SPEECH 
I °r 
HON. WM. LOWNDES YANCEY, 
OF ALABAMA, 
ON THE 
ANNEXATION OFTEXAS TO THE UNITED STATES. 
Delivered in the House of Representatives, Jan. 7, 1845. 
Printed by HabbiS & Hbabt, "Constitution" Office. SPEECH. 
Mr. Yancey commenced by expressing a sin- 
cere regret, that between the great political par 
ites which had for a half century divided our 
people, and which must ever exist under a free 
and popular Government, animosities had been 
engendered, prejudices had been formed, and 
acrimonies had been given birth to, which had 
become so deeply seated in the public mind, that 
what might otherwise have proven a blessing to 
our Government, by tending to guard and pre 
serve its purity, had, in fact, become its bane. 
Instead of estimating measures by their bearing 
upon the great interests of the country, there 
were but too many who tested them simply by 
their contemplated effect upon party. That spi- 
rit, he lamented to see, had crept into this Hall. 
Men of eminence and ability had given it coun- 
tenance; and when, a short time since, he had 
obtained the door, in the Committee of the 
Whole, when the Sub-Treasury bill was under 
consideration, he had designed (but was pre- 
vented by sudden and severe illness) to have ex- 
pressed his deep and unfeigned regret, that the 
gentleman from Ohio, (Mr. Schenck,) who had 
preceded him in that debate, distinguished as he 
was in the possession of a keen and searching 
intellect, brilliant powers of sarcasm and wit, so 
rich a diction, and such varied accomplish- 
ments, should have lent himself to lower the 
character of an American Representative, which 
he appeared so well able to dignify and adorn.- 
The inevitable consequence of the prevalence of 
such a spirit, to which he had alluded, was that 
we were fast becoming, if we had not already 
become, a nation of embittered partisans, in- 
stead of enlightened and generous freemen. It 
is under the influence of convictions like these, 
(continued Mr. Y.) that I rejoice that a great na- 
tional question has at length presented itself, 
which, by its towering greatness, overtops all 
minor issues-which is so well calculated to 
purify and elevate the national heart-to call 
into requisition the nobler qualities of our nature 
-to create high hopes-to crush beneath its 
lofty patriotism and undoubted wisdom the con- 
temptible machinations of the mere politician- 
to rebuke the sordid and groveling propensities 
of those who know, and feel, and appreciate no 
impulse but such as draws them irresistibly- 
mere bubbles dancing in the wake of party! 
That question was the proposed annexation of 
Texas to the Union-a question so purely Ame- 
rican, and addressing itself so directly to the ho- 
nor, and to the great interests of the entire Re- 
public, that it seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that 
all party feuds should be hushed upon its an- 
nouncement. Every party, and every Admini- 
stration, for the last twenty years, has so hailed 
it. Like that mysterious star which of old drew 
the shepherds' attention from their lowly pur- 
suits to the spot where the Saviour of the World 
lay bandaged in his swaddling clothes, is this ques- 
tion now culminating over an infant Republic, 
appealing to us as freemen, and as patriots, to 
forego our petty wrangling-to arise and accom- 
plish in harmony the great destiny to which our 
principles have devoted us-the spread of the 
blessings of civilized freedom. 
And this appeal has not been in vain. I thank 
God that there are still amongst us men whose 
hearts bounded with renewed vigor at the first 
flutter of such a banner; and who, like the an- 
cient Jews, when from the great temple the sa- 
cred trumpet sounded "to arms!" forgot their 
intestine broils, and girded themselves for their 
country and her cause. There are others, sir, 
who, though still partisans, yet have respected 
the dignity of the question sufficiently to discuss 
it in a statesmanlike manner. Not so, however, 
the Representative from North Carolina, (Mr. 
Clinoman.) With him, the extension of our in- 
stitutions-the immense effect, for weal or wo, 
to be produced upon our commercial, manufac- 
turing, agricultural, and planting interests, by 
this momentous measure-its great bearing upon 
our military defences-its effect upon the insti- 
tution of slavery-its consequences upon the fate 
of the Federal Union, all of which are now en- 
gaging the diplomatic abilities, and attracting the 
anxious attention, of the great aad good of two 
immense continents-have not had sufficient in- 
terest or dignity to draw his intellect, or his pas- 
sions, from an erudite research into the causes 
why "Capt. Rynders" visited the White House 
upon a certain day-why that individual dined 
with another upon another day-why the sailors 
of the ship "North Carolina" voted in the 7th 
ward of the city of New York, and not in the city 4 
of Brooklyn!-for such were some of the themes 
expatiated upon by that Representative in a debate 
upon a question which was agitating this entire 
Union, and which, more than any other which 
had been started amongst us during the past half 
century, was calculated to arouse the dormant 
energies of the patriot. 
We are in the habit, Mr. Chairman, of form- 
ing estimates of persons whom we have never 
seen, by what we read of their productions, or 
hear others say of them. I had formed such an 
estimate of the Representative from North Caro- 
lina, and was not, therefore, astonished at this 
expose of his head and heart. In that portion of 
the Union I have the honor to represent, that Re- 
presentative is looked upon, almost without a 
solitary exception in either party, as a betrayer 
of the trust which had been reposedin his hands. 
But I do confess to some astonishment, when I 
heard even that Representative exulting in his tri- 
umph over those brother Representatives from the 
South, whose most strenuous efforts had not been 
able to retain the 25th rule, which prohibited the 
presentation of abolition petitions; and attribut- 
ing to their silence, on its repeal, motives which 
every honorable man amongst them spurns with 
scorn, and which could only have found prompt- 
ing in the heart of one who had given a stab to 
the institutions of his own land, and wears the 
garb of its enemy. 
[Mr. Clingman here rose and wished to ex- 
plain.] 
I wish no explanations from the Representative 
from North Carolina. Explanations elsewhere. 
Such an exulting cry over our failure to retain 
this one barrier erected for the preservation of our 
property and institutions, is an insult to us in our 
defeat, which merits the scorn and execration of 
every honest heart in the South. 
And even with the estimate of that Represen- 
tative which I had, sir, I again confess to some 
surprise, when I heard him give an account, 
with much apparent glee, of what he termed 
the dishonesty of the Senate of North Carolina. 
Upon the merits of that case, I can pass no ver- 
dict. But if it were as represented, wauld not a 
truly honorable heart and high-toned intellect 
have shrunk from an unnecessary exposure of 
the disgrace of his native State, which he, in 
part, represented, before the assembled wisdom of 
the nation ? It has been said that the wild deer 
of the Western prairie will turn and gore a 
wounded companion to death. But that is the in- 
stinct of a brute; for man shrinks from laying 
bare the failings of his family to the gaze of a 
censorious world. Such an unwelcome task, if 
needs be it must be performed, should at least be 
left to other hands. And well might North Caro- 
lina, thus wounded by one of her native sons, ex-, 
claim, with the falling Ctesar, "El tu Brute!" I 
shall pane no sentence upon him; I shall not 
undertake to pronounce what conduct like this de- 
serves; but the Bible (If ever that Representative 
reads such a book) might teach hi rn the fate of one 
who fo/got what was time to himself and to his 
family. Let him turn to that portion which tells 
us of the patriarch Noah, betrayed in an un- 
guarded hour, by too free an indulgence in the use 
of wine, and lying'exposed in his tent. One of his 
sons saw his parent's shame, and went forth and 
ridiculed the spectacle before his brothers. In 
silence they took a mantle,and, with averted face, 
approached their prostrate parent and cast it over 
him-the broad mantle of filial charity-to cover 
his shame from too prying eyes. The old man 
at length awoke, and having heard what had 
passed, gifted with the spirit of prophecy, he 
arose and pronounced upon him a curse, which 
has come down upon his posterity to the latest 
day, that he and his children, and children's chiL 
dren, should be the servant of servants throughout 
all time. And most fearfully has that curst1 been 
fulfilled upon the descendants of Ham, who even 
now dwell in the tents of Japhet and Shem, 
pitched upon these western shores; proving the 
stern truths of the Scripture, and offering an 
awful lesson to him who dares forget his filial 
duties. How the people of North Carolina will 
view similar conduct in their Representative, I 
cannot say; but of this I may feel well assured, 
had the spirit of that pure and great patriot, Na- 
thaniel Macon, been hovering in these halls, and 
amidst these stately pillars, and had heard a 
son of North Carolina utter such language as had 
fallen from oie of her Representatives here, 
on this occasion, and that spirit could have been 
susceptible of an earthly feeling, that feeliag 
would have been one of the most unmitigated 
disgust. 
I shall be pardoned, then, by the committee, if, 
entertaining these views of the character which 
the Representative from North Carolina has at- 
tempted to give to a debate which otherwise had 
been eminently dignified, and worthy of that 
Hall and the subject, I do not follow him into the 
sinks and purlieus of party; and shall therefore at 
once address myself to the great question before us. 
Of the several propositions which have been 
committed to the Committe cf the Whole on the 
state of the Union, I am most inclined to vote 
for that introduced by the gentleman from Ken- 
tucky, (Mr. Tibbattb.) It more fully meets my 
oonstitutional view of the subject than any other. 
It conforms to the very letter, and, what is better, 
to the very spirit, too, of the Constitution of the 
United States. It will be remembered that, under 
the Articles of Confederation, our governmental 
action was found, and almost universally ac- 
knowledged to be, too restricted. The powers 
conferred were too few-too circumscribed and 
limited-to give that efficiency, energy and scope, 
to the action of the General Government, which 
the interest of so large a Confederacy justly de- 
manded. Gentlemen desirous of ascertaining the 
true extent of power conferred upon Congress by 
the Constitution, enabling it to admit "new 
States," should keep thia in view in examining 
into the history of the article conferring the 
power. What is its history? Ils root and origin 5 
is to be traced to the 11th article of the Articles of 
Confederation; it reads thus: 
" Canada, acceding to this confederation, and join 
ing in the measures of the United States, shall be ad- 
mitted into, and entitled to the advantages of, this 
Union; but no other colony shall be admitted into 
the same, unless such admission be agreed to by nine 
States." 
This article, it will at once be perceived, was 
specific in its terms, and narrowed down the ad- 
mission of a State into the Union by the usual 
legislative action to one solitary State, viz : Ca- 
nada ; yet it had compass enough to allow the 
confederation to admit a foreign State by act of 
Congress. A convention, however, was called to 
remedy the defects alluded to, and "to form a 
more perfect Union." That body framed the 
Constitution under which we now legislate. Let 
us note the transformation of the 11 th article of 
the Articles of the Confederacy. By reference to 
Elliott's Debates, it will be found that Mr. Ran- 
dolph submitted a series of articles for the consi- 
deration of the convention. Amongst them is 
the following; 
"Art. 10. That provision ought to be made for the 
admission of States lawfully arising within the limits 
ot the United States, whether from a voluntary junc- 
tion of government and territory or otherwise, with 
the consent of a number ol voices in the National 
Legislature less than the whole." 
It will be seen that this proposition narrowed 
down, in a still greater degree, the power already 
possessed by Congress under the Articles of Con- 
federation, and proposed that the new Govern- 
ment should not have the power to admit into the 
Union a State arising out of the then limits of the 
Union. Gentlemen contend here, on this ques- 
tion, that Congress can only admit new States 
"lawfully arising within the limits of the United 
States." Here, then, we find an issue made in 
the convention on this very point. Mr. Ran- 
dolph's proposition contravened the spirit of the 
11th article already quoted. That allowed the 
admission of a foreign State; this did not. And, 
moreover, Mr. Randolph's 10th proposition was 
opposed to the whole view and purpose of the 
people in calling the convention and demanding 
a new constitution, which should augment the 
powers and enlarge the sphere of action oi the 
Federal Government. What then was the fate 
of Mr. R.'s proposition? The convention refused 
to adopt it. On the 6th of August, 1787, a com- 
mittee of five, who had been appointed lor that 
purpose, reported to the convention a draft of a 
constitution. The 17th article reads thus: 
"New States, lawfully constituted or established 
within the limits of the United States, may be admit- 
ted by the Legislature into this Government," See. 
Again, then, we find an attempt made to limit 
the power of Congress in admitting new States. 
The striking fact stares us in the face that two 
efforts were made to do this, and that both failed. 
This 17th article was rejected, and, in its stead, 
breathing the spirit which dictated the call of the 
convention, in plain, strong, unrestricted lan- 
guage, was adopted the following article in our 
Constitution: 
Sec. 3, art. 4. New States may be admitted by the 
Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be 
formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other 
State; nor any State be formed by the junction of 
two or more States, or parts of States, without the 
consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned, 
as well as of the Congress." 
"W ho is he-where is he-that can place any 
limit upon the power conferred by that article, 
save the good sense of the American people? It 
is not to be found in the phraseology, for that is 
in the broadest and most general language. It is 
not to be found in the history of its adoption, for 
that tells us that the original, an article in the 
old Articles, conferred a specific power upon Con- 
gress to admit one foreign State at least by act; that 
two propositions to restrict the power were re- 
jected, and that finally an article was adopted con- 
taining no checks upon the admission of any 
foreign State! 
The proposition, therefore, of the gentleman, 
from Kentucky (Mr. Tibbatts) came up to the 
very spirit and letter of our Constitution, and. 
hence I prefer it. That article which gives us 
the power, was wisely adopted for the purpose 
of affording the most unbounded means of pro- 
viding for the common defence and the general 
welfare. On the admission of Texas as a Slate, 
by these propositions, she is to cede to us her 
territory, precisely as Virginia and other States 
had done; and to this no reasonable objection 
can be urged. I would say, too, to the friends of 
annexation on this floor, that however great may 
be individual partialities for some other of the 
several projects before us, and however well 
convinced many might be that Congress has the 
power to receive foreign territory into the Union, 
(and I entertain no doubt that by a long and 
subtle train of reasoning it can be logically esta- 
blished,) partialities should yield to that project 
most likely to secure the great end in view, to 
wit: annexation. No man can doubt the consti- 
tutional power to admit Texas as a "new State." 
That being so, some such project must be united 
upon. It effects the great end in a more direct 
manner, and more in conformity with the very 
language of the Constitution. The proposition 
needs a much shorter train of argument to prove 
it, and nothing but sophistry and fallacy can de- 
ny it. 
Considering the character for intelligence and 
enlarged views attributed to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts, (Mr. Winthrop,) I was some- 
what surprised when I heard him declare that 
the Federal Constitution was only designed to 
operate over the territory held by the people who 
adopted it. This surely is too limited a view to 
he taken of that instrument, and of its destined 
effect upon the world. I think I have already 
demonstrated that nothing but the inexpediency o. 
the admission of a foreign State checks the powei 
of Congress over the subject. If it is not so 6 
where do Louisiana, Arkansas, and Missouri,! 
three of the sovereign States of this Union, now 
stand? Are they not within the constitutional 
limits of the Federal Union ? And has not the 
shield of that glorious instrument "ample room 
and verge enough" to cover those young States? 
The gentleman from Massachusetts has for years 
legislated on this floor upon the rights and inte- 
rests of those States-has collected taxes from 
their citizens-has assumed and exercised juris- 
diction over the vast landed domain within their 
limits. Whence did he derive the power and the 
right to do t o, if not from this very Constitution, 
which he sax ■ is limited in its action to the boun- 
dary of the Republic when it was formed ? 
And yet those States have been erected out ol 
territory which was not within that boundary at 
the time oi'its formation. And will he-dare he- 
aver in his place, that those States are unconstitu- 
tionally within the limits of the United States? 
We are told the limits of the Republic were 
never to be extended! It is a sentiment, sir, as 
narrow as the limits of the State which appears 
most to have cherished it. As far as my memory 
now serves me, whenever the boundary lines of 
this Republic have been drawn in, and its territo- 
ry dipt and circumscribed, it has invariably been 
under the auspices and peculiar direction of Mas- 
sachusetts statesmen-why was this? Was it 
that their hearts were so narrow, and views so 
contracted, that their sympathies could not reach 
beyond the precise area of territory owned by 
)ur fathers at the time they agreed to form and 
irdain a Constitution, which "should secure the 
ilessings of liberty" to themselves and their 
'posterity ?" Or, rather, does it not arise from 
hat old federal leaven which yet exists in the heart 
»f the Commonwealth-which is ever prone 
o circumscribe the liberties of mankind-has an 
nborn proclivity towards the bestowal upon "the 
avored few" a monopoly of those inestimable 
dessings which God has given alike to all? 
If the constitutional point may be considered 
s settled, that Congress has the unrestricted right 
o admit "new States" into the Union, then, 
•ranting the expediency in this case, the only 
uestion to consider is, will the duties which we 
we, in gocd faith, to others permit the annexa 
ion ? 1 respett those who sincerely urge this 
bjection. The honor of a nation is the brightest 
?wel it possesses. It constitutes the main fea- 
ire of its character; and should be guarded by 
s representatives with that sensitive solicitude 
nd watchfulness with which they would shield 
leir own as individuals. Briefly, then, in review 
f the relations existing, or which have existed, 
2tween the two countries. 
I will not argue the question of reannexation ; 
>r on that point reasonable doubts might be and 
ere entertained. I speak to the simple proposi- 
)n of annexing the independent Republic of 
United States. If we annex it, 
id the country ever was ours, reannexation 
kes place of course : if it never was ours, the 
question in this light will be disembarrassed of 
a doubtful issue. Antecedent to the formation 
of the Mexican Confederacy, but two powers 
claimed sovereignty over the province of Texas, 
to wit: Spain and the United States. In 1819, 
the United States ceded whatever rights and 
claims it had to Spain. The Government of 
Spain, however, was prevented from perfecting 
its title by the protest ol Texas, and the conse- 
quent revolution. After repeated and ineffectual 
attempts to subdue that and her other revolted 
provinces, Spain acknowledged their independ- 
ence in 1836. These facts clearly dispose of the 
title.of the only two powers claiming allegiance 
of Texas, prior to the confederacy formed in 
1824. In that year the various revolted Spanish 
provinces in North America joined in framing 
the confederacy alluded to, under the title of 
"The United Mexican States." 
What was the political condition of Texas on 
entering that confederacy ? The United States 
had quietly thrown up their claims upon her. 
Spain was endeavoring to make good her own 
by arms; but, as I have said, afterwards yielded 
them. Mexico, who claims sovereignty over 
her, then asserted none-then, in fact, claimed 
her own freedom at the point of the sword-a 
gem she was wresting by arms from the crown 
of Spain. Texas must then be considered as a 
sovereign in the part she took in joining that 
confederacy. She entered it an unfettered pow- 
er. That confederacy, in all its great leading 
features, was similar to our own. It was com- 
posed of sovereign States-giving to the federal 
head certain powers, and retaining all else. In 
1834, that confederacy was violently subverted 
by a military despotism. The members of the 
National Congress were driven from their hall by 
force. The rights of the various States com- 
posing it were trampled upon, and a central 
despotism of the worst character was established 
upon the ruins of the constitution of 1824. All 
this was not done, however, without a blow 
struck in its defence. As soon as the Texans 
became aware of the ultimate designs of the ty- 
rant despot, they assembled and framed a pro- 
visional government-raised the banner of the 
confederacy of 1824-invited the citizens of the 
States to rally to its defence. Though the fee- 
blest in mere number of all those States, the 
gallantry of the Anglo-Saxon shone conspicuous 
in their conduct. So far trom going there under 
the immigration laws of the confederacy for the 
purpose, as has been charged, of revolutionizing 
the country, those brave men were the nucleus 
around which loyalty and valor were invited to 
rally in arms for the constitution and against the 
Mexican tyrant. 
Finding the great mass too spiritless to respond 
to their call, and that the Constitution of 1824 
was indeed subverted, the Texans looked to their 
fatherland for example; they, the descendants of 
the men of '76, went to the very fountain head 
of liberty, and there learned the right of every 7 
people to dissolve the bonds of Government, i 
whenever they became subversive of their liber- l 
ties, and of the purposes for which government < 
was established. They declared, in solemn form, < 
their independence-took position as a free and i 
sovereign Slate-in fact, were remitted back to I 
that, sovereignty which was undpubtedly theirs in I 
1824, and which no act had since forfeited. < 
Whence, then, arises the claim of Mexico? It is 
not to be found in the law of nations. She has 
[not even that shadow of a claim which arms can 
jgive; never, not for a single moment, has the 
present central military government of that coun- 
try exercised, within the limits of Texas, a single 
legislative act. Not for a moment have its laws 
been in force there-not for an instant has its au- 
thority been recognised there. Not finding au- 
thority for her claim, then,either in possession or 
in the Constitution of 1824, Mexico can find it 
nowhere, save in her oft-repeated declaration of 
her determination to conquer Texas. Texas has 
exhibited then to the whole world, for the past 
eight years, the spectacle of an independent 
State-quietly and harmoniously governed by 
the people-electing her own officers-enacting 
her own laws-forming tr< aties with the various 
powers of the world-as the highest of all acts 
of acknowledged sovereignty, treatingas to boun- 
daries, and recognised by the great nations of the 
earth as an independent sovereignty. As a so- 
, vereign, she has a right to form alliances; and, 
|bf course, to ally hersell with this Government, 
>unless we are estopped from so doing by a treaty 
of amity and commerce now existing with 
Mexico. 
Our next inquiry, therefore, should be, whe- 
ther annexation would be an infringement of 
|that treaty, and would justly interfere with a 
state of amity between ours and the Mexican 
Government. I hold that it most clearly would 
not; and for this reason, that Mexico can urge 
no title that would be hazarded by the act. And 
the only contingency under which we would be 
forbidden to join to our own the destinies of 
Texas, was the existence of a war, actually in 
progress between Mexico and Texas. If such a 
I state of things existed, I confess, however unjust 
and improper might be the design of Mexico, we 
could not ally ourself with Texas in the way 
proposed, without making ourselves a party to 
the war. But is there such a war? Could it be 
maintained that a war was now, or had been for 
?eight years past, in progress between those two 
powers? There has been, as all will admit, no 
military invasion of, or other act of acknowledged 
national hostility to, Texas, authorized by the 
Government of Mexico since the memorable 
battle of San Jacinto. True, there have been 
some forays-some predatory incursions over 
the borders, in which women and children were 
brutally murdered, churches desecrated, and 
courts of justice broken up and robbed of their 
records. But gentlemen will not dignify such 
proceedings as war; they were rather the 
I acts of robber bands, which, under the law of 
national comity, would have rightfully subjected 
the perpetrators, if caught, to the punishment of 
death. Thal was not war in which the Mexi- 
can partizan had never seen or dared to look 
upon a Texan banner, or the g;leam of a Texan 
bayonet. And further: Mexico, so far from 
being in a condition to achieve this much desired 
conquest, was not able to preserve the tottering 
fabric of her own Government from domestic , 
violence. To carry on such a war as would be 
notice to the world to abstain from interference, 
(here must not be a declaration of such intent 
merely, but an ability to prosecute, and a prose- 
cution of it. But Mexic® had neither; she was 
rent and torn with the most unhappy intestine 
broils; and this very morning intelligence has 
reached this city that Santa Anna had been de- 
posed, and a decree of banishment issued against 
him. Mexico, then, was not only not at war, 
but had not the ability to carry on a single cam- 
paign against her young neighbor. As the chair- 
man of the Committee on Foreign Affairs well 
said: the best and chiefest sinew of war is mo- 
ney; and this sinew Mexico did not possess. 
Her treasury robbed and despoiled by her own 
officers, and her soldiery arrayed against each 
other in deadly civil strife, she exhibited the 
spectacle of a revengeful, but dying and impo- 
tent, tyrant. A paper war, then, is all that exists 
to deter us in our movements; and does honor, 
law, or reason call upon us to pause even in, se- 
curing to ourselves a great national good under 
such circumstances? I contend that they do not 
make the call. A paper declaration of intent to 
war was no more to be regarded by the other na- 
tions of the world than a paper blockade. It 
never has been contended that a mere declaration 
by one power that a certain port of another 
power should be put under blockade, unsupport- 
ed by a military or naval force, was of the least 
binding force upon other nations having friendly 
relations. The law of nations, (universally ad- 
mitted to be so,) and the common sense of man- 
kind, requires that the means of enforcing the 
blockade should be used, or it was a nullity in 
the eyes of the world. And is there such a dif- 
ference between the two cases as to require ar- 
gument to show that the same great principles 
apply in both? I will not insult the understand- 
ings of the gentlemen of the committee by think- 
ing so. 
If, then, annexation is not forbidden by the 
Constitution, nor prohibited by regard for na- 
tional honor, what should prevent the immediate 
consummation of so desirable an event? an event 
which had been steadily pursued as a favorite 
object of our diplomatic policy for the last twenty 
years and odd, and through the agency of some 
1 of our most distinguished statesmen ; and which 
has ever commanded the public approbation. 
The venerable gentleman from Massachusetts, 
■ (Mr. Adams,) when representing this Union in 
the Presidential chair, had pursued this che- 
i rished policy as vigorously as any. The distin- 
: guished head of the present Whig party, Mr. 8 
Clay, then the Secretary of State, had exhibited 
the most urgent desire for its attainment; and 
indeed, Mr. Chairman, if there was any one act 
of the Administration of 1825 and 1827, calcu- 
lated to relieve it in the least degree from the 
odium which almost universally rests upon it, on 
account of its being surreptitiously palmed upon 
the American people, it was the ardor and the 
ability displayed by it in its efforts to annex Texas 
to this Union. Andrew Jackson, too, true to 
the honor and interests of the country, pushed 
the matter with vigor, under two successive Se- 
cretaries of State. John Tyler, following in the 
footsteps of his illustrious predecessors, and tak- 
ing wise advantage of providential circumstances, 
has again pressed the policy of annexation, never 
for a moment intermitted; and at once, around, 
below, (but not above him,) are heard the 
hounds of party : while, envious of his fortune in 
being placed in a position more fortunate than his 
predecessors, to accomplish this great end, its 
heretofore most energetic and ardent supporters 
abandon their high ground, to join the smaller 
curs who bay at him. In this Hall, hono- 
rable gentlemen insult the Chief Magistrate 
as an "accidental President," who "was not the 
choice of the people," and who had urged this 
project with impure and "selfish views." Ask 
the gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. Win- 
throp,) who made these remarks, who he voted 
for in 1840, and he will answer "Harrison and 
Tyler." And when he gave the vote, did he not 
know that if it should please Providence to re- 
move Gen. Harrison by death, Mr. Tyler would 
succeed to the high station by the provisions of 
the Constitution ? It would be great disparage- 
ment to that gentleman to doubt it. Was the 
death of Gen. Harrison an accident? Did the 
gentleman hold that an event of that magnitude 
had not passed under the eye of an all-seeing and 
controlling Omnipotence-an Omnipotence that 
notes the fall of a sparrow? A Winthrop deny 
the providence of God! No, sir. He will not, 
dare not, deny it. Were he to do so, his ve- 
nerable Puritan ancestry would burst the ce- 
rements of the tomb, to rise and upbraid 
their recreant son. The death of General Har- 
rison was no accident. It occurred by the 
fiat of that Divine Ruler whose ways are not as 
our ways; and Mr. Tyler succeeded to the Presi- 
dency, not an "accidental" but a providential and 
constitutional President. As to his motives in 
pursuing a long-pursued policy of the Govern- 
ment, the gentleman from Massachusetts has 
keener eyes than mine, if he can dive into the 
secrets of the heart that moved this measure. 
The act savors well for the good of the country; 
and I do not envy that gentleman the privilege, 
assumed to himself, of sitting in judgment upon 
the motives of another. I have ever been taught 
the opinion thatsuch a task was unfit for frail man, 
and that it peculiarly belonged to a higher-a 
more awful tribunal. 
It has been said that in pressing this matter 
we wouldjake "a^snap judgment"-we would 
"get the start of the American people." Sir, it 
is well known to every individual within the 
sound of my voice, that the American masses 
have moved upon this question long before it 
came into this Hall. But it was only when the 
Senate of the United States most unaccountably, 
and to the astonishment of the whole world, re- 
jected the treaty, that the people aroused them- 
selves from a confidence and quiet produced by 
the absolute wisdom and propriety of a measure 
which they had every reason to believe would 
command now, as heretofore, an American sup- 
port, and that they began to move and speak in 
thunder tones, tones which caused many a heart 
to quake-whose reverberations shook, from 
"Battlement to foundation stone," 
that immense fabric of power, the Whig party 
of 1840, and which have not yet died away. 
This, more than any other agency, produced that 
resolution in the party tactics-in the party dis- 
cipine-in the party leaders of the Democracy, 
which has so astonished and amazed their oppo- 
nents; and the true wisdom of which, though 
demonstrated by a magnificent result, their op- 
ponents cannot yet understand. This, more than 
any thing else, it was which gave life, renewed 
energy and power, to old and stale issues. It 
was the moving spirit of the day and hour, and 
it cannot be without power to teach a wise and 
lasting lesson to an attentive and thinking ob- 
server of any party. 
The reason for this stirring of the deep foun- 
tains of the popular heart are obvious. No great 
national measure ever presented, in such bold 
relief, so many and such varied inducements 
to so many and such varied interests. It is evi- 
dent that the soil and climate of Texas will give 
such direction to the industry of its citizens, that 
the manufacturer, whether .of cotton, hemp, 
wool, iron, leather, or wood, will find there a 
near and valuable home-market, with a prospec- 
tive rapidity of increase, which certainly will not 
fall behind that exhibited within late years by 
the West and Southwest. The great forest inte- 
rest will be largely benefitted, owing to the known 
scarcity of timber upon those vast prairies; while 
the immense and valuable provision and stock- 
raising interest will feed the millions who will im- 
migrate to those fertile lowlands, and employ their 
labor in the cultivation of great tropical staples.' 
It will protect, too, the cotton and sugar cultiva- 
tion from an inimical rivalry, which might, and 
probably would, be encouraged by our great 
commercial antagonist. 
Such are some of the considerations which ad- 
dress themselves with force to individual inte- 
rests. There are others, not less powerful in the 
estimation of a true American heart, of a national 
character. The annexation of that region will 
complete what some of the clearest heads in thd 
Union think was originally ours, the magnificent 
valley of the Mississippi-will give us command 
of the sources and entire navigation of several of 
its largest and most valuable streams-will great- 
ly lengthen our share of the gulf coast, and, of ' 9 
course, increase the number of harbors necessary 
to the successful prosecution of the vast com- 
merce of our Western regions-will secure to us 
more natural boundaries, which can be defended 
with more ease and less expense; and, what 
must strike a chord of sympathy in every bosom, 
will extend our noble institutions over a gallant 
and kindred people, who yearn to resume their 
place beneath the aegis of the American arms. 
To motives and considerations such as these, 
what is opposed by the anti-annexationists? The 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Winthrop) 
had disclosed the reason, if it was ever attempted 
to be disguised before-"it will give a perpetual 
guaranty to slavery." 
Aye, there's the rub! A dread-a fear, dis- 
guised under the garb of humanity, that annexa- 
tion will benefit the Southern section of the 
Union. I see, in all this, an unmanly shrinking 
from the responsibilities imposed by the Consti- 
tution-a cowardly desire to weaken the slave- 
holding section by every means which perverted 
talent can devise-a dastardly envy of a pros- 
perity which still struggles upward in spite of 
the load which an unconstitutional restrictive le- 
gislation has bound upon it. 
The enemies of annexation, not only at the 
North, but a large portion of them at the South, 
had assailed it upon the ground that it had been 
placed by the negotiators upon the part of our 
Government upon the issue of slavery. The 
Secretary of State, who now fills that Depart- 
ment with such distinguished ability, had been 
made the mark for many a political shaft because 
he had the nerve to place the matter, between 
this Government and England, on its true basis, 
the transcendent genius to invest it with unan- 
swerable argument, and thus to deserve the 
thanks of the enlightened and patriotic of the 
day. That eminent statesman had abundant 
cause furnished for his course, not only by fo- 
reign diplomacy, but by intestine agitators. If 
the issue is one to be deprecated, it has been 
made but in defence of a national institution 
against the attacks of the abolitionists of the North 
and of the Government of Great Britain. I say 
the issue has been forced upon the Secretary. In 
1838, while a project of annexation was being 
discussed in Congress, the gentleman over the 
way, from Massachusetts, (Mr. Adams,) made a 
speech in opposition, running through some three 
or four days, placing the ground of his objection 
upon slavery. In the spring of 1843, that 
same gentleman, with several other members of 
Congress, issued a circular to the ''free States," 
anticipating an annexation treaty; and urging 
slavery as an objection to it; and declaring that 
if Texas should be annexed the Union ought to 
be, and should be dissolved! The piercing eye of 
fanaticism saw it coming-the keen scent of abo 
lition had snuffed it in the gale-and yet no trea- 
ty bad been framed-no correspondence existed 
offering this i^pue. No. The issue, as far as do- 
mestic matters could effect it, was already made 
by the opponents of annexation, when Mr Cal- 
houn took the office of Secretary of State. Bu 
most of all, this issue was pressed upon our Ga 
vernment by her Majesty's Principal Secretary o 
State for Foreign Affairs. In a despatch made by 
Mr. Everett to the Secretary of State, under dat< 
of "'London, Nov. 3, 1843," Mr. Everett says 
that Lord Aberdeen expressed himself thus: "tha 
it was most true that he was on that, as on aJ 
other occasions, desirous to be understood a 
wishing the abolition of slavery wherever it ex 
ists-that this was a sentiment, with reference t< 
which England was of one mind." Upon th 
26th February, 1844, Mr. Pakenham, by orde 
of Lord Aberdeen, communicated, officially, t 
the Secretary of State that, "with regard to th 
latter point it must be, and is, well known hot 
to the United States and the whole world, the 
Great Britain is constantly exerting herself to pre 
cure the general abolition of slavery throughon 
the whole world," &c. "With regard to Texas 
we avow that we wish to see slavery abolishe 
there as elsewhere," &c. These communication 
were made to Mr. Upshur, the then Secretary c 
' State. An awful calamity removed him in th 
midst of his usefulness, before he had answere 
the communication of Lord Aberdeen. M: 
Calhoun, taking the station thus vacated, w; 
called upon to answer that communication. Thei 
is not a line in it that does not bear directly upo 
the question of slavery; and portions speak of 
as existing in the slave-holding States of th 
Union. The Secretary, under date of "April II 
1844," gave the conclusive reply, which, fallir 
with the crushing force of a thunderbolt upc 
the cobweb positions of both foreign and natr 
abolitionists, has drawn down upon him th 
fire, as to the false issue made by him! Sir, tl 
false issue was made by others-the true issue w 
i placed before the country by Mr. Calhoun. Tl 
. question placed before him was between consi 
tutional slavery and factious abolition-betwee 
the Republic of the United States and Great Bi 
tain ; and he met it as one who knew his duty- 
and dared to do it. Fanaticism, avarice, and con 
mercial ambition had combined against the Co: 
stitution, the South, and our national prosperit 
The Secretary struck at the keystone of the arc! 
and has most eminently triumphed. 
I spoke of the duty of that officer. An institi 
tion had been assailed, which the Federal Co) 
stitution directly recognises, both in its organ 
formation and in the duties it imposes. The s 
cond section of the first article of the Constitutor 
' bases representative power not only upon tl 
numbers of free persons, but of slaves also; whi 
article 4, section 2, makes it obligatory upon si 
ter States to deliver up a slave if he escape fro 
• one to another State. That sacred bond of unir 
does not recognise slavery as a Southern, or as 
sectional institution, but as a national one-it w 
to be confined to no one spot. Its existence w 
recognised and provided for in Massachusetts 
well as in Georgia-the two extremes of t 
Union. That Constitution would protect Mai 
at this day in rights based upon slave proper! 10 
hat State chooses to own it-and it throws its 
eld around Louisiana in the enjoyment ol 
same rights. And if that species of popula- 
a in any State should rise in arms, the 4th sec- 
a of the 4th article secures to it the protection 
the armies of the Union. Is not slavery then a 
ional institution? And if so, was it not the 
:y of the Secretary of State to resist an impro- 
inte^ference, directly or indirectly, by any fo- 
jn power? And when he sounded the note of 
rning, should it not have excited the patriotic 
or of all our citizens, instead of the fierce, bitter, 
I vulgar denunciations, with which it has been 
t? Truly did the gentleman from Massachu- 
s, (Mr.Winthrop,) observe, that "some seem 
posed to forget the honor, the happiness, and 
sperity of their own country, and to fly off 
ndulge in sympathies for a foreign land;" and 
t remark could never be more appropriately 
flied than to the distinguished fellow-citizen 
that gentleman, who, in a recent letter to Miss 
axter, said that it remained to be seen whether 
august and powerful Government of Eng- 
d would turn aside from her purposes on ac- 
int of such puny threats as ours! 
laving thus given expression to my own 
ws upon the point on which the Secretary ol 
te has been assailed, I ask the indulgence of 
Committee while I address myself to the 
sons why Great Britain is so desirous of af- 
ting abolition of our slave property. 
-'he statistical history of the world has demon- 
.ted the immense superiority of a system of 
Dciated slave labor over free individual labor 
every species of tropical cultivation; while 
se regions are now, as of old, the great sources 
commercial wealth and grandeur to the civi- 
d nations of the temperate zone. To them en- 
;ed commercial enterprises are directed, and 
i to the capacity of their inhabitants to con- 
le the productions of the older civilized States 
t industry must look for its reward. To se- 
e to herself pre-eminence in this vast market, 
to infuse new vigorin to her vast system, Eng- 
1 has been endeavoring to rear up her East 
ia possessions, with a population of near 
ety millions, as the great competitor of the 
er nations of the world in the productions of 
ton, sugar, and indigo. In a moment of fa- 
icism, though under protest of her wisest and 
st sagacious statesman, Lord Wellington, she 
1 abolished slavery in her West India islands. 
J result, so far from answering the anticipa- 
ts of the friends of the measure, who made it 
ler the seducing theory that free labor was 
aper than slave labor, has proved the utter 
acy and suicidal character of the move. A 
ort of a select committee, to the British Par- 
nent, made July 25, 1842, speaks of the re- 
as having "caused serious, and in some 
?s ruinous, injury to the proprietors of estates 
those colonies," (West Indies,) "as to have 
sed many estates, hitherto prosperous and 
iuctive, to be cultivated for two or three 
years at considerable loss, and others to be aban- 
doned." 
The Assembly of Jamaica, in 1835, speaks, in 
its address to the Governor, of "seeing large por * 
tions of our neglected cane fields being overrun 
with weeds, and a still larger extent ol our pas- 
ture lands returning to a state oi nature; seeing, 
in fact, desolation already overspreading the very 
face of the land, it is impossible for us, without 
abandoning the evidences of our own senses, to 
entertain favorable anticipations, or to divest 
ourselves of the painful convictions that progres- 
sive and rapid deterioration of property will con- 
tinue to keep pace with the system of appren- 
ticeship, and that the termination thereof must 
complete the ruin of the colony." The exports 
of Jamaica, in 1805, two years before the aboli- 
tion of the slave trade, were over 137,000 hhds. 
of sugar, and above twenty-four million pounds 
of coffee. In 1841, after having felt the fair ef- 
fects of the abolition policy, those exports were 
reduced to thirty thousand hhds. of sugar, and 
about eight million pounds of coffee! Trinidad, 
St. Vincent, and British Guiana, where the same 
policy has been pursued, all exhibit the same 
speaking symptoms of commercial ruin. 
To the mortification of perceiving her once 
rich and flourishing colonies prostrated by her 
own acts, England has to add that of finding 
her vast East India possessions at a stand still. 
By a report of a recent date, of a select commit- 
tee on East India produce, made to the British 
Parliament, we are informed that "the imports 
from 1816 to 1825 amounted to nine hundred 
and sixteen millions rupees; and in the ensuing 
ten years, to seven hundred and ninety eight 
millions, showing a decrease of one hundred and 
eighteen million rupees for the past ten years; 
and this during a period of general peace, in- 
creasing civilization, and every possible advan- 
tage for the development of the trade of the coun- 
try." The evidence submitted by that report, 
shows, too, that ''comparing the years 1819 to 
1835, with the years 1802 to 1818, there has 
be^n a decrease of tonnage of all nations, enter- 
ing the port of Calcutta, of 192,182 tons." 
The above extracts, which might be multiplied 
to volumes, but which are sufficient for the pur- 
poses of this debate, show, officially, the true 
condition of England in respect to tropical culti- 
vation. To fathom her designs and views fully, 
it is necessary to take the same rapid glance at 
her great antagonist interests-the cultivation 
of tropical productions by slave labor : 
Brazils, from 1805 to 1841, the period in which 
I have reviewed the statistics ol Jamaica, in- 
creased her productions from 400,000 cwt. of 
sugar, and 24,000,000 lbs. of coffee, to 2,400,000 
cwt. of sugar, and 135,000,000 lbs. of coffee. 
Porto Rico, twenty years since, imported su- 
gar for its own use, but now exports one hun- 
dred thousand cwt. 
In Cuba, Turnbull, an intelligent English tra- 
veller, informs us, "in 1837, the date of the la- 11 
test official returns, the sugar exported amounted 
to 9.060,053 arobas of 25 lbs. each : Whereas, in 
1829, the earliest period for which I could find a 
corresponding return, ihe exposts of sugar did 
not exceed 6,588,428 arobas. In the same way, 
the exports of coffee which, in 1837, were 
2,133,567 arohas, in 1829 did not exceed 1,736,- 
257 arobas; so that the increase of these two 
principal staples exported in the course of eight 
years has been nearly 30 per cent." Continues 
the writer: "Independent of the dry details of 
statistical tables, the advance of the island towards 
a high degree of agricultural -and commercial 
prosperity is obvious at a glance." 
Now turn your attention to this Union. The 
following tabl a speaks eloquently of our agricul- 
tural and commercial prosperity. 
United States. 
Exports increased from m 1790,- - $20,205,156 
" to, in 1838, - - 108.486.616 
Of this, in 1790, of cotton exported, but 42 285 000 
1838, " " 61,556.811 
1790, of tobacco " 4.349,567 
1838, " " 7.392 029 
1840, " " 9,883.957 
1790, of rice " 1,753,796 
1838, " " 1721,819 
Average, however, of rice, of twelve years 
previous about 2,225,000 
Of manufactures exported- 
in 1803, when first reported - - $1,355,000 
1838, exported - - 8,397,078 
1790, of flour " - - 4 591,293 
1838, " " - - 3,603,290 
1790, of lumber " - - 1,263,534 
1838, " " - - 3,116,196 
It shows, too, the immense disparity of the 
exports between the North and South; that the 
South-the slaveholding region-the slave labor 
of the country, is the mainspring of that almost 
unparalleled advance in wealth and commercial 
importance which has distinguished the United 
States and excited the envy and astonishment of 
Europe. 
Now, I ask a calm and dispassionate review ol 
the picture thus drawn of the situation of the 
two rival industries of the world-the free and 
the slave labor. One, though aided by the pow- 
er, the grandeur, and the known sagacity of one 
of the greatest powers on earth, is gradually fall- 
ing behind in the great race of commercial com- 
petition. The other, seeming to derive renewed 
vigor from the decaying fortunes of its rival, is 
• springing forward with an elasticity and speed 
that will soon defy rivalry. And think you Eng- 
land is blinded to this? And cannot gentlemen 
see in all this sufficient causes to account for 
the sternly pursued policy of Great Britain to 
abolish that slavery "every where," which is 
snatching from her the trident of the ocean, and 
i dooming her to become a second rate, when she 
has ever haughtily claimed to be the first power? 
'Or must they, to give a reasonable ground for 
her course, conjure up the phantom of outraged 
humanity, beckoning on that giant nation to re- 
dress her long unavenged wrongs! England, 
the champion of humanity ! The first to legalize 
the slave trade, she clung to it with a tenacity 
which belied her boasted philabthropy. Her 
monarchs granted charters to her eminent citi- 
zens to monopolize the traffic in human flesh! 
Her Parliament sustained them by subsidies of 
money. And the Government ol England, in 
1713, by treaty of Utrecht, bargained for the ex- 
clusive privilege of supplying the Spanish domi- 
nions with slaves for thirty years. And in this 
century's trade in slaves, it is estimated that she 
has made $600,000,000! 
England govern her policy by dictates of hu- 
manity ! Where slept her humanity, while the 
arms of her East India Company swept in deso- 
lation and unheard of rapacity over the fertile and 
populous Ind ? Sir, the gorgeous eloquence of 
one of her own gifted statesmen will preserve, as 
long as humanity has a votary, those atrocities 
and crimes, for the indignation of mankind. 
To what quarter are the eyes of her philan- 
thropists now turned, that they see not and ex- 
pose not the present system of slavery, which ex- 
ists in parts of her dominions, and of tyrannical 
oppression of the ryotts, which exists all over her 
vast East India domain'? 
Or is that what is meant by humanity, 
which induced her to line the coast of China 
wiih her navy-to dismantle her fortresses-to 
sack her towns-to slaughter her children, in 
order to force them to buy her poisonous drugs, 
and thus in rease her pecuniary gains? 
Look at her parliamemary reports, and tell me if 
that is her view of the obligations imposed by hu- 
manity, in which she desires and contemplates 
even now to import extensively African laborers?* 
And for what? To force the miserable wretches, 
victims of her mistaken policy, to longer labor 
and at cheaper rates. 
It is such humanity as keen sighted interest 
and vaulting ambition generates, that she may 
outstrip the world in commercial enterprise. No 
nation has ever been guided by a more sagacious 
and effective policy in the main than she; and her 
designs upon Texas, and through Texas upon the 
Union, are parts of that grand system for which 
she is now struggling. 
And how are these designs met here? Sir, the 
champions of her robber policy towards China 
find no conscientious scruples which forbid their 
co-operation in a similar system against this na- 
tion. The code of morals which furnishes an 
excuse for the one is sufficiently loose to justify 
an abjuration of all constitutional obligations to 
defend the institutions of one's native land. Eng- 
lish interests find abettors now, as formerly, on 
American soil, under cover of reverence for the 
opinions of our ancestors. The gentleman from 
Massachusetts, (Mr. Winthrop,) who has ad- 
dressed the House on this subject, tells us grave- 
*See note A. in appendix. 12 
ly, "it would be well for us to have some re- 
membrance of what were the opinions of our an- 
cestors on this question of slavery." Aye, sir; 
I agree it would be well. Our ancestors were 
as hardy, as clear-headed, and as pure minded a 
set of men as ever breathed. They had no diffi- 
culty in settling the question of slavery upon a 
permanent footing. And yet some of their de 
scendants are heard, at this day, prating of their 
consciences and their enlarged views of liberty! 
And men of to-day, as it were, gravely urge, as 
an excuse for their traitorous designs, that the 
Declaration of Independence declared black, as 
well as white, to be free, and that our ancestors 
so understood it. Sir, neither our-ancestors as a 
body, nor the ancestors of those who particularly 
urge this, so understood it; neither did he who 
urges it so understand it. Many of the signers- 
it is more than probable the most of them-were 
slave owners. Slaves were held, in 1776, in 
every one of the 13 colonies. Aye, sir; and 
could I now trace back the title to what few I 
own to him who imported their progenitors from 
Africa, nine chances out of ten would be that I 
derive title from some old New England mer- 
chant. They were the slave traders of that day; 
and do you think that those who signed that de- 
claration designed thus to liberate their slave pro- 
perty? No, sir. An industrious friend, fond of 
research into old and musty volumes, has fur- 
nished me with a few facts going to show the 
view taken of the effect of that declaration, as 
well as how very glib those grave puritans were 
in the phraseology which their conscientious de- 
scendants can now hardly read in a Southern pa- 
per without shuddering at, as evidence of the 
great moral depravity of the slave breeders! 
Constitutional Journal and Weekly Advertiser, 
Boston, July 4, 1776. 
"A Negro Woman for Sale. 
To be sold, a likely young negro woman, that un- 
derstands house-work, common cooking, &c. has had 
the small pox. Enquire of the Printer." 
From New England Chronicle, same date and place. 
"Ranaway from me, the subscriber, a negro man named 
Sam, about 5 feet 6 inches high, 30 or 40 years old. 
Had on when he went off, a light crimsoned colored 
coat; his upper fore-teeth stick out; speaks good Eng- 
lish; has been nineteen years from Africa. Whoso- 
ever takes up said negro, and returns him to me, shall 
have one dollar reward. (Signed.) John Hunter. 
N. B. All masters of vessels are hereby desired not 
to barbor, conceal, or carry away said negro, so as to 
avoid the penalty of the law." 
From Penn. Journal and Weekly Advertiser, 
July 17, 1776. 
"To be sold, a large quantity of inch pine boards, 
that are well seasoned. Likewise, a negro wench. 
She is disposed of for no fault, but only that she is at 
present with child. She is about twenty years of age, 
has had the small-pox and measles, and is fit for town 
or country business. Enquire of the Printer." 
From the Continental Journal and Weekly Adv. 
Boston, Oct. 26, 1780. 
"Tobe sold, a likely negro boy, about 13 years old, 
well calculated to wait on a gentleman. 
Enquire of Printer. 
Also, to be sold, a likely cow and calf. 
Enquire of the Printer." 
I trust this remembrance and review of some 
of the "opinions ofour ancestors" will be cherish- 
ed and reflected upon, and have some eff ct in 
restraining the tongue of the puritan of to day, 
lest, in slandering the living slaveholder, he tra- 
duce the character oi the puritan of 1776, from 
whom we derive title. 
I said, too, that the immediate ancestors of some 
of those who urge as an excuse the Declaration 
ef Independence, did not think that instrument 
operative upon the servile portion of the commu- 
nity of that day. In proof, I refer to the treaty of 
peace between the United States and Great Bri- 
tain, made on the 3d Sept. 1783. The 7th art. 
stipulates that "his Britannic majesty, shall, with 
all convenient speed, and causing any de- 
struction, or carrying away, any negroes or other 
property of the American inhabitants, withdraw 
all his armies." &c, 
Here is an express acknowledgment of the 
right to hold negroes in slavery. And who sign- 
ed it, and thus sanctioned all it contained-in 
fact who negotiated it? Old John Adams ! 
And have we any evidence of the opinions 
of him who has uttered the sentiment I am now 
combatting ? I have a similar proof, to be found 
in the 1st art. of the Treaty of Ghent, negotiated 
in part by John Quincy Adams and signed by 
him. The 10th art. contains this stipulation- 
"without carrying away any slaves or other pro- 
perty." 
Again the laws of Massachusetts of 1776 for- 
bid the intermarriage of black and white per- 
sons, and declared any such marriage a nullity. 
That was one of "the opinions oi our ancestors 
on this question of slavery." 
The act of 1843, of a Massachusetts Legisla- 
ture, repealed this law, and permits the in er- 
marriage of the two races. This is an opinion 
of the Massachusetts man of to day. 
And what has been the result of this repeal? 
Why, sir, the statistics of the various prisons 
and alms-houses,f in the free States show that the 
black son of Africa, with flat nose, thick lips, 
protruding shin, and skin reddlent of rare odor 
though free to rise to the high estate of the wh 
man-though the parlors of the proud Puri' 
are thrown open to him-though free to ai 
himself with, aye, and even invited to the ardas 
of the fair skinned, cherry lipped, and graceful 
daughter of that famed race, still retains his na- 
ture-rejects with scorn the tendered connection, 
and prefers to revel in the brothel, until imprison- 
ed in the jail or penitenlitary! 
And when I hear such boasts of the stern 
j-See Note B, in Appendix. 13 
morality and love of liberty which is said to be 
peculiar to the old Bay State, I can but involun- 
tarily reflect upon another one of the striking 
evidences of the "opinions of our ancestors on 
this question of slavery." An eloquent and gift- 
ed citizen of that old State-a man who does 
honor to the Union on account of his noble ele- 
vation of thought and erudite learning, thus feel- 
ingly, and in glowing language, relates the event 
to w'hich I allude. 
"So perished the princes of the Pokanokets. Sad to 
them had been their acquaintance with civilization. 
The first ship that came on their coast kidnapped men 
of their kindred, and now the harmless boy, that had 
been cherished as an only child, and the future sachem 
of their tribes, the last of the family of Massasoit, was 
old into bondage, to toil as a slave, under the burning 
uns of Bermuda.-See Bancrofts History of the Uni- 
id States. 
Yes, sir, history tells the tale, that those ances- 
t<TS, whose opinions the gentleman thinks worthy 
of "some remembrance," not only sold to the 
southern planter African slaves, but actually sold 
lor gold the children of that famous Indian war- 
rior who gave lull employment to all their valor! 
Despoiled of their lands, and their children sold 
into slavery! And "remembrance" of these things 
invoked here, to give us just ideas of the blessings 
of liberty! 
Let me not be misunderstood, however, as dis- 
paraging the just claims of Massachusetts. There 
has been a time when a noble and enlarged pa- 
triotism ruled in her councils, and actuated her 
statesmen. The days of the Revolution exhibit- 
ed her in glory, which, though it has not received 
much addition since, will never fade. An orator 
has said that she needs no praise-"there she is- 
look at her. There are Lexington, Bunker Hill, 
&.c." And so they are. Sir, I look at her, and 
find her crowded with villages and an industrious, 
thriving population: I see immense piles of ma- 
nufacturing establishments built up out of the 
bounty extorted from Southern labor. I see Lex- 
ington and Bunker Hill too. But the spirit that 
ennobled those days, and gave undying glory to 
those fields, sleeps beneath their sod! All that re- 
mains of that great race, are their characters. 
Their descendants have forgotten "their opi- 
nions;" and those in whose veins flow the 
blood of the men who aided in forming this 
Union, now seek, unconstitutionally, to subvert 
it, and are content ignominiously to live upon 
plunder wrung from the sweat of Southern 
brows! 
The consequences of thin deep cherished and 
growing enmity to the institution of slavery, are 
exhibiting themselves in such a way as should 
cause good men to pause in their mad career. Not 
only are the laws of God put at defiance, but the 
laws oftheir own country. Societies areformed for 
the abolition of slavery, which, if the evidences of 
their own agents are to be believed, connive at 
and pay for the commission of most ignominious 
crimes. I speak in this matlftr a voicii of warn- 
ing to the people of the South. I have now be- 
fore me the confession of Charles Brown, who 
was hung at St. Louis, Missouri, for murder,on 
the 9th July, 1841, and confesses himself to 
have been one of the agents of an Abolii 
tion Society. He discloses that the Ohio 
State Anti-Slavery Society is very extensive- 
say about 18,000 in number, including societies 
in Indiana and Illinois. Agents are employed 
by it in nearly all the Southern and Southwestern 
States-about one hundred and fifty in number. 
They are supplied with blank certificates of 
freedom, and are paid from $20 to $50 per 
month, according to their success, or the risk they 
encounter. It is their duty to persuade slaves to 
run away, and to give them free papers. They 
direct them to some officers of an auxiliary 
society, who take charge of them and secrete or 
send them to a place of safety. 
Recently a Miss Webster has been convicted 
of the offence of stealing, and running to a free 
State, slaves. A Reverend [!] Mr. Torrey has 
likewise been convicted. In the name of hu- 
manity and religion these men steal our property, 
induce others to do so, and would aid England 
in her attempts to abolish the institution alto- 
gether, and teach us "slave breeders" lessons of 
morality! Sir, the great majority of our slaves 
would blush at such a morality as exhibits such 
a callous disregard of the rights of another. If 
these things are to continue-if, as we have been 
given to understand, the very citadel of the Union 
is to be made the theatre of exhibitions of hatred 
towards us as men, and of an eager desire to rob 
us of our property, as well as of the products of 
our labor, the denouement cannot be afar off'. 
And what would success in all these designs 
bring? Can it be thought of, without an invo- 
luntary shudder passing over the frame of every 
man, who remembers the description of like suc- 
cess elsewhere? Perhaps they were felt by him, 
who, on a recent memorablejoccasion, exclaimed 
with the concentrated energy ofvindictive hatred, 
"let 'five hundred millions perish, but that the 
black be freed." Before his vision must have 
floated the horrors of St. Domingo, where wives 
were violated upon the bodies of their slaugh- 
tered husbands, and the banner of the inhuman 
fiends was the dead body of an infant, impaled 
upon a spear, its golden looks dabbled in gore, 
and its little limbs stiffened by the last agony of 
suffering nature! But I turn from the picture^ 
sir. Such things will never be on these shores. 
The gallantry which, in times gone by, defended 
soil which the patriotism of a portion of New 
England had not compass enough to include 
within its vision, is ever rendy and sufficient, 
when the Constitution no longer prove# a pro- 
tection, to protect our institutions and our fami- 
lies. Bdt we trust in Providence never to be 
driven to so dire a resort. If but a portion of the 
wisdom and virtue of 1776 and 1787 yet remains 
to ua, the compromises of the Constitution will 
not only be preserved inviolate, but be protected 
and perpetuated. 
We ask"no(prepoiidei'ance in the Government," 14 
but we demand safety. So far from the slave- 
holding region increasing in power dispropor- 
tionately, as some have said, a report of one of 
your own committees shows unerringly the re- 
verse. By it we learn that instead of retaining 
our proportionate number of Representatives in 
Congress, taking as a standard our relative num- 
ber in 1790, we have lost. In the apportionment 
of 1810, we fell six below what that relative 
number demanded. In 1820 we fell seven below. 
In 1830 we fell ten below ; and in 1840 we fell 
fourteen below! Losing relative strength in the 
representative branch of the Government; having 
compromised away all possibility of retaining an 
equality even in the Senate, by the fatal Missouri 
compromise; with a fearful prospective inequa- 
lity staring us in the face; attacked day after 
day, month after month, year after year, by 
those who are virtually sworn to be our sup 
porters-with the world arrayed against, and its 
most subtle and efficient nation using every 
means to subvert, our favorite institution, can we 
be true to ourselves if we do not demand "the 
bond"-its fulfilment to the very letter. And if 
in considering upon this project of annexation, 
our Great Statesman has felt, and wrote, and act- 
ed, for his own land in acting for the Union-if 
we have ventured to express the reasons we en- 
tertain for it, boldly, candidly, and explicitly, as 
it becomes men at all times to do, nature sanctions, 
reason approves, the course and the folds of the 
Constitution should shield him and us from re- 
proach. 
The highest considerations ofindividual, of spc- 
tionnl, and of national interests, urge us then on to 
annexation, to open wide the door of the Union, 
to this young member of the family of Re 
publics. Unfeeling hands ejected her in 1819. 
She has survived the dangers of anaichy and 
despotism to which that act exposed her. Hers, 
indeed, is an epitome of our own history. And 
now, when leaning upon the sword of victory, 
her garments dripping with the blood of her 
merciless and tyrannical foe, and in the blue 
folds of her banner glittering a single star-the 
"Lost Pleiad" from our own constellation-when 
Texas, taught at the same fountain, and wor- 
shipping at the same altar of freedom as we, 
having transplanted upon her green prairies our 
institutions, laws, and religion-demands admis 
sion to our confederacy as a co-guardian of the 
fires It up in 1776-what American arm 
can closethat door upon her? Those fires were 
designed sir to spread their genial influence far be- 
yond the narrow confines of the republic as it 
existed in the days of '76; to blaze higher and 
higher until they had illuminated every dark cor 
nerofthe earth where benighted man was bowed 
down beneath the oppressions of despotic power. 
Instead of building a Chinese wall around it, sir, 
let us widen the sphere of its radiance, and add 
fuel to the flame: 
"Then let that mighty flame burn on. 
Through change and change, thro' good and ill; 
Like its own god's eternal will, 
Deep, consiant, bright, unquenchable." 
And may the day be not far distant when shall 
be heard from the holders of the States of Texas, 
the voices of her intelligent and patriotic citizens, 
mingling with ours in the great drama of SELF- 
GOVERNMENT. 
APPENDIX. 
Note A.-A select committee on West India co. 
lonies, repotted to the British Parliament, July 2b 
1842, a series of resolutions and the testimony take, 
before them. 
In answer to question 24.474, it came out that Sr 
Charles Metcalfe, former Governor of Jamaica, h«d 
"it indispensable for the relief of Jamaica, that imrj. 
gration from Africa, or some other tropical climte, 
should take place upon a very extensive scale." 
The Ulh of the resolutions reported, is, "Thatone 
obvious and most desirable mode of endeavoring to 
compensate for this diminished supply of labor, i to 
promote immigration of a fresh laboring population to 
such an extent as to create competition for en pay- 
ment." 
The 12th resolution recommends "that suc\ immi- 
gration should be conducted under the authority, in- 
spection, and control of responsible public offecers.'' 
The Foreign Quarterly Review for October, 1843, 
also urges immigration direct from Africa ! 
Note B. The relative condition of the blacks in 
the non-slaveholding and slaveholding States, is exhi- 
bited by the following table, made up from official 
State reports: 
The proportion of colored prisoners and paupers to 
the entire colored population, in 
Boston. Cheb-ea, and Suffolk, is as 1 to 16.17 
New York city and co. " 1 " 24.03 
Philadelphia city and co. " 1 " 29.03 
R chmoiid city and Henrico co. 1 " 45.09 
City of Charleston District " 1 " 63.48 
The above table shows that bond and free negroes 
stand higher, physically and morally, in the slave, than 
they do in the free, Slates. 
The report of the Eastern Penitentiary, Pennsylva- 
nia, for 1839,says: "The number of re convictions to this 
penitenti iry. and the continued yearly increase of the 
colored convicts, are subjects which demand the serious 
consideration of the Legislature." 
The, physician, in his report, says: "The admissions 
to the prison (for 1839) are, 80 colored and 99 white 
convict*-which shows an increasing disproportion- 
ate number of colored persons, constituting in it a pe- 
culiar and important feature; and accounting in a 
great measure for its sickness, mortality, medical ex- 
|rense, and labor." 
"Deaths have been 11. viz: 2 whites and 9 blacks. 
The inspectors report, that "the instances of mental 
disorder the last year, have been about half of those of 
the previous year; and. as usual, have occurred among 
the colored prisoners, with few exceptions, and are 
chargeable to their depraved habits." "At the close 
of the last year, there were 161 to 349colored and 216 
white prisoners"-the proportion being 1 to 135. The re- 
lative number of black and white in the whole State, 
by census of 1840, was 1 to 349.