{"newspaper_name": "The Arkansas banner.", "edition": "01", "page": "p4", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 5825, "word_count": 992, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9681000113487244], "ccnet_perplexity": [489.0], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
tions, and the defeat of the annexation of Texas to our Union as indispensable 10 the abolition of slavery there. She is too saga cious not to see what fatal blow It would give to slavery in the United States, and how certainly it's abolition with Is would abolish 1 1t over the whole continent, and thereby give her a monopoly in the productions of the great tropical staples, and the command of the commercial navigation, and manufactures ot the world, with an established naval ascen- dency and political preponderance. To this continent the blow would be calamitous be- yond description. It would destroy, in a great measure, the cultivation and production of the great tropical staples, amounting an- nually ill value to nearly three hundred mil- lions of dollars-the fund which stimulates and upholds almost every other branch of its industry, commerce, navigation, and manuiac- lures. The whole, by their joint influence, are rapidly spreading population, wealth, im- provement, and civilization over the whole continent, and vivifying by their overflow the industry of Europe, thereby increasing its population, wealth, advancement in the arts, in power, and civilization.

 Such must be the result, should Great Brit ain succeed in accomplishing the constant object of her desire and exertons-the aboli- ton of negro slavery over this continent and towards the effecting of which she regards the defeat of the annexation of Texas to our Union so important Can it be possible that Governments so enlightened and sagacious as those of France and the other great con- tinental powers can be so blinded by the plea of philanthropy as not to see what must inevitably follow, be her motive what 1t may, should she succeed in her object? It little short of mockery to talk of philanthropy, with the examples before us of abolishing negro slavery in her own colonies, in St. Domingo, and the Northern States of our Union, where statistical facts, not to be shaken, prove that the freed negro, after the experience of sixty years, is in far worse condition than for other States, where he has been left in his former condition No; the effect of what is called abolition, where the number is few, is not to raise the inferior race to the condition of freemen, but to deprive the negro of the guardian care of his owner, subject to all the depression and oppression belonging to his inferior condition. But, on the other hand, where the number is great, and bears large proportion to the whole population. it would be still worse. It would be to sub- stitute for the existing relation a deadly strife between the two races, to end ill subjection, expulsion, or extirpation of one or the other; and such would be the case over the greater part of this continent where negro slavery exists. It would not end there, but would. in all probability, extend, by its example, the war of races all over South America, includ- ing Mexico, and extending to the Indian as we'll as to the African race, and make the whole one scene of blood and devastation.

 Dismssing, then, the stale and unfolded plea of philanthropy, can it be that France and the other great continental powers, sec ing what must be the result of the policy for the accomplishment of which England is con stantly exerting herself, and that the defeat of the annexation of Texas is so important towards its consumation, are prepared to back or countenancc her in her efforts to effect either? What possible motives can they have to favor her cherished policy' Is not better for them that they should be supplied with tropical products, in exchange for their labor, from the United States, Brazil, Cuba, and this continent generally, than to be dependent on one great monopolizing power for their sup ply? sit not better that they should receive them allow prices which competition, cheaper means of production and nearness of market, would furnish them by the former, than to give the high prices which monopoly, dear labor, and great distance from market would impose, Is it not better that their labor should be exchanged with a new continent, rapidly increasing in population and the capa- city for consuming, and which would furnish, ill the course of few generations, market nearer to them, and of almost unlimited ex- tent, for the products of their industry and arts, than with old and distant regions, whose population has long since reached its growth?

 The above contains those enlarged views of policy which, it seems to me, an enlight- ened European statesman ought to take in making up his opinion on the subject of the annexation of Texas, and the grounds, as it may be inferred, on which England opposes 1t. They certainly involve considerations of the deepest importance, and demanding the greatestattention. Viewed connection with them, the question of annexation becomes one of the first magnitude, not only to Texas and the United States, but to this continent and Europe. They are presented, that you may use them on all suitable occasions where you think they may be with effect, in your correspondence (where 1t can be done with propriety) or otherwise. The President re lies with confidence on your sagacity, pru- dence, and zeal. Your mission is one of the first magnitude at all times, but especially now; and he feels assured nothing will be left undone on your part to do justice to the country and the Government in reference to this great measure.

 l have said nothing as to our right of treat ing with Texas without consulting Mexico; you so fully understand the grounds on which we rest our right, and are so familiar with all the facts necessary to maintain them, that It was not thought necessary to add any thing Tn reference to it.

 l am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant, ]. c. CAIUOITN

 Hon. VIM. R. KING, Sc.

 

 