The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-10-11

Der ofths House or OF the other do it, II can be done
only by the government, and not by one department Of ID
controversy with Texas as to her 6oandaryf Khad one
10 behalf OF Texas with Mexico but that is settled and
mere Is an end Of il But when and where has made
cne Tor itsef The President has most illegally attempts
el 70 do so but he has not yet become the State
rfench monarch claimed to be- although admit bis pre-.
a,so n ARE ARE rapidly leading that way L The Uniled
such Poiiueai being. She expired when she con-
aueiea oy our arms and annexed to territory BY the
treaty Whatever doubt there be as to the existence
OF Mexican municipal law the Territories We acquired
from her, there can be no doubt that her political law has
sHB,,sd Ba, 1; !. ..d i We adm, h., s,,, I,
revived, and that then she wosd be party capable of
itigaling with Texas have already shown that she
Without the coassn, Of Texas But SUPPOSE T am Wions
in ths STILL considering the character Of the conrover-
sy, New Mexico would not be such party 10 il as the
court could recognise party to controversy, TO be
proper the record must be such one will con.
tinne on to the end of the cause, survive the nal de-
sf sse ~
prive itself OF jurisdiction in the very act OF deciding the
upon IFS merits. and be incapable Of proncuncing
judicial decision upon the question undertook to Try.
Parties sometimes prove themselves out OF court; bui
here the court would determine had before ii
in the very act OF deciding it, Il may be said. however
Texas, and that that portion would still constitute the
State Very little OF New Mexico capable of habiaiioH
BY civilized man lies west Of the Rio Grande The
ton Of New Mexico west Of that river has white pop
uation Its entire population consists OF about ten thou
sand Pueblo Indians The idea Of such country % that
constituting State OF this Union is absolutely lIdicrous
Besides, as shall show directly, there is nobody there
who has the constitutional qualification OF ssnaioror
representative. ~ Hl gA4c st q AsuNi ~
These remarks may be applied aso 10 some extent, 10
the other party 1t is contended that the United States
by the treaty succeeded to all the claims OF MEXICO:
Texas up to the Sabine; and il was this claim shs was
preparing to enforce when with her commenced.
Suppose the Supreme Court should sustain these presa
sions what, then. would become OF the cause But
suppose all these difficulties how would you
enforce the decree' The question is not about prop
er!y for there s not foot a public land in New Mexico
appropriated more than hundred years ago, The con-
troversy is one about political jurisdiction. In such
how the decree be enforceda Are the Texan
and their officers to be driven out OF the eitory
| Ii attempted by force, il would be civil war. AAa
| know shall be told that the Supreme Court has
taken jurisdiction oil questions OF boundary between
States but in those the parties voluntarily ap-
peared, and the court acted very much as arbrator
ected BY the parties to whose judgment they would
good faith, be bound to submit But the question will be
very different whenever State refuses TO appear
or to recognise its authority. sgd2aTq woH
ihere Is one case IN winch lhe supreme oo1n couM
decide incidentally question OF boundary betwes!
States that is, between persons claiming the land
under grants Of different States. Il was supposed that
many OF that sort would the disputed eFr-
tory the several instances referred to in the early art
Of my argument. But such case would be one invou
ing merely Individual rights, and between parties who
could be reached by the process OF the court andse
bound by its power II the power claimed Tor the comp
which have been considering be valid then this psos
unnecessary.
useless provisions in the constitution II seems % M
that there be familiar with the history o. 0nf
constitution who will believe that the States in I,iyisg
it, ever contemplated the submission TO the Suprems
Court Of questions involving the corpus of their soven
eighty II the Supreme Court can deprive S!aseolt
part OF the territory claims may as tar 20 the ques
ton OF power is concerned, deprive Il OF all. and thus
annhilae it, Could such thing ever have been con.
templated You avoid all difficulty if you limit is3u.
risdcton controversies affecting merely questions OF
property, and its sovereign rights, and especially not
such involve its very existence. . .iet WI ~
In denying 10 the Supreme Court jurisdiction in the
case discussing, am but carrying out the vews
solemny expressed, Of my own wise and patriotic State
on memorable occasion She had question OF dlapu-
ted boundary with Maryland. That State threasnsd 70
bring the before the Supreme Court Virginia, un-
der the lead OF that great statesman and jurIs, Lleton
w. Tazewell, declared her unaerable purpose mot 10
submit question Syovng m the extent ol ne, sosssssn s
son. John Taylor Roane, and their compeers, IN more
questionable case, utterly denied the jurisdiction OF the
Supreme Court and repudiated and denounced ns de-
cison allude their denuncaion Of the opinion oi the
court in the OF Cohen the State oil Virginia. And
told in the Life Of John Hancock written BY the
elder Adams, contained in Sandersons series. thai the
former in favoring confederate republic did not vim
dlcate with less scrupulousness the dignity OF the ndi-
sss q "a the ca Of s &
States, in which he was summoned as governor 10
answer the prosecution he resisted the process. and
maintained involae the sovereignty OF the Common
wealth" .5tN .NNA 1N-lN
fthe effort shall be made to dag Texas before the su.
preme Court, hope her governor will profit BY the ex
preserve involae the sovereignty OF his Commonwealth
But Imay be asked il the Supreme Court has not urs
dichon in such case, where Is final arbiter 70 pe
found reply emphaticaly, nowhere. The constj,u.
ton provides none, did II design to provide any Our
constitution is a compact between sovereign States VINO
have reserved 10 themselves respectively all such ques
ons They be adjusted BY negotiation, mediation,
arbitration and the other which are almost I'M
nite OF amcable adjustment; and beyond this no rem,
edy is provided and II is scarcely possible any be me-
cessary They are TO be settled they were In the
case between Virginia and Maryland not 10 mention
many others. F. eti..
There are other provisions Of the constitution which
must be violated before New Mexico be brought into
this Union as State. ~ RI s,s.4ffpE
The constitution declares that no person shall be
representative who shall not have attained the age oi
twenty five, senator who shall not have attained
the age of thirty and been in the Of representa-
i've years, and 10 the OF senator nine years
citizen OF the United States, and who shall NOT when
elected, be nhablant OF the State 40 whc9 ne sAah
| sti,uon TO be complied WITH How many persons arr
there New Mexico qualified for sno IN
ators see my friend from New York Mt DoERl smiles
lie doubtless recoects that this objection was pEed
the case Of the admission Of Texas aud probably thAtl
answered il on this floor But will show hun they
moi analogous There were Texas al the time OF her
admission AT least hundred thousand persons who
were native American citizens. II ne they had exs
paated themselves, and al thai time citzens OF
Texas showed, however, by the law of nations.
by COURTS that The they were
again under our jurisdiction they became restored
10 their original rights aud privileges They became Al
once, in the language OF jurss, rediaegras citizens
But there not thousand American ciizens in
New Mexico The most authentic ACCOUNTS do not make