Carroll free press. [volume] (Carrollton [Ohio]) 1834-1861, 1848-01-07

OF the United States to he territory between the
Ssbine and The RIO Nouc was derived from the
boundaries Of Texas. aud that, by claiming as
lar west as this river, the United Siases did rec.
ognise thai il was the boundary Of The Tsras.-
lrealIy Do not understand What is meant By this
assertion.
The United States claned the Rio Nvrte as
being the legitimate boundary Of L0HsiaHa. and
not Of Texas. Neither they nor France had
ever been in possession OF the country beyond
the Sabine. Spain had always held possession,
and had divided the territory inio provinces as
she pleased. One Of these was called Texas,
and lis boundaries had been designated and al.
Iered al her will. With these the United States
had no concern. Ii their claim could be sus-
Iained, il must BE- by proving that Louisiana ex.
tended of right thus far. This had no connex.
ion with the boundaries which Spain might have
assigned 10 her province Of Texas. These
mighthaye extended beyond the Rio del None,
or have been east of-thc Rio Nueces. There
is not the slightest connexion between the Iegt.
innate boundaries of Louisiana aud those of the
Spanish province OF Texas. The presumed
identity is mere supposilion.
Ills not necessary TO discuss the soundness Of
the pretensions to the Rio Noue, asserted By
Mr. Jefferson and Mr.. Monroe, since They
were yielded in exchange for Florida, and some
other objects, by The treaty Of 1874 treaty
extremely popular at the Time, aud the execu.
lion Of which was pressed with great zeal and
perseverance,.
Whenever ultimately ceded to Mexico, that
Republic fixed its boundaries as il thought pro.
per. Texas and Coahnila were declared to
form State, and the Rio Nucccs was made The
boundary of rexas. When Texas declared it.
self independent, it was the insurrecton Of on.
ly parl of STATE, for Coahuila remained united
10 Mexico; but the RiS Nueces was the boun.
dary between the department Of Texas and the
State of Tamaulipas. The whole contested
territory lies within The limits Of Tamaulipas,
which never was, under the Mexican Govern.
ment, connected in any shape with Texas.
The question now under consideration is on.
" that between the United States and Mexico;
and in that view of the subject il is quite imma.
teral wheherthe acts Of the United States EN-.
enated from Congress or from the Executive -
No act Of either recognising the country be-
yond the Nueces as part of the territory of the
United States, can be alleged against Mexico as
u proof of their right TO the country thus claim
ed. Any such act is only an assertion, decla-
ration, but not an argument sustaining the right
1t is, however, proper TO observe here that the
port Of delivery west Of the Nucces, erected By
| the act Of Congress "to establish COLLECTION
district in the State of Texas" was at Corpu
Christi, place which was in the actual posses
sion of that State.
1t must also be promised that in the joint res
oution for the annexation of Texas, The qupso
Of the boundary between it and Mexico wa
expressly reserved as one which should be set
tied by treaty between the Uniled States ant
Mexico.
The only arguments in the Presidents Mes
sage, which sustain the right of Texas TO terri
tory beyond the NucceS, are contained in those
passages in which il is asserted that the jurisdic
lion of Texas had been extended and exercised
/ beyond the Nucces; that the country between
that river and the del Nortc had been represen
ted in the Congress and Convention of Texas
had taken part in the annexation Of itself, anC
was now included within one Of our Congress-
iona districts.
But il is not stated in the Presidents Mes
sage hop far beyond the Nueces The jurisdiction
of Texas had been extended. nor lUhat part O.
the country between that river and the de
Norle had been represented i'll the Congress ant
Convention of Texas, and was then included
within one Of ouI Congressional districts.
Now the actual jurisdiction beyond the Nue
ces never extended further than the adacen
settlement of San Palricio, consisting Of abou
twenty families. That small district, though be
yond the Nueces, was contiguous to, and in the
actual possession of Texas. On this account i
might be righllully included within The limits
which we were bound to protect against inva
sion.
But what was the country between this small
settlement Of San Patricio, or between Corpus
Christi and the Rio del Nortc, over which il
might be supposed from the message, that the ju'
risdiction of Texas had been extended, so as tc
be included within one of our Congressional dis
lricts! Here, again, Texas had erected tina
small settlement into county, called San Patr
clio, and declared that this county extended tC
the Rio del Norte. This, like all other declar
atory acts of the same kind, was only al
assertion, not affecting the question of right
The State Of Texas might, with equal proprlety
have declared that their boundary extended IL
the Sierra Madre or 10 the Pacific. The ,rut
question of right 10 any territory beyond th'
Mexican limits of the department of Texas de
pends on the facts: By whom was the TERRITORY
in question actually inhabited aud occupied! an'
had the inhabitants united with Texas in the In
sunec.ion against Mexico.
The whole country between the settlement 0
San Patricio and Corpus Christi, ill within
few miles of the del Norle, is perfec. desert
one hundred and sixty miles wide by the rout
pursued by Gen. Taylor, as stated by himself
and near one hundred and twenty miles in
straight line.
The only settled part of it is along the lei
bank of the del Norle, and but few miles i
breadth. This belt was settled, inhabited, an
occupied exclusively by Mexicuns. II includes
The town Of Loredo; and Mexico had a custom
house at Brasos, north of the mouth OF the riv
er. Till occupied by the American arms it ha
ever been, and was at The time when invaded b.
Gen. Taylor, part of the department of Ia