The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-08-09

Mr. Webster by the agents Of the people OF New
Mexicoi They officers OF the army, and nothing
else, Mr. Webster very well knows and any orders 10
them from Mr. Crawford were to be obsyed, under the
penalties prescribed by the articles of war We thought
that had done with all such false logic when General
Tsylor's cabinet was disbanded
After dsposing of Governor Bells FIRST question in the
manner we have mentioned Mr. Webster proceeds TO
swer the second And most singular method he adopts
The President asked by the governor Of sovereign
State whether he approves the conduct OF an officer OF
the United States army. which that State regards
insuectonary against her legitimate authority
Instead OF answering this grave question plainly and d.
recty and thus putting the responsibility where il prop
erly belongs, Mr. Webster, in loo diplomatic spirit,
looks fret at the o5set OF Colonel Munroe's procla
nation, and then at the effect OF the proceedings had
under it. Surely this is strange method OF pro-
ceedng. Is sovereign State TO be outraged and her
territory wrested from her by officer OF the army, be-
the President may possibly believe that his object was
good one And is sovereign State to be ouiraged-her
officers driven from what she claims to be her territory
because great dpomatis in the State Department says
that such outrage viii work no evil effect upon that
State, it will no; ultimately impair her title No
who had sufficient respect for the rights OF the States
would have given such answer We must be excused
for saying that the is insult 10 Texas-an
insult which may be inflicted any State in the confed
eracy II il is not rebuked But, in discussing the object
which Colonel Munroe had in issuing his proclamation
Mr. Webster makes fatal mistake. He admits that il
the object oil Colonel Munroa's proclamation TO
sumo settle the disputed boundary OF Texas, then the
President would have hesitation in disappearing that
proclamation. True, Colonel Munroe's proclamation
does not lay down the precise line between Texas and
New Mexico but asserts. plain il ii had used the
very words that the jurisdiction Of Texas did MOI extend
the Santa Fs country, and to The east bank Of The
Rio Grande, He tried 10 settle claim to territory
though he did not define It's limits He called conyen
ton 10 meet in Santa Fe He organized counties east OF
the Rio Gande, and he appor,onei the delegates among
them. That equivalent direct assertion tina
Texas had right the Santa Fe country tdid not say
where authority Of Texas should stop but declared
that the authority Of Texas did extend as far as Tex
as claimed that il rightfully extended. Otherwise, he
was guilty Of rebellion against the authority OF Texas
by calling convention in her territory hostile TO her au.
thority. Mr.. Webster may take either horn Of the
dilemma we have presented and, no matter which
he takes, tell him now that, with all his abil-
ity, he will find it task beyond his strength to
satisfy the people OF any State in this conederacy that
is wrong State for the officers OF the United States
army TO deny her jurisdiction in her borders because
orsooth, at subsequent period the federal Legislature
may acknowledge her true limits and thereby undo The
acts of its officers.
We have much more TO say on this subject We have
just cleared away the distractions which Mr. Fillmore
and Mr. Webster have thrown around the subject To-
morrow we will take up the real point involyed-the
claim OF Texas