Articles liés à Reply to the Pamphlet, by Commanders Buchanan, Dupont...
Reply to the Pamphlet, by Commanders Buchanan, Dupont & Magruder, of the United States Navy, Addressed to the House of Representatives, in Reply to the Officers of the Late Texas Navy - Couverture rigide
Présentation de l'éditeur
On the other hand, if I fail to accompli.-b this, I shall be con t.;nt to admit, that any claim to a favorable consideration of our mrriinrial is absolutely groundless. l;i-sin by any remarks vhich the unnecessary and unjust pcr onal imputations are calculated to call forth, I proceed at once, and as brieily as possible, to consider the grounds of objection to the action of Congress, as presented in their pam)hleL With reirard to their argument upon the construction ot the Joint Resolution of annexation, I will not occupy your time by oti ering a single observation, since the report of the committee is, in it self, a full and complete answer upon that point. And I suppose it will not be doubted that the opinion of the members of that committee upon construction of law, is at least as worthy of consideration as the opinion of z Zree Commanders in the avy. I will, however, in this connexion, simply remark that if these ofiicers had been so liberal and candid as to have quoted the icholc of ihc opinion of the Supreme Court, it would have been seen, that the real ground upon which the mandamus was refused, was want of jurisdiction ;and as proof of this fact, I beg to refer to the opinion of the Court in the case of Brashear vs. Mason, fith Howard s Reports, pp. 92, ct passim. Rut whatever may be the true interpretation of the Joint Resolutions of annexation, it is perfectly clear, that Texas, one of the parties to this contract of annexation, believed that the terms ot the resolution did provide for the ol Ficers of her navy, as is shov.n by tiie Joint Resolution of her Legislature, instructing and requesting her .S enators and Representatives to use their infliir-nce to have it accomplished. But supppoe the opinion of the :upreme Court does go to the extent claimed for it by these o Hicers, what does it prove?? simply that the terms of the Joint Resolutions wer
(Typographical errors above are due to OCR software and don't occur in the book.)
Présentation de l'éditeur
This book was originally published prior to 1923, and represents a reproduction of an important historical work, maintaining the same format as the original work. While some publishers have opted to apply OCR (optical character recognition) technology to the process, we believe this leads to sub-optimal results (frequent typographical errors, strange characters and confusing formatting) and does not adequately preserve the historical character of the original artifact. We believe this work is culturally important in its original archival form. While we strive to adequately clean and digitally enhance the original work, there are occasionally instances where imperfections such as blurred or missing pages, poor pictures or errant marks may have been introduced due to either the quality of the original work or the scanning process itself. Despite these occasional imperfections, we have brought it back into print as part of our ongoing global book preservation commitment, providing customers with access to the best possible historical reprints. We appreciate your understanding of these occasional imperfections, and sincerely hope you enjoy seeing the book in a format as close as possible to that intended by the original publisher.
Les informations fournies dans la section « A propos du livre » peuvent faire référence à une autre édition de ce titre.
