Democratic banner., 1847-12-13
was known in Mexico at all. And in that
doculnen he declared he had already Civ

iuoCuHhent lie occldIco LC to3 .
en- orders to the army to commence Imme'
itiatc hostilities. The revolution that plac'
led him in power had been brought about
Tor tIiat very purpose, and the objections
inrged against President Herrera were sub
istanltri.y, that he refused to suffer the
arm 70 march to tie subjugation of Texas
ri; is was formally set forth in the prnclama-
Ition Of the army that placed Paroles at the
iilead Of the government by a revolution OIL
the 18th OF Dec. 1916.
Gen. Taylor reached the cast bank of the
Rio Grand on the 2Sth of March, 1876
He was there ordered by Gen. Arnpudia to
break up his en%campment in % hours and
retire beyond the Nueces, and this is the
first time since the annexation that any
Mexican has ever been known to desig-
nate the Nueces as the western boundary
of Texas.
American statesmen had Numbered forth
the argument at Washington, and else
where, which speeches had been copied in
to Mexican journals and read by the ma
tion a, large. No unprecedented man will
be at a loss to discern, at once, where the
idea of the disputed territory had its origin.
1t never originated in a Mexican brain. No
where in all the manifestoes and speeches
of Mexicans, do we see any claim Of the
kind prior to the actual breaking out Of
.hostilities. The first time it was ever seen
by our government in Mexican Journals, it
was copied from american speeches. 1t
was moi even thought of by these Ameri-
can statesmen, until war was inevitable.
Congress passed by a unanimous vote an.
act extending the jurisdiction of the Uni
ted States over this territory, and no OBJ
lection was then heard.
The act was voted for by men, who now
condemn the President, for carrying out
the spirit of that act. IF the act of the
in marching the army TO the Rio
Grands was unconstitutional, as engrafted
in Clay's resolutions, the previous act Of
Congress was certainly unconstitutional;
and it is strange that, that body should have
passed an act so clearly unconstitutional,
20 extend the jurisdiction of the United.
States in a direction where there was so
much opposition without a dissenting voice.
We have shown, that after the act Of an
nexation, that war was inevitable with that
implacable people. That they made war
for the avowed object Of r~econquering Tex
as, and no claim had ever been raised toI
one part of it, more than to all. That Tie
President at the time, and under the circum-
stances, did nothing more than his official
duty, in marching the army to the Rio
Grande for the National defence. With
what show Of reason then we would ask,
can the President be condemned for taking
possession Of territory, over which the jrr-
isdiction Of the United States had previ-
ously been extended by Congress. That
Congress had the right to extend that juIis-
diction, has never been questioned, but is
found in the fact that Texas (Mr. Clay to
the contrary, notwithanding,) ever claim
ed and held military and civil jurisdiction
over this territory, from the battle of San
to the day of annexation. That
territory had its representatives in the gal
liant little army that won for Texas a posi-
ton among the nations of the earth. 1t had
its representatives in the Texas Conventionl
hat set forth and declared the Rio Grande|
to be the Western boundary Of the State.
1t was represented in the Texas Congress-,
and Convention, that consumated the act
of annexation to our Union.
Texas had her civil officers, and CustomI
Houses in this territory ever since her in
She had counties laid OF ex-I
to the Rio Grande, but TO wherei
had Mexico a landmark, or civil officer
Lastly, since the act of annexation tits
territory has been represented in the Texas
and the National Congress-
Judge Pillsbury is its representative I'M
Congress, and Gen. Lamar in tie Texas