The North-Carolina standard., 1849-08-01
NUMBER 769!

may be, thatit was regarded as an offence because
it calculated to embarrass him, and fh waft what
he then meditated, and has since carried into
tion, open desertion to the aboltionists.
II pass now to his next charges. He asserts that
u gave away Texas, and to make it out, he asserts.
that Texas belonged to the United States, when the
treaty with Spain was made, by which she eeded
Florida to US. He claims that Texas was part of
Louisiana and that its boundary extended TO the2io
Cande ;that it all slave territory and looked
the natural outlet for their great increasing slave
i populations and finally, that it was surrendered By
the treaty of Florida, made in 1919. during the ad-
ministration of Mr.. Monroe of which was OF
the members On this statement, he rests his charge
that gave away Texas. 7t-as 81 e4'zAia2 EEsW
i II is difficult for one, who lacks sincerity and is
acuated by violent passions to escape the geaestn in
consistency and contradiction In defending himself
or assailing others, in making long speech. Col.
Benton furnishes strong illustration Of the truth Of
this position, and than in making the
above statement. In order aggravate the act of Civ
ing away Texas, which he charges me with, has
made assertions entirely inconsistent with the grounds
| he took, and the course he pursued while the qnes
ton of the annexation of Fexas before the Sen
ate. He asserts that the boundary ofSEexas as
part of Louisiana extended to the Rio Grdnde, when
the treaty of Florida made, in the very teeth of
the assertions he made when the question of annex
alton before the Senate In the speech he made
in 1884, the treaty for annexing Texas he assert
ed, that 'The Texas which acquired by the treas
ty ofls03, (that of louisiana approachedtho
Rio Grande, excepting its MOUTH 70 show
that by its mouth! - he did that il
touched the river, he said, speaking of Tamaulipas,
one of the States of Mexico, that" it covered both
sides of the river from its mouth for some hundred
miles up" He asserted in the same speech that all
New Mexico, Chihuahua, CoahHla and TarnaRlipab
made no part of the Texas which acquired bysthe
treaty of Louisiana He estimates the part belonging
to Mexico Tying the east side of the Rio Grande TO
be 1000 miles long, (the whole length of the river,S
and some hundred miles broad, and concluded by
saying she washe his hands of all attempts dis
member the republic of Mexico by seizing her do
m in New h0la
Tamaulipas.'' .ats--.E 80 ,}.Isss "a hsE-
These were his assertions, soIemnTy made, aud as
he states after the fullest examination, when hiseob
ject was to defelt the treaty which negotiated with
the commissioners of'TeXas for its annexation. For
tharpurpose he attempted to show, that the treaty
covered large part of Mexico which never belong
ed to Texas, although the treaty specified bounda-
ry; and left the boundary open the side of Mexi-
CO, Intentionally in order to settle it by treaty with
her, Bat now, when his object is toshow, that /
gave away Texas by the treaty of Florida he holds
very different language. He does not, indeed, say
in many ords, that Texas covered the whole re-
gion from the Sabine to the Rio Grande, for that
would have been too openly and plainly direct coD-
tradction what he contended for when his object
de feat nnexation; hut he does the same thing,
in covered and objectionable way, by using
language that could fail to make that impression
on all who heard him, or who may read his speech.
- He goes further. In order to aggravate tlechaTg3
against me he becomes apparently advocate
of slavery extension, he calls t and uses strong
language to show the value of Texas to the South,
that was looked the natural outlet of the Souih-
States with their increasing slave population, and
it was large enough to make six large States or ten
common ones. Snch is his language, when his OBJ
ect is to prove that gave away Texas Y You would
suppose from this language, that he slavery
extensionist, as he calls all those who defend your
rights, and that he placed high value Texas, as
an outlet for your slave populations, and preserva
your Just influence and weight in the Union. One
would conclude that with these feelings and views,
he would have been strong advocate of the treaty
that was rejected by the Senate, which proposed to
Texas without any restriction w hateyer infre-
ation slavery, to leave it, to his own lam
guage, the outlet to your increasing slave popula=
on. Instead of that, he made most strenuous efforts
defeat it, and contributed mot Little towards it,.
He went further. Afterits defeat he moved string
of resolutions, containing provisions for its admis-
sion, and among others, one which proposed to di-
vide Texas into two parts, nearly equal as possi-
BILE by line. running North and South, and to allot
the you, and the the abolition-
sts the entire exclusion to your 'increasing Stare
papiaon 1tcan hardly be, that he forgot all this In
delivering his speech but if not, what machless eff
ontery and Inconsistency make the charge he does
against me! There would indeed seem to be no linz
its his audacity and inconsistency and he appears
to have selected FeXas as proper field to make tho
greatest display of them. AS, if to cap the climax,
after having deliberately asserted and srenu-
ously nIantained that the boundaryof Texas
did not extend to- the Rio Grande, he placed short
time afterwards, his YotefoH record that it didby
voting for the bill declaring war against Mexico
The bill assumed it did in asserting that the blood
shed on the eastern bank was blood shed ON
American soil, which could not be, unless Tex
ds extended to- the Rio 1Grande. If it did not the
war stands without justification. Iftdd not, the
march of army to the Rio Grande was an in-
vasion of neighboring country unauthorized by
Constitution law and yet Col. Benton, who
had but short time before declared solemnly after
full investigation, that all the bank of the river
for hundred miles wide, belonged to the Mexi-
can republic, and emphattcaly decared he wash
ed his hands of all attempts to dismember the Mexi-
can Republic by selzing her dominions, New Mexi-
CO, chihuahua, Coahua, and Falnanlipas,'' voted,
for the bill He went further. He reported il as
the Chairman of the Committee on military affairs.
in total disregard of his motion made the day,
before to refer much of the Message of the Presi-
dent, related to declaring war, to its appropriate
Commtiee-that on Foreign Relations. Comment.
is unnecessary. 5ss5 ssssf. rc5.5 s-zr 81 8
But am not yet done with Texas, nor with the
effrontery and absnrdity of the charges he made
aganstme in reference to it. He says gave it away
7-gave it away by the Florida treaty. How could,
give it away by that any other treafyl The
power to make treaties belongs to the President and
never was vested in me. 1t was at the time vested
IN Mr. Monroe,sas President of the United States.
Nor did negotiate it. i was only one member Of
the Cabinet, and the youngest of the whole.s How.
could l. then, give away Texas To proYethe charge
he resorts to his old patent reasoning that was alt
much so, as to make the President and
all the members of the Cabinet mere cyphers.e He,
would have it, that they Were but tools In my hands;
and alone was responsible for all that was done,
Wellf he wiil ay it so, Imeet the charge direct
". 1t is not true that the Florida treaty gave away.
Texas did not believe, when the treaty was ade,-
Rio Grande, or even to the NeHces and ihat il was
Wltethar