The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1848-03-03

NAHUM the counsel OF Gen. Taylor relieved the PRESIDENT
to that extent His folly shared at least By an emf
and judicous soldier, within reach OF the enemy
who had been for months rejecting upon their DISPOSE
ton, and his own situation and responsibility can
well understand that the gentleman from Indiana should
be anxious to rescue Gen. Taylor from all connexion
with this hord march of the army from Corpus Christi to
the Rio Grande-he last issue OF the wing party for
what with the very independent relation now borne by
Gen. Taylor TO all parties in this country, he ls 10 DC
separated from his friends on this issue, how are
they to seek connex with him. without the humilia-
ton referred to by the honorable gentleman from New
York, Mr.. DUER, -their dissolution Taylor wings and
Clay wings alike anxious TO shut their eyes to their
own embarrassmens
have felt sir that with such freedom exists on the
other side OF this House, in charactezing the executive
exposons OF the and policy of the administration
unworthy OF credit, and stgmatzlng in masses those
who support this policy almost partciPes crn.s, with
the mputaton OF and agumenatve as well as his
orlcal assumption laid at my door Individuality have
felt say bound thus to present full exposition, to re-
buke III may say) this somewhat osentanous ar
aignment Of my accuracy. Besides, sir do not choose
be made the occasion of calling out either Clay whigs
Taylor tohigs to the vindcaion of General Taylors
character or Judgment beg to assure my friend from
Indiana that do not need his sstance TO enable meto
do justice TO General Taylor which able to do with
out any fear of embarrassing myself here or elsewhere
This explanation is the necessary as my honorable
friend from Indiana has been represented to my constu
the hddome and most eloquent man IN Congress,
who had dded to flinders their young locooco represent
alive My friend has been in Baltimore, and has heard
something of the same kind from the frest portion OF my
constituency concede to him. sir, the palm of beauty
and eioquence but cannot consent to let HIM pass cur
more accurate truthfu he must permit me- on
TINS laller oanGn Oh Inc co'parSoh' o'a i' " ''
Another assumption-and the second in ORDER treat
ed by the honorable gentleman from Indiana to which
he pleased TO take exceponconssts, he says IN the
position laid down by me in these terms:
"a reference this of admission OF the State of Texas
SS9th December ioto WIN snow ,nai was ,ne nr o.
.5 rm a5 the decera"rv statutes Which defined the
was, 10 the Rio C;rande and with such bounda
ny she admitted State into the Union"
To this the honorable gentleman objects, in the first
place. that Texas herself By her boundary statute Of
do not nrnnose 10 interfere Having stated it, he saws
81 rsnsa, hsrsnre that Tera. Having acquired no
; h ,epta,' @ de,i her honpdary 70 he the Rio
Gnnde none could have been Conferred on the United
States, if we had adopted that act But did not In
the constitution of Texas with which she received
into the Union, and which adopted after the Joint
resolution for had passed. there was an express
provision that al acts OF hef congress were ~ M nn
u t eSf ps, @ o riopio of n,
~ me Now the Joint resolution Of annexation
as one of s most prominent features contained provision
that the question Of boundary should be left to by
negotiation And if the question of boundary be
settled by negotiation, could this of 1886 be other
wise than inconsistent with the joint resolution That
act fixed the boundary without negoaton declared the
no nrahde 70 DC tne we , W u 6J a. hd
Of course Dy Inc Pd S % nnu d
k h o dd ,hat s,ar,e as aarmeJ iv her constitn
~ s xoant;na eli ac,s in cnnact yith onr ;o;n,
re H she in point of fact repealed the act of
nschn, Iaas spch ia Tho LEGAL eHect oc her o,yn con-
stution solemny made and ratified and by its terms She
must stand"
have but word of comment here and it is to sug-
eest that differ entirely with the gentleman from Indiana
IN regard n the qualification in the constitution Of
nndr which h awcon,s tho houpdarv statutes n
s3s ,s IN daroat;on f no io;n resolutions of
ooo' as ~ ueosal9i o, .le |o % 81
uon whch reserved 10 the Unted oates Inc rght 10 ad-
Just the boundary question This reservation merely con-
erred the United States the right TO cede to Mexico
in the exercise of the treaty power portion of the soil
been deemed advisable IN fly IN boundary east of the
Rio Grande the then boundary of Texas and so recop
Missed in the Joint resolutions of annexation which pro-
vided for TERRITORY north and south of the parallel
of 36e 3o-a parallel which, by reference to the map il
will be seem would never have been reached if the
Nueces river had been the western boundary of Texas
or indeed anv intermediate river east of the Rio ,rande
which latter being the western boundary of Texas has
source near the head of the Arkansas river about the
necessity and proprey of extending TO Texas the prnc
pie of the Missouri compromise.
The only remaining issue presented by the gentleman
from Indiana, to which | called to reply, that
which has reference to the act of December g. 1S45
extending 10 Texas the revenue system of the United
States s,a,ed in evnlanaon IN Tho honor,hle oentIa
'-I' -. eN L. r. s.e iio'oooIs be..ie
man, .al :ne act Oh GongGess only 70 con-
s!u'e one CcneCuoh uistliCt tol nS catc OF 1exas'
win port OF delivery al corpus Chrisu' ana an IN
specto OF customs al foln ISABEL near the ho Grande
| In the face of this explanation, he affirms that
Congress did not intend bv these act, to 90 bevond the
point to which the jurisdiction of Texas extended at the
time of annexation. That point the county of San
Patrco, which had been extended so embrace Cor
pus Christi the Immediately adjacent had
never, at that time, gone farther"
And in a note amended tn his prnted sneech the oep
olHoe 'uIs sPeeeh vas acuvoeu, nave oA'linco ana
nontsd for po;at ,absi The l,W d nor an,hola .nnh
an officer The act of 3lst December lSt provided for