El Paso herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1901-1931, 1911-05-27
burgess To CLOSE
CHAMIzAL CASE
ARGUMENTS
Commissioners in Case Ad-
journ Saturday Morn
ing Till Tuesday.

Argument in the Chamizal case will
close Tuesday when R T. Bur0es will
make the final presentation of the
American side of the case
Seymour Thurmond, of counsel foI
Mexico, asked the commission, after a
two hour and a half session Saturday
morning, to adjourn, and this was done.
Thurmond had spent the greater part of
the morning summing UP the duties of
the commission under the treaty of 1910
by. which it was created, and he became
exhausted.
z He said in part:
Treaties are supposed to be deter
mined according to the plain language
in which they are put.
ct maintain there could not be any
title of prescription.
Treaties Made to Read.
Treaties are made not for the inter
pretation, but that the public may run
and read
Not only is the treaty of 184S void
of any ambiguity but the treaty of 1858
reiteqates it.
The treaties between the two coun-
tries show that the United States has
always held title TO this property.
The treaty OF 1910 has grown out of
& nlisconception of the treaties hereto
fore existing between the two countries.
This court does not know where the
boundary of the ChamiZal zone is. There
was never any report of the boundary
commission in 1848 but in 1856 or 1857
the line was established.
Il contend that under the first article
of the treaty of 1910, it is acknowledged
by the United States that this land at
one time belonged TO Mexico
Cannot Lay Aside Treaty.
Mexico rests feeling that it is be-
yond the judicial power of this court to
lay aside the treaties of 1848 and 1853
The jurisdiction of this court DOS
not extend beyond the boundaries of the
Chamizal tract. Hence It is immaterial
whether or no Santa Cruz or Santa anv-
thing else should become part of Amer
lean territory.
The legal presumption is that
treaty is not retroactivel unless it is
directly stated that it is retroactive
Retroactlon goes back only as far as the
signing of the treaty The retroactive
feature could have no effect on private
rights. Governments, are not prone to
entirely disregard their constituents in
making treaties.
The convention of 1889 was con-
constituted for the purpose of carrying
out the provisions of the treaty of 1884
and the treaty of 1884 is the first one
to use the words Changes of channel by
natural causes. In 1884 they legislated
in regard to future conditions and not
TO past"
Judge W. B. Grant, of counsel for the
United States, spoke yesterday.
The shifts Of the river would un-
doubtedly give Mexico as much land
as we get over here he said.
Cites Colorado River.
''The Colorado river was originally
made boundary in 1883" He then
submitted a map of the Colorado river
ana said: Calling attention to the
scale OF this map it is shown that the
two channels are three-fifths to one
half mile apart
Yesterday I enormously stated that
monuments were placed at the mouth
Of the Rio Grande
In 1893 a serious question arose at
Rio Grande City, opposite Camargo,
involving $500 acres of land The
United States claimed it on the ground
that it was alluviun-Whieh was re-
ferred to the boundary commissioner
1894. 1t was found there was a large
accretion and an emulsion, and in 1905
the convention agreed that by an ex-
change Of land the establishment OF
6S boundary monuments would be
obviated.
I'm 1891 the Ell Paso customs col
lecter seized cattle on the boundary
between Ysleta and Zaragoza.
1.-THE commission decided that be-
tween 1891 and 1897 the boundary
had shifted so much they could not
determine where it was at the time of
this seizure"
Commissioner Laf1eur said: There
would be difference in the class of
cases because in some instances claims
were made by the mayors, others by
private citizens and others by the
governments"
Is Clear Case.
Yes" replied Mr.. Grant, ftbut the
Camargo case is z very clear one
Taking up the matter of accretion,
Mr.. Grant said: The contention of
the United States is that this land