Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1849-01-19
From the Washington Union, 4ih inst.
THE PRESIDENTS MESSAGE-MILITA

/
From the Washington Union, 4lh inst
THE PRESIDENTS MESSAGE-MILlTA-
;RY CONTRIBUTIONS IN MEXICO.
The previous communications to Congress
On this subject by the President have left, as
We think, no cause ard little excuse for the
further call for information contained in Mr..
Bol;ss recent resolution, 10 which the lucid
and conclusive paper published this morning
insanother column Is the Presidents reply
But il must certainly be admitted that this pre-.
sent showing of the matter by the wings has
had At least one beneficial result, in that it has
given tbs President an opportunity finally and
conclusively to settle before the country this
whole question of the military contributions
levied and disbursed in Mexico for the sup
port OF the war. We apprehend that, after
the publication of this message, few politi-
Clans OF character and standing will be found
reckless enough 10 make an issue with the ad-
mlnlstratlon upon the doctrines of consttu-
tional and international law which it sets
forth. Its statements of fact, and its course of
argument, leave nothing TO be desired for a
thorough understanding of the subject by the
Presidents vindicaton of the wisdom, the le-
gality, and the high expediency of the policy
and plan of military contributions which the
administration most successfully adopted. In
a word, the message, besides settling the ques-
ton put in issue by Mr. Bolts resolution, full
ly Eustalns the unsurpassed reputation which
the President has won by the whole series of
his previous official communications to Con-
gress
The Presidents demonstration of the right
fulness and legality of the military contribu
tons, as levied and disbursed by his orders in
the ports of Mexico, for the support of the
war during its continuance, rests, as we un.
derstand it from rapid perusal of the mes
sage, mainly upon the following propositions
all of which, as we think, are indisputabIe
1st. That, by the constitution, the President
is made commander in-chief of the army and
navy, and enjoned ''to take care that the laws
be faithfully executed; p
I'd. That Congress having. by the act of
May 13, 1S45, declared war against Mexico,
the faithful execution of that law required the
President. in the language of the law itself,
" to prosecute it to a speedy and successful
termination -
Sd. That Congress having forborne to pres
cribe the special acts of war by which the
war was TO be so prosecuted, it became the
Presidents duty to conduct the war according
to the laws of nations and to select from the
various modes OF conducting the war, which
that code sanctions, those which, with the
best means placed at his disposal, were DEEM
ed best fitted to accomplish its "speedy and
successful termination - and
4th. That among these modes of conducting
the war and weakening the enemy's power
and resources, the levying and disbursing of
military contributions for the support of the
war in his ports or his territory, is not only
fully settled and well recognised by the law
of nations, and by the usages of the civilized
world, but oftentimes. in the case of a foreign
war, becomes an indispensable element in the
military policy of an invading army.
We do not see which of these propositions
can be. gainsaid and if they be admitted, there
is surely an end to the question of the legality
OF the military contributions in question. But
it has been maintained that the collections of
taxes on imports in the ports OF Mexico, by
our military authority, and for the support of
the war, were not military contributions. But
what is a military contribution if it be not the
seizure, by military power, for military pur-
poses. of the enemy's public revenue in its
sources Is it the less a military contribution
because the seizure is made in pursuance of a
military rule prescribing beforehand the cir
cumstances and the amount or proportion of
the seizure! On the contrary, this regala-
ton OF the transaction by the military author
ity charged with the conduct of the war; is of
the very essence of the military contribution
as distinguished from arbitrary and ndiscrimi-
nate plumber.
It has been said that special statute of
Congress was needed to authorize expressly
such leyying and disbursing of military con-
trbutions. Why more needed 10 authorize
this than any other act of war sanctioned by
the laws of nations-say, for instance, block
ade Congress passed no special statute d.
recting in terms the blockade of Vera Cruz, or
any other Mexican port Why, then, does
not MIR. Botts's resolution ask by what au-
thority the blockade was ordered, and put on
or taken Off Again, is the idea to be coun-
fenanced for moment. thatan invading army
entering the enemy's country in lawful war
and finding military stores, or munitions. OF
money or substance, of the enemy's govern.
menf, which it can seize and appropriate to its
own support or defence, must fold its hands
before them and wait for Congress to pass e
special statute before they can be touched
But we have already pursued the subiec
farther than we intended or deem necessary
and we close our remarks by again referring
our readers TO the luminous and conclusive
language of the message. Nothing can b.
added to the force and completeness Of its de-
monstration.