New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-11-23
sest. We thisk they caused that defeat. but moth
irg was further from their purpose.

III Mr. Clay might have been eieo'cd' In sPie
Of the blunders and misc tAnoes above recorded,
but for the course of the "Liberty-parY ADO
utionists These bad poll~d some Sixteen Ihousaaa
yoies ia our State in the Fan Of 49, and it seemed
INDISPENSABLE ~ Mr. CLAY success thata NOD
mart of tbis number should be induced to vote for
him in IA. The ground he maintained on the An
p,xstion of Texss, and the Southern opposition -
him based thereon. rendered 1t their ddtJ TO do SO
and we are csnedent thss, had the Election taken
place in June of that year, Birney would not have
received more than 900 votes Bat Mr. Gays
Southern friends would not let him stand on the
only ground whereon he could be elected they
kept writing and personally urging him to render
hi. position more acceptable to the SOut,, aud
finally induced him to write two private letters to
Alabama. stating in substance that has repuglance
10 the Annexation Of Texas was rot based on the
Slavery aspects Of the question-that. If Mexico
could be conciliated and the Northern States salts
fed. he should be glad to see Annexation effected
These letters were published. snd OF course used
With great effect BY the supporters OF both Polk
and Birpey and they unquestionably doubled tho
vote for the latter so that, in trying to coneate
Alabama, which he nevertheless lost by Twelve
thousand majority, Mr Clay lost New York and
the Election. We think the use made of Mr
Clay Alabama letters by the Birneyites WAS IN
fair and their construction forced one we think
every sincere OppOneGt of Slavery Extension ought
to have supported Mr. Clay in view of all the facts
we II ink the Birney leaders, bad they been as
anxious to pre- rent The growth and spread OF Slav
ery as they we're to build up party, would have
done so But al this ground has been repeatedly
t1ayersed in cur columns Messrs Btrney, Cert
Smith, Stanton, S6m Hammond and other Abolition
leaders of le44, would doubtless have opposed Mr.
CLAW ans how but their rank and file would mainly
have left them aud supported him but for those
unfortunate letters to Alabama. letter on any
important controverted topic is dangerous ex-
periment for a Presidential candidate; while a
rendition of the dose is almost certain death.
III. "Oliyer" says that 81 the question of the
Annexation Of Texas was practically settled be-
fore Mr. Polk came into Office This is true in
letter. but utterly misleading in spirit. We wore
in Washington intenty watching the progress Of
the drama, and we can appeal to hundreds in sup
mort # our averment, that the Annexine Joint Re
solves of March, lo45. could no more have passed
that Congress had Mr.. Clay been the President
elect than could resolve now pass making the
Roman Catholic the Established Church of this
country. Mr. Tyler then sat in the White House
hut il was the influence Of James X Polk in his
rooms at the National Hotel that passed the Al
nexipg Resolves. He had places in the Cabinet
Embassies, Collectorships, &c, to give; every
Democratic Member of Congress was sutton for
his favor in some way and they were oil given
very distinctly to understand that they would be
| counted out if they opposed Annexation. Silas
Wright had been taken out of the Senate by his
election of Governor simultat ,usy with Polk
Daniel S. Dickinson filled his place-or rather, sat
In it-eyen Col Benton was made to vote for the
measure he had 20 unspsringly denouDced-Bagby
of Alabama was twisted about-and Allen of OHIO
roared you as gently as any sucking dove. Take
away the influence of Mr. Polk and his patronage
and that measure could not have secured the
votes Of thre eeightbs ofihe Senate.
OF cou,se, "Oliver" is at liberty to assert that
" If Mr.. Clay had been elected, the measure would
have been contaminated just ~ soen-perhaps
sOoner"-as he might say if Dir Brney had been
elected, that cone ANIMATION would have been still
more certain and speedy. But Mr Clay himself is
better authority on this point and his declara
tions that hs would never consent to any Anne1a
ton while Mexico objected or any considerable
portion o. the Union protested, are entitled to
more weight than the bare dictum of anybody
else. We are utterly unable to perceive any dis
crepancy or ground for even confusion in the
premises Mr. Clay did not regard the accession
of Texas to our Union as per SC unde'irable-
who did or does But Mexico objected that
Texas was her eSolted province, with no moral
right to transfer hesself to the Union and that We
q friendly Deighbor and ally, had no moral right to
receive her. Mr.. Clay, Mr.. Van Buren, with
nearly an tie eminent Statesmen of this country
and Of Europe, sustained this view, and stigma
tized our proposed absorption of Texas as an act
OF bad faith toward and Of aggression upon Mexico
Then we anti Slavery men Of the North controlling
seven States, (n fact, nine for New-York and
Indiana concurred as to the principle but differed
as to the mode of giving effect to it, protested
against Annexation in any form which would in
crease the power or extend the domain of Slavery
Mr.. Clay, while not himself uniting in this protest
affirmed our right to make it, and insisted that An
ne1ation must not take place, even were Mexico
plscated until the measure should have taken
such shape that the Northern States also should
acauiesce in it's contamination as proposed. What
more could we ask
Texas must have ultimately come into our Union
had even Brney been chosen President In l5i4.
Manifest destiny in this instance was indisputa-