The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-02-02

Texas the whole Of that country east OF the Rio Gnde.
which was once in New Mexico, but they give 70 me
State three distinct guarantees to that portion Of the
country north Of $50 so entirely in the old State Of New
Mexico and also north OF Santa Fe l. That Texas shall
have right o form new state out oi tns very !elG
north OF that line slavery shall not be tolerated . And
necessary consequence ii no State 10 formed out OF
that territory north Of the MssouE compro%%ss y ne; Gen
law at the time OF annexation. well by virtue OF its
recognition in the resolutions Of annexation :,
The two goyernmens did not undertake 70 aooisn sia
very in any portion OF Texas by the resolutions OF annex
alton Il institution existing in the whole extent
Of Texas and must continue to exist unless abolished
by the State ITSELF or unless Texas shall consent % tne
formation of new State entirely north OF 36o 80; II
here is any portion Of the State south OF that line
Texas has right to insist upon its coming into the Union
with slavery and good faith e the South s., 'nr sss
will stand up to the South the question OF southern
rights as one man. She will never consent under the
presnce Ct settling her boundary nsi nes rgns a.. q
be impaired by introducing within her limits the principle
Of reeso where slavery is guaranteed to her by the
Here, them are distinct guarantees resting solemn
compact positively asserted rules OF action to obtain
in New Mexico alone, as New Mexico is now claimed
Texas that territory when the compact Of annexation not
only comedies her the civil jurisdiction and the right
Of soil. but expressly prescribes the rule Of domestic
he right to form out OF the country ITSELF when, too the
southern boundary OF the new State is given with maf
smatca precision in the compact and divides nearly CEN
rally that portion OF New Mexico which, under the
Mexican organization east OF the Rio Grandes So
lar from the United States having any faculty to acquire
he country in opposition to that State Texas has right
nity with treaty. that this government shall exercise its
authority and power only TO the country TO
Texas, but to organize State States in it. in accord
,ble to form State north Of sss sO,, under the Com
pact without giving Texas this portion OF what was
,nce New Mexico. and equally mpracticabe to divide
Nf hin
1er limits as by herself defined is not to be presumed
hat the Congress of the United States would far stu
fy itself as to guarantee to Texas the right to form
20 or the government of the United States But go
urher, and maintain that ii this territory had actually
belonged to the United States at the tme il would have
passed to Texas by virtue of the resolutions OF annexa
ion The country and jurisdiction thus guaranteed to
Texas part Of the consideration OF annexation to
my State Ii one OF the most material inducements
10 the measure, and, as such, would have operated
transfer of he country II would have passed the fee,
II il had been the United States at the time. And who
doubt that estops the United States from setting up
what does the idea arise that the United States could Pur
chase claim from any government and. least OF all OF
Mexico and set up against the State OF Texas What
might be the condition OF the question between
Texas and Mexico the United States has precluded her
self from succeeding to the rights OF Mexico BY the reso
uons oil annexation, as well as by her whole political
Texas
Again. Texas having been admitted into the Union
with other limit condition in her boundary than the
right in the United States TO settle all questions Of bound
ary with other governments and that authority being
now at an end by the treaty with Mexico, deny the
power OF this government under the constitution, to ex
ercise any jurisdiction the subject Congress has
power TO unsete the boundaries OF State This has
been uniformly admitted in the practice OF the govern.
nent In the case Of Maine, the government asserted
that il had no right settle the boundary Of Maine
any other basis than that which she claimed, without her
consent and did not adjust II without the consent OF
both Maine and Massachusetts Even If there Were any
II ho,nd hofru Tavu and
States, this government could not settle i by its own ac-
bon. II could not be both party and judge and assume
Of It's own authority to adjust the matter without the
consent of Texas To attempt II, would only be an ap-
pcation of force, which would inevitably lead to col
sion with the State and It's officers, and, in all human
probability. to violence and bloodshed
its boundaries or limits State must have Identify
which is impossible, without defined limits.
The boundary Of Texas established by her revolu-
ton II of the trophies Of San Jacinto II was
Identical with her Independence, and maintained by the
force OF In the language OF Mr. Trist 10 his cor
respondence with the Mexican governmen the Ievou-
ton Of Texas obierated the boundaries between the two
counes He asserted upon this subject the true prn
ciple Of international law and the rights Of Texas The
position he then assumed as the Justification Of annexa
now; and she cannot change without disgracing her,
self in the opinion of the civilized world. fa
Mr.. Trist. writing TO the Mexican commissioners at
Tacubaya, September ?, 1s47. says; erf
As defined and asserted by herself tho territory Of Tex
extended the Rio Bravo Her right TO insist upon this
equally good, nticaly same.
all respects the right OF Mexico 10 insist upon any other
Of international law well established 10 admit OF dis
pue doubt existed independently OF the question ss TO
what light might have been the true mis Of Texas
whilst constituting part OF the Mexican republic
Again
sUnt ascertaincd by q compact agreement, dehni.
between the United States and Mexico
boundary between the two republics, when considered
ton 70 protect their territory from invasion, eosd be wos
other a~ thai vy bos~dary Shieh had bee" asserted oy
7s1as hsrseff"
One Of the main grounds Of the opposition Of the oppo
nenfs OF the Tyler treaty was, that TO admit Texan with
out defining her m was to admit her with the bound
aries as claimed by herself. Colonel Benton, in his
speech in the Senate, May i6, 1s44, asserted
''rhe republic OF Texas Is ceded 70 by name; ts
specified, was necessary 70 specify
thcm Smte s corporate body. uni,-sone single,
that and passes without further description or
definition: There was no necessity for an exhibition OF
and boundaries. The republic OF Texas acts BY s
name and ef 70 In the whole extent OF all the
limits and boundaries which Il asserts 10 be s own
In his remarks on the Joint resolutions for the
alton of Texas, February s. ie45 Colonel Benton de-
clared In fact, when once admitted as State, she
never can be reduced without her consent The const
tuition forbids it II II be true that the admission OF
Texas BY name without fixing any boundary passed her
can be doubted that this be the result when she
is authorized to subdivide herself into FIVE Saes one
more of which IL TO be north Of 36o 3V which establishes
her extent by the very language Of he joint resolutions
20 further than this and assert that as the limits OF
nation OF the essential elements of s exist
ence no nation who acknowledged the independence OF
Texas could acquire the right Of Mexico and subugae