Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1850-06-22

ernmen or no Government, except that which they
have is better than attempt at Territorial Government
with the obstacle of the Wilmo proviso
But here all comparison G comparison il mty be called)
between the recommendation of the E1ecutveand the plan
of the committee ends From this ponthe commit
tee starts aone om this point none can say Up plan OF the
committee has rival its defeat It's gfy or shame,
is all its announced grea pacihcator,
having healing in its influence, throwing oil uponhe troubled
waters Ay sir it is not the first time that the performance
has not up to the promise it Is not the ft time that
the play has not equaed the BILL This plan of Pc commit
tee In its first step towards restoring harmony a aayng
excitement leaves they themselves say, the queon OF sa-
very the Tertoeshe very seat of disorder I'D confu-
behind it. 1t advancesino the don Of dis
cord for further conquests in behalf Of harmony loving the
entenched camp of its enemy in the rear My gfat ohjec-
ton this scheme IT, that while il is called COMPROMISE of
all conflicting questions, it. in fact, will finally sde le
and compromise less that will not accomplish wht affects
to accomplish and that there is consideration adAuae to
the sacrifice the North is called upon TO make.
Now permit me to approach the first question Which the
committee deals with, on its own plan; and that NE set
element of the boundary Of Texas There Is mud COM
plant now made that the plan Of the Executive administers
remedy for this evil Why what the Executive to
this question. Was the Executive to lines to make
propositions 1t could not do that II did the lille that it
was necessary should do by asking the attention Of Con-
gress the subject But this matter OF the boundary
line of Texas has become important as 1t said BECAUSE In
addition other chances its settlement will avert civil war;
to all the other evils which to cluster around U.s. The
country take it. scarcely prepared for SO unexpected
and startling development. civil var II is very i'm
poran if correct in point Of fact and it will serve much to
enhance in the public eye the value Of this grand scheme Of
compromise On what facts does it assume that dvil war
will be avered cannot presume that Texas-one Of the
loving States of this Union-wl attempt for one mo-
ment enforce doubtful claim Of jurisdiction by AIMS
she do So however brave her czensand we needed not
the inmaton of her Senator to know thatI take for
granted she will g find lion in her path
The constitution devoves the duty OF protecting the Terri
tories upon the General Government which owns them; and
it is obligation which, have no doubt would be promptly
But respect Texas forbids the idea of attempt by
her violence upon such question mere question o civil
right and civil jurisdiction tor the full settlement OF which
the constitution Of the United States provides fit and pro-
per arber. suppose, by civil war was meant something
like the riot which recently broke out in the streets OF Santa
Fe-omented as the newspapers say by Texan soldier
attached to that portion of the army stationed there This
promptly suppressed it seems, by military force then
upon the spot AT all events, cannot be made by one
solitary man. three hundred miles least from any,
to support his claim And that is exactly the condition OF
things between New Mexico and the Texan commissioner
Santa Fe This question will ultimately be decided,
trust by our judicial tribunals.
Mr.. HOUSTON. Never Never !
N Mr.. DAYTON. Never Sir does the Senator from
Texas say neverl By what right ask Is the State Of
Texas more than one Of the sovereign States Of this Union
hold in my hand the constitution OF the United States,
which says that not only upon all controversies between
States is party the Supreme Court shall have jurisdiction
And pray sir why may not the Supreme Court as well
settle the boundary Of Texas the boundary between Mas
sachuses and Rhode and and the boundary between Mas
sachuses and Connecticut and the boundary between New
York York New Jersey and the boundary between Dea
ware and New Jersey, and the boundary between half
dozen other States Of this Unon involving much in point
Of value and Of interest the boundary between Texas and
New Mexico Why isit that Texas alone can override the
constitution The question Of State boundaries Of
fhosay
Judiciary provided and yet the Senator before me says
never Sir there is hardly old State of the Union whose
boundary has not at some time been settled or questioned In
this way. Why, then, ask again, with all respect to
Texas that that State alone almost the last of the sister
hood is to ride roughshod the constitution Why moi
submit to the common arbiter | .1...#
Mr.. RCSK. will answer the question.
Mr.. HOUSTON 1t can be answered at the proper time,
when the Senator has got through.
Mr.. RUsK. thought, perhaps, the Senator desired an
answer now
Mr.. DAYTON. can anticipate the suggestion which
the honorable Senator would make and in the course OF
remarks may attempt 70 answer It. butl VIII proceed IN
reference to the point hand The Senator from Massachu-
ses (Mr. WEBSTER, well the Senator from Georgia,
BERRIEN have already expressed the opinion that the
Supreme Court has jurisdiction Of the question now while New
Mexico is yet Territory, and in that opinion concur though
without upon my part much examination this be SO, it's not
even to await the tary action Of New Mexico the
door is open the test be applied now yet TINS plan OF
the committee proposes to pay - millions LOT tne claim
title of Texas that part of New Mexico east OF the Klo
Gande Now the wisdom Of buying or tgatng title always
depends much upon your estimate of its strength. beg,
therefore, look little into this question OF the Iexian
title Our friends from Texas observe, are warm on this
question they get excited and can hardly see how any
person honestly differ with them They think that were
ii for this question Of eeso man would have any
doubt about the Texan title 1t is needless TO argue in thai
way because may that were not for their slave
could doubt the title Of New Mexico
br SOIL and when have thus recmnated the argument
balanced and neither has advanced STEP suppose that
the judgments Of all liable be operated upon indirectly
with the best possible intentions and permit me to say
to the Senators from Texas, that they are in an especial
degree liable to these indirect influences for in addition
the general question Of slavery they represent the very State
claiming title they parties to the record trust there
fore, they will extend little charity when we perchance
differ in judgment. admit cheeruly, that the honorable
Senator, Mr RusK in the speech which ne delivered The
other day. made the best of the scan materials which
the title of Texas is founded
But sir that title to New Mexico bad; it is unsusaned
by any principle which apply to such question II
Just of those cases. where the question between
and man, and should be asked by client in behalf Of New
Mexico what he should do, would say to him the thing is
youspay much only the expense and vexation Of
lawsuit would be worth to seek for another title, is literally
to abandon the substance and look for the shadow.
But to the title How has Texas herself regarded it Has
she in her sovereign capacity claimed disclamed II
According my understanding of the past history Of he
legislation she herself has utterly dscaimed all title to New
Mexico. am not speaking Of the Lower Rio Grande
now beg leave call the attention of the Senate little
historical or political detail.
Texas in theyear 1886, became independent State
that time she passed laws organize her countless others
to establish her judicial districts others apporon reprcse
taves in her Congress all parts Of the State but neither
countless nor districts representatives did she give 10 New
Mexico, though that population, If owned by Texas, was
greater at that time than the population of Texas herself Sofa
as can ascertain she in any Of her laws came within
Ix.~l - H.. al- 49,