The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-01-03

ducton Of the southern staples; and the North has
derived still greater benefit from the same source.
How significantly. then, do these weighty interests
point to the necessity Of union! And are they Ia
be put in peril merely for an abstraction. to graf
lily handful Of fanatical agiiatorsl Let the true
men--the patriots Of the North, the South, and the
Westponder these things, and then let them give peace
to the troubled elements.
The boundary Of Texas.
We publish below communication from Hon. volney
f. Howard touching the territorial claims Of Texas We
make this publication act OF justice TO General How
ard and without the intention Of expressing any opinion
IS to the merits Of the controversy.
WASHINGTON, January l., 1885,
TO the Editors Of the Union:
Your report OF the proceedings Of the House on Mr.
Roots resolution does not show that | offered to
vote the motion to lay the table, but excluded
under the rule having been called out of the House for
and noes AS all debate was cut oil BY the previous
question, wish through your paper to state the
Why should have voted TO lay the resolution on the
l. In the FIRST place. do not believe Congress has the
constitutional power 70 abolish or inhbit slavery in the
.. As the resolution was intended to embrace New
Mexico, and gives special instructions to the committee,
ought to have defined the boundaries OF the territory
acquired BY the United States, under the treaty Of Guada
lupe Hdalg0, in such manner as To respect the rights
of Texas or. il the intention OF the resolution to
disregard the claim Of Texas, it was due to the State
that the intent should be distinctly announced. Frank
ness was certainly proper at time when attempt has
been made to organize territorial government within
the limits OF Texas from which TO Introduce delegate
upon the floor Of the House. To such an outrage upon
her rights and feelings when consummated Texas will
not submit, long As she command rifle to defend
her somore especially when this pretended terrific
rial government has been organized under military super
fears and prejudices OF the Mexican population It is
not the province OF the general government to encourage
sedon rebellion in OF the States OF this Union
The State OF Texas assured officially that the mil
itary government in Santa Fe would cease with the war
with Mexico.
g. The claim Of Texas TO the whole Rio Grande. from
latitude will never be contested BY any intelligent law
yer who takes the trouble investigate the grounds upon
which il rests There is greater fallacy than that Of
That the limited S, , 70 ne ~, rga'
Grande Between the republic Of Texas and the Unied
States the question Of boundary settled finally and
ne e o aos
ernments; The treaty with Spain Of 1919 fixed the
northern boundary between Spain and the United States
the % Ss ss
ecng that the treaty Of 1919 was binding upon Mexico
The convention between Texas and the United States
Of 1885, reced that the treaty With Mexico OF ISIS "is
been entered ihto at time when Texas formed part oil
the said United Mexican States And whereas il is
deemed proper and expeden in order to prevent future
disputes and collisions between the United States and
Texas in regardio The boundary bsfsCeen the too coun
res the treaty. that portion OF the same
should be run and marked without unnecessary delay
&c. This convention ratified and carried out BY the
act OF the United States Congress Of January IL, 1892
under which the eastern boundary OF Texas actually
run and marked BY the two governments as far as the
this convention negotiated upon the part Of Texas
was her boundary act OF 1885, BY which her boundary
declared 10 be the Rio Gnde to its source and thence
the AID degree Of north latitude and thence east and
SOUTH according 10 boundary formerly existing between
the United States and Mexico. This convention
express recognition OF the entire boundary OF Texas, and
made with reference 70 the act oil the Texas Congress- OF
1896. Whatever might have been its effect upon Mexico,
this convention is forever oondusipe OF the boundary
against the United States, By act as solemn as treaty
stipulation.
I. The Texas act OF boundary together with other
laws not inconsistent with the constitution OF the United
States, the resolutions OF annexation, or the constitution
which she admitted into the Union, and therefore
ratified by the Congress Of the United States.
s. Texas was admitted into the Union with specified
to sss ali q rs boundary ' which may arse
with other OF course, govern.
nents other than The United States. This naked
construct Under i the Texas boundary. with any
foreign government might have been settled. But
a the late treaty with Mexico removed the pos
% e nS
States, thus acting the trustee OF Texas TO settle the
boundary with other governments, acquire OF any gov
eminent right in opposition TO the claim OF Texas
To assert such proposition, 10 affirm that the trustee
may acquire the subject matter OF the trust in opposition
to the benefciay or that the judge arbitrator may
adudge the subject Of controversy 10 hmse IN opposi
ton to the parties gant Il is evident that whatever
right the United States acquired under he treaty with
Mexico TO the country east Of the Rio Grande Was &C
qured the trustee Of Texas. and enures to the beneh
OF that State
a The United States having neglected 10 settle the
boundary In the treaty with Mexico, have now no con-
suiona power 10 change or alter the boundary OF Tex
AZ, any more than that OF any other sovereign State II
admitted in the Of Maine, that this govern
ment without the consent OF Maine, could not negotiate
for less than the claim OF Maine In his remarks on the
resolutions OF annexation, in the Senate, February D.
1885, COL Benton said "In fact, when once admitted ~
State she (Texas) never can be reduced without her
consent The constitution forbids it." Having gwen
her consent TO the alteration only in particular MANNER
II cannot be effected in any different method.
2. The joint resolutions OF annexation evidently IN
tended that the whole OF New Mexico, on the east bank
OF the Rio Gande should Be embraced within the State
Of Texas because they give three guarantees, applicable
into Eve States That In any States south OF 800 3o,
Che Missouri compromise lne, slavery may exist at the
option OF the people Of the same g. That in any state
or States 10 Be formed north Of that line slavery pro-
hibted Now, the Missouri compromise line divides the
country formerly comprised in New Mexico, east OF the
Rio Gfands nearly centraly-Santa Fe being in about
latitude $50 10 north II il incomprehensibe that the
Congress of the United States should have thus provided
for the domestic government Of this very territory
part Of Texas II Twas in Mexico and not in Texas By