The Woodstock age. [volume] (Woodstock, Vt.) 1844-1845, 1845-03-20
WOODSTOCK, THURSDAY EVENING, MARCH go, asA5


our independence, obtained foot ofprop
erty-lrom a nation which had seized up
on lands, provinces, and regions ofcoun
try in every quarter ofthe habitable glob
and that had dotted over the map Of TIT
world with her forts to Cypress, as W
have with lighthouses on our coasts, t.
protect and to save. When Poland wa
partitoned-when Aaghanistan was sez
ed upon, or Scinde-that was only Mint
days wonder, and no official complaint
no interference, was heard from US; Blu
when we merely express our assent, (a
the gentleman from Pennsylvania Mr.
BUCHANAN had said, when We merely
consent that another country may unite
with us in government-andt that country
formed of one hundred thousand of oul
brethren, our kith and kin, men who
had worshipped at the same affairs witt
US, who had been educated at the same
schools, and trained up to the same re-
publican principles, who had fought with
us at New Orleans and Chippewa-wher
we merely consent that they may come
itno cur Union and participate in the bless
ings of our institution, -one would sup.
pose that the elements Of our republic
were to melt with fervent heat and chao:
revisit the earth.
Nor was there any superiority in eff
forts to abide by honest convictions o.
what was right or constitutional, in re-
spect to this measure, among its foes
rather than friends, or in the eastern OIL
middle States ever the South and West.
Honest purposes belong to all, without
doubt; and some of us, who were born
with the constitution, have no wish to sur
vive it.
What, then, were these considerations
as to eXpediency, and what were they as
to constitutional rights? Had we not
travelled over this whole subject Of oXpe-
diency at a former session? had it not
gone out to the world; had not the whole
nation been agilated by it during the re-
cent presidential canvass' and was it not
as well understood now as it could be by
a years further discussion? After all
this, would gentlemen stand here and de-
ny the general eXpcdioncy ola measure
of this kind-the eXpcdiency of sustain
ing the general defence of this country,
by uniting with people in our neigh
borhood, who ask the liberty to become
Incorporated with us, and enter in our
measures for lf.protection and seIt-de-
fence? Our fathers settled, in the old
Congress, the great question, after long
debate, that our people should have free
access to cross the Alleghanies, and
should enjoy the undisputed navigation
IF the Mississippi. We felt ourselves
bound, therefore to defend its outlet
they and we held it duty to carry out
he provisions ofthe constitution in main
aiming the domestic tranquility Of the
Union, and in maintaining the property
md institutions Of the States, as protec-
ed by that instrument Nor was the OBJ
igation in the least varied, whether the
and the rights of our citizens ex-
sted on the savannahs of the South or on
he boundless prairlcs ofthe Far West
Some of the opponents OF annexation,
o far from entertaining this view, which
vas held by the revolutionary fathers, had
ot spared to assail the constitution itself,
nd to dcnomnate it "leauge with hell"
I'D ga convenant with DEATH" but the
rends of this measure, one and all, held
hat, so long as the constitution lived, the
government was bound to protectthe prop
rty of all our citizens. In like manner,
was bound to guard the safety of our
rontier from the attacks Of savage indl
n tribes. We had collected into one
reat mass the remnants of that injured
nd vindictiye people; and ought we not
, embrace an opportunity like this to get
ossession of a region of country the pos
ession of which would give quietness and
ccurity to the cabins of the westean set
ears from the tomahawk and the torch'
pass by the encouragement it would
ohfer on our navigation-our agrlcul-
lre-our manufactures, in Il new market
irger, in ten years to come, than the
hole beyond the mountains was when
lis government began. pass by all
leso considerations in order to approach
he true and great question in the matter
neither the proposed measure is in con-
,rmty with the constitution.
Before entering on that, however, |
ught to advert to an objection which had
cen urged on grounds of eXqediency
} the form of this joint resolution. Gen
emen contended that it might have been
ut in better form, because, as it now
God, it asked for the assent Of the pco-
lie ofTexas to future division of her
srritory into States. | have no doubt
lat gentlemen thought so; but must
ike the liberty to tell them that il they ad-
lifted Texas as sovereign State, it
as as proper to ask her assent to the
vision of her territory, as it was that OF
'irginia or New York to the division Of
leir territory. five brought in Texas
5 State, did she not enter the Union as
free and equal sister, Let it not be
aid that, if we so received her, she never
ould consent to divide Their territory
lad not the great States of our own I'm
IN consented to divide theirs? Had not
irgnia consented to lay off the State
{ Kentucky? Had not North Carolina