of the two houses of congress.[1] In short, the joint resolutions had been passed on the 1st of March, 1845, the senate leaving, however, to the president the option of effecting the annexation by resolution or by treaty,[2] which that functionary promptly availed himself of. A messenger was at once despatched with a letter from Secretary Calhoun to the American representative in Texas to propose the resolutions of annexation to the acceptance of the Texan government.[3] On the 4th of July Texas agreed to be annexed,[4] and on the 22d of December, 1845, she formally became a member of the American Union. The European governments which had recognized Texas as a nation, albeit they had endeavored to prevail on her to retain her independent status, made no objection to the change effected.[5]
It is almost needless to state that General Almonte, the Mexican minister, upon the official publication of the joint resolutions, on the 7th of March, demanded his passports after addressing a protest to the diplomatic corps at Washington against the spoliation thus decreed of his country's territory.[6] This was fol-
- ↑ See his message of Dec. 1844. Id., 222.
- ↑ In the house it was adopted by a majority of 22 votes; in the senate, finally, by a majority of two. Id., 369, 378-83, 401.
- ↑ Some of the most prominent American statesmen and jurists not only pronounced this device unconstitutional, but the whole plan of annexation and the consequent war, violent, unjust, pernicious, and unprincipled. Among these were Chancellor Kent, Judge William Jay, Charles Sumner, Theodore Parker, Giddings, and many others. See Kent's and Jay's letters in Id., lxviii. 89-90; Jay's Rev. War Mex., 101; Sumner's Orations, ii. 131-62, 18695; Parker's Sermon on Mex. War, Am. Rev., ii. 221-9, iii. 565-80, iv. 1-16, v. 217-30, vi. 331; Giddings' Speeches in Cong., 230-63; Mansfield's Mex. War 9-19; Livermore's War with Mex., 5-40. On the other hand, the authors and upholders of the annexation plot were numerous and able, though interested in the scheme of enlarging the area of slave territory, and to a great extent unprincipled. Among the most prominent was Thos H. Benton, a man always too ready to sacrifice right to interest. See Benton's Debates in Cong., xv. 241, 487, 622, 634; Benton's Thirty Years' View, ii. 639-49, 679-711.
- ↑ The convention held at Austin voted 55 ayes against one nay, Richard Bache's being the only negative vote. That action was almost unanimously ratified by the people Oct. 10th. Thrall's Hist. Texas, 348-50.
- ↑ Their commercial treaties with Texas accordingly ceased to have any effect.
- ↑ The correspondence may be found in Monitor Constituc. Ind., 1845, March 22d, 29th, and May 3d; Boletin de Notic., 1845, March 31st: U. S. Govt, Cong. 23. Ses. 2, San Journ., 142;Niles' Reg., lxviii. 17, 84, 117; Mayer's Hist. War Mex., i. 76.
