tion the Constitution of our country, adopted expressly to secure the blessings of liberty,' and not the perpetuation of Slaveryand to prevent the speedy and violent dissolution of the Union-we invite you to unite, without distinction of party, in an immediate exposition of your views on this subject, in such manner as you may deem best calculated to answer the end proposed."

On the 27th of March, 1844, Mr. Wm. H. Hammet, Representative in Congress from Mississippi, and an unpledged delegate elect to the approaching Democratic National Convention, addressed, from his seat in the House, a letter of inquiry to Mr. Van Buren, asking an expression of his "opinions as to the constitutionality and expediency of immediately annexing Texas to the United States, so soon as the consent of Texas may be had to such Annexation." The writer commended himself to Mr. Van Buren as "one of your warmest supporters in 1836 and 1840, and an unpledged delegate to the Baltimore Convention;" and, though courteous in its terms, the letter gave him very clearly to understand that his answer would govern the course of the querist in the Convention aforesaid, and be very likely to influence the result of its deliberations.

Mr. Van Buren replied in a very long and elaborate letter, dated Lindenwald, April 20th, whereof the drift and purport were very clearly hostile to the contemplated Annexation. He fully admitted that Annexation was per se desirable; encouraging hopes that he might consent to it, as a measure of imperative self-defense, rather than permit Texas to become a British dependency, or the colony of any European power; and intimating that Mexico might too long persist "in refusing to acknowledge the independence of Texas, and in destructive but

161

fruitless efforts to reconquer that State," so as to produce a general conviction of the necessity of Annexation to the permanent welfare, if not absolute safety, of all concerned. He, nevertheless, decidedly negatived any presumption that he could, under existing circumstances, or un

der any in immediate prospect, give his support to the scheme, even though assured that his re-election to the Pres

idency depended thereon. His view of the main question directly presented, is fairly and forcibly set forth in the following passage of his letter:

"The question, then, recurs, if, as sensible men, we cannot avoid the conclusion that the immediate Annexation of Texas would, in all human probability, draw after it a war with Mexico, can it be expedient to attempt it? Of the consequences of such a war, the character it might be made to assume, the entanglements with other naalmost unavoidably draws after it, and the tions which the position of a belligerent undoubted injuries which might be inflicted on each, notwithstanding the great disparity of their respective forces, I will not say a word. God forbid that an American citizen should ever count the cost of any appeal to what is appropriately denominated the last resort of nations, whenever that resort becomes necessary, either for the safety, or to vindicate the honor, of his country. There is, I trust, not one so base as not to regard himself, and all he has, to be forever, and at all times, subject to such a requisition. But would a war with Mexico, brought on under such circumstances, be a contest of that character? Could we hope to stand perfectly justified in the eyes of mankind for mencement is to be preceded by the approentering into it; more especially if its compriation to our own uses of the territory, the sovereignty of which is in dispute between two nations, one of which we are to join in the struggle? This, Sir, is a matter of the very gravest import-one in respect to which no American statesman or citizen can possibly be indifferent. We have a character among the nations of the earth to maintain. All our public functionaries, as well those who advocate this measure as

those who oppose it, however much they may differ as to its effects, will, I am sure, be equally solicitous for the performance of

this first of duties.

"It has hitherto been our pride and our

boast that, whilst the lust of power, with fraud and violence in its train, has led other and differently constituted Governments to aggression and conquest, our movements in these respects have always been regulated by reason and justice. A disposition to detract from our pretensions in this respect will, in the nature of things, be always prevalent elsewhere, and has, at this very moment, and from special causes, assumed, in some quarters, the most rabid character. Should not every one, then, who sincerely loves his country-who venerates its timehonored and glorious institutions who dwells with pride and delight on associations connected with our rise, progress, and present condition-on the steady step with which we have advanced to our present eminence, in despite of the hostility, and in contempt of the bitter revilings, of the ene

mies of freedom in all parts of the globe consider, and that deeply, whether we would not, by the immediate Annexation of Texas, place a weapon in the hands of those who now look upon us and our institutions with distrustful and envious eyes, that would do us more real, lasting injury as a nation,

than the acquisition of such a territory, valuable as it undoubtedly is, could possibly repair?

"It is said, and truly said, that this war be

tween Texas and Mexico has already been of too long duration. We are, and must continue to be, annoyed by its prosecution, and have undoubtedly, as has been remarked, an interest in seeing it terminated. But can we appeal to any principle in the law of Nations, to which we practice a scrupulous adherence, that would, under present circumstances, justify us in interfering for its suppression in a manner that would unavoidably make us a party to its further prosecution? Can this position be made sufficiently clear to justify us in committing the peace and honor of the country to its support?

"In regard to the performance by us of that duty, so difficult for any Government to perform the observance of an honest neutrality between nations at war-we can now look through our whole career, since our first admission into the family of nations, not only without a blush, but with feelings of honest pride and satisfaction. The way was opened by President Washington himself, under circumstances of the most difficult character, and at no less a hazard than that of exposing ourselves to plausible, yet unjust, imputations of infidelity to treaty stipulations. The path he trod with such unfaltering steps, and which led to such beneficial results, has hitherto been pursued with unvarying fidelity by every one of his successors, of whom it becomes me to speak."

The Whigs were unanimous and enthusiastic in their determination that no other than Mr. Clay should be their candidate, and that no other than he should be elected. He had spent the Winter of 1843-4, mainly in New Orleans—then a hot-bed of the Texas intrigue-but had left it unshaken in his opposition to the plot-not to Annexation itself, at a suitable time, and under satisfactory conditions; but to its accomplishment while the boundaries of Texas remained undetermined and disputed, her independence unacknowledg ed by Mexico, and her war with that country unconcluded.

Mr. Clay set forth his view of the matter in a letter to The National Intelligencer, dated "Raleigh, N. C., April 17, 1844"-three days earlier than the date of Mr. Van Buren's

letter. Premising that he had believed and maintained that Texas was included in the Louisiana purchase, and had, therefore, opposed the treaty of 1819, with Spain, by which Florida was acquired, and the Sabine recognized as our western boundary, he says:

"My opinions of the inexpediency of the treaty of 1819 did not prevail. The country and Congress were satisfied with it; appropriations were made to carry it into effect; the line of the Sabine was recognized by us as our boundary, in negotiations both with Spain and Mexico, after Mexico became independent; and measures have been in actual progress to mark the line, from the Sabine to the Red river, and thence to the Pacific ocean. We have thus fairly alienated our title to Texas, by solemn National compacts, to the fulfillment of which we stand bound by good faith and National honor. It is, therefore, perfectly idle and ridiculous, if not dishonorable, to talk of resuming our title to Texas, as if we had never parted with it. We can no more do that than Spain can resume Florida, France Louisiana, or Great Britain the thirteen colonies now comprising a part of the United States."

After glancing at the recent history of Texas, Mr. Clay continues:

"Mexico has not abandoned, but perseveres in, the assertion of her rights by actual force of arms, which, if suspended, are intended to be renewed. Under these circumstances, if the Government of the United States were to acquire Texas, it would acquire along with it all the encumbrances which Texas is under, and, among them, the actual or suspended war between Mexico and Texas. Of that consequence, there cannot be a doubt. Annexation and war with Mexico are identical. Now, for one, I certainly am not willing to involve this country in a foreign war for the object of acquiring Texas. I know there are those who regard such a war with indifference, and as a trifling affair, on account of the weakness of Mexico, and her inability to inflict serious injury on this country. But I do not look upon it thus lightly. I regard all wars as great calamities, to be avoided, if possible, and honorable peace as the wisest and truest policy of this country. What the United States most need are union, peace, and patience. Nor do I think that the weakness of a power should form a motive, in any case, for inducing us to engage in, or to depreciate, the evils of war. Honor, and good faith, and justice, are equally due from this country toward the weak as toward the strong. And, if an act of injustice were to be perpetrated toward any power, it would be more compatible with the dignity of the nation, and, in my judgment, less dishonorable, to inflict it upon a powerful, instead of a weak, foreign nation."

Mr. Van Buren, in his very long letter, had studiously avoided all allusion to what, in the cant of a later day, would have been termed the "sectional" aspect of the question; that is, the earnest and invincible repugnance of a large portion of our people to the annexation proposed, because of its necessary tendency to extend and strengthen Slavery. Mr. Clay confronted this view of the case cautiously, yet manfully, saying:

"I have hitherto considered the question upon the supposition that the annexation is attempted without the assent of Mexico. If she yields her consent, that would materially affect the foreign aspect of the ques

163

tion, if it did not remove all foreign difficulties. On the assumption of that assent, the question would be confined to the domestic considerations which belong to it, embracing the terms and conditions upon which annexation is proposed. I do not think Texas ought to be received into the Union, as an integral part of it, in decided opposition to the wishes of a considerable and respectable portion of the confederacy. I think it far more wise and important to compose and harmonize the present confederacy, as it now exists, than to introduce a new element of discord and distraction into it. In my humble opinion, it should be the constant and earnest endeavor of American statesmen to eradicate prejudices, to cultivate and foster concord, and to produce general contentment among all parts of our confederacy. And true wisdom, it seems to me, points to the duty of rendering its present members happy, prosperous, and satisfied with each other, rather than to attempt to introduce alien members, against the common consent, and with the certainty of deep dissatisfaction. Mr. Jefferson expressed the opinion, and others believed, that it never was in the contemplation of the framers of the Constitution to add foreign territory to the confederacy, out of which new States were to be formed. The acquisitions of Louisiana and Florida may be defended upon the peculiar ground of the relation in which they stood to the States of the Union. After they were admitted, we might well pause a while, people our vast wastes, develop our resources, prepare the means of defending what we possess, and augment our strength, power, and greatness. If, hereafter, further territory tion, we need entertain no apprehension should be wanted for an increased populabut that it will be acquired, by ineans, it is to be hoped, fair, honorable, and constitutional. It is useless to disguise that there are those who espouse, and those who oppose, the annexation of Texas upon the ground of the influence which it would exert on the balance of political power between two great sections of the Union. I conceive that no motive for the acquisition of foreign territory could be more unfortunate, or pregnant with more fatal consequences, than that of obtaining it for the purpose of strengthening one part against another part of the common confederacy. Such a principle, put into practical operation, would menace the existence, if it did not certainly sow the seeds of a dissolution of the Union."

He closed his letter-which is not quite a third so long as Mr. Van

Vice-royalty, now departments of the Mexi- | can Republic, lying on both sides of the Rio Grande from its head to its mouth, we now propose to incorporate, so far as they lie on the left bank of the river, into our Union, by virtue of a treaty of reannexation with Texas. Let us pause and look at our new and important proposed acquisitions in this quarter. First: There is the department, formerly the province, of New Mexico, lying on both sides of the river from its head-spring to near the Pass del Nortethat is to say, half way down the river. This department is studded with towns and villages-is populated, well cultivated, and covered with flocks and berds. On its left bank (for I only speak of the part which we propose to reannex) is, first, the frontier village Taos, 3,000 souls, and where the custom-house is kept at which the Missouri caravans enter their goods. Then comes Santa Fé, the capital, 4,000 souls; then Albuquerque, 6,000 souls; then some scores of other towns and villages-all more or less populated and surrounded by flocks and fields. Then come the departments of Chihuahua, Coahuila, and Tamaulipas, without settlements on the left bank of the river, but occupying the right bank, and commanding the left. All this being parts of four Mexican departments, now under Mexican Governors and Governments-is permanently reannexed to this Union, if this treaty is ratified, and is actually reannexed from the moment of the signature of the treaty, according to the President's last Message, to remain so until the acquisition is rejected by rejecting the treaty! one-half of the department of New Mexico, with its capital, becomes a territory of the United States; an angle of Chihuahua, at the Pass del Norte, famous for its wine, also becomes ours; a part of the department of Coahuila, not populated on the left bank, which we take, but commanded from the right bank by Mexican authorities; the same of Tamaulipas, the ancient Nuevo Santander (New St. Andrew), and which covers both sides of the river from its mouth for some hundred miles up, and all the left bank of which is in the power and possession of Mexico. These, in addition to old Texas; these parts of four States-these towns and villages these people and territory-these flocks and herds-this slice of the Republic

The

of Mexico, two thousand miles long and some hundred broad-all this our President has cut off from its mother empire, and presents to us, and declares it ours till the Senate rejects it! He calls it Texas! and the cutting off he calls reannexation! Humboldt calls it New Mexico, Chihuahua, Cōahuila, and Nuevo Santander-now Tamaulipas; and the civilized world may qualify

165

this reannexation by the application of some odious and terrible epithet. Demosthenes advised the people of Athens not to take, but to retake, a certain city; and in that re lay the virtue which saved the act from the character of spoliation and robbery. Will it be equally potent with us? and will the re prefixed to the annexation legitimate the seizure of two thousand miles of a neighbor's dominion, with whom we have treaties of peace, and friendship, and commerce? Will it legitimate this seizure, made by virtue of a treaty with Texas, when no Texan force-witness the disastrous expeditions to Mier and to Santa Fé-have been seen near it without being killed or taken, to the last man?

"I wash my hands of all attempts to dismember the Mexican Republic by seizing her dominions in New Mexico, Chihuahua, Coahuila, and Tamaulipas. The treaty, in all that relates to the boundary of the Rio Grande, is an act of unparalleled outrage on Mexico. It is the seizure of two thousand miles of her territory, without a word of explanation with her, and by virtue of a treaty with Texas, to which she is no party. Our Secretary of State, in his letter to the United States Chargé in Mexico several days after the treaty was signed, and after the Mexican Minister had withdrawn from our seat of Government, shows full well that he was conscious of the enormity of this outrage; knew it was war; and proffered volunteer apologies to avert the consequences which he knew he had provoked.

"I therefore propose, as an additional resolution, applicable to the Rio del Norte boundary alone-the one which I will read and send to the Secretary's table, and on which, at the proper time, I shall ask the vote of the Senate. This is the resolution: Resolved, That the incorporation of the left bank of the Rio Del Norte into the American Union, by virtue of a treaty with Texas, comprehending, as the said incorporation would do, a part of the Mexican departments of New Mexico, Chihuahua, Cōahuila, and Tamaulipas, would be an act of direct aggression on Mexico; for all the consequences of which the United States would stand responsible."

The opposition of the Northern Democrats to the Annexation project, though crippled by the action of their National Convention, was not entirely suppressed. Especially in New York, where attachment to the person and the fortunes of Mr. Van Buren had been peculiarly strong,