Texas National Register. (Washington, Tex.), Vol. 1, No. 18, Ed. 1, Thursday, April 10, 1845 Page: 3 of 8
eight pages : illus. ; page 13 x 18 in. Digitized from 35 mm. microfilm.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
i'ftSfiV"'
April 10
TEXAS NATIONAL REGISTER
33r
L
139
The subjoined communication came to hand
bv last rani!. We have cheerfully admitted all
we have received from the friends of annexa-
tion in favor of the measure because we were
anxious that a question of such grave impnit-
ance should be freely and fairly discussed.
While we have claimed and exercised the right
of speaking1 our own opinions we have never
denied or refused it to others. As to the argu-
ment of the " Citizen of Montgomery" drawn
from the provisions of the Tyler treaty we
maybe allowed to remark thut by the ruiific.-r
tion of that treaty the United States would
have performed a conclusive net which with the
resolutions upon which you have animadvert-
ed with so much severity anddndignation but
take it for granted the first section is correct-
ly quoted by yourself in the following words:
the Congress of the United States 'doth con-
sent that the territory included within and
rightfully belonging to theRepublie 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 as-
sembled with the consent of the existing gov-
ernment in order Unit the same may ho "ad-
mitted as one of the States of the Union."
In this resolution I can see nothing either of
arrogat.ee or assumption nor any thing else
than a plain and as 1 think an equitable pro-
concurrence of the' Government and pconlc of position submitted !iy the Government of the
United spates to receive Texas into the Union
as a State with a Renublicnn form nf fimwu.
ment if the existing government of Texas will
consent thereto thus deferring to the judg-
ment and action of Texas the "determination
of the most deeply interesting subject that has
ever been agit;iied in either of the countries.
Should it be affirmatively the condition prece-
dent is that our government should undergo
such transformation as is indispensably neces-
sary to our admission into the Union." Can it
be expected that we are to be received as a
State with our present form of government?
t)r is it preferred and is it supposed that the
people of Texas would prefer that we should
he appended to the government of the United
States as a territory and kept in territorial
bondage as long as it may comport with the
convenience or interest of that government
thus to keep us ? I am in favor of annexation
on any honorable terms but I would prefer the
assurances given the pledges made or if you
choose the language used in the resolution
"the consent" that we may be received into
the Union as one of the States if we desire it;
having a Republican form of government
without which it would be more than folly to
expect admission.
Thus I think I have shown that this mem-
ber of the proposition is as unexceptionable as
under all the circumstances could have been
expected. And unless you disregard the
plighted faith should be made as proposed in
the resolution ofthat government from whence
v uhu ui.-iwii our iunuamentai princi-
ples; in whose citizens are to be found a kin-
dred people within whose limits you and I
first had conferred upon us the blessings of life
of light and of liberty you too when your
mind shall have regained its equilibrium from
which it has been driven by the vigor of its
impulses will 1 am constrained to think be
led to the same conclusions.
But Sir we are required to cede to the
United States "all our mines minerals salt
lakes and springs also all our public edifices
fortifications barracks ports and harbors
navy and navy yards docks magazines
arms armaments and all other property and
means pertaining to the public defe'uee. But
of these weighty matters Iwill speak in my
next communication.
Truly your friend
A Citizcn op Montgomery.
this Republic would at once have admitted us
into the Union In our view tlsere is a
marked difference between the ratification of
such a treaty and the naked consent embraced
in the resolutions of Mr. Brown. The Tyler
treaty however was rejected by a vote of 35
to IG ; and if it was less favorable and less li-
beral to the people of Texas than the resolu-
tions lately passed and now submitted to this
Government is it reasonable to think that
when the " final action" is taken the result
will be much different 1
Montgomery March Sth IS45.
To the Editor of the Register:
Sir I regret to see from your paper of the
22d nit. which I did not get sight of although
a subscriber and living but a short distance
from you until a few days since that you are
out and armed capapie against annexation ;
and in a very handsomely written article would
fain induce us to believe that annexation on
the terms j)roi)oscd in the joint resolution
passed by the lower branch of Congress of the
United States would not only be ruinous and
impolitic but unjust and dishonorable.
Entertaining different views on this great
national question and believing that no public
detriment can result from a discussion of its
advantages and disadvantages its present and
prospective influences upon the happiness
and prosperity of the political community of
which you and I are members I will with your
" consent briefly notice the grounds ot your op--position
and will endeavor to reply to some of.
the most prominent arguments advanced by
you to sustain them.
In the discussion of the question of annexa-
fiotf and the beneficial results which I trust
( will he able to show will flow from its consu-
tnntion I will take as I pass along a glance
at the great and 'pre-eminent blessings in ex-
pectancy which are to be conferred by British
munificence if we decline the acceptance of
the proposition should it be submitted in due
form embraced in ike resolution before alluded
to; certain am I that the terms embraced in
the resolutions are infinitely more advantageous
to Texas than those contained in the Tyler
treaty rejected by the Senate. By the latter
we were required to surrender to the govern-
ment of the United States all our public do-
main without the reservation of a single salt
lake or spring gold silver copper or lead
mine together with all and singular and every
part and parcel of our public property of what-
ever kind or nature soever it may be and in
consideration of this unreserved transfer of
every thing which belongs to us as a nation it
was expressly stipulated that the public lauds
of Texas should be pledged for the payment
of her debt to the amount of ton million dol-
lars if it were that much if more the rest and
residue thereof would inure to the especial
use and benefit of the state of Texas whilst
the government of the United States would be
the recipient and proprietor of whatever part
of the public lauds or other property ot Texas
not necessary to the paymeut of the-amount
specificaly designated in the.treaty: nor would
the situation of Texas have been different if
.her public debt had been more or less than ten
millions dollarsfor in either event as has been
before remarked the remainder of the public
lauds or other property after the payment of
the specific amount often millions or the en-
tire amount of the national debt should it he
less than that sum of which if it be reduced
ut its equivalent there cannot be a doubt
would by operation of the treaty have become
the property of the United states.
But you object especially to the joint reso-
lutions because we were not by their provis-
ions to be admitted as a state(?) Permit me to
'enquire if we were to be received as a state by
the provisions of the treaty of 1844! or were
we not to be annexed as a territory only.? It
is only to turn to that notahle -instrument to
satisfy yourself that such were its provisions.
Having taken a brief view of the prominent
characteristics of the treaty of which you were
amongst the most abler advocates it may not
b improper to consider for a moment the
terms of the joint resolution which' if acceded
to by Texas would as you are inclined to
think bnn shame and degradation on us as of the three Whig Senators who made tro the subordinate
a nation. Iclnnot now Jay my hands on the I majority of one iu that body; ' Telegraph.
Your Republic is placed 'in very difficult
circumstances by our conduct. J heartily
wish you a safe and honorable deliverance
from them all and future prosperity. I was
glad to see your President's proclamation re-
voking letters of marque and reprisal as I
have always deemed your 'pacific policy wise
and prudent. All you need for national hap-
piness is quiet: to be Jet alone till your prai-
ries are cultivated your cities built up and
your commerce extended".
The only argument which is calculated to
deceive the mass of your population is that
in regard to the benefit tp be derived from our
sugar duty on your admission into the Union.
This admits of a ready answer conclusive to
all judgments but that of the sugar cultivator.
It is that the encouragement of the produc-
tion of this necessary of life is to be paid for
at the 'expense of the consumer; and for one
cultivator of sugar iu Louisiana there arc foe
hundred and more consumers. This is a sin
gular species of benefit to h community com-
posed as yours is of 100000 people who eat
sugar ami 100 or less that produce it. The
100000 arc taxed for the benefit of the hun-
dred. So with regard to an argument current
here the land speculators or holders are for
annexation because it will increase the price
of their lands. Can this be done by transfer-
ring to lands now unproductive the $177000
in the shape of direct taxes which must be
collected for the support of your state govern-
ment? If so it is a new and patent mode of
mending one's condition by increasing his
taxes and compelling him to sell the article
taxed to pay the tax for it produces no income.
The following table compiled from official
sources exhibts the debts of the several States
of the American Union on the 1st January
1845 and their annual expenditures respect-
ively for the support of Government for the
year 1S44.
Nacogdoches March;2I IS-io.
States Debt Expenditures.
Louisiana $16850000 $616684
Alabama 13432555 120098
Arkansas 3500000 163005
Tennessee 3260416 261416
Kentucky 4419000 366379
Georgia 1725133 295.999
South Carolina 3182992 347704
Missouri ' 92261 193307
Illinois 14633869 190000
Indiana; 14445500 98037
Ohio 19276751 194374
Maryland 15I86'735 490000
Maine 1732097 289087
Massachusetts 7272339 462844
New York . 28263412 1003753
Pennsylvania 40703866 S5S3l5
Michigan 4.077177 455.IS9
Virginia 7360932 884293
Mississippi 7600000 140000
Florida 4850000 100000
Total $212700000 $7530484
There is a good deal of opposition to annexa-
tion and especially on the grounds of Mr.
Brown's bill ; but still the question would at
this lime be carried by a large majority unless
our independence was certain.
Gonzales County March 27 1S45.
Your paper is read with a great deal of in-
terest by your old acquaintances and friends ;
and I assure you with regard to the policy
which Texas should pursue in relation to an-
nexation I can add that as far as I can learn
a majority think alike with you.
Galveston 2Sth March 1845.
U. S. Government $19076188 $32958827
This gives the whole present debts of the
several State?; of which eight with the Terri-
tory of Florida making nine (marked) have
failed and Pennsylvania has again resumed.
-
Gen. Simon Cameron has been elected to
the United States Senate by the Legislature
of Pensylvania in the place of Mr. Bucha-
nan nowSecretary of State. In this election
a portion of the democratic party united with
the whigs. But we are assured that the senator
elect is a warm personal friend of Mr. Buchan-
an and has been always identified with
the democratic party. '
Which together with its Yucatan appurtenances
we should consider ourselves uxcccdinsrlv fortunate to
?
get rid of.
Correspondence of the Register.
New Orleans March 24 1845.
Your great men will have to come out
openly and zealously in defence of your coun-
try's dearest interests and therefore iu oppo-
sition to the joint resolutions of the two
Houses. Their last act provides an alterna-
tive in a new negotiation on the subject : but
In this place the anti annexationists form a
majority but 1 do not know the relative
strength of the two parties.
EvcTry man whom I have spoken with of
whatever party seemed unwilling to yield the
Rio Grande boundary for the sake of annex-
ation or any thing else. If the West shall see
that the United states are almost certain te
yield to the Nueces and perhaps eveu more
(of which 1 have no doubt) I beliove they
would not fail to io against the measure en
7iiassc as numbers would alsp in other sections
One great object with the United States in
advocating annexation is to gain possession
of all the waters of the Mississippi with all
the lauds dependent upon them. This they
would gain should they acquire no more than
the country east of the Brazos. One chief
ground in that Union for opposition to the
measure is the fact that Mexico does not con-
sent to it. Now suppose the opposition from
various causes should have increased when
our new constitution (not fixing the boundary)
is presented and that Mexico should in the
mean time offer the compromise of consenting
if-the country west of the Nueces the La Baca
or perhaps the Colorado be restored to her.
In order to carry the measure a similar com-
promise would take place between parties in
the United Stales and the West would be sold
to Mexico iu order to acquire the East. If
those who are most deeply interested shut
their eves to this state of things a worse ca-
it is believed here that Mr. Tyler instructed
Mr. Donelson with the approbation of Mr.
Polk to tender to your acceptance the reso-
lutions which first passed the House of Rep
resentatives known as Brown's resolutions hunity than was brought by Woll or Vasquez
ituhi omer .instructions lie may have of ' mav await them.
course I know nor. " :
Is it notroiuewhaf surprising that among The main object must be to ascertain
all the sueeches arainst nnnPTminn ; .o n whether the terms offered by the United
States Congress aud all the newspaper discus- States wil1 be accePtabIe .t0 a majority of
sions.no notice has been tnkmi f i. t.M. the neoDle ot lexas. I his can be ascer-
.. .. ... uiv I I
Some persons have entertained fears that
President Jones being secretly opposed to
annexation will neglect to call Congress
until the period for the regular meeting of
that body iu November next. And in the
meantime he expects through the medium
of the "Washington Register to excite so
much prejudice among the people against
the act of the United States Congress that
they will elect members of the next Con-
gress with instructions to reject the terms
offered by the United States. We have no
such fears. We shall not question the
patriotism of the President : and until we
have proof to the contrary shall confident-
ly look to him for a fair candid and open
line of conduct at this momentous crisis.
We venture to predict that he will be gov-
erned by no narrow minded and illiberal pre-
judices nor resort to any hypocritical arti-
fices to dupe or delude the people. His
voice will we doubt not soon be heard and
it will we are confident be found in uni-
son wifh that of the People. Even if-he
is dissatisfied with the law as passed by the
United States Congress he will have suffi-
cient respect for the People ot Texas to
submit the question promptly to their Rep-
resentatives and if their decision should be
fou ud favourable he will undoubtedly pro-
ceed with alacrity to carry out the measu
res necessary for its consummation. Telegraph.
visions of the subsisting treaties between Tex-
as and England aud France. I mav be in
"error ; but suppose with the former you have
exchanged the right ot search a measure
zealously resisted by the United States and
with the other you have by treaty fixed the
lann on wines ana siiks ot rrencli produc-
tion at a rate varying essentially from our
present policy : what iu case of annexation
is to become of those treaties? In the view
of commercial men they at least afford a
ground to those in our Congress who may
have been ignorant of their existence to
change their votes at the next session when the
question may come up jor their final action
and it is very certain that one change at
least adverse to annexation has been effected
by ttlie substitution of Reverdy Johnson of
oammore in cne senate; tor Mr. Merrick one
tained only by the direct vole of the people.
It is important that the vote should be ta-
ken at as early a period as practicable;
but the question arises how is the question
to be submitted to the people 1 Shall it be
done by the proclamation of the President?
by an act of Congress ? or shall the People
acting in their sovereign capacity call
meetings in each county and decide the
question as they decided the question of a
separation frojnMexico? The lattercourse
would be a revolution but the .uestion
OF ITSELF INVOLVES A REVOLUTION.
Whichever wav the Governmernt may turn
uto this complexion it must come at last."
The Governmernt at present established is
to be changed and a new Government is
to be established under a new Constitution
subordinate to that of the United States.
Fannin co. Feb. 20 1845.
Mr. C. DeMerse Dear Sir For the pur-
pose of correcting any error into which the
community may be led by persons unfriendly
to the Grant of General C. F. Mercer oftht
29th ot January 1844 and to remove al!
doubts about the running or surveying the ex-
ternal boundaries of said Grant I ask leave
through your columns to say to the public
that said boundaries have been surveyed and
marked. The northern boundary line run
niug due east from Peters Colony 48 miles
thence nouth 65 miles to a post and a hickory
marked XXX. thence souih 27 deg 15 W
30 miles to the lower bank of Cedar Creek
on the West side of the river Trinity to a
mound on which there is a post near which
stands two ash trees and two black oaks
marked C. F. M thence south 79 deg.3 W
6Q$ miles to the mouth of Aguila Creek
on the east side of the river Brazos thence up
said river to tht Indian boundary line to the
south boundary line of Peters' Colony and
around said Colony east and north to the
place of beginning.
It was threatened and by some much was
expected to be done by the late session of Con
gress to impair or injure said Grant but I as-
sure the public that notwithstanding the many-
attempts made nothing has. been done to.affect
said Grant iu any way. .
D. ROWtETT
Sub Ajrent for C Tl fiercer.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Texas National Register. (Washington, Tex.), Vol. 1, No. 18, Ed. 1, Thursday, April 10, 1845, newspaper, April 10, 1845; Washington, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth80112/m1/3/: accessed July 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting The Dolph Briscoe Center for American History.