Our Position Vindicated

The whigs in this vicinity have been indeiatigable in assertingthat Mr. Clay's Texas letter fully pledged him and the Whig party against Annexation: and since we took the ground that no such position was involved in that letter, we have been treated as though we had designedly fabricated a falsehood. A little closer inspection of that document will teach them to moderate the fierceness of their anathemas. It is well known that the Junius Tracts are issued from the Tribune Office, in N. York, and that the author, and his productions, have been recommended to the Whigs of the Union by members of Congress, both from the North and South. - These tracts are circulated every where, and purchased in quantities by the Clay Clubs, and may therefore be regarded as the highest standard of Wbigorthodoxy. saving only be resolutions of the Whig National Convention. The Junius Tract No. 9, which has been recently issued, treats of the Annexation of Texas, and after analyzing Mr. Clay's letter on Texas, sums up his position thus: "9. Mr. Clay'a position on the annexation qiipsüon, lea ves it precieely where it was. - He opens nnfl shuts no door on this question, nor does he put his little finger to one. He frnnkly ventures on some suggestionfi, which, pprchancp, may prove prophetic. But Mr. Clay, po faras we een see, is notcmnmitted or pledged to any course of policy on this question, olhpr ihan - 1. To maintain the niih of treaties. 2. Not to viólate our rule of non-intervention, where our position is neiHniL Si. To do whot we can, fairly and honorably. to secure the independence of Texas. 4. To pee that uur own republ;c receives no dnmage by European interference in the affoira of Texas. 5. T. oppose, if necexsnry, by torce of anns, a!l puch machinaiions. 6. To l'8vethe qnestion ol Annexation open nnd onembnrrhsveri. for ihe fumre decisión of tho porties concfrned. after tiiey shall have had a fair an.l snfficient opportiinity to consider it. And 7. To help fhe country flirough the critical posture, into whicli mbitiout! men, rfclde.as of consequcn ces. l)Hve bronght it. This is the politlón of Mr. Cluy on the nnnoxarion question, as we undt-rs'and it. He wonld not piclc a quarrel, where we could only reap dinhonor, and where we wou ld cïinnce to bave the worid ugamst us. And vve have reasn to ijeÜPve, there is no pan of the Union and no interest, no feding or prejudice on this subjpct, which Mr. Cluy does not regard wilh impartialand patriolic concern." Now this is precisely what we have contended. Junius writes for the South as well as the North, and his exposition of the letter, being adapted for both sections, is fair 'and impartial. Mr. Clay "OPENS AND SHÜTS NO DOOR ON THI8 question." But Junius says he is pledged- - to do what? "To leave the question of Annexation OPEN AND UNEMBARRASSED. for the future decisión OF THE PARTTES CONCERNED." "Mr. Claifs ■position on the Annexalion question, LEAVES IT PRECISELY WHERE IT WAS." This exactly coincides with out statement. We and Junius are fully agreed on this question. Will those who have denounced üs as fabricators of falsehood. place the Rev.' Calvin Cölton, the au'fhor óf their' "Whig Tracts, on the same platform? And if this is not the real posiHon of Mr. Clay, why do they circuíate the tract asserting that he is not pledged against Annexation, but has left it an open question?