The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-07-23


sssscrhen. w go enclosed win ssansl : - 49, a.
sans sdtuoa they furnish ssbsc.slas ~ svssss
in this body thirty constituting half Of the whos
number is no warrant for hope with me to know thst
nearly all the northern States have instructed In fn a
it, aud that probably large majority in the other houss
for il, and restrained with difficulty from sppIyipe
i 10 country where they told slavery is sxfI6dsd
by Mexican law, and on account Of natural caueAo but
who probably would insist applying TO any portion
of the territory said TO belong to Texas 6is fss
ture of the bill would, It me, lead to the
most bitter and intense excitement hereafter II 10 now
easy for gentlemen to themselves from voting the
Pfoviso applied TO the Territories, account Of the
alleged existence OF the Mexican law there but il will
then be said, here s for which you can i've no
such reason Northern gentlemen will then be urged irrs
sistby Or TO their own destruction to apply the Pcvso 70
its application with the more vehemsnce TO territory which
has once been under the dominion OF pro slavery laws
than they would perhaps to any other portion OF the do.
main Of the United States
But we are toId in answer to this tha, the territory
does not belong to Texas and we are also assured that
she will get more in this way than in any other. Sir,
the territory does belong to Texas. as ! think has
been conclusvey shown by her senators and r0oeeha
ves, do not know how can @ aud thas sAs wla ~
pose thai there is majority here who have the power
and viii to deprive Texas Of her territory, whethss she
consult here or to reason on the subject ioi in hat eass
II would be useless to show that the right was On the
side Of Texas and that il s duty and justice 70 her to
acknowledge that right. make no s1ch preSumpion.
presume ii il be shown that the territory belongs to
Texas il will be declared to belong to her BY Congress
and she will be protected in its enjoyment Now, that
the territory does belong to Texas think pte.
cuded from denying by our own acts precluded BY the
opinion of our own courts and precuded also, was
sav % ss because there %
ence of spnon that subject between honest and able
men this floor But believe, when the heat OF the mo-
ment and excitement Of the day shall have passed away.
no man will look on the page Of American history which
records the fact that disputed the title OF Texas under
existing circumstances without sentiment OF regret! Or.
L.. Of ohu that Tho
be told that in misguided moment we had been betrayed
into such an error. a
boundaries Of New Mexico before the revolution in
Texas hold that to be mmaterial issue Vet be-
leve il be shown that at the time Of the wsr Or Of
the declaration Of Independence by Texas the bound
aries Of New Mexico did not run down 80 lowlas the
senator from Missouri seems to think: believe can
be shown upon the authority of Muhlenf0rdt. Aext to
that of Humboldt. and in some respects bcter than that
Of Humboldt because more recent that the boundlArof
New Mexico did not extend below the parallel OF 81 1e
grees Of north latitude But hold all that Ut ttain ot IN
bound by our own acts in which we have acknowledged
the right of Texas to all the territory east OF He ho
Grande from its mouth to its source We took Tstas
with this claim. Our ministers instructed p tatn
tain this claim; and Mr. Buchanan 80 instructed Mf Hl-
dell and Mr.. Trist The United States goverrnent.shy
its convention in 1898 with Texas acknowledged M nle
to what it claimed by recognising much OF that's
as related to the former western boundary between nor
with wit al known and declared claim 10 the whole of o
trande as her western limit, and from that mntst r.
came bound renquvh that territory TO Texps ~ Mo
event that she should make good against Metico She
was thus bound because she then became t4S went
through whom alone the rights and claims Of 1AfAs
could be msn'aned M pn as against T. foreign powF oar
acknowledged the right OF Texas the country, and
sused his military possession account OF the nsessi
ties of war. map made part OF the treaty OF
peace with Mexico; and that map recognized thA Rio
Grande the western boundary OF Texas In svesyw
in which i could be done. the title OF Texas ~ Deen
eminent recognise it in the declaration Of war with Mex
leo We justified that war upon the ground hAt Texas
ns h. e ss
shed upon American soil and il il was, then Texas bad
good claim at the source OF the Rio Grande q Il the
the ped, postso where along that line but wss
upon her claim to this that we justified the waf with
Mexico. And can we turn about now, and set up the
claim of Mexico against Texas' Can we acknowiedge
before the world that entered into this war without
good cause and attempted TO justify il by fasehood'
Can thus recall our own admissions, our own record
ed acknowledgements of the title of Texas n the hdp4 OF
gaining some advantage by iti What has our own Su
preme Court decided in = stniar instance What the
dicum Of Judge Marshall IN relation to thus vsfX 49,
2 Peters, 3o9 ..e
AAer those OF sovereign power over the terrific
in dispute asserting tho American con.tInosion q nc
opposite IN its own courts would cersan ps
ds which sps With the ss
Of the nation, which asscr and mansan - sss
4. ,isas. Of dominion over. country of whoh es
session md which claims under ucaty--if the bGsa-
acted the construction thus asseFed 10 IN
Its that this construction Is 70 be denied
But sir ia said that the United States u not II %
precuded on account of being the agent in making this
aco uson for Texas because il the agent for The oher
States aso and Texas would thus get lager shafe hah
she was entitled TO- 1t to be remembered that Texas
Claimed the whole OF Texas the Sabine Suppose she
cases had been reversedthat Mexico had ben srnng
and we weak, and we had gone iato such Qnafrd. ~
might have resulted that Texas would have lost Al Ano
H. on the other hand Texas. having staksd ncse' ns
more ia il not fair compensation for thai risx nN
But hold that we are precuded by our owa sce fsom
disputing the authority of Texas now; and bold mat
h always the wises aad the best courss whsss there 10
dispute as 10 boundary between this govWunsnt md
State unless the be Of Aayant wrong. toE the
government yield to the State for there ID common
arber between them. and protest against tho docne
that the Supreme Court try title between eovueeEn
State and the consderacy There 10 cocm0n 11eDnr.
and no way settle it except by mode aaFss1 upon
bstwoen the parties 1t would be far wiser and more u
dent in such instances for the United States 70 yed and
States is forced by her avowas, BY her own eo.n-
initials to admit the right Of Texas and how would ens
stand the page of history il she were to be Pee'
a. in one breath disputing the title of Texas. nee.s
ing to lower her demands, and then o6enn9 monsy g
purchase this es Sir. such prscedsni - tn.t wV1a
have unseemy appearance upon the rsco.us " 49,
nation But we are told that the people NJ yNN,
luctant to live under the government q - no
thai We should have difficulties from thai soSsee I!cfe
= more than one mode OF escaping that dcasys Wsh-
an. redinv avay one hundred and tWeny to001And
suuare miles of land belonging . !sxas bot uee,
~ n, ~ fac any reason believe that tAa people
~ Wu"s W ~ -