The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1848-03-19


on to the very last against the great war measure recon-
mended by the Executive plainly and solely for the pur
pose OF securing from the hazards of Mexican bad faith
the PEACE which part has just been concluded
upon the basis agreed by the Mexican commissioners
And IN tins last stage of their opposition 10 the Ten Reg
ment Bill, be it remembered the wings of the Senate
have not even ventured 10 bring forward of the
miserable pretexts upon which their opposition 10
the war OF their country has hitherto sought to Justify
itself Their last opposition has BEEN beyond all doubt
and almost without any concealmcnt, an opposition to
the securing OF peace stipulated for in the treaty
which not few OF themselves have Just voted TO ratfy
When we entered the Senate chamber, Mr. Webster
choosing TO postpone to another day his objections to
the bill against which he was to record his vote
was nveghng, in strong terms against the policy of the
Executive in evying military contributions in the ports
of Mexico held in armed possession. He wholly
denied the right of the Executive do this has been
done, by the military collection of taxes upon imports
the ground that to levy and collect by military
authority, by military agency, and for military purposes
rs an act Of legislation within the power of Congress-
and not within the power of the Executive in the per-
Torrance OF It's constitutional duty Of executing the War
Law OF the 18th of May, 1916 In taking this position
Mr. Webster distinctly admitted the right of our COM
handing officer In Mexico to seize the property of Mexi-
co. both public and private for the support of our army
He also fully admitted the right of the same officer to
substitute for such arbitrary seizure regulated system OF
military contributions; but, in reply TO pointed question
from Mr. Foote to whether it was the duty of our
generals and OF the President, during the war; to leave
the Mexican and system in the Mexican
ports held by us just they found them he replied,
that all that matter must be settled by la of Congress
ertended those ports. We would ask Mr. Webster
by what right, pending the war; and the temporary occu-
patton of Vera Cruz by forces can Congress egsla,e
for the port of Vera Cruz, and put tariff and custom
house there' Is Vera Cruz, in such CASE part of the ter
rtory of the United States Nobody preends -and the
whgs with all their clamor about military annexation
least of all In virtue of what authority alone can our
government go there Plainly by virtue of our military
rights alone-tha is in the execution OF our ,car a,c
and in the exercise of the power which Congress,
awoke when it passed the war law. Now, whose
duty is it, by the constitution, execute that war law
to WELD that power, when thus called into action
by Congress against the public enemy Is this the duty
of the national Executive, being the constitutional CON-
manderin-chie of the army and navy or is the duty
OF the national legislaure7 The execution of the war
law aganstexico involves the levying of military con-
tribuons upon her property Is the war law to be ex
ecued to that effect by Congress. by the President
the commander-in chief But Mr. Webster says tina,
the collection of tax levied and collected by military
authority upon the imports into the ports of Mexico is
not military contribution. Why not, |, it NOT
regulated seizure Of Mexican public revenues for
military purposes, and by military force If this
be not a military contribution in money, what is
a military contribution General Scott has is.uea
order Selling upon of the internal excise rev.
nues of Mexco-"parish revenues" Mr. Webster calls
them Mr.. Webster objects 10 what he calls the paltr;
and meanness of such seizure and that point we
leave him-being the wrong, think he s-to SET
tie with General Scott But he does not if we under
stand him. contest the legality under the laws OF war; Of
such seizure for the support Of army in the field
Then why not seize the customs revenue in the port of
Vera Cruz, by the authority, as like military con-
ribuon for like military purposes And if the customs
is thus to be seized by military authority,
has not that authority plainly right TO determine 1chat
per cenage upon the mposs it will and exact
And this is precisely what has been done Mr. Webster
complains that violation OF the constitution and then
says that Congress, in order to the constitution
should go out in its civil legislative capacity beyond
the precincts of the United States and lay taxes by law
on the people of foreign country We should be glad
the writ of f. ia. under which marshal or depu
y marshal of any district circuit court of the United
States could safely proceed TO collect taxes so imposed
at Vera Cruz, pending temporary occupation by law
of Congress There is but one law of Congress which
can righuly Carry the power of government into
the city of Vera Cruz-and that law is the War
Law The only power carried there by that law
is military power and that power so carried there,
must, under the constitution of the United States be
welded by the President not welded at all Ii is that
power, so welded, which, in the absence of legislation
by Congress, exacts and rghtfuy and regulates
military contributions, whether of excise taxes or i'm
post taxes.
We must reserve some further notice of this interest
ing debate, and of other positions taken in the course of
il by wing senators, for another article.
Meantime may take occasion 10 say, that upon no
previous occasion do remember the triumph of the
good to have been signal than it shown
to be during this debate, the prompt and powerful
replies from the democratic side of the chamber to the
succession of wing attacks upon the administration and
its war policy We hope to lay the debate before our
readers at an early day
AS Col Sewer has been for several days Frustrated
with sickness and will not probably be able to leave
W,ebpoton Mexjco for some DAVIS to come. the