The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-05-15

tracts read by Mr. THURMAN, IN relation 10 the leuer-
alism of the last war, as made to bear upon the
fourteen negative votes on the Mexican war bill.
Some of that immortal number, Mr. II. said,) had
fought the battles of their country during that war.
| He doubted whether the gentleman from Ohio
could say much for himself, or some of those
who voted for him But in relation to the old ted
erallsts, he Mr. II had nothing TO say. He was
a young man then. His views were all on the
other side, and he had for limited time been in the
service of his country.
| MI h. replied 10 the denunclatlOns of Mr..
DOUGLASS against those who dared to express
| their views on the course Of the administration.
| They would have effect upon him. He had in
dependence enough TO speak his views, and he de-
sired the respect of no man, either here or among
| his constituents, who would ask him TO come for
ward, like sycophant, to register the edlcts OF
| James X. Polk, because that high functonaTy, IN
direct violation of the principles of the government
and the provisions Of the constitution, had seen
| nj to involve the country in an unnecessary
war. So far supplies were concerned, he
(Mr. ii would vote for them il necessary. But he
denied that the bill passed the other day was TO res
| cue General Taylors army from immediate lmPend'
Ing peril And he referred 10 dates to the call upon
theexecuuyes Of Texas and louisiana, for volunteers
&c, TO show that troops for the relief Of the army
were about TO embark and that their fate, one way
| or the other, would have been sealed long before
| any supplies under the bill of Congress could
| reach them. Ii was not, therefore, TO supply the
army in It's exigency that that bill had been passed,
but TO put at the disposal of the President 1000
| men, and ten millions Of dollars to prosecute
| war and TO invade and chasuse Mexico.
| In conclusion, he advered to this war one of
the predicted fruits Of that of annexation,
| whose ayowed purpose, las expressed by Mr..
CALHOUN, Mr.. Upshur, and others,) was the extern
sion and perPetuatlOn Of slavery. Whilst he would
not interfere with that institution in the States never,
by any act vote of his should II be brought into
| being in State where 1t had not before existed.
| Mr.. 5. JONES said he regretted exceedingly that
they could not go into the consideration of render
| ing supplies to the army of the United States IN
| time OF war without the question Of slavery being
lugged into the discussion. And he must confess,
that 1t seemed to him from the last three or four
/ speeches they had heard, that It would be out Of
order TO discuss the question before the House IN
reality, and that they were necessarily compelled to
follow these gentlemen, to show the shifts, the sub
teruges the devices they have 10 TO for the
purpose of protecting themselves course which
they know to be contrary to their duty and the in
| terests of the country.
| On the question of slavery he should leave the
gentleman he should not expect TO convert him, nor
that the gentleman would convert others.
The question Of the annexation Of Texas was not
before the House. 1t had been annexed. 1t was
an integral part Of the Union; it stands as much
under the protection Of the flag Of the United States
| as Massachusetts herself-the "Old Bay State D."
Would to God that her remembered the spirit
OF their fathers, and the lesson dictated from their
example IN time Of trouble and danger, to stand by
the flag Of their country, and die in its defence II
need be
With the question OF slavery he would not inter-
fere. he would only say that It was an institu.
ton put upon them, and for the mere purpose of
gain, by the ancestors of those who were now inter-
fering with it, and in defiance Of the feelings wishes
and interests Of the southern States And he would
say further that the black slaves of the South would
compare In all respects-were IA we'll fed and well
clothed-as the white slaves of the North and that
there were no paupers among them. While this
continued to be the case, let them confne their
efforts of change at home, and when thew had
there satisfied every object of charity they would
then receive them missionaries at the South
But the immediate question under consideration
| was the question of supplies of the army of the
United States in time Of war; and the gentleman
from Kentucky Mr.. G. DAVIS said there was no
war, and almost in the next breath he says there is
war
! Mr.. G. DAVIS was understood to say that he
said no such thing.
Mr.. JONES was happy to be corrected He un-
derstood the gentleman from Kentucky then, TO be-
lIeve, with him, that there is a And how did
he ascertain that fact If he understood rightly,
for he was not here in the debate on MondayD the
gentleman said there was no war.
Mr.. DAVIS (Mr J again yledlng) said he had
declared, as distinctly language could make it,
| that there was informal The distinction he
Mr.. JONES did not understand what the gentle
man meant by "nformal" war. He understood
the gentleman to object to the preamble of the bill
that had passed into law, on the ground that it de-
clared there was war
| Mr.. DAVIS. No. The gentleman misrepresents
me- ] voted against the preamble because it de-
clares that begun by Mexico
| Mr.. JONES (resumlng) was perfectly satisfied to
| receive the gentleman's explanation. He under
stood the gentleman to-day to say it was the United
States that had commenced the war, by sending our
army to the Rio Grande, by invading the terrific
ny beyond the Nueces. Was he right or wrong
| now
Mr.. DAVIS. Right.
| MIR. JONES further commented upon the incon-
| sIsency of the genteman's position TODAY and on
| the former day, and on the inconsistency between
| Mr. ID. and Mr. HUDsoN who had said that he
! Mr.. DAVIS
| But 1t was conended by both these gentlemen
that we do not possess this country-that the terri
tory between the Nueces and the Rio Grande
is not an integral part of Texas 1t is
true that there a member in the legislature
OF Texas from that part Of the country. 1t was
true, 1t forms part ola congressional district the
representative from which is already elected and
soon to take his seat in this hall But what of that
was true, that when Texas separated herself from
Mexlco and declared herselfin independent she claim
ed to the Rio Grande. But what of that; II u,,s
true, that by her constitution and her laws sbe ev
ercsed jurisdiction to the Rio Grande. But what
of that II might be true, that the venerable gen.
teman from Massachusetts, [Mr. ADAMS when
connected with another department of the govern
ment commended that the province of Texas extend
ed to the Rio Grande. 1t true that Mr. Madi-
son contended for it, and that Mr. Monroe contend
ed tor It, But what of that? Ii was true that Tex
az was received as an integral part of this Unoa
when she claimed to the Rio Grande But what of
that That Congress had extended our iurisdc-
ton to the Rio Grande, and that it had made port
o, entry WITHIN mat territory But what of that }
We have men, laws jurisdiction, and possession
there, and all that will not constitute, in the opinion
OF some gentlemen, title to that country
tie had heard of speech delivered in the other
end OF the Capitol. He told that it was not in
order to mention names If it was he would say it
was by Mr.. Johnson, of Maryand-a speech
which made his heart thrill with Joy when he said
II was part OF the United States recognised as
such; and that we are bound to defend it, And he
would to God that those of the same party with the
gentleman would echo that sentiment