The southern press., 1850-09-10
THE SOUTHERN PRESS.
From the Columbus { Ga. Times.
Texas-The DUTY Of the South.

Texas-The Duty Of the South.
The Legislature of Texas was to have assem-
bled at Austin on the 18th inst. Its answer to
the proposition of the United States Govern
ment to relinquish its sovereignty and jurisdc-
ton over an immense portion Of its soil, will be
looked for with absorbing interest by the South
crn States We have hopes that her patriotism
and sense of fidelity to her sister States of the
South will prompt her to reject the bribe offered
to corrupt her integrity. We are unable to see
this proposition in any other light than mon
strons outrage. If Texas holds good title to
the soil in question, why should she sell it to
the Free Soilers' If she does not, what busi-
ness has the Government to offer herten millions
for it: And after all, why all this fuss over the
disputed territory Whether Texas keeps it,
and in the course of time, forms three new slave
States out of it, (as she has u right to do under
the terms Of her annexation,) or whether it is
decided to belong to New Mexico, we do not
see what difference it can make to the well-being
Of the people who live in it, In either event they
I" life, religion and property" will be amply pro-
tected, and the terms of the treaty of peace with
Mexico. What, then, is the real ground of the
solicitude of Mr.. Fillmore and Congress? They
have seen the public domain in California seized
upon by an army of adventurers and its wealth
in gold and land coolly appropriated, and yet we
have heard of no army sent there to protect the
rights of the Government. Why, then, so much
solicitude about this wild and almost inhabited
portion Of country east of the Rio Grande? The
answer is plain. II is the old story Slavery is
involved in it. Our Abolition Government
knows, that if the Texas title is maintained, that
country, in time, will be turned into three new
slave States. Its decree has gone forth that no
more Stare States are TO be admitted into this
Union and this whole boundary difficulty has
been raised for the purpose of dispossessing
Texas of u territory, which the faith of the Gov
ernment is plighted to receive into this Union
as slave States at some future day. And now
having fraudulently set up this claim for Il
fraudulent purpose, how do they propose to
settle it? Two methods are proposed. lst.
To buy it with the public money, at least
one-half of which has been paid into the
Treasury by the South, who is to suffer by the
purchase; or, ID if gold will not corrupt, then,
the cold steel of the Federal army is to force a
the fraudulent and self-nade parties to the claim.
Nothing more proAigate and monstrous is re-
corded in history, than this pretension of the
Government, and the modes proposed to main
tain it.
The United States has not shadow OF claim
to it. That Territory was claimed by Texas,
before annexation: The United States at that
time had nothing to do with it, as an adverse
claimant. The dispute was between Texas and
Mexico. That dispute was settled by the sword
and Texas afterwards came into the Union with
the limits she now claims. When, and where,
and how did the claim of the United States orr
ginate! The United States has never had any
interest in the claim, except as the agent and
trustee of Texas. After annexation, Mexico in
vaded Texas. The United States went to war
to rcpel that invasion and to drive the Mexican
troops beyond the boundaries which Texas
claimed She made the cause of Texas her own,
and the result Of the war, was treaty by which
Mexico consented to the boundary that was the
cause of the war. Now, did the victory and
treaty enure to the benefit Of the General Gov
ernment or Texas! We admit, that in the for
nation of the treaty, the question of boundary
was matter for the U. States to determine, and
she might have consented to one line or another;
but when she signed and ratified the treaty, her
power over the quest on was at an end, and she
as the mere agent Of Texas has no right now to
assume that she has cquired the territory within
the ancient limits of Texas in her own right as
principal Nor, we repeat, would such pretension
ever have been dreamed Of but for the impert.
ne,.t and grasping spirit of tanaticism, which has
created this dispute for the purpose of perpetra-
ting new and monstrous fraud on the slave
States.
If Texas resolves to defend the integrity Of
her sovereign rights over her SOIL what ought
the other South RI States to do! Will they
permit her to be overrun and conquered by the
troops of the u States We say "no." We
say the South ought to make common cause with
her, and make the West the battle ground, on
which is to be decided whether Abolition fanati-
cism shall rule this country, and subdue by
force, sovereign State, making gallant stand
for rights common to the whole South.
Gov. Quitman, of Mississippi, has already in
dicated what course duty will prompt him to take
in such a conting. ncy. We have no hesitation
in saying srch oug t to be, and such we be-
lieve will be the course of tile worthy patriotic,
and truly Southern-hearted Executive of Geor-
gia.
SHALL WE RESIST OR SUBMIT I'VE have
the fortune to witness many strange and unac-
countable things in this busy world of ours,
which "natures God" has assigned us, as the
scene of our mortal pilgrimage; but what is cs-
pecally strauge-nay, passing wonderful-is,
that residents of the slavcholding Statesmen
of intelligence ard character-shouId so far for
get themselves. should so far forget what is due
to Justice and fair-dealing as well as to the i'll
terests Of the South, as to cry down, to sneer at
and denounce the honest and patriotic attempts
of the Southern people to resist aggression and
to maintain their constitutional rights in this
Union. Do not these men see that there are but
two courses to be pursued-th;:t the South must
either submit or resist! and that they themselves
must, therefore, either join the SOUTH in resist
ing aggression, or unite with the North in threat
oninr and trrtnnlipn tho Southprn Stntas into
submission! Unless they are Abolitionis:s
themselves, and worse than Abolitionists, they
cannot be so foolhardy, so stupid and ignorant,
us to pretend that the North has rot perpetrated
high-h banded aggressions upon the South-that
it is constant study with Northern Legislators
to devise ways aud means for continuing these
agcrcssions, until their emancipation objects are
accor plished. What do they mean then? Do
they mean to say that the North is right in tram
pling upon the Constitution of the country.
that she is right in denying the South an equal