The Whig standard. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1843-1844, 1844-06-12

have been communicated to us on this subject,
than that the war had come completely TO an end
hv the inability of the parties To prosecute II OIL
tensiyelv-that it had thus expired by It's own
exhauston--and that the forms OF an armlstlce
had been resorted to solely to Disguise this fact,
and 10 make the termination of the war, which
was an event already consunmated, appear the
result of mutual and temporary agreement.
What our late able aud successful minister at
Mexico (Gen. Thompson) says on the subject,
in a despatch dated AS recently as the I'd OF Feb
ruary last is SO direct to the point, and SO con-
elusive in ITSELF that will content myself with
merely reading it to the Senate.
"li," (the armisice) says he, "was only device
on the part of Santa Anna to relieve him from the
difficulty in which he had involved himself by his
threats and promises of reconquering Texas,
which he knows perfectly well is impossible.
There mry be other marauding forays, like mat
of General VOL, rereating more rapidly man
they advanced. But as to any regular and rea-
sonably sufficient force invading the country, the
thing is impossible, and will not be attempted
They can not raise money to support such an
| army two months My opinion s, notwlth-
standing all their vaporing and gasconade, that
the most agreeable thing TO Santa Anna would
be an authoritative interp"sltlon OF our Govern
ment to put an end to the war. as he would then
say that we were too strong for them to contend
with"
But, sir, even if there were war--formal and
actual war--between Mexico and Texas what
principle the laU If nations is there that would
be violated, as has been constantly but gratui-
tously assumed in this debate, by third power.
(f she thought her duties to herself, to her neigh
Dor, to the cause of humanity required ~
becoming party. | am very far from counsel
ling such course, in the case of the United
States But am now considering the question
as depending upon the la,U 1T nations aL0ne, the
authority of which has been very often invoked
in this debate, without attending sufficiently to
that distinction of ideas so important to be pre-
served in such discussions. Is there anything
more common, in the usages of nations, than
powers at war strengthening themselves, when
| they can, by alliances contracted after the COM
mencement of the war; and has it ever been
| heard of that third power, entering into such
| an alliance, whether from considerations of hui
mainly or policy, has, by doing so, violated the
la,o of nationss Never, venture to assert.
1t has been shown, think, by undsputed his
toricaI facts, that there FLAGRANT war be-
tween Spain and Mexico, lat that time treated by
Spain revol,ed provnce.) when the Govern
ment Of the United States, twice during the ad
mnstration of Mr.. Adams, and once under the
administration of General Jackson, earnestly
/ sought to acquire Texas from Mexico, of whose
territory and political organization it was then a
member. The state of open and undeniable war
between Spain and Mexico, carried on, at times,
by great display of military force, and by i'm
posing expeditions, which drew the attention of
the world, was not deemed, by the able and ex-
perienced statesmen who then presided over the
conduct of public affairs, to be an insuperabIe
obstacle to the acquisition of Texas from one Of
| the parties at war, though still claimed by the
other an integral part of her dotninions, as we
had indeed formally acknowledged it TO be by the
treaty of 1919.
The history of Europe, and of modern Europe,
abounds with instances, in which the policy and
interests of third powers have been recognised
and allowed juslifable causes for disregarding,
and even forcibIy setting aside, the claims of the
parent and metropolitan State over revoed pro-
vince. The case of Holland and Belgium, in
1880, is one so strongly marked in all its features,
that, having been in Europe at the time, and in
some sort personal witness Of the transaction,
can speak of it without much risk of falling into
error. The revolutionary movement IN Belgium
broke out in the month OF September, 1880, just
two months after the memorable trois jnurn<,s of
Paris. In January, 1881, less Than four short
months at er the commencement of the revolu-
ton, the five great powers of Europe, through
| conference ot their respective ministers at Lon
don, undertook to proclaim and decree the per-
manent separation of Belgium from Holland
| Holland, recoecting the days Of her ancient
organized and brought into the field an army of
$4,000 well appointed troops, all-sutficent to re-
establish her dominion and authority in Belgium.
| can speak, IRON personal observation, Of the
strength and imposing countenance of this army,
for passed through Its headquarters. while as
sembed at Breda. The Prince of Orange, then
the heir apparent and now the actual King of
Holland, was at the head Of this powerful array,
and overwhelming every opposition in his victo-
na no riypda Of rnto If IL,
where he was met by Sir Robert Adair and Gen
eral Bellard, the respective plenipotentiaries of
England and France, who announced to him, in
the name and by the authority of their govern
ients, that if he advanced step farther, he would
be at war with both France and England, and
numerous and powerful French army, under the
| command of Marshal Gerard, was then rapidly
advancing, and had actually entered the territory
of Belgium, for the purpose of supporting the
declaration. Thus was Holland, at the very. mo-
ment of entering VIGOROUSLY the capitol Of her
reyolted subjects, and triumphantly re-estabsh-