{"character_count": 6214, "word_count": 1078, "ccnet_language_score": [0.968500018119812], "ccnet_perplexity": [826.5], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
50 far from feeling opposed to the termipation o


slavery by all lega&safe, and constitutional means


none ceuld rejoice more heartily than myself tc
see it thus ended the world over; and among the


whites as well as blacks; among the disfranchis


ed, the serfs and paupers of Europe, and even the


dark Hindoos, as well as the sable sons of Afri
ca; not conhniag my sympathies TO color or name
but to real suffering and degradation among the


whole human race, and to theiE.relief, by intro
ancing gradually superior state of Intelligence,


religion, and rights, rather than by rash crusade
against law and order, and the public peace
g. The annexation is disapproved by others, be-


cause considered Unconstitutional But asthe pro.


vision for introducing new States was altered in


Its progress through the convention, so as to leave
the language broad enough to include territory
without well as within our original limits and
as the admission of Louisiana Arkansas, and


Missouri, since, into the Union, though not en-


braced within our old boundaries, besides the pur-


chases of Florida and Louisiana as territories


have taken place, this question should be regard
ed as officially settled in favor Of annexation.
In reply to- some objections which have been


urged against The admission of the whole terrific
ry of any State, rother than part, and of its
sovereignty we'll as territory, the principles in


volved in the above decisions and the language of


the constitution and the precedents are all broad
enough to include the whoIe-and they thus ac-
COIu Will WIldI Is usage Ol OlDeI


federacies, both in Europe and South America.


Nor is any sanction to such admission required


under our constitution, and the principles of pub


lie law, except the consent of those ceded on the
one hand !; and on the other, that of Congress, by


proper laws and treaties. And if the people and
the independent Republic of Texas are, for this
reason, not as competent to unite with US entirely,
as they to cede only part of their territory,
then the absurdity would seem to follow, that they
never can, be competent for admission into the


Union,- though recognised by Mexico. and no
shadow of war existing, till they become qualif-
ed by abandoning their independence, repudating
repubiicansm, and as servile dependency or re-
conquest of the monarchs of Spain or Mexico,
be sold merely as portion of their territory TO
the United States


Lastly, this measure is opposed by some from
fear that such step will subject us to war with
Mexico, or some other foreign power.


But the right Of Texas to cede, and the right
of the United States to accept her territory, and
admit it into the Union, without producing any
exposure to just war from any quarter, is, in my
opinion, clear.


In the purchase of Louisiana, we obtained with
inrher limits Texas. certainly as obtained
"the island of New Orleans" according to the
opinions of such jursts and dpomatists as Jeffer-
son, Madison, Monroe, Livingston, Clay, and
even Adams, in 1918; and. as since developed, of
Don Onis himself if not CT the Spanish govern.
ment. But we having ceded it away by treaty
ratified in 1920, the revolution from that year
until 1924 breaking out, and ripening in all the
Spanish provinces west of US each acted and made
constitutions for itself, like ourselves after l776,
as independent States. Texas aad 0aahuiIa max
ing one for themselves, joined the Mexican con-
federacy in 1924 as an independent State re-
manned faithful to it till dissolved ten years after
by the usurpations of Santa Anna refused as
was their right to unite in his new consolidated
government, built upon the ruins of the former
and has remained and acted since
MS she began, an independent sovereignty. What
duty then to Mexico has she violatedt The
wong is on the other side. Where is the justice
for Mexico now TO hold, or now to rule her
And more especially on the principles now set up
by Mexico when, twelve years before the latter
was recognised by Spain independent Texas
had established her own constitution, and two
years before that event had separated enlrcly from
he Mexican confederacy.


But if this view of the case should appear in !
my respect Objectionable, there is another, which
shows the annexation to be proper and just.


As we purchased Texas in 1903, within the
Limits of Louisiana, and then engaged by treaty
10 admit her into the Union ''as soon as possible"
consistent with the principles of the constitution,
and to allow to her inhabitants all the rights and
of citizens, how could we rid our
selves of that engagement without first getting
he consent of France, with whom the treaty was
made, or of Texas, which was the party more
immediately TO enjoy those benefits? Yet, with
,ut asking the consent of either we unadvisabIy,
n 1919, undertook to cede Texas to Spain. The
'ession, being without authority, seems m law to
nave been imperfect inoperatire, and Texas to
.emain still possessed of right, which she now
virtually asks, to enter the Union, and to have
conferred on her people all the privileges which
he original treaty promised In this apect of the
:ase, if we would not violate good faith and the
anctity of treaties, ought to execute the stpu-
alton first made, by now admitting her; and if
nv injury should result therefrom to Spain or
Mexico, under the provisions of subsequent trea-
les not being able 10 be longer fulfilled, the a
mount of damage ought to be paid to those who
suffer But when it is recollected that we have
levcr guaranteed the integrity of the territories of
either of thcm and the very defective title if any,
which either Lretains over Texas, there could not
oe great difficulty in estimating this damage.


So far assregards war on this account, the just
,ause for one seems to be on the part of France
,r Texas if we do not reannex the latter, rather
nan on the part of Mexico, if we do. The So
emnity and inviolability of the treaty of 1903
must be quite as great that Of either 1919, 1925
,r any other more recent.


But, finally, supposing that both these views of
he subject are untenabe and, for the sake of ar
yument, indulging moment in the idea that Tex
6 T