Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1861-04-27

It's head. Mr.. Wallis says the British Col. Mich.
OILS told him the Naval commander had biz orders
to place Harrison Gray Otis at the head Of the
affair, until the pleasure Of the Prince Regent was
known,
What that pleasure was to be, appears to have
been elrcady arranged. The British United Ser
Vice Journal rays the object was to separate the
Northern and Eastern from the Southern and
Western States, to establish a limited monarchy
in the fret named States, placing one Of our prin.
ces Of the blood on the throne.
rHf ANNEXATION OF TEXAS.
Texas was from tho Hfst a rock Of ofense to
New England. Mr., Monroe, who regarded our ii.
tie 10 1t rs indieputaJle, was persuaded by Mr..
Adams to give i. up TO Spain by the treaty Of Flor
ida. The New England men threatened dissolu-
ton should Texas not be given up, Said Mr..
Monroe, 10. one Of his letters on This subject; "Tbc
difficulty is altogether internal and of tho most
distressing nature and dangerous tendency"
And what was that dihculty2 The Eastern Fed
eralists menaced the Union if Mr.. Monroe admit
ted Texas into the Unionl Mr.. Monroe was de-
TERED by these mensces o. disunionl Mr.. j. Q.
Adams was in his Cabinet and be knew the de-
signs Of the Boston Federalists. What these de-
signs we're, Mr.. Adams himself subsequently de-
veloped in his attack upon the Hartford COnven-
ton.
This difficulty about Texas again broke out aE
ter the establishment Of her independence, and
when she applied for admission into the Federal
Union, this developed afresh the sectioual;sm and
secessionism Of New England, and here we have
to note a change Of opinion on the part Of Mr..
Adams. lie now makes his appearance as one of
the New England agitators.
In speech on the 9Th Of November, 1914, at
Bridgewater, Mass, Mr.. Adams said in relation
to The annexation of Texas; the whole transac-
tion was a fragrant violation of the Constitution,
and its contamination, had it been effected, would
have been itself a dissolution of the Union. This
was said after the rejection of the treaty and be-
fore annexation by resolution of Congress.
In 1913, Mr.. Adams and nineteen Congress
men issued a most elaborate paper, addressed to
the people of the Free States of the Union. The
National Iuteltigencer, in which it appeared, ex-
pressed reluctance in publishing it, because Of
the address which it bears TO the people of a por-
ton only Of the United States.
In March, 1916, the Boston Post said
"By the annexation resolutions of the Wing
Legislature, Massachusetts declares that she will
20 out of the Union if Texas comes in, or that at
least she will nullify the act of annexation"
The following is one Of the resolutions offered
by Mr.. Bell, passed at its session in l845.-
Resolved, That as the powers Of legislation
granted in Congress do not embrace the case OF
the admission Of q foreign State or Territory, by
Legislation, into the Union, suck an act would have
no binding force whatever on the people of MAssa-
chusetts."
The Boston Atlas, on the Goth December, 1914,
says OF the annexation Of Texas:
at involves the whole broad question Of the
permanency of our Government, and the continue
tion of our Unich.
"Massachusetts cannot-she must not, she will
not-submit to the annexation of Texas to the
United States. Let this idea be impressed firmly,
indelibly upon the public mind. This Union is a
Partnership Of twenty-six States"
The following is also Of that party:
1--WE shall certainly consider the annexation OF
Texas, or Of any other foreign State, to this cOun-
try, as q virtual dissolution Of the Union, and we
apprehend that such o vast addition TO our terri
tory and population would SO far change the ma
ture and circumstances of the connection, az to
absolve the dissenting States from any further OBJ
LEGATION under the original contract Of the Union"
John Reed, Lieut.. Governor Of Massachusetts, on
August 4, 1914, said:
ut must be understood that the free states will
neither consent nor submit to the annexation of
Texas to this Union. Such annexation would re-
suit in it's dissolution. Indeed, annexation with
out provision 10 the Constitution, and without con-
sent, would be an absolution from the bonds and
obligations of the Constitution"
And John Quincy Adams, in the declaration by
himself aud nineteen ether memteIs Of Congress
says:
ave hesitate not TO say that annexation, ehec
ted by any act or proceedings Of the Federal Gov
eminent, or any Of it's Departments, would b
identical with dissolution. Not only inevitably t
result in a dissolution Of the Union, but fully t
justify it."
Gov. Slade, of Vermont, said, in his message t
the Legislature of that State:
'siI do not hesitate to declare, as my opinion
that upon the contamination Of this project,
will he the duty Of Vermont, to declare her una
terable determination to refuse any connectio
With the new Union, thus formed without her COZ
sent and against her will"
Mr.. King, a leading Republican, thus gives hi
opinion on session
1--WE say this advisedly-upon information nj
TO be disregarded-and with a full, deliberate on
mistaken conviction, that annexation, come
What form it may, is, and should be, the disSolt
don Of the Union"
The Boston Atlas said
at is a grave matter to dissolve such q hol
Union - ours has been-and none bat grave eau
es should sever the bond. We eau bear all bt
this, (annexatien of Texas)." 3
John Quincy Adams offered, in the House
Representatives. on 2slh February, 1913, the 70
lowing, among other resoiutions.-
s'Resolsed, That any attempt Of the GoyernmeT
Of the United States. by an act Of Congress, or /
treaty, to annex to this Union the Republic Of Te
as, or the people thereof, would be a violation