The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-05-30

they prove, srl Nothing more than this; That, ac-
cording to the civil division Of that country, as
claimed by Spain embracing not merely the country
. between the Nueces and the Rio Grande, but the
whole OF Texas 10 the Sabine, the most Of the coun-
Try between the Nueces aud the Rio Grande was
assigned to Tamaulipas-not all of it, as my col
league supposes, for the very maps he refers TO do
not make the Nueces the boundary but an imagin.
nary line from the Gulf, which strikes the Nueces
some distance from Its mouth. These maps
have no weight to the question Of title they only
show how that country was allotted in civil diyis-
, ions by the government Of Spain claiming the
whole OF Texas at the very time when we claimed
Texas and claimed that Il extended to the lower
Rio del Noe its its western boundary, upon tes-
timony clear and indisputable, to which made ref
erence the other day, which l will not now con-
sumo the time Of the committee by repeating
} The Rio del Norte the boundary claimed by
us, and was the boundary claimed by the people
OF Texas, who fought for tho ancient boundary of
Louisiana, and established IL by conquest; for sir
the people Of Texas did submit themselves TO-
the Spanish yoke TO which we doomed them by the
, violation ofa solemn treaty made with France, by
which Louisiana was coded to US, which provided
that
This Inhabitants Of the esded tsi,sr, sGs Sc iso,po,.
sed In the United States ant admitted possible
the enjoyment Of ali The rights sdssnases and im%ani
} ties ofcittens Of the United States"
Though this government had no right 10 reclaim
that territory after had coded il to SPAIN yet so
far as the people Of Texas were concerned, the act
OF this government was void. We had no power
to cede them away. They were not bound by the
cession any more than the citizens Of Kentucky
would be bound by a treaty made by this govern
ment ceding them to Spain. They did not feel
themselves bound by it, After the treaty was
made, but before II was confirmed by the Senate,
the people Of Texas at Nacogdoehes protested
against it, and manfully resisted it. They never
submitted to the jurisdiction Of Spain, but declared
their independence and have ever maintained it,
haNa rad to id IL
tiles to show that the Rio 0rande was the ancient
boundary of Texas-authorities which cannot be
overthrown by the ALIASES to which my colleague
has referred, nor by his declaration that the opin-
ions of those distinguished men, to which | have
referred were but the opinions Of advocates who
were endeavoring to make the best Of their case |
have also before referred TO the treaty entered
Santa Ana, which was afterwards ratified by Filisola
the general in actual command Of the Mexican
forces. will again refer to it, and TO other facts
showing the actual boundary Of Texas in modern
times. My colleague, forgetfu of his own declara-
ton that the republic Of Mexico had been overurn-
ed and was then military despotism, conte DIS that
this treaty had no binding force upon the Mexican
nation, and was in fact repudated by the Mexican
Congress. Ii is true that the Mexican Congress re-
fused to ratify the treaty. but that fact is no srgu-
men against its validity. This is not the only trea
ty with which they have refused to comply, after
having enjoyed the benefits resulting from it. But
the Mexican people, at the date Of this very treaty
Inhue ny odnu ANA, Claimed thelr own Indepen-
dence based upon a treaty OF precisely the same
character The independence OF Mexico was ac-
knowledged by the treaty of Cordova, entered into
on the gath August, 1921 between lurbde, the gen.
eral of the Mexican armies and Don John O'Dono-
jon the lieutenant-gener Of the armies Of Spain.
The Spanish government, by a decree OF the Cor
tex of the 18th February, 1922, not only refused to
ratify this treaty, but protested most solemnly
against IT. and, at the very time that Santa Ana
tered into the treaty with Texas, Mexico had
IL. d. La II. ia
on except her victories, than this very treaty Of
Cordova, with the protest Of the Spanish govern
ment against it, for Spain did not in fact ac-
knowledge the Independence Of Mexico until the
2Sth of December 1886, long after the battle of San
Jacinto, and the date Of the treaty entered into by
Santa Ana. 1t may be, sir, that there is no legal
obligation on Mexico in regard TO this treaty. That
true of all treaties, because there is legal tribu
nal to enforce them; and it would be true if Mexico
could have her own way, that this treaty, no
other treaty, would have any moral obligation up
on her; but that Mexico is morally bound by this
treaty, upon the immutable principles Of justice and
the laws which should govern civilized nations,
| there can be no doubt.
The Mexicans and their leader Santa Ana were
| captves in the hands of the Texans. They were
prisoners Of war, and by the laws Of war the Tex
ans had the right to put them to death, they,
| themselves, under the orders of Santa Ana, had
murdered the Texans, whom they had captured at
the Alamo, and under Fannin, carrying them to in
|
shambles. A large and honorable party in Texas
insisted that Santa Ana should be tried and punish
ed as a murderer for the massacres which had been
committed under his orders, in violation Of the terms
of capitulaon; but, in consideration of this treaty,
this acknowledgment of the independence of Texas,
and this agreement that the Mexican forces should
be Withdrawn beyond the ,oestern boundary Of Tex
as-beyond the Rio Graade-Santa Ana and his army
were released
BY accepting the benefits of this treaty, and enjoy
| shaS.f
thorites of Mexico in effect ratified the treaty, so
far as anything be effected by the obligations Of
morality and justice. If she did not intend to do it,
she should have done the Romans did with the
Samntes-she should have sent back to Texas her
| general and his army and placed them again in cap
tvity, as they were at the time the treaty made
She cannot escape the moral obligation Of the treaty
| in any other way. The Mexican authorities them
selves, after this, however they might deny the
lidity of the treaty with Santa Ana considered the
| Rio Grande the boundary of Texas. Gen. Fisola
gave his assent the treaty, and in obedience to its
provisions Withdrew the Mexican forces to the other
side of the Rio Grande. The Mexican government
ITSELF and the Mexican generals, have, at still later
period admitted the Rio Grande to be the boundary
of Texas. General Wo, in pursuance Of decree
of the Mexican government of the 18th June, lS43,
| issued a proclamation after the expiration Of the
armistice, dated at his headquarters at Mier, June
| 20, 1874 the Sd article of which, was as follows:
ss sS o the % be
garded and accomplee Of the uspers of that
mart of the national territory and traitor his
try; and summary military trial. shall receive the
| said punishment"
The very towns of Laredo and Santa Rita de
Ampudia, to which my colleague has referred, as
well as ali "the farm houses beyond the Rio Bravo"
were included in this order-and the whole country
cas-, of the Rio Grandeur fact all Texas, was des-
tined to be the scene of war Of extermination-
and the people and everything found in the territory,
from the Rio Grande to the Sabine, were devoted
from that day, to fire and the sword.
| Again: in the Texan Congress, by act of the 18th
December, 1896, copy Of which have before me,
declare the Rio Grande from its mouth to its source,
| to be the boundary Of the republic of Texas. But
nv colleague INT DAusl says that no mere act Of
the Texan Congress declaring the Rio Grandc to be
the boundary Of Texas would give to Texas the
right to the country. readily admit this position,
sir, no person has contended that il would do
moi refer To il to show the right Of Texas TO the