Tri-weekly journal. (Evansville, Ia. [i.e. Ind.]) 1847-188?, 1848-02-10

ly before the event."
And another letter of our secretary, to the
same officer, was as follows:
VAR DEPARTMENT, July S, 1845.
SIR: This department is informed that Mexico
has some military establishments on the east
side of the Rio Grande, which are, and for
sometime have been, in the actual occupancy
of her troops. In carrying out the Instructions
heretofore received, you will be careful to
avoid any acts of aggression unless an actual
state of war should exist. The Mexican forces
at the posts in their possession and which have
been SO, will not be disturbed as long as the
relations of peace between the United States
and Mexico continue. VIM. l.. MARCY.
Brig. Gen. L. TAYLOR.
Well, now Sir, you will recollect that in his
march he was met at San Colorado by officers
who demonstrated against his passage; and, at
San Isabel he found that the custom-houses had
been set on fire. How did this happen, ifTex-
as had possess ion of this country? How did
it happen that he found none but Mexicans
there, burning their houses and flying from his
troops! The Texans were our friends. They
would not have fled from friendly forces and
burned their houses as if our troops were bar
barians coming to waste with fire and sword.
No, they were Mevicans. Well, our army en-
camp9d where? In the Mexicans corn and cot
ton fields bordering the river; they pleced their
batteries on the bank of the river commanding
the city of Matamoros so as to spot any house
in the town. Sir, the Senator from Missouri
well said that such an act as this was an act of
unparalleled outrage, seizure of slice Of the
Mexican republic | will mention another
fact in connection with this subject which is
worth remembrance. It's this-that Texas
framed new constitution when she came into
this Union, and took especial care not to spe-
city her boundaries. looked over it to-day
and found that she has left that matter entire
ly open, because the act of annexation by
which she came into the Union, made provis-
ion for the establishment Of the boundary by
the Government of the Union. Sir, the first Of
these annexation resolutions provides.
The first resolution provides, That Congress
doth consent that the territory properly inclu-
ded within, and rightfully belonging TO the re-
public of Texas, may be erected into a new
State, to be called the State of Texas, with a
republican form of government, to be adopted
by the people of said republic, by deputies in
convention assembled, with the consent of the
existing Government, in order that the same
may be admitted as one of the States of the
Union.
That the foregoing consent Of Congress is
given upon the condition that the said State be
formed subject TO the adjustment by this Gov
eminent OF all questions of boundary that may
arise with other governments.
! Now, why were these words introduced in
to that resolution? Did not the speech of the
Senator from Arkansas from which | have
read, furnish a key to this mystery, which
seems to have oppressed the minds of some
gentlemen2 That Texas was not admitted
with the limits which she had prescribed for
herself, but with such as might be rightfully
To- 20 h.. H.
settlement by negotiation with this Govern
ment, is as clear as any proposition can be.
MIR. Calhoun. Will the Senator yield the
floor that may make short explanation in
reference to that treaty? 1t is treaty which
negotiated in reference to the admission of
Texas, and which was rejected by the Sem
ate.
In making that treaty, and entering into it,
l by no means assumed that the Rio del Norte
was the western boundary of Texas. On the
contrary, | assumed that the boundary was an
Unsettled one between Mexico and Texas. No
provisions were made in reference to ii, because
Iexas, by the provisions of that treaty, was to
come into the Union as territory; and as SUCH
the right of the Government of the U. States
10 settle the boundary was unquestionable,
there Was an express provision to that eff
lect. IL vas different in reference to the reso-
lutlons under which Texes was actually admit
ted INTO the Union. They proposed TO admit
ner as STATE, not as territory; and, coming
In that character, it would have been necessa-
ry to have hat the consent of Texas to estab-
lIsh boundary between herand Mexico. Those
resolutions, &c avoid the difficulties which
\ might result, very properly contained pro-
vision which provided that the matter in dis
Pute should be settled by the Government of
the U. States.
am farfrom thinking that the treaty which
l negotiated, established the Del Norte as the
boundary. Immediately after the negotiation,
despatched messenger to our charge in Mexi-
co, and among other things intimated to him
that the Government of the United States was
prepared to settle the boundary on the most
liberal terms. What boundary was contem-
plated at the time il is unnecessary to state.
and would be improper, perhaps, on the pre-
i sent occasion.
Mr.. Pearce. have heard the Senator from
South Carolina with great deal of pleasure
l had not forgotten that map of Texas and
think1 know all about it. If | recollect dis
tlnctly, In the memoir which accompanied it
the intelligent officer who made the map, It.
Emory, stated that he felt himself bound to de-
sigma tie the boundaries of Texasas prescribed in
her ordinance, not meaning to assign them as
the true boundaries. 1t exhibited the boun-
daTies as claimed by Texas, and was not una
ware of the position of the Senator from South
Carolina on this point; nor did mean TO say that
the objection taken nv the Sanator FROM Me