{"character_count": 5917, "word_count": 1021, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9746000170707703], "ccnet_perplexity": [588.2000122070312], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
ficultieS Whcl2hreateneu most SERIOUSLY lle peace of the country. Nor has any opportu- nity been lost for enlarging the commerce Of the country, and giving new markets to our agricultural and manufactured products. If the country has not reaped full fruition of benefit from all the Treaties thus negotiated, ii surely has not been the fault of the Admin- istration. The loss of two of these Treaties through the action of the Senate, cannot but be deplored by me as great public calamities By the Treaty with the German States, we had opened the way to more extended commerce with 27000,000 of people, in our cotton, tobacco, rice and lard, at duties on tobacco, rice and lard greatly reduced, and with a stipulation for the free admission of cotton while we had agreed to receive at somewhat reduced duties articles from those States which entered into the most limited competition, if at all, with a few similar artl- cles of American product. The Treaty was particularly interesting from the fact, that for the first time, after repeated struggles on the part of my predecessors, 10 accomplish re- duction of duty on tobacco, the Government had succeeded in doing so. ltwas negotiated under resolutions originating with the tobacco States, and with the presumed sanction oi Congress. who had raised, 1t Is believed, the mission to Vienna, from a second to a first rate mission, with direct reference to the to- bacco interest, and had also appropriated sum Of money, some years ago, 10 enable the Executive to employ in Germany to acquire information as 10 the tobacco trade, the ser- vices of which agent had only ceased short time prior 10 the negotiation ol the Treaty. My hope sill however is, that the benefits of the Treaty and the Treaty itself may not be lost to the country. think 1t proper to add that there was no design to deprive the House of Representatives of any rightlul and con- sttutiona action over the subject, which il might properly exercise. It was, on the con- trary, my intention to have submitted the Treaty, and all that appeared calculated to ea- cidate it, to the House of Representatives, fl 1t had been ratified by the Senate, for such ac- ton as they might have deemed it proper to adopt-a course pursued in all cases in which the action of the House is required to vote supplies of money, or lul ilany other object falling within the scope of their power.

 In negotiating the Treaty for the ahnexa- ton of Texas, which was rejected hy the Senate, motives have been aseribed to the Administration which had no place in it's mind or heart. One gentleman, occupying prominent place in the Democratic party, whether for good or evil it does not become me to say, has assigned in anaddress recont- Ey delivered in Missouri, two prominent mo- lives for it's negotiation lst, Personal ambI= ton, and 2dly, purpose 10 dissolve the Union. Mir Clay also, in a recent letter written to the editor of a newspaper in Ala hama, has called the Treaty ufamous and ascrbed to it, in it's origin, sinister objects.

 rcpel both their assaults upon the Treaty and it's negoiators. What object of mere personal ambition in any way connected with office could have influenced the Admin

 istration in negotiating the Treaty The public archives furnished the strongest req sons to believe that the Treaty would have met the unqualified approval of both Mr. Clay and Mr. Van Buren. While the one was Secretary of State to MT. Adams, and the other to General Jackson, each in his turn attempted 10 obtain the annexation of Texas. Mir. Clay's negotiation was carried on with Mexico in the third year of her Revolutlon- ary struggle, while Spain regarded her as a revolted Province, and her armies were in possession of many of the strongholds of the country. What reason, then, could have had for supposing for an instant that a treaty with Texas, after eight years of aetu- al independence, with no Mexican soldier within her territory, and subject only to oc- casional border Interruptions, could or would have mel with opposition. from him or his friends and meeting with no such opposi- ton on the part either of Mr. Van Buren or Mir. Clay, and their friends, 1t would puzzle a sounder casuist than profess to be, to con- eeive in what possible way it could have in-

 errupted the relations of those two gentle men, who stood at the moment at the head of their respective parties. and looked upon by all as competitors for the Presidency, It is well known that, when the negotiation for the acquisition of Texas was commenced. and up to period succeeding the signing of the

 Treaty, 1t was my confident conviction, ex- pressed to many, that 1t would, from the cir cumstances 1 have stated, receive the sup port of both MT. Clay and Mir. Van Buren, so that neither would be affected by its ne- goiiation.

 If it had been charged that the Administra- uoti Was ItoiuptCu u9 Nle dliipltlol oI SCOUT ing the greatest boon to the country, and the whole country, i'll the acquisition of terri tory so important in itself and so nseparably connected with the interests of every State

 in the Union, and every interest of the Union, would have plead guilty, without moment of hesitation. confess felt ambitious to add another bright star to the American con stelation. It would have been source of pride to me, if that measure had been carried, to have witnessed from the retirement that awaits me, the annual expansion of our coast

 wise and foreign trade, and the increased prosperity of our agriculture and manulac- tnres, through the rapid growth of Texas, which would have followed the ratification of the Treaty. Yes, freely confess that

 this would have furnished me an uniaiiing source of qualification to the end of my life.

 should have seen also the Union of the States becoming stronger and stronger thro' their reciprocal aaeetion-local jealousies and fanatical schemes and seheners alike