-=> On 12-05-97  09:30, Mike Angwin did testify and affirm <=-
-=> to Robert Craft concerning Re: The American Culture <=-
 RC> The treaty is irrelevant. It applied only to that period
 RC> subsequent to it's initial admission to the Union and prior
 RC> to its secession. However, since Texas was readmitted to
 RC> the Union after the Civil War in exactly the same manner as
 RC> other secessionist states, the earlier treaty is completely
 RC> null and void. 
 MA> Not so, and I offer two immediate examples. First the flag
 MA> protocol. The Texas flag is never formally flown in a
 MA> subordinate position to the American flag. In all formal
 MA> functions it is flown at the same height, and of the same
 MA> size, next to the American flag. In protocols this is
 MA> something otherwise reserved for other soverign nations and
 MA> is not done with any other state flag. 
Better check the Flag Code - you are in error. A state flag
is flown below Old Glory when both are flown on the SAME
pole. When flown on separate poles, Old Glory is flown in
the superior position - the right. The subordinate position
is on the left, even when flown at the same height.
Next argument?
 MA> Second, Texas reserves, and federal courts have recognized
 MA> the reserved right of Texas, to subdivide into as many as
 MA> five states if the desire is ever present. No other state
 MA> has this right. 
Wrong. That is not unique to Texas. Not only is California
is even now entertaining that idea, but it has been
utilized by other states in the past. 
Next argument?
 MA> If your argumement is, as you suggest, that once we were annexed
 MA> all former national rights were ceded, then hoiw can the purchase, by
 MA> the United States from Texas, of a third of our national territory in
 MA> 1850 be explained. If, as you suggest, Texas territory is American
 MA> territory, where would be the motive to compensate Texas for the loss
 MA> of half of New Mexico and parts of Colorado, Wyoming, Oklahoma, and
 MA> Nebraska?
Red herring - Texas re-entered the Union under current
conditions AFTER the Civil War - not in 1850.
 MA> [...snip...] Also, our own courts have ruled that Texas
 MA> cannot violate the bi-lingual provisions of our treaty even
 MA> if we ourselves desire to alter them. 
Irrelvant until ruled upon by the Federal Supreme Court.
 MA> While it is indeed unclear, at times, exactly what rights
 MA> we reserve and what conditions apply relative to the Treaty
 MA> of Annexation and the Consitution of 1845, both still have
 MA> a strong impact both on state and federal affairs. To deny
 MA> this is to deny what actually is occuring. 
You've yet to produce any argument substantiating that
claim.
... Reagan watched John Wayne movies. Clinton watches the Marx Brothers.
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20
--- PCBoard (R) v15.22/5
---------------