The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-07-31
ANTI-EXPANsION AND ANTI-WAR
PARTIES.

The present discussion regarding natiohdi
expansion is simply repetition of history.
In every instance Of the acquisition OF new
territory since the foundation of the gov
eminent it has been opposed more or less
vigorously by the party out of power and
defended by the administration, with the re-
suit that the party in power has always
been indicated. The latter fact should be
warning to any party that is tempted to
oppose expansion. From the time of Thomas
jefferson, who acquired the Louisiana Ter
ritory. to the present such opposition has
always failed. Some Of the strongest argu-
ments in favor of the policy have been pre-
sented by Democratic Presidents. President
Tyler urged the annexation of Texas sew
eral years before 1t was done. In April.
1874, he sent to the Senate a treaty Of an
nexation in which, after presenting reasons
for its ratifca ton. he said:
But one view of the subject remains to be
presented. 1t grows out of the proposed en-
largement of our territory. From this, am
free 10 confess. see no danger. Our
confederated republic consisted originally OF
that number While app f@ are now be-
fore Congress to permit other additions.
This addition of new States has served to
strengthen rather than to weaken the
Union.
The treaty was not ratified by the Senate.
and in June. 1874. the President sent the re-
jected treaty to the House with another spe-
cial message, in which he said:
The objections which have been taken to
the enlargement of our territory were urged
with much zeal against the acquisition of
louisiana, and yet the futility of each has
long since been fully demonstrated. Since
dnced pto neW We tb mas 6 oeen
has for all practical purposes brought Texas
much nearer to the seat of government than
ton. Distant regions are by the application
OF the steam engine brought within a close
proximity.
Texas was finally annexed by joint reso-
luton of Congress- and in the war which
followed the anti-expansionists tried to
make political capital by opposing both the
motives and the conduct of the war. Pres
ident Polk adverted to this state of things
I'm his second annual message to Congress,
that Of Dec. 5. 1916. as follows
The war has been represented as unjust
and unnecessary and as one Of aggression
on our part upon a weak and injured
enemy. Such erroneous views, though en-
tertained by but few. have been widely and
but have been spread throughout s t MEXICO s;
and the whole world A more effectual
means could not have been devised to en-
than to advocate and adhere to their cause
and thus give them aid and comfort.
1t is surprising how closely the present
situation in some respects resembles that of
1916 and how we'll the rebuke administered
by Democratic President to the anti-war
party of. that period fits the American
Aguinaldists Of to-day, who have protracted
the war and given the enemy aid and COM
fort by adhering to their cause. When the
war with Mexico closed and the United
States proposed to hold the territory it had
conquered the anti-expansionists again OBJ
jected and demanded that our troops be
withdrawn. In his annual message of 1871
President Polk said:
With the views ! entertain I cannot favor
the policy which has been suggested. either
TO withdraw our army altogether or to re-
tire TO designated line and simply hold and
defend IL. To withdraw our army altogether
from the conquests they have made by
deeds Of unparalleled bravery, and at the
expense of so much blood and treasure. in
a just war on our part, and one which, by
the act OF the enemy, We could not honora-
bly, have avoided. would be to degrade the
Nation In its own estimation and in that of
the world.
No better answer than this of a Demo
cratic President could be made to Mr.
Bryan and other anti-expansionists who are
demanding the withdrawal Of our troops
from the Philippines. If the Democrats are
wise they will learn from history that nc
party In this country has ever succeeded or
a platform of anti-expansion or opposition
to war in which the honor of the Nation
or the flag was at stake.