communication from the English Minister. He declared that the President viewed with deep concern, the desire avowed by Great Britain for the abolition of slaveiy ; that in his opinion, Texas by herself, could not withstand a compliance with this desire, and therefore "It is the imperative duty of the Federal Government, the common representative and protector of the States of the Union, to adopt, in self- defence, the inost effectual means to resist it ;" and that, in obedience to this obligation, a treaty of annexation had been concluded. "And this step" (he asserted) " had been taken as the most effectual^ if not the only means of guarding against the threatened danger." The next day he addressed a letter to the xYraeriqan Agent in Mexico, anuoancing the conclusion of the treaty, a step, he says, " wkick was forced on the Goveiiwient of the United States in self-defence, in consequence of the policy adopted hy Great Britain in reference to the abolition of slavery in Texas"
The audacious mendacity of this declaration is the more remarkable, as Mr. Calhoun's own language bears witness to its falsity. The readers of these sheets have already had abundant proof, that • the annexation of Texas was prompted by