The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1850-07-31

of the country under the treaty OF peace, the in
hsbitsnts became entitled 70 the benefits Of our
Consti and laws, that Congress having failed
established by the military power during the war,
being the government de faeto. must continue with
the presumed consent of the Inhabitants. And MIR.
buchanan late Secretary Of State, in his letter Of
October I, lS4s, says: 'rhe great law of necessity
pie Is irresstiby inferred from the fact that civ
ilized community could possibly desire TO abrogate
| an existing government when the alternative pre-
sented would be to place themselves in a state Of
| anarchy" &c. This the Secretary says of Cali
tornia, but 1t is equally applicable to New Mexico.
Well, sir, the Senator says that this government
| de Jocto ought to have ceased Immediately upon
| the peace; that its continuance is a subversion
of the authority of Texas, and an infraction
Of her territorial limits. This would all be
| true If the territory in question was the ac-
| knowledged right of Texas. There could then
be no pretence for holding it an hour. But there
has never been any such acknowledgment Of the
| claim of Texas by the Government of the United
States or by the people of the Territory. The gov
| eminent de Jacto has continued with the assent Of
| the people, and with such sanction the silent
quiescence OF Congress may give. No proposition
| has been made to Congress to yield up the Santa
| Fe country to Texas; no such proposition, think,
| could command majority of Congress- The treaty
Of peace which is the supreme law of the land does
not INK the limits Of Texas, but does guaranty to
the people Of the cedcd territory incorporation into
our Union. What the treaty transfers to is that
which Mexico had before the war, including New
Mexico on both sides OF the Rio Grande. The peo-
pie thus transferred have right to be heard before
they ASST gned over to Texas. None but Legislative
| authority, and that Of both Texas and the United
States, determine the limits of Texas and settle
| this dispute. in which there ia a claim side
and claim with possession on the other
| Now, what is the Executive to do? He cannot
| yield up the country we hold to the State which
claims it. That would be usurpaton of Legislative
authority Nor can he do indirectly that which it
| would be " q
| he cannot, by any orders from the Department of
transfer to Texas that territory, her claim TO which
presents, Mr.. Polk said, question for Congress
TO settle. If1exas has title, that will not be in
validated by the continuance of the United States
possession till the settlement Of the dispute. IT, then,
the possession of the United States should be dis
turbcd by an armed force is the Executive to stand
still, an idle spectator of this violence II the State
OF Chihuahua, claiming title to this territory and
insisting upon ts delivery to her authority should
march three thousand men to Santa Fe would il not
be the duty OF the President to repe this invasion
And if Texas should do the same thing, how would
his duty be varied by the fact that she was State
in the Union? She cannot make war, nor can she
constitutionally keep troops in time Of peace, ex
cept by consent of Congress. Can she constitution
ally employ them because their force to be directed
against people within the limits and under the
protection Of the United States1
But will not pursue this subject My most earn
est desire is to avert the dangers which lie in such
prospect. For this am willing, indeed very anx-
ious, to effect an arrangement most liberal, and |
hope, satisfactory to Texas My vote shall give the
proof of my sincerity.