The voice of freedom. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1839-1848, 1848-01-27
If this was right in our government, who can dc

If this was right in our government, who can dc
wrong by breaking promise?
The declaration also of our President, and reitera
ted by Congress, that, "the Mexicans began the
war" when they merely resisted the invasion of the
possessions would, if conceded, make every resist
ance a wrong.
War having thus been begun, and by the sole act
Of our President and Congress called upon for the
means Of perpetratirg carnage and destruction, we
find large portion of the whig members in Con
gress, after protesting against the war, being I'M
necessary, and unjust on part, voting all the
sinews Of war asked for; and then turn cody round
to the nation and declare, We are in no way re-
sponsible for the mischief The President and ad-
mnistration party are alone accountable. Though
we may vote men and money; enlist, kill and de-
stroy we are not responsible. We 60 for our coun-
try administration right wrong" If those that
thus voted are not responsible, can an accessory to
any deed be responsible?
know that Of old it is laid down as law, that
6 The king can do no wrongs" but it is altogether
new doctrine to me, that Congressman is notre
sponsible for the consequences of his votes. What
right; and wrong than to have ourrulcrs assert such
doctrines? Vote men and money to carry on an
unjust war; and not he responsible Volunteer to
kill and destroy and not be accountable.!
More than 10000 persons have already been kill
ed in this war, and many of our eminent wings, who
call the war unjust on our part, say, "The surest
way to bring about peace, is, to fight and kill with
all our might-right or wrong"
Oh cXpediency! how easy for thee to make the
blacklist deeds appear lovely in the eyes Of poti:
clans IT.!
even expect now that a majority of our wing
members in Congress will continue to vote nearly
all the supplies the President asks for respond
ing to the sentiment, "lor our country, even in do
ing wrong" and having begun war, to conquer at
all events though our own men be killed like dogs,
and rot like sheep fed lturei Is it possible that
genuine national honor requires perssting in wrong
doing?
The minority might with consistency have refused
to vote more supplies than were necessary to pro-
tect Iaylors return to the "ndisputcd part of the
Texan territory, and not blocked one wheel of gov
eminent. The administration party had the power
and should have had all the glory of prosecuting this
war, got up for the mere prize of a hornets nest
And now again | expect many of the minority in
Congress will cry out, fight fght!!
Did despot ever lead more willing people to
the slaughter than has our President? And when
were our perceptions of right and wrong ever so be-
clouded as by these acts and declarations of our
rulers?
Besides this fighting for prize corse than nothing
look upon the prosecution of the war as dabolcally
brutal.
1t is abomnable that mighty nation like ours
should send, in almost every instance numerically
inferior f5rcc against the enemy. The consequence
has been, what every person must know would hap
pen, we have courted carnage from CHOICE and
swan in blood as the consequence.
Here is a sin of neglect, which has probably made
the war doubly sanguinary.
Great Britain impressed our seamen for over 20
years. and plundered shipping for over six years
before we chose to fight her. We waited on her
over 10 years to settle the northeastern boundary
question, and over 20 years to settle the northwest
ern boundary question; and we waited on France
over 20 years before she made reparation for her
spoilatons and therefore it is but sheer humbug to
suppose that our national honor required that we
should force settlement of the boundary question
with Mexico within year from the time we pre-
tended to have 4 right to; and that, too, under an
express pledge from the Executive of this nation,
that we would leave the boundary question to am
icuble negotiation"
Nor in my opinion does duty honor, consistency
or expedency, require Of those who profess to be
opposed to the war, any farther support of it than
the lars Of the lind compel
CLARK RICH.
Shorcham, January II, 1913.