The boundary line between the two Republics shall commence in the Gulf
of Mexico 3 leagues from land, opposite the mouth of the Rio Grande,
otherwise called Rio Bravo del Norte, or opposite the mouth of its
deepest branch if it should have more than one branch emptying
directly into the sea; from thence up the middle of that river,
following the deepest channel where it has more than one, to the point
where it strikes the southern boundary of New Mexico; thence
westwardly, along the whole southern boundary of New Mexico (which
runs north of the town called Paso) to its western termination; thence
northward along the western line of New Mexico until it intersects the
first branch of the river Gila (or, if it should not intersect any
branch of that river, then to the point on the said line nearest to
such branch, and thence in a direct line to the same); thence down the
middle of the said branch and of the said river until it empties into
the Rio Colorado; thence across the Rio Colorado, following the
division line between Upper and Lower California, to the Pacific
Ocean.
The eighth article of the treaty is in the following terms:
Mexicans now established in territories previously belonging to
Mexico, and which remain for the future within the limits of the
United States as defined by the present treaty, shall be free to
continue where they now reside or to remove at any time to the Mexican
Republic, retaining the property which they possess in the said
territories, or disposing thereof and removing the proceeds wherever
they please without their being subjected on this account to any
contribution, tax, or charge whatever.
Those who shall prefer to remain in the said territories may either
retain the title, and rights of Mexican citizens or acquire those of
citizens of the United States; but they shall be under the obligation
to make their election within one year from the date of the exchange
of ratifications of this treaty; and those who shall remain in the
said territories after the expiration of that year without having
declared their intention to retain the character of Mexicans shall be
considered to have elected to become citizens of the United States.
In the said territories property of every kind now belonging to
Mexicans not established there shall be inviolably respected. The
present owners, the heirs of these, and all Mexicans who may hereafter
acquire said property by contract shall enjoy with respect to it
guaranties equally ample as if the same belonged to citizens of the
United States.
The ninth article of the treaty is in these words:
The Mexicans who, in the territories aforesaid, shall not preserve the
character of citizens of the Mexican Republic, conformably with what
is stipulated in the preceding article, shall be incorporated into the
Union of the United States and be admitted at the proper time (to be
judged of by the Congress of the United States) to the enjoyment of
all the rights of citizens of the United States according to the
principles of the Constitution, and in the meantime shall be
maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty and
property and secured in the free exercise of their religion without
restriction.
It is plain, therefore, on the face of these treaty stipulations that
all Mexicans established in territories north or east of the line of
demarcation already mentioned come within the protection of the ninth
article, and that the treaty, being a part of the supreme law of the
land, does extend over all such Mexicans, and assures to them perfect
security in the free enjoyment of their liberty and property, as well
as in the free exercise of their religion; and this supreme law of
the land, being thus in actual force over this territory, is to be
maintained until it shall be displaced or superseded by other legal
provisions; and if it be obstructed or resisted by combinations too
powerful to be suppressed by the civil authority the case is one which
comes within the provisions of law and which obliges the President to
enforce those provisions. Neither the Constitution nor the laws nor my
duty nor my oath of office leave me any alternative or any choice in
my mode of action.
The executive government of the United States has no power or
authority to determine what was the true line of boundary between
Mexico and the United States before the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo,
nor has it any such power now, since the question has become a
question between the State of Texas and the United States. So far as
this boundary is doubtful, that doubt can only be removed by some
act of Congress, to which the assent of the State of Texas may be
necessary, or by some appropriate mode of legal adjudication; but
in the meantime, if disturbances or collisions arise or should be
threatened, it is absolutely incumbent on the executive government,
however painful the duty, to take care that the laws be faithfully
maintained; and he can regard only the actual state of things as
it existed at the date of the treaty, and is bound to protect all
inhabitants who were then established and who now remain north and
east of the line of demarcation in the full enjoyment of their liberty
and property, according to the provisions of the ninth article of the
treaty. In other words, all must be now regarded as New Mexico which
was possessed and occupied as New Mexico by citizens of Mexico at the
date of the treaty until a definite line of boundary shall be
established by competent authority.
This assertion of duty to protect the people of New Mexico from
threatened violence, or from seizure to be carried into Texas for
trial for alleged offenses against Texan laws, does not at all include
any claim of power on the part of the Executive to establish any civil
or military government within that Territory. _That power_ belongs
exclusively to the legislative department, and Congress is the sole
judge of the time and manner of creating or authorizing any such
government.
The duty of the Executive extends only to the execution of laws and
the maintenance of treaties already in force and the protection of all
the people of the United States in the enjoyment of the rights which
those treaties and laws guarantee.
It is exceedingly desirable that no occasion should arise for
the exercise of the powers thus vested in the President by the
Constitution and the laws. With whatever mildness those powers might
be executed, or however clear the case of necessity, yet consequences
might, nevertheless, follow of which no human sagacity can foresee
either the evils or the end.
Having thus laid before Congress the communication of his excellency
the governor of Texas and the answer thereto, and having made such
observations as I have thought the occasion called for respecting
constitutional obligations which may arise in the further progress of
things and may devolve on me to be performed, I hope I shall not be
regarded as stepping aside from the line of my duty, notwithstanding
that I am aware that the subject is now before both Houses, if I
express my deep and earnest conviction of the importance of an immediate
decision or arrangement or settlement of the question of boundary
between Texas and the Territory of New Mexico. All considerations of
justice, general expediency, and domestic tranquillity call for this.
It seems to be in its character and by position the first, or one of
the first, of the questions growing out of the acquisition of California
and New Mexico, and now requiring decision.
No government can be established for New Mexico, either State or
Territorial, until it shall be first ascertained what New Mexico
is, and what are her limits and boundaries. These can not be fixed
or known till the line of division between her and Texas shall be
ascertained and established; and numerous and weighty reasons
conspire, in my judgment, to show that this divisional line should be
established by Congress with the assent of the government of Texas. In
the first place, this seems by far the most prompt mode of proceeding
by which the end can be accomplished. If judicial proceedings were
resorted to, such proceedings would necessarily be slow, and years
would pass by, in all probability, before the controversy could be
ended. So great a delay in this case is to be avoided if possible.
Such delay would be every way inconvenient, and might be the occasion
of disturbances and collisions. For the same reason I would, with the
utmost deference to the wisdom of Congress, express a doubt of the
expediency of the appointment of commissioners, and of an examination,
estimate, and an award of indemnity to be made by them. This would be
but a species of arbitration, which might last as long as a suit at
law.
So far as I am able to comprehend the case, the general facts are
now all known, and Congress is as capable of deciding on it justly
and properly now as it probably would be after the report of the
commissioners. If the claim of title on the part of Texas appears
to Congress to be well founded in whole or in part, it is in the
competency of Congress to offer her an indemnity for the surrender of
that claim. In a case like this, surrounded, as it is, by many cogent
considerations, all calling for amicable adjustment and immediate
settlement, the Government of the United States would be justified,
in my opinion, in allowing an indemnity to Texas, not unreasonable
or extravagant, but fair, liberal, and awarded in a just spirit of
accommodation.
I think no event would be hailed with more gratification by the people
of the United States than the amicable adjustment of questions of
difficulty which have now for a long time agitated the country and
occupied, to the exclusion of other subjects, the time and attention
of Congress.
Having thus freely communicated the results of my own reflections on
the most advisable mode of adjusting the boundary question, I shall
nevertheless cheerfully acquiesce in any other mode which the wisdom
of Congress may devise. And in conclusion I repeat my conviction that
every consideration of the public interest manifests the necessity of
a provision by Congress for the settlement of this boundary question
before the present session be brought to a close. The settlement of
other questions connected with the same subject within the same period
is greatly to be desired, but the adjustment of this appears to me to
be in the highest degree important. In the train of such an adjustment
we may well hope that there will follow a return of harmony and good
will, an increased attachment to the Union, and the general
satisfaction of the country.