It may be asked: how is it, as Texas is so far south, that a white population can labour there? It is because Texas is a prairie country, and situated at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico. A sea-breeze always blows across the whole of the country, rendering it cool, and refreshing it notwithstanding the power of the sun’s rays. This breeze is apparently a continuation of the trade-winds following the course of the sun.

From circumstances, therefore, Texas, which but a few years since was hardly known as a country, becomes a state of the greatest importance to the civilised and moral world.

I am not in this chapter about to raise the question how Texas has been ravished from Mexico. Miss Martineau, with all her admiration of democracy, admits it to have been “the most high-handed theft of modern times;” and the letter of the celebrated Dr Charming to Mr Clay has laid bare to the world the whole nefarious transaction. In this letter Dr Charming points out the cause of the seizure of Texas, and the wish to enrol it among the federal states.

“Mexico, at the moment of throwing off the Spanish yoke, gave a noble testimony of her loyalty to free principles, by decreeing ‘That no person thereafter should be born a slave, or introduced as such into the Mexican states; that all slaves then held should receive stipulated wages, and be subject to no punishment but on trial and judgment by the magistrate.’ The subsequent acts of the government fully carried out these constitutional provisions. It is matter of deep grief and humiliation, that the emigrants from this country, while boasting of superior civilisation, refused to second this honourable policy, intended to set limits to one of the greatest of social evils. Slaves come into Texas with their masters from the neighbouring states of this country. One mode of evading the laws was, to introduce slaves under formal indentures for long periods, in some cases, it is said, for ninety-nine years; but by a decree of the state legislature of Coahuila and Texas, all indentures for a longer period than ten years were annulled, and provision was made for the freedom of children during this apprenticeship. This settled, invincible purpose of Mexico to exclude slavery from her limits, created as strong a purpose to annihilate her authority in Texas. By this prohibition, Texas was virtually shut against emigration from the southern and western portions of this country; and it is well known that the eyes of the south and west had for some time been turned to this province as a new market for slaves, as a new field for slave labour, and as a vast accession of political power to the slave-holding states. That such views were prevalent we know; for, nefarious as they are, they found their way into the public prints. The project of dismembering a neighbouring republic, that slaveholders and slaves might overspread a region which had been consecrated to a free population, was discussed in newspapers as coolly as if it were a matter of obvious right and unquestionable humanity. A powerful interest was thus created for severing from Mexico her distant province.”

The fact is this:— America, (for the government looked on and offered no interruption,) has seized upon Texas, with a view of extending the curse of slavery, and of finding a mart for the excess of her negro population: if Texas is admitted into the Union, all chance of the abolition of slavery must be thrown forward to such an indefinite period, as to be lost in the mist of futurity; if, on the contrary, Texas remains an independent province, or is restored to its legitimate owners, and in either case slavery is abolished, she then becomes, from the very circumstance of her fertility and aptitude for white labour, not only the great check to slavery, but eventually the means of its abolition. Never, therefore, was there a portion of the globe upon which the moral world must look with such interest.

England may, if she acts promptly and wisely, make such terms with this young state as to raise it up as a barrier against the profligate ambition of America. Texas was a portion of Mexico, and Mexico abolished slavery; the Texians are bound (if they are Texians and not Americans) to adhere to what might be considered a treaty with the whole Christian world; if not, they can make no demand upon its sympathy or protection, and it should be a sine qua non with England and all other European powers previous to acknowledging or entering into commercial relations with Texas, that she should adhere to the law which was passed at the time that she was an integral portion of Mexico, and declare herself to be a Free State—if she does not, unless the chains are broken by the negro himself, the cause and hopes of emancipation are lost.

There certainly is one outlet for the slaves, which as they are removed thither and farther to the west will eventually be offered:— that of escaping to the Indian tribes which are spread over the western frontier, and amalgamating with them; such indeed, I think, will some future day be the result, whether they gain their liberty by desertion, insurrection, or manumission.

Of insurrection there is at present but little fear. In the eastern slave states, the negroes do not think of it, and if they did, the difficulty of combination and of procuring arms is so great, that it would be attended with very partial success. The intervention of a foreign power might indeed bring it to pass, but it is to be hoped that England, at all events, will never be the party to foment a servile war. Let us not forget that for more than two centuries we have been particeps criminis, and should have been in as great a difficulty as the Americans now are, had we had the negro population on our own soil, and not on distant islands which could be legislated for without affecting the condition of the mother country. Nay, at this very moment, by taking nearly the whole of the American cotton off their hands in exchange for our manufactures, we are ourselves virtually encouraging slavery by affording the Americans such a profitable mart for their slave labour.

There is one point to which I have not yet adverted, which is, Whether the question of emancipation is likely to produce a separation between the Northern and Southern states? The only reply that can be given is, that it entirely depends upon whether the abolition party can be held in check by the federal government. That the federal government will do its utmost there can be no doubt, but the federal government is not so powerful as many of the societies formed in America, and especially the Abolition Society, which every day adds to its members. The interests of the North are certainly at variance with the measures of the society, yet still it gains strength. The last proceedings in congress show that the federal government is aware of its rapid extension, and are determined to do all in its power to suppress it. The following are a portion of the resolutions which were passed last year by an overwhelming majority.

The first resolution was; “That the government is of limited powers, and that by the constitution of the United States, congress has no jurisdiction whatever over the institution of slavery in the several states of the confederacy;” the last was as follows: “Resolved, therefore, that all attempts on the part of congress to abolish slavery in the district of Columbia, or the territories, or to prohibit the removal of the slaves from state to state; or to discriminate between the constitution of one portions of the confederacy and another, with the views aforesaid, are in violation of the constitutional principles on which the union of these States rests, and beyond the jurisdiction of congress; and that every petition, memorial, resolution, proposition, or paper touching or relating in any way or to any extent whatever to slavery as aforesaid, or the abolition thereof, shall without any farther action thereon, be laid on the table, without printing, reading, debate, or reference.” Question put, “Shall the resolutions pass?” Yeas, 198; Noes, 6—Examiner.