The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1847-02-24


commit the unhea Of act OF violence (auito atenfado-
the expression is much stronger than the tansation( OF
appoprang TO themselves an ntegrant part OF the Mex
lean territory the Undersigned in the Of his nation
and no~ for them, protest, in the most solemn manner
cypress order Of his government that on sanction being
given by the Executive of the Union the incorporation of
Texas into the United States, he viii consider his mission
ended seeing that, as the Secretary Of State H hare ear-
ed ne Mriean government resolved 20 declare ear SO soon
as u recetpes Information Of such an att
This, sir, is very solemn and emphatic declaration.
If sanction is given by Executive to the incorporation
of Texas into the United States, he will consider his
mission ended seeing that the Secretary of State will
have learned, the Mexican government is resolved to
DECLARE WAR so il receives information OF such
an act!
date Of the 18th of November ls43, he repeats that this
declaration made by cypress order OF his government
Here is his language in reoinder TO our Secretary OF
State
ellis desires have tended solely tho maintenance Of
the peace and haruaony which ought ssbsist between
has aard Ss y ss " ' o 0ssp %
that win be the nera6t consequence Of the annexa-
50 with the object of ntimdatng the government of the
honorable Secretary of sare but with the view of showing
of And, truth the honorable Secretary of
State should not regard this as other than very nap
should , h ate 70 msrss d Pp na
sent il without first appealing whatsoever might
be the result TO which the fortune of war might subject
them
In this letter he says that WAR will be the INEVITABLE
consequence of annexation and repeats the repeated
declaration that Texas recognised independent ma
ton by and BY other great powers OF the world is
portion of the territory of Mexico!
These letters found in the first volume of executive
documents of the first session of the 2Sth Congress- and
clearly indicate the views of Mexico and her deermna-
on upon the consummaton OF the negotiation then pend
ing for the annexation Of Texas The treaty. sir. which
was the result OF those NEGOTIATIONS, was concluded
for on af a of all is ssf to wss
our history In the month Of May preceding, according to
the States of the Union, one, had assembled
in neighborng city to present their candidates
for the presidency and vice presidency, The annex
alton of Texas had become topic of popular re-
mark and attracted much of the public attention to such
degree, as to engage the deliberations OF that conven-
on and conspicuous among the resolutions adopted by
it and published to the world one presented by
distinguished delegate from the great State OF New York
and this is it:
"Resolpsd, That title the whole of the Territory OF
same ought TO be coded to England or any other power
and that the eoccupaon of Oregon and the
measures, which this convention recommends to the
cordial support Of the democracy of the Union"
With full knowledge Of the declarations of Mexico,
that she would declare in the event OF annexation
the American people expressed their opinions upon the
question, by the election Of those candidates who
States giving them their suffrage against eleven States
voting for candidates understood to be opposed to it. No
one think Mr. President will deny that the question OF
annexation and he whole Oregon, were the principal
turning points of the election of ls44hat if these issues
had hot have been presented to the country the
mn ns
war They believed the of sufficient importance
to peace, and safety and prosperity to Justify the
naugurated the Congress of the United States by
orty Of thirty in the popular branch, and of two in this
body, adopted Joint resolution moyed BY a mem mem
nessee, providing for the annexation on certain
terms 10 be submitted to the authorities Of Texas which
resolution approved by the then President, on the
frat nf arch In x
ecutive took no part. He was not then in power,
and had no other agency in, bringing it about
party favorable TO the acted an humble part,
sir both in advocating the treaty and voting for the ont
resolution, and did it conscientlously dld 1t under
State and had perfect right to merge her sovereignty IN
ours if il was her will and pleasure so to do and the
reasons for this belief gave at large to the Senate.
have considered them SINCE sir, and find nothing IN them
to abate recall.
Soon after this act accomplished, and the present
Executive installed, the Mexican minister Mr. Almonte,
addressed the 9th of March, letter to our Secretary
of State the honorable senator from South Carolina,
lMr CALHoys then filling the office protesting against
the act and declaring, in the name of his government
hat the said law in no wise lnvalidate the rights
on which Mexico relies TO recover the aforementioned
province of Texas of which she sees herself un,
those rights at all times, by every means which may be
in her powers and concludes by demanding his pass
ports, which were furnished him
Here it will be seen, sir, that Mexico did not consider
her rights in anywise nvadated by the act OF annexa-
ton the province OF Texas expressing al the
same time a determination to uphold and maintain them
by every her power What were these means but
war; as denounced in 1s43 and what the object other
than the recovery of the whole Of Texas TO the Sabine
Laborng under the deuson (which nothing could dispe,
that Texas rghtfuy belonged to her, Mexico has had
no other object has avowed other than Its recovery
by war; and am correct, therefore, in saying that she
has made the movement OF our troops to the RIO
Cirande a pretext for the II Texas belonged to
Mexico, was an invasion of her territory to pass our
army beyond the Sabine, and has pretended that
She contendng for the whole of Texas and IN so do
ing puts it in power to go with our forces into any
part of Texas we please.
But, say senator's, Texas extended to the Rio
1rande that its boundaries west underlined farther
than the Nueces and the senator OF Rhode Island Mr.
SMMoNsl lays stress upon that expression in the Presi
dents message of December ls45 which speaks OF the
Nueces "the western frontier of Texas and to which
he had ordered the army in the preceding July But sir
is there not vast difference between frontier and
boundary nel If the President had said he had ordered
the troops the Nueces boundary west then he
would have been inexcusable for the after order-he
would have been committed to that limit He nowhere
however such expression. "fronter" Is very
indefinite it may be hundreds of miles from boundary
But Mr.. President, Il propose to show that the Rio
rande always considered the boundary of the old
Spanish province of Texas by Spain herself and for
this purpose will read the Senate extract from the
letter OF the Prime Minister OF SPAIN Don Pedro Cevaos
to Messrs Monroe and Pinckney dated the 18th oil
April, 1905 when they oontending, under the IN
strucons of Mr. Jefferson, for that river the
western boundary of louisiana which we had purchased
of France in 1903 under the protest of Spain Here IT is
"The province of Texas, New PHILIPPINES, has its
boundaries about the middle of the Gulf of Mexico 10
Poncenes Rio Grdnde, and to the east, Louisiana
Vol g. American State Papers, title Foreign Relations
Il page 66I)