Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1844-05-10

m.ke the anne xatlon, oil lie ReheIa e1peu'ehey, ai
IL erIsn aspects Of the future, the necessity OF
l., N, Van Buren, finds his only difficulty IN
,h ar,,tinp state of things between mexico ana iexas
! On this topic propose t. make ie" 'rmafhs' W
v,ed by the general interest which INSPIRES 10 oo
/ ,mnni,y and called for, perhaps, by the drc'oea
/ nono we have heretofore expressed IN regard "a,
IT.. % -, ,nuch power every production oil MT
Van Buren, ard especlay IN ihis iettet-it oea'hes 81
Io,,v soult Of PATRIOTISM ana 80 "'uch elevate" u"
,y,ty OF Tone that Democrat can dissent from any
OF It's conclusions, without strong aouo'' u n'' wv"
;,doment |, is not the less our duty, however, 10
lJsn, o,ro un views as we have carefully formed
them ,, ..a;,; e tho
e,s For eight wears past, there have been con-
cs,,.d hostes by Mexico against her former colony
rho,e ha ,e been from time 10 time maraudngs, house
n,,,nns ne,ly paces and near The frontiers; but
| mn army has invaded the territory There has been
M rscognz daylight enemy IN Texas since the bstiie
; r 81, J,cinto Mexico, however, though unable to
=. Sa On The wnr Effectively has refused 10 make peace
hs oreets the continued assertion of her former rights
If sovereignty. She has not declared war as against
an enemy but ne rslsts the declared purpose TO sub
ds an insurrecon This is her attitude now, and has
hse, since 1886 On the part Of Texas, this attitude
f Me x,co is well understood, admitted complained o.
She has invited Mexico TO the arbrament of battle,
od !, hns been declined; che has invited the media
,;,n of friendly powers and Mexico has declined this
I.o The state of facts between the two countries IS
well known Government, which has endeuvored
s,rsnuously and repeatedly TO change il.
The case then 10 one of asserted war, not of actual
cfsctio, ho,,ities. Now, in our humble Judgment
t6ere is nothing here to deter US from The annexation
orTe1as Such step does not necessarily involve war
with Mexico.
We say nece,,arly-for we distinguish between
.r itself and the cause of or the causes which
nstfy The appeal arms, every nation Judges for H.
self: and r,ghfuly, because there is higher forum
Cause for war may exist, where there has been no
nu,Dose 10 give offence and where no wrong has been
nsrpetra,ed The recognition Of an insurgent colony
as an independent nation, Jnsihes The mather country
in declaring war agans. the government that makes
the recognition And, yet, the recognition may be no
thing more than the assertion Of sn existing fact call
ed for by duty to the colony that has become tree, and
harmless to ihs country whose allegiance she has
thrown off The recognition by the United States OF
the independent government OF Mexico gave Spain
i the right to declare against ne: recognition OF
T,xas wave the same right 10 Mexico But in neither
case was the recognition war itself.
/ And IN this .pect, see lille difference between
treaty recognition and an annexation, or the ac-
cep,ance of a cession. Either of them may under cir
cumstances involve a war,-cher of them, under other
circumstances, may justify war.-either cf them.
lodged according to liz code OF international morality,
may be innocent OF consequences.
Let us illustrate this The treaty of IT'S, by which
France acknowledged the Independence OF the United
States, contained engagement 10 give to our mer
chant ships the protection of her convoy. THIS was
virtually declaration of against Englaud, for II
bound France interfere against tho capture OF our YES
involved war.
Our recognition of the South American Republics
gave for 10 Span i she chose so to cons
der it; for il Intervention by us IN what she
chose still To regard her domestic concerns 1t WAS
however, perfectly moral act on our part, called Tor
by Justice as we'll as interest
So too The ptance Of cession il the territory
eLed IL actually the theatre o. war Is an adoption Ct
the war b. the power accepting. She 6nds the var
IN the soil and takes them together. But make her
! i.au Ia fant
actual ho,iil''cs ard The territory cedcd War may
truly exist and the crding nation may be involved IN
!, extremity hut unless the coded territory be
,self the battle ground, 1t passes IN state OF pace
The territory ad"pt the relations Of ITS sovereign
it does not communicate ITS former relations to him.
Such we believe be The nd doctrine OF modern
I rrnaoaai isw. 1t IS the legitimate deduction from
that Christian principle which seeks to mitigate the
evils OF war, by contracting the circle OF ITS Influence
On This point, sc cannot DO better than 10 adopt
the language Of MIR Madison, an occasion That was
fail of interest. In 1903, while the negotiation was
pr Ding with France which resulted in the crssion o
Louisiana the doub; whether the transfer might
not be embarrassed by the hostile projects Of Great
Br tain against New Orleans AT this time, Mr. Ma
olson wrote Secretary OF State, 10 our ENJOYS at
Psrs, IN The following terms
"rhe proposed occupancy of New Orleans, by Great
Britain suggests a further precautIon.
/ Gas the question may arise, how far, in state Of
war one Of the parties of right convey Territory
10 ural power, and thereby deprive lis enemy of
the canoe o! conquest incident 10 war; especially Wneh
the conquest may have been actually projected 1t s
proper observe to you LIST. That in the
sent case, the project of peacenble acquisition by the
United States, originated prior to the and, con-
sequcnty, before project Of conquest could have
EXISTED
"2d Tina, the right of neutral to procure for itself,
by bona Gde Transaction, property Of any sort from
bslligerent power ought not to be frustrated by the
chance tina, rghsful conquest thereof might there
by be preciuded. contrary doctrine would eacr'hce
the Just interests peace TO the unreasonable preen-
SONS of and the positive rights OF one nation to
the possible rights Of another. A restraint on the
alienation Of territory from nation at wa. to nation
at peace, imposed only in where the proceed
ing might have colusive reference TO the existence
Of the war and might be calculated to save the pro-
pery from danger, by placing It IN secret trust 10 De
reconveyed The return of peace No objection OF
this be made to the acquisitions we have IN
: view
Applying no the principle laid down By MIR. Madi-
son. how the persistence of Mexico in her nominal
against Texas affect the rights or duties oil The
United Suites? The right of neutral to procure tor
property by cesson, ought not to be frustrated
this eminent jurist, by the chance that r'ghtn
, conquest thereof may be thereby p,ecuded. Mexico
has not the chance Of righul conquest over Tex
as; for eight years she has not thought her chance
worth The hazards TO herself that might attend ITS iorc-
r BILE assertion. Why then should the United States
: forego The rendered advantage of the cess'on?
In making these observations, probably not as
sumng principle nj variance with the general tone oil
Mr. Van Burens letter The question is rather one OF
facts than of their consequences, of time and circum-
stances rather than of result, There is truth and fore
sight, well distinct reference to future action, IN
It the paragraph OF the letter with which we close:
Whcn Inc period for denitiye action shall have ar
Il rived" says Mr.. Van Buren,, "lhe considerations now
taken into view may have lost the weight they at pre-
possess the estimation Of the public; and Others
not regarded as Of any value, may, in the mean
! me arise TO affect materially, If not TO change the
whole aspect of the subject. The present condition of
the relations between Mexico and Texas may soon be
far changed TO weaken and perhaps TO obvate en-
: ircy, the OH econs against the immediate annexation
OF the latter 10 the United States which have here set
forth. and 10 place the question different grounds
Should such state cf things arise and be found in
the charge of tie responsible duties of President you
may be assured that would meet the question: II then
presented 10 with sincere desire 10 promote the
result which believe best calculated to advance the
permanent welfare OF the whole country
Peansylranian
) THE BALTIMORE PROCEEDINGS.
So far az the Whcs Of the II s are concerned,