Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1846-10-23

wholly aggressive on the part Of the United
>ta'es-"a war OF conquest, Of plumber and
rapine, marked by rufianism. rerfdy, and
every other feature OF national deprivation,
and wsged solely fer The detestable and hor-
nd purpose Of extending American Slavery
throughout the vast territory of Mexico -
and that all who in any way countenance or
uphold it are murderers Of no ordinary guilt
-"covered with the crime Of plumber and
the shedding of torrents of innocent blood"
This war upon Mexico, then, was regarded
by the meeting referred to, as base and brutal
on the part of this country. Gen. Taylor
and the U. S. Army had gone into Mexico,
planted themselves on the banks of the Rio
Grande with their cannons pointed at NLata-
moros, the willing tools of a %piratical Cow
ernment, Of which they themselves are part,
to carry on a war of plumber and rapine.-
Could the Western A. s. Society do other
than look upon them as a band of marauders,
engaged in a work which must brand the
American arms and name with eternal dis
grace and infamyl Could they do less than
condemn, in the strongest terms, all who give
them any countenance or support in such a
c%ontestl You will | believe agree that they
could not.
Is it then to be wondered at that d ~resolu-
ton was adopted censuring your course 3
You had, it is true, before the time of the an
nual meeting, written articles in which you
denounced the Matchmaking it as agrees
slve and infamous on the part of the United
States. 1t seemed, however, that your course
had been misunderstood, or misrepresented.
Hence you published "a word of o~xplana-
tion," in which you used the following Ian
guage;
ave have had all confidence from the
first In the ability of General Taylor to save
himself from defeat. He is on the spoil
lie knows his antagonists and their strength,
and what force is required 10 make his army
perfectly secure. This force he demanded
IRON Louisiana and Texas.
elf we thought him in danger, and that
volunteers from this section were needed to
save him, we should certainly postpone the
articles we are now writing. Heaven forbid
that word or act of ours shonld have the re-
molost tendency to leopard the safety Of that
noble officer and his brave army"
The above was read twice in the meeting
before the adoption of the resolution Of cen.
sure; and this, together with one or two shor-
ter articles, also publicly read, was consider
ed by the Society as sufficient to Justify the
course pursued.
The language Of the latter part Of the res
%olution, may, perhaps, be too strong. | am
not willing to assert, or believe, that your
conduct i" Identifies you with the originators''
of the war, if the language be intended to
mean that you are as vile and morally degra-
ded as they have shown themselves 10 be;
but | must say that | regard your course as
being a violation of moral principle of no
small magnitude, and one which should be
promptly and decisively condemned by the
friends of freedom and humanity.
Your word of explanation" conveys-as
clearly as language can well do so-the inn
preston, that if it were not for your conf
dence in General Taylor's ability to save
himself from defeat, you would favor the
sending of volunteers TO his relief. Defeat
to General Taylor, would bu success to the
Mexlcans, the party which you have all along
commended is in the right. Mexico then, as
you admit, is fighting for her territory and
her rights. Our country, the aggressor in
the warfare, is fighting for plumber and sla-
very. Truth and the right are attempting TO
bear up against outrage and tyranny, yet you
tell US that if you thought justice would tri-
umph IN the contest, you would postp one ex-
posing and unmasking the outrage until it
was fully secured against defeat! This, it
seems to me, is the meaning OF your word of
explanation.
You say ii is false that you advocated The
protection and defense Of General Taylor in
a marauding expedition, believing at that
thee that he was on Texan territory. Before
g that time" however, yod declared the war
to be strictly aggressive, and represented this
country as being UNANIMOUSLY in the wrong.-
If, therefore, you did not consider the war a
niarauding expedition in the strict sense of
the term, you, at any rate, looked upon it as
nothing Jeher. As TO your supposition that
General Taylor and his army are ignorant of
the merits of The controversy, | know not up
on what. il is based. The General has been too
long engaged in fighting the battles of Sla-
very not TO know what he is about; and his
g brave army" the intelligent portion of
them, are not, imagine, such fools as you
take them for.
You deny, also, that you ~eulogized the
General and army highly, For their success
ful slaughter of the Mexicans. Will you
please inform your readers what kind of Ian
guage it takes to amount to the "highest eu-
if that you have used does mott AL
so on what grounds YOU spoke Of Gen. Tay.