TO GEORGE McDUFFIE. ESQ
{"character_count": 5165, "word_count": 916, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9527999758720398], "ccnet_perplexity": [757.7000122070312], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}


 Senator from SouH Carolina.

 My DEAR McDUrrIE: Youmustfind my apology for this public communication, in the relations of our old and valued friend- ship, and the interesting subject which con- stitutes it's sole topic.

 On reaching this place last evening from Texas, read for the first time, hefolowing extract ol recent letter from Mir. WEBSTER, to some of his friends in Massachusetts:

 | frankly avow my entire unWillmgness to do any thing which shall extend the slave ry of the African race, on this continent, or add other slape-holding States 10 He Union We have slavery already amongst us. The constitution found il amongst Us i, it recognized it, and gave 1t solemn guarantee To the full extent of these guaranties we are all bound in honor, in justice. and by the con- stitution. But when we come to speak of admitting new States, tte subject as- s7tmes 0p entirely dDcrem aspect. Our rights and orr duties are then both different In my opinion, the people of the United States acW not consent to bring new, vastly extensive and Sldrc-holdmg country, large enough for half dozen or dozen States, into the Union, Ia my opinion ateg ought mol 10 conSent 10 it''

 We cannot misunderstood this remarkable manifesto. Whilst 1t asserts broadly that no slaye-holding Siate is again to be admitted within the pale of the Union, 1t leaves by necessary implication the door open without limit, to the admission of those in which do- nestle slavery does not exist. In othesF words he tells Us, when we adopted the fed- eral constitution we permitted you to come into the confederaey with this taint of moral leprosy. We must stand by our bargain.- We will, however, contaminate our house. hold no further with such associates T.!

 The meanest rhite slave who crawls in his cowardice and seryiity among Us can giyeno other interpretation to this anathema It must come to this complexion at last.

 When this doctrine is ayowed, when this brand of Cain is put upon our foreheads, what is and what becomes of our situation Remember, too, this language comes from a man of mark. From < voice potential ''- from one who is at once regarded as the Nestor and Demosthenes of that part of the Union which lays claim 10 the largest share of the virtue and intelligence of the country.

 For one, however much may be satisfied of whatthe United States must lose by yreiect ing the proposition for the annexation of Texas, yet if she should be repulsed from considerations of political power on which parties may fairly take antagonist ground, l should be content that this question like other public questions, should be decided by the arbirament of the public will, with a due re- gard to that spirit of compromise whichlorm- ed the constitution. But the principles of exclusion, as ayowed by 1Ir. WEBSTER, (and doubtless he speaks for a party which has taken its stand) involves insult and defiance to us at the south. In one word that we be- long to C morally degraded caste.

 l ask, my friend, as men can we stand this2 Even if we have a craven willingness to re- main in the house of our fathers, insulted and reviled as long as we are permitted to abide, what security have we that we shall not at last be kicked gnominiously out of doors and sink to the level of our own slaves? With all possible moderation allow me to ask, if this is the ground on which Texas Is to be excluded from the conlederacy, have we any other alternative but ANNEXATION OR DISUNION There are times and oe- casions in which the best discretion Is to be found in the highest courage, and if slave holders are not fit to be admitted into the Union, aCe are not # t0 be Here. The ar qument can have no other extent but this.

 Humble an individual as am, desire my position in relation to this subject not to he misunderstood. 1 have hitherto taken no partsin the battery of this question. To the best of my recollection, have neither writ ten to Mir. CALHOUN, yourself, nor single member of the South Carolina Delegation on the topic. Ido not even know your opinion, intimate as our relations have been. have been restrained by considerations of peculiar delicacy. have large pecuniary claims on the government of Texas, and desired no distrust of my motives. Besides, l procured the recognition of Texas from the first and most powerful nation on the face of the earth, and from two of the second rate powers of Europe, and co-operated in obtaining that of the King of the French After assuring these powers that Texas desired 10 be a sovereign and independent State, 1t was not for me to take a prominent part in measures which were 10 place her in a subordinate sphere, ny contributing to a reversal of my own assur- ances.

 But if the ground on which Texas is 10 be excluded from the Union, is the ground as sumed by Mr. WEBSTER, the question of An nexation itself, sinks absolutely into compa- ratye insignifcance. The Union is, in fact, dissolved, if the principle assumed is allowed to bear the bitter fruit of is insult and inius- tice. That is to say, if the sordid cultivation of cotton, rice, sugar and tobacco, has left one impulse of manly pride and courage in our bosoms.