The voice of freedom. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1839-1848, 1848-03-02

was, shall amy such power be exercised in any rag
on the subject. On this point, say, the great body
of our people held but one sentiment.
But it seems that in order toinduce the people o.
the South to enter into the annexation policy, an
unfounded alarm was created, and this doctrine Of
non-inte,ference was discarded. And, in order tc
secure and perpetuate slavery in the States, the
exercise of the power Of the United States Govern
ment was invoked and was put forth for the annex
alton of Texas, for that PmPose; and thus the
southern shareholder has actually gone over 10 tlle
ultra political aboitionst on this ISSUE and holds
with him. the doctrine that the power of this Gov
eminent should be exercised, at least indirectly, on
the subject of slavery within the States ana we
are thus driven to the wall and all that is lett us Is
to say if it is settled that this power is to be used,
we must soon say whith 1Cay it shall be used. On
that point think little doubt will long eX ST.
In proof of the position that such was the purpose
for which this annexation policy was commenced, |
do not refer to the individual opinion or action OF
any private citizen whatever but to the public re-
cords of this country, made and promulgated by the
official organs of the Government. The SecretmyGt
State (r. Calhoun) in his official letters, as the or
gan of this Government, to the British minister MIR.
Packenham, and to Mr. King, then our minister to
France, openly, and frankly, and officially amour
Ces, that such was the cause and purpose OF the
formation Of the treaty for the annexation Of Texas
that it was done to prevent the abolition of slavery
in Texas and thereby to secure the institution here
Thus sir, the trcaty-making power Of the Govern
mert of the United States has actually been tnrOked
and used, for the avowed purpose OF pcrpetuatlng
slavery within the States.
That treaty was rejected by the Senate aud why ?
Can it be possible that gentlemen can expect to dis
ouise and evade this point? Sir it was rejected be-
it attempted to annex, as Texas all the coun-
try west to the Rio Grande and thus took in large
part Of three of the provinces of Mexico, and the
| Mexican towns settlements, and posts on the east
side Of that river. 1t is true, some Senators were
| sn1 70 ot
reason have stated that the treaty received the de-
cided rejection Of the Senate.
Now sir, had that treaty been ratified by the Sen
ate can any man doubt that it would have been Il
constitutional act and that Texas, or at least so
much belonged to her, would have been conStitu-
| tionaly annexed to this country? In the case of
the american Insurance Company vs.. C1nter, LIST
Peters Rel orts, the Supreme Court decided that
territory may be acquired, by the merchandising
power of this Government, and when so acquired
it was thereby brought within jurisdiction, and
then the law-naking power Of Congress mi hit be
exercised overit | insist that the distribution Of
the powers Of this Government into the different de
partlnents is perfect and exclusive. The same pow
er cannot be possessed and exercised by two dis
tinct departments. 1t would involve utter conflict
and confusion. Mr.. Madison speaking Of the legis-
latvo aud the treaty making power, says: The
same power cannot belong, in whole, to both depart
nents, or be properly so vested as to operate sepa-
ratelv in each Still more evident is il, that the same
f''''"'J
depar0lens, Gnd be separately ere1t 1Sea5Ie by eaCh"
Again he says: A concurrent authority IN two m
dependent departments toperiorm the same function
with respect to the same thing, would be asawkward
in practice as it is unnatural in theory" (LeHers
Of Heltidi"s, No. J
If will hardly be commended that. when any dcpart
mcnt declines to exercise its power, it then devolves
pre.i 1amt md Senate neglect or decline to make n
ireat . then Congress can do it.
Rn+ ,bo.o c,oar rroviso,s and constructions If thc
CONSTITUTION were entreiy o'e'fole una GsIes!IIcu'
IN the annexation OF eN"S, AN "PPe". WIS eiHen
rom me y-Ne p"mJa 10 NV Gln
power anu congress Pl'teooeu 70 aeJ,'o'o ~ :"
country not III our '.u 70 Mei oS J",.'
reSoIu,Io's eo"t'''r WIN 'N", ''ueo,'
and SO the deed was done. This has ever appeared
TO me as A gross violation of the CONSTITUTIONS But
it is done, and cannot now be undone; and bring
it forward row only to show that this annexation
policy in its inception, and all the progress it has
made and is making is head!ong and unscrupu-