Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1848-02-25

become unwilling to be satisfied with improving
our own broad patrmony, the boon OF Heaven,
and new course of territorial extension was
begun. This, unlike former measures, which
might be changed if on trial they proved UNI
satisfactory, was, when done, incapable of re-
peal and yet the course was entered upon with
a hot haste and unseemly preciptancy The
first scene in this great drama Il hope it may
not turn out tragedy to us (was the annexa-
ton of Texas.
1t is undoubtedly true, there were some men,
in the northern and eastern part of the United
States, who insisted that the powers of the Cen
eral Government of the United States should be
so directed and exercised rs to produce the abo-
ltion of slavery, within the States where it eX-
listed but the great body of the people, even in
the free States, held, in common with the people
of slave States, that the institution of slavery
was exclusively within the control of the States,
where it existed, and that the United States Gov
eminent should put forth no exercise of power,
either directly or indirectly, to affect it within
those States. The issue was not which way
shall the power of the United States be exer-
cised-for or against slavery-but the question
was, shall any such power be exercised in any
way on the subject. On this point, say, the
great body of our people held but one sent-
mcnt.
But it seems that, in order to induce the people
Of the South to enter into the annexation policy.
an unfounded alarm was created, and this doc
trine of non-interference was discarded. And,
in order to secure and perpetuatc slavery in the
States, the exercise Of the power of the United
States Government was invoked, and was put
forth for the annexation Of Texas, for that pur.
pose; and thus the southern stakeholder has ac.
tuay gone over to the ultra political al olitiOnist,
on this issue, and holds, with him, the doctrine
that the power of this Government should be ex-
ercised, at least indirectly, on the subject of
slavery within the States; and we are thus
driven to the wall, and all that is left us is to
say, if it is settled that this power is to be used,
we must soon say, which way it shall be used.
On that point think little doubt will long exist.
In proof of the position that such was the pur-
pose for which this annexation policy was COM
menced, l do not refer to the individual opinion or
action of any private citizen whatever, but to the
public records of this country, made and promu-
gated by the official organs of the Government.
The Secretary of State (Mr. Calhoun) in his
official letters, as the organ of this Government,
to the British minister, Mr.. Packenham, and to
Mr.. King. then our minister to France, openly,
and frankly, and officially announces, 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, g. thereby to secure the institution here.
Thus, sir, the treaty.making power of the
Government of the United States has actually
been invoked and used, for the avowed purpose
of perpetuatng slavery within the States.
| That treaty was rejected by the Senate, and
why? Can it be possible that gentlemen can
expect to disguise and evade this point Sir, il
was rejected because it attempted to annex, as
Texas, all the country west to the Rio Grande
and thus took in a large part of three of the pro.
vnces of Mexico, and the Mexican towns, set
Elements, and posts on the east side of that river
1t is true, some Senators were opposed TO an
heNation ehtireiy,yet II was Tor the reason have
stated that the treaty received the decided rejec.
ton OF the Senate.
Now. sir. had that treaty been ratified by the
Senate. can any man doubt that it would have
been constitutional act and that Texas. or at
least so much as belonged to her, would have
been constitutionallv annexed 10 this country
In fine case ot the American Insurance Comnany
Us. Canter. lst Peters Rcporls. the Supreme
Cour, decided that territory NAV he acouired Inv
the treatv.makino mower of his Government.
and when so aconired il was thereby broupht
within our jurisdiction. and then the lawn ahinp
mower of con1ross MIGHT no eyerc;sed ovor #
insist that the distribution of the mowers of this
c;overnment i,to ,he diIf,rrnt drnar,mants Is
oa,ron, and ox , Tho sa,,o nonar came,
fo nossnssod and exe,ciscJ bv twn J;s,;nct do.
M r,mon,s II wonlJ involve u,tor conN;ct and
rorrnson Mr. Madison sne,k;n, of tho ien;s.
I,,;vo md ,be tro,tv.making nower saws ..'The
enc mower cannot heiono in whole 10 ho,b d.
M r,mants ar he nroncrlv 50 vested a. n onorato
scnaratrv in each. Still more evident is i iLa,
,he same snec;tic function or act cannot nossihly
helono To the two departments. and he enara,c.
lv exerciseahe nv each" AGAIN, he saws g A
concurrent authority in two indcnendeni dena RI.
ments to perform the same function with respec,
r. the same thing. would be as awkward in prac.
tce AS il is unnatural in theory" Letters OF
Helyidius. No. ~
II will hardly be contepded that when any
denartm.nt declines to exercise its mower. /,
the devoIyes upon another. 1t cannot be true
that whom th, President and Senate NEGLECT or
decline IN make a treaty. then CONGRESS can
do il
RI, ,boso c,oor provisions and cops,rnc,;op,
of tho CONSTITUTION were entirely OVERRIDE and
dis ren,rJeJ in the annexation Of Texas An
anne.i was taken from the treatv.makinc now.
or. and Congress- proceeded to lepislate fol-
a country moi in our iurisdictionI and n
make NV ;opt resolutions a CONTACT with Texas
foreipn independeut State, thus usurDnp the
treatv.n,k;nu mower: and so the deed was done
This has ever appsared to me as gross viola
ton of the Constitution. But it is done. and
cannot now be undonc and bring it forwarc
now only 10 show that this annexation policy. in
its ipception. and in all the progress it has made
and is making, is headlone and unscrupulous.
II IL is however TO he rocollected that in one