The primitive Republican. (Columbus, Miss.) 18??-1852, 1851-07-03


Twill only be nece aly lofecuf 70 some OF the
Ifacts eonnected with TIE history Of Texa il
lrcierence to her admission into The Union
In the early part d The year 1915 Texas
VAS al Independent nation hasing declared
lher independence Of Mexico to whom she
formerly belonged as one Of her provinces.
/ All or nearly all the civilized nations Of the
learth, With the exception Of Mexico, the mo.
iIther country, had acknowledged her inds.
1pendence as nation and even Mexico her
self had ceased for many years any attempt
| to subjugate her. On the north Of Texas
was situated New Mexico one Of the States
Of the republic of Mexico which still adher-
ed to the mother country The boundary
line between Texas and New Mexico was an
omen question, as had never been definitely
!. settled since Texas declared herindependence
lof Mexico. Under this state Of facts Texas
applied to become one of the States of this
Union and on the LIST of March, 1S45, the
Congress of the United States passed the fol
lowing resolutions
That Congress doth consent that the ter
eritory properly included within, and right
1 fully belonging to the Republic of Texas
may be erected into new State, to be call
ed the State of Texas, with a republican
form of government, to be adopted by the
people Of said republic, by deputies in con-
yention assembled, with the consent Of the
existing government, in order that the same
may be admitted as one of the States of this
Union.
And6e Il further resOlved, That the fore
going consent Of Congress is given upon the
following conditions, a1dwith the following
guarantees, to,wit: First, said State to be
formed, subject to the adjustment by this
government of all questions of boundary
that may arise with other governments" &C.
There are other conditions embraced in
said resolutions which we shall notice here
after. 1t will be seen from the above quota
ton, that in the admission of Texas into the
Union, the question of boundary which, as
We have before stated was an open question,
was still left for adjustment by the govern
ment Of the United States with the republic
Of Mexico. tits unnecessary here to state,
for the fact is fresh within the recollection of
all, that this unsettled question of boundary,
led to bloody war with the republic of Mex
leo and which ended in the cession of large
extent of country by the republic of NIexi-
co to the United States, including within the
same the province of New Mexico There
can be nothing more conclusive, than that by
the transfer as aforesaid of the State of N.
Mexico, the United States succeeded to all
the rights of territory and government over
that province which the republic of Mexico
originally held. Tue war did not settle the
question of the boundary of Texas which
had produced it, but left the matter still O
pen for adjustment. Had not this cession of
territory been made, all must perceive that
that the boundary between Texas and New
Mexico must necessarily have been adjusted
between the two republics by treaty, but the
United States having acquired the rights of
Mexico over the territory and occupying her
position in relation thereto, leaving the ques=
Ition of boundary still open, it necessarily fol-
lows, that the boundary line must be estab-
Ilished by the government Of the u. States
and thestate of Texas by negotiation and ar
rangement satisfactory to each. How else
could it ever have been established?
Under this view Of facts, and We helieve
We have stated them fairly and correctly the
Congress Of the United States made sim
pie proposition to- Texas which she had the
anquestionable right to adopt or reject for a
settlement of the boundary line between that
State and the territory Of New Mexico and
J, which as We have before stated was adopted
by the State Of Texas by an Overwhelming
majority Of its citizens How is it possible
then for the resistance party of this State to
say that they regard this act, asan evidence
of the determination of the North to tram.
pie upon the political rights Of he.southern
States" What else could Congress have
done in the settlementof the question? How
else could the question have been settled?-
But is it not as great an evidence Of a deter
nination upon theipart Of the peopleof Tex
as to trample upon the political rights Of the
Southern States" sheherselfis a Southern
State and her interests are identified solely
with the South and the adoption Of the prop
osition on her part was as great, if not {
greater wrong inflicted upon her sister State,
of the South, as the offer Of settlement b
the Congress Of the United States
$ 1t seems to US that Texas should be helc
: responsible for the settlement Of this ques
0 tien and not Congress, for she could have pre-
vented the settlement by refusal of tn,
{ proposition, Was she intimidated and di,
. she act from fear doubt whether thos
who know any thing of the characterof th
people If that State would make such a suq
gestion If it Was therefore calm, delibel
E ate act upon the part of Texas, and that
Z was, alImust admit, then wrong has bee