The south-western. [volume] (Shreveport, La.) 1852-1870, 1856-09-17

:, organ states That, III the senate OF the u mite
G States, in the month Of May, 1885, a PROPOSE
:, ton to recognise the independence of Texas wa
: discussed. Mr.. Buchanan opposed the resolu
! ton On the 9th Of that month, he declare
G Gas an American senator he could give th
: Texans nothing but his prayers and his goo
, wishes. = See Cong. Globe, 1886, page 500.
d On the esd May, after Texas had triumphe,
n and fairly won her independence, he still op
posed the proposition, declaring at the sam
f time that he believed that the dominion O
: Mexico over Texas was gone forever" On th
1st of March, 1886, the following resolution of
fered by Robert J. Walker, then a senator from
Mississippi, was adopted BY the senate, by
vote of % yeas to 10 nays. Mr.. Buchanan, will
the most bitter anti-southern senators, voted
against the resolution, notwithstanding nearly
a year previously he admitted that *'the domin
ion Of Mexico over Texas was gone forever:''
s'Resolyed, That the State of Texas having
established and maintained an independent gov.
eminent, capable of performing those duties
foreign and domestic, which appertain to indie
pendent governments, and it appearing that
There Is no longer any reasonable prospect OF
the successful prosecution of the war by Mexico
against said State, it is expedient and proper
in conformity with the laws of nations, and the
practice Of this government in like cases, that
the independent political existence of said State
be acknowledged by the. government Of the u.
States.--(See Cong. Globe, for 1886, P. 476. J
Now, will the Washington Union, or colonel
Forney, of the Pennsylvania, be kind enough
| to inform us, what induced Mr. Buchanan to
display such a determined hostility to the GOV
eminent ofthe United States recognising the in
dependence of the infant republic of Texas?-
Let them explain why Mr.. Buchanan was OPP
posed to giving Texas a place among the gov
ernments and nations.
We copy the following query from the Rich
mong (Va.) Wing, which it put to the Enquir-
er, and vanly solicited an explanation:
"If Buchanan is ''sound'' on the question of
southern rights and slavery, why didn't the
southern delegates at Cincinnati vote for him
on the first ballot? The facts of the case are
these, however--nearly three-lorrths of Buch-
anan's votes in the Cincinnati convention were
from the antisavery States; the slave States
giving him but thirty-ive votes! Why was
this? As the Louisville Journal says, the south
ern delegates in the convention had no faith in |
Buchanan, and the southern masses have no
faith in him"
And the masses at the south have, since his
avowal of the obnoxious squatter sovereignty
doctrine, far less confidence in Mr.. Buchanan's .
"soundness" than ever, and are convinced that .
he is not TO be trusted. He is endorsed by, /
and in all probability is under the maIign in
tluence of, the cunning old abolition and free
soil agtator Martin Van Buren,; and the peo-
pie begin to understand his true position In
a word, tie people of the south, begin to feel
assured that the election of Buchanan would
rot only be endorsing the policy of Pierce, but
also equivalent to the restoration of Martin
Van Buren, to power.
The non. Z. c. Cabell, of Florida, addressed
| letter to the democratic and American cleo
ors Of that State, proposing that they shall
pledge themselves to cast their votes for either
he Buchanan Or the Fillmore ticket as the one
II the may stand the better chance of election
The following intcrr0yatories were proposed
1st Do you not prefer, and do you not be-
eVc the democratic American party of Flor
la prefers the election of Fillmore and Don
lSon Buchanan and Breckenridge to that of
he abolition or black republican Candidates?
I'd. ShouId you be elected, and should it be ;
scertaincd that Fillmore and Donelson Buch- t
nan and Breckenridge will receive more t
Iectoral votes than Buchanan and Brecken- t
ldge, Fillmore and Donelson, and that your I
ote FOR the latter gentlemen cannot elect them.
vii YOU not cast your vote for Fillmore and c
)oneIson, buchanan and Breckenridge, if c
GU find You can thereby defeat the black re- t
ubcan Or abolition candidates, or prevent the 6
lection from going into tic house of represen- t
4uveS? a
One the democratic electors has replied for il
imseIf and associates refusing to give the 7
ledge. The result Of this answer is, SAYS the -,
'ensacoa Gazette, that the BUCCANEERS in Flor :
la would rather see Fremont elected than Fill 5
lore. S
The New York journal of Commerce, a de h
locratic Sheet says that the democrats in the Il
T. s. senate voted to prohibit foreigners from [;
oting in Kansas because it was important to :;
ass the bill and ''n no other way could it OBJ
lin the votes Of the American party" In 9TH Ia
words, that the democracy threw its ma ei
'ral allies" overheard, the very first time it u
aror,o avroI;on+ n do ca or 81 ,,-.o oo,,lJ h., ~