The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1847-07-08


We cheerfuly give up considerable space IN our col
umns to the following extract of strong and well-writ
ten article on this subject, which find in the Journal
of Commerce of the Sd instant the signature OF Mr.
Haock one Of the editors of that paper The article is
written in reply TO two publications in relation to the
war, which appeared in the columns of the same journal
some days since, the signature OF Mr. Hae the Sc
Nor Of its editorial firm. Considered reply to these
articles, Mr. Hallocks publication must appear to every
impartial mind entirely triumphant and conclusive Start
ing upon the principle that in itself is great evil
and that general rule. il is justhable only when
is detenstue Mr. Haock proceeds to prove, by clear
and condensed review of well known facts that war
against Mexico is emneny entitled to claim that char
acer The fact that have prosecuted into the very
heart of Mexico, with the purpose of securing just
peace speedily possible, constitutes in his view no
objection 10 such conclusion. On this point, he OBJ
serves very Justly:
"A war originally defensive often in the sequel becomes
offensive, and is in reference to slch cases
especially exception to the general rule
asserting the OF offensive war suppose
nation invaded, without shadow OF provocatlo, by
hostile armyking burning and destroying as they adj
vance; suppose The invaded people al length fa' @
they stop that ne and lose the advantage gained or
make the victory complete Mus, they always have the
war AT their doors or may they II hey cam transfer II 10
they have TO believe that to halt at the frontier
would only aggressions, under circumstances
less favorable 10 the defenders"
Mr. Hallock next proceeds to assert, and to prove
from the official records, that Mexico denounced and
made war against us, avowedy in consequence of the
annexation of Texas In support of this position, he
fers to the well known fact, that while the question OF
annexation pending in Congress, General Almonte
the Mexican minister the United States, announced
Al.
be considered equivalent to declaration of war; and
that three days after the passage of the joint resolution
in Congress, he demanded his passports At the same
tme and for the cause, the Mexican government
refused all further diplomatic intercourse with Mr. Shan
non; and thus diplomatic relations between the two
countries were broken off avowedy in consequence OF
the passage of the joint resolution Mr. Haock contin
ues his argument on this point as follows
''This resolution passed the la day, last but
one, OF the administration of President Tyler Since that
time, says President Polk in his message OF December 3D.
of the year, Mexico has until recently occupied
attitude of hostility towards the United Staesas been
na the IN a un M ne
States either by an open declarato or by invading Tex
the preparation occasionedby the OF the
American government for adjustment of all differences
by of special envoy. 1t was, however ofvery
short continuance scarcely had the special envoy Mf
SdeD arrived in The Mexican territory, when he discover
ed that change had the spirit of the Mexican
government and that his mission would failure The
TACT is that Gen. Paredes, who had for lime been
medatng revolution against the OF Herrera,
got wind OF the and was making the most OF 1t for
hesitate and raise objections, till at length the 2st De-
cember 1885, he through his minister formally refused TO
the strength which the latter had been out But
wa: 100 late the o %acry Of parsss had secured hs t
redes succeeded TO the presidency,
"In manifesto issued by the latter just before his
Congress- he would either retire private life
the privilege of marching the frontier
dependence and prosperity This about the I'd
January, lsi6eeven weeks before the American army
Paredes's Minister OF War; (senor Almone.) in
cepng office, declared that he moved do SO by his
desire cooperate in carrying out the oer NOW happily
reesiablished' for preparing The Texas campaign
an insulting Mr.. Sdel, dated March I2h, 1876,
"A fact such this 1.-THE annexation OF Iexas Or
speak with greater exacess notable asurp
alton created an mperous necessity that Mexico, her
honor. should repe with proper rnness and digni-
The supreme government had before declared tina,
would look upon such act beHi and,
sequence of this declaration negotiation was by its very
Gin manifesto dated April 23d, 1886 Paredes himsell
vtaes that the revolution (n Decsmbcr) which elevated
were waiting with impaience 10 rush forward to dnothef
,rar TO which they called by the scandaious agges
sions Of government calling itself friend, but al the
same time aiming TO prostate us And again. he De
Summation offences, if the relations between the two
republics had suffered any disturbance by the definite
Lei il be borne in mind that Paredes's revolution com
menced and finished two or three months before the
American troops LETT corpus ohrst
In thus bringing forward the annexation OF Texas as
l,le prominent cause of the war; from which, according
}fo the whole tenor of subsequent Mexican declarations
the war directly resulted Mr. Hallock avails himself OF
IN unanswerabe argument ad homnem against the
ces Of his partner, to which he is making reply for
II is well known that, with the full concurrence of Mr.
Hale the Journal OF Commerce took very active part
lin the advocacy of that Mr.. Hallock omits
however las being necessary to the immediate pur-
pose of his artcle state that the opposition of Mex
CO. BY force of arms, the annexation of Texas was in
Itself most n,oerable act of aggression upon the we'll
Established independence and sovereignty, both of Texas
land of the United States. This the part OF
Mexico was in fact, nothing less than direct attack
upon the right of selfgovernment in two Independent
nations Not only had the independence of Texas been
established for nine years, and consolidated by the organ
zaton and action of Independent government during
THAT whole period, and recognised by all the leading
powers of the world but before the act of annexation
was consummated, Mexico herself had consented TO
kaoiedge the independence Of Terds, upon the sole con-
diton that Texas would stpulae not 10 herself TO
the United States According all the principles OF the laws
OF nations, tins acknowledgment Of Texan independence
by Mexico in fact complete and efecual, because
the sole condition which Mexico sought TO attach to heI
acknowledgment palpaby inconsistent with the ae-
knowledgment itself and was all Intents and