{"character_count": 6149, "word_count": 1085, "ccnet_language_score": [0.968999981880188], "ccnet_perplexity": [933.7999877929688], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}



position of Mr. Jefferson to the "reLinquishmemt
of any territory whatever eastward of the Rio
Bravo" In the letter of James Monroe of the
9Th November, 1903, he incloses documents which
he says "prove aneOmtestably" that the boundary
OF Louisiana is "the Rio Bravo to the west ~ and
Mr.. Pinckney unites with him in similar decla-
ration. In a subsequent letter-not to foreign
government but to Mr.. Madison-of the goth
April, 1905, they assert our title as unquestona-
| bic. In Mr.. Monroe's letters, as Secretary of
State, dated January 19, 1916, and June 10, 1916,
he says none could question our title TO Texas"
and he expresses his concurrence in opinion with
Jefferson and Madison, "that our title to the Del
| Norte was as clear as to the island of New Or
leans" In his letter, as Secretary of State, to
Don Onis, of the 18th March, 1918, John Qnin-
cy Adams says: "The claim of France always
did extend westward to the Rio Brave" {" she
aLooays claimed the territory which you call Texas
as being within the limits, and forming part, of
Louisiana" After demonstrating our title to Tex
as in this letter, MIR. Adams says: SWELL might
Messrs Pinckney and Monroe write to NJ Ceva-
los, in 1905, that the claim Of the United States
to the boundary of the Rio Bravo was as clear as
their right to the island of New Orleans" Again.
in his letter of the 3lst October, 1873 Mr.. Adams
says our title to Texas is established beyond the
power of further controversy"


! Here, then, by the discovery and occupation of





France, in 1856 by the delivery Of possession to
US, in 1903, by Spain and France; by the action
Of our government from the date of the treaty Of
acquisition the date of the treaty OF surrender,
(avowedIy so its face;) by the opinion of all
our Presidents and ministers connected in any
way with the acquisition, our title 10 Texas was
undoubted. Il was surrendered to Spain by the
treaty of 1919; but Mr.. Clay maintained in his
speech of the Sd April, 1920 that territory could
bo oJs tod b1,
quently that notwithstanding the treaty, Texas
was still In the cession of portion of
Maine, it asserted in Legislative resolutions,
by Massachusetts and Maine, and conceded by
this government, that portion of Maine could
be ceded by treaty without the consent of Maine.
Did Texas assent to this treaty, we cede
part of a territory but not Of State? These are
grave questions; they raise the point whether
Texas is not now a part of our territory, and
whether her people may not now rightfuly claim
the protection of our government and laws. Re-
collect this not question Of settlement, under
the powers of thus government, of disputed
boundary. The treaty declares, as respects Tex
as, that we ccde TO has Catholic majesty" Com
mcnting on this in his speech before referred to,
MIR. Clay says it was not qucso Of the power
in case of dispute L" of fixing boundary previous
y existing" 1t was, on the contrary, the case
of an avowed cession of territory from the United
OtdteS " OpdHI AlluOuSH, tueu govern
mcnt may be competent to fix disputed bound
airy, by ascertaining as near as practicable where
it is; although, also, State, with the consent of
this government. as in the of Maine, may
cede portion of her terrtory,-yct il by means
follows that this government, by treaty, conld cede
la Territory of the Union. Could we by treaty
cede Florida to Spain, especially without consult
ing the people Of Florida ? and, if not, the treaty
by which Texas was surrendered was as Mr..
Clay contended imoperGtire.


By the treaty of 1903, by which, we have seen,
Texas was acquired by US from France, we
pledged our faith to France and to the people of
Teras, never to surrender that territory The Sd
article of that treaty declares 'the Inhabitants of
the ccded territory shall be incorporated in the
Union ofthc United States, and admitted as soon
possible according to the principles of the federal
constitution 10 the enjoyment of all the rights, ad
vantages and immuntes of citizens of the United
States; and in the mean time they shall be pro-
tected in the free enjoyment Of their liberty, pro-
perty, and the religion which they profess" Such
was our pledge to France and to the people of Ter
as by the treaty of purchase; and flour subsequent
treaty of cesson to Spain was not unconstitutional
and ihvalid it gross infraction of a previous
treaty, and of one of the fundamental conditions
under which Texas was acquired


Here, then, are many grave questions OF constl-
tutional power. Gould the solemn guaranty to
France, and to the people OF Texas, be rfscndcd
by treaty with Spain2 Can this government.
by its own mere power, surrender any portion OF
its terfitory2 Can it cut off territory without
the consent of its people, and surrender them and
the territory 10 foreign power2 Can it expa-
trlate and expcl from the Union its own citizens,
who occupy that territory, and change an Ameri-
can citizen into citizen of Spain or Mexico?
These are momentous questions, which it is not
necessary now to determine, and in regard to
which I advance at this time no opinion. Ger
tain, however, it is, that, with the consent of the
people of Texas, Congress can carry out the So
lemn pledges of the treaty of 1903, and admit one
or more States from Texas into the Uuop.


The question as 10 Texas is in any aspect,
question of the re-establishment of our ancient
boundaries, and the repossession of a territory
most reluctantly surrendered The surrender of
territory, even if constitutional is almost univer
sally inexpedicnt and unwise, and, IN any event,
when circumstances may seem to demand such
surrender, the territory thus abandoned should al
ways be reacquired whenever it may be done with
justice and propriety Independent Of these views,
we have the recorded opinion of John @. Adams
as President, and Henry Clay as Secretary of
State, and also of Gen. Andrew Jackson PresiN
dent, and Martin Van Buren Secretary of State,
that Texas ought to be reannexed to the Union
On the Goth of March, 1925, Mr.. Clay, in con-
formity with his own views, and the eTpresS direc
tions of Mr. Adams as President, directed a letter
