The New era. [volume] ([Portsmouth, Va.]) 1845-1847, 1845-08-28
WAR WITH MEXICO.

that considerable excitement prevails in many
parts Of the country on this important subject.
This is natural We are emphatically peacefu
people. Our predictions. habits, and interests
predispose 10 peace rather than war. Hence
1t is not at all surprising, that the approach
of the grim vSiler should produce some degree
of anxiety and agitation But we do deprecate
the spirit with which some, in our midst, seem
to regard this matter We hear it spoken of as
most dreadful impending calamity, tina, has
been brought near at hand by the avidity of our
Government for territorial ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, which
the whole civilized world will condemn as unjust
and most inIqnous Why. let us ask, is the
subject TO be so regarded Simply because
Mexico chooses TO pretend that Texas is prov
ince OF hers in state of revolt, instead of an
Independent State? Are the unsupported claims
of any Government to authority over a neighbor-
ing territory to which That Government Meier had
any shadO,o Of right to fix upon that territory
the perpetual curse of border warfare, continu-
al inroads, and damning deeds of murder, rapne,
and inhuman cruelty by plundererS claiming the
protection of the Law of Nations. as giving them
the right to outrage and violate all laws, human
and divine2
And shall we be told. with sad and sapent
face, we have been told, that Sc millions cannot
pay for the sacrifice of single life" that swe
should never commit an act of Injustice and
where there is any doubt should act upon the
safe side, never doing what is not clearly right 2"
Are we, then, not bound 10 exert ourselves for the
protection of the oppressed? When neighbor.
ing people surrounded by dangers and difficulties
which they have braveIy met, and triumphantly
overcome, is still menaced with unjust attacks by
barbarian spoilers, who declare they will never
cease their inroads, though the nations of the
earth have acknowledged the clear claim of their
intended uictims to the security and respect of
an independent nation. what philanthropy, what
love of humanity, what desire for the security of
human life and of human rights is it. that would
dictate to cooy fold the arms and when solicited
to exercise our power, for the safety and well be
ing of thousands of our fellow morlals declare To
them never interfere with the affairs of others,
the life of single individual is worth more than
millions; therefore, we will see you buchered
annhilaed it may be- but from principle we can
not attempt TO avert the blow. Is this the dictate
of love to man? Is this American doctrine Is
this the part of the good Samaritan Does he pass
by on the other side, leaving the wounded and
imploring sufferer to his fate, without an effort to
relieve?
Shame where is thy blush ?"
We maintain that our Government would have
had no right to refuse the aid asked for by Tex
as Regard for the interests of humanity, of
civil liberty, of individual happiness and of our
own national security and honor, all rendered it
imperative upon government to adopt the course
that has been adopted, to pursue the policy that
hos been pursued and boldly to meet the result
as it has been met. To have turned deaf ear
to the application Of Texas for family alliance
with us, would have been most clearly wrong in
violation of the principle that requires us to " do
good unto all" If Mexico has had the foolhardi-
ness to thrust herself, ,cithom cause, into posi-
ton from which she cannot safely recede, with
out decation of war that furnishes not the least
shadow OF objection to the course adopted by ouy
own country. Because others may, by possibili
ty, set themselves to doing evil deeds in ccnse.
quence Of acts of goodness and Of right performed
by us, is that any objection to our doing good p
Because band Of desperate robbers may attack
the object Of bounty, does this furnish any
objection to our doing deeds Of charity, to our be-
slowing Of our abundance upon the needy appli
cant2 Because there may be those who would
take exception to it, and possibly bring upon US
the evils Of war, are we, therefore, absoIved from
all obligation to protect others and ourselves?
1t is cowardiy doctrine to avoid all response
bilty, and suffer thousands to be murdered, lest
by giving aid to those that ask, and have right
to expect, and to whom have right to grant
it, we might, by possibility, be involved in a wal
that may cost blood and treasure ." Let Justice
be done though the heavens fall say we and
we despise any who would not do his utmost
to secure it. But it is said, "the civilized world
France and England, disapprove our course
They will not sanction ito What then II is
for their interest to prevent it, but are we, there.
fore listen to their diciation in defence Of what
we know to be rght7 They have no right To
complain, no pretenos for Interference They