comprehend the spirit of people of English blood. If there be two distinct, well-defined characteristics which have distinguished the English race wherever found, these two characteristics are submission to authority which they recognize, and resistance to authority which they do not recognize. The Southern people recognized no authority in the Federal government to interfere with their domestic institution of slavery. There was no such right in 1844 nor in 1861. They did not intend to submit to it at either date. It could be accomplished only by force of arms. In 1844, as in 1861, the Southern people loved the Union, and resisted only what they believed to be an arbitrary invasion of their rights. In 1844 they saw a mode of maintaining the equipoise of the government in the admission of Texas, and they eagerly seized it. The aggressive abolition faction of the North endeavored to shut the door. Fortunately for the country they were unsuccessful for the time, and the irrepressible conflict" was delayed until after the United States was enabled to complete the extension of its territory to the Rio Grande and the Pacific. The arguments on both sides show that the question was regarded as a contest for the balance of power in the Senate, and that the slavery question was injected into the discussion to promote a geographical division of parties.
Said the New York Evening Post in 1844 (as quoted in Ladd’s History of the War with Mexico, p. 29): "The issue is whether this government shall devote its whole energies to the perpetuation of slavery; whether all sister republics on this continent which desire to abolish slavery are to be dragooned by us into the support of this institution."
Said the New Hampshire Patriot: "Slavery and the defense of slavery form the controlling considerations urged in favor of the treaty by those who have engaged in its negotiations."
Such arguments found favor with those who had been
