The Cadiz sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 184?-1851, 1845-04-16
AN ERRONEOUs OPINION.

AN ARbONEOOD OEANIONs
One of the principal arguments used BY the
enemies Of the remuneration of Texas 10 The
United States is, that such measure would ip-
so factO, be declaration of war by the United
States against Mexico. This opinion is altogeth-
er fallacious. The suppositon that, by the ad-
mission in Texas into the Union, (remarks the
Globe,) we virtually declare war against Mexico,
implies that the relations of the United States
with Mexico would take their character from
those which exist between Texas and that coun-
try But this is obviously the reverse of the
truth. On the admission of Texas into the
Union, her relations with Mexico, as with all
other foreign countries, take their character
from those Of tie United States. If the United
States, for example, were now at war with Great
Britain, Texas, by becoming member of the
Union, would be placed ipsO .facto, in state of
war with that power. The United States being,
as they are, at peace with Mexico, Texas--sup-
posing even that she were really and in good ear
nest at war with that power--by becoming a
member Of the Union, would be placed ipso
facto in state of peace with her former ene-
my. The act Of annexation is not, as it has
been represented, declaration of war between
the United States and Mexico; but, on the con-
trary, declaration of peace between Mexico
and Texas, If the act be unauthorized by the
recognized principles Of international law, and
consequently in itself injurious and wrong, il
may be considered by Mexico as furnishing suf
ficient cause why she should declare war against
the United States. In this case, however, the
war so declared is not the war that previously
existed between Mexico and Texas, but differ,
ent one, carried on between different parties, and
founded in different causes. The cause in one
case is the claim of Mexico to exercise political
jurisdiction over Texas; and in the other the in
jury supposed to have been inflicted on Mexico
BY the incorporation ofa territory claimed by hel
as revolted province into the Union.
| The supposition that, by the mere act Of ad
mitting Texas into the Union, we virtually de-
clare war against Mexico, is therefore entirely
erroneous So far, indeed, are the United State:
from cspousng the wars in which Texas may be
engaged, that it is by no means certain wbethe
We should undertake to enforce, even BY civi
means, the views entertained by the previously
existing government Of Texas upon the question
pending between that republic and other foreign
powers Upon the admission of Texas into tho
Union, all such questions would come for consid
eraton and decision before new ribunal--lha
of the federal government of the United States
In the composition Of this tribunal, Texas, when
recognized as State, would be represented as
one of the members Of the Union. She would
have The weight corresponding with her popula
ton, but would have no more in regard TO sub.
iccts connected with her previous history than
any other State. The federal government would
not be bound to follow, upon snch subjects, the
course previously pursued by Texas, but would
consider each question upon its own merits. II
we took the same course which had before been
taken by Texas, it would not be for that reason
but because her course appeared 10 be the true
and proper one. If the course taken by Texas
upon particular question should appear to US
not TO have been the proper one, another would
now be pursued. The very question of The claim
of Mexico to jurisdiction over the territory Of
Texas would now be open for the consideration
of the government of the United States upon its
merits, if that Of Mexico should think proper tc
the United States would be bound 10 review the
whole subject under The double aspect of right
and fact; and, if it should be satisfied, upon such
review, of the justice of the claim of Mexico
(Which is hardly supposablc,) would be bound
to acknowledge it, and 10 permit the territory tc
60 back TO that power.