Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1847-08-07

however, done at the same peril as Woalons OF the
law at any other time if the revived laws do not
find the necessity to have been such as really put
an end to all law, the acts may be punished; and
So indeed, may such acts be if they plainly exceeded
that necessity.
Now, these same principles modified only by
different circumstances, apply to the armed force
abroad and its leader Victor or vanquished, con-
queror captive, the Leader Of that force has no
rights there he has only force. Where he lies
encamped, or ranks his men for fight, or marches
them the law of the country mot its tiae has, for
the time, ceased, because its possession has ceased
but the adverse possession is that of arms only, and
carries no right no jurisdiction, but only-lke the
state of siege at home-temporary force; and such
momentary power to use ones own will alone, and
the having used it, no creates for the occupant
nation any real sovereignty there than does Com
mander's having set up martial law in besieged
town or invaded country give him property in or
dominion over it. To cure his acts there, or give
him the right to continue them, Law must come to
lend sanction and Treaty must have done the
same thing between nations, in order that the do
main Of the one, wrested from it by force, may pass
W VIC OlIlcTs IOI hdloH llSlt W Wlldt w do ilo
own and has only been taken from it by arms, is
precisely like an individuals title to his property
which you got from him by the strong hand in
either case, the consent of the true owner is
sary in order to make valid your possession; or he
must have failed SO long to take steps for the reco
very of what you hold that the failure is to be con-
sidered consent or, lastly, you may get bloody
title, by destroying after you have robbed and thus
leaving no owner-naton's consent to be gotten, by
leaving no owner-nation to give it.
Let US here add that these principles are in no
sort varied by the fact that you aege yourself in
jured, or that you have been really injured, to the
extent of your having good cause of war; For, let
my neighbor have done me no matter what wrongs
say that he steals my corn or horses, or that he
beats and plumbers my people they pass, or that
he shoots at myself even-stll, though have every
right to redress or damages, his land does not be-
come mine, if can go and beat him off it. A ma
ton and man may help themselves to damages ;
but the property seized is not theirs, until the
consents. Now, nations consent by treaty or aban-
comments and individuals consent through the law,
which acts for Them
Thus, plainly stated, every man can see how
little we have yet, acquired any right of soil
dominion in Mexico; that our laws have no juris-
diction there, because our authorities have no sove-
reignty, no right of eminent doman-no right to
prescribe laws there; that, in the mere possession
without title which we hold there by arms, we are
necessarily limited TO the governing by force, not
law From this source, this tenure, this condition
of our dominion there, must flow the manner Of
the rule its character, and its whole extent. This,
again, can be made too clear for doubt.
We are in possession by arms. So is the COM
mandant of one of our besieged towns, who puts
an end to all law there, by setting up martial law,
his own will, and constituting his view of each ne
cessity the sole CODE This is banishing all right,
not acquiring any. Mere possession is not right,
but is force, the opposite Of right Possession can,
therefore, make no law; for law only arise out
of right. Naked possession is not conquest: for
conquest is possession which has, by consent by
It's equivalent, (abandonment) passed into legal
right. And this confounding present possession
with conquest is another of the great fallacies TO
which the Executive arguers resort. But suppose
they were right! Then any thing would follow
but what they infer. For if, instantly upon our
taking town, the rights of legal conquest arose,
and it became part of the territory of the United
States, then all the constitutional rights of Me peo-
pie of the United States would accrue as instantly
TO the inhabitants. But it is clear that they can
not; because, in addition TO the reasons already men,
toned, the inhabitants would still be bound BY
their original allegiance, and could not be Justly
punished for aiding the enemy. Neither Vera
Cruz, then, nor Monterey, nor New Mexico, nor
California are yet our conquests and, if they were
what then! Would that make Mr.. Polk their
conqueror How? He is nothing but either the
legal Executive or the legal Soldier; and in neither
case can he make or give them laws. The moment
that right acquired it enures where the right to
make laws for Louisiana, for Florida, for Texas
for Oregon did, as soon as each of these became a
part of our territory. And until the exclusive law
making power of Congress had reached those coun-
tries, who can imagine that our marching an army
to Pensacola or sending expedition to California
could create any legal rights for over the soil or
the people!
The government organ now plainly admits that
the President has no legal, but only military, au-
thority in Mexico. But of course, as it would be