Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1845-09-20

Ipower, the style and the strength Of their defence
would have long since undeceived us. But our
acquaintance with what such can do--with what
| any can do whom nothing but the service Of "a
master animates, whom no sincere public cause
inspires is not quite recent as the last of
fidelity Of intrguers and urncoats, that will tomor
row betray (give them only another Baltimore Con-
vention) their idol of to-day We know too WELL
and have known too long, the genuine power Of
Truth and of the Press, to dread any contest with
official arrogance, no matter how oversweeping,
while we have good public cause. We have stood
darker days Of violence, if not Of foy than these.
If power could have crushed us, or the eaumnies
Of its reckless instruments robbed Of the opn-
ion of the good, we should have been long ago
ground to powder. But enough have always been
LEFT Of the calm and just Of both parties to sustain
us and as many win ever be left, while we take
care that they shall comprehend US, by whom alone
lit is worth while to be comprehended in public de-
bates or in private life.
Let us pass, therefore, to the U,aions final argu-
ment. Declining all other attempt to confite us,
abandoning the effort even TO show. that there is
any link wanting in that chain Of proofs which we
have given, it places its last reliance on but single
argument and 50 easily is this shiyered entirely to
pieces, that look it nothing short OF giving
lup the whole question. \, n r.s
Tostate its whole point in a few Words it main
tains the exceedingly feeble and shallow notion,
that the Texas bounded by the Rio del Norte is
the only Texas which has had political existence
since the 10th December, 1885, because, after
| she had, by her law of that date declared the Rio
del Norte her boundary, !" she scGs recognised by
Us, by England, and 5y France as independent
For the Union holds that to recognise nation as
nation amounts to affirming not merely the fact
that she has an actual government of her own, but
tina. her government really extends wherever she
may, by mere domestic statute, have affirmed it
to extend
Who viii not smile at such proposition Sup
pose Texas had, by the same act claimed a part of
our territories, would our recognition of her have
precluded us from subsequent settlement Of boun-
daries with her! Nay, did ace moi afterwards
proceed, by treaty and survey, 10 mark our mutual
imits? How should this have been, if mere re-
cogniton determined the territorial questions in her
favor, against the nations recognising her!
But, if the recognition of a People thus carries
with it that of her subsistng legislative enacments,
then we recognised any other claim, against no
matter whom, that she had then by law voted her
self to have and if she had at that time passed a
bill declaring that she did not owe England or Hol
land dollar Of the moneys she had borrowed Of
them, our recognition would have taken away the
loans Of Europe, just il did the lands of Mexico
We have seen that our act did not invalidate any
territorial right Of against Texas; for that
we afterwards adjusted our boundaries with her.
Now if the act of recognition could not affect the
territorial claims Of the nation making that recogni
tion how could it affect rny body else not making
|it-as Mexico, for instance
But suppose we try the matter by the courts Of
history little. We recognised all the South Ame-
rican Republics, they successfully arose, with
boundaries completely uncertain did that bind us
or them Nay, we recognised both sides, where
there were many such disputes: did we then recog-
Mise all sorts Of opposite rights But-for it grows
better and better--we recognised, and we still re-
copnise, Mexico herself; and surely that as much
bound and binds us to her territorial claims nclud
ing Texas entre) as it does to those Of Texas.
Then let lis try it little the other side of the
Atlantic. France recognised in l77s: did that
settle any of the questions of limits between US
and England We believe not since it strikes us
that they were only closed some two years since,
and then without Frances thinking she had any
thing to do with them. We have always recognised
Russia, and Turkey of late but who has ever had
the folly to imagine that this affected the contests
in Crcassia, or Syria, or Egypt
This, then, is obviously one Of the new and lu-
cid principles with which the science of " Annexa-
tom has adorned National Law. That these in
terpoatons meant to be rather bad for other coun-
tries, must prove equally bad to ourselves, one more
argument must somewhat demonstrate. If the eff
fects of recognition are such as tho Administration
says flow from it, then mark We recognise Eng
land but England has long (since at least l79o)
claimed Oregon. She has latterly, as some affirm,
extended over it, by act Of Parliament her le-
gal jurisdiction. In recognising her, we "recog-
mise England as she was,7 in l790--the political
and territorial power that claimed Oregon. So
there's an end to the Oregon question
This brings us to remember the Secretary of
State, our negotiaor and the trouble which the dis
covery by the . Union must save him. 1t quotes
him, too, as authority, but with its usual illfortune
for, when it has found an authority of which the
worst part is little in its favor, it has seldom the
luck 10 see that the rest is as fatal to it, When
Mr.. BUCHANAN afIirms that Texas has always
claimed to the Del Norte," what is the assertion