The Boundaries of Texas'

WHILE the debate was in progress in the Senate of the United States, upon the resolutions of Mr. Clay, a motion was made by Mr. Foote of Mis sissippi, for a committee of thirteen, to consider and report a comprehensive plan of adjustment of all the matters in controversy on the subject of slavery. This motion prevailed, and a committee was appointed by ballot, composed of the following persons: Messrs. Clay, Bell, Berrien, Bright, Cass, Cooper, Dickinson, Downs, King, Mangum, Mason, Phelps, and Webster. This committee, on the 8th of May, reported by their chairman (Mr. Clay) a bill, the principal provisions of which were the admission of California with the existing boundaries, the establishment of territorial governments for Utah and New Mexico without the Wilmot Proviso, the settlement of the boundary controversy between New Mexico and Texas, the surrender of fugitive slaves, and the prohibition of the slave trade in the District of Columbia.

While this bill was under consideration, a motion was made by Mr. Turney of Tennessee to strike out the thirty-ninth section, which contained a proposal, to be offered to the acceptance of the people of Texas, for the settlement of their boundary controversy with New Mexico. On this motion Mr. Webster spoke as follows:

I WISH to make a few remarks upon this question, considering it a very important one, under all the aspects in which it is presented. This bill contains three leading subjects, the admission of California into the Union, the establishment of territorial governments for New Mexico and Utah, and the settlement of the boundary line between the United States or New Mexico and the State of Texas. I am in favor of each and every one of these subjects, and should be inclined to vote for them,

* Remarks in the Senate of the United States, on the 13th of June, 1850, on a Motion to strike out the thirty-ninth section of "The Compromise Bill," being the section relative to the Boundaries of Texas.

separately or together, as may best suit the convenience or the general judgment of the Senate, my own opinion having been well known from the beginning to be, that it would have been wiser to proceed with California as a separate measure. Here is now before us a bill providing for the three objects. That provision which relates to the establishment of the boundary between the territory of the United States and Texas is under immediate consideration, and the section embracing that part of the bill is now open to amendment. The present motion is, however, to strike out from the bill the whole section; that is, all that respects the United States and Texas.

Now, Sir, it appears to me that we shall have no question more important than this in the course of our deliberations in the Senate. It seems to me that it is one of the most material points connected with this subject, which gives us all so much general anxiety, the disposition of our territories newly acquired from Mexico.

Mr. President, there are different views entertained with respect to the manner in which these territories should be treated, whether a provision should now be made for establishing in New Mexico and Utah territorial governments in the common form, or whether, California being admitted, these territories should not be left for future consideration. I am most anxious, Sir, to take that course in this respect which shall be most conformable to our common practice heretofore, the most suitable to the occasion, and the most likely to produce a speedy settlement of all the various questions.

Now, Sir, before any territorial government can be established for New Mexico, it is clearly necessary that the boundary of New Mexico should be ascertained, or else defined by a provision simultaneous with that which establishes the government. But that is not all. There is evidently something in this case which goes much further. Some gentlemen are of opinion that the Territory of New Mexico should remain as she is until she is prepared to come in as a State. Well, Sir, it strikes me as highly improbable, if not impossible, that she ever can come in as a State, until we define her boundaries and know what really constitutes New Mexico. If we leave her as she is, how is it to be known who her people are? Who are to get together to form her constitution and apply for admission as a State? What is New Mexico? How is she limited and bounded?

Now I understand it to be admitted by gentlemen here, while Texas claims all the country east of the Rio del Norte up to the forty-second degree of north latitude, and while this claim of hers is not admitted, that she has some title or right, or some claim or plausible pretence of title or right, to a portion of the country between the Nueces and the Rio Grande. What portion, and how far to the north does that pretence or claim of right extend? How far above the common track which leads from Austin into Mexico, along the Presidio road? Where are its true limits? This is quite unsettled, and Texas, in the mean time, claims all along the line, not only up to El Paso del Norte, but still further, on to Santa Fé and Taos, and so to the forty-second degree of north latitude, embracing all that lies to the eastward of the Rio del Norte. If that be so, Sir, every body sees that it takes away a great portion of what has usually been considered as New Mexico. The fact is stated to be, and I suppose truly, that Texas has organized her civil government, not only up to El Paso del Norte, but beyond that, and has established civil jurisdiction some sixty or eighty miles above the Paso del Norte, claiming the whole of that country, with the right to establish her civil jurisdiction over the whole of it, just so soon as her own convenience requires it.

Now, I submit it to every one, what will be the state of things in New Mexico if these matters be not immediately adjusted? I should suppose all must see that things cannot remain as they are long, without some interposition by Congress. It is to be remembered that this territory is becoming Texas territory, in point of fact, every day. I understand an honorable member from Texas to say, that, in that part of the country which lies above the line contemplated by the committee, there are many voters who have actually attached themselves to the Texan government; that several hundred votes were cast last year, as in the exercise of municipal and political rights under the jurisdiction of Texas, by persons, many of whom live as far as seventy or eighty miles above the Paso del Norte, and others a little below.

Texas is a State with a regular constitution, a regular executive and legislative and judicial authority, and it is proposed now to leave New Mexico without any government to resist or contest the claims of Texas. How can that be considered a

wise and practical mode of settling the question? The power is all on one side. There is now no authority, executive, legislative, or judicial, that can unitedly call itself the government of New Mexico. There are alcaldes, I suppose, in the cities and towns; but where is the political government, the head, the leading authority of New Mexico? Where is there any thing in New Mexico that can say that it represents the territory? There is nothing upon earth that can do so, nothing anywhere that can remonstrate against Texas. There is nothing that can assert its own rights against Texas. Who is there even that can memorialize Congress? There is nobody but individuals, and those individuals very much disposed, according to recent appearances, at least some of them, to attach themselves to Texas, perhaps from a sort of necessity of having some government. Now, Sir, under this aspect of the case, the time seems to me to be far distant when New Mexico will be able to present herself here as a State, proper to be admitted into this Union. Our young and amiable sister, Texas, is, even by her best friends, admitted to be in love with land. She seeks land, and the immensity of her territory as it is does not satisfy her appetite in that respect.

Sir, with respect to all that country that lies beyond the outer settlements of Texas, beyond San Antonio de Bexar, and thence stretching out to the Paso del Norte in a southwestern direction, I presume it is of little importance to whom it belongs, because I do not suppose that there is a more desert, arid section of country on the continent. The honorable Senator from Missouri* made out a pretty good case for what he called the bucolic region of New Mexico, that is, the banks of the Puerco, and, according to him, there were formerly a great number of sheep depastured along the banks of that river. If so, Sir, that was the exception to the general rule. I suppose that no one doubts that, in the whole country from the Nueces to the Rio Grande, and thence along north between the mountains of Guadalupe, and so also beyond the mountains, the land is of but little value to any body. I take it to be true, as was said by my friend from North Carolina † the other day, that the great want of the country is the want of water. It is true, also, that there is almost a total want of tim† Mr. Mangum.

• Mr. Benton.

ber, although it is possible in that climate to get on somewhat better without fuel than without water. The expedition that went through there last year found many parts in which there is not a drop of water, sometimes for twenty miles, sometimes for thirty miles, sometimes for forty miles, and sometimes for seventy miles. That there are some few spots more favored is true; but it is certain that, throughout that whole region, there is one fatal want of water; and I understand that, even above the Paso del Norte, on the route to Santa Fé and Taos, there are long stretches where the traveller, be he Indian or be he white man, is driven away from the river by the near approach of the mountains, and is obliged to take his course along the plains; and that in one instance there is a distance of ninety miles to be traversed over these plains, in which he does not find a drop of water. Above this, I believe, the land and the

climate are somewhat better.

Now I think that it will require all the population that we can secure to New Mexico to make her hereafter either a respectable Territory or a respectable State; and my opinion is, therefore, that this is of the utmost importance; and, to speak out plainly at once, I think this amendment places almost the whole of New Mexico entirely at the sovereign will and pleasure of Texas. I wish to rescue it from the grasp of Texas. I wish to preserve all of it, so that it may hereafter constitute a respectable political community. And I put it to gentlemen, whether they wish this bill to be passed or not; and, even if they have made up their minds to go against it, to say on their consciences whether it is not better to retain this provision in the bill, for the purpose of keeping New Mexico out of the hands of Texas? That is the precise question presented here to-day, and I think the country must take that view of it. What can New Mexico do against Texas, let her right be ever so good? I entertain a strong opinion, though not a decisive one; I am at least strongly inclined to the opinion that her right is good. But then what is right against might? And if this govern

ment neglects her, if she will not define her boundaries, and will not say what New Mexico has or what she is, but leaves that to be decided at some indefinite time hereafter, New Mexico will be pretty likely to disappear from the face of the country, - will become Texas. Texas will swallow her up.