The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1844-08-13

OF pENNsYLyANIAS.

"a
favor of the treaty for the annexation oil Texas 10
the United States, (the injunction Of secrecy being
removed
CONCLUDED.
| That one nation, in a state Of with another,
may rightfully cede portion OF its territory to
neutral nation is principle of public law which can
| not he doubted. We have the high authority oil
| MIR. Madison IN support OF this principle, which he
has illustrated with rare felicity OF expression In
| his letter TO Messrs Livingston and Monroe oil The
2Sth May, 1903, instructiDg them IN regard to The
purchase of Louisiana, he says "Ihat the right oil
neutral 10 procure for itself, by bona Gde trans
action property OF any Sort from belligerant pow
er, ought not 10 be frustrated by the chance tha
| rightfuI conquest thereof might be pfecuded A
contrary doctrine would sacrifice the just interests
of peace 10 the unreasonable pretensons OF war; and
the positive rights Of one nation TO the positive rights
of another" This pure and able statesman does
not seem to have been alarmed by such fears as now
haunt Senators, lest the acceptance oil The cession
| OF Louisiana from France by the United States
might be a violation Of our treaty Of peace with
England. This authority would be directly in point
on the present occasion, If Texas had coded to us
part of her territory whilst at war with Mexico
instead Of the whole, and ask how the principle
be changed by the amount OF the cessiont The
neutral obtaining such cession of begerant terri
tory most probably accepts IT, subject to the right oil
conquest by the opposite party but the idea oil bad
faith such transaction does not seem to have en-
| tered the pure mind of Mr.. Madison. We are far
more sensitive this subject new, than our ances-
tors were forty years ago
| But there other examples in our history d.
recty IN point in every particular. Messrs. Adams
and Clay made unsuccessful efforts, in 1925 and
1927, TO purchase Texas from Mexico, whilst actual
war-and u mere paper war-was raging between
Spain and Mexico, and long before the Government
OF Spain had recognised the independence OF Mex
| leo.
In August, 1929, General Jackson and Mr.. Van
Buren, made a similar attempt to purchase Texas
from Mexico, although at the very moment the great
expedition OF Barradas had sailed from the Havana
| to make last and desperate struggle 10 recover
Mexico aud, in the language of this commander, TO
"re-establish order, and the paternal Government
OF the best Of Kings" This expedition was known
to the whole world. Mr. Van Buren,, so far from
| believing that the purchase Of Texas ON Mexico
would be a violation Of our treaty OF peace with
Spain, even whilst war was raging between that
power and Mexico, actually urged the existence Of
| this very upon Mexico a strong reason to in
duce her to make the cesson. @ i he particularly
threatening attitude of Spain at the present moment"
| was presented TO Mexico a most cogent reason
why she should accept the money offered by the
United States for Texas, and thus supply herself
with the means of defending the residue of her terri
tory. The idea OF violation of national faith to-
wards Spain, by the acquisition Of Texas, does not
seem once to have occurred to the minds of MIR,
Adams, Mr.. Clay, General Jackson, o Mr. Van Bu-
| rem. Mexico now stands precisely in the same po-
ston towards the question that Spain did then and,
in accepting the ccssion Of Texas from Texas her
self, without the consent of Mexico, no more vi
olate faith towards Mexico than all these dstin-
guished statesmen would have done when they were
intent upon obtaining the cession Of the same terri
| tory from Mexico without the consent of SPAIN
The difference Is, indeed greatly in favor Of the pre-
sent treaty They were anxious TO obtain the
sion whilst actual war raging between Spain
and Mexico; but delayed TO make the attempt
until eight years had elapsed since the last serious
| effort was made by Mexico to subdue Texas. The
truth is this is not question involving national
faith at all and it would have been cons.
dered, had we not ourselves proclaimed TO the world
that IL would be heinous crime against Mexico to
ratlfy the treaty.
defy human ingenuity to point out difference
between the cases have cited under tue administra-
tons Of Mr.. Adams and General Jackson and the
present case that would not operate in favor of the
treaty now before Had we then purchased from
Mexico, this would have been done without the con-
sent of The inhabitants of Texas but now we can
obtain Texas by the unanimous consent of its Free
| sovereign and independent people. But | promised
not to enlarge upon this branch Of the subject.
shall now merely glance al a few Of what con-
slider the minor objections to this treaty.
And first; 1t has been commended that the true
boundary or Texas dooe not extend far the west
the Rio del Norte; and that for this rea son we
should violate the just rights of Mexico by ra,yng the
treaty II this true those who make the oblec-
ton ought to offer amendment to the treaty So as
to make IT conform TO the relative rights Of the par
ties. But, sir, ask you, could any reasonable man
have expected that Texas would dismember herself
NoTlu, on Tue oil tfs treaty
that the boundaries which she had solemnly estab-
lIshed in 1886, by act of Congress- embraced terri
tory rigbtully belonging TO Mexico. No, sir, no.
We must accept Texas just she is, not at all
and after we have acquired the territory we can
then finally fix the boundaries between ourselves and
Mexico according to the rights of each and the mu-
tua interest and security of the two countries The
present administra ion have done every thing this
subject which could reasonably have been desired
They left the boundary OF Texas without speci6ca-
lInu IN the treat t.ve flo OF, "A
just II with Mexico on fair and favorable terms
Texas haa always claimed to the Del Norte and is
now in possession Of the whole OF the left bank Of
that river to the Passo, nearly thousand miles from
its mouth Her claim TO that portion Of New Mex
lco which lies east of this river and north Of the
Passo, Is certainly OF very doubtful character and
1t Is one upon which we ought not to insist
Again; 1t has been objected that we have made
bad bargain, by assuming TO pay the dett OF Texas
not exceeding $40 900, 900. But will any senator
contend that could, either in honor or Justice &C
cept all her broad lands, without paying her debts
his we mus do unless are willing to present
ourselves before the civilized world as a nation of
swlndlers Even II bound to pay these ten
millions out Of the treasury Of the United States the
sum would be so small, when compared with the
vast and enduring advantages Of the acquisition as
scarcely to be worthy OF moments consideration
But with the exception of $3.50, 900, not dollar will
be drawn from the Treasury The residue Is paya-
bic out Of the proceeds Of the public lands II Tex
as and these lands yet Incorporated according 10
late report Of their commissioner of public lands
exceed one hundred and thirty six millions Of acres
This may be, and probably is, an exaggerated esii
mate but still there no doubt but that these
lands will pay FIVE times the Of the debt thus
assumed.
IL has, also, been srenuously urged that, as Cor.
gress alone, under the Constitution possesses the
power to declare war; the President and Senate have
no power 10 make this treaty, because we would thus
adopt the alleged war the part Of Texas against
Mexico. But the answer to this argument is easy
Whe her this war has any actual existence or not
the friends OF the present treaty far as I know
their opinion have never entertained the idea for
moment either that 1t could be- or ought to be- exc
cuted without previous act Of Congress for this.