Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1847-08-28
THE WAR WITH MEXICO,

with Mexico is " uncaileo Tor, impoliuc, and UNI
just" Mr. BRowNsoN is known o WELD power
full pen he has been Tor many years considered as
no mean champion of Democracy, in support of
which he obtained considerable celebrity while edi-
tor of the Democratic Review He is still the
political friend Of the President and an adherent of
the party by whom he was elected. 1t was there
fore certainly not to be expected that such man,
in such position, would undertake to demosh
every argument advanced by Mr.. Polk and his
friends in support OF the present war, as Mr. Brown
son has DONE He has thus voluntarily rendered
service to truth, for which the democrat" will
never forgive him. But we will allow him to speak
for HIMSELF
"For ourselves have regarded the Mexican war from
the first uncaed for mpoitc, and unjust We have ex
amned the documents published by oder of the Government
have read the official defence of the war in the last annual
message of the President Congress- and with every dispo-
son to find Government the right but we are
bound to that original impressions have been strength
ened rather than weakened The President undoubtedly
makes It clear that we had many just of complaint
against Mexico which, at the time Of their occurrence might
have justified rePsa perhaps war; but he plead
these in justification Of the present they not the
ground on which we protested to engage it. The official
OF the President to Congress that al
ready existed between the two Republics by the act of Meal
co herself and, whatever may make of old grievances
IN adjusting the terms OF peace make use of them
in defending the We plead in its defence only the
TACT on which we grounded -namey exists by the act
OF Mexico herself But unhapp at the time of the official
announcement did not ec between the two Republics
ALL for neither Republic had declared against the other
there had been collision of their forces but this war;
the President would probably have conceded had he known
recolected the distinction between and hosties By
placing the the ground that existed by the act Of
Mexico and that ground being false he has left wholly in
defensibe whatever old grievances may have to aege
against Mexico.
"The act of Mexico in crossing the Rio Crande and en-
The MI nd
still claimed hers, but which asserted had by a recent
act against which she had protested become ourshe act
which the President chose to inform Congress ard the world
warmay may have been Just cause for eclar-
ing war against her, but assuredy not itself We
have no intention to justify Mexico. She may have been de-
cdedy in the wrong she may have had valid title to the
territory of which the President had just taken military occu-
patton that territory may have been rightfuy ours and it
may even have been the duty of the President occupy and
defend but canno be denied that had once
1t that was still part of of her States Provinces
that she still claimed it, and had continued exercise uris
dchon over till driven from it by army Of occupation
that she invaded with armed force if invasion be
Called not territory belonging u.s. but territory belong
ing to hers and that she attacked troops for the rea-
son that they ours but for the reason she held and
she had as good right to be judge in her
had IN that they ntrude espassers on her SOIL
he motive OF the act not against the United States
but the expulsion of ntruders from her territory
No sophistry can make her act certainly with
out concedng that act in taking military possession that
II.
existed at ALL existed by and by hers for her
act was consequent upon The most that the President
was at liberty TO say, without condemnng his Govern
ment that there had been collision Of the forces of the
two Republics territory claimed by each but this col
on he had no right to term for every body knows that
it takes something than collision of their respective
forces on disputed territory to constitute between two
civilized nations In no possible point of view the
nouncemen of the President that existed between the
Republics, and existed by the act of Mexico correct 1t did
not exist at all or if it did, existed not by act of Mexico
but by our act In either the official
false, and cannot be defended.
1.-The President may have been governed by patriotic
lives he have felt that prompt and energetic action was
required he may have believed that in great emergencies
the chief magistrate of powerful Republic having to deal
with weak and dsgrace State should rise superior 10 mere
technical forms, and the nceties of truth and honor but
strikes us that he would have done better proved himself
patriotic and sufficiently prompt and energetic
ne had confined himself to the ordinary rules Of morality and
the well defined principles of international law By aspiring
rise above these and to appear original he has placed his
country in false position and debarred himself whatever the
Just causes OF war Mexico may have given us from pleading
one OF them IN justification of the actual We be
permitted to regret that he did reflect beforehand that
be placed the defence of the war on the ground that il al
ready existed and existed by the of Mexico herself and
on that ground demanded of Congress the of
ing IT. he would in that ground proved to be
oe las ne must have known it would have nothing whatever
alege In Its or his justification He should have been
enough to have known that he could not plead anew
our pleadngs to plead what and in doing SO in
he present the President has only offended morality
which he may regard small NATTER but has COM
nied blunder
"The course the President should have pursued is
plain and obvious On learning the Of things on the
ronue the critical condition Of army Of occupation, he
should have demanded Of Congress the renfocements and
supplies necessary to relieve it. and the purpose for
which was avowedly the Rio Grande and if he
believed proper necessary, have, in addition laid be-
lore Congress full and truthful of our relations
with Mexico, including all the unadused complaints past
and present. had against her. accompanied by the recon-
nendation OF a declaration Of He would then have
Kept within the limits of his duty, proved himself plain
'uutiona President, and left the responsibility Of no
war to Congress, the only war-makng power known
avs Congress, after mature deberaion, might might
not have declared wa-most likely would not the RESPONSE
oly would have rested with it. and blame would have
ached TO the President.
Unhapply this course did not TO the President
was too plain and simple meet his appreciation As if
earsn Congress delbeated might refuse to declare war,
md as If determined to have any rate he presented
Congress- not the true ISSUE whether should should
not be declared but the false whether Congress would
grant him the means of prosecuting waged against
" foreign Power In the ISSUE Congress might have
1estaed in the one actually presented there
lestae the official announcement Of the President to
credited, and hesitation would have been criminal BY de-
arng that the war already existed and by the act of Mexico
lersel the President relieved Congress of the responsibility
" the war; by throwing all Mexico But since he
not fasten 1t on Mexco-for did not already exist if
70 by act, and not hert necessarily recols upon him
e and he must bear the responsibility Of doing what the
constitution fobids him to do Of making war without the in
ervention of Congress In effect therefore, he has tramped