May dear Sir:--Yours of the 23d ultimo has been received, and with it
The Madisonian, containing
Gov. Gilmer's letter on the subject of the annexation of
Texas to the
United States.
You are not mistaken in supposing that I have formed an opinion on this interesting subject.
It occupied much of my time during my Presidency, and, I am sure, has lost none of its importance by what has since transpired.
Soon after my election in 1829, it was made known to me by
Mr. Erwin, formerly our minister to the Court of Madrid, that, whilst at that Court, he had laid the foundation of a treaty with
Spain for the cession of the
Floridas and the settlement of the boundary of
Louisiana, fixing the western limit of the latter at the
Rio Grande, agreeably to the understanding of
France; that he had written home to our Government for powers to complete and sign this negotiation; but that, instead of receiving such authority, the negotiation was taken out of his hands and transferred to
Washington, and a new treaty was there concluded by which the
Sabine, and not the
Rio Grande, was recognized and established as the boundary of
Louisiana.
Finding that these statements were true, and that our Government
did really give up that important territory, when it was at its option to retain it, I was filled with astonishment.
The right of the territory was obtained from
France;
Spain stood ready to acknowledge it to the
Rio Grande; and yet the authority asked by our Minister to insert the true boundary was not only withheld, but, in lieu of it, a limit was adopted which stripped us of the whole of the vast country lying between the two rivers.
On such a subject, I thought, with the ancient
Romans, that it was right never to cede any land or boundary of the republic, but always to add to it by honorable treaty, thus extending the area of freedom; and it was in accordance with this feeling that I gave our Minister to
Mexico instructions to enter upon a negotiation for the retrocession of
Texas to the
United States.
This negotiation failed; and I shall ever regret it as a misfortune both to
Mexico and the
United States.
Mr. Gilmer's letter presents many of the considerations which, in my judgment, rendered the step necessary to the peace and harmony of the two countries; but the point in it, at that time, which most strongly impelled me to the course I pursued, was the injustice done to us by the surrender of the territory, when it was obvious that it could have been retained, without increasing the consideration afterward given for the
Floridas.
I could not but feel that the surrender of so vast and important a territory was attributable to an erroneous estimate of the tendency of our institutions, in which there was mingled somewhat of jealousy as to the rising greatness of the South and West.
But I forbear to dwell on this part of the history of this question.
It is past, and cannot now be undone.
We can now only look at it as one of annexation, if
Texas presents it to us; and, if she does, I do not hesitate to say that the welfare and happiness of our Union require that it should be accepted.
If, in a military point of view alone, the question be examined, it will be found to be most important to the
United States to be in possession of the territory.