Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1846-06-25

Extracts from the Speech of Mr. CHARLES Hun
son, of Mass, on the subject of the war with Mex.
leo.
Mr. Chairman, was one Of the fourteen who vo.
ted against the passage Of the war bill. / voted
against II for various reasons; and, among others,
for this believe the preamble and its repetition
IN the hrst section of the bill, to be untrue The
preamble is as follows "Whereas by the act of
the Republic of Mexico, state of war exists be-
tween that government and the United States"
Now sir, regard this preamble utterly false
-ialse as whole, and false in each of its rectals
1t is not true that war existed before the passage
of that act. There had been a collision between
our troops and those of Mexico but collision of
forces in singh instance, and particular point
does not amount to war in the legal aud constitu-
tlonal sense of that term. By the Constitution of
this country and of Mexico, the power to declare
war is vested in Congress, and in the President
or the commanding general. We have no authori-
ty for saying that the Mexican Government had de.
clared war, and we know that our Congress had
given no authority to the President TO march his
troops upon disputed territory in possession of the
Mexicans. There is also a manifest distinction be-
tween hostihties and ,oar. When war is proclaim
ed by the constituted authority, the whole nation
and the world are bound TO take cognizance Of it,
and to govern themselves according 10 the rules o.
may be outbreaks collisions at particular point.
hostllltes within limited sphere, and even letters
OF marqne and reprisal may be granted TO one or
more injured subjects under certain circumstances
and with suitable limitations, without being in
state of war, in the legal of that term When
war exists, neutral nations bound TO take notice
OF II but the same is not true in every OF hos
tility. We have several examples in our own his
tory which will illustrate this distinction The al.
tar Nhn xA.Ir. IL.
before the late with England, was an act of
hostility, but neither nation regarded it as war
The same is true of the destruction of the Caroline
on the Canadian frontier. The capture of Monte
rey, Mexican town upon the Pacific, by Commo.
dore Jones, in 1913, is another in point Each
of these shows that there may be acts Of hos
tility between the forces of two powers and vet the
relations OF peace may be preserved The declar-
alton, therefore, that war existed is not sustained
by facts. We had no evidence of its existence at
that time the contrary all the evidence we had
before US went to sustain the opposite conclusion
could not therefore, subscribe to the declaration
that war already exsted'
The preamble states not only that war exists, but
that ii crisis by the act of the Republic of MeTicO
This declaration | believe to be untrue. Mexico,
with all her faults has not in this case, been the
aggressor, The statement which ascribed the war
to the acts of Mexico is clearly and concIusyely
1
back to the commencement of the Revolution in
Texas, and show that the Government of the United
States have not maintained apolicy strictly neutral
as they were bound TO do But in the act Of an
nexa,on, we not only violated our own organic law,
but violated our faith pledged TO Mexico by solemn
treaty. But sir, will not rely upon that act, I'M
just as believe that to have been. | will take the
case as it stood after the joint resolution was pass
ed /; aud believe that our conduct towards Mexico
is entirely indefensible Texas was annexed TO the
United States, and on the supposon that that act
was valid, what did it include! What did we an
nexl The old province of Texas was bounded on
the southwest by the Nueces, which does not ap-
proach within one hundred and fifty miles of the
position occupied by General Taylor The Texas
which has been annexed to the United States was
the old province Of Texas the Texas which form
ed one Of the States or departments of Mexico the
Texas which rebelled against the parent govern
ment, and set up government for herself in
word, the Texas which bounded by the river
Nueces 1t is true that the Texan Congress in
1886 passed declaring that their republic was
bounded westerly by the Rio Grande, But what
title had she to the territory lying west of her org
nal limllsl She could have none but that Of con-
quest. And did she ever carry her conquest up TO
the Rio Grandel Nothing like il every attempt
she made proved a signal failure. The population
upon the Rio Grande never rebelled against Next
co, were never conquered by Texas, or submitted
10 Texan law or authority. Texas made several at
tempts to plant her standard upon the banks ofihat
river but in every attempt her forces were either
then, can we maintain that the wilderness or desert
country between the Nueces and Rio Grande ever
belonged to Texasl A large strip Of country on
the left or eastern bank Of the Rio Grande has
been in possession of Mexico and we have acknowl-
edged that possession both before and after annexa-
ton. At the last session Of Congress, act was
passed allowing drawback upon foreign merchan-
disc imported into this country, and exported to
Canada and Mexico and among the places men,
toned in Mexico was Santa Fe. And during this
session Mr. Secretary Walker, in his report on the
finances says "The act Of March Sd, 1916, allow
ing drawback on foreign imports, exported from
certain Of our ports to Canada, and also to Santa
Fe and chihuahua, in Mexico has gone TO some
extent into effect, and is beginning 10 produce the
most happy results"
Here, sir, we have the most positive recognition
on the part of our Government that Santa Fe be.
longs TO Mexico, and is included within her lawful
territory. But every one knows that Santa Fe is
on the east side of the Rio Grande, How hen can
it be pretended for a single moment, that the whole
country, or that any part Of the country bordering
upon that river belongs 10 Texas, and hence is
part Of the United Stalesl There is no authority
at all for that plea not particle of proof that
the Rio Grande is our true boundary, except the act
OF the Texan Congress, and that We have confessed
to be invalid by admitting Santa Fc, town on the
east side OF that river, to be part Of the Mexican
territory. At that place we have consul; there
we have been paying duties on merchandise; and
'sinee the delivery of the Speech have received the
Manifesto of Paroles, dated "Natona Palace of Mexico
April 49, s46 only day before the collision the Rio
Grande in which he says most emphuticay ~ soiemnly
flg