The Middlebury galaxy. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1848-1850, 1849-02-13

ton of every member Of this Union, to resort
to other sourcesof revenue in lieu OF that she
had voluntarily surrendered. She retained
TO herself the power, she retained to herseH
the ssuEces of revenue. lrih a single eTctptto"
Well, sir, if Texas had entered into an oelga-
SION with the United States nat TO raise a rev
enue in a particular nlannef, docs Ii ioiio"
that she is not bound to resort TO other modes
of raising revenue for the discharge OF her
obligations i? And does it follow, that in con-
sequence Of the treaty by which she becomes
a member Of this Union, and rclinqushcs the
power of imposing imposts, that the United
States becomes responsible for the debts OF
that republic, simply because she has COMPEL
cd herself to provide in some other mann,r
for the payment of her debts
We certainly have taken from Texas the
power of raising revenue by imposts. This Is
true but il is not true that that power has
been transferred from Texas TO this Gov
erImcnt. The power now exercised by this
Government of raising revenue by imposts
is different thing from the power that was
exercised by Texas. That power, when ex-
,ercsed by Texas, was exercised for the bene-
fit of that State alone. The power exercised
by this Government is for the benefit OF the
whole Union, and cannot be made 10 bear I'M
equally for the benefit or to the injury OF any
State
Theresult of the whole argument, Mr. Pres-
Ilent, is this Texas pledges her faith to ap-
ply her revenues, bona fde, TO the extinguish-
ment OF this debt, reserving TO herself the con-
troll Of her own financial system, and reserving
10 herself the right 10 levy that revenue IN
anv way or manner which TO her wisdom
might seem fl. II, theref re. she las made
a contract, OH the one hand, for the sat
isfaction of these debts by the appropriation
Of her revenue generally, and ma dc contract
on the other hand, not 10 satisfy them in par
ticular manner, there is no ground Tor the ar
gumcnc that we have taken from her or her
creditors anything pledged TO Them She Is
left TO her public domain, her internal taxa
ton. her internal imposts, and to every so"rce
Of revenue to which the other States OF this
Union now resort.
There is another view Of this subject. Ii
NAV be urgcd-indeed such an idea IS sug
gested by the report OF the Committeeman
by the arrangement By the force of which the
power Of Te, to levy imposts is surrendered.
her resources are diminished. Let us look at
this subject for moment All these pledges
AZ rcvenne must be regarded a' subject to the
necessities of national existence and OF nation
n. defence No State, by pledging its reve-
nue.. can be regarded rs having surrendered
the means Of sustaining its civil institutions, or
of projecting Itself in its foreign relations
The pledge, then, from the nalu.e OF the case,
must be nothing more than TO apply such OF
her revenue as would not be required for the |
nccc isary existence and protection OF Teas
to the satisfaction of the debt. Well, sir, what
have we done ? I his pledge, evidenced bythe
security given to these petitioners, was subject
to the qualification that the revenue Of Texas
should be applied, in the first instance, to main
tain her national existence. She was then en-
gagged in war, prosecuted by her under the
creates disadvantages. She was engaged in
a contest which, if not hopeless, was at least
doub ful. Under these circumstances, the
pledge mus; have been understood as going no
further than have described. Ii was a pledge,
in reality, of the surplus of her revenue, after
m .ctinr the necessities and the cxigcncies oil
the Stale.
By placing herself in this Union, and by
transf; ring 10 us the duty of protection. Tex
as relieved herself of all her diplomatic, her {
military, and her Laval expenditures; and as
a consideration for having thus relieved her
self from these expenditures she yielded the
power of raising revenue by foreign impoSs.
But is her ability to pay her debts diminished
by her annexation to this Confederacy? On
the contrary, is not her solvency fortified Is
not the security of h-r. creditors made better ?
Is not. in short, her credit, her stock, higher
than if she had been left to prosecute the war
sinslr-handcd? Why sir, it seems to me that
the arrangement by which she berame MEM
Der Of this C9ntctleracy placed her and her
creditors in an infinitely better position than
they would have been in if no such arrange
ment had been made. Upon what ground,
then, can it be insisted that we have taken
from that republic either her capacity or her
means? Upon what ground can 1t be said
that we have disabled her from the perform
ance of her obligations, and should, therefore,
assume That performance upon ourselves? Up
on what ground can it be urged that, by that
arrangement, we have diminished her capaci-
ty, o., to speak more appropriately her ability
to satisfy these debts? / do not intend to de-
tain the Senate with long argument, and
Therefore shall dismiss that point.
Another ground suggested by the commit
tee in their report is. that inducement to an
nexa,ion was held ont to Texas by an aSsur
an thatiwc woul provide for her honor by
which. il seems TO be understood, Is meant her
debts-by the instruction given 10 the commits
stOuc-S WHO ncgolidleu lllc treaty vi aHicAd- Il
ton. But, sir. it is to be remarked, that these
instructions were never carried out. They
were never acted upon. No stipulation OF a.
grecmcnt grew on; of them; anil. what is more,
Mr.. President. we all know that if this ques-
ton of anne Ration had been left to rest upon
the negotiation of the treaty, we never should
have been troubled with the question of the
pawn n of these debts, and some other ques-
tions of tar greater Importance.
Texas came into the Union with no qualifi-
cation or restriction, except, if | remember
right il was provided BY the resolution Of an
nexation, that she should be still held respon-
sible for her debts and retain her own public
domain putting herself, By the act of annexa-
ton, upon precisely the footing which rave
endelycred 10 describe. These instructions
Of the commissioners were never carried out.
The contract was never consummatcd. The ;
treaty WIS rejected, and the annexation eff
fectei at last, not by the treatv-making power,
but by a simple act of legislation. which maAe
-. - 10 (fNnf..,ln,a,.x- |