Carroll free press. [volume] (Carrollton [Ohio]) 1834-1861, 1845-08-08

=
dane, fMsy had been Tutoring solely 10 SEE
cure The eteciioH gf L'Olk and Dailas.
here was the Texas question, sprung
upon US by John Tyler just is the canvass
opened, with deliberate intent 10 marshal
the south on sectional issue. Mr. Clay
was in the south at the time-spendiUg the
winter in New Orleans, at all times The 10
cns Of the Texas conspiracy. AsthpeWing
opened, he travelled slowly norlhWad,
through the States most vehemenhy mad
drned by the Texas phren2y. Reaching
Raleigh in April, he there wrote and trans-
mtted tn the National Inteligencer his sem
timents on the Texas question, taking
ground most decidedly against annexation,
Nobody pretended to misunderstood him.
nor to say that hs Language was at all am
! bguous In that letter he declared him
sell peremptorily hostile to annexation at
aIeVentS until Mexico and all portions of
our own Union should assent 10 the mea-
sure. He wen! farther than even this, and
declared himself averse OF general grounds
TO the extension Of our territory, believing
it far wiser and hettor to improve and peo-
J pie what we already have. 1t would hard
| Iy be possible to crowd into TWO medium
sized columns more decided objections to
the measure.
In the course Of the summer, Mr.. Clay
replied to two letters from Alabama. asking
! tauherexpIanatioHs Of his views. In these
| replies he again expressly declared that he
considered the assent Of Mexico and of our
own States --thatanneXation mast
/ be effected without war, without 1lshonor
/ (hp had already shown that annexation in
defiance Of Mexico would he an act OF war
and dishonorahle breach OF our public
iuilh) and with the CT m,no0 co nseutof the
/ American people, These tond tions salts.
/ fed, he would make no farther objections
10 annexation (who woudl)-he would
even he glad to see it.
Il Was al once exclaimed by the Folk and
8jIhey papers that MIR. Clay had en- drir.
en- oA his original ground by the pressure
Of southern op0ian- that il lad virtually
irenoanted his hostility 10 annexation. ii
seemed desirable to both Of these parties
shat this impression u should Le made--to the
Brneyites, because they wanted the anti
Texas votes for their mans 10 the i.1c0tOro
! because they ionnd that the ecienliuus
/ Sod fearing, oppression-hating men still
lingering in their ranks We're disturbed and
=, agitated by The contemplation Of this Tex
IS natter. The only way tc rope thorn In
to vote as usual was TO camor that Mr..
Clay was MS mach for annexation M Mr.
Polk. and pick some words out Of his Ala
bama letter to sustain the assertion. This
the speakers and journals OF the party did
| wherever it seemed polite to DO So And
they found the Hrneyts hail-lelIows in the
work. Thas they went on, through Au.
gust and September. On the 23d dav o.
the latter month, in ample season to he read
and pondered in every part OF the Union,
! Mr.. Clay addressed final letter 10 the Ma.
uonaI lnteIIiEencer announcing his deter
animation to write no more letters during the
| penden'g Of The contest. In this letter he
says OF the Texas question: WequoleIhe
whole, so that there shall be no pretext for
the charge Of garbling or sUpprcssion!)
"ln announcing my determination, to
| permit no other letters to he drawn ircm ME
Oh public atltrs, think it right 10 avail
myself OF the occasion to correct the erro-
neous Interpretation Of one or two Of those
which had previously written. In A pr.I
last nd d@ressed to you, from Roleigh, let
ter in respect to the proposed treaty annex
| ing Texas to the United States, aud | Ihave
since addressed two letters to Alabama up
on the same subject. Most unwauanted
allegations have been made that those let
ters are inconsistent with each other, and,
to make it out, particular Phrases or eX-
prcssions have been torn from their con.
text, and meaning attributed to me which
| never entertained.
81 wish now distinctly to say that there
is not a ierli9g, a sentiment, or an opinion
expressed iG my Raleigh letter to which
do not adhere. am decidedly opposed to
the immediate nNNoYq:'94 ot Texas to the
T"j,c3 St1l,, | think it would be disho-
noNbe, might involve them in war, " ould
he dangerous 10 the integrity and hl~mo2y
of the Union, and if oil these objections
were removed, could not he effected, ac-
cOrding to any information possess, upon
Just ana admissible conditions.
at was not my intention, in eitherof the
Two letters which addressed to Alabama,
10 express any contrary opinion, Repre-
sentalions ha,, been made to me that was
considered as inheXi5y opposed to the an.
nexaton Of Texas under Uay circums.rN-
ces; and that my opposition was so extreme
that would not waive it, even if there
we're general consent to the measure by
all the States of the Union. | replied, in
my first letter to Alabama, that personally |
| had no objection to oannexation. Thought
that my meaning was sufficiently obvious,
that | had no personal, private, or individ-
ual motives for opposing, as have none for
espouslng the measure, my Judgment being
altogether influenced by general and polit-
icaI considerations, which have ever been
the guide Of my public conduct.
"ln my second letter to Alabama, assu-
ming that the annexation Of Texas might
be accomplished without national dishon-
or, without war, with the general consent
Of the States Of the Union, and upon fair
and reasonable terms, l have stated that |
should he glad to sec it. did not suppose
that ii was possible could be misundcr-
I ip,nctnoJ oVarv kolu t,outI ,a,y,