Daily Richmond times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1849-1850, 1850-06-11
OF THE UNITED STATES.
IN SENATE,
FRIDAY, June 7, 1850.

bill reported by the Select Committee OF Thirteen,
admit California as State in the Union; to establish
Territorial governments for Utah and New Mexico; and
making proposals to Texas for the establishment of
her western and northern boundaries.
Mr.. CLEMENS moved to strike out OF the Both section
the LIST and I'd provisions, which prescribe the Northern
boundary of Texas and release all the rights of the Uni
ted States and Texas, respectively, on the North and
South of that line.
And insert in lieu thereof, the following
1st The boundaries OF the said state of Texas shall
be confirmed and acknowledged as such by her law of
limits passed by her Congress in 1886, and the
reigny the whole of the territory included in said
boundary shall be reserved absolutely 10 the SAID State
of Texas.
I'd. That for the safety and comfort of the whe in
habants, and to enable the Government OF the United
States the better to epress Indian depredatons and
otherwise control them in such manner the peace of
the country may require the various Indian tribes with
said State shall be collected and removed to that part
OF the State of Texas which lies north of the thirty
outh parallel ofnoh latitude, and such collection and
removal shall be made under the authority and at
the expense ofthe United States
Mr.. CLEMENS said that it had been his intention to
debate this amendment, but as notice had been given
that Monday the indefinite postponement of the vote
would be moved he would not now discuss it, That
motion would cut off all amendments. He desired to
have votes upon certain amendments and would present
the amendment and be satisfied with having vote upon
it, He would say, however, that the amendments Of
fered that side of the Senate were offered in good
faith, and for the purpose of making the bill acceptable
TMr. RUsK moved to amend the amendment, by srk-
the words " is hereby recognized"
Mr.. CLEMENS accepted the amendment modfica
ton Of his own.
Mr.. CLAY said the effect Of the amendment was to
strike that portion CT the bill which provided for the
settlement of the boundary line between Texas and
New Mexco and proposes to give her all the territory
in dispute He considered the provisions in the bill de-
fining the boundaries of Texas not OF binding
force upon Texas unless she gave her assent them. 1t
was an overture to Texas which she may or may not
accept, she pleases should she accept it, the diff
cult and perplexing question would be forever settled
and if not accepted, will leave the question as it is at
present. Neither party will be preudiced by the pas
sage of this bill
He then alluded to the different opinions upon the sub
lect of the western boundary of Texas. One large
party always commended that the true western boundary
of Texas previous her annexation, the Nueces
another great party held that the western boundary of
Texas the Rio Grande, from its mouth to itssource
II the Nueces the true boundary OF Texas, and
the Mexican laws prohibiting slavery were in force,
then there large concession OF territory, supposed
TO be free, to the jurisdiction OF Texas where would
be slave territory If the opposite ground be correct
that the Rio Crapde was the true boundary from its
month to its source-then there would be concession
of slave territory to free soil. He alluded to various
speeches this subject OF the boundary OF Texas by
Messs Benton, Pearce and Shields, and urged that he
thought the advocates of increase OF slave territory
would gain but little by having this subject decided by
the judiciary One side claimed as free territory
tent of about nine hundred miles; Texas claimed about
four and half degrees more than this bill granted her
The BILL therefore, comedies to the principle OF tree soil
(supposug the Mexican laws to be in force) only
tent OF some three hundred miles, while the balance
ceded to Texas slave territory is about nine hundred
miles tIe considered that, of all questions, whether
national or between individuals, these boundary lines,
above all Others should be settled by accommodation
adjustment and compromise.
If Texas should eventually be decided the proper
OF this territory, if it should be decided 9TH
erwse the question OF slavery is in no way affected
by this bill; The principle OF non-in'ervention is the
principle fthe bill
He then alluded to the importance of settling this sub
iect of benefittng New Mexico. He
capituaed the distressing condition OF that Territory
and the miserable ofaffars there present. He
stated the character 1.-THE present military government
OF the country and urged the necessity Tor doing
thing for her benefit.
Mr.. RusE said that he was anxious as any one
could be for the settlement OF the difficulties agta-
ting the country, and he believed his constituents
would be willing to do all that was just and honorable
attain that end.
He thenread from Mr. Bentons speeches, in 1856,
to show that Texas republic and if admitted,
was TO be admitted with boundaries as fixed by herself
and, when once admitted her boundaries could not be
reduced except by her own consent.
lie then sustained, at length the boundary claim OF
hsState In conclusion he asked how could the claim
ofTexas be carried before the Supreme Court for de-
cision, without the consent OF Texas?
Mr. CLAY said the question could be brought be fore
the Supreme Court Of the United States in the follow
ing manner: Let New Mexico be admitted a State;
the question of right and boundary arises and it be
earned up to the Supreme Court on bill in equity, in
Rhode Island and Massachusetts,, between New York
and New Jersey and between Ohio and Iowa, had been
carried before that tribunal
He had said that Texas had no title to the Terri
tory in dispute. 1t we'll known that large portion
OF the country believed Texas claim to be good with
out deciding either way the title of Texas the
mittee had proposed to Texas an equivalent Tor her
claim Had he been satisfied that Texas had no title
claim, he could not have agreed to give her such
equivalent
Mr. CLEMENS called the attention of the Senate to the
fact that in the reclamation of the President OF Mex-
setting forth to the Mexican nation the territory
ded by the treaty OF Hidalgo, mention is made OF
this territory but says that all that part has been recog
nized as part OF Texas, since the year 1886.
M RUSK further defended the title OF Texas to the
territory in dispute.
Mr.. HALE called the attention of the Senator from
Texas of Congress- passed the Sd of March,
1885, 1.-TWO days after the resolutions Of annexation
were approved,) whereby drawbacks were allowed on
foreign goods exported into Santa Fe in New Mexico.
He thought this act passed by the same Congress which
annexed Texas did not show that was not understood
that Santa Fe was part OF Texas.
Mr.. RUsK said that Texas was not at that time in the
Unon and he was sure that that act was passed with
out any reference TO the question of Texas boundary.
Mr.. DAVIS, of Massachusetts, and Mr.. RUsK con-
tinued the debate on the title of Texas,
Mr.. Doug as said that he always maintained the IL
tie of Texas the lower Rio Grande, but could not
bring his mind to admit her title to the valley OF the
upper Rio Grande. lie then suggested some amend
ments, or notifications, to the pending amendment
particularly that part relating to the territory to be set
apart tor the Indian territory.
Mr.. DAVIS, OF Massachusetts,, and Mr. Rusk again
discussed the right of Texas to the territory Fast of the
Rio Grapde
Mr.. DAVIS, of Mississippi maintained the right of
Texas defended the present military governor OF Santa
Fe and the conduct OF the Secretary OF War; in direct
ing strict neutrality The territory disputed ter
rory and the United States had right interfere
by force to determine the point He consdered the pro-
per question to be express declaration of what the
territory Of Texas should be. lfsTexas has no IT,
tie this territory then it is the property Of the United
ttle then is the property of Texas, and the United
States have no constitutional power to purchase it FOL
any such purpose indicated. For certain specified OBJ
ecs, the United States have right purchase proper
y within the States, such sites for forts, yards
&c but not for such purposes this present
contempates. He considered it as making the reasu-
the purpose OF excluding the Southern States from their
constitutional rights,
He said he unalterably opposed to that part OF
the bill which provided Tor taking away from Texas
anV portion of her territory and giving to the Gene