The southern press., 1850-07-29

puted. And why' Simply, because il was mad 4
defeasable only upon the happening Of an evend
subsequent, which never would have happened.
But under the power vested in the Government
by the consent of Texas, the United States unde II
took for Tsras to settle the question Of boundary
This Government in addition to this express
pledge on her own part, held certain importa nj
relations to Texas under the Constitution. And
what were these reationss
| As her own Government upon her admission, !!
its powers were bound to be directed TO one OBJ
ject: to provide for her defence In order TO dol
this, powers were vested in the Government LyI
the Constitution, (Which Texas had made he,]
own,) 'sto raise and support armies ssto pro-
vide and maintain navy" "to provide for cal
ling forth the militia to suppress instructions and2
repel invasions' Texas had disarmed herself by'
entering the Union, and threw herself into the
fraternity of States for her protection She did;
more. By the Constitution she invested the
Government with power, which, by the sam e !,
she relinquished to treat with other nations re-
specting her rights and interests.
In exchange for these powers SO vested in the
Government, she demanded by the terms Of the
Constitution, that the United States should protcc,
her "against INVASION" and even 'against do
mesc violence" s H.Fi s
What relation did this Government bear then
to Texas in respect to the adjustment of her bou-
dary with MexicO9 By the terms of the annexa-
ton resolution it had assumed to adjust the quey-
ton for Texas, by the Constitution it had power
to treat with Mexico, to enforce the rights ot
Texas, and was bound to protect her agains Il
INVASION. This Government was clearly then the
agent Of Tsras in the sriete legal sense, to adjust
this matter for her. ae 1e
The simple question then, is this, can the Gov
ernmen, in negotiating for Texas, or as the result
OF negotiation, take any interest hostile to her
claim? to that claim which was to be asserted bvl
the United States for herr to that claim which had
been recognized, and the invasion Of which had
been the cause Of war' The question suggests its
answer; for If this Government can, holding such
relations to Texas as ! have shown, acquire the
territory in dispute, and assert the claim Of Mexico
to it against the right Of Texas; nay, more if it
| cannot only assert such claim, but maintain it's
rghtfuness by the threats of force, by denouncing
the protests of Texas treason to its authority !;
If 1t can do all this, and at the same time encourage
the people of such territory to rebel against their
sovereign Slate, and defy her commands then Ia
agency most apt means of fraud, national faitl,
"a lie, and the Federal Government omnipotent i,
| its despotism. .fia
think, then, that Texas has claim indefeas;
BILE as against the Federal Government to all ofa
the territory claimed by her under the act Of
1886.
Assuming that am right in this conclusion, let
me now examine the circumstances in brief, not
in detail, attending the present action of the Coy
ernment towards Texas. G 3
This action has been Of two-fold nature. Two
Departments have conjoined to change the rights
Of Texas State of the Union, the Legislative
and Executive.
Congress early in its session was made tile
theatre of many open well as secret assault g
upon the sovereignty of the State. The speeches
Of various members of Congress, the resolutions
of Mr.. Clay, all converged SO to speak upon the
last attempts in the form of the Compromise bill,
to aceaken her title by doubling it, and then to
speculate upon the doubt by an appeal in the form
Of pecuniary offer to her embarrassed and shaken
credit.
A brief analysis Of this far-amed bill may not
be inappropriate at this time.
The bill is most adroitly warded to avoid The
charge to which it is liable. If am right in the
conclusion to which have before arrived, that as
between the Government and Texas the claim
OF the latter to the boundaries assumed by her in
her constitution are indisputable, then the whole
bill is an insulting assault upon her sovereignty
The proposition to Texas is put in most in
sidous form. After providing for California and
Utah, and defining their boundaries, New Mex
leo is made by the bill to include all the residue
Of the territory ceded by Mexico under the treaty.
Now what is this residuel Texas will answer
that it can include portion Of her assumed ter
ritory. But what says Congress through this
bill. e
SEC. 80. 9th clause "If the said State Of Tex
as shall refuse decline to accede to the preced-
ing articles, they shall become null and void, and
the United States shall be ren,ed back to all their
territorial rights in the state and condition as
if these articles of compact had never been ten
dered to the acceptance of the State of Texas. y
The report of the committe is still more EN-
phatic. according to these terms it is propos ed
to Texas that her boundry be recognized to the
Rio Grande, and up that river to the point com
monty called El Paso," &C., ** 'sIf this
boundary be assented to by Texas she will be
Quilted to that extent in her title. And some may
suppose that in consideration of this consessio,a by
the United States,'' &c, ' But under the infu-
ence of sentiment of justice and grea: iberalitu
the bill purposes" sc, @** "It cannot be
anticipated that Texas will decline to accede to
these liberal propositions; but if she should, it is
to be distinctly understood that the title of the
United States to any territory acquired from Merico
east Of the Rio Grande will remain unimpared and
in the same condition as if the proposal of adj
justment had never been made.
Sec. 80. Ist clause, fixes the northern boundry
of Texas as proposed, beginning at point on the
Rio Grande, twenty miles above Ell Paso and run
ming westwardly. The second clause says: "The
United States cede to the State of Texas all rights,
claim and title which they have to any territory,
WING south of the line af,,rasa;d aud IL. .a;l