Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1845-1851, 1846-01-03
Cen. Sam Houston.


respectable citizens of Galveston Texas addressed
letter to General NJ B. Lamar requesting his opinion
of the course of Gen Sam Houston relative to the
annexation Questions his answer IS direct and point
ed and exposes the charac and movements of Hous-
ton rs fully as il shows his mcanncss in attempting 10
make political apital by denying hs former measures
We give the following extract which forms Inc con-
clusion of Cen Lamar's reply.
Ills useless to pile Ossa Pclion. Ii the facts and
ressounes already adduced insufficient satisfy the
reader of the asehsod of Gen Housions decara
ton that all this apparent opposition to annexation,
only intended deceive the British Minister, fear that
his mind upon this question, mpervous to truth and
would be useless to upon him any further consdeIa
tons IT, however, there Is patient examiner of evil
Jence who slow in receiving conviction, yet willing
when fairly convinced. surrender his prejudces and
passions the sacfed Of truth, to him will address
argumrnt--or rather will present of the
past arguments in shape and then leave the matter,
the elegant aud prosperous language Of the present
Exceency TO its contingencies Let US then, for little
while suppose that Cen Houston TO be arragned by Capt
Elliott upon the charge of nsncerity Suppose the min
lister say him Sir, you assured upon your
official honor that You opposed to the OF
Texas TO the United Sairs and you desired me to notify
my government of the fact. Why, then. have you since
declared that correspondence and intercourse this
subject. was mere coquefry on your part Against Inc
depravty implied this charge, and the defence OF
his honor the General might justly and triumphany
reply in the following language He might say to the
minister Sir you know well that this declaration
extored from by the dangerous position IN which
| was placed by my fidelity you. Had acknowledged
to the truth and validity OF pledges 10 your govern.
men it would have involved in treason to my
people To gloss them therefore, under the plea Of
coquetry, only alternative. Ii was not done IN
malice ycu but in safety myself That have acted
good faith your government you have every
beieve and have testimony To dlsprove. Did not
my Cabinet oppose tie nexation Did rRy press.
my par,isans my foreign ministers, my officers of
ment and all others whom had any control, do the
same! Did not under your advice. issue my procama-
ton of Armistice, and send my commissioners to Mex
leo Did also DR.. Jones be elected the
Presidency for the avowed purpose of having my pledges
to YOU carried out And has he done the full
of his abilities Did he furnish you with the
basis of the Treaty with Mexico OF the provisions of
which expressly denounced annexation Did he de-
lay the calling of Congress until your with that
Treaty and he received il, did he issue
Proclamation of Armis,ice, in which he distinctly indi
Gated his preference Of independence annexation And
did throughout this period whilst the whole country
clamorous for annexation, maintain sul,en silence
though strongly appealed to- by the dying Hero of
New Orleans, TO come out in favor of What stronger
proof can you require of my fidelity defy you
the first act that have committed favor of the
measure, the first one omitted, which it in my
power 10 employ against it, without utter ruin myself
wha, then becomes of charge against me Produce
your evidence Do you hope TO convict me by my
confession You know well | do the necessity of
my repudisting the past and you oppose my
torted acknowledgment to the long train of consistent
conduct which has under your own observation.
Actions speak louder than words let be judged by
them.
And now, gentlemen. suppose Gen. Houston were to
make such speech this the British Minister in reply
TO his mputation-what could the minister offer
He would be compelled to acknowledge the force and
lidy of the argument, aud withdraw his charge And If
these and sufficient produce con-
vction when urged by Gen. Houston himself in what 10.
spect ar their weight aud authority diminished by their
being urged in his behalf by another
And now, gentlemen, what the conclusions 10 be
drawn from this conduct, No man enters into inrigues
without object either public private. What then,
the object of Sam Houston in these disgraceul ne
EQUATIONS with the British Minister aud the Mexican
crumentl He is pleased TO denominae hese nego,ia Ion
10y the gentle appeaiion of coqnefry.' What, then
the object of his coque,ry What public good did he
propose accomplish By Was the union If Texas
and Mexico intended This he denies. Was the per-
manen independence of the country. the object! This
he also denies What. then, was his object Like a
criminal who rushes vsiny the his prison.
Gen. Houston imprisoned IN triple walls by his in
endeavors desperate plunge the
door of But that door barred against him
with fastening which he cannot rend What then, was
the object Of his gentle coquetry with Great Britain and
Mexico In the absence Of all public reasons we are
left conjecture the private II he has received
from the British Minister or from the Mexican Govern
any personal favor the reward Of his negotiations
with them then is he double aitorfrst to his coun-
try, aud then to them-and merits a double execration.
But the other hand ii ho has received from these
ers which have been redeemed then he
in the miserable condition OF disappointed traitor who
recriminates for revenge
Such gentlemen, has been the con 'uct of Gen Hous-
ton the question OF annexation In all the phases Of
bis ortuous and elaborate p,rdy it is but epome of
his life. The browning ac-conssent only with himself
is the climax of audacy. Does he blush the expos
ure Of his treason No lie makes a merit of his guilt
and turning TO tho people he has dshonored il in mock
of all human virtue he demands the patriots reward
Tor the traitors crime.
Your fellow citizen,
MIRABEAU Il. LAMAR