The Arkansas banner., 1845-02-05
ACQUISITION OF TERRITORY.

place, and from that consideration, and the addition al one of personal respect for its author we give 1t the further attention of few comments.
 The strongest point made by "Civis," and upon which he mainly rests his case is the assumed right of begerent nations to acquire territory by "con- quest" For the sake,of the argument, admitting the truth of this as general rule, it is very far from following that the same right belongs to the United States Indeed if the history of our country, in re- ference either to the adoption of our peculiar sys- tem of government to its principles and practice or to the motives and purposes of it's iramers teaches any one thing more clearly and emphatically than another, its that no o6esipe war, and least of all war for the acquisition Of territory was eyer for moment contemplated or designed. Defensive war, alone was intended to limit he power of our gov ernment to declare war at all. Even if other evi- dence were wanting, the Farewell Address" of WAsHINGToN affords enough to shew that peace is the settled policy and detensive war, alone, the hard necessity, of our government. We are not aware that any statesman, from the beginning of our tiona existence to the present moment has ever, in speech or writing asserted the contrary of tbis-if we may except "Ciyis ;'' and we greatly sur prised at it in who, like him, pfofesses to be well read in the history of our government. But he will not only find himself unsustained by history The spirit and wishes of our people, of the present day. are insuperable barriers to the declaration or maintenance of war; by our government, for any other purpose than necessary SeL-defence The eX- pectation, of the framers of our Constitution that Caaada would, at some future day, become portion
 4l. surely never based upon any supposed right or in tention of ours, to acquire her by of conquest Nor does it help his al all. that he retention of the conquered country may be as imperative as was the cause that justified the declaration of the war" Necessary self-delence being the only cause for which the United States may declare war, If the invasion and conquest of portion of the enemy's country become necessary 10 make good that de- fence, the invasion and conquest must be attempted ; and, ifsuceessfu, retention of the conquered eoun try would be justified upon the same ground, but up otter. It is necessity alone, then, even by the showing of .Gvis" himself, that would justify either the declaration of war; or the invasion con- quest, retention of foreign territory. This is all we contend for Precisely what s.Civis" means by the terms-she tyrant's plea-necessitg," we are at loss to determine. Why or how necessity is more the plea of "the tyrant than of any else, do not know. But that all, governments as well as in- dividuals have, al times, to bow to necessity, and obey its behess is most certain. Asregards its va lidity the piea and the only safe plea in usca- ton of Mir. Jeferson's purchase of Louisiana, we will only remark that, repugnant itmay be to the feelings of "Civs," 1t was relied by Mir. Jelier son himself. Ever foremost of those who maintain ed that our general government existed only by specific grant of powers, MT. Jefferson would have been the last to say that to acquire territory either by conquest or purchase, constitutional power; for no such power is specified in the Constitution The necessity of the case, alone, justified it. The acquisition of Louisiana was necessary 10 our de- fence, and 10 secure our safe existence as nation Under law, then paramount, alike, 10 information al law, and to our Constitution-the law of selede- fence and preservation, we acquired it by pur- chase; and under the same law, we would have been justified in acquiring it by conquest.
 "Civis' seems good deel perplexed and confused' in mind, by that portion of the Constitution Art 1, Sec. 5 Clause 2,) which provides that the Congress shall have power to make all needlul rules and rcgu- ations respecting 'he territory or other property belonging to the United States" A more thorough reading of the instrument would have relieved him. By reference to Art. l, Sec s, clause r. he would have found that this power related directly to the contemplated "ten miles square, for seat of gov ernmcnt and to .'places for "the erection of forts dock-yards, &c''
 In the beginning of his communications aCiyis" brides himself 'upon the tenacity with which he has held to what he deemed the approved and ortho dox tenets of Democracy" And, yet, towards the conclusion, he claims power for the general govern ment in certain cases. because ere Is no article in the Consultation prohibiting it's erercise We know nothing of the "tenacity" with which "Civis" ad- heres to his opinioas-.-nor what he deems the ap proved and orthodox tenets of Democracy" But do knom that this is not the mode in which Demo- crats, of the teersonian school, interpret the Con shtution. We do know that our party has ever held tai least since l79Sl that our government is one of limited powers, derived from express and afgaatire grants, specified in the Constitution. To contend that Congress may do whatever is not prohibited by the Constitution, is, indeed, going stones throw beyond the mostextravaganty latitudinous consruc-
  bier in the Gazette, of last summer, took the same ground. We looked upon it so utterly absurd, as to require no notice; nor should we notice such doctrine, now, if it were not in our own columns It may not be FederaIsm-it may not be Whiggery; indeed, we do not know what sort of doctrine 10 call it. But we do know that it IS not Democracy.
 We have said nothing with the view of preiudicing "Cvis" in the minds of our readers. hut merely to indicate wherein he has failed to disprove our posi- tions and equally failed to prove himself safe teach CT of Democracy We hope all our readers will give him perusal.
 WHis AssTHNeTIe.--We clip the following from an exchange paper. It is one of the best speci- mems of Whig Arithmetic we have ever seen We have been trying long while, to figure out the pro. biem-how Banks, and their excessive issues of paper promises, were to make the people rich This makes the matter so plain that ..he who runs may read"-and understand if he can: