The Whig standard. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1843-1844, 1844-05-30
MR.. WALKER ON ANNEXATION.

$50 far as it has been pubshed) upon the an
nexation of Texas, in reply to Mr.. Benton; aud
the best we can say for his arguments is, that
they are sophstical, fmsy, and immaterial to
the last degree. He labors very hard, but in
vain, to parry the force of Col. Benton's attack
on the treaty, grounded upon its assumption of
authority over Mexican territory, beyond the
limits of the Department of Texas, and beyond
the limits of the jurisdiction of Texan authority.
Col. Benton proved incontestibly, that the treaty
fares the boundary of the country annexed by the
treaty, since the " Republic of Texas" is annexed
go nomine. The republic, too defined its limits
by an act of its legislature, which makes the Rio
Grande del Norte its western boundary. But
the ancient Department of Texas only extended
west to the Nieuces, and from thence north to
point on the Red river, and falling short of the
limits of the republic by the whole eastern border
of the Rio Grande, 900 miles in length, following
the course of the stream, with an average breadth
of more than one hundred miles. This vast strip
of country, it will be remembered is wholly out
of the control of the Republic of Texas-upon
which she dare plant her standard and to which
she has no other title than that of naked claim.
To annex this portion of the republic to the
United States, therefore, would be nothing else
than robbery-t would be destitute of even a
| pretext TO support it; and Mr. Walker evidently
feels it TO be the weakest point in the very bad
cause which he has assumed to defend. He con-
tends that the question Of boundary between the
United States and Mexico, after annexation is eff
4 cd will and hat we ms lon
off the excrescence which has brought down the
thunders of Col Benton upon the treaty. Texas,
| in the plastic hands of Mr.. Walker, may be
widened or narrowed at pleasure 1t may be con-
fined within the Nieuces, or, for all that appears
to the contrary, may be reduced to nothing, be-
cause the question of boundary is an "open
| question:" On the other hand, such is the gum
elastic nature of the treaty. or the country of
which it treats, the territory of Texas may be
stretched from the Sabine to the Rocky noun.
tains-perhaps beyond them to the Pacific ocean
because the question of boundaries is an " open
question" But is it so! Can the limits Of
Texas be circumscribed at pleasure? If such
be the case, what, we ask, becomes of the guar
anty which has been offered to the people for the
assumption of the enormous debt of Texas The
amount of the debt, and the extent of our liabi-
ty, we apprehend, is not to be an "open ques-
ton" Should the treaty be ratified, the people
of the United States will assume, Internationally,
to pay ten millions Of dollars for Texas and they
must pay it by the sweat Of their brows, no mat
ter how much Of Texas is given up in adjusting
the "open question of boundaries. An odd pur
| rb that in xpb tha ic pa ia dawn fl
| the land, and no warrant given of the title.
| But let us look at the "open question in
another point of view Mr.. Walker says that
Mexico ought not to be offended with this Gov
eminent about this question Of boundaries"-
he assumes that our title TO Texas proper is IN
disputable, and for the strip of country upon
| the border of the Rio Grande, we may, to show
our liberality towards Mexico, compromise the
difficulty by snrrenderng to Mexico a part of her
own territory He says that the President has
obviated all difficulty on that score by his con-
clatory language to Mexico the occasion
He quotes the Presidents instructions to our
minister lately resident at Mexico, as follows:
"You are enjoined also, by the President, to
assure the Mexican Government that it is his
desire to settle all questions between the two
countries which may grow out OF the treaty, or
any other cause, on the most liberal and salts
factory terms, including that of boundary
AS if fellow who had stolen match OF horses
should write to the owner" Sir, | have stolen
your horses, it is true; but let me assure you
that AIN actuated by the most liberal spirit of
compromise; and, rather than go to the expense
of litigation, will freely surrender one of the
horses to you"
Such, in the estimation of men of common
sense and common honesty, is the legitimate
meaning of Captain Tyler's honied words to
Mexico
Mr. Walker gravely argues, that we are bound
by the treaty of 1903, to admit Texas into the
Union By that treaty, the territory coded to
the United States by France was to be incorpo-
rated into the Union, and its Inhabitants to enjoy
all the privileges of citzens-and hence he argues
that the subsequent treaty with Spain, by which
Florida was acuuired and Texas ceded aWav is