The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-06-19

4 sldCte OF tie WllInO GfOVlSO 4
\ But here all comparison Qf comparison il may be
called) between the accommodation OF the Executive
and the plan OF the committee ends at once From this
ponI me comiee starts alone; from ns pom. none can
defeat, its glory shame, is all its II
nounced great Pacifcaor, having healing in its in
uence, throwing oil upon the troubled waters. Ay, sir
is not the first time that the performance has NOT come
up TO the promises is not the first time that the play
has moi equaed the bill This plan Of the committee,
in lis first step towards restoring harmony and aaying
excitement leaves, they themselves say, the question Of
slavery in the Tenitoriesthe very OF disorder and
confusion untouched behind it. II advances into the
ony leaving the enrenched camp OF its enemy in the
rear My great objection this scheme is that while 1t
called compromise Of all conflicting questions, il in
iact will finally settle little, and compromise less; that
il will not accomplish what affects to accomplish; and
that there s adequate to the sacrifice the
North il called upon 10 make.
i Now permit me approach the first question which
the committee deals with, on its own plan and that is,
the settlement OF the boundary Of Texas There is much
complaint now made that the plan q the Executive ad
ministers no remedy Tor this evil Why, what was the
Executive to dol II called the attention OF Congress to
the settlement OF this question. Was the Executive TO
run llnes--to make propositions It could not do that
Il did the little that II necessary II should do, by
asking. the attention OF Congress to the subject But
this matter Of the boundary line Of Texas has be-
come important, II is said because, in addition TO
other chances lis settlement will avert civil war Why,
sir, this was starting announcement, sad addition to
all the other evils which to cluster around The
important, II correct in point OF fact, and it will
much to enhance in the public eye the value Of this gra
scheme OF compromise. On what facts does il assume
that civil will beayerted cannot presume that
Texasone Of the law loving States OF this Unionwill
attempt Tor one moment to enforce doubtful claim of
Jurisdiction BY arms. she do so. however brave her
citizens, (and needed not the innaon Of her
tor to know that9 take i Tor granted she will "fnd
lion in her path"
The constitution devolves the duty Of protecting the
Territories upon the general government which owns
them and It il an obligation which, have doubt. would
Of attempt BY her at violence upon such question
mere question Of civil right and civil ursdiconfor the
full settlement Of which the constitution Of the United
States provides fiji and proper arpiter suppose, by
civil war, was meant something like the riot which re.
Gently broke in the streets of Santa Fe-fomented
the newspapers say. by Texan soldier attached to that
portion OF the army stationed there This promptly
suppressed. seems by military force then upon The
spot. AT all events cannot be made by solitary
man. some three hundred miles, at least from any one
OF things between New Mexico and The Texap commis-
sioner at Santa Fe This question will ultimately be de-
cidsd, trust, BY our Judicial tribunals.
Mr.. DAYTON Never Sir, does the senator from
Texas say never' By what right, ask Is the State
OF Texas than OF the sovereign States Of this
Union hold in my hand the constitution OF the United
States which says that not only upon all controversies
between the States, but Gin all controversies to which
the United States is party, the Supreme Court shall
have jurisdiction And pray, sir, why may not the Su
preme Court well settle the boundary OF Texas the
boundary between Massachusetts and Rhode Island and
the boundary between Massachusetts and Connecticut
and the boundary between New York and New Jersey,
and the boundary between Delaware and New Jersey
and the boundary between half dozen other States Of
this Unon involving much in point Of value and OF
ntees, as the boundary between Texas and New Mex.
leo Why is it that Texas alone override the con-
stutionl The question OF Stale boundaries OF
those very questions for the settlement OF which
preme Judiciary provded and yet the before
me says never Sir there is hardly old State OF the
rnion whose boundary has moi at time been set
tied or questioned in this way. Why, then, I ask
again, with all respect 10 Texas, is that that State
alone almost the last OF the sserhood, ride rough
shod over the constitution Why no, submit to the COM
Mr. RUSK. will answer the question.
Mr.. HOUSTON. IL can be answered at the proper
time, when the senator has got through.
Mr. RuSk thought, perhaps, the senator desired an
MI DAYTON can anticipate the suggestion which
the honorable senator would make; and in the course Of
my remarks may attempt TO answer it. But will pro-
ceed reference TO the point in hand The senator from
Massachusetts, MIR. WEBsrER.l as well the senator
from Georgia, [Mr. BERRrEs.l has already expressed
question now, while New Mexico is yet a Territory
and in that opinion concur, though without upon my
part much examination. u this be SO, i is not even
cessary 10 await the afdy action oil New Mexlco the
door open; the test can be applied yet this plan
OF The committee proposes 10 pay - millions Tor The
claim or title OF Texas 10 that part OF New Mexico east
oil the Rio Grange Now, the wisdom o buying lni.
gazing title always depends much upon your estimate OF
It's strength beg therefore, TO look little into this
question OF the Isxaa ii.Is Oar friends from Texas
and can hardly how any person can honestly differ
with them They think that il not for this ques-
ton oil free soil, would have any doubt about the
Texan title II IS needless 10 argue in that way, be.
cause may that, II not for their slave
prcpossessions, could doubt the title OF New
Mexico to her soil aud when we have thus recrimina-
ted the argument Is balanced, and neither has advanced
step suppose that the Judgments OF all liable 10 be
operated upon indirectly, with the best possible in
Texas that they especial degree liable to these
indirect influences; for, addition 10 the general ques-
ton Of slavery, they represent the vey State claiming
title they parties 10 the record trust therefore,
they will extend little charity when perchance diff
fer in judgment admit cbeerfully that the honorable
senator, Mr. RUsK IN the speech which he delivered
the other day, made the best OF the scany materials
on which the title o Texas is founded.
But, sir, that title TO New Mexico is bad il Is unsus
ton Il is Just OF those cases where, il the ques-
ton between and man, and should be asked
by Client in behalf Of New Mexico what he should do,
would say to him the thing is yours-pay much only
the expense and yexation Of lawsuit would be worth
to seek Tor another title literally TO abandon the sub
stance and look for the shadow.
Bot To the title How has Texas herself regarded il (.
Has she in her sovereign capacity claimed dsclaimed
~ According TO my understanding OF the past history OF
10 New Mexico | not now speaking OF the Lower
Rio Grande now beg leave 10 call he attention OF the
Senate to a little historical or political detail
Texas, in The year 1880 became an independent State
AT that time she passed laws TO organize her counties
oeIs TO establish her judicial districts others to appor
ton representatives In her Congress 10 all parts OF The
State but neither counties, districts nor representa-.
tyes did she give TO New Mexico, though that popua
iion II owned BY Texas was greater at that time than