tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-612052649872821494.post3630676342802437896..comments2023-11-17T01:01:32.816-08:00Comments on Retroactive Ramblings: Summary and Reactions to Cattlemen and LibertariansDavid Colbornehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03617582541558637856noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-612052649872821494.post-39190690404090793402014-05-23T13:12:53.790-07:002014-05-23T13:12:53.790-07:00No, it is not safe to assume anything about the co...No, it is not safe to assume anything about the contract of 1848. If something is not stated within the contract then it is not part of the contract. The only thing that is mentioned is the change of the border. It is silent as to ownership of ceded territories. To whom were they ceded? Another complication is that the treaty is an adhesion contract at best. (the language is ours and we are responsible for the defects!)<br /><br />Another aspect of this situation is the fact that an unelected official (BLM) has the authority to take private property rights (water), by operation of regulation. This type of taking (5th Amendment) is more worthy of oligarchy than republic. See http://www.icleiusa.org/ Clark County is signatory to the ICLEI US) it is a method to make an end run around the Constitution to effect United Nations agenda. <br /><br />John McCormickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07741583909667901790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-612052649872821494.post-68991028342065639642014-04-28T15:51:23.710-07:002014-04-28T15:51:23.710-07:00Article V of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (http...Article V of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=009/llsl009.db&recNum=979):<br /><br />"The boundary line between the two republics shall commence in the Gulf of Mexico, three 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, northweard, 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 to 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."<br /><br />The remainder of Article V further defines the redrawn boundary between the United States and Mexico. Article VIII deals with Mexicans that already lived in the ceded territories; as I mentioned in previous articles, the United States made it a habit to ignore that provision. Article XII is where the United States pays Mexico in exchange for the territory.<br /><br />Since the treaty was between the government of the United States of America and the government of the United Mexican States, it's safe to assume that the lands gained under Article V, minus those exempted under Article VIII, were ceded to the government of the United States of America since no other counterparty was present.<br /><br />As for "what should be", I think "what should be" would be either the complete privatization of all public lands or the return of those lands to the Native Americans (or some combination thereof). Either way, I find the idea of land ownership under the governments of the United States, the State of Nevada, Clark County, or any other governmental entity morally and philosophically repugnant. Since that's not happening anytime soon, it looks like we'll be dealing with the BLM for a while longer.David Colbornehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03617582541558637856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-612052649872821494.post-20572504667597519822014-04-25T16:47:29.073-07:002014-04-25T16:47:29.073-07:00 BTW the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in both of it... BTW the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in both of its forms is widely available on the net. Can you find any description of the lands ceded, or, who they were ceded to, within the four corners of the contract? John McCormickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07741583909667901790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-612052649872821494.post-71894391732429273772014-04-25T16:43:59.565-07:002014-04-25T16:43:59.565-07:00Here are my thoughts on the situation from April 1...Here are my thoughts on the situation from April 15th. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzDaO6uJjfc We must deal with the fact that lands ceded to the State Of Nevada by the act of May 5th 1866 may have a different status than those that were ceded back to the US by the enabling act. I have started reading Wayne Hage's book "Storm over Rangeland" and think that you would find it most interesting! It may help change your opinions about "what should be" ............. we most agree on "what is" John McCormickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07741583909667901790noreply@blogger.com