There are discrepancies in the combined treatment offered by the United States government, which led to the Republic of Texas not desiring an intimate partnership with the United States. The disloyalty of the Northern states and their citizens, in addition to, the irresponsible acts of the Federal Government; repetitive incidents with outlaws have been permitted in those states and the common territory of Kansas to trample upon the federal laws in order to war upon the lives and properties of the citizens of the South. It was claimed that the Federal Government was considered to be under the influence and control of these unnatural and sectional enemies; failing to protect the lives and properties of Texas against Indian savages on their borders; and against the murderous forays of banditti from the neighboring territory of Mexico. This process,in effect, would absolutely render the conditions of Texas more insecure and harassed, in comparison to the existence of the Republic of Texas.
Indian raids were a bother: Article XI of the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hildalgo contained a guarantee of the United States being able to protect Mexicans, by preventing raids across the border of Native American tribes. At the time the Treaty was ratified; Secretary of State James Buchanan had understood that the United States had the obligation and resources to enforce the oath. A historian, Richard Kluger, is quoted describing the difficulties of executing this mission: “Comanche, Apache, and other tribal warriors had been punishing Spanish, Mexican, and American intruders into their stark homeland for three centuries and been given no incentive to let up their murderous marauding and pillaging; horse stealing in particular. The United States Army had posted nearly 8,000 of its total of 11,000 soldiers along the southwestern boundary, but they could not halt the 75,000 or so native nomads in the region from attacking swiftly and taking refuge among the hills, buttes, and arroyos in a landscape where one’s enemies could be spotted twenty or thirty miles away.”
For these and other reasons, solemnly asserting that the Federal Constitution has been violated; observing the federal government has become under the control of Texas enemies; to be diverted from the origins of tradition of existence; those of oppression and wrong, are realizing that our own State can no longer look for protection; but to God and her sons.
–We the delegate of the people of Texas, in Convention assembled have passed an ordinance dissolving all political connection with the government of the United States of America and the people thereof and confidently appeal to the intelligence and patriotism of the freemen of Texas to ratify the same at the ballot box.—-
Texas just isn’t getting her money’s worth. Moving on is an idea, which may profit them all.The Gadsden Purchase; also known as Venta de La Mesilla, or “Sale of La Mesilla”, in Mexico, is present day southern Arizona and southern New Mexico. This area was purchased by the United States in a treaty signed by Former President Franklin Pierce on 24 of June 1853; ratified by the U.S. Senate on 25 April 1854. This purchase was the last major territorial acquisition in the continental United States. The Gadsden Purchase was needed for the purpose of providing land to assemble a part of the United States’ construction project, of the Transcontinental Railroad; covering the deep pocketed deep southern route.
James Gadsden, of South Carolina, was influential during the Commercial Convention of 1845, in Memphis, TN. Additional guests of this convention were John C. Calhoun, John Bell, William Gwin, Clement C. Clay, and Edmund P. Gaines. James Gadsden recommended a southern route for the railroad; beginning in Texas and ending in San Diego/Mazatlan. The Southerners desired that this route would provide southern prosperity, while exposing the west to the Southern influence and settlement. The interests of Southerners with railroads and the Pacific grew after the Mexican War in 1848.
Gadsden had become the president of the South Carolina Canal and Rail Road Company in 1839. Ten years later, this company would construct approx. 136 miles (209 km) of train track extending west from Charleston, SC; developed $300,000,000 in debt. Gadsden wanted to link all Southern railroads into one functional network. Gadsden was concerned that the increase in railroad construction, in the North, would produce trade in lumber, farm goods, and the manufacturing goods from the traditional Northern and Southern routes along the Ohio and Mississippi rivers and also to the East and West; bypassing the South.Gadsden noticed Charleston, SC losing its prominence as a seaport. Moreover, Southern businesses became paranoid against a Northern transcontinental route limiting or even ceasing the trade with the Orient. Some Southerners also argued for the complexities of the plantation economy, in order to demand independence for the South from the prestigious Northern bankers.
The Kansas-Nebraska Act very much involves Stephen A. Douglas. Douglas was a Vermont native, obsessed with the Western continental expansion. During his career, he was a powerful chairman of the Senate Committee on Territories. He needed to organize a territory; the areas west of Iowa and Missouri: the northern portions of the Louisiana Purchase. The Wyandot Indians didn’t invite this attempt of organizing territory and petitioned against this event. Douglas insisted on spreading his views of Christianity and his exposure to “our institutions”.
The Wyandot tribe elected Abelard Guthrie to be the defending territorial delegate. No use, his bill failed in March of 1853 at the attempt to lobby for the area west of Missouri. On December 14, 1853, Senator Augustus C. Dodge, of Iowa, introduced a bill to organize Nebraska territory between 30 degrees 30′ and 43 degrees 30′ North latitude. This Dodge bill was then reported to Douglas’ Committee on Territories. At the time, there was not much interest towards these areas, because a persuaded unfulfilled life was influenced due to the efforts to forbid slavery.
Stephen A. Douglas presented a billon January 23rd, which created two territories: Kansas and Nebraska. This bill declared the eighth section of the Missouri Enabling Act-superseded by the Compromise measures of 1850; and also an elaborate concerning the principle of the 1850 compromise; “all questions pertaining to slavery, in the territories and the new states to be formed, are to be left to the decisions of the people residing therein, through their appropriate representatives”. For Southerners, Kansas-Nebraska was a “symbolic victory”; In contrast, democrats, condemned the Kansas-Nebraska Act bill as a plot to extend slavery and hold freedom hostage. Some explained Douglas’ position; back the bill, in order to build support for future presidential bids.
As to the Wilmont Proviso; it was of a devise to degrade the slave holding states.On August 8, the Wilmot Proviso, a bill that would outlaw slavery in any future land acquired from Mexico, is introduced into Congress by Pennsylvania representative David Wilmot. The bill embitters Southern politicians. “A Nation Breaks Apart, 1840-1877.” American History. ABC-CLIO, 2010. Web. 24 May 2010.
In a declaration from the Yankee Belt and New England; of the Cleveland Plain Dealer: The West has but to say that no more slave territory shall be stayed… Let the motto be written on the back of every man’s vote when the question arises-“NO MORE SLAVE TERRITORY.” In this antislavery sentiment was a provision of the popular foundations for the Proviso.
Feature Image Copyright: olgacov / 123RF Stock Photo