[CTRL] [11b] Treason in America -- From Aaron Burr to Averell Harriman

[Kris Millegan]

 -Caveat Lector-

Treason in America -- From Aaron Burr to Averell Harriman
ANTON CHAITKIN (C)1984
New Benjamin Franklin House
P. O. Box 20551
New York, New York 10023
ISBN 0-933488-32-7
--[11b]--


The American Foreign Policy Disaster

The sudden death of President Harrison, his replacement by the mole Tyler,
and the Boston Brahmins' control over foreign policy, through the intriguer
Caleb Cushing and the pathetic Daniel Webster, brought about a terrible shift
in the foreign relations of the United States. The "Imperialists" now
appeared in American public life. Their object was to make the United States
"a new Britain," a looter and exploiter of the colonial world, for themselves
and their senior partners in Europe.

The grandfather of the Southern secession movement, British faker Thomas
Cooper, had told South Carolina's Senators in 1826 that they must "at all
costs" frustrate President John Quincy Adams's attempt to get a U.S.
delegation to the inter-American conference at Panama; and indeed, our
delegation arrived after the dose of the meeting. Now, in the 1840s, the
British-Swiss game was to make the United States itself, through these new
Imperialists, repudiate its leadership of the colonial and formerly colonial
areas, and to thereby stifle the prospects for an American system of
republican alliances that might check or destroy oligarchical world ambitions.

In 1840, British Foreign Minister Palmerston's new envoy to China, Charles
Elliot, arrived in Canton. The Chinese government was trying once again to
stop the import of illegal opium, the British business which had also
enriched the family and political employers of Caleb Cushing.


British Plenipotentiary Elliot opened up hostilities by ordering the
destruction of a number of Chinese war junks, and coordinated the ensuing
"Opium War" with his cousin, the British admiral who was sent to carry out
the planned conquest.

The outgunned Chinese succumbed to British massacres and town-burning, and
gave Elliot a treaty which became the model for the humiliation of Britain's
unwilling non-Western subjects. China was required to pay Britain for the
value of the illegal opium which Chinese authorities had confiscated and
burned; China was to pay Britain for the cost to Britain of sending its armed
forces to conquer China; Five Chinese ports were opened to unrestricted
British trade; British merchants trading in China were exempted from all
Chinese laws, and were thus given almost unlimited economic power; and
Britain was given the island of Hong Kong, which has been retained up to the
present as a Crown Colony, engaged in the illegal narcotics trade.(28)

Having succeeded in starting and winning this war of conquest,
Plenipotentiary Charles Elliot was redeployed to another area of colonial
difficulties: he was sent as the British Ambassador to the newly independent
Republic of Texas. Elliot's assignment in Texas would prove to be a disaster
for the United States, as we shall see.


The U.S. Is Disgraced in China

Back in 1839, the "godfather" of the Boston opium syndicate, Thomas Handasyd
Perkins, had addressed to Congress a memorial describing a British-Chinese
clash as "inevitable" and asking for the dispatch of an American naval force
to Chinese waters. Perhaps Perkins's earlier message to Congress, when he was
a representative of the disunionist Hartford Convention, was remembered; the
request for U.S. military involvement was ignored.

But the Boston Brahmins in China, with Franklin D. Roosevelt's grandfather
Warren Delano as their consul in Canton, watched with glee as their British
partners in crime invaded and burned Chinese cities. When the rape was
consummated, Caleb Cushing wrote to President Tyler, on December 27, 1842:


The British Government has succeeded in forcing China to admit British
vessels into five ports in the Chinese Empire and to cede to England in
perpetual sovereignty a commercial depot and fortified port on the coast of
China.

It does not appear that England contemplates attempting to exclude other
nations from similar free access to China. But it does appear that she has
made the arrangement for her own benefit only, and, if other nations wish for
like advantages, they must apply to China to obtain them on their own account.
Is not the present, therefore, an urgent occasion for despatching an
authorized agent of the United States to China, with instructions to make
commercial arrangements in behalf of the United States?(29)


Three days later President Tyler sent a Special Message to Congress,
proposing an appropriation of money for sending an American Commissioner to
China, along the lines of Cushing's letter.

At this time Caleb Cushing was unemployed. About as popular as Benedict
Arnold, he had been appointed Secretary of the Treasury by Tyler, but the
Senate had rejected his nomination three times�first by 27 to 19, then by 27
to 10, and when Tyler came back with Cushing's name yet again, only three
Senators voted for him. When President Tyler appointed Caleb Cushing
America's first minister to the Chinese government, the choice was not
rejected; Cushing, it was reasoned, would be leaving the country.

After purchasing for himself a fantastic Major General's uniform�an
embroidered blue coat with white plume�the civilian Cushing left for China.
He carried with him a letter to the Emperor from President Tyler, composed by
Daniel Webster, which explained the mission: "It is proper, and according to
the will of heaven, that [our two governments] should respect each other, and
act wisely. I therefore send to you Count [sic] Caleb Cushing, one of the
wise and learned men of this country . . . we doubt not that you will be
pleased that our minister of peace . . . shall come to Peking . . . and that
your great officers will, by your order, make a treaty with him to regulate
affairs of trade, so that nothing may happen to disturb the peace between
China and America."(30)

On his way to China, Caleb Cushing�who affected an "anti-British" political
tone in his public speeches�was wined, dined, saluted, and celebrated by
British Empire governors and military authorities in Malta, Bombay, and
Colombo; took part in a tiger hunt; reviewed British troops; and sent back
detailed accounts of how British communications tied together the distant
ends of their empire.(3l)
Preceded by several U. S. warships, Cushing arrived in China in February,
1843, landing in the Portuguese enclave of Macao. There he announced his
intention of proceeding to the Chinese capital of Peking. But the Emperor was
in no hurry to have another British-style treaty imposed on him, and he made
no move to permit the "Count" to enter into the interior of the country.

So Cushing sent a note to the Emperor's representative, stating that "it is
neither the custom in China, nor consistent with the high character of its
sovereign, to decline to receive the embassies of friendly states. To do so,
indeed, would among western States be considered an act of national insult,
and a just cause of war." A week later he wrote: "It is my duty, in the
outset, not to omit any of the tokens of respect customary among western
nations. If these demonstrations are not met in a correspondent manner, it
will be the misfortune of China, but it will not be the fault of the United
States."

Cushing then ordered an American frigate to sail up Canton Bay to Whampoa and
fire off a few threatening rounds. When the Chinese still hesitated to be
raped anew, Cushing sent the following message:

I can assure your excellency that this is not the way for China to cultivate
good will and maintain peace. The late war with England was caused by the
conduct of authorities at Canton, in disregarding the rights of public
officers who represented the British Government.

If, in the face of the experience of the last five years, the Chinese
government now reverts to antiquated customs, which have already brought such
disaster upon her, it can be regarded in no other light than as evidence that
she invites and desires war with the other great Western Powers.(32)


Cushing ultimately utilized the threat of the entire mobilized American
squadron in obtaining his celebrated Chinese Treaty. This treaty, similar to
the earlier one with Britain, included provisions exempting Cushing's
relatives in the opium traffic from any possible punishment by Chinese
authorities: Americans in China were not to be subject to Chinese laws.

This treaty did not merely extend to the United States the status of
conqueror which the British had gained months before; the British and
American treaties, in fact, required that any new concessions given to either
of these countries were to be automatically extended to the other. America,
under its unexpected President and its posturing "Count" Cushing, was being
led back into its connection with the bloody Mother Country.

The Monroe Doctrine Is Buried in Mexico

While he was in China, Cushing received word that the Tyler administration
was attempting to annex Texas to the United States, a measure which the
Mexican government had formally stated would bring about a war.

As we saw above, the British plenipotentiary who had started the Opium War in
China, Charles Elliot, had been sent next as British ambassador to the
Republic of Texas, a de facto independent state which had been part of Mexico
before the Texan revolution.

Some historians, defending the concept of Manifest Destiny in American
territorial expansion, claim that the Tyler administration had to annex Texas
in order to stop "British intrigues" in Texas�Britain was, after all, making
obvious moves to entangle Texas as a pseudo-colony. Abolitionists at the
time, such as Caleb Cushing's student William Lloyd Garrison, called for the
breaking up of the United States rather than that Texas should be annexed,
and said that England should control Texas and act as an Abolition policeman
on this continent. (The masthead of Garrison's newspaper, The Liberator, had
begun carrying this new motto in 1842: "A repeal of the union between
Northern liberty and Southern slavery is essential to the abolition of the
one and the preservation of the other.")

What did Britain, and its Ambassador Elliot, want in Texas? We shall leave a
detailed study of the contest between British and American System parties in
and about Latin America, to be published in another location. What is clear
at the outset is what Britain, and the Venetian-Swiss oligarchs of Europe,
did not want: the continuation of the Henry Clay-John Quincy Adams policy of
alliance with the emerging republics. Clay and Adams had both been favorable
to U.S. acquisition of Texas�but not at the cost of a war with Mexico. Though
Adams, like most conscientious Northerners, was concerned that the Negro
slavery system not be extended into newly acquired territory, his lifelong
premise, continuing the tradition of the Founding Fathers, was that the
United States must be the model and guide for the new anti-colonial system,
and certainly not itself sink into participation in colonialism.

Returning in autumn 1844, from his mission to China, Caleb Cushing landed on
Mexico's west coast, letting the ship proceed on home without him. Cushing
then undertook an "intelligence-gathering" tour of the Mexican interior. To
assure the reader that what follows is not simply written out of malice for
our subject, we will quote from the Cushing biography (to this day, the only
one written) by his relative and defender, Claude M. Fuess: "Caleb Cushing
left the [ship] Perry  at San Blas, Mexico, and rode on horseback to
Guadelajara, at which he took a diligence for Mexico City, his route lying
directly between two hostile revolutionary armies.
What he had learned from his correspondents about American politics convinced
him that a knowledge of Mexican affairs would undoubtedly be an asset during
the next few years, and he seized every favorable opportunity for gathering
information. ... While his coach was bowling along the national highway,
between Puebla and Perote, a band of brigands suddenly appeared, wearing
masks and armed with swords and pistols. In true bandit fashion, they halted
the vehicle, and robbed Cushing of some his most valuable possessions....
Incensed by this outrage in broad daylight, Cushing complained to the Alcalde
[mayor] in the village of El Pinal, but that official merely shrugged his
shoulders.... Cushing was by this time in a passion. After the American
Commissioner [to China] said in his best Castilian�which was excellent�'You
may not care to listen to me now, but I shall some day return with an
American Army at my back, and you may change your tune then....' "It was
rather less than four years later that Cushing, a Brigadier General in the
American forces invading Mexico, passed through the same village of El
Pinal.... When he heard the familiar name, the incident of the robbery . . .
came back to his memory. He sent a troop of guards to bring the Alcalde
before him; and soon the the trembling Mexican appeared.... General Cushing,
assuming his sternest mien, then reminded the Mayor of their former meeting,
explaining, with grim humor, that the United States never left unavenged such
insults to its representatives, and leaving it to be inferred that this
powerful army was there to exact reparation for the indignity offered him in
1844. The Alcalde was abjectly, tearfully, tragically penitent, and cringed
at his captor's feet in submission.... At last Cushing released him....

"During this overland journey . . . Cushing acquired a considerable knowledge
of Mexican character a knowledge which, it may be added, led him to view war
with that country with approbation and even elation. What he saw of Mexican
sloth, procrastination, shiftlessness, bigotry, and treachery gave him an
insuperable prejudice against that nation.... Cushing's report on Mexico,
dated March 22, 1845, was exhaustive and authoritative, and was used
extensively by the War Department two years later. . ."(33)

Caleb Cushing and associated enemies of both North American republics
succeeded in getting their war with Mexico, which dragged the United States
well down the road to its own near-destruction in 1861. A brief study of the
origins of the U.S.-Mexican War will provide valuable insights into the true
nature of the insurrectionary combination on which was based the Southern
Confederacy, and of the American foreign policy catastrophe of Theodore
Roosevelt's day.

The Mexican Secretary of Foreign Relations had stated bluntly in 1843 that
Mexico "would consider equivalent to a declaration of war against the Mexican
Republic the passage of an act for the incorporation of Texas with the
territory of the United States; the certainty of the fact being sufficient
for the immediate proclamation of war. "(34) With this in mind, the U. S.
Senate�which included 26 Southern members, rejected the Tyler
administration's annexation treaty, on June 8, 1844, by a vote of 35 to 16.
Hostility to the presidential mole, and the good prospects for replacing him
in the November elections, certainly helped swing the vote.

For the 1844 presidential contest, the Whigs nominated Henry Clay of
Kentucky, and the Democrats chose the avid pro-annexationist James K. Polk of
Tennessee, former Speaker of the House. Clay tried to keep the Texas issue in
the background, running on a program of restoring the United States Bank and
"internal improvements"�great national construction projects.

But Clay's campaign strategy was disrupted by one George Sanders, a
Kentuckian, grandson of a co-conspirator(35) of disunionist General James
Wilkinson, and an admitted paid political agent of the British Hudson's Bay
Company. Sanders engineered a supposed community election meeting which
"authorized" him to poll the candidates on the issues. With this cover,
Sanders framed and submitted a question on Texas to Clay, and caused Clay's
answer to be published nationally, in which it seemed that Clay weakly
encouraged the annexation of Texas (we shall see more of Sanders's bizarre
career shortly).

This Texas gaffe was then played in the Northeast against an appeal for
"third party" anti-slavery votes, and a wildly false representation of Polk
as a pro-tariff, pro-industrial development candidate. Polk narrowly won the
election in Pennsylvania and New York, and took the national election by a
popular vote margin of 40,000 out of about 3 million.

The New York contest decided the issue. Polk received 237,588 New York State
votes, to 232,482 for Clay and 15,814 to James Birney for the anti-slavery
Liberty Party. If these Liberty votes had gone to Clay, the 36 New York
electoral votes would have changed columns and given Clay the national
election by 139 to 134 electoral votes.

The Liberty Party had been organized by Gerrit Smith, an upstate New York
multi-millionaire. Smith and his father had been business partners with John
Jacob Astor from the beginning of Astor's career in 1784. With land acquired
in the Astor partnership, Smith's father had become one of the largest
landowners in the United States.

Gerrit Smith's coziness with the anti-American Astor is illustrated by a loan
of $250,000 which Astor extended to him in 1837, in the middle of the worst
depression the country had ever had, with no contract and no collateral�and
Astor was notorious as a tightwad.

According to an adoring biography,(36) Gerrit Smith donated at least
$8,000,000 to causes which included the revolutionary schemes of Giuseppe
Mazzini in Europe and America and the activities of abolitionists William
Lloyd Garrison and John Brown. Would a philanthropist dedicated to such
liberal causes deliberately throw the election to the "most reactionary"
candidate, Polk? The answer will shortly become clear as we probe the nature
of the Mazzini-allied movement known as "Young America.


James Polk's presidential candidacy was also boosted by the outlandish fraud
perpetrated by John Slidell. A graduate of Aaron Burr's political machine in
New York, Slidell had moved to New Orleans in 1819, and was personally
trained by Burr's indicted collaborator in treason, Edward Livingston. In
1844, he was on his way to becoming political boss of Louisiana. Slidell's
electioneering consisted of herding masses of Polk voters up and down the
Mississippi on steamboats, voting in every parish they visited. This famous,
audacious tactic, though illegal and insulting to the republic, was never
successfully challenged.

Caleb Cushing, carrying his plans for war with Mexico, arrived back in New
York on December 31, 1844. With the election of Polk accomplished, the
outgoing mole President Tyler secured from the demoralized Congress the
unanimous ratification of Cushing's China treaty, and the passage of a
resolution annexing Texas.

The new President spent several months puffing various ancient American
claims for damages against the Mexican government, and feinting towards
hostilities with England over unsettled Anglo-American boundaries in the
Oregon territory. American statesman and Texas Independence leader Sam
Houston had fought for annexation to the United States. But now, as a U. S.
Senator, Houston urged his countrymen not to make war on Mexico, but to
secure Oregon from the British�even at the risk of a war with Britain.

In the autumn of 1845, Polk sent Burrite John Slidell of Louisiana to Mexico
as a "peace commissioner," in the tradition of Cushing's mission to China.
When the Mexican government flatly refused to receive him, Slidell gave the
word to start the war, and Polk sent U. S. troops down to the Rio
Grande�among the Mexican villages, far past the line of American
settlement.(37) A Mexican army detachment finally managed to show minimal
resistance, attacking a U.S. scouting party just north of the river.


President Polk then sent to Congress a message declaring that war already
existed "by the act of Mexico herself . . . after reiterated menaces, Mexico
has passed the boundary of the United States . . . and shed American blood on
American soil. "(38) Congress voted for supplies and enlistments, and the war
was on.

Among the American Army officers who took part in the subsequent invasion of
Mexico were most of the military leaders of the American Civil War that would
come in the 1860s, including Ulysses S. Grant, Robert E. Lee, William T.
Sherman, and Jefferson Davis; these American soldiers were performing their
duties under the ugly circumstances they found their country in.


For the two leading American generals, Zachary Taylor and Winfield Scott�both
Whig enemies of Polk's ruinous policies� the problem was to win the war as
quickly as possible, conclude peace with Mexico, and permanently withdraw
U.S. forces. Much to the disgust of President Polk, they accomplished these
aims, becoming heroes to the American public and causing a major political
battle with the administration, which accused the generals of softness toward
Mexico.

Besides the thousands of deaths and blasted lives left by the war, there was
a deep and permanent wound on the face of the United States. The new
republics of Latin America looked north and saw no reason to hope for support
against European grasping, and they stood open and undefended as the British
quickly moved in diplomatically and economically. Until the advent of Abraham
Lincoln, and his special alliance with Benito Juarez, the Monroe Doctrine
would lie shattered.
But there was yet another category of officers in the invasion of Mexico:
individuals involved in a political movement whose leadership had in fact
brought the war on, a movement whose aims were quite foreign to the culture
and thought patterns of American citizens. For later reference, we will now
simply list some of these odd gentlemen: Caleb Cushing of Massachusetts,
Albert Pike of Massachusetts and Arkansas, John A. Quitman of New York and
Mississippi, Dr. David Camden DeLeon of South Carolina, Grayson
Mallet-Prevost of Switzerland and Pennsylvania, and Franklin Pierce of New
Hampshire.

Young America

The Young America movement was first brought before the public in 1845 upon
the reprinting of a speech by Edwin DeLeon, delivered to the students of
South Carolina College. DeLeon was the brother of the above-named officer.
Their father was the physician and closest friend of British revolutionist
Thomas Cooper, who had come to South Carolina and started the
Nullification-Secession Crisis in the 1820s. Edwin DeLeon was later to be
chief Confederate propagandist in Europe and the closest adviser to
Confederate President Jefferson Davis; David DeLeon would later organize the
medical department of the Confederate army and be its first Surgeon General;
they had another brother, Thomas Cooper DeLeon, who was the most celebrated
Confederate author.

In 1845, Edwin DeLeon was returning to his alma mater and to the scene of his
tutalege by Cooper�in his memoirs he said: "The discussions which took place
constantly between [Cooper] and my father on literary and scientific
questions, did much to the development of my mind and character. "(39) In his
1845 speech, entitled "The Positions and Duties of Young America," he praises
Thomas Cooper's "broad philanthropy, and . . . untiring zeal for the honor,
the interest and the intellectual elevation of South Carolina . . . an
eminently practical man . . . an earnest and sincere disciple of the school
of Bentham and Malthus....
["Of his religious heresies I do not speak; save to remark" [on] . . . the
purity of his life, the extent of his acquirements, and the unbounded
philanthropy of his heart, whose kindly pulsations....

"Thomas Cooper was one of the most zealous pioneers of science and literature
in his adopted state."(40) This, of the man who first proposed that the South
secede from the Union.

DeLeon then named his movement: "There is a 'Young Germany,' a 'Young
France,' and a 'Young England'�and why not a 'Young Arnerica'?" His student
auditors' generation is to be the material for this movement, and he urges
them to work quietly and prepare thoroughly for the explosions they are to
bring about:

If we trace back any great civil convulsion, we will find its source
originating in some quarter equally unsuspected and obscure. Take as an
example the trite one of the French Revolution; what agency had her pampered
Priests and Nobles in kindling up that blaze which gleamed like a balefire
over Europe? They were no more than the flax with which the flame was
kindled. Those who first applied the spark were the squalid and obscure
Savants, who in their garrets compiled the materials of the French
Encyclopedie, that mighty arsenal of mischief; and the breath which fanned
the flame was that of the wretched and frenzied enthusiast, whom all men then
scorned and reviled�Jean-Jacques Rousseau. True, they had all passed away
before the train which they had fired blazed fully forth, but on their heads
should rest the glory or shame attaching to the deed, for the actors in that
dead drama were its creatures, not its creators.(4l)


Near the close of this maiden speech for Young America, DeLeon pronounces the
motivating slogan: "Whatever extent of soil the desire of 'extending the area
of freedom' may prompt our people to enclose within the walls of our national
structure, let us ever stand prepared to guard its threshold against the
profaning foot of any foreign foe."(42)

"Extending the area of freedom" was then to be used in two parallel meanings:
conquering the Western Hemisphere, Spanish colonies and sovereign nations
alike, to convert all the Americas into a slave plantation; and aiding the
revolutionary anarchist Giuseppe Mazzini, the creator of Young Italy, Young
France, Young England, and Young Europe organzations, in his designs to
overthrow Europe's governments.

Observing how these two aims, revolution in Europe and slavery in America,
may be complementary, as "left-wing" and "right-wing" versions of the same
movement, should be very instructive in the twentieth century, confronted,
for example, by the actually reactionary policy of the "revolutionary" Soviet
state; and it is crucial to American history, because this movement created
the insurrection of 1861 and the American Civil War.

Mazzini biographer Stringfellow Barr condenses Mazzini's aims in these words:

A new cycle of civilization, comparable to the Christian cycle. The Christian
afflatus was exhausted.... Twice Rome had brought unity. Once the Roman
Republic had developed the idea of justice, and Roman legions had carried law
to three continents. Once again, this time under the then still vital papacy,
Rome's Universal Church had united the West in a common purpose. Now a Third
Rome in the name of God and democracy was destined . . . to unite the world
he saw crumbling about him. It was Italy's mission to free herself, to free
Rome [ie. break the Catholic Church] and to bring to birth the religion of
the future, of which the word "Association" was the key . . . and in his
vision he [now quoting Mazzini] "saw Europe, weary of skepticism, egotism and
anarchy, accept the new faith with acclamations."(43)

The Philosophy of Universal Slavery

When some nineteenth-century Southern politicians began contending that black
slavery was a positive thing, good for society and slave alike, perhaps they
thought they were cleverly passing along a simple rationale for a threatened
property institution, defying "traditional" morality in a tough political
game.
But the origins of this new notion, which contradicted the eventual-abolition
premises of both Northern and Southern Founding Fathers, are not to be found
in any "regional," or in any American context. This was a revival of
feudalism, issued from the same, undead European oligarchy which centuries
before had enveloped the Old World in feudal tyranny�and had introduced black
slavery to the New World.

Edwin DeLeon tells us, in his memoirs (written in 1890 in England), "The
relations between the white and black races� master and slave�in the Southern
states . . . were partly patriarchal and partly feudal, and the plantation
negro was the revival in some respects of the English Serf . . . [conquered
and enslaved by] the victorious Norman."(44)

And how did these two groups of slaves appreciate their condition? "The
[black] agricultural laborer, or 'field-hand,' was of course ignorant and
uneducated; but he was contented and happy, and enjoyed life far more than
his more responsible old master, from whose cares and anxieties for the
future he was entirely free.... They were, in fact, a noisy set of
good-natured, rollicking, grown-up children . . . such was the 'fieldhand,' a
purely animal creature, whose ringing laugh resounded a quarter of a mile
off, with a spaniel-like affection for 'the family.' (45)

And the English? "The Saxon thrall was a White Slave, bound to the soil, but
of the same blood and race as his master, the Feudal Lord�and to raise him to
political equality with that master, was the work only of education and time.
Given to him those opportunities, there was no insuperable natural barrier
between them.

"In the stalwart peasantry of England we now see his descendants; and no
dividing line of color, caste, or inborn diversity of character separates the
descendants of Norman or Saxon, noblemen or gentlemen, from the freed tillers
of the soil, their former serfs."(46)

England, then, by being enslaved under feudalism, has become a perfectly
democratic society! Ah, but the black slave, says our Young American (in
1890), not being "of the same blood and race as his master," can never really
advance his condition despite his master's graciousness, and this problem
"may result in the peaceable or forcible expulsion of the surplus portion of
the coloured race" from the United  States.(47)

David Hume (in his History of England in a similar spirit, describes the
background of those Norman pirate chiefs, who, upon conquering England in
1066 and stealing the land, created themselves the Aristocracy of Britain to
rule over the enslaved Englishmen. The "freedom" of which DeLeon and Hume
speak is the freedom of the master from any restraints of morality or
civilization, whether imposed by the Christian emperor Charlemagne or the U.
S. Constitution.

"The Emperor Charlemagne, though naturally generous and humane, had been
induced by bigotry to exercise great severities upon the pagan Saxons in
Germany . . . and had obliged them, by the most rigorous edicts, to make a
seeming compliance with the Christian doctrine. That religion which had
easily made its way among British Saxons . . . appeared shocking to their
German brethren, when imposed on them by the violence of Charlemagne....
[many of them] fled northward into Jutland [Denmark], in order to escape the
fury of his persecutions.

"Meeting there with people of similar manners, they were readily received
among them, and they soon stimulated the natives to concur in enterprises
which promised revenge on the haughty conqueror.... They invaded the
provinces of France . . . being there known under the general name of Normans
. . . from their northern situation, they became the terror of all the
maritime, and even of the inland countries"(48); and they used Normandy in
France as a springboard to invade England.

It is from these untamed, pagan conquerors that the "Cavaliers" of the
American South, and the Northern "bluebloods" such as Lowell, counted
themselves as descended, and on this basis were encouraged to feel racially
superior to the American and English white people. This is the wormy kernel
inside the racist nut.
The feudalists in the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry would exploit this
myth-based racialism in creating an insurrectionary machine in the 1850s;
they still hyped the myth in their 1938 biography of J. J. J. Gourgas, by J.
Hugo Tatsch:

"The conquest of England by the Normans during the eleventh century
introduced artistic, scientific and religious activities to a region which up
to that time had been one of the frontiers of Europe. The military
overlords�the feudal barons who laid the foundations of a new form of
government which finally blossomed into the democracy we know today...."(49)


Enter William Lloyd Garrison

But there was yet another side to the Young America movement abolitionism!
How, one might ask, could the same movement encompass both > expansion of
slavery and its abolition? Only if the movement's' objective was the
splitting of the United States and the overthrow of republican institutions.
The leader of Young America's abolitionism was William Lloyd Garrison. We
have seen that Garrison was trained in philosophy by Essex Junto agent Caleb
Cushing, after having been raised a disciple of the Tory-Federalists and
their disunion strategies in Newburyport, Massachusetts.

Garrison started The Liberator, his anti-slavery newspaper, in January 1831.
He sent free subscriptions to blacks, and had, in the early years, few white
subscribers. His most dramatic impact came from the 100 free subscriptions
Garrison sent to Southern, pro-slavery newspapers. The Southerners would read
The Liberator, publish an editorial denouncing Garrison and send him a copy
of it; then he would reply, and so forth. Garrison's importance is not that
he turned Northern opinion against slavery every moral leader of the North
prepared public thinking for abolition�but that he and his Young America
collaborators consciously and openly bred the hatred and the tension which,
he hoped, would produce the "irrepressible conflict" predicted by New York
Senator William Seward, and the breakup of the United States.

In one Garrison speech, given in England and reprinted in the London Patriot
in 1833, he called the U.S. Constitution "the most bloody and heaven-daring
arrangement ever made by men for the continuance and protection of the most
atrocious villainy ever exhibited on earth . . . it will be held in
everlasting infamy by the friends of humanity and justice throughout the
world. Who or what were the framers of the American government that they
should dare confirm and authorize such high-handed villainy.... It was not
valid then�it is not valid now."(50)


Garrison on Mazzini

In his 1872 introduction to the autobiography of Giuseppe (Joseph) Mazzini,
William Lloyd Garrison begins "My first interview with the great Italian
patriot, Joseph Mazzini, was in summer of 1846, at the charming residence of
my honored friend, the late William H. Ashurst, Esq., an eminent solicitor of
London. He impressed me very favorably . . . by the brilliancy of his mind .
. . the modesty of his deportment, the urbanity of his spirit . . . he
strongly drew upon my sympathies and excited my deepest interest. There our
personal friendship began, which revolving years served but to strengthen;
for though our fields of labor were widely apart, and our modes of action in
some respects diverse, we cherished the same hostility to every form of
tyranny, and had many experiences in common."(51)

Garrison goes on to say that unlike other, merely nationalist
revolutionaries, Mazzini "never tried to propitiate us by silence respecting
our great national sin. He deplored it in private and in public, though he
might have avoided the question altogether. Writing to Rev. Dr. Beard of
Massachusetts [in] 1854 he recorded his sentiments in the following
impressive language: 'I must express to you how grateful I feel for being
asked to attend the first meeting of the North of England Anti-Slavery
Association; how earnestly I sympathize with your noble object; how deeply I
shall commune with your efforts, and help, if I can, their success . . . the
sacred word liberty . . . the tears of the good and the blood of the brave .
. . the unity of God . . . apostle of truth and justice . . . do not forget,
whilst at work for the emancipation of the black race, the millions of white
slaves . . . in Italy, in Poland, in Hungary, throughout all Europe . . .
whilst Europe [is] desecrated by arbitrary, tyrannical power, by czars,
emperors, and popes."(52)

As we shall see, Mazzini issued this "impressive language" immediately after
having thrown considerable resources into the election of Franklin Pierce as
President of the United States, and the initiation of a wild, fanatical
pro-slavery conspiracy against the American republic.


Not all anti-slavery activists followed Garrison's lead in provocative
disunionism, though many did; and very few followed his footsteps into the
leftist "swamp" (as a similar melange of causes was known in the 1960s). The
cases of Fredrick Douglass and John Quincy Adams are useful by way of
contrast.

Douglass was a freed slave, entirely self-educated, who devoted his life to
the emancipation of black Americans. Speaking on many of the same platforms
as Garrison, he yet kept his dignity, and by his bearing and his eloquence,
demonstrated n his own person the bright prospects for the full development
of blacks after emancipation. This, however, was not to the liking of
Garrison and his ilk. They consistently warned Frederick Douglass that he was
hurting the cause because he did not sound like a slave; his diction was too
developed, his vocabulary too large, to appear "credible."

But Douglass refused to be patronized, and his persistent courage in this
regard makes him one of the heroes of his time. Though he, like many
abolitionists, later criticized Lincoln's Civil War efforts as "too slow, "
Douglass nevertheless faithfully aided the President wherever possible, and
effectively recruited black troops for the U.S. Army.

John Quincy Adams' education, as a teenager with Benjanmin Franklin in Paris,
and for several decades as diplomat, Secretary of State and President, was
too thorough to allow him to view British and British-allied abolitionism
without great skepticism. (53)


Thus when Adams, defeated for presidential re-election by Andrew Jackson,
embarked on a new career as an elder statesman in the House of
Representatives, he always steered clear of involvement with Garrison's
movement. But John Quincy Adams's valor in standing up to the mounting power
of pro-slavery politicians in Washington�his successful fight to break a gag
rule on discussion of the slavery issue�kept Congress alive as a republican
institution in the very dark days of the 1840s.

As for the Union, Garrison said it should be broken up so that he would not
have to live in a country that included in it the institution of slavery;
Adams wanted it strengthened so that he could exercise government power to
break up that institution, by economics or by force.

Their political methods were opposite, because while Garrison's irrationalism
was typified by his emulation of Mazzini's new "religious" thought, John Q.
Adams was a follower of Plato. On June 11, 1819, when he was U.S. Secretary
of State, Adams made the following entry in his diary:

My wife has made a translation of the first and second Alcibiades [dialogues]
of Plato, from that of Dacier in the Bibliothec des Philosophes. She made it
for the benefit of her sons, and I this morning finished the revisal of it,
in which I have made very little alteration.

I read the first Alcibiades at Auteuil [France], in the year 1784, at the age
of seventeen. The folly of that presumption which would rush to the
management of public affairs without a stock of knowledge concerning them,
the meanness of setting up as the standard of our own acquirements those of
our associates, the indissoluble union of moral beauty and goodness, the
indispensable duty of seeking self-knowledge and self-improvement, and the
exalted doctrine which considers the body as merely the mortal instrument of
the soul, made a deep and lasting impression upon my mind.

The beauties of the composition did not then so affect me. The dramatic
character of the dialogue . . . the playful but cutting irony . . . struck me
less than the pure and glorious moral sentiments inculcated in his discourse.
The lessons of Socrates were lost on Alcibiades; they were not so upon me....
I wish my sons to read, and to be penetrated as deeply as I have been with
the lessons of, the first Alcibiades.


Other entries in Adams's diary, especially during his earlier sojourn in
Russia as U. S. ambassador, proclaim his rediscovery of Plato, discussing the
Republic, the Laws, and other dialogues. Let it be remembered that this
American designed the Monroe Doctrine, and fought for the rest of his life
against the racialist foreign agents who wanted to remove the United States
from its leadership of the world's republicans.

Southern President versus 'Southern' Insurrection

General Zachary Taylor, who had led the American army to a successful
termination of the Mexican War, won the presidency on the Whig ticket in the
election of 1848. A lifelong military man, a slaveholding Southerner (his
daughter was Jefferson Davis's first wife), Taylor was devoted to the Union
and the Constitution.

In his inaugural address, President Taylor threw cold water on the doctrine
of Young America, characterized by Edwin DeLeon as "extending the area of
freedom," whether that involved "revolutionizing" Europe or subjugating Latin
America: "As American freemen we can not but sympathize in all efforts to
extend the blessings of civil and political liberty, but at the same time we
are warned by the admonitions of history and the voice of our own beloved
Washington to abstain from entangling alliances with foreign nations. In all
disputes between conflicting governments it is our interest not less than our
duty to remain strictly neutral . . . [and to cultivate] peaceful and
friendly relations with all other powers."(54)


The Quitman Project

Resuming the Whig economic outlook, Taylor informed Congress that he would
favorably receive their bills designed to protect American manufacturing and
to recommence federal construction projects for improving transport and
commerce.

But within a short time, the nation was to be plunged into a profound crisis,
the new President would be dead, and the Whig Party would be at an end.
"Young America" played a central role in these events, acting largely through
the person of John Anthony Quitman.

Quitman was a New Yorker who moved to Mississippi in 1821, at age 23, and
married into a wealthy family there. On January 3, 1830, as the
Nullification-Secession Crisis was being heated up in South Carolina, the
Scottish Rite Supreme Council in Charleston issued a warrant to "John A.
Quitman, 1st Sovereign of Sovereigns and Grand Illustrious Prince," to open
and preside over a Scottish Rite organization in the state of Mississippi.
(55)

According to the sketch on Quitman in the Dictionary of American Biography,
"In 1834 he became identified with the political group known as 'Nullifiers'
who held the views expressed by the Nullification leaders in South Carolina.
He prepared an address in their behalf, which was adopted May 21, 1834, by a
convention of 'Nullifiers' at Jackson . . . the sentiments therein set forth
were not then popular in Mississippi."

To express the same thing somewhat less politely, Quitman imported into
Mississippi the project of the European oligarchs to destroy the American
republic, which had recently been tried out in South Carolina, and whose
success would have to await the creation of a wider insurrectionary
organization and greater public demoralization.

John A. Quitman was an avid participant a brigadier-general of volunteers�in
the Mexican War, becoming a close friend of Caleb Cushing of Massachusetts.
At the close of the war, he presented a plan to President Polk for the
permanent subjugation and annexation of Mexico.

The Freemasons' monthly magazine of Boston printed the following notice on
February 1, 1848:

"At a special session of the Supreme Council . . . for the Southern
Jurisdiction . . . our illustrious Brother, John A. Quitman . . . Major
General in the Army of the United States, was elected to fill a vacancy in
the [Southern] Supreme Council, and was duly and formally inaugurated a
Sovereign Grand Inspector General of the 33d. All Consistories, Councils,
Chapters and Lodges under [the Southern] jurisdiction are hereby ordered to
obey and respect him accordingly." Quitman was by this time the recognized
leader of the secessionist movement in Mississippi, the most important such
grouping outside South Carolina.


The Quitman proposal for the annexation of all Mexico had not been adopted by
the federal government. But beyond annexing Texas, the United States had
taken from Mexico, as a result of the war, territory composing the present
states of Utah, Nevada, New Mexico, California, and most of Arizona. There
was widespread anxiety concerning the disposition of this territory: What
states would be formed out of it? Would they be slave states or free?

In October 1849, Quitman's Mississippi secessionists convened a strategy
session in Natchez with representatives from throughout the South, and a call
was issued to all Southern states to send delegates to a convention on June 3
of the following year.(56) In January 1850, Quitman took office as Governor
of Mississippi. In that office, as leader of the extremists in the South,
Quitman was openly proposing the breakup of the Union, and the new president,
Zachary Taylor, was presented with a deepening national crisis.

At the same time, Quitman was engaged in another of Young America's
adventures: he was arranging and financing the invasion of Cuba by mercenary
troops. With the ostensible purpose of taking Cuba out from under
"oppressive" Spanish rule, and saving the South from the threat that Spain
might abolish slavery in that neighboring island, a "Cuban Junta" of
revolutionaries in New York had hired Spanish renegade Narciso Lopez as a
general for the invasion, and Quitman for broker and sponsor. It is useful to
note that Virginia's Robert E. Lee and Mississippi'S Jefferson Davis were
both offered the leadership of the invasion, and both refused the offer.

The newspaper of the "Cuban Junta," La Verdad, published from 1848 to 1853
with a steady support for these Caribbean "filibusters," was edited by Jane
McManus, alias Cora Montgomery. Miss McManus had first begun her career as an
anti-Latin American intriguer when Aaron Burr sent her into Mexico's Texan
province after he returned from his European exile. Burr had sent along a
letter of introduction for her to Judge James Workman of Louisiana, former
British War Ministry official who had written the 1801 British plan for the
conquest of Spanish America.

In the 1830s, when the ancient Burr was sued by his last wife for divorce,
she had named Jane McManus in court as the "other woman"�the object of Burr's
adultery.
Seeking to defuse the national crisis cooked up by this assortment of spies
and agents, the old Whig Party leader Henry Clay constructed a congressional
compromise over the disposition of the new western territories, similar to
the Missouri Compromise he had arranged in 1820.

President Zachary Taylor took a different, complementary approach to the
problem. He sent his own agents into California and New Mexico and arranged
for those territories to request that Congress admit them to the Union as
free states. While Texas leaders were claiming part of New Mexico, and there
were threats of invasion across the desert from Texas into New Mexico, Taylor
pledged that he would uphold the law and the Constitution at all costs.

Taylor now acted against the primary anti-Union conspirator. In June, 1850, a
federal grand jury in New Orleans indicted Mississippi Governor John A.
Quitman for financing the invasion of Cuba, in violation of laws protecting
the neutrality and peace of the United States.

On July 3, John Quitman sent a telegram to Washington, D.C., saying that he
would personally be leading an anti-federal army of several thousand troops
from Texas into New Mexico. Allan Nevins, in Ordeal of the Union, paraphrases
President Taylor describing a meeting he had that day with some Southern
visitors:

" 'I told them . . . that if it becomes necessary I will take command of the
army myself to enforce the laws. And I said that if you men are taken in
rebellion against the Union, I will hang you with less reluctance than I
hanged the spies and deserters in Mexico!' (57)


The next day, July 4, 1850, Taylor had on his desk a half-finished message
declaring that he would never permit Texas to seize any part of New Mexico's
area. The President appeared that afternoon at an Independence Day
celebration, at which the audience was exhorted to rally to the Union.

That evening the President "fell ill," vomiting up a mass of blackish
material. He died on July 9th. Death was officially attributed to his having
consumed too-cold milk and too many cherries. This, according to the official
reports, had caused "cholera morbus," then fever.

Following this second death of a Whig President by "stomach distress," the
compromise bill proposed by Henry Clay was defeated. But a new compromise
plan, credited by Democrats to Stephen Douglas, a Young America- affiliated
Senator from Illinois, passed the Congress�and the crisis was abated. Henry
Clay died in 1852, and the Whig Party died with him.

pps. 163-212
--notes--
1. See Carey, Mathew, Addresses of the Philadelphia Society for the Promotion
of National Industry, Philadelphia, 1819; and Carey, Mathew, The New Olive
Branch, Or, An Attempt to Establish An Identity of Interest between
Agriculture, Manufactures and Commerce, Philadelphia, 1820; and Carey,
Mathew, Essays on Political Economy, Or the Most Certain Means of Promoting
the Wealth, Power, Resources and Happiness of Nations, Philadelphia, 1822.
2. Everett, Alexander H., New Ideas on Population, with Remarks on the
Theories of Malthus and Godwin, published in London and Boston; reviewed and
partially reproduced in the North American Review, No. XLI, New Series No.
XVI, Boston, October, 1823, p. 288-310.
3. See the excellent biography: Govan, Thomas P., Nicholas Biddle:
Nationalist and Public Banker, 1786-1844, University of Chicago Press,
Chicago, 1959.
4. The Monroe Doctrine is contained in the Annual Message of President
James Monroe to Congress, Dec. 2, 1823; see Richardson, James D. ed.,
Messages and Papers of the Presidents. 1789-1897, U. S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D. C., 1896-1899, Vol II, p. 218.
5. Inaugural Addresses of the Presidents, pp. 48-50.
6. ibid, p. 51.
 7. Carey, Mathew, The Crisis, An Appeal to the good sense of the nation,
against the spirit of resistance and dissolution of the Union, Philadelphia,
1832.
8. Huguenot Society of South Carolina, "Historical Sketch of the Prioleau
Family in Europe and America," first printed 1899, reprinted in Transactions
of the Huguenot Society of South Carolina, No. 71, Charleston,1966, pp.
80-101; the president of the South Carolina Huguenot Society for 1966-67 was
Horry Frost Prioleau.
9. The history and genealogy of the DeSaussures was provided to the present
author in lavish detail by a retired U. S. Army colonel living in Charleston,
a member of the DeSaussure family. This gentleman kindly allowed inspection
of his computerized family geneology, and of his collection of memorabilia
including masonic and other family heirlooms. The colonel's data was
cross-checked against the DeSaussure genealogical information in the files of
the Huguenot Society of South Carolina.
10. Harris, Ray Baker, Eleven Gentlemen, p. 25.
11. For a detailed account of the Tory military exploits of Captain Robert
Cunningham, see Jones, Lewis Pinckney, The South Carolina Civil War of ENS,
The Sandlapper Store, Inc., P. O. Box. 841, Lexington, S.C 29072 (also
distributed through South Carolina state historical site facilities).
Cunningham's son was married to the sister of Yancey's mother Caroline Bird
Yancey. William L. Yancey's father died when the boy was three years old, and
the uncle, with his Tory background and tales of "loyalism, " was an
important early influence.
12. See Nepveux, Ethel Trenholm Seabrook, George Alfred Trenholm: The
Company-That Went to War, 1861-1865, Comprint, Charleston, South Carolina,
1973.
13. The Minutes of the Board of Trustees of South Carolina College, on
microfilm at the library of the University of South Carolina, were consulted
for the period beginning in 1819. Cooper was DeSaussure's special project;
DeSaussure was on each Board committee dealing with Cooper so that he could
personally deal with Cooper's selection and hiring as a teacher and rapid
advancement to president of the college. See the Minutes for Dec. 3, 1819,
April 28, 1820, May 1, 1820, Dec. 15, 1820.
14. The fullest extant accounts of Cooper's amazing career are in Malone,
Dumas, The Public Life of Thomas Cooper, 1783-1839, Yale University Press,
New Haven, Connecticut, 1926; and Hollis, Daniel Walker, University of South
Carolina, Univesity of South Carolina Press, Columbia, S. C., 1951-1956, Vol.
I, p. 74-118. Malone is one of the most entrenched of "establishrnent"
historians, the general editor of the Dictionary of American Biography. His
life of Cooper is an example of that expertise, which starts with violently
contradictory story elements, dampens those ironies which might lead the
reader to infer that the subject's life is a career of deception, and blandly
presents the whole as a series of events connected only by the driving force
of the hero's unpredictable emotional makeup.
15. Cooper, Thomas, A Tract on the Proposed Alteration of the Tariff
Submitted to the Consideration of its Members from South Carolina, in the
Ensuing Congress. of 18234, Charleston, 1823; an interesting edition of the
Cooper Tract is that in which it is appended to Carey, Mathew, Examination of
A Tract on the Proposed Alteration of the Tariff printed by R.A. Skerrett for
H.C. Carey & I. Lea, Philadelphia, 1824, in which Carey refutes "Judge
Cooper's" anti-nationalist arguments.
16. DeLeon, Edwin, Thirty Years of My Life on Three Continents, Ward and
Downey, London, 1890, p. 5.
17. Charleston Mercury, July 18, 1827.
18. Turnbull, Robert James, The Crisis; or Essays on the Usurpation of the
Federal Government, by Brutus [pseudonym], printed by A. E. Miller,
Charleston, South Carolina, 1827.
19. Richardson, ed., Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Vol III, p. 981.
20. The Journal of the Free Trade Convention, Held in Philadelphia, From
September 30 to October 7, 1831, and their Address to the People of the
United States, to which is added A Sketch of the Debates in the Convention
printed by T.W. Ustick, Philadelphia, 1831; in the New York Society Library.
The convention's Address to the People of the United States denounces the
"tyranny" of the American government, and suggests that
the high tariff policy must inevitably lead to civil war. Boston Brahmins in
attendance, aside from Theodore Sedgwick, included George Peabody, Henry Lee,
Frederick Cabot and Joseph Ropes, along with their allies from, primarily,
South Carolina and Virginia.
21. ibid., p. 69.
22. De Leon, Edwin, The Position and Duties of "Young America, "An Address
Delivered Before The Two Literary Societies of the South Carolina College
December, 1845, A.S. Johnston, Columbia, South Carolina, 1846, p. 13.
23. Thomas, The Liberator, p. 53.
24. Koke, Accomplice in Treason, p. 65.
25. Fuess, The Life of Caleb Cushing, Vol. 1, p. 298.
26. Clay's speech to the U. S. Senate, Aug. 19, 1841, in Colton, Calvin The
Life and Times of Henry Clay, A.S. Barnes & Co., New York, 1846 reprinted by
Garland Publishing, Inc., New York and London, 1974, Vol. II, p. 370. Cotton
names (p. 371) Caleb Cushing as the first of the "corporal's guard" running
President Tyler's Congressional affairs. An important Southern co-manager of
the Tyler project, with Cushing, was Nathaniel Beverly Tucker�see Chapter 12.
27. See Albert Pike to Caleb Cushing March 2, March 14, and May 25, 1843,
manuscripts in the Cushing Papers, Library of Congress.
The March 2, 1843 letter, addressed "Dear Friend," says "As incompetent as I
am to the Station your kindness thought me fit for, I feel more sensibly the
friendship which prompted you to move in my behalf. " Further on, Pike, who
was to be built up as the great Arkansas secessionist leader, tells Cushing,
"I congratulate you still more on this, that you are still a citizen of our
own New England, where you enjoy that protection of the law and liberty of
conscience, which none of us here even dream of.... I do not know whether or
not I am tied here for life. I would fain hope not, and would, at almost any
sacrifice, get into some more orderly and law-abiding part of the world. "
Pike enclosed with that letter a declaration of principles for a new
political party-faction he is starting in Arkansas, for Cushing's approval.
The May 25, 1843 letter begins, "Soon after the accession of General Harrison
to the Presidency, you were so kind, at my earnest solicitation and
recommendation, as to interest yourself in procuring the appointment of
Thomas W. Newton, Esq. to the office of Marshall of this district . . . I
also solicited your influence, and you . . . exerted it, to procure for
Absalom Fowler Esq., the appointment of District Attorney...." The rest
reports on the problems of the political machine that Cushing put into Pike's
hands.
28. See Beeching, Jack, The Chinese Opium Wars, Harcourt Brace Jovanovitch,
New York and London, 1975.
29. Fuess, The Life of Caleb Cushing, Vol. I, p. 407.
30. Letter dated July 13, 1843, quoted in ibid, pp. 419-420.
31. There are still hanging, on the walls of his house in Newburyport,
Massachusetts, several etchings of the imposing British Imperial buildings
visited by Cushing during his visit to India.
32. Date April 24, 1844, Fuess, The Life of Caleb Cushing, Vol. I, p. 431.
33. ibid., p. 446-448.
34. Bemis, Samuel Flagg, The Latin American Policy of the United States: An
Historical Interpretation, Harcourt, Brace and Company, New York, 1943, p. 88.
35. His mother's father, Col. George Nicholas, for whom Sanders was named.
36. National Cyclopedia of American Biography, James T. White & Co., New
York, 1921, Vol II, pp. 322-323.
37. Young, The American Statesman, p. 835: "The act of annexation was
consummated on the 4th of July, 1845.... Immediately after this event, the
president [Polk], aware that it would be considered by Mexico as an act of
war on the part of the United States, ordered Gen. Taylor with his troops to
some place on the Gulf of Mexico.... The place selected by Gen. Taylor was
Corpus Christi, on the west side of the Nueces, the extreme western
settlement made by the people of Texas.... The army, after having been at
Corpus Christi from August to January, and no hostile act having been
committed by the Mexicans, was ordered, in January, 1846, to take position on
the left bank of the Rio Grande [i.e. far to the south of the Texans'
settlements]."
38. Message of James K. Polk, May 11, 1846, in Richardson, Messages and
Papers of the Presidents, Vol. IV, p. 442. Sam Houston is said to have
remarked, that the trouble with James Polk was that he drank too much water.
39. DeLeon, Thirty Years of My Life, p. 6.
40. DeLeon, Positions and Duties of Young America, p. 9.
41. ibid., pp. 13-14.
42. ibid., p. 26.
43. Barr, Stringfellow, Mazzini, Portrait of an Exile, Octagon Books, New
York, 1975, pp. 34-35.
44. DeLeon, Thirty Years of My Life, p. 19.
45. ibid., pp. 23-25.
46. ibid., p. 21.
47. ibid., p. 22.
48. Hume, David, The History of England from the Invasion of Julius Caesar to
the Revolution in 1688 in 7 Volumes, Levis and Weaver, Philadelphia
1810, Vol. I; pp. 57-58.
49. Tatsch, J. Hugo, Gourgas, p. 13.
50. Quoted in Thomas, The Liberator, pp. 161-162.
51. Mazzini, Joseph, His Life, Writings, and Political Principles, New York
Hurd and Houghton, 1872, p. vii.
52. ibid., p. xvi.
53. When he was ambassador to England, John Quincy Adams encountered the
British anti-slavery movement, headed by William Wilberforce. Adams says in
his Diary, June 6, 1817:
". . . The suppression of the slave-trade was the subject of Mr. Wilberforce
to see me, and we had an hour's conversation relating to it. His object is to
obtain the consent of the United States, and of all other maritime powers,
that ships under their flags may be searched and captured by the British
cruisers against the slave-trade�a concession which I thought would be liable
to objections....
"Probably this project originated in the brain of Master Stephen, the author
of [the anti-American book] 'War in Disguise,' and brother-in-law to
Wilberforce, one of the party called in derision the Saints, and who under
sanctified visors pursue wordly objects with the ardor and perseverence of
saints.... [British Foreign Minister Lord] Castlereagh has more than once
thrown out this idea [for consideration].... In substance it is a barefaced
and impudent attempt of the British to obtain in time of peace that right of
searching and seizing the ships of other nations which they have so
outrageously abused during war...."
54. Inaugural Addresses of the Presidents, p. 100
55. The original warrant is photographically reproduced in Harris, Ray Baker
Southern Supreme Council, p. 202.
56. Jennings, Thelma, The Nashville Convention: Southern Movement for Unity,
1848-1851, Memphis State University Press, Memphis, Tennessee, 1980, p. 6.
57. Nevins, Allan, Ordeal of the Union, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York,
1947, p. 331.

--cont--
Aloha, He'Ping,
Om, Shalom, Salaam.
Em Hotep, Peace Be,
Omnia Bona Bonis,
All My Relations.
Adieu, Adios, Aloha.
Amen.
Roads End
Kris

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om