Westward extension, 1841-1850, by George Pierce Garrison.

1844]

TEXAN NEGOTIATIONS

121

the treaty. Henderson's affirmative vote is the
only one that by any sort of logic could be charged
to the influence of slavery. The Democrats were
not united; and it was thought necessary to give to
the press a letter from Jackson condemning the
senator who should vote against the treaty as a
traitor to the best interests of his country.1 Nevertheless, there was soreness over the leaving-out of
Van Buren by the convention at Baltimore, and for
this or other reasons eight of the Democrats broke
ranks when the vote occurred.2 One, Hannegan of
Indiana, declined to vote, and absented himself
when the vote was taken; it stood, therefore, i6
ayes to 35 noes; of those voting aye five were from
free states, and of those voting no fifteen were from
slave states.
It is interesting to speculate on what the result
would have been if the treaty had been ratified in
the form in which it was signed. The policy of
compromise which so characterized the history of
the United States up to the Civil War would doubtless have secured the admission of Texas as a slave
state; but it is not easy to say what the price of
admission would have been. The anti-slavery element would have had a much better chance in the
compromise of i85o, and might have driven a
better bargain. The treaty would also have taken
from Texas her public lands, whose value was not
then understood, but which have played a most
I. iles' Register, LXVI., 241. 2 Ibid.