Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1847-04-15
sold FEDERALISM" & "MoD-
ERIN DEMOCRACY"
SPEECH OF HON. e. D. CULVER OF ".
ON THE MEXICAN WAR.
Delivered m the House of Representatives. Of III
u s., January 20, 1S47,

The House, 10 Committee Of the Whole, hav-
ing under consideration the Naval appropriation
| biil-Mr. CULVER said:
Two rules, Mr.. Chairman, are said TO OBTAIN
for the regulation CT our conduct toward our rel.
low-men: one il denominatod the Golden rule"
teaching us to do to others as we would hare
! them DO to us the other is called the "Sttuer
rule" practically teaching us to do to others as
they do to us.
In the few remarks propose to submit on the
| Presidents war; to aid which this bill is 10 be
passed, and in reply to the arguments of his de-
tenders on this floor, | have concluded to adopt
the Silver rule. 1 have long since become con-
vinced, that in warning with savages, their wea
pons, the Ratchet, the tomahawk, and the scalp
! ing knife were most effective. Heavy artillery
and well planted batteries cannot always be used
to advantage in disiodging an enemy, which dodg-
es behind Trees or shoots from thickets. The
course of the gentlemen over the way, in defen-
ding their President on this MEXICAN WAR, is
one peculiar to men struggling in bad cause
Scarcely can any two of them be found resting
their defence on the same grounds and most for
tunato has any one of them been, if he could
complete his own speech without having one part
of it clash with the other. Like the man running
the mll-pond, he leaves no bridge behind him on
which another may venture, but instead of it, an
hundred logs, floating and tipping, happy that he
had saved himself in his race. have been not
a little amused at one argument resorted to bv
the friends of Mr.. Polk. 1t is the Simmum drgu-
menttn, the suuebutter, the dead shot, that kills
when all others fail and that is, the charge of
"OLD FEDERALIsTs," OppoSerS Of The ao1r Of
1872" Enemies of The country" ".Anti.,car,"
" Peace Party mea" These changes have been
rung with great ippancy by the Executive and
his trained yelpers, from the highest to the low
est With these stale epithets, they have sought
to brand all those who question the necessity, or
challenge the justice, of this war.
Now, SIR, as | am one of the "immortal H."
who washed my hands in the outset, of all parti-
cipation in this war--one of that small, but con-
sistent few who fear not to be catechised here
or elsewhere for this course-one too of that
number, which have suddenly obtained a COM
paralive popularity for their admitted consisten-
cy, shall take the liberty to examine somewhat
in detail these charges and epithets ] am dis
posed to hold up the mirror of Cid Federalism"
TO some of the gentlemen over the way, that they
may see their own, and the faces of their fathers
and grandfathers. But before doing that, let me
devote moment to Analysing the charge, that
opposition TO this war is identical with opposition
to the last war. Whence the origin of such
sentiment? Here the two wars identical in their
nature, causes, and objects? Nay, is there one
trait of resemblance between them? The war
of 1879 was meritorious in itself. There existed
deep seated, long-standing causes of complaint
An ancient, naughty, and powerful foe impressed
our seamen, restricted our rights on the ocean,
and inflicted wrongs without number upon our
country. To redress those wrongs, to vindicate
those rights, to chastse that enemy, we waged
the war. That war became popular. Oppos-
ton to it; in the end, was unpopular. Hence,
demagogues have taken advantage Of its popu-
iarity; and for the last twenty-five years, in all
the marks and issues that have distinguished par
ties, these demagogues have sought to identify
themselves with the friends, and their opponents
with the enemies, OF that war; Their argument
amounts to this: the war of 1879 was just war,
therefore, all wars are just that was popular,
therefore every war will be POPULAR opposition
to that war turned out to be popular, therefore
opposition TO this war will be unpopular This
sir, is strange logic; strange conclusions from
such premises. There is scarcely an element oil
similarity in the two wars. This was aggression
in its origin, has conquest for its object, and ter
ritorial ACKNOWLEDGMENT for its end. The erro
of the gentlemen lies in not taking into account
the different circumstances attending the two ca
ses. You might as well aver that calomel cured
one man. therefore it will cure every man, nc
matter what the type, the malgnity, OF the stage
of the disease. But the gentlemen's argumen
proves too much. From their premises can draw
, very different, but much more truthful conclu
sions. The Florida war was unpopular, there
: fore this war will be unpopular; the lnsllgator
and abettors Of that war were frowned down b.
; the people, therefore the instigators Of this wa
+ will be put down. Is not the argument, Mr.. Chair
man, as conclusive in the latter as in the forme
case? Yes, sir, and far more SO for between
: the Florida and the Mexican war there are stri
king points of affinity. The one was waged TO
the determination of poor remnant OF Seminol
Indians, who refused to surrender their homes
and put themselves into the power OF their enc
nv; the other is waged against poor, distract
ed. and factlon.torn republic, because she refus
ed to allow us to seize and despoil her of thir
of her realm And while on this topic of wal
J. popularity let me ask the friends of the Execr
n i've what laurels did you ever know won by III
q heroes of this Florida war? Who chants tn
@ praises of the blood-hounds' associates, tht
; traversed those swamps, and captured a fe
n squa,cs? What friends urge their claims ft
G political promotion, because of their valorot
h deeds in that war? None, sir Their names ar
! their deeds, sleep in unruffied repose. And
IL warn gentlem en- over the way, as with the voic
i of a prophet, t,at like infamous notariety wi
Y hang around those who have plunged us into tn
unnecessary and wantonly waged war.
But, sir, let me add word farther IN relate
to the war of 1912. Popular as that war prove
to be, and lust as it was in itself, yet it drew n
70 1.-THE part of its popularity from It's own intri
- sic merits Nine-tenths of its popularity was
u the relation this war bore to the war of the Re
g olution. 1t was rel alive popularity. In the W
of 1872 had France, Instead of Great Britain, (
the same cause, on the same provocatlon, be-
our pitted antagonist, not one half the zeal a
enthusiasm could have been aroused among I
ID people; not one tenth of the glory and popula
of ty would have gathered ABOUT the war and
" supporters No, sir, it was the enemy we we
" fighting, that gave point and relish to the col
he bat We were cancelling an old grudge, payil
off an old debt chastlsing an old enemy, and I
reckoning was sweet This, sir, was what ma
The war Of 1912 popular, and was the cause
the ultimate discontinue of the party which G
at hbited an organized opposition.
But let Inc go one step further. Let me a
, you, Mr.. Chairman, what was there in the war
he the revolution SO marked, so peculiar, 30 dist
IT. gushing that rendered it popular with all ella
90 SEES? What element, what ingredient was the
in it. by which it could transfer its popular
over to war thirty years after?
All, sir, we had in thet war what we fall sh
er- IN this-we had RIGHT and JUSTICE and Cop
Iii our side. We could lay our hand upon our hea
ell and look up to Heaven asking the aid of the G
81 of battles. 1t was the deep seated, the well i
Vi pressed completion of the JUSTICE OF OUR eau.
an that made the conflict popular, rousing the ent
Iif masses, dltfusng patriotism though all the ave
>, ues of society, waking the pulpit, unlocking
10 press, inspiring the social and the frc-sce c
= ~ -