The Writings of Sam Houston, Volume I

WRITINGS OF 5AM HOUSTON, 1826

officers of the General Government. They refused obedience to thir officers, and the compromise was dissolved. There were then but few regular troops in that State. The situation of the North- ern frontier required their presence, and that became their desti- nation. In Massachusetts we find there was a great reverence entertained for the Constitution of the country. The State authori- ties would not permit their troops to step beyond the lines of the State. Yet we are called upon to pay these troops for service rendered to the United States in the last war. And pray, Sir, how long did they serve?. Jnformation on this point is very vague and indefinite. Some for "nearly three months,"-some for two weeks, and others for two days. But, Sir, we are assured, and with much gravity, too, that Governor Strong, in all this matter had no "desire to embarrass the General Government." On this point I may safely leave all to judge for themselves. But, Sir, what says Massachusetts herself on this point? Hear the address of Governor Eustis to the Legislature in the May session of 1823. In addressing the Legislature touching this claim, he says: "The long continued opposition to the Federal Government, more espe- cially the measures pursued in this State during the eventual and critical period of the late wars- the withholding from the Gov- ernment the Constitutional means of defence- the paralyzing influence exercised over the agents of that Government, which occasioned double sacrifice of life and treasure, while the citizens of other States were exercising their utmost energies against a common enemy; and, when a gallant army and navy were cover- ing themselves with glory and retrieving and establishing, on an imperishable basis, the national character, on the ocean and on the land must ever be regretted." And again, Sir, when referring to the same object, in the continuation of the same address- "The rising generation, who could have had no agency in this disloyal course, appear to have taken an honest and earnest inter- est in its disavowal." To these sentiments we find both branches of the State Legislature of Massachusetts responding. Is it not then enough to darken and destroy this claim, when we behold the rising generation in that State reprobating this disloyal course, and taking earnest interest in its disavowal? Can you then think this generation have any claims for remuneration for acts pronounced by themselves "disloyal?" Any right to reward for a course of conduct tending directly to the utter destruction of the Union of these States, and to the subversion of all the ..