CONGRESS ASSENTS TO ANNEXATION. 173 forts and harbors, navy and navy-yards, docks, magazines, arms, armaments, and all other property and means pertaining to the public defense, belonging to the said Republic of Texas, shall retain all public funds, debts, taxes, and dues of every kind, which may belong to, or be due or owing said Republic; and shall also retain all the vacant or unappropriated lands lying within its limits, to be applied to the payment of the debts and liabilities of said Republic of Texas: alternative contemplating negotiation as a means of effecting the end proposed: and this was carried by 27 Yeas, to 25 Nays-the Nays all Whigs. The measure, as thus amended, passed the Senate by Yeas 27all the Democrats present and three Whigs, of whom two thereupon turned Democrats-to 25 Nays and the residue of said lands, after dischargall Whigs; and the proposition being returned to the House, the amendment of the Senate was concurred in by 134 Yeas to 77 Naysa party vote: so the Annexation of Texas was decreed, in the following terms: 5 Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled, That Congress doth consent that the territory properly included within, and rightfully belonging to, the Republic of Texas, may be erected into a new State, to be called the State of Texas, with a republican form of government, to be adopted by the people of said republic, by deputies in Convention assembled, with the consent of the existing government, in order that the same may be admitted as one of the States of the Union. “Sec. 2. And be it further resolved, That the foregoing consent of Congress is given upon the following conditions, and with the following guarantees, to wit: "First: Said State to be formed, subject to the adjustment by this Government of all questions of boundary that may arise with other governments; and the Constitution thereof, with the proper evidence of its adoption by the people of said Republic of Texas, shall be transmitted to the President of the United States, to be laid before Congress for its final action, on or before the first day of January, one thousand eight hundred and forty six. "Second: Said State, when admitted into the Union, after ceding to the United States all public edifices, fortifications, barracks, 5 On the final vote in the Senate, the YEAS -for the Proposition as amended-were as follows the names in italics being those of Whigs: `Messrs. Allen, Ashley, Atchison, Atherton, Bagby, Benton, Breese, Buchanan, Colquitt, Dickinson, Dix, Fairfield, Hannegan, Haywood, Henderson, Huger, Johnson, Lewis, McDuffie, Merrick, Niles, Semple, Sevier, Sturgeon, Tappan, Walker, Woodbury—27. of as said State may direct; but in no event ing said debts and liabilities, to be disposed are said debts and liabilities to become a charge upon the United States. "Third. New States of convenient size, not exceeding four in number, in addition to the said State of Texas, and having sufficient said State, be formed out of the territory population, may hereafter, by the consent of thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of the Federal Constitution; and such States as may be formed out of that portion of said territory lying south of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, commonly known as the Missouri Compromise line, shall be admitted into the Union with or without Slavery, as the people of each State asking admission may desire. And in such State or States as shall be formed out of said territory north of said Missouri Compromise line, Slavery or involuntary servitude (except for crime) shall be prohibited. [WALKER'S AMENDMENT-ADDED.] "And be it further resolved, That if the President of the United States shall, in his judgment and discretion, deem it most advisable, instead of proceeding to submit the foregoing resolutions to the Republic of Texas, as an overture on the part of the United States for admission, to negotiate with that Republic; then, "Be it resolved, That a State to be formed out of the present Republic of Texas, with suitable extent and boundaries, and with two representatives in Congress, until the next apportionment of representation, shall be admitted into the Union by virtue of this act, on an equal footing with the existing States, as soon as the terms and conditions of such admission, and the "And be it further enacted, That the sum of one hundred thousand dollars be, and the same is hereby, appropriated to defray the expenses of missions and negotiations, to agree upon the terms of said admission and cession, either by treaty to be submitted to the Senate, or by articles to be submitted to the two Houses of Congress, as the President may direct. Approved, March 2, 1845.” President Tyler immediately, on the last day of his term, rendered the Walker amendment nugatory by dispatching a messenger to Texas to secure her assent to Annexation, pure and simple; and thus the triumph of the measure was secured. The pretext or show of compromise with respect to Slavery, by a partition of territory, was one of the worst features of this most objectionable measure. So much of Texas as lay north of the parallel of 36° 30′ north latitude was thereby allotted to Free labor, when Texas had never controlled, and did not at that moment possess, a single acre north of that parallel, nor for two hundred miles south of it. All the territory claimed by her north of that line was New Mexico, which had never been for a week under the flag of Texas. While seeming to curtail and circumscribe Slavery north of the above parallel, this measure really extended it northward to that parallel, which it had not yet approached, under the flag of Texas, within hundreds of miles. But the chief end of this sham compromise was the involving of Congress and the country in an indirect indorsement of the claim of Texas to the entire left bank of the Rio Grande, from its mouth to its source; and this was effected. This complete triumph of Annexation, even before the inauguration of Mr. Polk, was hailed with exultation throughout the South, and received with profound sensation and concern at the North. It excited, moreover, some surprise; as, three days before it occurred, its defeat for that session appeared almost certain. Mr. Bagby, a Democratic Senator from Alabama, positively declared from his seat that he would not support it; while the opposition of Messrs. Niles, of Connecticut, Dix, of New York, and Benton, of Missouri, was deemed invincible; but the Alabamian was tamed by private, but unquestionable, intimations, that it would not be safe for him to return to his own State, nor even to remain in Washington, if his vote should defeat the darling project; and the repugnance of Messrs. Niles, Dix, and Benton, was somehow overcome---the Walker amendment serving as a pretext for submission to the party behest, when no plausible excuse could be given. Mr. Polk was already in Washington, engaged in making up his jewels; and he had very freely intimated that no man who opposed Annexation should receive office or consideration at his hands. The three Tylerized Whigs from the South, who voted in the affirmative, had not been counted on as opponents of the scheme. The Democrats of the North, having elected Mr. Polk after a desperate struggle, and being intent on the imminent distribution of the spoils, might regret this early fruit of their triumph, but could hardly be expected openly to denounce it. Mr. John P. Hale, of New Hampshire, who had evinced (as we have seen) insubor THE UNION A CHAMPION OF SLAVERY. dination in the House, and who was then the regular Democratic nominee for the next House in the election just at hand, was thrown off the ticket unceremoniously, and another nominated in his stead-who, how ever, failed of success; the election resulting in no choice, so far as this seat was concerned. Three regular Democrats were elected to the others. In no other State was there any open and formidable opposition manifested by Democrats to this sudden consummation of the Texan intrigue. The Whigs and Abolitionists of the Free States, of course, murmured; but to what end? What could they do? The new Democratic Administration must hold the reins for the ensuing four years, and its decided ascendency in both Houses of the next Congress was already amply secured. There were the usual editorial thunderings; perhaps a few sermons, and less than half-adozen rather thinly-attended public meetings, mainly in Massachusetts, whereat ominous whispers may have been heard, that, if things were to go on in this way much longer, the Union would, or should, be dissolved. This covert menace was emphatically rebuked by Mr. Robert C. Winthrop, of Boston, speaking the sentiment of the great majority of leading Whigs. "Our country, however bounded," was declared by him entitled to his allegiance, and the object of his affections. The great majority, even of the murmurers, went on with their industry and their trade, their pursuits and their aspirations, as though 6"The negroes taken from the Southern States should be returned to their owners, or paid for at their full value. If these slaves were considered as non-combatants, they ought to be restored; if as property, they ought to be paid 175 nothing of special moment had happened. ご Yet it did not escape the regard of keen observers that our country had placed herself, by annexing Texas under the circumstances, not merely in the light of a powerful aggressor on the rights of neighboring helplessness, but of a champion and propagandist of Slavery, as the fit, beneficent condition of the producers of tropical and semi-tropical staples throughout the world. The dispatch of Mr. Calhoun to France, with one or two others of like purport, aimed more directly at England, justified and commended our designs on Texas expressly and emphatically on this ground. England, he argued, was plotting the extinction of Slavery throughout the Western Hemisphere. The United States must clutch Texas, or she would soon fall a prey to British intrigue and British influence-being induced thereby to emancipate her slaves; thus dealing a damaging, if not mortal, blow to Slavery throughout the New World. To avert this blow, and to shield the social and industrial system which it menaced, were the chief ends of Annexation. Now, it was not literally true that our country was thus presented, for the first time, in the questionable attitude of a champion of Slavery. In our last treaty of peace with Great Britain, our commissioners at Ghent, acting under special instructions from the State Department," had adroitly bound Great Britain to return to for." This stipulation is, moreover, expressly included "in the conditions on which you are to insist in the proposed negotiations."-Letter of Instructions from Mr. Monroe, Secretary of State, 28th January, 1814. us such slaves as had escaped from our coast to her cruisers, during the progress of the war.' And, under this treaty, after a tedious controverGreat Britain—refusing, of course, sy, to surrender persons who had fled from her enemies to her protectionwas compelled, in 1818, on the award of Alexander I. of Russia to pay over to us no less than twelve hundred thousand dollars, to be divided among our bereft slaveholders. Before this sum was received (1826-7), our Government had made application to the British for a mutual stipulation, by treaty, to return fugitives from labor. But, though Great Britain, through her colonies, was then a slave-holding nation, she peremptorily declined the proposed reciprocity. The first application for such a nice arrangement was made by Mr. Gallatin, our Minister at London, under instructions from Mr. Clay, as Secretary of State, dated June 19, 1826. On the 5th of July, 1827, Mr. Gallatin communicated to his Government the final answer of the British Minister, that "it was utterly impossible for them to agree to the stipulation for the surrender of fugitive slaves;" and, when the application was renewed through our next Minister, Mr. James Barbour, the British Minister conclusively replied that "the law of Parliament gives freedom to every slave who effects his landing on British ground." Yet a Democratic House of Representatives, in 1828, (May 10), requested the President "To open a negotiation with the British Government, in the view to obtain an ar 7" ART. I. All territory, places, and possessions whatever, taken from either party by the other, during the war, or which may be taken after the signing of this treaty, shall be restored without delay; and without causing any de rangement, whereby fugitive slaves, who have taken refuge in the Canadian provinces of that Government, may be surrendered by the functionaries thereof to their masters, upon making satisfactory proof of their ownership of said slaves." A Presidential Election was then imminent, and neither party willing to provoke the jealousy of the Slave Power: so this disgraceful resolve passed the House without a division. In 1826, Joel R. Poinsett, our Minister to Mexico, acting under instructions from Mr. Clay, negotiated with the Mexican Government a treaty for the mutual restoration of runaway slaves, but the Mexican Senate refused to ratify it. In 1831 (January 3), the brig Comet, a regular slaver from the District of Columbia, on her voyage to New Orleans, with a cargo of 164 slaves, was lost off the island of Abaco. The slaves were saved, and carried into New Providence, a British port, whose authorities immediately set them at liberty. And in 1833 (February 4), the brig Encomium, from Charleston to New Orleans with 45 slaves, was also wrecked near Abaco, and the slaves, in like manner, carried into New Providence, and there declared free. In February, 1835, the Enterprise, another slaver from the Federal District, proceeding to Charleston with 78 slaves, was driven in distress into Bermuda, where the slaves were immediately set at liberty. After long and earnest efforts on the part of our Government, the British Cabinet reluctantly consented to pay for the cargoes of the Comet and Encomium, expressly on the grounds that Slavery struction or the carrying away of the artillery, or other public property originally captured in said forts or places, and which shall remain upon the exchange of the ratifications of this trea ty, or any slaves, or other private property." DESTRUCTION OF A FORT IN FLORIDA. still existed in the British West Indies at the time their slaves were liberated; but refused to pay for those of the Enterprise, or any other slaver, who might be brought on British soil subsequently to the passage of her Emancipation act. Importunity and menace were alike exhausted by our diplomatists down to a recent period, but to no purpose. Great Britain stubbornly refused either to unite with us in a reciprocal surrender of fugitive slaves to their masters, or in paying for such as, by their own efforts, or through the interposition of Providence, might emerge from Amer. ican bondage into British liberty. Our repeated invasions of Florida, while a Spanish colony, our purchase of that colony from Spain, and our unjust, costly, and discreditable wars upon her Aboriginal tribes, were all prompted by a concern for the interests and security of the slaveholders of southern Georgia and Alabama, whose chattels would persist in following each other out of Christian bondage into savage freedom. Gen. Jackson, in 1816, wrote to Gen. Gaines with respect to a fort in Florida, then a Spanish possession: "If the fort harbors the negroes of our citizens, or of friendly Indians living within our territory, or holds out inducements to the slaves of our citizens to desert from their owners' service, it must be destroyed. Notify the Governor of Pensacola of your advance into his territory, and for the express purpose of destroying these lawless banditti." Gen. Gaines, for some reason, did not execute this order; but a gunboat, sent up the Apalachicola river by our Commodore Patterson, on the 27th of July, attacked and destroyed the fort by firing red-hot shot, exploding its magazine. The result is thus summed up in the official report: 177 ‹ Three hundred negroes, men, women, and children, and about twenty Indians, were in the fort; of these two hundred and seventy were killed, and the greater part of the rest mortally wounded." Commodore Patterson, in his official letter to the Secretary of the Navy, expressly justifies the destruction of this fort on the ground of its affording a harbor "for runaway slaves and disaffected Indians:" adding, "they have no longer a place to fly to, and will not be so liable to abscond." The resistance interposed by Gen. Cass, our Minister at Paris in 184041, to the treaty negotiated between the Great Powers, conceding a mutual right to search on the slave-coast of Africa, with a view to the more effectual suppression of the SlaveTrade, though cloaked by a jealousy of British maritime preponderance, was really a bid for the favor of the Slave Power. The concession, by our Government, of the right to search, since that Government has passed out of the hands of the devotees of Slavery, is suggestive. It was American Slavery, not American commerce, that dreaded the visitation of our vessels on the western coast of central Africa by National cruisers, intent on the punishment of a crime which had already been pronounced piracy by the awakened conscience of Christendom. In fact, so long as more than one hundred members of Congress were chosen to represent, to advance, and to guard, before all else, the interests of Slavery, and one hundred electoral votes were controlled, primarily, by that interest, it was morally impossible that our Government should not be warped into subserviency to our National cancer. A 'peculiar insti |