Has the possession of the United States of America of the Chamizal" been public, continuous, and without interruption? Since the gradual formation of the "Chamizal" tract the United States Congress has exercised jurisdiction over the tract. The customs authorities and peace officers of the United States of America have exercised undivided, undisputed, and uninterrupted authority over the "Chamizal" tract and to the center of the Rio Grande, bordering thereon, since 1846. The Republic of Texas established and maintained its boundaries to the Rio Grande from March 2, 1836, to its incorporation into the United States of America in 1846. The Legislature of the State of Texas repeatedly, openly, and continuously asserted and exercised jurisdiction to the same point." The Public Land Office and Land Commissioners of Texas have exercised coextensive jurisdiction. The municipal corporation of El Paso has exercised like authority since its creation./ The peace officers and tax collectors of the State of Texas and city and county of El Paso have exercised a like and undisturbed authority within the same limits. The representatives and authorities of the United States of Mexico have recognized and acquiesced in the exercise of such jurisdiction by the United States of America and by the State of Texas and by the city and county of El Paso.h Has the possession of the United States been aided morally and legally by the employment of labor and capital upon the territory embraced in "El Chamizal?" In answer it is sufficient to say that the record discloses the utilization of the property at all times since its gradual formation for the erection and maintenance of public buildings, railways, irrigation works, pavements, public sewers, residences, and business houses by the Government of the United States of America, of the State of Texas, and of the city and county of El Paso, Tex., a See U. S. Countercase Appendix, p. 132; ibid., 133; ibid., 170. b See U. S. Countercase Appendix, pp. 185 to 202. See treaty of Velasco, supra; also U. S. Countercase Appendix, pp. 134, 135, and 137. d See U. S. Countercase Appendix, pp. 137, 138, and 139. e See U. S. Countercase Appendix, pp. 139 to 146. f See U. S. Countercase Appendix, pp. 139 and 147 to 168; also map No. 10, U. S. Countercase Appendix. 9 See U. S. Countercase Appendix, pp. 185 to 202. h See U. S. Countercase, pp. 172 to 183; also pp. 185 to 202; see also diplomatic correspondence published in the appendices to the United States Case and the United States Countercase, as well as the appendices of the Mexican Case and Countercase. See U. S. Countercase Appendix, pp. 172-185. and of the citizens and inhabitants thereof. In further support of which reference is respectfully made to the territory itself. Therefore, it is respectfully submitted upon this phase of the case, before this honorable court, that the rights of the United States of America are "founded on the solid rock of prescription; the soundest, the most general, and the most recognized title between man and man that is known in municipal or public jurisdiction, a title in which no arbitrary institution or the eternal order of things gives judgment; a title which is not the creature, but the master of positive law; a title which, though not fixed in its terms, is rooted in its principle in the law of nature itself and is indeed the original ground of all known property, for all property and soil will always be traced back to that source and arise there."" WILLIAM CULLEN DENNIS, Agent of the United States. WALTER B. GRANT, Counsel for the United States. RICHARD F. BURGESS, Associate Counsel for the United States. a Burke, Works, Vol. VI, p. 411, Revised Edition. 116 Has the p Since the gr customs au America he authority The Re to the R the Unit State of The 1 exercise ity sir The city a T Me jur Το correspondenc See U. S. Countercase Appen... |