New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1844-01-09
National Morality.

blush and aQfOll IeCuldlloi 10 io ooi ~ 9o""0
quent popularity and official honors, we cannot
reasonably expect any elevated or rigorous stand
ard of National Morals. a recent aVoWai on
the floor of the House of Representatives, now
ever. struck us as rather out OF the common
course. and we have waited several days to see
whether it would be made the theme OF pubic
comment. So far, no remark upon it has inet our
eve, and we may as well give place to the rsfec
lions which its contemplation has excited.
Mr.. John @. Adams, it appears, had said some
thing in rebuke of the passion for breathing out
threatenings and slaughter which is so prevalent
on that floor, especially among the more raw and
windy portion Of the collective wisdom In the
course of his remarks, he alluded particularly to
the very rampant propensity to lick the British
which is well nigh disease with large portion
of our free and independent sovereigns, and
therefore staple ingredient in all Congressional
effervescences for Buncombc. '-Hereupon, the
report proceeds, Mr.. Charles J. Ingers00 (and
who but he p tartly interposed-
Would not the gentleman declare War if Eng
land we're to get possession OF Cuba Z
No. responded MIR. Adams.
I would said Mr.. Ingersoll, and the remark
was hailed with eager appreciation by ut Is the fer
aid we believe styles them) the Democratic Mem
bers.
Let us look now at the morality of this brava-
do, testing it by a parallel PASSAGE
Mexico was lately the unquestioned owner OF
Texas; for the claims zoe raised to that region
had been expressly surrendered by US, after tho
rough discussion, by the Treaty of 1919. Some
of our people settled in this territory as immi-
grants and loyal Mexicans, but soon threw off
allegiance to Mexico, and by violence declared
their independence, which they have practically
maintained. Now suppose it were for our inter
est to obtain this territory, and VIC should see TIT
to pay Mexico fair price for her province, and
she should think proper to accept 1t, and Texas
to become portion of our confederacy-who
could object? Now suppose Great Britain should
attempt to interpose a veto, saying, You Yam
KEGS cannot have Texas-it will disquiet our
West India possessions, or circumscribe our trade,
and shall not be-we Will make war upon you If
you de not desist'-what an unreasonable storm
of wrath, an indignation, and defiance to the
death, should we not be sure to find boiling up in
the yesty bosoms of Mr.. C. ]. Ingersoll and his
applauders
Well: look at the same principles involved
in another case-only the Bull and the other
animal having changed places: Spain is fee
BILE and declining nation, in debt to Great Brit
ain; the latter covets 1--WE will suppose) Cuba
She says, 'Wc will give you what Cuba is
werth-cede it to us, as Bonaparte sold Louis
lana to the Yankees Spain gladly consents,
and Cuba has no objection; but zoe do MT like
tive would rather have Cuba ourselves, or let
it remain as it is.
Well: what are we to do about it
Go to war" say Mr.. Ingersol and his tail.
Yes, it is easy to go to war; but how is that to
mend the matter It generally proves pretty
are we to get hold of Cubs7 The Moro Castle is
rather stout, the island a great deal harder to
overun than Canada, and the British Navy not
badly overmatched by our Home Squadron -
Under the protection of the batteries which guard
the harbor OF Havana, they would be able to
make us a respectable fight!
What then? We can burn good many Bri-
fish merchant vessels, while she is burning as
many or more of ours; we can take some Bri-
fish frigates if we attack them with force enough
but we did all this once before. We did some
very good fighting, az all the world allows; but
should we have taken Cuba if that had been the
bone of contention We rather think not Should
We take 1t nowl We reckon not. Then what
does Mr. IngersoIl propose as the end Of his
fighting. To shatter few thousand ANGLES with
grapeshot and do an extensive business in the
carrlon manufacture may be very well as means,
but regarded as an end, we have no great opin-
ION OF It. What, then, should we fight for :?
But this is not the main point: What right
have we to go to war on any such ground On
what principle could we justify our own purchase
of Louisiana, yet make war on Great Britain for
purchasing Cuba? Cuba is none of ours-we
claim almost all that joins US, but we never yet
thought of claiming tina. island. II We NAV go
to war because a nation peacefully acquires it
that we prefer should not have it, is there any
thing for which we may not 90 to war if it hap
pens not to please us
0 that the Peoplc-the all-suffering, tax-paying,
bulletstopping People-of this and of all Nations
would but just blow aside the fimsy curtain on
which are painted the swindfng pretexts for muir
der, misnamed National Honor Balance of
Power National Safety sc. They would
soon teach these war-inciters salutary dread, if
not of human misery, at least of general abhor-
renee.
GEoRelA.-'The following is the vote for Con.
gress in the counties from which have returns,
as compared with the corresponding vote at the
regular State Election last October, viz: