The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-06-18

the world. We have other enemies, and powerful
/ enemies too, beside the Mexicans-enernies who
will gladly seize everything that to put us
IN the wrong. We must not furnish them with ar
gumenIs against us--argumenLs that would derive
their chief weight from being first uttered by US.
Above ALL must we not dishearten our own people,
and eXalt the spirits Of our foes. We must encour-
age, not discourage, enlistments must increase,
| not repTess, the ardor of our countrymen. Did we
even know with certainty that our government is 10
blame, this would yet be our duty. How much
more strongly is it our duty when we cannot say
that our government Is in the wrong We have re-
ceised numberess injuries from Mexico. For a
long series of years has she plundered and impris-
oned our citizens. Year after year has she refused
TO reimburse them what she admitted herself TO
owe. Again and again has she violated her treaty
engagements with US; all intercourse between the
two nations has been broken off by her; she has
Withdrawn her minister from our country, and ex-
PEELED our ministers from hers she has persisted In
her claim TO Texas after IL had been nearly ten
years Independent OF her power; she has thus per-
sisted out Of hostility 10 u.s. for she offered to
knowledge the independence OF that country IL IL
would eject annexation to the United States. We
have offered her peace, and, in return, she has
threatened TO invade our territory. We have alb
stained from declaring war against her, as we might
Justly have done. 20 the recomPense for our for
bearance has oSen t4 murder Of our people. The
hrst blood that was shed was the blood Of an Amer
lean eiuzeni the hand that shed il the hand Of
Mexican soldier. With these facts before US, shall
we prenaturely pronounce judment ON ourselves
Can we truly say IN the face ofthese facts, that our
government has done wrong' How could Il have
acted otherwise than II has, If II meant TO per-
form Its duty Of UNFOLDING the rights and main
tanning the honor Of the nation Will there
be found any among seeking 10 make
little paltry, party capital, by throwing the
blame OF the upon the President Will the
scenes Of 1912, and 1913, and 1914 be revived, and
..afNa h. IL. -. i'd
denn an administration in the midst Of war, on
the charge that on 1t, and not on the enemy rests
the responsibility Of producing the war We
hope not We believe not. We trust that
the lessons Of experience have not been taught
in vain. We see that Congress has acted,
so far, promptly; and rejoice to see IT,
We hear that It has acted with almost unanmity;
and we are gratifed TO hear il. Some few, It ap.
pears, voted as il their country was in the wrong
We are glad TO learn their number so small We
trust that representative of ours was among
them. Ohio unanimous in the late war;
would be grieved and ashamed were she divided in
this. One Of our representatives is now on the
floor addressing the House Of which he is member
The bill under discussion is to provide army sup
plies. The subject debated relates, therefore, 10 the
war. Doubtless the voice Of our representative is
heard on the side Of his country, Doubtless he
is exertng his talents and his eloquence (and he is
eloquent and talened) 10 give strength, not only
physical but moral TO his government in the strife
Doubtless his arguments will convince many one
Of the justice of our cause; his cheering words Of
patriotic encouragement, induce many one TO
volunteer in our defence. We are glad, heartily
glad, that he is speaking for and his country to-
day.
Such, Mr.. Chairman, believe would have been
the language Of the people of Ohio, in the case |
have supposed. But, alas, sir, they would have
been sadly, sadly mistaken. Could the voice Of
their representative have reached their homes-in-
stead of hearing him vndicate his country from the
charge of being the aggressor in the conflict, they
would have heard him loudly accuse its President
Of having wantonly and wiokedly produced the
war; instead of hearing him speak Of it as contest
in defence Of rights, they would have heard him
denounce il as a war OF aggrandizement and plum
der part; instead Of hearing him treat it as
struggle forced upon against will, they would
have heard him declare 1t war unconstiutonally
made by our Chief Magistrate; instead Of hearing
him maintain that justice is upon the side of his
own nation, they woold have heard him affirm and
repeat that she is prosecuting "unrighteous,
holy and damnable war;" instead Of hearing him
utter words Of encouragement TO the volunteer, they
would have heard him describe the scene of action
as a vast charnel-house Of health instead of hearing
him anticipate triumphant results, they would have
heard him dwell the cost of the war, the destruc
ton of commerce, and the yet more deplorable de-
struction of life True, they would have heard him
loudly declare that he would support his country
right wrong; but coming the declaration did, in
the midst Of assaults upon his own government
| arguments against his countrys claims, and fore
bodings Of the gloomest, saddest kind, they
would have stood amazed at such asupport.
Mr.. Chairman, did SINGER ely hope, when | saw
the declaration of the existence of war adopted by
of TIA to IA in this House, and 40 to in the
Senate that should be spared recurrence of the
dsgraceful scenes of the late war; did hope that
the "peace party" men Of that day would have no
| imitators now These hopes did most truly enter
D.. -. H.. \ hal,a -
luctant as | to admit the fact, passing events
compel me to fear that my hopes were premature,
were probably vain. fear that the same denunci-
atoms hurled against the war of 1872 are to be reit-
Grated against the present war; that the same vitu-
| peraton that then assaied Mr.. Madison is now to
| fall on Mr.. Polk. Between the language of the
!'peace party of that period, and that of the anti
war party Of the present day, there is wonderful
similarity. 1t is hardly too much to say that they
are almost identical. recurrence to the old fcder-
al speeches and journals will show the Justice of this
remark. Let us make brief comparison. ltsha
| be brief one. What are the charges brought by
my colleague against the present war, and the pres.
ent administrations Substantially, l understand
them to be as follows:
l. That the war is, on the part of our govern
ment, a dishonest war. ,
Now, what did the peace party of the late wa,
say of ii An extract from the Boston "Gazette'
Of 1914, leading federal paper published at Bos-
ton, Massachusetts,, may serve to show. The ex
tract is as follows;
at very grateful TO find that the universal sentiment is
that any who loans money to the government ut tn,
present time will forfeit all claim to honesty
common courtesy among all true friends of the country
God forbid that any fedelst should hold up his head
nay fedeasts for money lent to the present rulers;
cderass Judge whether democrats will tax their
| stituents to pay interest to federasts '"
So the peace party of the late war affirmed, j
would SEEM that u man who should then loan mon
ey to the government would 'Jorts all claim 10
mon honesty''--the so dishonest!
My colleague would not go thus far, know. HI
is willing as understand him, to vote for supplies
He would loan his money, dare say, to the gov
ernmcnt. He is doubtless friend to the union o
the States In these things he differs from the fed
eralists Of old. But thenceforh there is striking
analogy between them. The charges they maxi
have marvellous resemblance. The epithets they
use are almost always the same. The tendcncie'
of their acts differ only in degree Both tend tt
weaken their government-bolh tend to destroy II
moral force--both tend to subject it to disgrace
both tend 10 put their country in the wrong-ootl
tend to bring upon it the condemnation of the worl,
both tend to parolyze its enorts-both tend to in
snirp the foe,