The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1847-06-24
CITY OF WASHINGTON.
THURSDAY NIGHT, JUNE "a, Is47.
The March the Rio Grande.Cscncr~l Taylor's sug-
gestion and approval of. Il.

of citations from documents designed apparently TO attack
General Taylor, by showing
FIRST That he suggested the march OF army TO the
Rio Grande, iren there tras no necessity for such oUe
men and nearly three months before the order for the
advance was issued AT Washington.
Secondly. That General Taylor vacillaed in his
opinions the subject and declined act upon his
counses, Though fully authorized by his instructions to
do so0 until he received positive orders move forward
from the War Department under date OF the 18th of Jan
uary, 1916.
And, thirdly That General Taylors advice, that the
army should take position the banks of the Rio
erande, though given under his signature on the
lth OF October, 1915 by relieves the admins
ration from the ta responsibility directing that move
ment 10 be made when it was made
Such, as we understand it, the whole p,rport of the
ntelgencers elaborate article. As to the last of the
abovenamed points, only word is necessary The adj
minstration by relies upon General Taylors
advice (wel Judged that advice was, though posi-
bly, little premature when gven) TO shield it from the
responsibility of the movement of our troops to the Rio
Grande. On the contrary, the administration distinctly
claims the responsibility of that movement when ii was
made as the most judicous action which could have
been taken by government in the premses-action
not only in harmony with the views of General TAYLOR
but also approved by all those best informed of the neces
sites OF the case, and willing to protect country Tin
Guiding the State of Texas) against further Mexican
perfdy and outrage
The question of responsibility being thus disposed of,
let us see before taking up the two other points of the
ntelgencers article, how far that journal has seen fit to
go in its attack upon Gen. Taylor for suggesting and ad
vising the march 10 the Rio Grande In this view we
extract and commend to the careful attention of our read
ers, the following passages from the Inelgencers
tce
NECESSITY MOVEMENT, mil briefly recar to the
under chich Gen. Taylor time suggested
IT. without admitting however, that if military
paciy that officer had made it the subject of earnest
the Executive would that account be
absolved from any part its civil responsibility to obtain
boundary by negotiaton intended by Congress in
passing the law for the annexation of Texas"
Here told in terms, first, that the movement OF
our troops was suggested by General Taylor when
"ere necessity RITZ and Also that suggested
by him. the movement directly repugnant to the
duty, and to the weknown and perseverng purpose OF
our government to obtain boundary by negotiation"
This is the heaviest charge which we have yet
brought in any quarter against Gen. Taylors judgment
and course in this matter.
But the 'lnte,igencer is not done with the General
yet In another place the article describes, fol-
lows the consequences of the movement which General
Taylor had thus suggested and advised
"WAR QUICKLY ENsUED AS A MATTER OF COURSE and no
who reads the documents relating the subject be
loss Even the Secretary OF War, in his
annual report which laid before Congress the open
ing its last session, explains to have been prcpated
and brought on BY THE MARCH TO THE RIO GRANDE Near
the beginning of that report upon announcing the change
of position of our army from Corpus Christi the Secretary
says;
"'Notwiihstan ding the object the movement of our
troops made known, and all intention OF doing
than peaceaby occupy the territory of Texas dsa
vowed after the arrival oil the army the Rio Grande
hostile feeling began TO be manifested by the Mexican
forces stationed on the opposite bank of that river and on
the oath of April the Mexican general (Arsa) Informed
Sen Taylor that he considered hosties commenced and
should prosecute them"
We beg readers to contrast here the language of
the Secretary of War with the language Of the "Inelli-
yencer" The Secretary simply states the fact that the
hosfle feeling OF the Mexican forces began to show
itself soon as the approach of troops gave them
opportunity to show what their feelings towards us
were. The "lntellgencer" the contrary, AYERS,
in TERMS that the movement suggested and advised by
General Taylor was 'he cause" of the war, which it
preciPated and broaghto on matter Of course" Much
has been said about the unfrendlness of the admnstr
ion TO General Taylor Here is the language of the ad
and of the "ntegencer" in relation to the
Generals side by side. His friends easily de-
ermine which is the more mf,iendy
But there is yet. The "lntcligencerv goes on
describe, follows, the alleged racation of General
Taylor in his own counsels, coupling it with strange
ling at the small 'infuence" which his advice is al
legged to have had with the administration during the fall
1915, just after he Chen only Brevet Brgadier Gene
all had been appointed to important and respon-
ible command. Here are the words of the In,egen.
er's article on these points
"Do they suppose that the counsel of Gea Tayor in ti,
possessed such rcsght ,c the Executive as to hare in
iuenced The Increment hich suggests do thcy not KNOW
he contrary! and do not sue of them have seen the
printed documents also know that Gen Taylor being fully
authorized do declined pursue his onn counsel as
cited in defence of the President short time after
cas giren?"
For ourselves we answer, we "knon" nothing of any
UGH want of ''iafusnee" with the administration of
ieneral Taylors aivice, given the 18th of October
SIS. On the contrary, we know that advice to have
zen deemed worthy OF all respect and consideration
hough, in view Of facts known at Washington, and
robably not known General TAYLOR it was not acted
pon by the War Department until three months after
Yards AS to the alleged standardization in ade-
lining TO pursue his COUNSEL" which the "In,el-
'aylor, "kow, and will soon prove, that his par.
al change, rather suspension, of his opinion as to
he advance Of the army, (as indicated in his letter of
November 18th, cited by the "Integencer") was based
non neU information lust then received which ,f ~