The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-06-22

Contests of States different oas STATE may CLAIM
jurisdiction over territory which y claimed BY another
a 81 n,ss sas
~ % which has jurisdiction over any particular portion
and \ Necessary 70 have such dtieoliy settled by
such ease, than the Supreme Court We would come
10 the Supreme Court IN such case as that with conf
rights Of iii the States and would be s sSSoossd ' q stand
in relation OF Indifference and impartaly 10 them 50
far regarded the merits Of the controversy But thar
is very different thing from making the party who claims
right against another The Judge 20 determine and ad
judicate upon that right.
Sir this clause Of the constitution should be construed
strictly. State cannot before federal court ex-
cept in the Supreme Court But does this clause say thai
il shall apply when the United States party The
S1s Is
raf.oass party different from each 81 The States
and from all of them as political communities. One State
may be party placed in an adverse attitude to the other
States; and The United States third party, ID alto
gethes different You may have controversy between
every one q the States but the moment you substiiuie
the United States as party, you substitute the federal
government distinct thing in organization and scope
Dy aGd soe e Ss e
to me as strange proposition. There must be some
reason in the common law on that subject There il
allow one partner to sue another which Is the same thing
himself and thus, II the United States sue one
Of the States il is the same thing as % sue itself which u
il would If may use the expression be suing one Of its
selves il would therefore, be contest OF corporation
ng such han al altitude as il conempated 81 hs consa
ton Az 10 this question Of boundary, cannot see the
danger which s spoken Of By some gentlemen here AZ
il cannot Be defined BY the finger Of department Of this
II connsxon with this, will Jay that 1 have great
any Of The departments 81 this government But sir.
s Ss as o.. he
feel confident i viii Be said the Judiciary long Of
fear OF any OF those gentlemen who occupy posi-
ton in the Supreme Court that do not desire this Ques
on 2 60 before tnat tribunal but = because Isgad
and you cannot 70 against the United States ID the man
ner indicated by that amendment; and. II YOU cannot,
you have right to say that the government Of the Un
TED States has right to sue one Of the parties which
constitute itself
Nil President, know that, in transient and sudden
trust have only suggested my Impressions, and am not
bound by them as confirmed opinions The practice OF
this goyernment where against an exercise q ppwer
call for deviation from il State has never set been
made party in controversy in which the United States
party fearful issue would s. dsi Ii any ssmp
to force her to submission Let avoid the dangers
2 Mr. s1eI uNDERwooD Mr. President, did no. dream
when offered this amendment. that should excite the
indignation OF any one, or the rascibe feelings Of any
when we were endeavoring to pass bill which was to
settle all these controversies in which have been en-
gagged iOE years i should SO home and o3s Of
in Texas will not accede to the proposition which is
made TO her'pl should be compelled in that event, 10
answer ss he question Of my friend y cannot ts s
months, during long session of Congress- proposing
compromise, proposing settlement proposing 10 adjust
the event that Texas does not agree to your proposition
nothing has been done" Why, really sir do not like
to place myself in that position Looking at il them ia
would enable us TO say. when we returned home, that
we had put such system into operation as must uli-
matey settle all these agitang questions and 4 oc-
CURED to me that that could be done by providing Tor the
decision OF the Supreme Court Of the United States. in
case Texas rejected the proposition we are about to offer
her. sf4s,. "a Il. - 4
am met BY speech from one Of the senators from
Texas, expressing great deal Of feeling and another
from senator from Virginia, who thought that the State
such proposition WE'LL sur, wish to say the hon
ofable from Texas, that he and upon former
IT. years INTO 70.
It's mouth did not believe, al the commencement OF
this war. that it did. believed that the Mexican State
the Rio Grande al its mouth. do not propose at this
time TO renew any controversy with the senator from
Texas upon that subject Far from it propose in my
action this bill, TO yield all the country from the
mouth Of the Rio Gande up to the southern boundary
OF New Mexico, without any controversy, and 70 yield
all objections which have heretofore entertained upon
am driven into discussion upon the subject OF bound
airy and title. shall not 60 into discussion TO show
that was right two years ago. intend by my vote 10
give TO Texas all below The southern boundary oil New
Mexico TO the mouth OF the Rio Grande, without making
aquestion, even il should prove she has title. /
sorry the gentleman from Texas is not in his seat
for want TO present view OF this subject from the
speech he has made which, il TO me, must strike
him.
SENATOR He is here
Mr.. UNDERWOOD All am glad to see him
Now this bill proposes although the amount i now
blank, 10 pay Texas Millions Ii is in the plural,
think. Now, will my friend from Texas-for whom he
be assured have the highest respectwill he not
the predcamenf he places me and others under by
such argument he has made herei He says no
man can honestly deny The title OF Texas 10 the A5i de-
gree OF north latitude. $3.50 ~ t ~.
MIR. RUSK. The honorable senator has misunderstood
me- did not say could honestly deny H. I said
the United States could not honestly claim it, when, under
similar circumstances it could not be honestly claimed BY
MIR. UNDERWOOD. / am told ,hat |, il blank " dol.
lars" in the bill, but blank Millions ia the report but
this will male difference as TO the argument 4 will
briefly press upon the senator from Texas and trust
he will allow say respect him, and am HIS friend.
You present in this attitude You get up here and say
title clear the Of the river that were
il an individual case, honesty would silence The mouth
OF the claimant Now, how you charge, II you
have that title, that we shall buy Il from you TO make
free sois In your title is clear and undsputed. you ale
firm to be, do you think that southern wish to pay
for title not opposed to your holdng-to make
il free soil, and thereby give millions 10 abstract from
you title we would just as soon you would retain as