Page:Life and Select Literary Remains of Sam Houston of Texas (1884).djvu/374

 evinced very bad taste by adverting to the subject of slavery, in the internal affairs of this country. Your opinions, whilst here, on this subject were fully and freely avowed. You then believed that it would be of great advantage to Mexico to introduce slave labor into that country; that it would develop her resources, by enabling her to produce cotton, sugar, and coffee, for purposes of exportation; and that without it she would be seriously retarded in her march to greatness and prosperity. Your sympathy and commiseration at present expressed, are no doubt very sincere, and I only regret that they partake so little of consistency. You boast that Mexico gave the noble and illustrious example of emancipating her slaves. The fact that she has the name of having done so, has enabled you to add another flourish to your rhetoric. But the examination of facts for one moment will disclose the truth. The slaves of Mexico, you say, were emancipated. Did you elevate them to the condition of freemen? No, you did not; you gave them the name of freedom, but you reduced the common people to the condition of slaves. It is not uncommon in Mexico for one dignitary, upon his hacienda, to control from one hundred to ten thousand human beings, in a state of bondage more abject and intolerable than the negroes on any cotton plantation in this country. If an individual in Mexico owes but twenty-five cents, by application to an alcalde the creditor can have him, with his family, decreed to his service, and to remain in that state of slavery until he is able to pay the debt from the wages accruing from his labor, after being compelled to subsist his dependent family. This you call freedom; and graciously bestow your sympathy upon the African race. The Abolitionists of the present day will not feel that they are indebted to you for your support of their cause. Had some one else than the dictator of Mexico, or the self-styled "Napoleon of the West"—the subverter of the Constitution of 1824, the projector of centralism, and the man who endeavors to reduce a nation to slavery—become their advocate, they might have been more sensible of their obligation. Slavery is an evil: it was entailed upon us by Mexico. So far as its increase can be prevented, our Constitution and laws have presented every obstacle. They will be maintained to the letter: and on account of slavery, Texas will incur no reproach.

You tauntingly invite Texas to cover herself anew with the Mexican flag. You certainly intend this as mockery. You denied us the enjoyment of the laws under which we came to the country. Her flag was never raised in our behalf, nor has it been seen in Texas unless when displayed in an attempt at our subjugation. We know your lenity—we know your mercy—we are ready again to test your power. You have threatened to plant your banner on the banks of the Sabine. Is this done to intimidate us? Is it done to alarm us? Or do you deem it the most successful mode of conquest? If the latter, it may do to amuse the people surrounding you. If to alarm us, it will amuse those conversant with the history of your last campaign. If to intimidate us, the threat is idle. We have desired peace. You have annoyed our frontier—you have harassed our citizens— you have incarcerated our traders, after your commissioners had been kindly received, and your citizens allowed the privileges of commerce in Texas without molestation—you continue aggression—you will not accord us peace. We will have it. You threaten to conquer Texas— we will war with Mexico. Your pretensions, with ours, you have referred to the social world and to the God of Battles. We refer our cause to the same tribunals. The