Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1846-06-02
The Boundary Line.


The pertinacity with which the Administration
party in Congress insisted upon retaining the pre-
ambe to the bill granting to the Executive the
supplies of men and money required for the pro-
secuton OF the Mexican war, although they knew
that by so insisting they would compel many
members to place themselves in a false attitude
before the country, either by voting against the
supplies, or if voting for them, subscribing by in
ference TO assertion of fact the truth OF which
they denied, satisfied then that the Administra-
ton regarded the vindication of its own conduct,
by which the war was to say the least of it, need.
lessly precipitated, of FAR more consequence
than the defence of the country. 1t needed the
money and the men, and il asked for a unanimous
vote Of Congress in favor of the bill appropriating
the one and authorizing the organization of the
other; but as indispensable prerequisite, its
friends, speaking in its name, required that those
who voted for the bill should consent at the same
time to decide another question seriously involv-
ing the conduct Of the Administration. 1t requi-
red that they should acquit Mr.. Polk of all GEN.
sure IN advance, by voting for preamble assert
ing fact which did not exist, or which, if il did
exist, could not have been known either to the
Executive or TO a single member of Congress-
We refer to the declaration of the preamble that
iwar exists by the act of Mexico declaration
which might have had sufficient truth in it to au
ihorize lis use, if indeed the Rio Grande had been
the ascertained and acknowledged boundary of
Tex as, but which, that not being the case, was
wholly destitute of foundation.
Influenced by the same leading design, many
Of the presses devoted TO the Administration, fol.
lowing the clue given TO them by the Executive
Journal AT Washington, are now, even in the very
act of deprecating the party aspect sought to be
given to the Mexican question by few Wing
Journals, endeavoring with untiring assiduty to
torestal public opinion in regard to the Western
boundary Of Texas, for the obvious purpose of pro.
curing, in advance of the proper period for the
arragnment of the Presidents conduct a verdict
oil acquittal from the people, as, by like means
they extorted it, "under protest." from Congress
And yet, il the Wing presses, reluctant while the
war lasts, 10 discuss this branch of the question
attempt to show that 1t is at least matter of great
doubt whether the Texan boundary did extend TO
the Rio Grande and therefore that the President in
ordering the American army 10 take position on It's
eastern hank, invaded a territory in dispute, and
made war upon Mexico, of his own will. and without
the sanction authority of the war-naking pow
er, promptly reproached as deficient i'm that
very cheap commodity, patriotism, and impudent-
ly charged even with modified treason" At the
hazard, however, of subjecng ourselves to this re-
proach and ofincurring this guilt, with the punish.
ment which we suppose will soon be inflicted upon
those who are daring enough to discriminate be.
tween the allegiance whichthey owe to the Adm in.
lArafIon and that due to the country-which in
our vocabulary, are by means synonymous
ferns-we shall not hesitate, while exertng what.
ever influence wa may possess to stimulate our
countrymen to uphold the honor of our flag, at the
same time TO warn them not to be misled by their
patriotic impulses, into even a tact defence of
an act Of the Executive, which, indeed. if it be
one of aggression upon Mexico, is far more i'm
Portant to us in another point Of view-we mean
as usurPdtion Of The ICdr- poper by that branch
oi the government, with which all the infractions
oil the Constitution since It's adoption, put togeth.
er, are not TO he compared in magnitude OF in dam
ger. We would most willingly postpone this dis
cusslon to future day; but the Administration
presses will not permit il; and we proceed there
fore now, and shall hereafter as leisure may permit
continue to show, that if the Rio Neuces be not
the true Western boundary of Texas the authori.
ties which indicate it to be are at least hume
rous and potential enough to involve the question
in so much doubt, as 10 have rendered its seizure
under existing circumstances, utterly indefensibe
and justified Mexico in looking upon it as an act
Of war.
The first gro und taken by the defenders Of the
Executive, is, that when Texas proclaimed her
Independence in 1886, she declared that her boun.
Diary extended to the Rio Grande II is conced.
ed that she did but let us suppose, that, ON the
4th Of July, l77G, the authors of the Declaration
Of our own independence had embraced the Cana.
das within the limits Of the American Confedera.
cy-WOuld that claim have established our righf
10 those Provincesl We did, indeed, END an army
to storm Quebec, under Montgomery and Ar
nod; and Texas sent forces to Santa Fe, and to
other points east Of the Rio Grande, 10 revolu.
tionze those portions Of Mexico, and TO induce
The people to rally under her flag But our ar
my was defeated and driven back-and the Ter
nm forces we're To man captured and sent pri
sOners 10 the interior Of Mexico. We failed IN
conquer the Canadas, or to induce their people ,o
unite with us in i77G, and they remain to this
hour British provinces: The Texans, IN like man.
ner, failed to make the slightest impression ON the
border States Of Mexico, and they consequent,
still legitimately belong to Mexico. But, as ar
entirely conclusive reply to the preposterous ar
gument based upon the mere paper claim Of the
Texas Convention, which Texas endoavored IN
vain to make good by arms, we will adduce an
authority which not even our opponents will have
the boldnoss to discredit We mean ROBERT
j. WALKER, ESQ., Secretary Of the Treasury
and a member Of the very Administration which
now asserts that the Rio Grande is the Western
boundary OF Texas, and by whose advice and con.
sent u u 10 be presumed the President ordered
Gen. Taylor TO advance our army to that river
IL will be remembered that Mr.. Benton, in Cd.
posing tho ratification Of the Tyler treaty for the
annexation Of Texas, in 1874, took precisely the
ground for which we are now cOn,ending. One
Of his principal objections, indeed, TO that treaty
was that Il extended the limits of Texas 10 the