Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1850-02-21
-o,e tho mower of settling with any foreign ma

: -, chat the boundary should be.
Now. sir, it is impossible for me 10 go ,n.o u.
whole question. mean 10 express rainier ny
oninion than TO 90 into the whole extent OF the
aroumen. The western boundary OF Texas pc
inc unsettled. and Congress retaining 10 Hseh
the mower 10 settle ii, | ask suppose that power
! had heen exercised, and that no cession OF Ter
r;,orv to the United States had ensued, and that
the negotiations between the two countries hdu
bacp limited TO the settlement CT the western
and northern limits of Texas, could It not nave
been done BY the Uniled States and Mexico con
Jointly? Suppose that treaty OF the limits oi
/ Texas had been concluded between Mexico a"c
the United States, fixing the Nueces as The oonn-
dary. would not Texas have been bound Oy II:
/ Or suppose il had been the Rio GTande, C"ioFa-
do. or any other point, whatever limit had been
Fixed upon by the Joint act Of the two powers,
would it rot have been obligatory upon Texas,
! by the express terms OF the resolution by which
! 1t VAS annexed?
Well. 1ow SIR if Mexico and the United States
conformity by treaty might have hxed upon the
| Western and Noriherm mi.s OF Texas, and II
The United States have acquired ihit power py
treaty. then all tie power p,n winch the limits
of Texas must have depended Is now yes ed III
the United States solely and excnsiveiy-all
which Mexlco and the United Sales ronjointv
Possessed prior to the old treaty with Mexico. Il
seems 10 Ine, sir tlat the Conclusion ana reaso-
IN are perfectly lrresls ibir. l. Mexico and
the Unnec States could have fixed upon any
Western s for re,as. and did not do il. aud
il the United States have acquired 10 them
selves by the treaty any extent OF the territory
upon which them eslern hint was 10 be fixed.
and must be fixed, IL seems 10 me that no one
can resist the logical Conclusions that the United
States now has The power 10 do what the United
STATES and Mexico conljintiy could have done
| admit thar IL IS delicate power-an extreme
y delicate power. | admit HAT 1t ,uIht 10 be
exercised with spirit Of justice, generosity, and
lberalry towards this youngest member OF the
great American famlly.
Upon thai question | offer no positive opinion
but possibly If the United States fixes 1t in
way Contrary 10 the desire and rights Of Texas,
she might bring II before the Supreme Court OF
the United States, and have the question again
decided say possibly, because | not of
that Class OF politicians who believe that every
question Is proper question for the Supreme
Court OF the United States. There are qnes-
tons too large i)r any tribunal Of that kind to
decide great political national, and territorial
ques Ions, which transcend their limits, and 10
"mch they are utterly inco npeteni. Whether
ihls Is one or not, viii not decide, but | viii
maintain that the United States now invest
ed solely and exclusively with the power tina,
was IN 0o'h nations 10 fix, ascertain, and settle
T the Western an! n rihern limits of Texas.
Sir, the other dry my honorable freud who
pfeseais 50 wei tue Stale Of Texas Mr.. Rusk)
saiI llnt We had ho m1re right to touch tie lin
lis Oh eXas than we have to tnuch the llm'is oi
kentucky; that the State is one and indlvIslbe,
aud that the federal government has no right To
separate It, | agree with HIN that, when the
limits are certain cnl ascer,alued, they are I'M
DISPUTED atd md -np,,hlp To reuprai uev-
ernHenI has no right or power to interfere with
Ire hints of a State whose boundaries are hAed,
f known, ascertaimet, and recognizsd-ro power
It least 10 interfere with II voluntarily. An eX-
IRENE case may be put-oac which | trust IN
God never VIII happen to t!iis Union-o a con-
qucred nation and OF IA constitution adapting IL
self 10 the state OF subJugatlon aud conquest 20
which II has been reduced, and The giving up OF
whole States, as well parts Of h. Stale, in or
Ger 10 save what remains from the conquering
arm OF the successful invader. say such
power may possibly exist for a case OF extremi
ty such as tins; and | sd nt that short of such
an extremity, voluntarily, The general govern
nient has no right to separate State, or to take
any portion of It's territory from II, or 10 regard
1t oihrrw se than an inleger-oae and indniji-
bic.
But then assume what does not exist IN the
State OF Texas-that this boundary was known
ascertained and ind.sputable. Ga he contrary
1t was open unfixed, and remains unfixed
to this moment, with respect 10 her lin Is west
and noith of the Nueces. Why, sir, we gave
fifteen millions OF dollars for the e Territories
that we b0u -h', and God knows what costly
barg i'm to this country that was, We gave fl
teen millions OF dollars for The Territories ceIed
by MeAico to Us. Can Texas Justly. fauly, ami
honora5iy Come 10 claim all she has asserted
rtuht q. MiTHCuf "a a that H.
teen millions OF liars !? She tllhs, indeed,
about lhe United States being her agent her
trustee. WAY, SIR, she was more Ter agen:
or lrus;ee than she tie agent or tius &c OF
any o,hcr par, of The United Safes.
! Texas Involved her IN war wnh Mexico:
make 40 repToaches none, nnne. Texas brou gti
her into the waf; but when she soi inio Il. it
: not war of Texis and Mexicoit war
OF the whole hi ~ States with Mexico "a war
IN which the government Of the Unfed States
cunduc ed the hos.liiies, aad vas as much the
trustee and agent OF The twenty nne other States
composing this Union as she he trustee and
/ agent of Texas. Sir, with respec. 10 all these
circumstances such, for example, As map an
Bexec 10 the recent treaty WIKI Mexico: these
are The opinions Of individuals, hlgliy respecta
bic aud euneniy clevited individuals, as was
The lamened Mr.. Pc late President Of tac
United States. II was his individual opinlon,
J tlat lie had no right as President 81 tn Y aited
States, IN any other character, otherwise than
, as negotiating VITA Mexico, and then the Senate
had 10 act IN concurrence with hun, to fix a
! boundary. In respect to that msp, which is at
tached 10 the treaty, il is sufficient to say that
The treaty itself is SILENT from beginning TO end,
upon the limits of Texas; and the aunexng
l OF the map II the treaty no more confirms
The truth Of any thing delineated upon that
map IN relation to Texas than 1t does in relation
to any other geographical subject which compos
, cs the map.
) Mr. President. have said that thought the
power has been concentrated in the U. States to
, lx upon The limits of Texas. | have said that
, this power ought to be exercised in a spirit
OF great liberalny and justice, and put it to you
sir, 10 say, upon this second resolution of nine
whether that hberalty and justice have not been
displayed IN the resolution. What Is proposed /?
! 10 confne her TO The Nueces? No, sir To
extend II from the S-bine 10 the mouth of the
, RIO Grande-ond Is extend it up the Rio Grande
10 The southern limits of New Mexico, and
thence, with that !lmli, 10 the boundary between
f The United States and Spain. as marked out ia
, der the treaty of 1919. Why, sir, here is vast
f conniry. | have made estimate about 1t, but
| believe it is equal in amount of acres
. OF square mes-to what Texas east of the