The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1848-02-19
without any other definition of bounda-

without any other definition OF bounda-
ry, reserving the right only as between
themselves, Texas, and any other pow.
err, who might question the justice nf
the boundary,to settle it by negotiation.
Without a breach Of honor to Texas,
the United States could no more have
surrendered, without enquiry and ne.
gOtiation, TO m absolute and armed de.
mand this portion Of the territory, than
they could have surrendered to such a
demand the entire State. -"H
All then that can be said is, that the
title Of Texas to this part OF her terri.
tory was open to dispute. Such a dis
pute is TO be settled by two means, BY
negotiation or by force. If the nego.
tiation was refused, if Mexico elected
the other alternative, force, can she
complain il we meet her with force?--
But suppose her design was not actual
force, but to get possession only Of the
disputed ground. Had not the United
States the same right to take possession
and hold whatever they possessed, I'M
til the question OF title was decided by
nego,iationf The very question Of IT,
tie might have been affected by the fact
Of possession. Mexico might have re-
lied upon it as conclusive of the inabil.
ity Of Texas, and the United States as
their successors, to prevent it, and as
demonstrating that the original sever-
eighty had not been lost by the ~revolu.
tipn. This the United States had q.
right to guard against. .s
If actual possession, by Mexico,
could weaken the title of Texas, it was
their duty to strengthen by also taking
possession. Pending a question of dis
puted territory, not actually possessed
by either, who ever c~ontended that it
was the duty Of n Of the parties TO
suffer the other to take possession, and
then try the title. No sir, no lawyer
would give such advice. No statesman
would so act. Things should, in such
a case, be suffered to remain in sstatu
quo." Neither should seek TO get ad.
vantage of the other. If ] am right in
this, and Mexico designed taking pos
session, then she cannot complain if
we also take possession; and, especial.
ly not, if she knew that notwithstand-
ing such possession, we were willing at
any time to negotiate on the question
Of title.
Sir. it has been said, that to march
into The disputed territory is an act of
hostility. concede it. But then to
threaten to march--to prepare to march
TO muster an army to march, and
with the avOwed purpose Of taking for
chile possession and holding, is also an
act ofhostility. This Mexico did first,
and we had then aclear right to antici-
pate her upon every principal Of the
national law, by marching ourselves,
and placing ourselves in a condition
successfully to meet and repel her. Be-
tween nations, as between individuals,
aggression may be met by aggression,
assault may be met by battery. But it
is said revolution gives no title unac-
by actual and undisturbed
possession and jurisdiction. As a gen.
eral principle the proposition is true;
what is actual and u%ndisturbed pos.
session. Does it mean that the revo-
Iutionary government is to have a sol.
1ier on each foot Of her asserted do
naina Does it mean that every inhab-
tant within her territory is to acknowl-
Edge and submit to her sovereignty? or
ioes it not only mean, that such gov.
eminent is to have possession, claim
ng exclusive title to the whole other
asserted bounds,and possess the power
and determination to make that title
good BY force, against the original SOW
say it mea this and moth
ng more, rs
See the result ola differentdoctrine.
declared our independence in '7e;
he war continued years. Sup
no treaty Of peace had been made
recognizing our limits, but England had
retired from the contest in dis
rust with the struggle, as she might