The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1859-03-10

| could not but be struck with the similarity of
| some of the arguments to those that were used
| IN Congress on a former occasion, some fifteen
years ago. | allude to the anne xation of Texas.
Mr.. President, you have forgotten, venture
to say, the arguments by which that measure
was carried through Congress. l had almost
forgotten them myself; but have been refresh
ing myself on that subject. have lately read
letter published by distinguished Senator
| from Mississippi-he is not one now, but was
one in former days--in which he undertakes to
argue the annexation of Texas and will tell
you what the grounds upon which he put it
WERE and commend that letter to gentlemen;
| they should go and read it. In the first place,
he said it was great abolition measure and
would tend to the rapid extinction of Slavery in
| the United States. Said Mr.. Walker, in a let
| ter addressed to the citizens of Carrolton,
think it was, in Kentucky, if Texas should be
reannexed-why do not Senator's put that re on
to Cuba ?-Slavery would be abolished in Del
aware in ten years, in Maryland in twenty, and
| it would have been very much lessened and de-
creased in Virginia. Texas was to be the out
let by which Slavery, by the law of political
| gravitation, was to slide off through Texas into
| Central America, where there was no prejudice
against color; and there the colored man was
| to be elevated, and was to create new condi-
ton for himself, such as the blacks have ac-
| quired in the West Indies, according to the re-
port of the Governor That was one of the rea-
sons then given for the annexation of Texas
| and your Northern Democracy, which at that
time-I will not speak of the present; l hope
they have imprOved-were ready to do anything
| you asked, if you only gave them something by
which, if they could not deceive others, they
might themselves, caught it up, and the Demo
cratic party in my own State resolved that they
| were in favor of the annexation of Texas be-
| cause it would add more free than slave States
to the Union, and they had the authority of Mr..
| Walker for it. He said it would entirely abolish
Slavery in Delaware in ten years, finish it in
Maryland in twenty, and make awful inroads in
Virginia. Well, sir, Ar. MASON in the chair
you can state how much it has done in Virginia
on that subject
There was another argument, and l almost
stagger credulity when / repeat it, but find it
all in Mr.. Walkers letter. 1t was necessary to
| preserve the tariff. Yes, sir, the appeal was
| made to the manufacturers of the New England
and Middle States, that the annexation of Texas
was necessary to preserve the tariff. They found
out how efficacious it was in that respect. That
problem was demonstrated sooner than will be
the other one, of how long it will take to abol-
ish Slavery in Virginia.
| The third argument used by Mr.. Walker for
| the annexation of Texas was, that it was neces-
/
you suppose that military point of view was
| That it was necessary to defend New Orleans,
and to preserve the Union. Mr. Walker said,
| if Texas were not annexed, there would be a
! Southern Confederacy, the Union would be dis
| solved New Orleans would be at the mercy of
any foe that would come to take it. Those were
the arguments. The annexation of Texas was
to prepare for the extinction of Slavery it was
necessary to preserve the tariff, to protect New
| n-1z- Al L.
got it. Another prediction Walker ventured
upon to manufacturers was this: ifTexas should
be reannexed to the United States, in ten years
there was to be more cotton manufactured in
the United States than there was in Great
| Britain. That was another of the consequences
to flow from its annexation.
| Well, sir, the Democratic party listened to
| these arguments. | did not, and | got turned
out of doors for not listening. The measure
was cOnsuhmated, and cOnsummated, too, by
| the votes of the Northern Democracy; and now
they have history left to tell them how true, how
| specious, or how Just, were the arguments by
which it was advocated. There is to be the
same cry always, that it is necessary in mill
tary point of view. Why is Cuba so necessary
in military point of view? What can Cuba
| do towards protecting the mouth of the Missis-
! sippi? l believe the passage on the east side
Of the island to the capeS of Florida is some
thing like eighty miles. The fleets of the world
could 60 in there without the Notifications on
either side moesting them. On the western
side, from Cuba to Yucatan ] think the chan
mel is still wider-more than eighty miles across.
! How are you to protect and command the Gulf
of Mexico by owning this island of Cuba, which
has channel eighty miles wide on each side
of it, unless you maintain navy to do it? Mr..
Jefferson, when he, i'll the quotation which is
| made by the committee, undertook to recon-
mend receiving Cuba into our Union, he said
| we should Immediately erect a column on the
southernmost limits of Cuba, and inscrbe on
it that it was to be the ne plus ultra to us in
that directiOn-seemingt to admit, that FIVE took
! Cuba, we were going far as it could possibly
| be justfabe to go on any condition, and that
we were to erect monument when we got to
| Cuba, to proclaim to all the world through all
time, that our avaricc and our lust for dominion
and for empire were satiated, at least in that
direction, and that we were to go no further.
But there was another part of Mr.. Jefferson's
| opinion, in which he says:
We should then have only to include the
North in our Confederacy which would be, of
course, in the first war and we should have
such empire for Liberty as she has never
surveyed since the creation"
Well, sir, | have had occasion, more than
| once or twice, to speak about this north side of
the Union. Mr.. Jefferson thought it necessary
| to throw that in, when he suggested the acqui-
sition Of Cuba. He said that, after we had got
Cuba, all we should want was to take in the
! North. / believe, when the remuneration of
| Texas was proposed, that the remuneration of
Oregon was thrown in as a sop for the North
Well, sir we reannexed Texas; but what be-
came of Oregon? There is North to this
country, and, if we are to have annexation
why in the name of geographical necessities do
we not ever look north ? Here we have great
empire bounding us on the north from the At
lantic to the Pacific We have the most dense
part of our population lying within cannon shot
of the Notifications and the vessels of the most
powerful nation on earth Why, sir, during the
campaign of l848, the Democratic candidate for
the Presidency slept right under British guns
There was only a river that divided the city in
which he dwelt from the great force of the
British Empire. Well, sir, we have never
turned our thoughts that way. What is the
reason? Gentlemen will not admit that the
reason we look to Cuba, and neglect Canada, is
that Spain is feeble, and Britain strong. They
will not admit that, though / very much fear
that the world will suspect it.
Now, ask gentlemen, if there is a geographi-
cal necessity for our expansion, let US 90 north
We have gone south long enough we have taken
Florida, we have bought Louisiana, we have re-
annexed Texas, and we have divided Mexico
but on the north our history has been directly
the reverse. When there is the greatest and
most powerful nation on earth owning rivers
which run into the very centre of our continent,
penetrating into some of the most densely-set-
tied and wealthy parts of our country, why is it
that the views Of our statesmen, who give direc-
ton to our energies, and administer to this great
L 1