University of South Carolina Libraries
to show that it was owing to its introduc tion, and the disclosures it made, that I was deterred from introducing them as lie statrs. The fact is not so. The session cunmenced the first Monday of- Decem ber, 1847, and Mr. Dix did not introduce the paper until the 26th of July, 1848, nearly eight months subsequent. and one month after I had fully discussed the prin ciples of my resolutions. Did he see,that all. this would have been manifest at once without a word from me, if be had given the dates ? and was not that his reason fur not giving them ? Col. Benion seems to lie conscious, that it was necessary for him to explain why lie had not assailed my resolutions. and tie base and corrupt motives he attributes to me for introducing them,- long before, and in his place in the Senate; ami ac cordingly. he has attempted to make one. He asserts that " Mr. Calhoun's resolu tions are -those of the Missouri Legislature. They are identical. One is copied from the other. When the original is invali dated, the copy is of no avail. I am an sweriag his resolutions, and choose to do it. It is just and proper that I should do so. He is the prime mover and head con-. triver. I have had no chance to answer him in the Senate, and it will not do to at: low him to take a snap-judgment upon me in Missouri, in carrying disunion reso lutions in my own State, which he has been forced to abandon in the Senate. Duty to the country requires me to answer hin,, and personal reasons re-inforce that public duty.'' His explanation then is. that notwith . standing his burning zeal to defend the Union and of his own character against these wicked resolutions. " he could get no chance before to answer them." What! could get no chance from February, 1847, until June. 1849, (ite date of his speech) a period of upwards of iwo years ! Could get no chance when they were first intro luced and discussed ? None during the loug session which followed and which lasted more than eight months? None during the long and ful-discussion on the Oregon Territorial bill, when the princi pies of the resolutions formed the basis of the argument on the side of the south ? None to reply to ine. who fully discussed, and I may say established them bry.and controversy? None during the discussion of the report of the select committee, of which Mr. Clayton was chairman ? None on the discussion of the bill from the Dlouse of Representatives, which applied the Wilmot Proviso to the Oregon terri tory, and which was passed by his vote and his friend Gen. Houston's? None during the whole of the last session, and still more wonderful, none in making his lest spceh ? I say none, for he confined himself to drnunciation and abuse of the resolutions, without even attempting to answer them. No, he never could get, and never can get a chance to answer them. For every other purpose he can get a chance, whenever he pleases. No one is better at getting a chance when he is disposed. He had no difficulty in get, ting a chance to pour out a torrent of abuse, to empty seats, against the late Ge. neral Kearney, day after day, for the greater part of a week, and that too just at the close of a session, to the'utter dis g'tst of the Senate, and at the hazard of defeating many bills then ready for final action. I might go on and repeat similat questions until they would fill pages. but enough has been said to prove that his ex planation is puerile and hollow. swer the resolutions, and cotld have made one, if Iho desired it at any time, but there wvere two reasons which prevented him. The first is, that althtough he had made up his mind to desert you an'd your cause be fore the introductionz of the resolutions, he saw the hazard, and was unwilling to take that step hastily. The Missouri resolu tions forced him to disclose his intentions, and to proclaim his desertion before-lie was fully prepared to execute his design, and hence the depth to which they have excited his ire. The other is, that he had too much discretion to address sucn a far rago ton a body too well informed to be im posed upon by old, stale and oft-repeated charges. lIe knew besides that they would have been promptly met and repelled, and thtat the antidote woul go with_ the poison. He knew this from experience. He had tried it before. It failed most signally. It was in the session of 1847, a few datys after I had intr-oduced the resolutions. In thtat attack he paraded. nearly in the same words, all that he has cenarged in this, about the Florida treaty, Texas, and almost every othter subject. lie had taken time atnd prepared deliberately. It was given out that ho would demolish me. Trhe Senate was crowvdedl by those who wishted to witness the sacrifice. I rose antd repelted off hand his charges. I leave those who were present to decide vith wh'iat effect. It w-as certainly not to his gratification or satisfactionz. lHe, did not even attempt a rejoinder. But what be comes of his apology, that he had no chance to reply to my resoluition ? They had been initroduced but shortly before, and theni ho had at full chance to answer them, Hie then assailed every act of my life, which lie thought hte could distort, so as to make a plausible charge against me. Why then omit to ans wer resolutions which he now holds up as the worst and most objectionable of all? Can any answer he given, except that he is either not sincere, in what he asserts, or that the time had not thten arrived, at which he could safely venture to betray you ? But, according to his own statement, he is impelled in making his attacks by pri vate grief, as well as public considerations. He says I 'instigated attacks on him for twenty years. I instigate atiackson him! Ho must htave a very exalted opinion of' himself- I never thought of such a thing. We move in different spheres. MtuI course is, and has been, to have nothing to do with him. I never wanted his support, nor dreadcd his opposition. He took the same ground in htis speech just referred to, and endeavored to establish the charge by what'putrported to bie an extract from a letter, wvhich he states wvas delivered to him by the same person unnamted, and was wvritten by an unknowvn person to an unkntown person, lie introduced it ito the Senate, in a manner to make the im pression that I ntas its author. I arose and asked him if he intended to assert that I forced to admit I was not. I then re polled his charge with a scorn which the t base insinuation, that I had any kuov ledge or conuection with it i hatever, de served. He was covered with confusion ; and yet he has the effrontery to introduce it again to the puhlic, accomp. nied with the same insinuation which covered him with disgrace at its first introduction. But the deepest inound, it seems, was inflicted by a statement in my address to the people of Charles:on, on my return home after the session of '47 and '48, th:it ie voted for the bill establishing the terri tory of Oregon, containing the principle of the Wilmot Proviso, and that he and Gen Houston were the only two southern mem bers who voted for it ; that without their votes it would not have been drfeaied, foi lowed by the expression of an opinion, that for so domng, they deserved the reprobation of the whole south. Neither of them have ever denied the truth of my state ment, nor ever can. Every word is true, as the journals of the Senate show. The statement itself is in plain language and free from extortion or exaggeration. The fact stated, related to official acts which it was important my constituents sh'uld know. In expressing my opinion I ab stained from impeaching tnives. All vas done within the rules of decorum, and -those that govern parliat.tentary proceed ings. Wherein then consists the offence ? I am at a loss to perceive, except the prin ciple be adopted, that the greater the truth. the greater the libel. It may be, tthatit was regarded as an offence because it was ell culated to embarrass him, and thwart-what he then meditated, and has since carried into execution-an open desertion to the abolitionists. I pass now to his next charges. Ie as serts that I gave away Texas, and to make it out lie asserts that Texas belonged to the United States. when the treaty with Spain was made, by which she ceded Flo rida to ns. lie claims that Texas was a part of Louisiana, and that its boundary extended to the Rio Grande; that it was all slave territory, and lorked to as the na tural outlet for their great increasing slave population; and finally, that it was sur rendered by the treaty of Florida made in 1819, during the administration of Mr. Monroe, of which I was one of the mem bers. On this statement he rests his charge that I gave away Texas. it is diflicult for one who lecks sincerity and is actuated by violent passions, to es cape the greatest inconsistency and contra diction, in defendiug himself or assailing others, in making a long speech. lenton furnishes a strong illustration of the truth of this position, and never more so than in making the above statement. In order to aggravate the act of giving away Te.as, which he charges ma with, he has made assertions entirely inconsistent with the grounds he took, and the course he pur sued while the question of the annexation of Texas was before the Senate. le now asserts that the boundary of Texas as part of Louisiana extended to the Rio Grande, when the treaty of Florida was made, in the very teeth of the assertions he made, when the question of annexation was be fore the Senate. In the speech he made in May. 1844, on the treaty raw anneving Texas. he assorted, that " The Texas which we acquired by the treaty of 1803, (that of Louisiana ) never approached the Rio Grande, excepting near its mouth."| To show that " by near its month !" he did not mean that it touched the river, he said, speaking of Tamaulipas, one of the States of Mexico, that ' it coveretd both sides of the river, from its monwth for some hundred miles up." He assertedl in the same. seech that all New Mexico, Chihuahua, Goahuila, and Tamaulipas madec no part of the Texas whtich we0 acquired by the treaty of Louisiana. Hec estimnates the part belonging to Mexico lying on the east side of the Rio Grande to be 2000 miles long, (the whole length of the river.) and some hundred broad, and concluded by saying "he washed hishandsof all attempts to dismember the republic of Mexico by I seizing her domninions in Newv Mexico, Chihuahua, Coahtuila and Tamaulipas.": These were his assertiotns, solemnly madec, and as he st ates after the fullest exa-' mination, when his ob'ject was to defeatI the treaty which I negotiated with the Commissioners of Texas for its annexa tion. For that purpose he attempted to 1 show that the treaty covered a large p~art of Mexico, which never belonged to Texas, although the treaty specified no boundary. and left the boundary open on the side of Mexico, intentionally. ini order to settle it by treaty with her. But now, whren his object is to show I that gave away Texas by the treaty of Florida, lie holds a very difereut language. lie does not. indeed. say in so many words, that Te~xas covered the wvhole region from the Sabine to the Rio Grande, for that woculd bave been too pely and plainly a direct contradiction to what he contended for when his object vas to defeat annexation ; but he does the! same thing ini a more covered anti objee- I tionable way. by using language that could not fail to mnake that impression o't all who eard him, or may read his speech. i lie goes farther. In ordier to aggravate the charge against me, he becomes appa,. rently a warm advocate of slavery exten sion,'as lie calls it, anid uses strong Ian uge to show the valute of Texas to the outh in that respect. Hie says, it was all ' slave territory ; that it was looked to as the atural outlet of the Southern States with their increasing slave population, and that t was large enongh to make six large States, or ten common ones. Such is his anguage, wvhen his object is to prove tha'. gave away Texas. You would supposo from this language that he was a slavery xtensinist, as he calls all those who de fend your rights, anti that he placed a higha ale on Texas, as an otilet lfor your slaves population, and to preserve your just in fluence and wveight in the UJnion. One, aoudi conciuude, t~hat with these feelings and views, he wvould have been a strong I advocate of the treaty that was rejected by the Senate, which proposed to annex Texas without any restriction whatever in rela tion to slavery, so as to leave it, to use hise an language, as the outlet to your in-t reasing slave population. Instead of that 1 he made the most strenuous effurts to de-t feat it, and contributed not a little towardis rl it. Hie went further. After its defeat, he mnovedl a string of resolutions, containing provisions for its admission, and amnong nto two parts, as nearly equal as possible y a line running north and south, and to lMot the east,.ru to you, and the western a the abolitionists, 1o the entire exclusion fyour " inereasing slave poptilaitfn." It an hardly be, that he forgot all this in de ivering his speech; but, if not, what natchless effi tntery and inconsistency to nake the charge he does against me? 'here would indeed seem to be no limits o his audacity and inconsistency. Pnd lie ippears to have selected Texas as a proper ield to make the greatest display nr :hem. ,s if to cap the climax after having so de itierately asserted, and so strenuously naintained, that the western boundary or Texas. did not extend to the Rio Grande, Ie placed, a short time afterward, his vote )n record, that it did-by voting for the Aill declaring war against Mexico. The bill assumed it did in asserting that the Alond shed on the eastern bank was blood hed tin the A merican soil, which could not be unless Texas extended to the Rio Grande. If it did not the war stands with, ut justification. If it did not the march ,f our army to the Rio Grande was en in -asion of a neighboring country unautho rized ly the Constitution or law ; and yet Col. Benton, who had but a short time be rore declared solemnly, after full investiga tion, that all the east bank of the river rr some hundred miles wiide belonged to ho Mexican Republic; and emphatically :eclred, ie " washed his hands of all at remits to dismember the lexican Repub lic, by seizing her dominions, New Mexi :o. Chihiahnua, Coahuila, and Taumauli pas," voted for the bill i H went further. He reported it as the Chairman of the Com mittee on military affairs, in total disre. ,ard of his own motion made the day be Fore to refer so much of the Message of the President, as relates to declaring 1%ar to its appropriate Committe-that on Foreign relations. Comment is unnecessary. But I am not yet done with Texas, nor with the effrontery and absurdity of the charges lie made against me, in refereace Lo it. lie says I gave it- away-gave it away by the Florida treaty. -flow could [ pive it away by that, or any other treaty ? T'he power to make treaties belongs to the President, and never was invested in me. [t was-at the time invested in Mr. Monrne. as President of the United States. Nor lid I negotiate it. I was only:one member if the cabinet, and the youngest of the whole. How could I, then, give away Texas? To provo the charge he resorts to his old patent reasoning; that I was all powerful-so much so, as to make the President and all the members of his cabi net mere cyphers. He would have it, that they wore but tools in my hands; and I alone was responsible for all that was done. Well-if he will have it so, I meet the charge directly. It is not true, that the Florida treaty gave aw; I Texas. I did not believe, when the treaty was made,. that Louisiana extended, or ever did ex end in the Rio Grande, or- even to the iueces, and that it was uneertain whet her t extended beyond the Sabine. I knew t was claimed to extend far beyond. even 0 the Rio Grande; just as we claimed he whole of Oregon, and with just about s little title. I have seen nothing tochange his opinion: On the contrar. if my in ormitt"s~-~ State Department, obtained within he last few years, which conclusively rove, that Louisiana never extended ant nch beyond the Sabine. lIn reply to Col. Benton's assaults as to ho treaty, I annex an abstract from a peech itt answer to him, when he made he same charge, in 1847. It was an off iatd reply to a premeditated attack. "'['he K,'orida Treaty, forming another' tubject of attack, fagured also on that ne-, :asion, is connected wit h annexation; and hat lie saiJ now is but a repetition of hat he said then. Hoe then, as now, made ne responihle for that treaty,-although I sas but one of six members of.Jr. Alon -e's cabinet, and the youngest of its tmem >ers-responsible, without advancinig a article of proof thtat I even gave tt my upport or approbation. He rests the charge n some disclaimer, as it seems, that the leu Secretary of State (Mr. Adams) htas, it somae time made, that he was not res >onsible for thte treaty. The Senator may ec right as to that; but how can that, by ny possibility, show that I une respon si-i ~e I But I am prepared to tike mty full are of responsibility, as a member of ~Ir. Mlonroe's cabinet, withouthaving any articular agency in forming tie treaty, or nfluence in inducing the cabimet to adopt t. I then thought, and still ibnk it a good reaty; and so thought the Strate of the Jited States; for if my memery does not< leceive me, it received everyvote of the< Senate. -[A Senator: " yes ivery vote.", .t then received the unanimnousvote of the . enate, promptly given. O0 course. ifi hat treaty was the cause of tle war with dexico, as the Senator seemsto sitppose, his body is as much the authtr and cause if the war, as the individual a whtom hec s now so anxious to fix it. r 1 have said it is a gooid trea r, not with-. ut due reflection. We acqui d much by t. It gave us Florida-an acuuisition not ri mity important in itself, but iso in- refe- h ence to the whbole southwvestrn fronttier. ti rhere wvas, at that time, fort powverful c ribes of Indians, two of wvhomr the CGreeks fi nd the Choctaws, were cotii ns to Fin- a ida, and the two others-the hickasaws nm ndl Chemokees were adjoinitng They were o he must numerouis and powet I tri'bes in ii he Uuited States, and from tir positioni o ere exposed to be acted on od excited it gainst us from Florida. It as itnport- E nt that this state of things asld termi- a ate, which could only be don by obtain- iri ug the possession of Florida. ci But there wecre other and p verful con. te ideratiotns for the acquisition. We had. ab hort tinme before, extinguished he indian U! tie to large tracts of country Alabama. ei ississippi, and Georgiat, ing upon e treams and rivers which pasd through tC lorida to the Gulf-lands ini rreat me;'- tm ure valueless, without the rig of navi.. ati them to their moths. 'he acqui- ht iion of Florida gave us th tight, and is nabled us to bring inito succe I cultiva.- th ion a great extent of fertile ide, which it ave added much to the inecre ed produc- a ion of our great staple, e on. An ther important pint was eli ed by. the tht equiition. It terminated a yytrouble- trm oie dispute with Spaini, gra ng out of sti te captutre of St. Marks and lsacola by gi ;neal Jackson. in the So ole ivnr. ihi mnd, finally, it perfecied our title to Ore gon, by ceding to us, whatever right Spain bad to that territory. Nor is his next charge, in reference to the tract of land lying west of Arkansas, and sauth of 36 30, less baseless. le as serts that this strip of land, as he calls it, was enough to form two States, and that I "required this strip of land to be given up to the Indians, as a permanent abode; aid that it was lost to the slave States." This. like his other assertions, is without foundation. lie makes no attempt to esia blish it, but leaves it to be inferred from the mere statement, that "I was at the time Secretary of War, and member of Mr. Monroe's administration." lie knew it would not do to go into details, ns-they would refute his charge, and hence the vagueness of the language in which it is couched. What he omitued I shall supply. Tihe history of the affair may be told in a few words. The Choctaw tribe of Indians, at the time, inhabited the State of Mississippi. and occupied almost i's entire territory. General Jackson and General Hines. of Miississippi, were appointed by Mr. Mon roe to treat with them, for the purpose of obtaining a cession of a porlion of their lands. They succeeded in obtaining n large tract, lying in the very centre of the State. and extending from Pearl river to the Mississippi, in exchange for all the ter ritory lying between the Red River and the Arkansas, west of a line drawn from the point of the Arkansas, opposile to where the lower line of the Cherokee In dians struck it, to a point on Red River, three miles below the mouth of Little River. and westwardly to the source of the Canadian fork of the Arkansas, and a line drawn. due south to Red River. But the treaty, in making the exchange. made no provision to change the character of the InI dian title to ihe land given in Arkansa4, in exchange for inat which we received itt Mississippi. Nor did it make it the per matent abode of the Indians, as he asserts. They hold it just as they held the land they ceded in ilississippi. Nothing was lost by the slaveholding States, lut a great deal gained, by the treaty. A large and valuable tract in the very heart of the cot ton region. and lying convenient to mar ket, was acquired by Mississippi. without the loss of a single acre to her sisters of the slaveholding States. So that the great sympathy which lie professes for the slave States, in this case, is misapplied. If he chooses to consider me responsible for the treaty, instead ofrMr. Monroe, and the Commissioners who made it. and the Se nate that approved of it, he is welcome to do so, however contrary to the truth of the case. Another, and only another treaty, wns made with that tribe, while I remained in the War Department. I was the Comis sioner on the part of :he United States, and, of course, acknowledge my responsi bility for its provisions. Instead of re quirina a strip to be aiven to the Indians for their permanent abode, the Indians re ceded to the United States, by treaty, a part. and a most valuatule part, viihout our cedtng an inch to them. The entire line was moved westward, as for as Fort Smith, on the Arkansas, and thence by a - ,....... .. :Jtivpr. Nor dild it make the slightest chance in the title to what remained to the Indians, or pro, videsd a permanent home for them, as he would have you believe. So much fur this charge and its author. The r~cxt is of a kindred character. He states it still insure vagttely ; so much so, that I am at a loss to know to wvhicht one of the many treaties made with the In dians about the region in question. hte re fers. He speaks of a slice forty miles wide and three hundred long, " cut oflT from Arkansas anti given to the !sndians ;" "~ that it was done by Indian treaty-treaty made by a protege of Mr. Calhou's;" andi adds that I was Vice President at the time. but gives no boundary, and avoids naming what treaty it was, with what tribe of Indians made, or tho name of the person be calls my " protege." It is an in dictmlenit without specification of time, place, or circumst ances, t0 which it is im possible to make a specific answer. But, ortunately, such an one is tnt necessary to repel it effectually, without descendtng nto details, which, it is fair trufprestume, were unittedi because they could not be given vishout exposing the absurdity of the :barge. hlis admission, that the treaty vas made while I was Vice President, fur ishes me with ample means for that pur ose. It is suflicient to repel it, to st ate, that luring the whole period, that I filled the flie of Vice President. thtat of President was filled, either by Mr. Adams sir Gen. actason, and that- it was my fortinno to be i opposition so both, and the obuject of heir strong dislike, as must he well known o all. I not only had no itnflucnce with ither, but wvas the object of their perse utio. My support of atiy measure our ecommendation of any individual, wvas tfficient to defeat the one, and reject the ther; and yet Col. Benton, who is la tilliar with all this, assumes, in making is charge, that I am responsible, for a -eaty made by either the one or the otherI f themD, it matters not which. It wvas goittg. ir to make me solely responsible for the eta of adminissratioin, of a hieh I was no tember ; but it makes me responsible. not ily for them, but for the acts of those, at were deadly hostile to mie, is a piece Sextravagatnce beyond the reach of any dividual, but the author of the charge. ven he, in this instance, seetms to have misgiving, that he has gone too for, and order to give some color to so wtld ac large, adds, that the treaty was negotia d by a protege of mine. Ho mutst have en a fortunate mati bearinig that relati.mtx me, to have got an appoitntment fromts ther of the two administratiotis. I have amined all the Indian trenties; relating e the region in qttestion, made during I eir administrations, in order to ascertattn, a ho this lucky individual could he. but , ye been unable to discover him. There d not a single treaty negouiated, during c e period, that was negotiated by any iividual, who had any claim to be called il protege of mine. But why charge me with being the an- u [)r of at measure, by which these large I sets, suflicietnt, as lie says, to make two ro tes, wvere lost to the slave states, andI o renx away to the Indians, whetn the au- s< mr ofth mesures by which t hey wemre given away, are known to all, and to none betier than Col. Ienion. They were tie measures of Mr. Adams and Gen. Jackson and their adiniistraiens. One or the oiher made all the treeties by w hich the old merely possessory iiles of the Indians to their lands, were converied over the whole leriitory, into a pernanent right of possession, and proprrty, and made the permanent home of the Indians, to use hi.) own expression.-There wns no treaty madewhile I filled the War Departmenit, in Mr. Monroe's administration, which made any such alterations in the title of Indians, to lands west of the Mississippi, or any where else to my knowledge. The making of Indian treaties, containing slip. nilations for permanent titles, and their removal west of the Mississippi. constitu led a large portion of the doings of those adminisirations, nnd much of that on which they rested their reputation. Much the greater part was the work of Gen. Jackson's administration, with which Col. Beaton wad intimately associateJ, and over which lie had sulticient itinfluence to make himsehf responsible for no small share of its doings, especially as to what related to the west. in attempting now to shuffl oil his portinn of the responsibility, and that of ihe adminisi ration, and to place it ott me, who was hostile to it, speaks badly for his manliness, or regard for the char acter of the administratiOn of Gen. Jack son, for whirh he professes so much at. tachment and admiration. He would hardly have ventured in the lifetime of "the old Hero," to make the heavy charge lie has. against measures, of which he was the author, and on which he so much pri. ied hirself. In his eagerness to assnil me, he has lost: riot only his discretion but his memo ry. In order to make ott that the anti slavery party of the North, duly apprecia ted the great service that I had done their ctuse, lie says "that they gave proof of their gratitude, that I was then a candi date for the Vice Presidenzy, and became the f(avorite of the North, heating even Mr Allams himself on the free soil tack," for getting what ie had said just before, that I was Vice President at the time, when he well kriew, that I was elected for the first time Vice President with Mr. Adams. and of course, the vote of the North could cot have been given me for the reasons he assigns. His next charge is that I supported the abolition of slavery in a State. Among his other traits, Col. Benton is distinguish ed for charging on others, what he knows he is guilty of hinself. lust men from prudence and a sense of propriety, cau tiously abstain from assailing others for what they know they may in turn thetnse selves lie justly assailed, Not so with him. I-he is one of the few who are ever more fierce in their assauis when they know they can be assailed for the saie thir.g. They seem to deliaht in dragging down otherst o their own level, nod to have con cealed joy in ihinking that others partake of their own deforinity.-It is a trait so de testable that those who are distinguished for it areusually likened to a notorious personage reproving sin. Col. Benton has strikingly displayed this trait of character in the pre.sent charge. lie well knows how utterly false he was to youi rough otit ont ,the Texas question. He took, as has beetn stated, an active part to defeat the treaty of annexntio". neptotiated-by me ott the part of the United States, He knows that it contained uoi provisions that coutntenancedthe abtolition of slavery in aniy pottin of Texas. I was strongly nrged during the nt'gotiationi to insert a provtstion to extenid the Miissotnri compro tnise line aicross Texas to its western boun dary, and was informed that it would aid . i secutring a constiturioinal majority itt the Senate, in its favor-i peremptorily re fttsed. lie knows that he oll'ered a propo sition to abolish it in one half of the whojle of Texas, atnd that by a line, not drawn east anti west, b~ut north and south, so as to hem in the south on till sides ; by sur rountding her with abolition States. He also knows, that his friend and supporter, on the occasion, Mr. Hayward, of North Carolina, wvent still further, and offered resolutions to extend the ordinance of 1778. not onlty over Texas, but evett all the Ter ritories lying west of Arkansas, and Mis souri, atnd sotuth of 36. 30., with however a proviso excepting ihe portion of Texas lying sotuth of a line drawvn east and west in the 34th degree of parallel of latitude. The presumption is strong that in offering his resolutions, he acted wvith his friend Colonel Benton, to whose course he ad hered on the Texian question. But, hie that as it tmay. certain) it is he sat mttte. He raised tno voice of indignation, against a measure which proposed to exclude sla very forever from that very region, which hte chatrges me with having given away to the Indianis, and losintg it to the South. As bad as the policy of Mr. Adlams and Gen. Jackson mtay be in reference to that region. they dlid not excludle slavery. The .Indi anis. who occupy it, are slaveholders, andI having an itnterest in common with you, may lie regarded ats faithful allies on that I vital qtuestinn. TIhe resolutints of hisi riend Mr. Ihayward wvere desigtted to de- I privo you of this advantage ; and yet Col. B~etntn nowv ratses his voice in loud de monciauion agaimnst me upon the falsei ~harge of giving away the territory to the< nditatis whbile he approved, at least by his< ilence of excluding yott entirely from the erritory, and oiie htalf Texas to boot, andI I extenid the principle of the ordinance of c 67 over the whole, including Texas and r he territories. So much for his ownt p0-. itton, in reference to the subject of the Ii barge. It now remains to shtow that it is, like r 11 his other charges, dlestitme of fotnnda.- E inti. lie rests his chargo that I abolished " lavery in Texas, on the fact that I was - ben Secretary of State, and that I select di tho resolutitn, as it pjassedl the H-ouse of tepresentittives, ittsteadl of the amendment ~ riginatlly proposed by hitn, as the basis ott r 'hich to annex Texas. Thus far, lie has " eparted from his usual and statted facts ~ arrectly. I shuit no responsibility. Ilam g rilling to take all on this occasiotn ; but it I is dtte to thu Preside-t and the members St f his adminitstration to say-they were natinimns ini favor of tho selectiotnmde. not ontly selected it, hut assignted my p 'asons for making it, in a desoatch to si .tr thetn Minister toi Texas, Mr. Donaldl- st mn. I assignedl thetm because atii- It atel tha~t thorn would beann attet~n1) to I undo what was done, alter the expiration of Tyler's administrniotn. This 1 was resolved In prevent, by stating reasons for the seleeion that couli not be over. ruled. The attempi, as I suspec:ed, was made, anJ the late President has since been airraigned before the pululic by two friends and associates of Ci. Benton& (Blair and Tarpan,) because he could not be forced to overrule. what hia predecessor had done. The following is an extract from the despatch: "It is not deemed necessary to state at large the ground-i on which his decision rests. (Tne President.) It will hesuf ficient it state, briefly, that the provisions of the resolution, as it came from the House, are more simple in their character4 may be more readily. and with less di' ficulty and expense. carried into effect, and that the great object contemplated by them is tmuch less exposed to the haz ard of tltimate defect. That they are more simple in their char. acter, a very few remarks will suffice to show. According to the resolution as it came from- the House. nothing more is necessary than that the Courgress of Texas should be called together, its consent given to the provisions contained in it, and the adoption of a constitution by the people in Convention, to be submitted (a the Congress of the United States for its ap proval, in the same manner as when one of our own territories is admitted as 9 state. On the contrary, according td thd provisions or the Senate's amendment, the Congress or Texas must, in like manner be convened, it must then go through the slow and troublesome process of carving a state out of a part of its territory; after wards it must appoint agents or commis sioners to meet similar agents ot commis sioners, to be appointed on our part, to discuss ind agree ou the terms and condi tious on which the stati shall be admitted and the cession of the remaining territory to the United States; and after all this, and not before, the people of the said state must call a convention, frame si constita tion, and then present it to the Congress of the United States for its approval, fiut which cannot be acted on, until the terms agreed upon by theNegotiators, and which constitute the conditiouns on which the state is tolbo admitted, shall have been ratified, That they may be more readily, and with less difficulty and expense carried into effsci, is plaits from the fact, that the details are fewer and less complex. It is obvious that the numerous and complicated provisions contained in the amendment of the .senate UaWt involve much time a difficulty in their execution ;-while the expense, the appropriation 000 provided for by it, is a cle al cost, over and above tha the execution of the r llouse. But the decisive obj ment of the Senate-A danger the ultimal it' It proposes to fi !he overnmen Texas, the to" the state shall and-the cessi to the Us' namo tion may called comm other title--t them its behal ments, would~ called or designate [CONcLUDED 0 MooaE As A Poar.O' perhaps of death, in a thae - D~evonshiire. lies the greats' new tongues uf Irelanid. After . nearly seventy years--for fifty yei' which he has been famous-the son ofa Dublin grocer, the friend of Emmetf, Grattan. Byron and Fox, lieu, crushed in mind and heart, bis memory with all its untold tales taken from him, the goiver of his fancy emptied of the last arrow with many years and sorrows like oak and lead wrapping about his body in anicipa tion of the grave. Poor "Tom Moore, how grey and cold sets in the night of his long and brilliant day ! The poet's body mtust die. Let us leave that to thte utndertaker and sexton it belongs lawfully to them. But the poet's works and words, hie genius, or that part of it developed its type, his philosophy as revealed in his writings, hist moral its flnence on his nation and his age-these belong to us who are of that posterity to which all the genius of the past has ap pealed, and before wvhom such men as Sloore have laid their words a. it were in evidence. Oribhe moral influence of Moore on his age but hiit e can be said. In temperament and tastes, he was neither European nor C~hristino. -He wan "a child of the sun" itn Asiatic. AUH his itmmagery and all his uredilections were orient al. Born in the very wvest of Europe, on the brink of the. itlantic, in an atmospherejof salted mist, ie was as totally unlike an Islander of hat latitude, as man could be. Judging y his writing~s, lie should have been a alive of Rhodes, half-Greek half-Asiatic n intellectual compounid of Epicurus and lahomet. He sings forever of the sun. *fnightingales, of living in the open air. f orangfe groves and fire-dies, palankeens nd ,pham trees. A true child of the is., inds would have substituted for these the houdy stormihiess of his own climate. Thea tighity Hlomerie sea, the oak and piaet te struggling ship, andI the thugdee og eaven. But his first exercise of self-wilI ras to forsake his coutntry, and to accli. inte his imaginations itn the eastz~an ef >rt in which hie succeeded, as no WVestern inn ever nid before or will da again. -The Nation. Theare.is some hope that the people of lassachusetti ndil yet eome to their ght minds on the subjeet of abolition. ie see by the papers that Mr. Frederick onigas, (a gentleman of color.) was re, sled with a shower otf over-ripe eggs in /eymouth, while hulding forth en- the ibject of slavery. N. P. Willis, speaking of those who ide themselves on their own ancestry. tys-"They are like the reflections of ar9 in the water-they never would have ten there but for their brigh igias