Richmond daily times. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1853, 1853-05-04
THE RICHMOND TIMES,
published DAILY AND SEMI-wEKLY,
The Nev Neaicaa D;Gcuzta..

The intelligent correspondent of the Philadel.
phia North American makes the following re-
marks on this subject:
The only possible plea under which Governor
Lanes act could be excused in the least would DO
that Mescia Valley was territory in dispute
which Mexico, or the revolutonists OF chihuahua
were about to exercise jurisdiction over in viola
ton of the principle of International law, which
directs that ''territory in dispute" shall not be
subjected to the jurisdiction, or occupied by the
armed forces of either of the claimants; and that
the contemplated violation Of this provision of law
made it necessary for Governor Lane to take
possession.
"Itseems highly improbable that any such state
OF things existed In the present But the
interesting question arises-Could Msscia Val
ley, by any possibility, have been .territory in
dispute" in the sense which subjected it to the
operation of the principle Of law cited above =
The negative of the proposition seems to me to
be true. The treaty of Guadalupe Hidago, in
the article relating to the appointment of the
Boundary Commissioners, and defining their du-
ties. provides as follows:
"They THE Commissioners shall keep journals and
make out plans of their operations and tie results
agreed upon By them shall be deemed mart of this Teatv
and shGHhare ne same force as 'cere inserted therein.
The boundary line established by this article shall be
regiously respected by each of the republics and
moehaage shall be made therein, except By erpres.
and free consent Of both nations cty g2ren ju the
constitution"
''Now the two Commissioners hare agreed upon
the line of New Mexico; and if the provisions
nave quoted mean any thing, the agreement of
those Commissioners. the ..resuIt" at which
they have arrived, is part of the treaty ITSELF
If this be so, how can the territory on one side
or the other of the line be sin dispute" when
we have so lately divided and set apart the same
rs deemed proper, by the solemn stipuations of
treaty! 1t has been inferred, however, that
under the second clause in the quotation from the
treaty OF Guadaloupe, we have power to reopen
the subject True, we have, and will have fifty
years hence; but how shall re-open it? Only
by seeking to enter into n new convention with
Mexico just as we would with Spain for the
cessien to us of Cuba. For the present, the
whole subject is finally disposed Of and the title
to Mescilla Valley is 10 longer an open question.
Negotiations for its cession to the United States.
under the clause referred to above, may be opened
at some future day; but meantime tho Mexican
title, having been settled by treaty, can no more
be considered in dispute than can that of Spain
to Cuba; because. at some day we may open me-
got'atlons for the purchase of that luxurant isle.
"The question whether Commissioner Bartett
erred or not, does not enter into the discussion.
Tue only inquiries are-dd he agree to line1
are we bound by his agreement! and does the
hne agreed upon exclude Mescia Valley? If
the affirmative of these propositions be true
mere Is not shadow of apology for General
Lanes act and it amounts to simple unmitiga
ted assumption of the powers of Congress-a
declaration of war against nation with whom
'"e ta~ hectares we are at peace. Soch, am
'a"s"eo' must be the conclusion of the admiuis.
traton' and the end will be an entire disayowaI
of General Lanes course.