Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1847-02-02

psreien as 10 1rhat she had done--that she was So
veIeisn in her jurisdiction over her territory as
we'll as in every other capaciy-,hat she had The
same power 10 extend her ju,isdiction over her
territory as every other sovereign Stale has and
that when we cont acled, we contracted wi h The
whole Of Texas, and not with part only; and we
contracted, according ~ the acl Of The Texan Con-
gress OF Dec 1886, with State which, in the ex-
ercise of her sovereign authority and jurisdic-
li"n, had defined her limits by meIes and bouncs,
TO extend from the 'mouh of the Sabine river,
and running West along The Gulf OF Mexico,
three leagues from land, 10 The mouth OF the Rio
Grade, thence up the principal stream OF said RI
yer to lis source" Is il competent, then, for the
Government Of the United Siaes to deny hat
this is The Texas thai this is The party thus de-
| fined and idenlified-wth whom She contracted?
Is il competent for her 10 discaim Tor herself and
deny 10 Texas The benefits OF this contract. by re-
linquishins 10 Mexico portion OF the territory,
| with which, as part oil The whole, She had con-
tracted tor Us admission into The Union :? But
is said that there was express reservation in
The contract, Of The risL. 10 adjust boundaries
which is equivalent 10 saving that there was an
express reservation in 49, -eifac thereafter 10
ascertain who The parties we.e that did contract! !
And il j manifest, therefore, that This reservation
| contemplated The adjustment OF such boundaries
only as Texas, The parry contracting, had not al
ready adjusted.
We need not however look TO the act oil the
| Texan Congress, and 10 the contract If annexa-
lion alone, 10 determine he identity 81 Iegas-
for, by reference 10 The history al The country, and
10 other evidence establishing The true boundaries
Of Louisiana, il will tc found amply sufficient ol
itself 10 place The question Of the Western boun-
Diary OF Texas beyond further dispute or cavil.
In l16l, Louisiana was ceded by France TO
| Spain; in 1900, she was reroceded BY Spain TO
France; and, in 1909, by The Treaty OF Paris,
Louisiana was cedcd BY France 10 The United
States, and possession was delivered BY the
| French authorities in iS04;-and The public do.
cumenis and records ul that time afford such am
pie and conclusive proof that Louisiana extended
Weslwaldly 10 The Rio Glande, that he "who
runs may read
| The United Staies always regarded her title as
perfect under The uealy Of 1909, as lar West as
The RiodeI Norle. When discussing This point,
MessIs Monroe aud Pinckney, IN the part of The
!; United States, SAID 10 The Spanish Government
thai "lhe facts and principles which JUSTIFIED this
| conclusion were 50 satisfactory /" this Govern
men, as 10 convince il that The United States had
! moi a better lille 10 Inc island OF New Orleans
than they had 10 The whole Gislric, ul territory
thus described" In 1916, Mr.. Monroe said, in
his letter to the Chevalirr lie Oni> with respect
10 the Western boundary Of Louisiana, have 10
remark that This Government has never doubted,
since The treaty Of 1903, that it extended 10 the
Rio Bravo" In 1918, Mr.. Adams, Secretary Of
Slae under Mr.. Monroe, afrr reviewing all he
tacis and proris on both sizes, relating To The
! Wc>lern boundary Of Louisiana, usri ihiS Ian
/; euage: dwell might Mr>srs Plncknrv and Mon
roe wife 10 MIR. Cevallos in 1863, that The claim
of The United States 10 the Rio Bravo was
clear as their right 10 The island of New
Orleans;" and we might 20 on and multi.
! ply proof upon proof and authority upon
authority, upon The same poinl; but il is I'M
necessary-and ! will refer 10 one other only
which amsure will command the respect OF The
reviewer. MIR. Clay in letter OF as aic 4 date
as the l7lh Of April, 1914, published in The "N..-
lional lnlelligencer" says-"That The u. States
acquired title 10 Texas extending, as believe
10 The Rio Del NoIle by the treaty c Louisiana
they coded and relinquished that title 10 Spain
by The treaty OF 1919, by which the Sabine was
substituted for the Rio Del Nore, as our Wesern
boundary
II, then, By the treaty with France in 1863, We
acquired all lha! territory extending West 10
The Rio Grande, called al that time louisiana
territory and afterwards Texas, that same
territory was By US ceded 10 Spain BY the
treaty Of 1919, and j; was out OF that ter
ritory that the Stale OF Texas was formed
l % dH lHuc HuVHt SONClClSH -ldlC VI lHC ht-
public OF Mexico. |, was that same Texas
thus defined and bounded BY The Rio Bravo on
The Wesl, that soemnly protested, a few months
after The ratification ii the treaty oil 1919 against
il, as a palpab!e violation Of The sacred laih
and honor OF this Government, pledged By the
treaty oil 1909 il was that same Texas, thu,
defined and bounded b. the Rio Bravo on
the West, that was one OF the members Of
the confederation that formed the Repub-
\ IL, M VI hat ~,
defned and bounded by the Rio Bravo on the
West that protested in her sovereign capacity
against The overthrow OF The Federal Govern
ment by Santa Anna, as an act OF lawless usur-
parion-it was that same Texas, thus defined and
bounded by Inc Rio Bravo on The West, who, in
opposition 10 a military despolism established
Republican Government, and mainiained her in.
dependence BY the nobiesl patriotism and most
undaunted yaor 81 which the world has ever
read-it was that same Texas, thus defined and
bounded by The Riu Bravo on the West, whose
independence was acknowledged, not only by the
| United States and all OF The most powerful ma
tons OF The eaIh but by the ahess and lreach-
erous Santa Anna himself, who had vainly strove
10 iasten military despolism upon her Ill wasthal
same Texas, thus defined and founded by the
Rio Bravo on the West, that adopted a Conslilu-
ton and formed laws foT her sovernment-and
il was that same Texas, thus defined and bound
ed by The Rio Bravo on The West with whom
this Government entered into a solemn contract
and covenant, and 10 whom We pledged our sa-
cred honor that we would preserve, protect and
defend her, in her iull power and extent, agains
"word in arms" When, then, in The face OF
all these things, The Mexican Government has
sworn vengeance against us, Tor that very act,
as one OF public robbery and plunder-when she
has proclaimed 10 The rorM her intention IN recon-
quer and regain, Jy HE spord, the rhoieof Teas
up 10 The SaJine-when she has refused 10 neeo-
tiaie peace with us-whcn she has coniempiu-
ousy rejected our minister, bearing 10 her very
uours The "olive-branch OF PEACE when, in laci,
she has marched her armies within stones throw
OF our soil-shall il be asked why mr. amy was
marched from Corpus Christi 10 the Rio Grande2
Shall il be said That Mr.. Polk ough, 10 have al
lowed the armies of Mexico TO cross over INFO
Texas seize upon our soil and murder our cit
zens before he dared even make an effort 10 Ic-
pei them? No. had he been thus careless Of our
! rights AMI Of his countrys honor, he would very
Justly have incurred the charge Of dishonorable
and guilty apathy, and might will be s,igmatzed
with "pusillanimily and cowardice." And he,
doubtless, would have been 50 denounced even
BY those who are now clamorous for The nfic-
ton of what they are pleased To call constitution
al punishment upon him, for his reckessness and
presumption" in having placed his country in
| an auiluQe VI defence against q threatened as
saull from an acknowledged foe. When the
American people are prepared 10 arraisn Mr.
Polk Tor This and thus 10 sacrifice The national
honor, then, indeed, may il be truly said, our
/ Unconstitutional Government is al an end" But
so long as can say Tor my countrymen.
that they are not prepared TO skulk and
cover al The menaces Of an insolent and
bragsarl foe; so long as can say Tor them
they are unwilling to see the nations honor tar
nished, so long shall be able 10 anwer why our
army was marched from Corpus Christi 10 The
Rio Grande.
Having then, as we think, answered this ones.
ton satisfactorily, al least 10 The American peo-
pie, il not to our reviewer, we will give one So
iilary reflection 10 The question, whether il our
army had remained al Corpus Christi this war
would have taken place. and to this may be re-
piled much that has been already said. And is
il not beyond all things curious that This question
should come ircm quarter in which The annex
alton Of Texas was opposed, ufon The grounds
that lie contamination Of such an acl would not
Only lie "violalion OF our national faith towards