Holmes County farmer. [volume] (Millersburg, Ohio) 1857-1926, 1861-06-20


publishing it, "because of the addres
which it bears to the people OF a portion
only Of the United States"
AT meeting in Milford, Mass, on 25tl
of March. 1874, violent secession resolu
tions were passed.
In March, 1S45, tho Boston Post said
''By the annexation resolutions Of th
Wing Legislature, Massachusetts declare
that she will go ont Of the Union ifTexa
comes in, or that at least she will nullify
the act Of annexation.
The following is one Of the resolution,
offered by Mr.. Bell, passed at its session
in 1S45:
4 "Itesolved, That as the powers Of leg
islation granted to Congress do not EN-
brace the case Of admission Of a foreign
State or Territory by legislation into tn
Union such an act would have nc bindin,
force whatever on the people of NJ ass achu
setts."
The Boston Atlas, on the 26th Of De
cember, 1874, says of the anexation o
Texas:
"Mr. King leading Republican, thu,
gives his opinion on secession:
1--WE heartily say this advisedly-upo,
information not to be disregaded-a
with full, deliberate and mistaken con
victjon, that annexation, come in wha
form it may, is, and should be, the disso
luton of the Union"
The Boston atlas, said:
" 1t is a grave matter to dissolve sucl
a holy Union as ours has been-none bn,
grave causes should sever the bond. We
can bear all but this" (annexation ol
Texas
John Quincy Adams offered iu the
House of Representatives, on 28th o.
February, 1S43, the following, among
other, resolutions
RESOLVED, That any attempt of the
Government of the United States, by ar
act of Congress. or by treaty to annex
to this Union the Republic of Texas, OF
the people thereof, would be a violation
Of the Constitution, null and void, and
to which the free States of this Union
and their people ought not to submit"
We might cite numerous proofs if our
space allowed but these are sufficient
indeed, to establish our proposition that
sectionalism, disunionism and secession.
ism originated in the North-in New
England-and it appears now that theil
own discarded invention has returned to
plague her.-The very idea-the remedy
that she invented-is now asserted by
the-South against, her usurpation, heI
tyranny and her aggressive Abolitionism
At three severa! historical epochs has
New England asserted the right of seces-
sion. She is now foremost in the denial
and dennnciation of it, and she who oppo-
scs all foreign wars is now clameraous fol
civil war. Our citations occudy so much
space that future comment is inadmissible
| History is some times troublesome; New
England finds it especially so. Those
who want authority for disunion, section
alism, secessionism, and those who want
uathority for the political dogma that the
Constitution is compact and that the
Union is partnership, will find their
authority in the above Citations.
''lt involves the whole broad question
OF the permanency of our Government,
and the continuation Of our Union"
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 part
nership of twenty-six States.'
The following is also of that party
1--WE shall certainly consider the an.
nexation of Texas. or any other foreign
State, to this country as a virtual disso-
luton of the Uuion. and we apprehend
that such vast addition to our territory
and population would so for change the
nature and circumstances of the connec-
ton, as to absolve the dissenting States
from any furthor obligation under the
original contract of Union"
John Reed, Lieut. Governor of Massa
chusetts, on August 4, 1874, said
at must be understood that the free
States will neither consent nor submit to
the annexation of Texas to this Union, -
Such annexation would result iu dissolu
tion. Indeed annexation without pro.
vision in the Constitution and without
consent, would be an absolution from the
bonds and obligations Of the G Constitution