Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1845-02-01

by Spain as independent as they are now, on the
ground that It would be breach of neutrality on
our part, such as would involve us in war with
Spain, and possibly with other Powers.
Our object is not here TO revive the question as
to the merits Of that Mission, but only to show upon
what grounds it was opposed by statesmen whose
arguments are entitled to great weight with many
Of those gentleman who will now hardly suffer even
the plainest provisions Of the fundamental law OF
our own country to stand in the way Of a war with
Mexico for the purpose of I" annexing" Texas.
The debate in thsSenate upon this question grew
out Of Report Of the Committee on Foreign Re-
lations against theexpediency Of sending Ministers
to represent the United States at the Congress Of
American Nation, proposed to be held at Panama,
and is reported a large in Vol. II. of the Register
Of Debates. each Senator having prepared his own
speech, delivered in conclave, for publication.
The Report lin the same volume) of the Com
mittee on Foreign Relations, from the pen of Mr..
TAzEwELL, much commended by those of his own
party, is apaper drawn up with the ability which
might be expected from that gentleman, and is of
grave and statesmanlike character.
In that report, as well as in all the speeches on
the same side of the question, we find passages
well worthy of being recalled to the public atten-
ton at the present moment Of which, as apt to the
occasion, quote the following, stating, in concise
and distinct terms, Mr.. TAzEwELL's opinion Of the
true foreign policy and duty of the United States:
The first question which suggested itself to the
committee, at the very threshold OF their investi-
CATION, was, what cogent reasons now existed Tor
Z adopting this new and untried measure, SO much
in conflict with the whole course of policy uni
foraly and happily pursued by the United States
from almost the very creation of this Government
/. to the present hour By the principles OF this
policy, iecmcated By wisest statesmen IN for
/ merdays, and approved By the experience Of all
< subsequent time, the true interest of the United
States was supposed to be promoted by avoiding
all entangling connexions with any other nation
whatsoever. Steadily pursuing this course, while
they have been DESTROYS to manifest the most cor.
dial good will to all nations, and to maintain with
each relations of perfect amity, and Of commerce
regulated and adjusted by rules Of the most fair
equal, and just reciprocity, the United States hac,
hitherto sedulously abstained from associatins
4 themselves IN any other ,cay, eren ,oifh those ma
fions for ,chose acelfare The most Ereiy sensibi
Hty has been at all fines feh and otherwise
manifested.
The following passage Of the same report applies
with prodigous force to the whole scope and teno
of our late diplomatic intercourse with the authori
ties of Mexico, whom we have undertaken to in
sruct in matters which belong exclusively to thei
own discretion:
oThe United States have not certainly the right
and ought never to feel the inclination, TO dictat
I to others, who may differ with them upon thu
I subject; nor do the committee see the expedienc
| I of insulting. other States, With ,chom zoe a,
maintaining relations Of perfect anaity, BY a
cending the moral chair, and prociGiming fro,
thence mere abstract principles, the rectitude
\ which each nation enjoys the perfect right OF d
Gliding for ITSELF"
j And conclusvely, upon the principle, the RICH
and the duty of no,,-i,aeruention, Mr.. TAzEwEL
in this report, says:
In the opinion of this committee, there is n
i proposition concerning which the people of tn
I United States are now and ever have been NOR
unanimous than that achich denies, not merely N
cxpediency, but The righf, of i,atermeddling tcit
The Internal 'qfairs Of other States, and, csPe
ciay, Of seeking TO alter any provision they ma,
| have thought proper to adopt as Fundamental
law, or may have incorporated with their politica
| constitutions"
These passages from the report of the committee
sufficiently establish the doctrine maintained by Mr.
TAzEwELL, and the Senators his associates, of th,
duty of the United States to abstain from interior
ing under whatever pretence of sympathy, morality
expediency, &c. between nations engaged in wa
for civil ascendency
In the Debate upon this report we find the same
sentiment expressed on all hands, but especially BY
those who opposed the mission. We begin, out o
respect for the memory OF gallant gentleman now
no more, with the remarks of Mr.. HAYNE, who
considered the holding counsel with these young Re.
publics, not yet recognised as independent by Spain
to be palpable violation of our international OBJ.
legations:
If the character of the Congress is beligerent,'
said Mr. HAYNE, no neutral can lawfully be
there. Ii, for any purpose ohateuer, questions
connected with the further prosecution Of the wal
are to be there discussed and decided, our Minis
tiers cannot take their seats in the assembly Nth
out inUofriRg as By that Uery act IN the contest
strict and honorable neutrality must keep us out
Of any meeting not having peaceful objects eTciu
: sirely The law of nations, in this respect. cam
not differ from those rules Of municipal law, found
ed in The common sense of mankind. which in
volve in common guilt all who associate with
those engaged in any unlawful enterprise II is
not permitted to individuals nor IL be permit
ted TO nations, TO excuse themselves for acting
with those engaged in belligerent enterprises, by
: alleging that their own purposes are peaceful.
Sir hold that, if you 90 into council at all with
!. such Powers, you become aaswerabie for all their
: acts ar
War i'm the opinion OF Mr. HAyNr must have