NEUTRALITY!

Next in turn was the change in the government effected by Santa Anna; and next the Texian revolution. Was it not laughable to see these Texians, all of them, generally speaking, slaveholders; adhering to the constitution of 1824, one article of which emancipates all the slaves in Mexico! Was it not laughable to see them proclaiming a constitution, of which, eleven years ago, the Americans in Texas had prohibited the proclamation by the Mexican authorities there, under the heaviest threats!-What man of common sense can believe in this humbug? None, gentlemen; none but those that have risked their thousands in this country; and they, whoever they may be, feign to believe it. The statements made throughout the United States, of tyranny and oppression on the part of Mexico toward the Ameri can citizens in Texas, are slanderous falsehoods, fabricated to create and nurture the worst prejudices and jealousies. The Americans in Texas have had their own way in every case, and on every occasion; and whenever there happened a legislative act that was, from any cause, repugnant to the feelings of the people of Texas, it was silenced at once. In short, if there has existed a good cause of complaint in Texas, it was that men were too much their own masters, and too little under the restraint of any law. Any allegation to the effect that the Mexican government had deceived citizens of the United States in relation to promises of lands first made to them, is false, and I defy any one to show a forfeiture of title to lands, when the conditions of the grant had been fulfilled by the settler.

Now, sir, as to the war: here I will ask Americans, (except the speculators,) how many military incursions, insurrections, and rebellions, avowedly for the purpose of snatching Texas from its proper owners, will, in their mind, justify Mexico in driving from its territories, the pirates that would thus possess themselves of the country? Be it remembered, that these revolutions have never been attempted by the resident citizens of Texas, but in every case by men organized in the United States for the purpose, and coming from afar: why, a single provocation of this nature were ample justification; but Texas has, from the time of the adjustment of the boundary by Wilkinson and Ferrara, experienced seven or eight. Now what is Mexico to do? Can it be expected that she will maintain a large ariny in Texas merely for the purpose of guarding against the attempts of a few? Certainly not. Were the population of the United States one of savages, from one of which we should not expect good policy, and that international equity which has heretofore been the boast of Americans, it might perhaps be expected; but Mexico has rested under the belief that when a few marauders should interfere with her possessions, the American people would not object to see them properly chastised. But, gentlemen, what at present seems to be the situation of affairs? Not only has Houston avowed that his acts were prompted by the highest authority within the United States, but a general officer of the army of the United States presents himself, with forces, upon the Mexican frontier. His first orders are to preserve perfect neutrality; and his particular attention is called to one of the articles of the treaty between the United States and Mexico, by which the contracting parties bind themselves to restrain their respective Indians within their own limits. General Gaines having arrived, is at once in correspondence with the Texian officers, and despatches to Washington "information derived from the highest authority in Texas”—this, too, against the most positive information given to General Gaines, by respectable and intelligent people, that misrepresentations of all kinds were fabricating, and would be invented to induce him to cross. Upon the information thus given at Washington by General Gaines, Mr. Secretary Cass writes that he has laid before the executive his letter, and that his construction, in the uncertainty of the boundary between the United States and Mexico being acquiesced in, he, General Gaines, is authorized to cross the Sabine river, and proceed as far as Nacogdoches, seventy-five miles within the Mexican territory. This permission is given, however, only under certain contingencies; (and I am certain that these have not been present.) Here I must be permitted to ask, (and I address myself to every American who loves his country, and is proud of it,) how it can be maintained, under any pretext, that honor would suggest, or justify, that the frontier between the United States and Mexico is uncertain? For a long time after the acquisition of Louisiana, the United States

exercised jurisdiction only to the Rio Hondo, but six miles west of Natchitoches, the intermediate territory between this point and the Sabine river, about twenty miles, being considered neutral territory. At last General Wilkinson, for the United States, and General Ferrara, for Mexico, arranged the Sabine as the frontier; a survey made by Mr. Melish also establishes the Sabine, at this point, as the frontier. A subsequent regular and formal treaty between the two governments confirms this frontier, and has especial and particular reference to Melish's map and survey; and more recently still, the present executive declares by proclamation, that the two governments shall continue to exercise jurisdiction within the territory now occupied by either. This was the result of a conference with the Mexican minister, who justly represented that Arkansas had overleaped the boundary be tween the two governments, and was in the exercise of jurisdiction within a part of the Mexican dominions.

There is certainly a part of the boundary not yet traced; but it is a line passing over land only, and running from the thirty-second degree of latitude on the Sabine, due north to Red River. Thus it will be perceived, that all the Sabine, from the sea to the thirty-second degree, is the boundary; and that the Sabine above the thirty-second degree, belongs exclusively to Mexico;-hence the impossibility of there being uncertainty about it. I will ask again, if there is doubt as to the Sabine frontier, how it happens that when the Texians were petitioning congress for a recognition of their independence, no information was imparted to the national legislature of the circumstances.-Again, if there is a doubt as to the Sabine frontier, how happens it that war in that territory, by regularly organized armies of citizens of the United States, is tolerated against a friendly power? No, sir; there is no doubt or uncertainty as to the Sabine frontier. Mr. Secretary Cass cannot be au fait, or he is willing to lend himself for a most unworthy purpose.

General Gaines having, however, persuaded the executive and secretary that the line was "imaginary," and that he "might cross it," orders troops from forts Towson and Gibson, to occupy Nacogdoches, as I have said before, seventy-five miles_beyond the limits of Mexico; and what is worse, directs those troops to cross the Red River above, and march through the country to the place of destination; so that the troops came into the Mexican dominions at least two hundred miles beyond Nacogdoches, and, having arrived there, are ordered to fortify and erect other buildings. How is this, gentlemen? Call you all this neutrality?

But, for a farther description of our affairs here, I will add the following facts. The Americans (I mean the regulars) and Texians, appear to understand each other perfectly. The neutrality is preserved on the part of General Gaines, by allowing all volunteers, and other organized corps destined for Texas, to pass in hundreds and thousands undisturbed, but keeps in check any attempt on the part of the native Mexicans and Indians, to act against the Texians. The Texians are allowed to wage war against a friendly power, in a district of country claimed by the United States. The prisoners of war taken by the Texians are ignorant to which party they are subject. The American general claims the country only from Mexico, but has no objections to the carrying on of war against Mexico in the district he claims! Pray, sir, let Americans speak honestly, and let them say whether any government has, within the last century, placed itself in so ridiculous a light?— not only ridiculous, but contemptible. Will not any honest man confess at once that General Gaines, or any authority clothing him with the discretion so indiscreetly used, would never have dreamed of the like against a government able and ready to defend itself, and punish such arrogance? What is Europe to say to this? Will not Mexico complain? And will there be no sympathy for her?-Letter to the Editors of the New-York Commercial Advertiser, dated Nacogdoches, Texas, September 14, 1836.

[Alas, for our national degeneracy and infamy;-In 1811, the suspicion of being accessory to this horrible outrage against the laws of nature, and of nations, led a distinct charge in the trial for treason of]

GENERAL WILKINSON.

CHARGE V.-That he, the said James Wilkinson, while commanding the army of the United States, by virtue of his said commission, and being bound by the duties of his office to do all that in him lay, to discover and to frustrate all such enormous violations of the law as tended to endanger the peace and tranquillity of the United States, did, nevertheless, unlawfully combine and conspire to set on foot a military expedition against the territories of a nation, then at peace with the United States. Specification, He, the said James Wilkinson, in the years 1805 and 1806, combining and conspiring with Aaron Burr and his associates, to set on foot a military expedition against the Spanish provinces and territories in America.-Wilkinson's Memoirs, Vol. 2.

[The Charleston Mercury, March, 1837, gives the following in the report of a speech of the Hon. John C. Calhoun, at a public dinner given him in Charleston on his return from congress.]

"He spoke of Texas, and at that name was interrupted with long and loud cheering, and his concluding words on that topic, pronounced with deep emotion, that 'TEXAS must be annexed to the Union,' were answered with a universal burst of applause, that showed how glowing was the syınpathy of the people of South Carolina with the heroes of San Jacinto, He pointed out clearly the importance to the South, of the annexation," &c.

RELIGIOUS AND MORAL TESTIMONY.

Presbyterian Synod of New York and Philadelphia, 1787.

The Synod, taking into consideration the overture concerning slavery, came to the following judgment:

The Synod of New York and Philadelphia do highly approve of the general principles in favor of universal liberty that prevail in America, and the interest which many of the states have taken in promoting the abolition of slavery. They earnestly recommend it. to all the members belonging to their communion, to give those persons who are at present held in servitude, such good education as to prepare them for the better enjoyment of freedom. And they moreover recommend that masters, wherever they find servants disposed to make a just improvement of the privilege, would give them a peculium, or grant them sufficient time, and sufficient means of procuring their own liberty at a moderate rate; that thereby they may be brought into society with those habits of industry that may render them useful citizens. And finally, they recommend it to all their people to use the most prudent measures, consistent with the interests and the state of civil society in the countries where they live, to procure eventually the final abolition of slavery in America.

[This "judgment" was also republished as the decision of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in 1793.]

The second annunciation of the sentiments of the Presbyterian Church upon the subject of slavery, was made in the year 1794, when the "scripture proofs," notes, &c., were adopted by the General As

RELIGIOUS AND MORAL TESTIMONY.

sembly. Their doctrine at that period is stated in the note b, appended to the one hundred and forty-second question of the larger Catechism, in these words:

This crime

"1 Tim. i, 10. The law is made for man stealers. among the Jews exposed the perpetrators of it to capital punishment; Exodus xxi, 16; and the apostle here classes them with sinners of the first rank. The word he uses, in its original import, comprehends all who are concerned in bringing any of the human race into slavery, or in retaining them in it. Hominum fures, qui servos vel liberos abducunt, retinent, vendunt, vel emunt. Stealers of men are all those who bring off slaves or freemen, and keep, sell, or buy them. To steal a freeman, says Grotius, is the highest kind of theft. In other instances, we only steal human property, but when we steal or retain men in slavery, we seize those who, in common with ourselves, are constituted by the original grant, lords of the earth. Genesis i, 28. Vide Poli synopsin in loc."

Advice given by the Assembly, in relation to Slavery, in 1815.

"The committee to which was committed the report of the committee to which the petition of some elders, who entertain conscientious scruples on the subject of holding slaves, together with that of the Synod of Ohio, concerning the buying and selling of slaves, had been referred, reported; and their report being read and amended, was adopted, and is as follows:

"The General Assembly have repeatedly declared their cordial approbation of those principles of civil liberty which appear to be recognised by the Federal and State governments, in these United States. They have expressed their regret that the slavery of the Africans and of their descendants still continues in so many places, and even among those within the pale of the Church; and have urged the Presbyteries under their care, to adopt such measures as will secure at least to the rising generation of slaves, within the bounds of the Church, a religious education; that they may be prepared for the exercise and enjoyment of liberty, when God, in his providence, may open a door for their emancipation. The committee refer said petitioners to the printed extracts of the Synod of New York and Philadelphia, for the year 1787, on this subject, republished by the Assembly in 1793; and also to the extracts of the minutes of the Assembly for 1795; which last are in the following words :

"A serious and conscientious person, a member of a Presbyterian congregation, who views the slavery of the negroes as a moral evil, highly offensive to God, and injurious to the interests of the gospel, lives under the ministry of a person, or among a society of people, who concur with him in sentiment on the subject upon general principles; yet, for particular reasons, hold slaves, and tolerate the practice in others, Ought the former of these persons, under the impressions and circumstances above described, to hold Christian communion with the latter?'

"Whereupon, after due deliberation, it was Resolved; that as the same difference of opinion with respect to slavery takes place in sundry other parts of the Presbyterian Church, notwithstanding which, they live in charity and peace, according to the doctrine and practice of the apostles; it is hereby recommended to all conscientious persons, and especially to those whom it immediately respects, to do the same. At the same time, the General Assembly assure all the Churches under their care, that they view with the deepest concern any vestiges of slavery which may exist in our country, and refer the Churches to the records of the General Assembly, published at different times; but especially to an overture of the late Synod of New York and Philadelphia, published in 1787, and republished among the extracts from the minutes of the General Assembly of 1793, on that head, with which they trust every conscientious person will be fully satisfied. "This is deemed a sufficient answer to the first petition; and with regard to the second, the Assembly observe, that although in some sections of our country, under certain circumstances, the transfer of slaves may be unavoidable, yet they consider the buying and selling of slaves by way of traffic, and all undue severity in the management of them, as inconsistent with the spirit of the gospel. And they recommend it to the Presbyteries and Sessions under their care, to make use of all prudent measures to prevent such shameful and unrighteous conduct."—Digest, page 339.

"A full expression of the Assembly's views of slavery in 1818.

"The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, having taken into consideration the subject of slavery, think proper to make known their sentiments upon it.

"We consider the voluntary enslaving of one part of the human race by another, as a gross violation of the most precious and sacred rights of human nature; as utterly inconsistent with the law of God which requires us to love our neighbor as ourselves; and as totally irreconcilable with the spirit and principles of the gospel of Christ, which enjoin that 'all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.' Slavery creates a paradox in the moral system-it exhibits rational, accountable, and immortal beings in such circumstances as scarcely to leave them the power of moral action. It exhibits them as dependant on the will of others, whether they shall receive religious instruction; whether they shall know and worship the true God; whether they shall enjoy the ordinances of the gospel; whether they shall perform the duties and cherish the endearments of husbands and wives, parents and children, neighbors and friends; whether they shall preserve their chastity and purity, or regard the dictates of justice and humanity. Such are some of the consequences of slavery; consequences not imaginary, but which connect themselves with its very existence. The evils to which the slave is always exposed, often take place in their very worst degree and form; and where all of them do not take place, still the slave is