_ September 21, 1839.]
[Footnote 176: _Globe,_28 Cong., 1 Sess., pp. 527-528]
[Footnote 177: _Globe_, 28 Cong., 1 Sess., p. 534.]
[Footnote 178: Illinois _State Register_, February 9, 1844.]
[Footnote 179: _Ibid._, May 17, 1844.]
[Footnote 180: It was intimated that he had at first aided Tyler in
his forlorn hope of a second term.]
[Footnote 181: _Globe_, 28 Cong., 1 Sess., pp. 598 ff.]
[Footnote 182: Illinois _State Register_, August 30, 1844.]
[Footnote 183: _Ibid._, September 27, 1844.]
[Footnote 184: Sheahan, Douglas, pp. 70-71.]
[Footnote 185: Official returns in the office of the Secretary of
State.]
CHAPTER V
MANIFEST DESTINY
The defeat of President Tyler's treaty in June, 1844, just on the eve
of the presidential campaign, gave the Texas question an importance
which the Democrats in convention had not foreseen, when they inserted
the re-annexation plank in the platform. The hostile attitude of Whig
senators and of Clay himself toward annexation, helped to make Texas a
party issue. While it cannot be said that Polk was elected on this
issue alone, there was some plausibility in the statement of President
Tyler, that "a controlling majority of the people, and a majority of
the States, have declared in favor of immediate annexation." At all
events, when Congress reassembled, President Tyler promptly acted on
this supposition. In his annual message, and again in a special
message a fortnight later, he urged "prompt and immediate action on
the subject of annexation." Since the two governments had already
agreed on terms of annexation, he recommended their adoption by
Congress "in the form of a joint resolution, or act, to be perfected
and made binding on the two countries, when adopted in like manner by
the government of Texas."[186] A policy which had not been able to
secure the approval of two-thirds of the Senate was now to be endorsed
by a majority of both houses. In short, a legislative treaty was to be
enacted by Congress.
The Hon. Stephen A. Douglas had taken his seat in the House with
augmented self-assurance. He had not only secured his re-election and
the success of his party in Illinois, but he had served most
acceptably as a campaign speaker in Polk's own State. Surely he was
entitled to some consideration in the councils of his party. In the
appointment of standing committees, he could hardly hope for a
chairmanship. It was reward enough to be made a member of the
|