Another Letter Of Annexation

Mi. Clay has wriiten one more letter on this snbjecr, which he says phall be the last. [t is üddreessed to the Editora of the National Intelligencer, Sept. 23, 1844. It commences wit li ;m announcement of his determinaron to write no more letters for pubücation till after olection, and proceeds as follows: "I announcinfir my determlnotion to permit no other letters to be drawn from me on public affairs, I think it right to avail myself of the occasion to correct the erroneons interpretation of one dr iwo of'tbose which I fwd previonsly written. In April last I addressert to you, from Raleigh, a letter in respect to the proposed treury annexing Texas to the United States, and I have pince addressed tw.p letters to Alaba ma upon the Bame subject. Most unwarranted allegations have been made that those letters ai e inconsistent with each other, and to make it out, particular phrases of expressione have been torn from tbeir context, and a meaning attribuled to me which I never cntertained. I wish now distinctly to say that there is not a feeling, a sentiment, or an opinión expressed in my Raleigh letter to which I do not ndhere. I am deeidedly opposed to the immediaie annexntion of Texas to the U. States. - I think it would be dishonorable, might involve them in wnr, would be dangerous to the integritv and harnony of the Union, and, ïf all these bjections were removed, could not be effected according to any inforrnation I possess, upon just and admissible conditiona. It was not my intenfion in either of the wo letters which I addressed to Alaba ma, to express any contrary opinión. Representations had been made to me thiit I was considered inflexibly opposed to the onnexation of Texas under any circumstauces; and thnt my opposition was so extreme that I would not waive it, even if there were a general consent to the ineasure by all the Siates of he Union. I replied, in my first letter to Al abama, that personuiïy, I hnd no o!jection to annexation. I thought that my meuntng was snfficienlly obviouAthíft I hifco -personal, )rivatc, or mfitfmoJivWor opposinc, as I hnve luniKuusing the measure, my udgment bemg oltogether infltienced by general and poliiical consideraliops, which have ever been the guide of my public conduct. In my second letter to Alabama, assuming that the annexalion ofWTexas might be acebm plished without national dishonor, without war, w'nh the general consent of the Siales of the Jnion, and upon fair and rensonable terms. i stated that I should be glad to see it. I did not suppose that it was possible I could be misunderstood . ] imngined every body would compreliend me as intendiug that, vvhatever might be my particular views and upinions I should be happy to eee what the whole nntion might conctir in desiring under thé conditions stalt d. Nothing wos further from my purpose than !o intímate ony chauge of opinión as long as any considerable and respectable portion of the confederacy should continue to stand out in opposition to the annexalion of Texas.In al) tliree of my Jetters uppn the subject of Texas, Ietated that nnnexation wasinadmissible except npon fair and rea sonable terms, if every other objection were removed. In a speech which I addresserl to thrSena;e of the United States more tban three yeare go, I avowed my oppositon, for the reasons ihere siated, to the assumption, by the Genentl Government, of the debts of the severa] States. Ii was bordly, therefore, to be presvmed that Iconld be n favor of assuminor the unascertained debt of a foreign State, with which we have no frnternal ties, and whose bnd faith or violation of its engagements can bring no reproaches tipon us." If would be hard, indeed, of Mr. Clay conld not make himelf understood a ff er such repeated and laborious efforip, This letter is bu' a recapitulation and reiteration of the former ones. h shows, 1. That Mr. Chy s opposed to immedjatk annexaticn for certain reasons he meniion?. This is ns we have always unde'rstood him. 2. It sbows that in h is second Alabama letter, he did ''assiimp, that the annexalion of Texas might be ace mplished. [in future] without nationnl dishonor, without war, witb the general consent of the Siotes of the Union, and upon fuir and réasonable terms,'" and that svch onnexation, eo accomplished, "Ar should be glad to see ." This is as we supposed, and have heretofore stated. 3. That the only absolute bar to Mr. Clay'e assent to a bül for annexation would be, "the standing end in opposilion to the annexatlon of Texas of a coimderable and respeclable portion of the Confederan.'1 This is precisely as we have represented the matter. Mr. Giddinga, C. M. Claj, and nll others who have asserted that the opposition of one State would prevent annexation, can now see theirmistake. We stippose t will tnke at least four or five States to constitute a ro.spectable and considerable portion of the whole: and the assent of a majority of their delegntions in Congress will show the assent of the States. 4. As to the debt of Texas, which Mr. Clay seems dispo&ed to repudíate, our wisest stntcsmen concur in the belief that nccordmg to the law of nations, f we take Texas, we shall be justly holden to pay all her debts. We tliink no honest, well informed mnn can possibly mistake Mr. Clay's position. He is opposed to immediafe Annexation, but decidedly in favor of the future admission of Texas, upon terms which he believes migh t be consummated.