1914.
FOR PRESIDENT,
HENRY CLAY. Of Kentucky.
foR VICE PRESIDENT,
Theodore FreIinghuysen, Of ". j.
The roice If 1tras on ANNEXATION.

that they actually mporiug us 10 receive them
into this great iamly Of Sates-an assumption wholly
uunndcd, fnl o which II Is almost py in the present
condition Of the exploded hnmbug, to deprive the adj.
voeale of thai measure The peopte Of Texas were not
only not consulted by their government, but when the
conclusion o the treaty made known they were as
much astannded by the information the people of
the United States who, IN like manner. had been kept
in profound ignorance OF the negotiation until the treaty
VAS almost ready to be lnld before the Senate. And
that circumstances constitutes Of the strongest objcc
tiohs 10 the treaty itself. The Executive of Texas is
invested by the constitution Of that country with precise
~ The same powers IN the negotiation OF treaties AS our
own Executive possesses. What right had Presden,
HOUSTON Invested only with such powers extinguish
the sovereignty of the Republic over which he had
been called 10 preside not for The purpose of overthrow
ing and subverilng The very instrument which gaye
him official exslei ce, but to ''mainian preser,
and defend" II, In all its yigor2 What riph had he
unauthorized by the public voice. and without deignipp
to consult the public WILL to blot Texas from the map of
nations and 10 denatiOnaze her people, by transferring
them, like 50 many cattle, to neghborIng government?
The potrer OF the Executive of Texas being identicay
The same as that possessed by the Executive ofhe L.
States, SO far as the treaty making power is concerned
iolows That II President Houston possessed the right
thus 10 sell or cede Texas 10 the United States Pre,
dent Tyler might have bartered or given away any Stale
IN hs Cnlon, or all OF them had suited his views of
interest or ambton Yet who will assert such mon.
sirous proposilonl II may be said Indeed that this he
Just objection 10 The Tyler treaty can be urged with
/ "
mol we, would DO the party aggreved by the monstrous
usurpallon OF power on the part Of their Executive,ni
had That treaty been ratified though nine ,,ens of
Tue people OF Texas, all of ihen had been opposed
10 II, where would have been their remedy2 Their
government would have been at an end not by Their
agency, but against their willard they themselves
would nave been handed over, like SO much of Pres
dent iionston's goods and chatels 10 a government
when hinoy>nhe hundredths Of them had voluntarily
abandoned, and 10 which they might have been ayerse
10 be thus transferred Would nat we have hoa, .,h
bors and spoaors obnoxious censure and reprach
as The infamous paonsts of Poland it. in opposition
10 the VIII OF the people of Texas had forced them
lo,o our embrace, because Of heaty stipulation made
without their knowledge, and against their will by an
uhiaiihlul and reaeheruus agent? No one will deny
.a', II such was The state of public sentiment in Texas
IN reference To the ,reay-and no step was taken as
oeofe observed to ascertain whether it was or noi,s
consnmm1oh would have been an act of mopslrous on
preston on our part, only surpassed in enormty by the
pe'huy Oh me Executive agent through whose ls,u-
mentality II would have been accomplished
we do not, Of course, assert that majority of
inc people oil leXas were, al the time of the conclusion
oil the treaty. hostile 10 that measure; but we saw that
no such treaty should have been concluded without bav
ing INST clearly ascertaned their wishes. This was
done IN 1857, when TeXa applied for admission into
me !, mon, and when, although it was an acl of the
people, and not merely of their Executive agent their
application was promptly rejected by the Van Buren, ad
ninlSratlon. But since that time no development of
public opinion has been made in reference to the
question. Certainly, there was known 10 be a strong
party IN Texas opposed the treaty. the oroan of bicb
was the "Gairesoa Criiiaa;" and although they NAV
nave constituted minority of the people, no treaty could
nave oeen constlnonally formed. and therefore valid
which was formed without knowledge of that fact.
:. 10 show that there was always a strong party in
leXasopposed TO annexaton,& that that party is growing
IN numbers. We suboin the following interesting extracts
from Texas papers:
The Galveston Civilian says "'rhe annexation Ge
yer Is we are happy to state now confined principally
In tho, ,,,a ID. & A.I
10 'e ehei SIDE OF the Sabine Like the grippe ii has
taen OF much mlder type aud passed off much sooner
here than in the United States Solitary and alone
unil recently wehed teony pen, feeble one is true
winch has been directed against his measure but sue
cor has at length come forward, and the large ntell
gent and respectable class Of citizens who have stood
opposed Inc measure. likely to fad other and ADLER
advocates OF their opinions AT the of the hego-
all0lIs, 1t was assumed, with more confidence than
the circumstances warranted, that nne-tenths of the
people Texas in favor of the measure This was
mere guess like to the which gave rise TO it, VIZ
that two thirds Of the L. States Senate would vote for the
eay) and better knowledge of facts has proved that
both were erroneous lis friends here ason,hed to
lind the opposition to it strong aud successful The
FACT is not to be concealed, that from all quarters the
evidences are strong and palpabe Of growing aversion
to the scheme"
The Washington CTexas) vindicator says: ..If an
heNaon ial, under the favorable combna on OF crcum
stances IN which 1t was conceived, it is lost forever
proving conclusively that higher destiny awaits us than
TO shrink into annhilaon by being merged aud lost in
tue cunbrons, unnanageabe, unwiedy government of
The United Sta'es-a failure for which pos,ery will
with holy iervor thank the God of their destiny for
Judging more wisely for them than their furetathers
!, did"
The Lagrange (Texas) lnteigencer says "Who
ASK were the great Of the annexation question
hrst III the United States Was it not ilose tina,
hold thousands OF acres of Texas lands Texas bonds
treasury notes. &cl Even one of the starved rentlemn
has been proeded for in the treaty, Mr. Diwson-
What produced ,his?-Was it their love of Texas? No;
but desire to secure, by few thousand dollars land out
IN Wild speculation an everlasting ioruns. This might
all be done, and. we perhaps would have beeu in three
years from ihlS IN worse situation than were three
years ago Every working would have quit his
helu, bought tegrocs credit, at three or four
prices, aad that never-ang, fl ang, gentry specula-
tors, would have covered our lands as the lies did f.
Egypt
letter from san eminent Texan to the editor of the
New YORK tribune, dated at Galveston on the 7lh ult
says i nave always most firmly opposed our national
suicide, or annexation to the United States or any other
country That Texas unable maintain her position
oase SANDER gotten up for the express and avowed
purpose OF driving the people of the United States into
Immediate action upon the annexation question: Il O.
rlglnaied 18th speculaors--men who, holding LARGE
amount OF wild lands in Texas, intended avail Them
serves OF Tie temporary rise IN properly which would
most probably have been Produced sell and leave
INC country Most OF them have permanent interest
tere-Most of the statesmen in the United States who
nave written or spoken iavoraby TO annexation have in
glowing terms depicted the many and great advantages
winch would accrue TO the United States, but not one
OF Them has ever enumerated the benefits which Texas
would derive. As an Independent nation our course