The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-01-06

The Legislature OF "he Empire State" assembled on
the LIST January The Lieutenant governor took the chair
of the senate Mr. Elderkin, the nominee Of the demo-
cratic caucus, elected speaker Of the house of
semby --haying received SO votes and his wing com
petor 90. James r. Rose, OF Albany, (dem.,) was
elected clerk. Governor Fish has sent in long
sage in which he refers to the question Of slavery, but
in terms not sufficiently strong in the eyes Of the New
York Evening Post.
Resolutions have already been submitted to the Senate
by Mr. Geddes against the slave trade in the District Of
Columbia and also the following new and extraordinary
one:
Rsoired f the assembly cnncur) That the territory ly
Ing betweea the Nueces and Rio Grande is the common
ress be instructed and requested
their best efforts The such common
property and protect from the unounded claims Of the
Stale oTexas, and prohibit the extension over OF the laws
OF Texas.
This view is directly in opposition to the ground hth
erto taken, (see Mr. Kaufman's speech in this days
Union that the Rio Grande the western boundary OF
Texas II is in direct collision with the views entertain
ed by Jefferson, and Madison, and Adams, and Polk II
contravenes the legitimate boundary claimed by Texas
before she led the American Union We ask, in what
way has the State OF Texas forfeited the right of bound
AIRY which she held in her previous character Of the
republic of Texas This resolution OF Mr. Geddes
clashes directly with the following positions strongly
taken by Governor Wood Of Texas, in his message to
the legislature Of the 9th November;
The oare denial of justice involved an attempt 10
to succeed in that attempt would be reproach still
deeper; and for Texas passivey submit such de-
spol,nent would be the deepest reproach Of all.
Under these circumstances, IL Is for your honorable
body consider and determine tbs be adopted
by the State is folly suppose can now legis
ourselves into rghtfu jurisdiction portion
Of territory. An effort do has already signay
failed II Is question with which there should be no
rempofzing for the the issue made sooner
will the question be adjusted.
| would therefore recommend that ample power be
conferred the executive OF the State and ample
be placed al bis disposal and that it be expressly required
OF him to raise the proper issue and H. by de-
monstang argument the business Of our claim nor by
reference but with the whole power and
Of the State The result OF any legislation short Of
dis viii be barren and pro6ess that which regret
IL TO be my duty communicate. might be uuwise
TO despatch commissioner Washington city acquainr
the federal government with such determination as the
State may adopt The end that another and fair opporu
uity DO afforded IL 10 render US justice.
In connexion with this subject, we subjon the follow
ing remarks from the Bangor Democrat upon the
" Territorial Claims OF Texas" which the Baltimore
American Of yesterday morning republishes and says
they expressed with great point and =
and do very well how they are to be reu,ed
has no just claim any part Of New Mexico, while we
think that portion Of what Is generally called New Mexi
constitutes part Of the State Of Texas and ARE NOT
N DIsnKMBERIso STATE or rHE
UsIos. With those eho engaged ksping at,ps free
soil agitation BY fnpadsg the rghs s STATE rs have -
sympathy Texas las sufficient territory for several States
and States will doubtless be formed when the popua
tion authorizes III but until them there should be no Inter
ference with the domestic affairs Of the existing State and
frcibe change Of boundary. Te1a. wa, nation with
defined boundaries when she into The Union
Neither that time. snbseque nty, has she rein
qnshcd any part Of her territory The government and
people Of the United States regarded her claim to independ
and her claim territory, se asserted It. 10 be
valid against Mexco but the Age has put forth novel doc
irine, that distinction should he made between Texas n
nation and Texas State Its Language is this. Now
that New Mexico well Texas Is embraced within the
limits Of the United States Our inclination would be axaln
pressing the claim Of Texas the extent we should have
been In favor Of pressing against Mexico hersell
We think this neither sound public morality nor
II appears that the extent that the claim o
Texas was good against Mexico good against the
United saic and TO the that the United States was
willing enforce this territorial claim OF Texas a0aip.t
Mexico the The general government ,bould
now admit the claim Of Texas terory a. against itself
Is right and equitable for United state. to deprive
Texa without her consent Of any portion OF her territory
which she Obtained by re voIon and hell ,,
her own right right for the Uncd States 10
back Texas in her territorial claim against Mexico and
ien ufn round and cheat Texas the same
We canno, stand such platform" Public morality.
national ju'tice, State right. public tranquility and the
constitution OF the county, all against H. The consttu
ton guarantees every sAis the inery Of s TERRITORY
and the boundary OF Texas existed when she was admit,
ted into the Unou continues unless she consent.
have alteration Of IT, there sufficient populs
ton for States.
s-Prsms ce-rt ss ths United states.
FRIDAY, January T. 1880
.rH ID r.: m