Texas and the Massachusetts Resolutions Page: 17 of 54
This book is part of the collection entitled: From Republic to State: Debates and Documents Relating to the Annexation of Texas, 1836-1856 and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the UNT Libraries.
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
need none. The independence of Texas was established
principally by means of aid from the United States. And
now that the proposal to be attached is once more made, Mr.
Senator Walker, in his elaborate pamphlet, professes to see
no difference between the nature of this proposal, as it affects
the disposition towards us of Mexico, which has never yet
acknowledged the independence of Texas, and that made
during Mr. Adams's administration, to obtain by purchase the
territory from Mexico herself, before her independence had
been acknowledged by Spain. He maintains that Spain, with
whom we were then on friendly terms, had as much right to be
offended with us in the one case, as Mexico has in the other.
This is specious and plausible, but it is as unsound as every
other part of the argument in favor of annexation ;-for surely
there is a moral feeling in the breast of every man, which
leads him to distinguish between actions done under wholly
different circumstances. Mexico declared herself independent
of Spain. The struggle was between Mexicans and
Spaniards, and the United States did not interfere to decide
it. On the other hand, the citizens of the United States went
into Texas ostensibly as settlers, and they declared Texas
independent of Mexico. Can il be said that the United
States did not create as well as decide the struggle ? Can it be
said that the government was not during the whole time anxiously
betraying its interest in the result, by perpetual solicitation
of Mexico to cede the country as it was, whether in a state
of insurrection or not ? Does not the law forbid individuals to
take advantage of their own wrong ? And is it not the wrong
of our citizens, transplanted for a short time to another soil,
which has enabled us to treat with them for that soil, against
the consent and to the injury of Mexico ? So long as Spain
was unable to recover any territory from the Mexicans, it
could be matter of no offence who purchased the soil of the
new owners. But the Mexicans certainly have a right to be
offended, if the government with whom it is at peace, first
succeeds in tearing off a part of their country, by instigating
resistance to their authority on the part of its citizens imported
for the purpose, and then, after a few years have passed
just sufficient to save appearances, it takes through the agency
of those citizens that country very quietly within its own jurisdiction,
as the legitimate offspring of this treachery.
The Mexicans may be a feeble people, wanting in the energy
which is characteristic of the United States, but they are
not wanting in discernnlent. They long since penetrated the
ambitious designs of their powerful neighbor, and they have
not been without industry in watching and exposing its action
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Adams, Charles Francis. Texas and the Massachusetts Resolutions, book, January 1, 1844; Boston, Massachusetts. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth2355/m1/17/: accessed July 21, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .