The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-02-02

supported by the military power Of the Dictator over
threw not only me conenmon but reduced the States 10
mere departments supping 'nem OF every vestige OF
On tie q Of May. 1885, that Congress dssrssa
n the present general Congress remain. by the win Of
the nation, all the faculties 10
make, in the constitution Of the year 1924 many
tons il shall think convenient Tor the good of said
without the troubles and delays which IL prescribes"
DEGREES, p l5i tsiaN HlEla
In pursuance Of the power thus claimed, both branches
Of Congress were united in one assembly by decree
tually convened on the 10th, asserted all legislative
power r-Decrees. p. Att wv
On the 22d Of October 1885, the Congress proceeded to
destroy the confederation and reduce the States to depart
ments, by decreeing that
"The national territory sha be divided into departments
upon the basis Of population locality and other fitting cir
regulated by constusionallaw "--Dscrees, p, $50
This measure wasstl further regulated BY the decree
constitute one department This radical revolution,
changing the whole character OF the government,
rendered successful by the force Of throughout all
q
dom in the land Of Washington and not to be enslaved
in another. ti A..
possession Of power not only de facfo but ure
II would be enough for my purpose to prove that he rep
resented government de fdcfo for the law Of nations
nal regulations Of another 10 determine whether the gov
ernment is usurpaton or not Chancellor Kent says:
"a treaty peace Is valid and binding the nation, IL
s a. oSsr have ' no in
terfere with the domestic affairs Of particular nation
are 70 only The fact
cession" Kent l67 citing Vattel, b. 4. Sec a
II must be admitted that the powers Of Santa Anna
fected by his condition prisoner Of war at the time of
it's execution When the Congress of Mexico subse-.
quenty annulled the treaty, that body did not deny his
power but based the nuty entirely the ground that
he was prisoner OF war at the time of its execution.
That this shameful violation OF national faith, and
cannot obtain is evident from the fact that the decree OF
ers as commander OF the army for the declared purpose
Of enabling him to suppress the revolutions in the States
Under the law, i was function delegated to him as
clothed his authority with the appearance Of legality by
procuring the formal sanction OF Congress- The treaty
signed not only by Santa Anna but by his generals
respective divisions It was executed by Fisoa. the
next in command to Santa Anna and upon whom, &C.
cording to the laws of Mexico well as universal mil
itary usage the military functions Of the Command de-
volved the chief being prisoner dead His auhori-
y commander was also expressly recognised by the
at home after the capture OF Santa Anna He
OF pacfying conqueng treating with the evoed prov
of Texas And his signature and that OF the other
officers gave force and validity to the treaty It would
have been valid without the concurrence OF Santa Anna
whose authority was in no wise necessary to- render it
binding upon the republic of Mexico.
Vatte and all those writers who assert that the treaty
4,
rule that il is obligatory on the nation if ratified BY its
representatives the depositares Of the public author
W during the captivity Of the prince; lastly by him
paIer hs sapxy q Anna F.oa wa. the
representative OF the Mexican republic in this business
and the depositary OF all the military power OF the chief
among which that OF negotiating with the province
Of Texas The principle of duress therefore, has ap
plicaton the treaty of 1885, The officer whose sane
on gave force was not party TO that duress nor We're
his acts in any manner affected by II.
Again Fsoa acted in this treaty BY the appointment
and request of Santa Anna to whom the Mexican Con-
gress had given full power to delegate his authoy for
cfarec;
The President geneIaln chief OF the army shall be
able delegate the powers ths. belong to chiefs Of divs
ions, IL he finds il convenient"-Decrees p. 333.
He had therefore, power to negotiate the treaty, not
only under the law as the next in command but by virtue
Of the appointment Of Santa Anna authorized by the act
Of the Mexican Congress; II the treaty had no other
foundation than this validity could not be successfully
contested IN any impartial tribunal disposed to be govern
ed by the principles Of law and justice AS the chief OF
division. next in command and named by Santa Anna.
Again: Mexico acted upon the treaty, received all its
benefsthe liberation of the troops, the arms ammu
nition and military property OF the army 1t was not in
committing an act Of bad faith, condemned by all the
writers on national law She could refuse ratification
only by restoring Texas the condition previous
TO the reayby returning, II not the prisoners Of war; at
least the military property which Mexico secured and
carried away by virtue Of the treaty.
There 10 principle OF International law more fully
settled than that government cannot take the benefits OF
treaty and then refuse be bound by its spulatons
II has been contended with much force that the present
treaty with Mexico recognises the claim of Texas TO New
Mexico in the map which Is made part of the treaty
The 9th article declares: ~ nqN laH
s.Thc southern and western limits OF New Mexico,
toned In this article those laid down In the map ent
lied mop Of the Uwsd Msxics~ States orga~izsd a~d
dsfmsd ~ vsyo~s acts sf fhs Cosgs Of sad ryvbe srd
eowsirscfsd aecording 20 s bs axihors Rsvixd sdi-
fio~ Pubissked at Nsp York, % 1s47, bS Dssrae OF
which map copy Is added 10 this treaty, bearing the sg
natures and seals Of the undersigned penpoiendaes
This map shows that the country east Of the Rio
Grande was not in New Mexico, bat in Texas, at the
date Of the treaty II 10 declared TO be cQnstucted &C
corng to the acts Of the Mexican Congress, "and the
best anthotss" This revised edition OF the map being
sealed and made part Of the treaty, s binding well in
m subdivisions as in the special line mentioned II s
declared IN authentic map by the treaty II is fair TO
presume that the Mexican government intended 10
redeem its faith pledged in the treaty by Santa
Anna in 1885, and 10 close all controversy. as well
with Texas ~ the United States. This CONCLUSION s
strengthened by the address OF the Mexican commission
ers who signed the uestysto their counrymen. who de-
clare that for twelve years. public events had tended TO
FIX the Rio Grande the boundary between Texas and
Mexico, and that had become impossible TO change It,
Il is also well known that for series Of years. Mexico
by many acts treated the Rio Grande the boundary be-
tween the two countries And surely, when the whole
be held bound BY the delneahons Of map which, by
solemn treaty, they declare authentic The map shows
conclusively that Mexico never attempted convey any
territory east of the Rio Grande, for il places New Mex-
co entirely on the west side Of that river Il shows what
covnpr,sed vvshin Nav Mexicr the