New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1850-01-14
The Texas boundary Question.

associations and you VIII be independent
The Texas boundary Question.
We have at last. in speech intended 10 bo de
livcred o. Hon Volney Howard one OF the
Representatives Of Texas, which we find in the
Washington Ta,on something like argument IN
support Of the claim of Texas in respect TO the
boundary line We had supposed that II was in
tended to maintain the claim by bold assertion
without youchsafng TO enlighten rs upon It's
grounds and We give Mr. Howard the credit Of
having treated the subject one admitting OF de
bnte At the same time We apprchend no diiiicnl
ty in answering all the arguments which he has
brought forward They are as follows
The claim OF Texas he whole Rio Grande from 30,
mouth 10 aad 10 the i21 degree Of north latitude
VIII never be contested hy any Intelligent lawyer who
takes the trouble 10 investigate The grounds upon which T.
rests There IS greater allscy tal that OF .upposinl
thai the United Stale, succeeded the rights Of Mexico
any portion Of the territory easl Of he RIO Grande Be
tween the Republic OF Texas and the United States DIE
question OF boundary settled finally snd conc.usvey
by the Convention OF 1888 which received The sencuo Of
tie legislative departments OF both Governments TIE
treaty with Spain Of 1919 fixed te northern boundary be-
tween Spain and the United States al the i2d parallel OF
latitude The treaty Of 1923 revived thai boundary between
the United States and Mexico reci that the ire6'y OF
1919 " as binding upon Mexico Tue Convention bfl"e'
Texas and the Ined States Of 1883. reced That lhe es
with Mexico Of 1923 Is binding upon The Republic 81
Texas The having been entered into 81 time when
Texas formed part Of he said United Mexican Saie,
Aud whereas i deemed proper and eNpedient ~ order
prevent future disputes and collisions between the ned
states and Texas ~ regard 10 the boundary beiTeer me @
countries desiQnoted by ire treaty that portion OF ihe
should be and marked without unnecessary de-
law" This Couy enion was rahed and carried out h'
the OF the United States Congress " January H. 1899
under which the boundary of Texas was actually
run and marked bv the Governments far a. the S
degree north latitude The under which tis
Convention negotiated upon the par OF Texas was he
boundary act Of 1875 by which her boundary IS declared 10
the Rio Grande its and thence 10 the AID de
gree Of latitude and thence and south accord
ing to the boundary formerly existing between the United
states and Mexico This Convention was an express re
cogniton Of entire boundary Of Texas, and made with
reference 20 The oct OF the Texas Congress OF lep ha
ever might have been Its effect upon Mexico TINS Conven'
ton il forever coacirs Of the boundary as against The
United States, by act as solemn as treaty slpuao
The Texas Of boundary, together with other laws MOI
inconsistent with the constitution of the ned States me
resoutions of annexation the constitution Of the state
was declared IN force by the constitution under which She
was admitted into the Inion and therefore ratified by The
Congress OF the uited States
dares subject only 10 the night OF r United states 10 SET
tie all questions OF boundary Which may arse WIN ONE
OF COURSE emmenis other ihan
he United States This was naked power, coupled VIII
interest which must be strictly construed nder The
Texas boundary with any foreign government might have
been settled. But h the ATE treaty with MEXICO removed
he possibility OF such question with any othe' govern
ment the power - al an end Neither could The United
States thus acting e trustee OF IeAas TO settle the bonn
dairy with other governments acquire OF any government
right IN opposition 10 the claim 81 Texas To assert such
proposition 10 10 sthrm that the trustee may scque ih
subjecma,icr OF the Trust m opposition 10 The beneficiary
ID
evident tai whatever reh, the Uned States acquired
under the treaty wh Mexico the country east OF the RI
Grande acquired the trustee Of Texas and enurrs
10 lhe benefit oi thai Sale.
The United STATES having eted 70 see he bounda
~ IN he treaty VIII Mexico have now 10 c"nsuluUuhal
power change alter the boundary Of Texas any NOR
ihau In, any other sovereign SAFE IL was admitted m
tie case q. Maine Ia. lms OotclhntuI h"ut We con
OF Maine could not negouae ior less than The odr 8"
Maine In his remarks on The resolutions OF anneNalun
the Senate Feb. = lS4a Col Benton SAID; IN iSet
when admitted siale she tIeNas never can be-
reduced without her consent The Constitution iornds o.
Having given her consent io the aiefAuvu ont VA psf
lar manner be effected IN any different method
The oint resolutions OF evidently intended
thai The whole of NewMenco ON the eas bsnk 81 Rio
Grande should be embraced within the STATE Of Texas, be
they give three guarantees applicable 10 TINS Yey
country That Texas may be subdiyided INTO Ave STATES
THAT IN any States south OF 81 50 the Missouri eompro
mse lnel Slavery may exist 81 The option OF The people OF
he s. That III any STATE OF States 10 be formed norm
promise hne divides the country formerly comprised IN
NcwNexco of the Rio Grande nearly centrally
conn n ensihe that he Congress olhe United states should
have thus provided for The domestic government VI HE
verv Territory pSr Of Texas u II Was IN MeNico, tnt
not m Texas by what right could he United STATES IN
compact with Texas assume To- regulate is so ermtn1 o
department OF Mexico, AMI make rules Tor k admission
az a Slate into the American inor Inc Icsoluiols o
annexation fsyns define the boundaries OF Texas ~ NE
extent States north OF 70 80 They hsserl
feNas and Is Included within her limits And he limit
OF one State, thus gNe. WI! include me whole OF New
Mexico essi OF the ko OfSde There IA inuih guaranty
given 10y the compact OF annexation as applicable 10 uis
Territory the Rio GrHlldc. If a Stale
formed wholly - ibe norm 81 . =" ShN-IN eAl>ts ih
Texas the s2d degree o NORTH stirde Il exists al preset
under the constitution with which tie Stale was sdlied
into The Union. When Texas as eimtied, ~ hef IA"
slavery existed 10 her utmost extent ant no resi- aiut as
placed upon he lnOn Of annexation but the pro
specve provision 10 operate IN case State was oTIntc
norih o. II SO Nav the resolutions give another
guaranty cn TO Texas, hus TO her creditors sppca
Die his Territory IN Pledgng her public lands TO 'e
payment OF her public debt
The boundaries OF rexas a. aforementioned 2e-
lined IN The treaty With SANTA Anna wldch Was a valid treaty
h.sr
IL inrshc ers constitution having been overturned snd
the States reduced 70 departments al Of which :Sgeer
N 1854 Nor A. the treaty affected by the lac; hat sSnIz
prisoner q wsr al he time Of rs execution be-
sls aud espeasy BY Fscls, upon whom by sw ard sDe
eA appointment the authority Of the command and the fe
signature Of Santa Anna, and Mexico having aed on Il sna
received the eenet, Of IL sfpuaions could noI under e
law Ct nations repud ate acknowledgements not win
ou' returning The properly and military stores which We're
secured 10 her BY he treaty.
the es BY her OF S4t and ordered a. he MeHiesn
settlements league beyond the RIO Grurde 10 Be BROKEN
M ard ne inhabitants 10 ia9 back Oh lie No Granite
rvS,ng al traitors found beyond thai line az least
the lower RIO Grsnoe. The Mexican Commissioners who
ess0Sss ne s5sSs .ss'y haze sniiieS uS the Re
wears Tie American COMMISSIONER, Mr. Ts, In his
rcspondenoe with he Nexesh Government asserted he
boundaries OF Texas as elsnned oy herself Il Is fAr %
presnne thar Mexico inlented provide for the treaty
ISIS with Texas By making Ds1grne.s map Of ls47 part
he whole OF TIE country East Of the Rio Grznae 70 - N
Texas and New Mexico As defoed BY The nap sutirey
snsed West Of hai rvef Thus he New Mexico acquired
nv re I'ued States defined situated West OF lie Ro
Gr.r8e bv the freav Mexico has transferred rohng Eas,
AZ raj river She admitted by he map that she owned
thing on that sde u the Rto Grsnde a. the urie o. NE rs
hcadon Of The treaty.
trus tsi the rights Of Texas IL Santa VII DC sPeed
iy admitted; for nothing shor o. uns VII A'''o se''u'
collision with her Haihorlnes
In the first place as to the Argument which Mr.
Howard mainly relies aPOn, that the United States
was Trustee Of Texas, and could not acquire tor
herself any part Of the territory claimed by Texas
IL seems to Us that il would be more appropriate as
rule OF pleading in Court Of Chspcery, than As
principle by which national rights are to be set
lied But assuming il TO be applicable, II VII
hardly be- sonseaded even By 20 Intelligent