Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1847-10-19

RICH MOND, VA.
Monday Morning, October Is, ls47.
THE ORIGIN OF THE WAR.

We believe that il is now generally admitted
that the war il which We are engaged with Mex
leo grew out oil the annexation oil Texas 10 The
United States. We have commended iron the be-
ginning that il Texas was in fact a sovereign and
independent nation, Mexico had no right 10 OBJ
ject 10 its annexation 10 cur coniedcIacy; and
when she took such 4 course, she became Iespnn
sible for the consequences which nigh, result
lhereirom. Tie whole history Of The subject
shows concllsiyely That she bases The business cl
her cause entirely on her claim 10 Texas, and The
wrong done her by The United States, in despoil-
ing her OF a portion OF her territory. The limits
OF that territory she has never, until he recent
negotiations, condescended 10. mention, that we
know OF. The country between the Nuccss and
The Rio Grande WAS moi distinguished from The
rest Of Texas. For Mexico claimed, and sill
does claim, lie whole q wha; is now a Stale Of
the Union. In The negotiations with Mr.. Trist,
The Mexican commissioners in fact were willing
TO 81 Texas TO lie u. States, on The payment Of
an adequate price. The very frs! article OF The
Instructions under which they ac,ed mean nothing
but thai; Tor il expressly says thai The independence
ofTexas VI i'll be acknowledged on the raymcn! OF
a suitable indemnify; and il is no forced interpIeia-
ton OF that article TO say, that the Mexican Gov
ernmen. still prefers a claim TO all The country te-
yond the Sabine as we'll as that beyond The Nue.
ccs-a claim which il is no, willing 10 relinquish
with oul a price. lflhis be so, it seems a useless
task Tor the Wings 10 go in search OF motives for
The war Tie origin OF The war stands Out plain
and dislinci. Mexico claims a Stale Of This
Union as her own property. That Stale, when
il was admitted into the Union, WAS at war with
Mexico. On The validity OF that claim Mexico
j~uslifes her course; and that war she has always
commended was transferred 10 the United States
BY The mere sct Of annexation. She has been
entirely consistent in This. We 10 no; know
that she has ever complained Of he march Of
Gen. Taylor from Corpus Christ 10 Fort Brown.
She has disregarded that maiur entirely, and
based her action on The question Of annexation.
Although Mexico has, By pliin implication,
admitted that the cause Of the United States is
right and just, il The measure of annexation was
right and jusl, her allies in ne United States
have gone farther. They do not dare 10 take
tue SiUulNu WHICH NhIAiNo ldlts my ~ HI
dare 10 come forward and say hat Texas should
be surrendered 10 The enemy, or that we are 10
pay a price for a sovereign State of the coniede-
racy. They must take other gound, and endca-
vor TO assign Ease motives Tor hosiililieS. They
have cavilled al The mamma in which The war
was commenced, as il that wasa matter in which
Mexico had any concern; aud have gone so Tar
as 10 Justify The cause oi The putlic enemy, upon
The frivolous prelexi, that The President, and mol
Congress, had commenced hosrlilies. Admit,
for the sake of argument, that The fact is so, and
we ask in all sincerity, how does that affect The
justice or the injustice 81 he waT7 Has Mexico
any Thing to 10 with The distribution OF powers
~ o".s-e-v "-a 'he Excculiye2 Has
Mexico any concris il, he provisions of onr
Constitution? and does tho
mend urun apy Thing bu, The cause oil Inc wal!
We think iho answer 10 ihcsc questions Is, 10 use
an elegant expression Of Mr.. Wcbs'cr's, as pain
as a turnpike: and, being thus plain, il, treaty. az
pears 10 us, that lhey vino base their Hostility 10
The war, on The manner in which il was declared,
and allow themselves 10 denounce Inc war as unjust
for that reason, are not actualed by HE proper
feelings. We are confirmed in this belief when
L
we see who they arc that oppose the war. Nearly
all. il not all Of lhcu, are those who opposed The
annexation Of Texas those who commended that
we had no right 10 annex Texas, and those who
opposed The further spread OF slavery. These
are they who oppose the war; and we believe
that they oppose ii because oil their hostility TO
The "Texas bomb" That, we believe, is The True
reason that we see so many who side with the
enemy. They bring forward other matters in
justification of their conduct-butw cannot help
believing hat lhey are mere p%rclcxls; for, almost
with one voice, they said in 1874 that The annex
alton of Texas would be the annexation Of the
war in which Texas was then engaged; and now
they say that tie President, and mol annexation,
made the war. This strikes us As being pre.emi-
nently absurd-and we are panied To see that ma
ny side with The public enemy, ard have no bet
Ter justification for their conduct. The Wings
of The North come on, plainly in the matter
They say lha,their opposition TO slavery IS aI'he
bottom of lhcit opposition TO The war. The Nor
thern Wings rule The Wing camp, for they have
The strength 10 rule il. The Southern Wings
have lc follow them, making such excuses Tor
their conduct as they can. Those excuses have in
times pas, been singular enough. When The an
~nexalion and Tariff questions were before The
people, they were cminenrly So; but now they are
more 50, and no courteous term can convey our
idea of them.