A literary fraud unmasked : how it falsifies history and traduces the South and how it is imposed upon the public

fo the citizens of Greene County
18441

Ga
F390
16

To the citizens of Greene County. 3
12 p. 23cm.

1. Texas - Annexation to the U.S.

BHo

GU66

Special Collection!

''' ' '** "i v r_ ', ,*'.'''

' "*''".

", ,!' #;

Ihe Ctfizero of fxreene County.
At an Annexation Meeting held at the Court House in this
County, on the 4th inst., a Committee was appointed to draft a Pre-
j amble and Resolutions, which, upon being presented and read by
the Chairman of that Committee, were rejected by the meeting.
The majority of the Committee have deemed it advisable to lay
the Preamble and Resolutions before the people,.together with 'an
Address in support of.their position, to all of which, they respect
fully invite the candid consideration of their fellow-citizens.
Whereas, a crisis has arrived in the affairs of the country that calls upon the people of the South, to arise in the magnitude of, their power in opposition to the machinations of wily politicians ' who are undermining the constitution and liberties of our country, by.pandering to the sectional prejudices of a fanatic set; and Whereas, a large portion of the people of the North are drop ping their local differences and uniting in one common bond of oppesitkm to the annexation of Texas to the United States as peculi arly a southern measure, thereby showing their determination to oppose southern interests and measures, even to the trampling under foot the Constitution itself; and Whereas, this meeting deprecating the schisms and divisions that distract us, and so neutralize our power that no respect is paid our claims or rights by aspirants for office, it proclaims the necessity of uni" ted 'southern action, as in the maintenance of our rights we but maintain the constitution inviolate that as we allow . our rights infringed, in the same degree are we enemies to constitutional liberty,-there being no difference between the abolitionist that strides over the constitution to strike .down our . domestic relations and the Southron who quietly submits to it: and while it becomes our painful duty to acknowledge that these divisions do exist that one State is expected to balance another" in their blind devotion to party, so that all their rights do not amount to a feather in the consideration of a general canvass, we utterly deny that it is a want of patriotism in the people, but the ,frait of designing politicians who have foisted themselves upon ' parties and pledged the people to support their respective leaders; Therefore:
Rtsglved, That it is the deliberate conviction of this meeting that the liberties of the cou/itry, are jeopardised by a scramble fot office, and that if the people continue to slumber over their rights, content to echo the signals of party leaders, it will end in a dirge to the constitution and a throne to consolidation and monarchy. ,. : Resolved, That we declare it as our honest conviction that up- *' "... on-.all questions where the Northern people unite. against the, ^ South they" do but combine to -wrest from as. bur rights as guar- -
, by.the constitution; .and wherx arrayed ae-enemies tolthevS'

constitutional rights of any Sovereign Slate, they are de facto dis- . -
unionists.
Resolved, That the South by permitting herself divided by de- . . signing men, violates the first law of nature, to wit: self preserva- "
tion, and that this meeting publicly proclaims its determination to burst the fetters of demagoguism and unite cordially with all who are willing to shelter themselves under the broad folds of the con
stitution for the protection of southern rights.
Resolved, That the People of the North in uniting with the ab olitionists against the annexation of Texas, do but aim a fatal blow ?.t domestic slavery, and that one side of this question -we
have not seen, nor can we conceive of a sound argument against immediate annexation.
We urge this measure upon the ground. That national policy
forbids us to yieid up the strong holds of the country; in evidence of which we adduce the united voice of the American people a- .
gainst England taking possession of Cuba, a few years ago, to which we had no shadow of claim, our objections being based alone upon the right to protect our coast against a grasping power,,
and as Texas is of far more importance to us than Cuba, and would be of infinitely.more danger to our commerce and domestic relations if possessed by England, and as it is now offered upon amicable terms, we should not "lose the golden moment," thereby subjecting ourselves to the risk of doing battle with our brethren of Texas for the dislodgment of British power. On the other
hand should England open free trade with Texas, the evil to the
United States, would be still greater, as England would not be bound for her acts but would stand up as an ally and defender,
having possessed herself of the greatest desideratum in her nation al policy for the last half century; to wit: a cotton growing coun
try; then by a rate of duties excluding our cotton, we should be left to the home market alone for its sale and the consumption of its fabrics, in competition with English goods smuggled in on some
fifteen hundred miles of Texas line free of duty the years crop is usually estimated at 24,000 bales the home consumption at GOOD bales, showing that it would take four or five year's to con sume onecrop: with the British manufactories depending upon us
for supplies it is barely at a living price, let them quit our market and it will run down to one or two cents, and negro property be- " ing valueless, the present policy of covert abolition would be eff ected of necessity. That such is the policy of GREAT BRITAIN is clearly stated in the despatches of Lord Aberdeen, dated Dec. 22d. 1843, as follows, "Great Britain DESIRES and is CON-
STANTLY EXERTING HERSELF TO PROCURE THE GENERAL ABOLITION OF SLAVERY THROUGHOUT THE WORLD" and "wishes to seeslavery abolished in Texas;" . it has been expressed in the House of Lords that "Great Britain is. irresistabfy anxious for the abolition of slavery in Texas, as the v consequence would be, that it must ultimately end in the aboli
tion of slavery in America;" to. which Lord Aberdeen responded,> /

"Her Majesty's ministers would press this matter." Sir Robert 'Peel urges that by discriminating duties on sugar he could force > a treaty with Brazil for the abolition of slavery in that country,
and says "In Cuba, in the United States in the Brazils, there is a ferment on the subject of slavery which is spreading and will spread. It is impossible to look to the discussions in the United States of America and especially in the conflicts between the Northern and Southern States without seeing that slavery stands on a precariousfooting." This being the avowed policy of England, it only remains for usto show that it is also the policy of the "anti-slavery" men of America, in order to demonstrate beyond question that there is a deep and dangerous conspiracy against the South, that can only be checked by "nipping in the bud." Mr. Adams says, "I deem it the duty of Great Britain, as a Christian nation, to tell the Texians that slavery must be abolished; that it shall not be planted there after all the efforts and sacrifices that have been made to abolish it all over the world. The an nexation of Texas will be a leading topic next session, but I will oppose it with all the vigor and talent God has given me. If sla very is abolished in Texas, it must speedily fall throughout America,and when it falls in America, it will expire throughout the world."
In proof that we have not misunderstood this language we adduce the views of our Secretary of State, Mr. Calhoun to Mr. Packenham 'Minister of her Britianic Majesty. "The undersigned has again referred, in conformity with the request of Mr. Packeuharri, to that portion of Lord Aberdeen's despatch to which he has pointed his attention, with the view of rebutting the inference of the President that Great Britain has endeavored through her diplomacy to effect the abolition of slavery in Texas, by making it one of the conditions on which Mexico should ac knowledge her independence. He is constrained to say, that on a careful perusal, that he can discover nothing in it calculated in . any degree to weaken the inference of the President. His Lord ship avows that Great Britain wishes to see slavery abolished in Texas; that she would rejoice if the recognition of that country by the Mexican government should be accompanied by an engagement on the part of Texas to do so, and that she feels it to be her . duty to promote sncha consummation. If to these emphatic dec larations the fact be added, that Great Britain, at the very time they were made, was engaged in negotiating with the Mexican government, in order to obtain from it the recognition of the inde pendence of Texas, and that she declined to unite with France and the United States in a joint effort for that purpose, it is surely hot a forced or unfair inference to conclude \jsjjUuttrdilUiftttin the aid of other evidence, that she used, in con^l^^AyWfoWl/^^sgiti-' mate means of diplomacy,-backed by her great itiflllgic^to effect an object in the accomplishment of whKh,|s|(3 RlftiWwbdgfesJfshe: ..took so deep an interest, and to whichwhe dbviwsrijT attaches so v much importance. Nor does the-underalgj^^r^^raM^if^ttecla-'.

rations of Lord Aberdeen, that Great Britain would not interfere unduly, or with any improper assumption of authority, that she will counsel, but not^eek to compel or unduly control either par
ty, as in any degree weakening the inference of the President, nor does he consider the remarks of Mr. Packenhain as a denial of its truth." Then having made our case a clear one, and it being evident that these influences are regarded as the balance of pow
er in these United States, we advocate immediate annexation as a measure of defence, as well as right and interest, being no longer able to doubt that both British and American abolition de
sign the blow at Texas to recoil upon our heads. &nd we put it upon higher ground still. Santa Anna stipulated
with the Texan authorities to end the war, upon condition that his life should be spared, which he knew was justly forfeited by the butchery of the Texan prisoners in violation of the terms of surren der, and claimed, as the supreme Chief of Mexico, to have power
to do so, leaving the terms to be dictated; the refusal of the Mex ican Congress to recognise his authority when a prisoner of war, was invalidated by his accession to power again, the authority of despotism not emanating from the people, but the Dictator. Then it appears thzit Texas has been acknowledged independent by the highest authority in Mexico, the pledge having been kept near nine
years, (except some piratical depredations) and as Mexico cannot
go to war without the consent of Santa Anna, and as he has sup,pressed her deliberate resolves to do so from the time of his return to power, we are justified in' the conclusion that he will adhere to
his pledge and accede to any measure that shall make Texas free and not weaken him with the M-exicau people: annexation to the United States will relieve him from all the odium of yielding the
ground and the responsibility of acting in opposition to the aristo cratic and church party.
find we put it upon higher ground still. The principle of re
cognising"^ government as de facto sovereign as soon as its sepa
ration ripens into such a state of national independence, as to be no longer in danger of subjection, has been the settled policy oi the American continent; it was acted out fully in the purchase of Lou isiana from Bonaparte so soon as he arrested it from Spain ; it was acted out by Mexico hi receiving Chiapas when it revolted from Guatamalia, upon her mere wish for annexation, and before her.
.independence was ever recognised by any nation whatever; this was the policy acted upon by Adams, Clay, Jackson and Van Bujen in '25, '27, '29, '33 and '35, in negociating with Mexico for
Texas when Spain was still at war with Mexico and held a title
direct from the United States; and it is our honest conviction that nothing has-5f,ltnuch operated to change this American policy as
the inflneiice orabolition.
Jlnd.uie.p.iltrt upon .higher ground still. We claim that Mex- . icoVneve? had. any ?> Jh$ to^ Texas, and sustain it not only by the fact's, but by the- arguments of the opposers of annexation; they
.claim that we cadi get aar just title .to Texas but from Mexico as the

parent government, and that upon the principle of her right from Spain : the independence of Mexico was not recognised until De cember 2Sth, 1836; Texas revolted in 1835, the battle of San Jacinto was fought April 21st, 1836, and her independence acknowl edged by the then, and now, highest authority in Mexico, which made the separation complete; in the treaty with Spain the rights of Mexico are acknowledged to all the territories in her possession Texas not then being in her possession could not have been in cluded : nor do we admit her ever to have been in the possession of Mexico ; Georgia is an integral part of this confederacy, but to whom does she belong ? not to the President, nor to the Senate, nor to the house of Representatives, nor to all combined, but to her sovereign self; so of Texas : the colonies were separate and dis tinct under the Spanish crown, as were the British Colonies of America; under oppressions from Spain they revolted, setting forth a declaration of independence as did our fathers,-and formed a confederated republic with a constitutional compact, by which a number oisovreign States entered into an alliance in the form of a general government, there being no bonds of union but the con stitutional agreement which Texas rilled to the letter; and which when destroyed by the usurper being no longer of any bind ing force upon her, she resolved back to her original state of sov. reignty, as would the State of Georgia were the constitution of the United States burned and a despot to build a throne upon its ruins.
Therefore, further Resolved, That the interests of Texas are our interests that a " blow at slavery there will but recoil upon our heads, and that we will resist it to the death come'from what quarter it may. Resolved, " That if the Senate of the United States, under the drill of party leaders, should reject the Treaty of Annexation, we appeal to the citizens of Texas, and urge them not to yield to a just resentment and turn their eyes to other alliances, but to believe that they have the warm advocacy of a large portion of the Amer ican public, who are resolved that sooner or later the pledge of the Treaty of 1803, shall be redeemed and Texas incorporated into our Union."
Resolved, That we. request our Senators and Representatives in Congress to use their best endeavors to procure the ratification of the Texas Treaty.
Resolved, That we urge upon all the counties in the State to call Annexation meetings for the purpose of eliciting truth and exciting interest in this all important question.
ADDRESS. In support of our cause, we psesent a few additional facts and arguments; and begin by inviting particular attention to the position of the first resolution,^ to the danger from a. general scramble for office. Mr. Webster stated that the anti-slavery party .would oppose the annexation of Texas. Without a part of that-
vote, no one could expect to be elected President. The Southern-,

Slates, being fixed in parly drill, so that no fears were,entertained, but that they would remain, as fixed, under any and e'very aspect of affairs, the anti-slavery vote was to settle the destinies of par ties hence the struggle between Mr. Van Buren and Mr. Clay for this balance of power. But let us go back to the motive power at its origin.
The world's British Abolition convention resolves, thatjslavery shall be abolished throughout the world ; and the delegates from the United States returned full of this project, having reported that the abolitionists of the United States held England bound, as a Christian nation, to strike down slavery in Texas, as by the same blow, she would sweep it from the Southern States. JVlr- Van Bu ren and Mr. Clay seeing where the power lay, catch the impulse and communicate it to the wireworkers at Washington they to the State leaders they to the demagogues in the respective coun ties they to the master managers in the districts, who attempt to drill, and thus make the honest yeomanry of the country dance to the tune of British abolition, brought through so many variations that its source is unknown to them. The most they wish the peo ple to see, is the fuglemen at Washington dancing "populorum jigs" without .fixed principles, save that, what one does, the other is not to do. The most they wish them to know is, that this one dances for Mr. Van Buren, and'that one for Mr. Clay, and so on, and that they are to follow suit according as they belong to either.
Another engine of corruption, in the same channel, is a hireling press: and we have but little else in this country. How are the honest people to get truth from hacks to do party service? Cor ruption seems stamped indelibly upon our press, but no difference where it draws'its principles, only give it a. parly brand, and it goes upon the wings of the wind the more base and corrupt, the more powerful to break down opposition : and hence the exertions . to disseminate the filthier sheets of the day. Against this kind of party corruption, we most solemnly protest. (See note A.)
We calf attention to the undeniable fact, that Great Britain -does desire the abolition of slavery throughout the world that she
does admit her efforts to make such terms ivitk Mexico, as to abolish it in Texas that she docs claim, that its abolition in Texas MUST BE followed by its abolitionin the United States. Upon these avowals that cannot be misunderstood, we are bound^
to thwart her plans for abolition, or by tacitly allowing them to move on, permit them to be consumated.
What shall we do ? resist it at the threshold, or welcome its in.fluence to make a President upon the hope then to be able to repel it? If the latter, may it not be a porcupine in our bosom never to be dislodged ? or shall we acknowledge its right to work its course, ' if no "undue influences" are used?by which we understand, no ef forts to have us butchered at the midnight hour. If we acknowl edge the right of any power, exterior to the State, to even meddle with Slavery, we yield up all the ground upon which it is based.. Let England come with sword in hand to liberate our slaves, and -

: she will meet a hearty welcome at the point of the bayonet, from one undivided phalaux south of the Potomac. But let her come sly and insidiously, with the specious shrewdness of her national policy, and she will find, yea, has already, thousands of apologists in our own country has already some men in slave States who seem disposed to traduce the character of our own Secretary of State, for .taking exceptions at these open avowals of design upon
our domestic relations, and thereby become the apologists of the British Minister.
But soothing language has been used to persuade us that we *'should have no fears." Duly a few weeks ago the citizens of Cuba had "nofears," notwithstanding abolition for three years had been diligently planning for their extermination. No! they had no fears till the truth burst upon them that the negroes were armed with weapons and boxes ofarsenic, ready to begin the work of death, and continue it until all were murdered, except the aboli tionists among them, and such of the younger white women'as they intended to keep for wives. But the plot was haply discovered just in time to save the whites; and that, which a little jealousy might have detected in the germ, and blasted at a word, has now
to be exterminated by gibbeting 25 to 50 negroes daily, with the. jails and barracks full, and no knowing when the work of death must cease. This was British policy, to be ended by establishing a
British Consul as King over the negroes within ninety miles of our coast. The same policy is going on in New Orleans and other southern cities by agents, whose business it is to report the true state of the slaves, their satisfaction with slavery &c., and yet " no
fears." We repeat, that it. is not open abolition we fear, either from Eng
land or America, but that diplomatic policy that steals upon us while unaware of danger, and which must ever end, as it has done in St. Domingo, in the destruction of one race or the other. We have given indubitable evidence of the existence of this policy at home and abroad; and now we ask for it a careful investigation by the unprejudiced, and a refutation of it at the hand of the de voted partizan.
In support of the position that Texas is independent by the high est authority in Mexico, to wit: Santa Anna, we adduce the argu ment of Mr. Benton for the independence of Mexico. He discov'ersthat O'Donojoii recognised the independence of Mexico inlS21, but fails to tell that Mexico was held as belonging to the Sovereign of Spain, he having full power to appoint a Governor that he sent out O'Donojou as a Governor General only that on his arrival he found all lost, and the country declaring itself independent, and that Iturbideybrcerfhim to these terms. He gets over the disavowal of the act by Ferdinand, by contending that he was unable to hold his
transatlantic power. There is this difference in the two cases one was an unauthor
ised act of an agent, disposing of the possessions of the Sovereign rthe other an act of the Sovereign himself, yielding up his preten-

s

. '-

sions to a usurped right. The King upon the throne could not re voke the act of his agent, according to Mr. Benton then much less could Mexico revoke the act of her Sovereign, who ruled and con tinues to rule with despotic power. All his arguments, for the validity of O'Donojou's act,based upon the inability of Spain
to reconquor Mexico, are doubly as strong for the act of Santa An na; Spam thought herself, able, and even attempted with some show of success; but Mexico knows her inability too well to risk
even an effort to subdue Texas. In absence of all evidence of war between Mexico and Texas, a
reputed armistice is bruited about as proof positive. Let us show the facts from the correspondence of the different authorities. At the instance of the British Charge d'affairs, Santa Anna agreed to receix-e commissioners from Texas to treat with others of Mexico. Torael the Minister of war of Mexico, proclaimed that " while coming, staying, and going, they shall be protected by the laws and authorities of Mexico." Mr. Van Zandt and Mr. Henderson in forms Mr. Calhoun, that "in pursuance of this the Texan Commis
sioners were appointed and proceeded to Mexico. They wereinstiu;t.=d that no arrangement made by them would be binding until approved by the President. When the agreement enterediuto by them was submitted to the President of Texas, he declined approv ing it. Referring to Texas as a department of Mexico was a suffi
cient reason for its prompt rejection. The negotiations having then terminated, and this agreement being held to be null and void, there
is at present no existing arrangement of any character between Mexico and Texas." To make the most of it possible, it seems to have been but an effort at an armistice, the prime object of the pro clamations being to recognise its beginning and to guarantee safe
ty, &c., to the commissioners. Tornel sustains this'view: after the proclamation of Houston, giving instructions to Gen. Woll, he
says: "Jn order that the armistice~be concluded, &c., you will give official notice to Samuel Houston that he should appoint Commis sioners, who, jointly with those chosen by yourself, may form the
stipulations," &c. The first rule that he lays down for the action of these joint Commissioners is, that "the armistice shall be submitted for the approval of the Supreme Government. "If the proclama tions for preventing injury or molestation to the Commissioners
constituted an armistice, what is the meaning of their appointment and these specific rules to govern them in the "stipulations" of an armistice to "be concluded?" If concluded in violation of pre scribed rules and rejected by the reserved authorities, could it be
other than void ': If void, could it be an armistice proper ? But it is left for the wise politicians of the United States to know-
more of the affairs of Mexico and Texas than their own Ministers. Mr. Benton in his celebrated "Three Resolutioas," says, ("the ar mistice having expired") but in his speech holds it up as yet ex isting. If in existence, where is it and what are its provisions ? If
"expired," what were its provisions, and when did it expire ? These are questions that none can answer ; yet we are told that it

.

9

has both an "expired" and an actual existence, upon which hangs the evidence of a great national war. This is the only reliable point left with the opposers of annexation in the South, and we state thus m'uch in reference to it, to show how hard they are
strained to get up a pretext for that opposition. It is argued by some that we shall find Texas .a great rival in ag
ricultural productions. We meet this with a quotation .from Mr. Clay on a- previous occasion, "There is something so narrow, and selfish, and grovelling in this argument, if founded in fact, some thing so unworthy the magnanimity of a great and a generous peo ple," that we "scarcely have patience to notice it."
There can be no facts or arguments brought against our position as to the settled policy of the country, save the fact, that Adams, Clay and Van Buren have struck for a change; which, though a killing argument to blinded partizans,has failed to reach us. Admit them to be correct now, and it either convicts them of attempting 15 swindle Spain out of her just rights, or of being grossly ignorant
of national alliances. Put them on either horn of the dilemma, and it disqualifies them to rule now "with a nod." If so dishon est and unfair as to violate the integrity, " public faith and treaty stipulations of the United States," are they now to be trusted ? If ignorance be plead, who will expect wisdom on the down grade of life? There were no evidences of selfishness then--now there are. A change is absolutely necessary to secure the anti-slavery vote".
We present other precedents, for their principle of action then, _ and ours now. Baton Rouge and the western part of West Flor
ida was taken possession of by revolutionists and transferred im mediately to the United States. At another time, Mobile and the adjacent country was obtained in the same way, an officer being stationed, under orders from the General Government to" receive and protect it; regardless of the rights of Spain. In these cases, the revolutionists could not have held their conquests for weeks even, being only able to overcome a little spot at a time and trans fer it (before the Spanish Government knew of the rebellion) to those who were able to protect it. Under a sec ret act of Congress, Mr. Mad
ison ordered the G-overnor of Georgia to station troops on the south ern frontier of the State, and to receive from the revolutionists, should they succeed, East Florida and extend to it the necessary protec tion. We obtained our title to Louisiana from France, without her
having gone into actual possession, nor could she have ever done so. The termination of her war with England, justly gave all her right into the hands of the latter power our title was by.purchase
from Bonaparte, England being ignorant that he set up any pretentions to this part of Spanish America. If not cleftly right in treating with Texas, let us go back and make amends for these "outrages" upon "public faith and treaty stipulations'.'' Croakers
for justice can never be credited for honesty of purpose on a hal fway business. We are not to take Texas, because the Despot has
not consented. We had no such consent for these enumerated ac-

'., : .

'

io ' ': '-^"' v ; ,

quisitions; then let us restore them to thefr proper owners accord
ing to this doctrine, and give to foreign powers the control of our western waters. The idea is supremely absurd, but legitimate to the position.
Our Declaration of Independence sets forth as unalienable rights of men, "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" that "to se- . cure these rights, governments were instituted amon? men, deriving their just powers from the CONSENT of the GOVERNED; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these
ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to in stitute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organising its powers in such forro, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness." On this point Mr. Clay says: I "maintain, that an oppressed people are authorized, whenever they can, to rise and break their fetters. This was the great principle of the English revolution. It was the great princi ple of our own. Vattel, if authority were wanting, expressly sup ports this right. We must pass sentence of condemnation upon the founders of our liberty -say that they were rebels traitors, that we are this moment legislating without competent powers, be fore we can condemn the cause of Spanish America."
The citizens of Texas modeled their Declaration after ours ; and if it be accorded that " life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" were as much "unalienable rights" to them as to us that with them, as with us, "government should derive itsjust power from Ihe'consent of the governed," it only remains to show that the gov
ernment under which they lived was " destructive of these ends" in order to establish their right "to alter, or abolish it."
Anglo Americans were invited to Texas under a pledge to allow them a written constitution and Republican government. In lieu of these liberties, the usurper, Santa Anna, required them to aban
don their homes or submit to a military despotism and the- more despotic exactions of a Catholic priesthood. They were required to legislate in Coahuila out of their territory, where their rights were trampled upon by hostile majorities in an unknown language. To remedy these evils, they complied with the provisions of the national constitution and presented a State constitution with peti tions for its acceptance, which was contemptuously rejected and , their commissioner imprisoned. They failed to secure the right of trial by jury. They were denied the benefits of a system of educa tion. They suffered arbitrary acts of oppression and tyranny from
the military. They were deprived the right of representation, their Legislators being driven out by force ot arms. Their citizens were carried from the country for trial, by military detachments. Their vessels and property were seized by desperadoes commis
sioned for that purpose. Their arms were required to be given up. The savages were incited to massacre their frontier inhabitants. .After enumerating these and many other wrongs, the Declaration
says: " The necessity of self-preservation, therefore, now, decrees our eternal political separation." These oppressions were destruc-

tive'of " life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," and made rev olution necessary by our own doctrine.
Had Jefferson, Franklin, and the Fathers held the doctrine of the present day, based upon-the "divine right of Kings," that no pow er can "institute new government" but the King, our Declaration would never have been penned, nor we liberated from the British yoke. The oppressions upon the United States were less than those upon Texas accord to the latter the same rights and princi ples, and she is as much a sovereign power as any nation on the globe. Mr. Clay in speaking of the emancipation of South Amer ica, says: " Not a Spanish bayonet remains within the immense extent of the territories of the La Plata to contest the authority of the actual government. It is free, it is independent,it is sovereign. It manages the interests of the society that submits to its sway. It is capable of maintaining the relations between that society and other nations."
To deny these principles, is but to claim that there is no power and right but what emanates from the Crown. It is but to claim that we were slaves after the Declaration after the revolution, and after all other nations recognised our independence, and that we should have continued to be slaves yet, had not King George III. liberated us. Those who hold these doctrines which deny the right of the people to "institute new government" except by the consent of despotism, strike at the very foundations of republican ism, for by such consent a Republic never did, or ever will exist.
We submit the question to an intelligent public, not doubting but that theirs will be a correct judgment. Our confidence is strengthened by a knowledge of the fact, that previous to the let ters of Mr. Van Buren and Mr. Clay, we were all agreed; and be lieving that such influences should cause men to consider well what they do, we have but little fear that "the sober second thought" of the people, will bring them out where duty, interest, and self-protection demands them to stand. The combined influ ences of abolition, in England and America, are upon us; their press in both countries, say, "Texas shall not be annexed, while slave ry exists." The Texas press, says, if the United States reject her, she must fall into the arms of England. The United States have now rejected her; and the only hope for our domestic relations, is in making such public demonstrations, as to hold Texas in confi dence till we try again >vhat can be done for our common inter est. The necessity for action is now greater than ever! if the bal lot box of the whole South does not tell for annexation, the antislavery torrent, that will pour in upon us from England through Texas, meeting the same fanatic current from our own States, will engulph us in remediless ruin. Seeing what the anti-slavery
press throughout Christendom says upon this subject, and kndtving that there is where the opposition started, and seeing how it is aDbOouUtBTto WenHdA, THOTOWDOC. AN SOUTHERN^^*^HnB=r=sfe-6N^GEK
Greene County, June 18th, 1844.

^S',oo*fa^#ntWu^uS f^&^ta^3frtsfH ^'.jtWlSf. f:.is*i.*^'f'^Jt.-yti. ^it/^T!St$iat^kVfe:^/kfW it^'d*^^j.ggr^wt,tf3^*i^.!>W -^Vs.*J

*'&

tr^',>'?';''>X/;^ t'',^%r-'iL'',;'-*-V?*>'V-;^.',,'f1-;'A^*y<>''-ewBta-DtAltecwhaohsaWoaeptaaAi<AAoQtAubQomQUn'Ia*on*ryUnef>M.g.t..n..t.aetolc.-.eshioUBsdaMel"hYpIttDnTTeantBan4oop"ydt;,etbghokpah,opooMaboahttaeeeeetanetabonhtitoco,nwshesrbebeiepoapotancn8teted.k;eitoDhldebatwttnhetoi;pestwhvefnyqkOoecpuhreifo'ApntMsabebplporicopn-cpeocsnooinppeBaorasgtMahKmttWtleoa.tpue.kitehsireartotinr&oei'm.inutysttcoroS8nedqfohhyht'rfadTaktteuaeibpeeatndJpobitthrttsrjbtrhhhtkvaieeouseateerytieydonsinadB*snsdnsRodlm.snttoMwg^b,e'oifhaecoeittwclaamO'flgnwoo;idorsJeittdhtteshndrtihfdetfiofayieeftoatanplbafshrf.sn,b<rtiwr.ebooo.io^peykaooatsnlroahaohsse.tsIfatfWe;-hstJoes.etefpvaoawodspppw'oubebit:tpoorn-tadyiaoawbfioosairnecreTebl,cfellaruetnhfm(ditbteoylicnidyiwdcrbalc!coymoreaoeoyeuehhacfoy,;opdpoifDmforc'u-ni,dga..rbtamcc'n''e(gopieBta'e.bodrjmsaeeje.,t;ooipeosabnos;fndot'otW'i.iideitp<r^n&t\,obm-os;tlhi.Ibdiot,ittd-n,e;'.spehdfnyf'^e'ifSvatioeffd^aectsneiAtnfhy*eio;e,,hafni"dic,.j'cl,fnpto'*.;iu^.Vep,ji-cee|s*t**ujs^i',-h^he?.^o'j."t8.is|&ie'V"fv^ftitd'^'tb!i.t^"r.-B$"^:'*'1!n'^x;i^'.:p*,'1-^"Xjt,^.^','' '^n ^*'-i.'t^v^*^ri't?L'..-'1'"^.':.,'''.*.

:V '.

nd the mass of the people are yet ignorant agk going party man, is to he a slave.

^&"A
,v'i ^