1842 a half dozen of the Texans fell, bravely fighting, Colonel Bowie and Davy Crockett among the rest.20 The others, except three women, were shot by order of Santa Anna. American history contains no chapter of greater heroism and devotion than the defense of the Alamo. While the siege of the Alamo was in progress a convention of the people of Texas was assembling at the town of Washington on the Brazos River. Texas sentiment was now unanimous in favor of separation from Mexico, and the convention promptly adopted a declaration of independence, established the Republic of Texas, put into force a constitution, elected David G. Burnett provisional president, and Sam Houston commander-in-chief of the Texas army. Finally, on April 21, 1836, the drama was ended by the utter rout of the Mexicans under Santa Anna at San Jacinto by a force commanded by General Houston. The Texans charged to the war cry "Remember the Alamo!" Burning with indignation and filled with vengeance, they flew at the Mexicans and sent them flying over the prairies. Over six hundred were shot down on the field, and nearly three hundred wounded, while the American loss was two killed and twenty-three wounded.21 Santa Anna while trying to escape was captured and compelled to sign a treaty agreeing to cease hostilities against Texas, send the Mexican troops out of the country, and use his influence to secure the recognition of the independence of Texas. What Yorktown was to the Americans in the Revolution against England, San Jacinto was to the Texans in their struggle against Mexican misrule. A general outburst of rejoicing followed, and the hero of San Jacinto was elected president of the republic in September, 1836, and M. B. Lamar vice president. At the same time the people voted almost unanimously in favor of annexation to the United States. For years, however, Mexico did not abandon her claim to Texas, and made several ineffectual attempts to reconquer her lost province. In March, 1837, the United States recognized the independence of the Texas republic; France did likewise in 1839; Holland and Belgium in 1840, and Great Britain in 1842. The people of Texas had no desire to remain an independent republic, and at once made overtures to the United States for annexation; but for the present the United States did nothing but 20 Garrison, "History of Texas," p. 208. 21 Ibid., p. 226. 1842-1844 recognize Texan independence, and sent an agent to Texas to investigate and report on the condition of affairs. Besides the question of defense, there were ethnical and geographical reasons why Texas should be annexed to the United States. Nearly ninety per cent. of the population was Anglo-American, and there were no welldefined natural boundaries between the two republics. Many people of the North, however, objected to annexation on account of the fact that it would mean an enormous extension of slavery. Here was a territory that could easily be erected into half a dozen States of the average area. If this should be done, it would destroy the equilibrium between the slavery and anti-slavery sections of the country, which it had been the policy of Congress to maintain ever since the opening of the slavery controversy. In view of this, President Van Buren, when the formal offer was made to him by the agent of Texas, promptly and firmly refused to consider a proposition looking toward annexation. With the accession of Tyler, however, the situation changed. He had no such scruples on the subject of slavery extension, and was eager to signalize his administration by the peaceful acquisition of so vast and valuable a domain. He remembered that it was an act of this kind which had immortalized Jefferson's administration, and he could not understand why the addition of the resources of Texas without the expenditure of a dollar from the national treasury would not add immensely to the power of the nation and incidentally increase his own popularity. He believed, with most Southerners, that as the greater part of the Louisiana cession would probably be erected into free States, the acquisition of additional Southern territory would be necessary to preserve the balance of power between the North and the South, and consequently the perpetuity of the Union. President Tyler, therefore, after the retirement of Webster in 1842, began negotiations with the Texas authorities, in spite of the threat of Mexico to go to war with the United States in the event of annexation. These plans had little result, until early in 1844, when John C. Calhoun was made Secretary of State for the special purpose of acquiring Texas.22 Up to this time they had been impeded on account of the refusal of the administration to promise the Texans protection from the threatened invasion of Mexico during the progress of the negotiations, as such interference might lead to war with Mexico. Soon after the accession of Mr. 22 Von Holst, "Life of Calhoun,” p. 227. 1844 Calhoun the Texas agent was informed, April, 1844, that the President had ordered war vessels to the Gulf of Mexico and troops to the Southwest, and that all the means placed within his power by the Constitution would be employed to protect Texas against foreign invasion pending the conclusion of a treaty.23 Calhoun believed, or professed to believe, that certain European nations, notably Great Britain and France, were making overtures to Texas with a view of securing its exceptional commercial advantages, and possibly extending their dominion to this hemisphere, to the peril of both the safety and the prosperity of the United States. This belief led him to redouble his efforts, and the promise of protection from Mexican aggression soon resulted in the conclusion of a treaty of annexation (April 12, 1844). For the most part the negotiations had been conducted in secret and the Senate was therefore somewhat surprised when the President laid before it a treaty asking for its advice and consent. The President was equally surprised when on June 8 he was informed that the treaty had been rejected by the large vote of thirty-five to sixteen. The Northern senators voted against it because of their opposition to the extension of slavery, some of the Southern senators opposed it for fear that it would embroil the country in war with Mexico, while a few who favored the acquisition of Texas opposed annexation by treaty on the ground that foreign territory could not be admitted to the Union as a State without an act of Congress. For the time the plans of the annexationists were thwarted, and before further action was taken the two parties were to go before the country to secure the popular verdict at the presidential election.24 While the treaty was before the Senate the national conventions of the Democratic and Whig parties met at Baltimore for the purpose of nominating candidates for the Presidency. Tyler being out of the race, Van Buren and Clay were recognized as the leading candidates of their respective parties. Clay had resigned from the Senate in 1841, and was now living in retirement on his estate in Ashland. But he was still the most popular man in America. All over the country he was nominated by Whig meetings, State legislatures, and various other public and private bodies. The en 23 Burgess, "Middle Period," p. 307; Von Holst, "Life of Calhoun,” p. 231. 24 See Von Holst, "Constitutional History of the United States," vol. iii. pp. 61-85. 1844 thusiasm for him was irresistible; he was invited to visit every town and county in the East and in the West; his journeys were like triumphal marches, and distinguished guests from all parts of America and Europe sought him at his Kentucky home.25 Van Buren, likewise, had been living for the last four years in honorable retirement. Before the meeting of the convention both announced that they were opposed to the immediate annexation of Texas - a concerted scheme, it would seem, to prevent the question from being made an issue in the presidential campaign, for in May, 1842, Van Buren had visited Ashland and enjoyed for several days the hospitality of his old adversary. During the visit there was "a great deal of agreeable conversation, but not much of politics." The Whig convention met first, and with one voice gave Clay the nomination which his friends claimed he should have had four years before. Theodore Frelinghuysen of New Jersey was nominated for Vice President. The proceedings of the Democratic convention were not marked with the same unanimity. Van Buren's declaration against annexation lost him the support of many Southern Democrats, and, although he was still the choice of a majority of the delegates, he was defeated by the operation of the rule which required a two-thirds majority to nominate, and which had now come to be a permanent feature of Democratic convention procedure. On the ninth ballot James K. Polk, the first "dark horse" in the history of the Presidency, received the nomination for President, and George M. Dallas for Vice President. The convention adopted a platform declaring in favor of the "reoccupation of Oregon" and the "reannexation of Texas at the earliest possible moment,' though it was conveniently vague on the subject of the tariff. The Whig platform contained no reference to Texas or Oregon, but offered its usual platitudes on the tariff, the bank and internal improvements. Another convention was held at Baltimore at the same time, and it nominated John Tyler for President, who promptly accepted. But before very long Tyler, convinced that he had but a feeble following, withdrew in favor of Polk. During the progress of the campaign Polk maintained a dignified silence on the slavery question; but Clay, being persuaded that annexation sentiment was on the increase, wrote a letter to a friend in Alabama in explanation of a letter which he had written to the National Intelligencer before the meeting of the convention, saying that he 25 Schurz, "Life of Clay," vol. ii. p. 242. 26 1844-1845 would be glad to see Texas annexed on fair and just terms, if it could be done without war and without dishonor. This appeared to many of his supporters as trimming, and served to alienate enough anti-slavery Whigs in New York and Michigan to turn those States in favor of Polk. Later attempts to explain these letters only made matters worse. Moreover, by a skillfully worded letter to a Philadelphia gentleman named Kane, Polk gave the impression that he was a "better tariff man" than Clay, and the cry was raised, "Polk, Dallas, and the tariff of 1842." Thus Polk and the Democrats were paraded as the special champions of protection, while Clay, the father of the " American system," was held up as the enemy of protection. It was, says Schurz, one of the most audacious political frauds in history.2 That the people of Pennsylvania should have been deceived by it seems strange; yet they went for Polk, and when two years later the Whig tariff of 1842 was repealed, their disappointment, not to say indignation, was great. The abolitionists, also refusing to support Clay, nominated a candidate of their own, and the 16,000 votes he received in New York helped to defeat the Whig candidate. The result was the election of Polk by an electoral majority of sixty-five, the Democrats carrying fifteen States and the Whigs eleven. The sorrow among the Whigs was pathetic. "It was," says Sargeant in his reminiscences, "as if the first-born of every family had been stricken down." Business was well-nigh suspended in many towns, while the people gathered together to discuss the result; not a few felt that the party would go to pieces; all were stunned and all felt that a great wrong had been done. Clay's feelings can be better imagined than described. "The late blow that has fallen upon our country," he wrote to a friend, "is very heavy. I hope that she may recover from it, but I confess that the prospect ahead is dark, and discouraging. I am afraid that it will be a long time, if ever, before the people recover from the corrupting influence and effects of Jacksonism. I pray God to give them a happy deliverance." 27 Tyler interpreted the results of the election as a popular verdict in favor of annexation, and he made haste to recommend that Texas be annexed by act of Congress, or by joint resolution, through the treaty-making power. The latter was a convenient 26 Schurz, "Life of Clay," vol. ii. p. 257. 27 Ibid., p. 267. |