The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1848-02-19
Speech Of Reverdy johnson.

Senator in Congress, from Maryland,
delivered on the 10Th inst. [Jan.] be.
cause it expresses the views Of a man
who is governed by his convictions OF
truth, rather than the blind notions OF
the wing party. He speaks strongly
on the justice Of the present war.--N.
Y. Evening Post.
Now what are the clear and indispu.
bic facts? The United States had re.
ceived the republic of Texas into the
Union without antecedently defining
her boundaries,a and under aconstitution
which reiterated what had been, as far
back as 1886, a part Of her original
constitution cs an independent republic
that the Rio Grande, from It's source
10 its mouth, was her southwestern
boundary. The United States extend
ed all her laws over the State of Texas,
as so admitted. They had assumed ac-
tual jurisdiction at Corpus Christi
They knew that there were citizens be.
tween the Nueces and the Rio Grande
who claimed to be citizens of thu State
of Texas SO admitted. They knew that
for nine years the State Of Texas had
existed as an independent nation.
Who proposed Withdrawing Taylor
on the 18th Of May? Who denied then,
that we had good right to repel the
Mexicans and to invade, for the pur.
pose Of avenging the outrages, any
and every part Of Mexico? She had
refused TO negotiate; she had consider
ed annexation as war; she had termi-
mated all diplomatic relations; she had
refused to receive our Minister upon a
mere bubble of the then President, be-
cause he was afraid Of his own power,
threatened with downfall because it
was believed he was willing to negoti.
ate at all. She had mustered an army
on the Rio Grande with the declared
object of invading Texas and owe
ing the whole of her W sovereignty.
Her then Government owed its exist.
ence to this very determination. She
had never maintained any peculiar title
to what is no called disputed terrific.
ry.
What, in this state, were the United
States to do? Were they bound to re.
main still and wait the invasioh,or were
they not authorized to meet the threat
ened invasion, even upon the admitted
territory of the invader? Who doubts
that with nations as with individuals,
that the ri light Of self defence gives the
right to strike the first blow7 To pre-
vent an injury is easier than to repair
Sir, where is the writer on the laws
If nations, who holds a different opin.
on? There are some propositions so
,lain that they admit Of no illustration;
hey furnish their own best illustration,
Ind this is one of them. We had a
clear undeniable right to meet Mexico
It the very outermost limits of Texas
ind repel her there, or if we deemed it
advisable, an equally clear and undeni.
lble right to anticipate her by striking
he first blow on her W admitted ter
itory. Blu! it is said that the place Of
conflict was on Mexican territory. III
t was, the argument in our behalf
would not be in the least enfeebled.-
She was there to drive our army back
o the Sabine. She was there to re-.
conquer Texas, the whole and every
,art Of Texas, and not to retain a por-
ion only, upon the ground that such
was not Texas.
But even the fact is not as alledged.
Whether this portion Of the territory
vas or was not rightfully a part of Tex
s was, at least, a matter OF dispute
Texas claimed it, and over a portion of
exercised jurisdiction. Citizens re-
iding on it, claimed to be citizens oil
hat government. Mexico had in vain
tempted to recover it. The consti.
ation Of Texas included it. The U.t
'tates had exercised, after the admis.
Of Texas into the Union,sovereign-
Y over part of 1.-THE highest act of
overeign:y, the taxing power. She
ad received Texas into the Union