Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1854-02-23

IF the Senator that I" closc examination of the
Utah act clearly establishes the fact that it was
the intent. as we'll Us the legal effect, of the
COMPROMISE Measures of 1850 to supersede the
Missouri Compromise, and all geographical and
territorial lines, is lite short Of preposterous.
There was no intent at all, except to make a
Eastern boundary to Utah, and no
legal effect at all upon the Louisiana acqulsl-
ton, except to cut off from it the little valley OF
the Middle Park.
The second specification of the Senator denies
the accuracy of the following statement Of the
address in relation to this pr1tense OF suppressed
ure:
I" The compromise acts themselves rcfutc this
pretension. In the third article OF the second
section of the Joint resolution for amcxing Tex
as to the United States, it is expressly declared
that in such State OF States az shall be formed
out of said Territory north of said Missouri COM
promise line. slavery or involuntary servitude,
except for crime, shall be prohibited and in
the act for organizing New Mexico, and settling
the boundary Of TEXAS, provso was incOrpo-
rated, Oh the motion Of Mr.. Mason, of Virgin
il, which distinctly preserves this prohibition,
and fouts the bare-ficed pretcnsion that all the
territory Of the United States, whether north
or south of the Missouri compromise line, is to
be open to slavery 1t is as follows:
- Provided, That nothing herein contained
shall be construed to impair or qualify ANYTHING
con aimed in the third article Of the second Sec
ton of the joint resolution for annexlng Texas TO
the Unitcd States, approved March |, 1915, Ell
ther as regards the number of States that may
h reafter be formed out Of the State of Texas,
OR OTHERWISE
8 Here is proof, beyond controversy. that the
principle Of the Missouri act, prohibiting avery
moth of SO d g. 80 min, far ffem being abroga-
ted by the comproml acis, is expressly at
firmed and that the proposed repeal Of this pro
hlbltion. instead of being an affirmation Of the
compromise acts, is repeal of very lmportan,
provision of The IN ST Impo. tant act of the series
1t is socnnIy declaredin the very compromise acts
that nothing hcr9n contained shall be construed
to impair or guaHfy' the prohibition of sav, ry
nor of SO deg. 80 min, and yet, in the face OF
this declaration, that scred prohibition is said to
be overthrown. an presumption further go
70 all who, in any way, lean upon these com
promises we commend this exp sition"
This is what the Senator says in his speech
about the passag have just read from the ad
dress:
"Tuey suppress til" following material facts,
which, if produced, would have disproved their
statement: They first suppress the fact that the
same section of the act cuts off from Texas, and
cedes To the Unt,d States, all that part of Texas
which lie S north of So deg. 80 min. They then
suppress the further fact that the same section Of
the law cuts off from Texas large tract OF
country on the west, more than three d grees Of
longitude, and added it to the territory OF the
United States. They then suppress the further
fact that this territory thus cut off from Texas land
to which the Missouri compromise line did apply,
was Incorporated into the Territory of New Mex
leo. And then what was done 1t was incor-
porated into that Territory with this clause
49, That when admitted as a state, the said
Territory, or any portion of the same, shall be
received into the Union, with or without slavery
as their constitution may prescribe at the time Of
its adoption
Eyes, sir, the very bill and section from which
they quote cuts off all that part of Texas whicl
was to lie free by the Missouri compromise, to-
gether with some on the south side of the line
incorporates it into the territory of New Mexico
and that that te irtory, and every portion of the
same. shall come into the Union with or wthou
slavery as 1t sees proper"
The assertion here is, that all the terrtor,
claimed bv Texas north of 36 deg. 80 min wa
cut off by the Texan boundary and New Mexico
act
Mr.. Douglas. Read ii
Mr.. Chas. have read it; but will read
again
Here the last paragraph quoted above was rea'
again.
Mr. Douglas, Tin his seat Most of it,
Mr. ('hoSe n his snnpch tho Senator cal,
ALL the territory aimed by Texas north of 81
deg. % min. was Incorporated into New Mexico
Now he says, MOST OF IT.. These are very diff
ferent statements viii show the Senate wha
was and what was not Incorporated The boun
Diary line between Spain and the United States
for want to make the matter perfectly clear an
distinct was this:
"The boundary line between the two countrio
west of the Mississippi, shall begin on the Gul
of Mexico, a the month of the river Sabine, i
the sea, continuing north on the western bank G
that river, to the 32d deg. of latitude, thence b
line due north to the degree of latitude wher
it strikes the Rio Roxo of Natchitoches or Re
River; then following the course of the Rio Rox
westward, to the degre, of longitude 100 dec
west from London, and % deg. from Washing
ton; then crossing the said Red River and rur
ming thence by line due north to the Arkansas
thence fol owing the course If thu southern ban
of the Arkansas to lis source in latitude AZ deg
north, and thence by that parallel of latitude /
the south Sea-
Now look at this boundary upon the map
Here it is. (Exhlbiting the map Here we g
up the Sabine to the 80 deg parallel; then mort
to the Red River; then along the Red River
| tha nf h,
again to the Arkansas then up the Arkansas I
its source then straight nor h once more to III
AZ deg of latitude. There you see the undf
ry between the United States and the SPANS
possession as defined by the treaty of 1929.
Now, what did Texas claim Here is tn
most authenli; evidence of it in her own act, az
proved December 10, 1886, by Sam Houston
will read it
i" Beginning at the mouth of the S bne river
running west along the Gulf of Mexico, thre
leagues from land, to the mouth of the Ri
Grande thence up the principal st cam Of tn
said river 10 lis source; then due north to the
deg of north latitude; thence along the boundar
line as defined in the treaty bst,ccen the Unite
States and Spain to The beginning.'
That sir, is the boundary claimed by Texas
After her annexation to the United S'a'es, an
alter the treaty with Mexico of Guadalupe Hldal
go, Texas asserted her claim 10 the whole terri
tory included within these limits The Senate
from Virginia (Mr. Mason)was among those VIII
regarded the claim of Texas as just = not becaus
of any valid original title to the territory, hut be
c ,use of the Implied recognition of her title b,
the United States. | need not say that !, il
commoA with very many Others, dissented from
that view. But the Senator from Virginia, an,
other Senators maintained it, That Senator, OF
the Both of July, 1850, moved joint resolution
recognizing this claim, which will read;
- Resolrcd, &C., That by the joint resolution
approved Mar h LIST, 1915, for annexing Texa!
to the United Stats, it being ordained that thu
territory properly included within and rightfull,
belonging to the Republic of Texas may be cree
ted into new State, &c it is the opinion anC
Judgment of Congress, that the admission o
fexas into the Union, with the boundaries de
scribed by the laws thereof, not objected to b,
the United States, at the time of such annexation
| is conclusive as AGAINST tho Ilnited Statas IF III