Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1845-02-20
TO Tie Editors oft The Enquirer
WASHINGTON Feb IS 1915.

WAsHINdToN, Feb. Is, 1915.
have seen no production for some time even
in these days when the press is teemiDg with
strange productions. which has surprised me so
much as the article in the Globe, comparing
the merits Of Browns and Benton's plans for
the admission OF Texas into this Union. Ii al
tributes to the first defects which do not belong TO it,
and 10 The last merits which it does mol possess.
The first thing which struck me in reading the
article was, 10 find that The Globe had been 50
slow in discovering the detects OF Browns resolu-
lions. You recoect they were pending in the
House of Representatives for several weeks
that they were almost identical with Boyd's-
differ lille from Burkes, as they do from Dronl-
coolies. For some time they were known TO be
among the most acceptable plans which had
been proposed; and if they had glaring defects,
the Globe as leading Democratic organ ought
10 have exposed them, that they might be cor
rected. But so far from doing that, in leading
article upon the subject, it took the ground that
details were unimporlani, and that bill in Two
lines providing Tor the admission OF Texas and
leaving all details Tor future adjustment was
sufficient. After Browns resolutions also had
passed the House OF Representatives, the Globe
stated, that il was precisely the plan which it had
suggested in lis first article uron the subject. But
have no desire TO expose Mr. Blair's inconsistency
for whom have the kndes feelinss-particularly
as il is unmpOrlan whether he is 50 OF not; for II
his objections have any weight, they are entitled
10 be considered, Notwithstanding they T. started
al 50 late date. Let us therefore proceed 10 con-
slider them:
In The first place. tits said that Browns propo-
siton "does not comport 50 well with the views OF
the main body of Wings and Democrats favora-
bic 10 The admission Of Texas, as that OF Mr. Ben
Iat ~ IL,
here Ii is known that prior 10 the vote in the
House, the Democratic party had several caucus
SEES upon The subject, and al the last OF them, Boyd
was directed 10 bring in his proposition which
was almost Identical with Browns as the one
which carried out The views Of The greatest num-
ber In the House. almost every plan submitted
was voted upon successfully, and Browns alone
could command a majority. This il would seem
shows pretty conclusively, that it embodied the
views OF the friends of Texas more completely
than any other. Is il possible, that the opinion OF
any individual, however we'll informed. can be
as decisive as these record facts? But ! assure
you, from full knowledge of the fact, that Mr..
Blair is utterly mistaken in supposing Mr.. Ben
tons bill 10 meet with any favor from the great bo-
dy Of The friends Of Texas. On the contrary
knop the fact that i, cannot, eren as a i0N re-
sori, command The vote OF more than one Wing
in the Senate and it will not, assure you, com
mand the vote OF single Wing in The House
Besides This, il s.ulierly Unacceptable to the great
body OF the Democracy. There aIe many from
The South who will not vote tor II, even as last
desperate resort-indeed, there are very few who
will, for reasons which will be fully exhibited, il
the lime for il ever arrives, as il probably will
not.
The Globe specifies three leading objections 10
Browns resolutions. IL says:
81. The resolutions of the Wing member pro-
vide for bringing in Texas as one great Stale,
extending fifteen hundred miles. The Demo
Gratis want State Of reasonable extent.
~. The joint resolution provides, that Texas
shall give up her income from her custom houses,
and rely upon the wild lands Of the Camanches
10 pay her debt. The Democracy, in general, OF
both Houses do not wish this hard condition i'm
posed.
g. The Wing members bill provides, that
Texas shall retain The ownership Of the lands, and
Of course 4 jurisdiction over the Indians in
habitine Them. The Democracy do not desire
this They prefer an immediate liquidation OF
the Texan debt, and The acquisition Of the I'M
settled territory ofTexas'
A short statement Of facts will show how utter
" mistaken MIR. Blair is in all This. Ii is well
known here, that large majority Of the North
ern Democratic members insisted upon il, as
amc qua non that We should not assume the Tex
ian debt, and as 4 consequence that we should
not take her lands, and by curtailng her limits,
remove them, which was 10 be her great resource
for The payment OF her debts, from under her ju-
risdiclion You may rely upon these facts; and
they are SO notorious, that Mr.. Blair ought 10
have been acquainted with them
The Globe insists that Benton's bill is more
effective for immediate annexation than Browns,
and TO prove this, after quoting the first clause Of
the BILL il SAYS:
ain this, il will be seen, that the clause of ad-
mission is peremptory the moment that the TWO
Governments have agreed upon terms; and these
terms are 10 be adjusted through board of COM
missioEers on the part OF the two Governments
When agreed upon, il is provided, "Ihat the STATE
stall be admitted into The Union IN ririHc Of THIS
act," and Wro Representatives. IN Congress" are
authorised i'll the act 10 take seats in The House
ca iustdaie with the agreement as TO the terms be-
tween the two Governments"
Now, the Globe surely does not mean TO main
tain, that Texas is brought into the Union by Col.
Benton's bill he moment the terms are agreed up
on by Tie commissioners, and Geforc they are "a
titled BIZ he Senate or Congress as the case may
be- II il does his construction is conlradicled by
the plain terms Of The bill itself. But if The Globe
does not mean 10 contend for this, his argument
has no force. For although The bill provides,
that when The terms are agreed upon by the two
Governments Texas is 10 be admitted "in,o the
Union in virtue OF this aet," YET, she will not be
so admitted uHH the terms are submitted Ia Con-
sress OF the Senate and approved So il will I've the
act approving the terms agreed upon, and mol The
act authorising the negotiation which will he the
effective one. The last would he utterly una
valing without the first If this is not So it
would only make the matter worse-tor surely
no one would be willing that TeXa: should I've
brought into The Union Immediately upon the
conclusion of The terms by the commissioners
without their being approved BY the Representa-
livcs OF The people Very few, fancy, wond be
willing To commit 10 four commissioners The pow
er 10 bind US conclnsively. Who could know in
advance lrhai iclnS would be agreed upon? But
this is not The meaning Of Mr.. BentonS bill. So
the declaration in il, that when the terms are
agreed upon, Texas shall be admitted = virtue
OF this act, amounts 10 nothing; for, Inc same
majority which could assent 10 the Terms could
very easily insert in the act giving il lire pro-
vidng Tor her admission.
Browns proposition is certainly, the Globes
opinion 10 the contrary Notwithstanding, much,
very much, the most direct. II contains our
terms. The moment they ole agreed 10 by ley
as, the faith of this nation is pledged 10 admit her.
In the event that Texas accepts our terms, the
whole business is settled; there will then be no
thing farther 10 care about; and there is nothing
farther 10 be done, bui 10 90 through The mere for
malily of her admission. Thereafter, Texas be-
ing secure to MS iorever-iree from diplomatic in
trignes-we can at leisure arrange all open gues-
tions with her upon liberal terms. But, with
Benton's bill, we first risk The Commissioners
agreeing which will be much greater with -four
than one negotaor second, Texas accepting the
terms agreed upon, ifthe Commissioners DO agree
thirdly, their terms being acceptable 10 us; and,
four,hly, being thrown al sea again. in the discus
sion upon them. For, let Them be what they may
they will not be acceptable 10 every body. And
ii must lie borne in mind that all this time Texas
is open 10 the inlrigues of Great Britain, from
which we have so much 10 apprehend.
But The most ominous remark of The whole ar
ticle is the one, that Benton's bill will receive the
support Of the ,wcnty-eighi Democrats who voted
against Browns resolutions. We are informed,
that Bpplon's bill obviates their objections Now