OPINIONS OF GEN. ANDREW JACKSON,
{"character_count": 5540, "word_count": 987, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9708999991416931], "ccnet_perplexity": [701.9000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
been received, and with 1t the Madisoniau, containing Governor Gilmer's letter on the subject of ameXation-of Texas to the United States.

 You are not mistaken in supposing that have formed an opinion on this interesting subject. l. occupied much of my attention during my Presidency, and ] ana sure has lost none of its importance by what has since transpirad.

 Soon after my election in 1929, it was made known to me by Mr. Erwin, formerly our Minister at the Court of Madrid, that whilst at the Court he had laid the fouuda- ton of treaty with Spain for the oession oi the Hofidas, and the settlement of the boun- dary of Louisiana, fixing the western lmil of the latter at the Rio Grande,* agreeably to the understanding of Ffance--that he had written home to our Government for powers to complete and sign this negotiation; but that, instead of receiving such authority, the negotiation was taken out of his hands and transferred 10 Washington, and new treaty was there concluded, by which the Sabine and not inc Rio Grande, was recognized and established as the boundary of Louisiana.

 Finding that these statements were true. and that our Government did really give up that important territory, when il was at its option to retain fl, was filled with astonish- ment The right to the territory was obtained from France; Spain stood ready to acknoW- ledge 1t to the Rio Grande; and yet the au- thority asked by our minister to insert the true boundary was not only withheld, but in lieu of it, limit was adopted, which stripped IS of the whole of the vast conutB lying between the two rivers.

 On such q subject, l thought with the an- cicnt Romans, that Is was right never to cede any land or boundary of the Republic, but always to add 10 it by honorable treaty, thus extending the area of freedom; and 1t was in accordance with this feeling that gave our minister 10 Mexico instructions to enter upon a negotiation for the fetrocession oi Texas 10 the United States

 This negotiation failed, and 1 shall ever regret i as misfortune te both Mexico and the United States. BIr. Gilmer's letter pre- sents many of the considerations which, in my judgment, rendered the step necessary to the peace and harmony of the two coun- tries; bRt the point in 1t al that time, which most strongly impelled me to the course pursued was the injustice done to Us by the surrender of the territory, when t was obvi- GUS that t could have been retained without increasing the consideration afterwards given for the FlorIdas 1 could not but feel that the surrender of so vast and important q territory was attributable 10 an erroneous es- tmate of the tendency of our institutions, in which there was mingled somewhat ol jealousy to the rising. greatness of the South and West

 But forbear 10 dwell on this part of the history of this question: It is passed, and cannot now be undone. Ne can now only look at 1t as one of annexation, if Texas presents it to us; and if she does, do not hesitate to say that the welfare and happiness of our Union require that 1t should be ac- copied.

 If in military point of view alone, the question be examined, il will be found to be most important to the United States to be in possession of that territory.

 Great Britain has already made treaties with Texas; and we know that ar-seeing nation never omts circumstance in her eX- 1 tensive intercourse with the world, which can be turned to account ill increasing hei military resources, May she not enter into an alliance with Texas? and reserying Gas she doubtless wll) the north western bonn- dary question as a cause of war with us whenever she chooses to declare it, let Us suppose that, as an ally with Texas, we arC to fight her? Preparatory to such move she sends 10000 or 30,000, men to Texas organizes them onthe Sabine, where her sup plies and arms can be concentrated befor, we have even notice of her intentions makes lodgment on the Mississippi; cxcites the negroes to insurrection; the lower country falls, and with it New Orleans, and a servilt war rages throughout the whole South and l West.

 In the mean while she Is also moving ar army along the upper western frontier iron l Canada, which, in cooperation with tn, army from Texas, spreads ruin and havoc from the Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico

 Who can. estimate the national loss .wt may sustain, before such movement coult i be repelled with such force as we could or ganize on short notice

 Remember that Texas borders upon us on our west, to 240 of north latitude, and is our southern boundary to the Pacific. Re member, also, that if annexed to the United States, our western boundary would be tRe Rio Grande, which is of itself lortllication on account of its extensive, barren, and un- inhahiable plains. With such barrier or our west we are invincble The whol, European world could not, in combination against us, make impression on our Union Our population on the Pacific would rapidl, increase, and soon be strong enough for th protection of our eastern whalers, and in tn worst event, could always be sustained b! timely aids from the intermediate country

 From the Rio Grande, over land, larg, army could not march, or be supplied, unies from the gulf by water, which by vigilance could always be intercepted; and, to marci an army near the gull, they could be harras sed by militia, and detained until an organize, force could be raised to meet them l But am in danger of running into un necessary detail, which my debility will no enable men to close. The question is lul