The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1847-10-26

n.
bound, the sforum of conscience" to support the
war; according TO MIR. Websters own admission
The charge that the President sought 20 bring Oh
the war unfounded and malicious.
In this article propose to consider two points OF
inquiry, not perhaps logically connected, but both
relating 10 the Mexican The first is, that according
to Mr. Websier's views of the constitutional duty OF
''every man," the federalists, instead OF ualtorousy
opposing the war; they have done, and are still doing
are bound support it, and 10 aid the government IN
carrying it on to successful termination The second
is that the President before the commenced,
nesty sought TO avoid it; and, after it commenced,
has, TO the present time, made every proper effort to
bring it to an honorable and satisfactory conclusion by
negotiation.
Mr. Webster admits that Congress make war. lie
says expressly (and his phraseoogy would seem to
INDEPENDENTLY the ''gea expounder' of the
stution0 hat there no man ignorant of the fact that
the constitution of the United States confers Congress
the power of making war" is then, the settled
sructon of the constitution that it confers upon Con
gress the power of "makng war" And it of course
follows, necessary deduction from the proposition
which Mr.. Webster states, that any war made by the
Congress is constitutional war, which all bound
TO support
Now we will endeavor to show that the existing war
with Mexico is constitutional scar, according to The
premises of Mr.. Webster.
We have established the fact that the march of oul
troops to the Rio Grande within territory,
no cause of war; and therefore of the
war by the President
We have shown, by liberal quotations from MIR. Web
sters speech that one of his propositions is that the war
grcw out of the annexation Of Teas. Now, as Con-
gess passed the act of annexation before Mr. Polk
into power-which, according to Mr. Webster, was the
cause of the warhat body made the war, and the
President On that ground, then, is the ''constu
tional," according to the reasoning of the "great
FOUNDER"
But the fact is, as have fully shown, that Mexico
herself commenced the war; and Congress recognised it,
and voted men and money to carry it on which was
making it the part OF the United States. In this view
of the CASE it is constitutional" war; according to the
reasoning of the "great expounder."
Now, in our opinion, it makes difference to the
constitutionaliy of this after Congress had thus
recognised it and provided the means of waging it,
whether it had been formally declared by that body
before Mexico had fired hostile gun, or whether
the President had oversepped the limits of his au-
thority and commenced hoslties himself. If Con-
should not have recognised it. If it had not voted men
and money, the President could not have carried it
Hostes, part, must necessarily have been sus
pended But instead OF refusing 10 suspend hostlites,
admitting for the argument that the President had com
menced hem) Congress voted men and money not only
to defend soil from invasion, but to invade the
territory OF the enemy. So that. the assertion
true that the President unconstuionally commenced
the war, Congress thus adopted it, and made it lis
and therefore, according to the reasoning OF the great
expounder," it is constitutional
Now, what is the duty of every citizen of the United
States in respect constitutional war, according TO
the view OF Mr. Webster We will give it in his own
words He says:
There is ignorant of the fact that the consu-
of the United States coners Congress the pocsr Of
making and therefore there is ignorant
know that when that power has been exercised
cordng the forms of the constitutions the will of Con-
gress expressed is the taW Of the land aud is binding
upon every mans conscience, in my humble opinion"
Having proved, according to Mr.. Webster's own rea-
soning that the war is constitutional it is the duty OF
every federas wing G they prefer the latter
the former) to support the wartha is according to Mr.
Webster's humble opinion" the laws of Congress
relating to the binding every man who
has conscience. And the system of reason
ing, the asute oracle Of the constitution vheher
of the Dephc or Pheban ORDER we are not avsed must
come to the conclusion that all opposition to the war;
thus made by Congress, and thus binding every mans
conscience, is giving aid and comfort" to the enemy
and therefore is " moral treason"
If the world did not know that consistency was vir
tue which Mr. Webster had, durag his long political
fe secuted with and derson, it would after his
exposition of the constitutional duty of the citizens of the
United States in reference to the war, be struck with
wonder and amazement that he should be found first in
the ranks of its vrulent and according TO his ad
mssion) unconstitutional opposers. But, knowng him
yell, the aeorld expects nothing else of him.
NWe will now proceed upon the second point of inquiry
and show for the purpose of setting history right, that
the President from the beginning, constantly sought to
avoid the war, and therefore did plunge the country
into the war, daily alleged by his INSCRIPTIONS ca
lumniators; and that since the war has commenced he
has made every reasonable effort to terminate it by a
treaty of peace honorable to both countries And in sup
port OF this proposition, shall rely mainly upon docu
mentary testimony which cannot be disputed We frs,
refer to the Presidents declarations In his ssage
of December s, 1915, after giving condensed history
the relations then existing with Mexico and his efforts
to renew diplomatic intercourse and preserve peace he
says
"With sincere desire preserve peace and restore
caiped all ceremony to the of reneoing diploma