reputation. He lived for a while in a boarding-house, where also resided a certain Dr. Robert Mayo, once a well known name, long ago forgotten. With Mayo General Houston gradually became intimate, and to him he finally confided the particulars of a grand project for wresting Texas from the feeble grasp of Mexico, and founding an independent republic. Dr. Mayo, who was then one of those waiters upon Providence whom we call office-seekers, betrayed his new acquaintance, and revealed the scheme to the President in a long letter. Heading his epistle with the cipher which the adventurers employed in their secret correspondence, he proceeded to impart to the President the substance of Houston's revelations. "I learned from him," wrote Mayo, "that he was organizing an expedition against Texas; to afford a cloak to which he had assumed the Indian costume, habits, and associations, by settling among them in the neighborhood of Texas. That nothing was more easy to accomplish than the conquest and possession of that extensive and fertile country, by the coöperation of the Indians in the Arkansas Territory, and recruits among the citizens of the United States. That in his view it would hardly be necessary to strike a blow to wrest Texas from Mexico. That it was ample for the establishment and maintenance of a separate and independent government from the United States. That the expedition would be got ready with all possible despatch, that the demonstration would and must be made in about twelve months from that time. That the event of success opened the most unbounded prospects of wealth to those who would embark in it, and that it was with a view to facilitate his recruiting he wished to elevate himself in the public. confidence by the aid of my communications to the Richmond Enquirer. That I should have a surgeoncy in the expedition, and he recommended me, in the mean time, to remove along with him and practice physic among the Indians in the territory.

* Eight Years in Washington. By Dr. Robert Mayo, Baltimore, 1839

Soon after General Houston had made these communications, Mayo fell in with another of the confederates, who confirmed them-a Mr. Hunter, who had been recently dismissed from the Military Academy at West Point. Hunter informed Dr. Mayo that "he was a bona fide agent of the recruiting service for this district; that there were agencies established in all the principal towns; that several thousands had already enlisted along the seaboard, from New England to Georgia, inclusive; that each man paid thirty dollars to the common fund, and took an oath of secrecy and good faith to the cause on joining the party; that they were to repair, in their individual capacities as travelers, to different points on the banks of the Mississippi, where they had already chartered steamboats on which to embark, and thence ply to their rendezvous, somewhere in the territory of Arkansas or Texas, convenient for action."

Here was an exact reproduction of the Burr project of 1806. The revelations of Hunter were communicated to the President by the zealous Mayo.

When we consider the relations existing between General Jackson and General Houston, it is difficult to believe that the President was ignorant of Houston's designs. His office, however, compelled him to assume an attitude of opposition to them. Upon the back of Dr. Mayo's letter he wrote these words: "Dr. Mayo on the contemplated invasion of Texas, private and confidential-a letter to be written confidential, to the secretary of the Territory of Arkansas, with copy of confidential letter to Wm. Fulton, Esq., secretary to the Territory of Florida." This indorsement seems to indicate agitation in the mind of the writer, for the "Wm. Fulton, Esq.," mentioned in it was not the "secretary of the Territory of Florida," but the secretary of the Territory of Arkansas.

A letter was written, marked " strictly confidential," which communicated the substance of Mayo's information, but expressed the opinion that that information was "erron

eous." Nevertheless, Mr. Fulton was ordered to be on the look-out for a possible descent upon Texas, and to let the President know if any suspicious movements were made in the south-western country. In all that he did Mr. Fulton was enjoined to observe the "utmost secrecy."

In due time, Gen. Houston entered upon the execution of his scheme. That he experienced no serious hindrance from the government of the United States, and that General Jackson watched his movements with interest and with sympathy, are facts well known to us. The last year of General Jackson's presidency saw Houston master of the province, and Santa Aña a prisoner in his hands. Santa Aña was permitted to retire to Mexico on the condition that he should use his influence to induce his government to acknowledge the independence of Texas. A mob prevented his return. In the spring of 1837, he came to Washington; had several interviews with General Jackson, the purport of which has not been disclosed; and was sent home in a national vessel.

Before finally leaving the White House, General Jackson employed many hours in burning useless papers, and in returning letters to the authors of them. Dr. Mayo received back his letter of 1830, and with it, in the same envelope, a copy, in General Jackson's own hand, of the letter to Mr. Fulton, referred to above. The sending of the Fulton letter was probably an accident. Instead of returning it to the President, Mayo showed it to members of the Opposition, one of whom, Mr. John Quincy Adams, read it to the House of Rep resentatives for a purpose that is obvious. General Jackson avowed the belief, in an affidavit, that Dr. Mayo had stolen the Fulton letter from his office in the White House. Dr. Mayo swore that he received it with his own confidential epistle. In either case, General Jackson was not far wrong when he spoke of his own letter to Fulton as the letter "purloined" by Dr. Mayo.

With this explanation, the reader is prepared to under

stand the events which roused the aged lion from the quiescence natural to his years, and caused him to roar and show his teeth, as of old.

General Harrison had triumphed and died. Mr. Tyler, the Vice-President had succeeded him. The presidential election of 1844 was approaching. Henry Clay, the beloved, the often disappointed, was to be the candidate for the whigs. Mr. Van Buren, defeated in 1840 because of his immovable devotion to the principles of his party, was the man entitled by that party's "usages," to be its candidate in 1844. A faction, headed (according to Col. Benton) by Mr. Calhoun, was resolved upon his being dropped by the nominating convention. To effect their purpose, the faction devised a new and popular "issue," or, as we now phrase it, a "new plank in the platform;" one upon which Mr. Van Buren could not stand; namely, the immediate annexation of Texas. As Mexico had not yet acknowledged the independence of the revolted province, its annexation to the United States was equivalent to a declaration of war against Mexico. But what of that if a president could be elected thereby? Early in 1843, Mr. Gilmer of Virginia, a particular friend of Mr. Calhoun, published in a Baltimore newspaper, an elaborate plea for immediate annexation, on the ground that Great Britain had designs upon Texas.

Mr. Gilmer's letter was sent to General Jackson by Mr. Aaron V. Brown, member of Congress from Tennessee, with a request for the General's opinion thereon. The object of the intriguers was to obtain from General Jackson a strong expression of opinion in favor of immediate annexation; to keep his letter a secret until a contrary opinion had been published by Mr. Van Buren; and, finally, to produce General Jackson's letter in the democratic convention, to the annihilation of Mr. Van Buren's hopes. General Jackson, suspecting no intrigue, replied to Mr. Brown with the utmost promptitude and completeness.

VOL. III-42

GENERAL JACKSON TO MR. A. V. BROWN.

"HERMITAGE, February 12, 1943. "MY DEAR SIR: Yours of the 23d ultimo has been received, and with it the Madisonian, containing Governor Gilmer's letter on the subject of the annexation of Texas to the United States.

"You are not mistaken in supposing that I have formed an opinion on this interesting subject. It occupied much of my attention during my presidency, and, I am sure, has lost none of its importance by what has since transpired.

"Soon after my election, in 1829, it was made known to me by Mr. Erwin, formerly our minister at the Court of Madrid, that whilst at that Court he had laid the foundation of a treaty with Spain for the cession of the Floridas and the settlement of the boundary of Louisiana, fixing the western limit of the latter at the Rio Grande, agreeably to the understanding of France; that he had written home to our government for powers to complete and sign this negotiation; but that, instead of receiving such authority, the negotiation was taken out of his hands and transferred to Washington, and a new treaty was there concluded, by which the Sabine, and not the Rio Grande, was recognized and established as the boundary of Louisiana.

"Finding that these statements were true, and that our government did really give up that important territory, when it was at its option to retain it, I was filled with astonishment. The right of the territory was obtained from France. Spain stood ready to acknowledge it to the Rio Grande, and yet the authority asked by our Minister to insert the true boundary was not only withheld, but in lieu of it, a limit was adopted which stripped us of the whole of the vast country lying between the two rivers.

"On such a subject, I thought with the ancient Romans, that it was right never to cede any land or boundary of the republic, but always to add to it by honorable treaty, thus extending the area of freedom; and it was in accordance with this feeling that I gave our minister to Mexico instructions to enter upon a negotiation for the retrocesssion of Texas to the United States.

"This negotiation failed, and I shall ever regret it as a misfortune to both Mexico and the United States. Mr. Gilmer's letter presents many of the considerations which, in my judgment, rendered the step necessary to the peace and harmony of the two countries; but the point in it, at that time, which most strongly impelled me to the course I pursued, was the injustice done to us by the surrender of the territory, when it was obvious that it could have been retained without increasing the consideration afterward given for the Floridas. I could not but feel that the surrender of so vast and important a territory was attributable to an erroneous estimate