- 
 
 EW7 
 
 .6 S3 
 
\ /p 
 
 ME. BREESE, OF ILLINOIS, 
 
 E 407 SPE" 
 
 .B83 
 
 Copy 1 
 
 OP 
 
 ON 
 
 THE MEXICAN QUESTION, 
 
 AND 
 
 . 
 
 THE TEN REGIMENT BILL 
 
 DELIVERED 
 
 IN THE SENATE OP THE UNITED STATES, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 1848. 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 
 PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE. 
 
 1848. 
 

 
 
THE MEXICAN QUESTION, &c. 
 
 The Senate having resumed the consideration of 
 the Bill to raise, for a limited time, an additional 
 military force — 
 
 Mr. BREESEsaid: 
 
 Mr. President: I never rise in this presence, 
 upon the most ordinary occasion, either to explain 
 or defend a measure purely local in its character, 
 without some embarrassment; and that feeling is 
 greatly increased, as you may well suppose, when 
 questions of vital importance to the nation are 
 under discussion, calling forth, as those have, con- 
 nected with this bill, the best efforts of the most 
 distinguished members of this body. Nothing, 
 sir, but an overwhelming sense of the duty I owe 
 to "the State which has honored me so much, and 
 whose patriotism has been so signally exhibited 
 from the very commencement of this war, and 
 Whose people take the deepest interest in its prog- 
 ress and success, could have broken the silence I 
 •had imposed upon myself, so far as the mere object 
 of the bill itself is concerned. It is upon those 
 great topics, which throw the bill quite into the 
 ishade, that I wish to express my opinions fully 
 •and without reserve— premising, however, that 
 they are my own individual opinions, for which 
 neither the Administration, nor any member of it, 
 nor the party with which I act, are in the slightest 
 degree responsible. They have been formed after 
 much careful deliberation and anxious inquiry, 
 and with a desire solely to arrive at correct con- 
 clusions^ and if they are unsound, or of wicked 
 and dangerous tendency, or impracticable, they 
 will find no echo in the public heart, and influence 
 in no degree the public judgment. My State, sir, 
 has a right to this expression from me, to enable 
 it to judge if I properly sustain here the important 
 relation their partiality has created between us, 
 •and if I fully meet all the responsibilities which it 
 imposes upon me. I have said, sir, that the people 
 of that great and patriotic State take the most 
 lively interest in this war, and in all the questions 
 connected with it; and look with confidence and 
 hope to some grand achievement as its final result. 
 From its inception, on the first call to arms to repel 
 • the aggressive act of Mexico, and to punish her 
 for her injustice and her wanton invasion of our 
 territory, the people there, with one heart and one 
 mind, were found on the side of their country, the 
 only strife among them being a generous rivalry 
 as to who could best serve it in the hour of its 
 need. Eight thousand of its choicest chivalry 
 offered themselves at the call, of whom four thou- 
 
 sand were accepted, who repaired at once to the 
 field, with an alacrity never before manifested, Aid 
 iri the campaign which followed, covered them- 
 selves with undying glory. 
 
 It was my fortune, sir, to be addressing the 
 Senate at the last session, on the three-million bill, 
 on the very day of the hard-fought battle of Buena 
 Vista, when my thoughts, as they had often done 
 before, turned to those noble spirits, my neighbors 
 and my friends, who had left all the fond endear- 
 ments of home — severing those dear family ties 
 they knew so well how to appreciate — to do battle 
 for their country in a foreign land, inspired only 
 by the fervor of a generous patriotism, when I 
 was prompted thus to speak of them: 
 
 "They have proved, by the sufferings they have endurei>i. 
 by disease, and by performing the most wonderful marchiSr. 
 in modern times— advancing forty miles in a day, bivouack-- 
 ing at night with half rations, and showing, by their discipline 
 and prompt obedience to orders, that they can be relief upon , 
 in any and every emergency ; and though it has beecdenied 
 them to participate in the perils of the battle-field, ttajf have 
 given the strongest assurances, that in it they wouU uotifaii,, 
 to reap a full harvest of glory." 
 
 • That prophecy, sir, was at that very- moment* 
 fact; at that very hour they were gathering glory 
 at the cannon's mouth — and so long as=Bue-na Vista 
 shall be a familiar word — so long as the mountains 
 there, in whose sight they fought and fell,. shall 
 lift their summit to the sky — so Jsc.g • will 1 the val- 
 orous deeds of the gallant lllmoiains- be remember- 
 ed and rehearsed. At Cerro Gordo, too, sir, they 
 exhibited like evidences of gallantry — exalting by 
 their deeds, not only the character of their State, 
 but of the whole country, to which they hat} so 
 signally manifested their devotion- These troops, 
 sir, were of the best blood of Che State, composed of 
 gentlemen of character at home, eaeh one of whom, 
 in battle, felt as if he had not only the character 
 of his country to sustain, but' his own individual 
 character, and that made tirem then — as they will 
 be ever — invincible. And', air* so far as the imme- 
 diate object of this bill is concerned, and in answer 
 to the remark that the tw>ops cannot be raised by 
 it in any reasonabte time, I should not fear to 
 pledge myself that on its being known that it had 
 become a law, one-lmlf of the whole number can 
 be there instantly raised, of the same material and 
 under the same inspiration. The people of that 
 State, sir, are fully impressed with the justice of 
 this war, and the denunciations indulged in here 
 and elsewhere against the Executive as its author, 
 will have no efiect upon them to turn them to peace, 
 or to oppose the Government in any of its measures 
 
4 
 
 to carry it on vigorously in the very heart of the 
 enemy's country; and they are not to be appalled 
 at the unfortunate results which, in the opinion of 
 some Senators, may flow from it, nor can they be 
 made to think they will be so dreadful as they have 
 been depicted. I had hoped, Mr. President, from 
 indications which I thought I saw when this bill 
 was first reported from the Committee on Military 
 Affairs, that it would receive the general assent of 
 this body, and that those denunciations to which 
 we have listened so long would have been reserved 
 for some more favorable occasion, when the prog- 
 ress of no great public measure would be impeded 
 by them, and a better opportunity afforded for the 
 most unlimited discussion and the widest range of 
 debate; but in this I have been disappointed, and 
 at the hazard of further delay, I must endeavor to 
 repel these assaults, and place the Administration, 
 and those who support it, right before the country, 
 Wd furnish a justification for their and our conduct. 
 Senators need not think this war is unpopular; in 
 this they deceive themselves. Every successful 
 war is popular; and bold declarations that this is 
 unjust and unconstitutionally commenced will not 
 satisfy those who are to pass upon our conduct. 
 The people, sir, will not be deluded by such dec- 
 larations: they will require of those who make them 
 to sustain them by facts, by reasoning, and by fair 
 argument; and I call upon Senators on the other 
 side of the Chamber to demonstrate, if they can, 
 with all their legal acumen, acknowledged ability, 
 and power of investigation, why it is that the war 
 is unjust and unconstitutionally commenced? They 
 will reply, that it was by the removal of our troops 
 to the bank of the Rio Grande; that such removal 
 was an act of war; and being ordered by the Pres- 
 ident, he acted therein in a manner not warrant- 
 ed by the Constitution. This allegation involves, 
 necessarily, the consideration of the question of 
 boundary; and if it has been established — as I 
 Sthink it has been — that the river was the true and 
 only boundary of Texas, the right to have eur 
 forces there, to prevent a threatened invasion, can- 
 not be controverted. And here, sir, it will not be 
 necessary to discuss this point, at length, inasmuch 
 as the argument of my honorable colleague upon 
 it [Mr. Douglas] has been most clear and con- 
 vincing. He has shed such a flood of light upon 
 it — has so brilliantly illuminated it — that none can 
 .any longer be in error, or go astray, except from 
 mere design and wanton perversity. I accord with 
 him, sir, fully, in all his views on that point; and 
 to show, sir, that it is not a sudden opinion and 
 hastily formed, I beg leave to quote a few passages 
 from the speech I had the honor to deliver in June, 
 1844, on the resolutions of the honorable Senator 
 • of Missouri, [Mr. Benton,] pending the treaty 
 of annexation. After stating the principal facts 
 connected with the history of Mexico and Texas, 
 I said: 
 
 "In 1835, Santa Anna, then a victorious general abandoning 
 >the cause of republicanism, declared in favor of a central 
 government by which the sovereignty of the Sutes was, in 
 effect, ab dished, and all power, civil and military, consolida- 
 ted in one man. Many of the States, as all " the old thirteen" 
 did, took up arms in defence of their lights and of their sover- 
 eignty, as guarantied by the federative system of lfc24. But 
 the power of the usurper was irresistible. State after State 
 was subdued, until finally, save in Texas alone of all the 
 Mexican States, the sacred fire of liberty was extinguished ; 
 there alone it was guarded with anxious vigilance. Texas 
 refused to submit to the dictator, and resort was had by the 
 people to resist his power to the same means our ancestors 
 
 adopted, to free themselves from colonial vassaltfge am? 
 maintain their independence. They never abandoned the 
 Federal Constitution of Mexico, so long as a hope remained 
 of its triumph, but battled manfully for it throughout the year 
 1835; and in many a hard fought conflict the Texans were 
 victorious. At the close of that year, a solemn declaration 
 of the delegates of the people was published, in which it is 
 asserted that they had recourse to arms in defence of the re- 
 publican principles of the Federal Constitution of 1834 ; that 
 they would adhere with fidelity to the Mexican Confederacy 
 so long as it should be governed by the constitution and laws 
 adopted for the protection of their political rights; and ap- 
 pealing to other members of the Confederacy, pledged their 
 aid to such of them as would resist the military despotism 
 then being established within their borders. No other State 
 but Texas dared to resi>t ; and she, unaided and alone, hav- 
 ing no France to come to her assistance, as we had, defied 
 and resisted the power of the usurper. A new convention 
 of the people assembled on the 1st of March, 1836 ; and al- 
 though the country was invaded by Santa Anna at the head 
 of a numerous army, the Alamo at Bexar taken by assault 
 though gallantly defended by a handful of men under the 
 command of trie brave Travis, Crockett, and Bowie, who 
 were all pot to death ; Fanning and his force captured, and 
 treacherously and inhumanly massacred, and desolation 
 brooding over Texas; in the mid-tofall this, a regularly organ- 
 ized convention assembled, and published their " Declara- 
 tion of Independence," formed a constitution to be submit- 
 ted to the people for their approval, and i n fifty days thereafter 
 — on the 21st of April, on the banks of the S:in Jacinto — 
 proved their ability to maintain it, and rewrote it in charac- 
 ters of blood." 
 
 I then said, sir, that — ■ 
 
 " The present government or supreme power of Mexico 
 has no right to subjugate Texas. And here lam opposed by 
 the admissions of alt, who have written and spoken upon 
 this subject, that she has such right. If she has the right, 
 whence did she derive it ? Has England a right to subjugate 
 us if she can, by a war undertaken for that express purpose? 
 No, sir; no nation has a right to commence an unjust war 
 of aggression upon a peaceable neighbor, for the purpose of 
 subjecting such nation to its power for the mere purpose of 
 conquest. It is in violation of the law of God, and of those 
 great principles of justice lie has established. 
 
 " Texas was never a party to the present established Gov- 
 ernment of Mexico. She was a party to her federative sys- 
 tem, but not to her central despotism, and owes to it no 
 fealtv. Hit history, as already recited, proves this ; and the 
 conclusion is irresistible, that being in that position towards 
 Mexico, she has a right to maintain it if she can ; and a war 
 waged to drive her from it, and subjugate her to a power she 
 has always repudiated, would be a warcommenced in wrong, 
 waged unjustly, and its authors, aiders and abettors, should 
 receive, as they would deserve, the execrations of the 
 world." 
 
 And, Mr. President, I entertain these opinions 
 now; and I assert that the whole history of the re- 
 lations of Texas with Mexico show that the for- 
 mer was never a party to any other system of 
 government, as acomponent part of the latter, than 
 as a member of the Federal Republican system of 
 1824. She resisted successfully the sway of the 
 usurper of 1835, which she had a perfect right to 
 do; and so would any one of the States of this 
 Union possess this right, under similar circumstan- 
 ces. I will take Maine as an instance, as that is a 
 frontier State, and newly admitted into the Union 
 of States on a federative system. How did she 
 join it, and on what principles? That she was a 
 sovereign and independent State, with a republican 
 form of government, uniting her fortunes with 
 other States, with the same forms of government. 
 Now, suppose, sir — but it is hardly a supposable 
 case — that all the rest of the States of the Confeder- 
 acy, except Maine, should agree to abolish tho 
 federative system and their republican forms of 
 government, and establish a monarchy, or a des- 
 potism, would they, united, have the right to coerce 
 Maine, by force of arms, to do the same thing — to 
 abolish her forms, and subject her to the control of 
 a system of government radically different from the 
 one she had joined ? No, sir, no. Maine would 
 
have a perfect right to declare and maintain her 
 independence, if she could; and a war waged to 
 subjugate her, would be a war waged in wrong. 
 No Senator will deny this. 
 
 Well, sir, this was the position of Texas, and, 
 as I have said, she rewrote her declaration of inde- 
 pendence on the bank of the San Jacinto, on the 
 21st of April, 1836, in characters of blood; and as 
 we point to the fourth of July, 1776, as the first 
 year of our independence, and to the triumph at 
 Yorktown as confirming it, so can Texas recur to 
 the second of March, 1836, and to the victory of San 
 Jacinto, as like memorable eras in her history. No 
 sir, the usurpers of 1835, never did extend their 
 conquest east of the Rio del Norte — they crossed 
 it for that purpose, but were invariably unsuccess- 
 ful; and that river was made the line beyond which 
 they should not come. 
 
 The independence of Texas, Mr. President, we 
 all know, was manifested by adopting a constitu- 
 tion and a name, as applicable to that division of 
 the earth's surface composing the Republic of 
 Texas. Her Congress met under this constitu- 
 tion, and among the acts passed by it, is one of 
 the 19th December, 1836, declaring the boundaries 
 of the republic, as one of the independent nations 
 of the earth, which was, upon the west, the west 
 bank of the Rio Grande, from its mouth to its 
 source; and this, in conformity with the treaty, 
 pact, or agreement, made with the head of the 
 Mexican Government — the usurper Santa Anna — 
 immediately after the battle of San Jacinto. This 
 act of Congress was a public act, and as such must 
 be presumed to have been in the knowledge of our 
 Government, in 1837, when the independence of 
 Texas was acknowledged, and diplomatic relations- 
 entered into with her. It gave to us, and to the 
 world, notice of the extent of that republic — of the 
 extentofthat portion of an independent sovereignty 
 called Texas. But it is said, sir, that one nation 
 cannot make a boundary for itself. As a general 
 remark, it may be sustained by facts, as cotermi- 
 nous nations usually establish their boundaries by 
 treaty; but cannot a nation enlarge its boundaries, 
 or prescribe a boundary for itself, without the con- 
 sent of another coterminous nation? Suppose 
 France, engaged in a defensive war with the neigh- 
 boring Powers, should carry her victorious arms 
 to the Elbe, and, by a decree, incorporate the con- 
 quered countries within her dominion, and declare 
 the Elbe, and not the Alps and the Rhine, her 
 boundary, and could maintain it, would she not 
 have a right to do so? So of Maine, sir, if she 
 was separated from the Confederacy by the revo- 
 lutionary acts of her sister States, remaining an 
 independent State, capable of forming such rela- 
 tions with the nations of the earth as their interests 
 required, she protecting and sustaining herself, 
 should she be invaded from the adjacent British 
 provinces, and was able to drive her foe beyond 
 the river St. John, and maintain her sovereignty 
 and jurisdiction up to that river — declare it a part 
 of her territory, and the leading nations of the 
 world, who make the law of the world, should 
 treat with her as an independent State, with that 
 boundary — would not the right of Maine to that 
 epiargement of territory and extension of boundary 
 bea.nerfect right? If otherwise, I would ask why? 
 
 Jjj<wi'id, France, Holland, and Belgium, two of 
 i. ^certainly the leading Powers of the world, 
 acknowledged the independence of Texas, with 
 
 these defined limits, as a republic — as a nation of 
 the earth, capable by its position of making war, 
 concluding peace, and clothed with all the attributes 
 of an independent sovereignty. I place much more 
 stress upon these acts of recognition by the great 
 Powers of the world than others seem to do, and 
 I must confess, sir, they have had a controlling 
 influence on my mind in forming my opinion. 
 They declare, in effect, that the division of the 
 earth called the Republic of Texas, with certain 
 prescribed limits, is an indeoendent Power of the 
 earth, and entitled to all the immunities of nations, 
 of which the right to a boundary is one. Suppose, 
 sir, this Government, France or England, had, 
 after acknowledging the independence of Texas, 
 entered into a treaty of alliance with her, offensive 
 and defensive, would not we and they be required 
 to defend her, up to the boundary she claimed, 
 against an invasion from Mexico? Clearly, sir, 
 this would be the extent of the bbligation under 
 such a treaty. If this be so, then was our duty 
 more imperative, after we had allured her to our 
 embrace — had prevailed on her to embark her for- 
 tunes with ours — to transfer her lone star, gleam- 
 ing in solitary splendor, to our field of azure — to 
 sink her nationality in our own — to yield her proud 
 position as an independent nation to become a 
 subordinate State; to defend her against all aggres- 
 sion with the best blood of our people, to the last 
 cent in our treasury, and with the whole might of 
 the nation. We were bound, most religiously 
 bound, to defend Texas in her entirety, and it was 
 for that purpose, and with no other view, our 
 troops were ordered to take their position on the 
 western - limits of that State. An invasion was 
 threatened. War had been denounced both before 
 and after the annexation. Have Senators forgotten 
 our efforts made in the fall of 1845, and in all sin- 
 cerity and good faith, to prevent this resort to arms? 
 Did we not, before that, assure Mexico, that in 
 what we had done by incorporating Texas into the 
 Union, we intended no unkindness to her — that 
 we could not but consider Texas an independent 
 nation, and the power of Mexico over it gone for- 
 ever, and did we not propose an amicable adjust- 
 ment of the matter, and seek to heal the wound 
 inflicted upon her pride? And how were these our 
 declarations, and this our attempt at adjustment 
 by sending a minister to them on their promise to 
 receive him, treated by that Power? We all know, 
 sir, and it is useless to speak of them. Our min- 
 ister was rejected — Mexico even refused to talk 
 with him — refused to hear our propositions; and 
 still persisted in her determination to repossess 
 herself of Texas by arms; she never alleging at 
 any time any other claim to Texas than the claim 
 to the Sabine, and taking no exception to the posi- 
 tion of our troops within that territory; for it will 
 be recollected, that preparatory to receiving our 
 minister, she only requested that our naval forces 
 should be withdrawn from her coast, lest it might 
 appear if she negotiated at all, it would be consid- 
 ered she did so under a menace. She never desired 
 that the army should be removed. 
 
 If, sir, the right to Texas was a doubtful one, 
 what was the duty of Mexico under such circum- 
 stances? Certainly to hear what we had to say 
 about it — to listen to propositions of settlement — to 
 negotiate, if possible; for there are but two ways 
 of settling such disputes — negotiation and arms; 
 and as Mexico has chosen the latter, I, for one, am 
 
6 
 
 determined she shall feel our might, and while we 
 have her in our power compel her to .yield up the 
 fullest measure of indemnity for all her past trans- 
 gressions and enormities, and- make no accommo- 
 dation with her until this is done. 
 
 Sir, in my view of the duty of nations disputing 
 about a doubtful right, we would have been per- 
 fectly justified by declaring war against Mexico on 
 her lefusal to receive our minister; for, sir, it is 
 incumbent on the contesting nation to negotiate, 
 and submit to an honorable compromise. If a na- 
 tion will not do this, the other party to the contest 
 has a right to resort to arms to compel an adjust- 
 ment of the question, and though war does not 
 decide the right, yet a victory usually puts it in the 
 power of the successful party to enforce a compli- 
 ance with the demand — at least this is so under- 
 stood among civilized nations. 
 
 Sir, the annexation of Texas was decided on by 
 the people with their eyes open — in view of the 
 threats of Mexico that she would declare war — 
 and they were willing to have war rather than lose 
 Texas; and the effort is vain, worse than useless, 
 to attempt to make them believe that it is an un- 
 just war or a war of aggression on our part. They 
 have too much sense for this. No, sir, they are 
 fully convinced of its justice, and it is, therefore, 
 popular; and no declamation can drive them from 
 the position they have taken, to support it with 
 zeal and energy. In view of the facts and reasons 
 
 C resented, no doubt can remain that the war was 
 rought on by the act of Mexico, and so declared 
 by an almost unanimous vote of both Houses of 
 Congress on the 13th of May, 1846, by the law of 
 that date in response to the message of the Execu- 
 tive unfolding its causes, and ushered to the world 
 in the usual mode by the proclamation of the 
 President. 
 
 Although, practically, war had commenced on 
 the 24th "of April, 1846, by the attack of Mexico 
 on a 'detachment of our troops, and again on the 
 8th and 9th of May, and existed on those days as 
 perfectly as the hostile acts of a foreign Power can 
 cause it to exist — they not being predatory incur- 
 sions, made without authority or without apparent 
 cause, and with a view to plunder, but under- 
 taken in pursuance of previous official notifications 
 to our Government, that war should follow the 
 annexation of Texas, which Mexico regarded as 
 a revolted province, and to which her right had not 
 been at all invalidated by the act of annexation, 
 yet, so far as we were concerned — so far as our 
 relations, nationally and individually, were in- 
 volved, the war had its constitutional existence on 
 the passage of the act of the 13th of May, 1846. 
 That act changed our relations from peace to 
 war — recognized the practical fact, that the act of 
 Mexico had produced it — and we gave it our sanc- 
 tion, and published our acknowledgment of it to 
 the world in the usual mode. The phraseology of 
 the act declaring it is nearly identical with that of 
 the 18th of June, 1812, as Senators may see who 
 v ill examine. Both proceeded from messages of 
 the President detailing the causes, and both were 
 announced to the world by proclamations; and, 
 yielding to no one in my sense of the justice of the 
 "war of 1812 with Great Britain, I am constrained 
 to say, sir, that the justice of this loses nothing by 
 the comparison, and as that war was denounced as 
 "Jim Madison's war," as unjust and aggressive, 
 so is this denounced as Mr. Polk's war, and with 
 
 equal boldness its injustice proclaimed. The causes 
 of the war of 1812 have been alluded to by the Sen- 
 ator of Kentucky, [Mr. Underwood;] they were 
 good causes, and such as should have prompted 
 the nation, with one heart, to rise up and defend 
 its rights; and as that had, so will, this have, a 
 glorious issue. But, sir, our then enemy had not 
 invaded our territory, had murdered none of our 
 citizens, though they had forcibly impressed them 
 in their naval service and flagrantly invaded our 
 neutral rights. To bring on this war, and to add 
 to the injury inflicted upon us by the robbery and 
 murder of our citizens, Mexico invaded the soil of 
 one of our sister States, threatening to subjugate 
 it, defying alike our power and our right. Mex- 
 ico commenced the war for conquest, avowedly to 
 conquer Texas, of which she alleged she had been 
 unjustly despoiled by us; and as she had repeat- 
 edly declared she would do, she sought by force 
 to recover it, and the whole of it, to the Sabine. 
 She sought conquest — sought to rob us of one of 
 the brightest gems in our national coronet — and 
 though the issue could not be doubtful, yet the 
 attempt was an indignity, adding insult to former 
 injuries, and should have been met and repulsed, 
 as it has been, by the power of the nation, and 
 merited chastisement inflicted. Can Senators tell 
 me for what purpose the Mexican army was on 
 the bank of the Rio Grande, if it was not to carry 
 out the oft repeated threat to recover Texas by 
 force? It was for no other purpose, and its leader 
 embraced the first favorable opportunity to make 
 the invasion, and it has never been disavowed by 
 the Government. Sir, as to the justice of this war, 
 in view of all these things, it loses nothing in com- 
 parison with that of 1812; and that war was de- 
 nounced in terms equally violent and unmeasured 
 with this. The party at that day arrayed against 
 it when it was declared, was eager to get the nation 
 into it years before Congress acted. Every effort 
 was made to influence the minds of the people 
 against Great Britain, and appeals of the most in- 
 flammatory character, accompanied by attacks upon 
 the Administration, of the want of spirit and patri- 
 otism, were constantly made; and they asserted 
 that it was so tame and spiritless, that it "could 
 not be kicked into a war." As early as 1806, a 
 leading Federal print of that day, declared that 
 " the disputes between this country and England, 
 'so long attended with rigor on her part, and in- 
 'jury on ours, will not admit of much longer vain 
 ' complaints and harsh recriminations. They must 
 ' terminate shortly in the silence of war or peace." 
 And again, in the same year, it declared, " they 
 ' [the Democrats in Congress] dare not resist all 
 ' aggressions alike, and assume the part of spirited 
 ' impartiality, as a magnanimous policy requires. 
 ' If war is called for by the insulted honor of the 
 'country; if the cup of conciliation is drained to 
 ' the dregs, as they declare it to be, let the war be 
 ' declared; let an embargo be laid; adequate funds 
 ' provided; the strong arm of defence nerved and 
 'extended; and a powerful navy ordered. In 
 ' these measures the whole country, from Georgia 
 ' to Maine, convinced of their propriety, will be 
 ' united." 
 
 These extracts are from the Boston Centinel, 
 then the leading Federal paper of the Union. 
 
 A letter from Washington, of the same yea£ 
 says: "Fear, prejudice, or some other dastardly, 
 ' principle, is continually crossing the path of out 
 
' rulers, and the loud call of our country, its com- 
 ' merce and spoiled merchants, for energetic pur- 
 ' poses, is unheard or disregarded. My fears are 
 4 that the President's messages will only be sup- 
 
 • ported by windy debates, or pen and ink re- 
 4 ports." 
 
 Although the " Centinel" had proposed an em- 
 bargo, yet when it was laid in 1807, it said : "The 
 4 embargo, which the Government has just laid, is 
 
 * of a new and alarming nature. War, great as 
 ' the evil is, has less terror, and will produce less 
 ' misery, than an embargo on such principles." 
 
 When — forbearance ceasing to be a virtue — war 
 was declared, the Senate of Massachusetts resolved 
 that " it was founded in falsehood, declared with- 
 
 * out necessity, and its real object was extent of 
 4 territory by unjust conquests, and to aid the late 
 1 tyrant of Europe in his view of aggrandize- 
 •ment." 
 
 And the pulpit, where politics should not enter, 
 became also a theatre in which its ministers sought 
 to inflame the public mind against the administra- 
 tion of their country, and place it in the wrong, in 
 the sight of their powerful enemy and the world. 
 
 One of them, highly distinguished by his posi- 
 tion as the Rector of the Trinity church in Boston, 
 in a discourse delivered in July, 1812, said: " This 
 'is a war unexampled in the history of the world, 
 4 wantonly proclaimed on the most frivolous and 
 
 • groundless pretences against a nation from whose 
 4 friendship we might derive the most signal ad- 
 1 vantages, and from whose hostility we have 
 4 reason to dread the most tremendous losses." 
 Again: " Every provocation has been offered to 
 
 • Great Britain on our part, and our resentment 
 'has risen in proportion as she has shown a con- 
 4 ciliatory spirit." 
 
 And then, in his pious fervor, he exhorts his 
 hearers thus: 44 Let no consideration whatever, my 
 4 brethren, deter you at all times and in all places, 
 
 * from execrating the present war. It is a war 
 4 unjust, foolish, and ruinous." And, "as Mr. 
 4 Madison has declared the war, let Mr. Madison 
 4 carry it on." 
 
 And, not to be outdone in the hostility here ex- 
 hibited, another eminent divine, at Medford, the 
 Rev. Dr. Osgood, endeavored to prevent his coun- 
 trymen from enlisting in the service, and from 
 loaning money to the Government, to carry on the 
 war. Here is what he says: 
 
 "If, at the command of a weak or wicked ruler, they un- 
 dertake an unjust war, each man who volunteers his ser- 
 vices in the cause, or loans his money for its support, or by 
 his conversation, his writings, or any other mode of influ- 
 ence, encourages its promotion, that man is an accomplice 
 in the wickedness, loads his conscience with the blackest 
 crimes, brings the guilt of blood upon his soul, and in the 
 sight of God and pis law, is a murderer." 
 
 Another one, a reverend doctor also, gave his 
 hearers, if there were any that justified the war, 
 this consolation: "Let every man who sanctions 
 4 this war by his suffrage or influence, remember 
 ' that he is laboring to cover himself and hiscoun- 
 4 try with blood. The blood of the slain will cry 
 ' from the ground against him." " And," he asks, 
 44 how will the supporters of this anti-Christian 
 4 warfare endure their sentence; endure their own 
 4 reflections; endure the fire that forever burns — 
 4 the worm which never dies — the hosannas of 
 4 Heaven — while the smoke of their torments as- 
 4 cends forever and ever." 
 
 The press too, sir, that mighty engine, opera- 
 
 ting with such wonderful power on the public 
 mind, in the very midst of the war, when loans 
 were necessary to carry it on, and our honor and 
 our all at issue, was engaged in most unholy and 
 unpatriotic efforts to embarrass the Government 
 by attempting to deter capitalists from loaning their 
 money; and I fear, sir, similar attempts may be 
 made now, but I hope not. 
 
 Here are two extracts from the leading Federal 
 and anti-war papers of that day: 
 
 " Will Federalists subscribe to the loan ? Will they lend 
 money to our national rulers ? It is impossible." " What, 
 then, if we now lend them money? They will not make 
 peace ; they will still hanker for Canada ; they will assemble 
 forces, and shed blood on our western frontier: mere pride, 
 if nothing else, would make them do it. The motives which 
 first brought on the war, will still continue it if the money 
 can be had." "Any Federalist who lends money to Gov- 
 ernment, must go and shake hands with James Madison, 
 and claim fellowship with Felix Grundy. Let him no more 
 call himself a Federalist and friend to his country ! He will 
 be called by others, infamous !" 
 
 " Our merchants constitute an honorable, high-minded, 
 independent, and intelligent class of citizens. They feel 
 the oppression, injury, and mockery with which they are 
 treated by this Government. They will lend their money to 
 retrace their steps; but none to persevere in their present 
 course. Let every highwayman find his own pistols." 
 
 The New York Evening Post, then a paper of 
 the same stamp, Federal and anti-war, said: 
 
 " We have only room this evening to say that we trust 
 no true friend to his country will be found among the sub- 
 scribers to the Gallatin loan." 
 
 And the Boston Gazette said: 
 
 " It is very grateful to find that the-universal sentiment is, 
 that any man who lends his money to the Government at the 
 present time will forfeit all claim to common honesty and com- 
 mon courtesy among all true friends to the country." 
 
 And, sir, to such an extent were their efforts 
 carried, that the agents of the Government ap- 
 pointed to receive subscriptions for the loan found 
 it necessary to advertise that the names ofthe sub- 
 scribers should be known only to themselves! 
 
 But, sir, this conduct, so unjustifiable as it was, 
 hardly equals that of the present day, as we may 
 see by reference to some of the leading opposition 
 journals in different parts of the United States, to 
 say nothing of their great organ here at Washing- 
 ton. I have in my hand, sir, some extracts from 
 these papers, and will read them, regretting at the 
 same time the necessity that exists for doing so. 
 
 Here are extracts from leading opposition prints 
 in Ohio: 
 
 " The voice of lamentation and war, heard all over the 
 country, from homes and firesides made desolate by the 
 slaughter of lathers, and husbands, and brothers, is sweet 
 music to the cars of the President and his friends, and they 
 seem ambitious to sircll the chorus by increasing the number of 
 victims."— Warren Chronicle. 
 
 " They (the Mexicans) ARE IN THE RIGHT— WE IN 
 THE WRONG. They may appeal in confidence to the 
 God of Battles ; but if we look for ai"d to any other than hu- 
 man power, it must be to the infernal machinations of 
 hell, for thus far, it would seem, the DEVIL HAS GOV- 
 ERNED AND GUIDED ALL OUR ACTIONS in the 
 premises." — Xenia Torch Light. 
 
 " We rejoice to see a large and respectable number ofthe 
 Whig papers in this and other States taking decided ground 
 against further appropriations by Congress of men and mo- 
 ney for the Mexican throat cutting business. This is as it 
 should be." — Ibid. 
 
 " If Congress is opposed to the war — if that body is ef 
 opinion that it is unjust, impolitic, and of dangerous tend- 
 ency, NO DUTV CAN HE MOKE BINDING THAN 
 THAT OF REFUSING THE MEANS TO PROSECUTE 
 IT. The war is the result of usurpation, begun originally 
 without consulting the war-making power." — Lebanon (O.) 
 Star. 
 
 44 No man, no people, looking upon the contest, can help 
 
8 
 
 sympathizing with Mexico, and uniting in UTTERING 
 A BITTER CONDEMNATION AGAINST OUR OWN 
 GOVERNMENT."— Cincinnati Gazette. 
 
 " A war against a neighboring republic, waged now avow- 
 edly for the acquisition of territory, under the fruuilulent pre- 
 text of seeking indemnity for alleged claims for injuries to 
 the persons and property of our citizens." — Cin. Atlas. 
 
 Here are some extracts from other papers of 
 the same stamp in different parts of the United 
 States: 
 
 " None of the aggressors in Europe or Asia ever resorted 
 to justificatory reasons which were so false and hypocritical 
 as those alleged for our aggressions on Mexico." "The 
 truth is, it (the war) was conceived in folly and wicked- 
 ness, and commenced by a gross usurpation on the part of 
 the President " — Kennebec (Me.) Journal. 
 
 " Let every one keep aloof from this unrighteous, infa- 
 mous, GOD ABHORRED war, and it will soon come to an 
 end. The prospect is, that the Administration can get 
 neither men nor money to carry on the war! Thank the 
 Lord for all that." — N. H. Statesman. 
 
 " To volunteer or vote a dollar to carry on the war is moral 
 treason against the God of Heaven and the rights of man- 
 kind." — Haverhill (Mass.) Gazette. 
 
 " Talk of this war as we may, shout, rejoice, and illuminate 
 your cities, it is still a war of injustice, of conquest, anil of un- 
 mitigated evil; and it is high time that the virtuous and 
 patriotic should speak out in condemnation of it." — Boston 
 Sentinel. 
 
 And on another occasion, speaking of Mr. 
 Trist's negotiation: 
 
 " It shows very clearly what the original object and pur- 
 poses of the war were ; that is, in a word, that the great 
 object was acquisition of new territory." 
 
 " The Mexican war appears to he fast settling down to a 
 mere matter of PL UNDER and MURDER. * * * 
 
 « We think the war DISREPUTABLE TO THE AGE 
 WE LIVE IN, and the country of which it is our boast to be 
 called her ehildren." — Boston Atlas. 
 
 "If there is in the United States a heart worthy of Ameri- 
 can liberty, its impulse is TO JOIN THE MEXICANS, and 
 to hurl down upon the base, slavish, mercenary invaders who, 
 born in a republic, go to play over the accursed game of the 
 Hessians on the tops of those Mexican volcanoes. // would 
 be a sad and wofuljoy nevertheless to hear that the hordes under 
 Scott and Taylor were every man of them swept into 
 the next world ! What business has an invading army in 
 thisl" — Boston Daily Chromotype. 
 
 Here are the sentiments of some of them in New 
 York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Kentucky, and 
 Tennessee, all leading opposition papers, and I 
 regret to say, sir, the last two from my own most 
 patriotic State: 
 
 "The whole world knows that it is Mexico which 
 HAS BEEN IMPOSED UPON', and that OUR PEOPLE 
 ARE THE ROBBERS!!" "So far as our Government can 
 effect it, the laws of Heaven are SUSPENDED, and those 
 of hell established in their stead." "To the people of the 
 United States ! Your rulers are precipitating you into a 
 fathomless abyss of crime and calumny .'" — Neio York Tri- 
 bune. 
 
 " But the Whig party are unchanged in their view of this 
 contest, (with Mexico.) Its origin was the annexation — its 
 immediate cause, the unauthorized occupation of disputed ter- 
 ritory. It is the President's war .'" " Mexico is the Poland 
 of America." "If there were excuse for the war, there is 
 none for the measure which opened it. But what excuse is 
 found for the war itself?" — North American. 
 
 " We may suppose that we are to carry on a war for con- 
 quest, and that the halls of the Montezumas are to be occu- 
 pied by THE INVADERS from the United States !" " Mex- 
 ico has done infinitely more for herself in this war than the 
 United States, by their Government, have done for them- 
 selves." — U. S. Gazette. 
 
 "What is it, then, that makes or allows Mr. Polk to sanc- 
 tion this war, and all the outrages of which it is the conse- 
 quence? Itisthis : Mr. Polk is a weak man. He was selected 
 to be the Locofoco candidate for President because he was 
 weak. It was this that recommended him to his party. It 
 was this that elected him. It has been correctly said, that 
 it is a curse upon a nation to have a weak-minded ruler. 
 We are under the judgment of that curse." — Baltimore 
 Patriot. 
 
 "If there is any conduct which constitutes moral treason, 
 it is an attempt to embark or to encourage the country in A 
 WAR AGAINST GOD, as is the case in a war like that IK 
 which we are now engaged." — LouUvi lie Journal. 
 
 " TO VOLUNTEER, OR VOTE A DOLLAR TO CAR- 
 RY ON THE WAR, is MORAL TREASON AGAINST 
 THE GOD OF HEAVEN, and the rights of mankind !" 
 — Nashville Gazette. 
 
 " The fact is, the Mexican war was begun in a perfidious, 
 rascally attempt of demagogues at President-making; and 
 is now being carried out in the same spirit and under the 
 auspices of men", who, to gain the spoils, have resorted 
 to this INIQUITOUS SCHEME OF CONQUEST."— 
 Chicago Journal. 
 
 " We cannot possibly look favorably upon this war ; iu 
 first act was A GROSS OUTRAGE UPON MEXICO. 
 And can it be supposed by Mr. Polk, and his advisers, that 
 an error so glaring, A CRIME SO UNPARDONABLE AS 
 THIS MEXICAN WAR, can be whitewashed? We may 
 well wish our country out of this UNRIGHTEOUS WAR." 
 — Mount Carmel Register. 
 
 I have not alluded, Mr. President, to the events of 
 the last war — all which come to me as history, for 
 I cannot say " quorum pars fui" — for the purpose 
 of awakening old resentments and buried animosi- 
 ties, nor with any unkind spirit to any of the actors 
 in them, nor indeed with any personal allusion 
 whatever; but I have thought it might be useful to 
 the country to exhibit the perfect resemblance be- 
 tween the spirit of the opposition of that day and 
 of this, and as we know that not one of the mis- 
 guided political fanatics of that time, however dis- 
 tinguished he might have been for his talents and 
 his virtues, has been able to stand before the 
 people of this nation and claim and receive their 
 confidence, their condemnation has been so over- 
 whelming; so we may expect that those of this 
 day, going as they do even beyond these their great 
 prototypes, will as surely meet with a punishment 
 equally withering and condign. Sir, there can be 
 no mistake about this — no one of them can escape 
 the blighting judgment of an offended and outraged 
 people. As willing as we all are and should be, 
 " to pardon something to the spirit of liberty," and 
 to indulge in the freest discussion, yet, sir, when 
 political fanaticism goes so far as we see it now, it 
 is much to be apprehended, the judgment of pos- 
 terity will distinguish it by another appellation. 
 Their fate should be a warning to those who may 
 be disposed to withhold supplies of men and money 
 now; they should listen to the teachings of the past, 
 learning wisdom from its experience. It is in vain 
 to say, sir, that the war is unjust or unconstitu- 
 tionally commenced, against all the facts to the 
 contrary, and thus attempt to escape responsibility; 
 they will be held to it, sir, and cannot shield them- 
 selves by any such pretence. 
 
 Mr. BADGER. Will the honorable Senator 
 allow me, as he has several times alluded to some 
 one who characterized this war as an unconstitu- 
 tional war, to ask him if he referred to me. 
 
 Mr. BREESE. I referred to the Senator of Ken- 
 tucky immediately before you, [Mr. Underwood.] 
 
 Mr. UNDERWOOD. I beg to inform the hon- 
 orable Senator, that my remark was, that it was 
 an unconstitutional act by which the war was com- 
 menced — the placing our troops on the Rio Grande. 
 
 Mr. BREESE. I have shown, sir, I think, that 
 was a proper act — one which he had a right to do. 
 Suppose our Government had taken no precaution- 
 ary measures for the defence of Texas against the 
 threatened invasion of Mexico, having, as she had, 
 a large force on and near that frontier, and breath- 
 ing war in every missile from her functionaries, 
 
9 
 
 would the President have discharged his duty to 
 Texas ? Would our obligations to her have been 
 fulfilled ? If one solitary inmate of the humblest 
 cabin within it had been the victim of a Mexican 
 inroad, and his little all given to the flames, or 
 carried off as booty, and we not there with our 
 protecting power, how loud, and deep, and bitter 
 would have been the denunciations of those who 
 now assail the Executive for this act intended 
 alone for protection — alone to prevent invasion ? 
 Sir, we were placed in such a situation as to com- 
 pel the Government, by all its obligations of jus- 
 tice, honor, and good faith, to take the position we 
 did; and such, sir, is the honest judgment of the 
 country. 
 
 Well, sir, we are now in this war, our armies 
 have gone "deep into the bowels of the land, "and 
 it seems to me alike the dictate of duty and patriot- 
 ism, to prosecute it with renewed vigor, and never 
 conclude a peace until we have accomplished what 
 is now, and has always been our object, repara- 
 tion for the past and security for the future, no 
 matter to what results the attempt may lead. 
 
 All of us, I believe, sir, were willing, in ]846, 
 and expected, that the war would be carried into 
 the heart of Mexico. I recollect well, sir, a re- 
 mark of the distinguished Senator of North Caro- 
 lina, [Mr. Mangum,] who has not spoken to this 
 bill, that if he could be satisfied that the war did 
 exist — if there should be no disavowal on the part 
 of the Mexican Government of the act of crossing 
 the Rio Grande and attacking our troops, he would 
 Tote, not only ten thousand, but fifty, or a hundred 
 thousand men; and, if necessary, proceed to the 
 plaza of the city of Mexico, and there dictate a 
 peace. I believe it was well understood then, 
 sir, at least such is the inference I draw from the 
 remarks of that honorable Senator, that crossing 
 the Rio Grande by Mexican troops would be an 
 invasion of our territory, and that we must not 
 only repel it, but carry the war with sufficient 
 array, into the enemy's country, and this Senator 
 expressed a most cheerful willingness to give the 
 Government all the means, both of men and money, 
 requisite for such a prosecution of the war; and, 
 at the last session, the same patriotic spirit was 
 manifested, for the supplies were then granted 
 with very little opposition — only three, I believe, 
 voting againt the bill to raise an additional military 
 force, and but two against the loan bill. And why 
 Senators should now refuse to support a measure 
 like this, to reinforce the army, I am at a loss to 
 conceive; nor can I reconcile it with the vote they 
 have already given on an amendment proposed 
 to it. 
 
 Mr. MANGUM. The honoVable Senator refers 
 to certain remarks which I am reported to have 
 made, introductory to my vote upon the bill re- 
 cognizing the existence of the war, and certainly 
 an erroneous inference has been drawn from those 
 remarks, or else I did not understand myself. 
 The question was raised, whether we should cross 
 the Rio Grande for the purpose of chastising our 
 enemy; well, I never doubted, that in the case of 
 aggression on their part, it was entirely proper for 
 us to pursue them even to the heart of their coun- 
 try; but an inference is not to be drawn from this, 
 that I contemplated anything like conquest. This 
 I have been utterly opposed to, as my recorded 
 votes will show. At the time when we were called 
 upon to recognize the existence of the war, we had 
 
 heard of a collision having taken place, but we 
 knew not how it originated, the documents were 
 not before us to be read, and we were driven to a 
 vote at once, and were obliged to vote in the dark; 
 but on that occasion I did not doubt that we had a 
 right to cross the Rio Grande, in order to chastise 
 an aggression. That was my meaning; and if my 
 remarks are correctly reported, they meant that, 
 and no more than that, and, therefore, I repel the 
 inference^ that I was desirous or willing to go into 
 a career of conquest. 
 
 Mr. BREESE. I will read, sir, an extract from 
 the remarks of the honorable Senator, as reported 
 in the Congressional Globe: 
 
 " He and his friends are ready to grant whatever men and 
 money were required in half an hour. And before the men 
 raised could arrive at their destination, the requisite lime 
 would have been afforded to determine, intelligently, and on 
 authentic evidence, whether a state of war did, or did not 
 exist. If it did, then Mr. M. should be unwilling to restrain 
 the action of our forces to the left bank of the Rio del Norte. 
 If we were actually at war, then he was under the impres- 
 sion that our forces ought to cross the river, and that we 
 should not stop till we had dictated peace at the capital of 
 the Mexican empire. Let the fact be clearly ascertained, 
 and then he was prepared to vote, not fifty thousand men 
 only, but a hundred or a hundred and fifty thou.-and, if the 
 Executive came to Congress and demanded that amount. 
 He was ready to place the whole force of the country at his 
 disposal, and that he should be enabled to conquer peace in 
 the heart of the Mexican empire." 
 
 The Senator does not deny that he is correctly 
 reported, and I could not, of course, know what 
 particular views the honorable Senator then enter- 
 tained, any further than I can gather them from 
 these remarks; but what are we to conclude was 
 to be done by such a force as he was willing to 
 vote, unless it was to overrun Mexico and conquer 
 it, and in that way " conquer peace." 
 
 Mr. MANGUM. I meant any force that might 
 be necessary to chastise the enemy, and to dictate 
 a peace. 
 
 Mr. BREESE. But why chastise the enemy 
 when they had done us no wronsr? If the Rio 
 Grande was not the boundary of Texas, but be- 
 longed to Mexico, then their troops perpetrated no 
 Wong in crossing it; and it would be an outrage 
 on our part to raise a force of one hundred thou- 
 sand men to chastise Mexico for this, and carry 
 our arms to her central city and there dictate a 
 peace. But, sir, I cannot reconcile the opposition 
 of Senators to this bill, on another ground. They 
 have insisted, every one of them who has spoken 
 to it, that our force in Mexico is amply sufficient 
 for all legitimate purposes, and minute calculations 
 have been made to prove it; yet, at the same time, 
 they vote under the ayes and noes on the amend- 
 ment of the honorable Senator from Kentucky, 
 [Mr. Crittenden,] to give the President power 
 to call for the services of thirty thousand volun- 
 teers, three times as many men as this bill pro- 
 poses. No doubt,.sir, there is good reason for this, 
 and it may not be at all inconsistent. This vote was 
 given before the passions had become excited by 
 the collision of debate; and I doubt, not, sir, the 
 Senators who voted for the amendment, voted in 
 good faith, and with a determination to grant rein- 
 forcements, the only strife seeming to be then, 
 which was the best description of force. 
 
 Mr. President, one thing is very certain, that we 
 are in the midst of one of the most remarkable 
 wars ever waged since the creation of the world, 
 in every step of which, we, the victorious party, 
 have held out the olive branch to the enemy; and 
 
10 
 
 yet Senators say, not only on that side of the 
 Chamber, but on this, that we can have peace 
 whenever we will it. The Senator of Connec- 
 ticut, [Mr. Niles,] declared this to be his belief, 
 but failed, in my judgment, to bring a single fact 
 in support of it. Do the facts and circumstances 
 developed in the progress of this war show that 
 peace — an honorable peace — is within our control? 
 And does he or any other Senator doubt the sin- 
 cerity of the President, and of his friends, when 
 they say that they are desirous of peace on honor- 
 able terms, bringing with it indemnity and secu- 
 rity? 
 
 Mr. NILES. The idea is correct in part, and 
 wrong in part. I did not say it was in the power 
 of this Governments make peace. I said it was 
 in the power of this Government, and which they 
 ought to exercise at the proper time, to put an end 
 to hostilities. 
 
 Mr. BREESE. Well, sir, that seems to me to 
 be very much the same thing. Putting an end to 
 hostilities on both sides — for otherwise there could 
 be no end — and peace results as a necessary con- 
 sequence; and therefore, it follows, that it is in 
 the power of our Government, according to that 
 Senator, to make a peace. But it was distinctly 
 avowed by the Senator of New Jersey, [Mr. 
 Miller,] that it was in our power to make a peace 
 at any time. Why, sir, we could not, with all 
 our efforts, prevent war — we sent a minister to dis- 
 cuss the matters in difference between us, but he 
 could not be heard — he was spurned, and the very 
 thought of the thing produced a revolution, and a 
 deposition of the then President. After our most 
 brilliant victories, when our conquering army was 
 at the gates of the capital, we had a commissioner 
 with it, with full powers to make a peace, who 
 was met by commissioners on the part of Mexico, 
 and what was the result? ' Could we have done, 
 ought we to have done, more than we have ? I put 
 it to the Senator, and to others on his side of the 
 Chamber, to say if they would have concluded a 
 peace on the basis proposed by Mexico ? Would 
 they have accepted the Mexican propositions, anjr 
 one of them? Would they, for the sake of peace, 
 disparage their country ? Do Senators recollect 
 the Mexican propositions of the 6th of September 
 last? What do they say to the twelfth and four- 
 teenth articles? If I understood the honorable 
 Senator of Maryland, not now in his seat, [Mr. 
 Pearce,] he would have accepted them ; but I 
 never would, and I doubt very much if there is a 
 respectable number of the Opposition who would. 
 Do Senators remember the twelfth article, requir- 
 ing a guarantee from us, and that guarantee Great 
 Britain, that we would not, at any time hereafter, 
 no matter how necessary it might be for our secu- 
 rity or welfare, annex any contiguous territory? 
 And that, as provided in the fourteenth article, we 
 should indemnify Mexico for all the injury our 
 army had inflicted? And with the further stipu- 
 lation, and mentioned for the first time in the his- 
 tory of this controversy in Mexico, that the Nueces 
 should be the boundary? 
 
 1 Now, in all sincerity, I put it to Senators, would 
 they consent to dismember Texas? Would they 
 acknowledge a line as a boundary to which Mexi- 
 co had never made claim ? Recollect that her pre- 
 tensions to Texas were, and always have been, to 
 the Sabine. Would any of them agree that we 
 should so degrade ourselves and our country, as to 
 
 give the guarantee of Great Britain, that we would 
 not annex to our Confederacy any contiguous ter- 
 ritory for all time to come? and above all, that we 
 should indemnify Mexico for all the injuries she 
 has received from her own aggressive acts ? Let 
 the Senator stand forth and avow it. If Senators 
 on the other side are sincere, however, they must 
 agree to the last proposition; for if the war is un- 
 just, as they asseverate it is, we are bound to make 
 full reparation to Mexico. They are then bound, 
 if they are sincere, (and who can doubt their sin- 
 cerity ?) to go before the people of the United States 
 on this, as one of the issues, at the coming fall 
 election. They assert the war is unjust. If it is, 
 must you not, on the restoration of peace, make 
 full reparation ? Is not this a well established 
 principle of public law ? Do not Grotius and Vat- 
 tel,and all other publicists, recognize this princi- 
 ple? And is it not a correct one? If our opponents 
 are sincere in the belief so often expressed here, 
 that the war is unjust, they must, in their effort to 
 obtain the government, carry it out to its conse- 
 quences. And, sir, if unfortunately they do get 
 into power, and negotiate for peace, how can 
 they escape the demands which Mexico will make 
 for indemnity, based, as they would be, on their 
 own admissions, that the war was unjust to her? 
 
 Mr. President, at the outset of this war, and in 
 its first year, it was distinctly avowed by the Ex- 
 ecutive, and reiterated by his friends, that as it was 
 brought upon us by Mexico, he had no other de- 
 sire in waging it, than an honorable peace, includ- 
 ing indemnity for the past injuries we had sustained 
 at her hands, and such security against future ag- 
 gressions, as Mexico might be enabled to give. 
 And is it unreasonable, sir, that as the war is pro- 
 tracted by Mexico, she refusing all offers of ac- 
 commodation, that our demands should rise in 
 proportion? In my own opinion, in the view I 
 have taken of this matter, we would not be doing 
 justice to our own country, by a show of too much 
 lenity to Mexico, and that sheer justice would de- 
 mand from her full indemnity also for the expenses 
 of this war; and in her peculiar position — she not 
 being able to provide any other indemnity — that 
 the cession of the sovereignty and jurisdiction 
 over a part of her territory, should be insisted 
 upon as a sine qua non ; for I believe with the 
 President, that the doctrine of no territory, which 
 was broached here at the last session, and found 
 so many advocates, is the doctrine of no indem- 
 nity. In territory only can Mexico make repara- 
 tion for the past, and afford security for her future 
 good behavior; and although we are strong as a 
 nation, yet, like the strong man who desires secu- 
 rity against the attack of a lurking, cowardly as- 
 sassin, so should we insist on it in such a line of 
 boundary between us as will secure us against fu- 
 ture aggressions. Yet, sir, it seems to be doubted 
 by some, whether the President is willing to ac- 
 cept a treaty ceding New Mexico and California 
 as, a full equivalent for indemnity, and as affording 
 that security he demands. I suppose, though I 
 do not know it from him, that he would accept 
 such a treaty, if he thought the Government of 
 Mexico was so established as to give a reasonable 
 assurance of its stability. None of us desire war 
 for the sake of it, as peace is admitted to be our 
 true policy; but on what terms this shall end, there 
 is, and there must be, great difference of opinion. 
 Our policy, sir, is, emphatically, peace with all na- 
 
11 
 
 tions, but with none at the sacrifice of our national 
 honor, the dearest possession of a nation. We 
 have never, sir, since the birth of our nation, given 
 occasion for war, not even with the barbarous 
 tribes upon our borders. It is our pride to be able 
 to say, that our whole history may be explored, 
 and no single act of national injustice can be found 
 upon its page — no blot of that kind upon our 
 national escutcheon. We, sir, would have never 
 disturbed our peaceful relations with Mexico, by 
 any act of our own; she has brought the war upon 
 herself, under a delusion that one of our sister 
 States belonged to her; and resolving to possess it 
 by force of arms, and refusing to hear our minis- 
 ter upon the matters in dispute, sought to end 
 them by the sword; and as she has appealed to 
 that dread arbiter, she must abide its fortune. But 
 war, sir, it is said, is full of evil; that this ought to 
 be terminated at the earliest moment, some Sena- 
 tors believing that the glory we have gained by it is 
 sufficient indemnity for all our wrongs, and others 
 deprecating any further advance of our army, as 
 likely to bring about the result alluded to in the 
 resolutions of the honorable Senator from South 
 Carolina, [Mr. Calhoun,] and which he depre- 
 cates so much. It is true, sir, war is an evil — a 
 great evil, but it has also its advantages, and though 
 the land may be, for a time, crushed by its armed 
 heel, it is but preparing it for the reception of that 
 seed whose fruit is commerce, science, the arts, 
 and the highest and purest forms of civilization. 
 Alexander, in opening Persia and India, by his 
 sword, to the commerce of Greece, founded more 
 cities than he conquered; and the world's whole his- 
 tory since, shows most clearly that its permanent 
 benefits far outweigh its transitory evils. The roads 
 traced by the soldiery are soon followed by the 
 merchant, greatly facilitating the commerce of 
 ideas — favoring the sympathies of nations, and in 
 the end will fraternize the whole human race. It 
 is one of the great instruments of God's provi- 
 dence, by which to accomplish such grand results; 
 and can any Senator doubt that this most remark- 
 able war will not greatly redound to the advantage 
 of Mexico, securing to her, in the end, every 
 blessing we so abundantly enjoy? 
 
 It has been a war waged thus far, not against 
 the people of Mexico, but emphatically against the 
 army alone, with a view only to its destruction, 
 and upon principles of the most enlightened hu- 
 manity. Not one single act of oppression or in- 
 justice has been committed by us — our path, as we 
 have strode from victory to victory, has not been 
 lighted by the flames of their dwellings, their de- 
 fenceless women and children given to the sword, 
 nor their cities sacked, nor churches defiled, nor 
 fields laid waste. Though we have been terrible 
 to the combatant, we have been generous to, him 
 when vanquished — never forgetting, in the midst 
 of the excitement, that the fairest chaplet victory 
 wears is that which mercy twines. These, sir, 
 are what make it a most extraordinary war; and 
 the faithful historian, as he writes its varied and 
 stirring events, will dwell with peculiar pleasure 
 and'pride on this, its bright and most distinguish- 
 ing feature. So humane and generous has been 
 our conduct, that the people of Mexico, those who 
 have most suffered by the oppression of the mili- 
 tary tyrants, regard our armies rather as benefac- 
 tors than as enemies; and if accounts can be relied 
 on, are utterly opposed to their withdrawal. This 
 
 has been the fruit of our policy, adopted at the out- 
 set; for early in June, 1846, our general in com- 
 mand issued a proclamation, prepared at the War 
 Department here, in which the people of Mexico 
 were assured that the war should not be waged 
 against such of them as remained neutral, but 
 against the army and the arbitrary rulers. They 
 were reminded that their Government was in the 
 hands of tyrants and usurpers, who had abolished 
 the State governments, overthrown the Federal 
 Constitution, deprived their people of the right of 
 suffrage, destroyed the liberty of the press, des- 
 poiled them of their arms, and reduced them to a 
 state of absolute dependance upon the power of a 
 military dictator. They were reminded, too, that 
 the army and rulers extorted from them, by griev- 
 ous taxation, by forced loans, and military seiz- 
 ures, the money which sustained the usurper in 
 power; and were told that we came to obtain rep- 
 aration for the repeated wrongs and injuries those 
 rulers had done to us; that we came to obtain in- 
 demnity for the past and security for the future, and 
 to overthrow the tyrants who had destroyed their 
 liberties, but to make no war upon the people of 
 Mexico, nor upon any form of government they 
 might choose to select for themselves. They were 
 promised, too, that their religion, their altars, and 
 churches, the property of their churches and citi- 
 zens, the emblems of their faith, and its ministers, 
 should be protected, and remain inviolate. They 
 were assured that we came among them as friends 
 and as republican brethren; and a pledge was given 
 to them, that whilst we were compelled to treat as 
 enemies and overthrow those tyrants, who, whilst 
 they had wronged and insulted us, had deprived 
 them of their liberties, the people themselves, who 
 remained neutral during the contest, should be pro- 
 tected against them by our army. 
 
 Now, sir, upon the proposition to withdraw the 
 force we now have there, instead of augmenting 
 it, either with or without a treaty, must not these 
 pledges to the Mexican people be regarded ? We 
 know the effect they have had upon them — we 
 know that the better portion of them have offered 
 no resistance to our advance — that they have sup- 
 plied provisions to our troops, and guides, and 
 means of transportation, and some have accepted 
 office from our military governors; in short, they 
 have extended to us every assistance in their power. 
 Would it, then, be just to them to withdraw our 
 protection from them, suffer their tyrants and op- 
 pressors again to return to power, and they be- 
 come, as they certainly would, a sacrifice to their 
 friendship for us? But Senators say it would be 
 magnanimous to withdraw — to prosecute the war 
 no further — as Mexico lies prostrate at our feet, 
 without the power of further resistance. 
 
 I think, sir, that neither the honorable Senator 
 of Tennessee, [Mr. Bell,] in the very able speech 
 he delivered, and who gave it as his advice that 
 we should make the best peace we could, and flee 
 the country, nor the distinguished Senator of South 
 Carolina, [Mr. Calhoun,] in his proposition to 
 leave the central parts of Mexico, and retire to an 
 indemnity line, could have recollected these pledges, 
 or duly considered the obligations we are under 
 arising out of them. It seems to me, it would be 
 the height of injustice to leave these people, whom 
 we have allured to our support, a prey to those 
 tyrants, who must succeed our power, and whose 
 revenge can only be satiated by the blood of those 
 
12 
 
 our absence will leave defenceless. v We owe that 
 protection to them we have promised; and any 
 treaty we may make with that Government should 
 contain a stipulation for it, as nothing short of this 
 would be just. 
 
 As I remarked on another occasion, sir, retiring 
 to a line, in the event of a refusal to treat or in any 
 event, would not end the war — it would make it 
 interminable, be quite as expensive as a more vig- 
 orous policy, and be the very course the military 
 rulers of Mexico would most desire we should 
 adopt, for it necessarily retains them in power, 
 and more than all, it would be an invitation to any 
 European Power (and it is thought one or more of 
 them have designs of this nature) to take posses- 
 sion of that part we abandon, involving us, per- 
 haps, at some future time, in a bloody and destruc- 
 tive war with them. Our withdrawal would be a 
 proclamation to them, that in assuming our line, 
 we abandon all claim to any part of Mexico south 
 of it, and they would not be slow, I think, sir, to 
 profit by our folly. But, sir, what prospect is 
 there of a treaty? Have we any certain knowledge 
 of the existence of any government in Mexico, 
 possessing such a share of public confidence and 
 so organized as to make one that will be observed? 
 As at present advised, with the knowledge I have 
 of the condition of affairs there, I should place but 
 little value upon any treaty that might be patched 
 up, and I would regard it as a most unfortunate 
 event if one was entered into, which should stipu- 
 late, as a concurrent act, for the withdrawal of our 
 troops from the interior and the city. Sir, the whole 
 history of that country admonishes us to be cau- 
 tious in our intercourse with it, and to run no haz- 
 ard which we have the power to avoid. Sir, if a 
 President could be deposed merely for consenting 
 to receive a minister from this Government pre- 
 paratory to a treaty, what may we not expect will 
 be the fate of him who shall make a treaty at all 
 favorable to us, and our protection withdrawn? If 
 it is not acceptable to the military chieftains and 
 the clergy, a pronunciamento will follow — then the 
 grito — then the march to the capital, and the reir.s 
 of government forcibly assumed. The function- 
 aries who have negotiated the treaty, will become 
 fugitives from their country, and scenes of butch- 
 ery and violence in quick succession, and with 
 aggravated horror, will be again enacted. 
 
 I do not believe, sir, that any good could result, 
 but much evil, from any treaty we might now be 
 able to make. I have no confidence that it would 
 be observed a day, and if not, the work we have 
 accomplished would have to be renewed, more 
 blood spilt and more treasure expended, to restore 
 us to the favorable position we now occupy. Any 
 authority now existing in Mexico is but the bub- 
 ble of the moment, which the first breath of popu- 
 lar clamor will suddenly destroy. 
 
 There is, sir, another difficulty in the way, which 
 deserves some notice. There is a strong party in 
 Mexico, called the Puros, or Republicans, who 
 are determined, if my information is correct, that 
 there shall be no peace with us, if they can prevent 
 it, and they are active, intelligent, and united. 
 They see in this war the approaching realization 
 of their fondest hopes — the enjoyment of that lib- 
 erty of thought, speech, and the press, for which 
 they have so long struggled, and which can only 
 be secured by our dominion. For this blessing 
 they are ready and anxious to surrender their na- 
 
 tionality — to merge it in our own, and thus relieve 
 themselves from oppression, from tyrannical ex- 
 actions, from plunder, and from all those accumu- 
 lated ills their miserable government of misrule has 
 enforced and encouraged. They see, in our ad- 
 vance, the dawnings of a brighter day for them 
 and their children, and in glad anticipation behold 
 our azure studded with their stars. They see no 
 refuge but in our free institutions, no shield but 
 our power, and desire no nationality but that which 
 an union with us will give them. This party, sir, 
 may submit for a time, but will not agree, and if 
 they obtain power, true to their original design, 
 they will become embroiled with us to effectuate 
 it. They have always been, and are now, the 
 most clamorous for war, and will oppose any ac- 
 commodation which withdraws our army, for its 
 continuance there they believe, and I believe, will 
 produce the result they desire. And this, sir, is 
 the opinion of the distinguished Senator of South 
 Carolina, [Mr. Calhoun,] as I gather from his 
 speech on the resolutions he has introduced, and 
 discussed with such great ability. He deprecates 
 a line of policy which shall result in conquering 
 Mexico, with a view to incorporate it into this 
 Union, or to hold it as a province, and maintains 
 that it would not only be inconsistent with the 
 avowed objects for which the war has been pros- 
 ecuted, but a departure from the settled policy of 
 the Government, in conflict with its character and 
 genius, and in the end subversive of our free and 
 popular institutions. 
 
 The avowed objects of the war which we de- 
 clared to exist by the act of Mexico wn3 to obtain 
 redress of wrongs, a permanent and honorable 
 peace, and indemnity for the past and security for 
 the future; and if they cannot be obtained in any 
 other way than by the conquest of Mexico, and 
 incorporating it into the Union, or holding it as a 
 province, such a result would be in harmony with 
 those objects. Nor would it be contrary to the 
 spirit and genius of our Government, nor against 
 its settled policy, to conquer, in a defensive war, 
 any country, and annex it, which might be 
 thought, from its contiguity, to be necessary to 
 our own safety. The power "to declare war" 
 carries with it all its consequences, of which terri- 
 torial conquest is one; and our policy in 1812 was 
 to conquer Canada, and if we had been success- 
 ful, after having made the most strenuous efforts 
 to that end, and on the return of peace, it had been 
 relinquished to us, no doubt it would have been 
 annexed to us, and I think the day is not distant 
 when that event shall transpire. How the annex- 
 ation of Mexico to our Union would tend to sub- 
 vert our free institutions, I cannot discover. The 
 argument of the Senator on that point has failed 
 to convince me. I have taken a different view of 
 the people of that country, and I think I see in 
 them attributes and elements quite susceptible, by 
 proper appliances, of high improvement. Could 
 they be brought under the happy influences of 
 such a Government as our own, having all their 
 rights, civil and religious, protected, what might 
 we not hope from them? TITe Indian population, 
 numbering about four millions, are reputed to be 
 very gentle and quiet in their dispositions, apt to 
 learn, and willing to improve, and, if not possessed 
 of all the manlier virtues, have at least those which 
 fully ensure their cheerful acquiescence to our con- 
 trol and rapid advancement under it. Take the 
 
population as a whole, and there is not a people 
 on the globe more capable of advancement in the 
 arts and sciences, and of assuming all the forms 
 of the highest civilization. They came out of their 
 revolution with a reputation only excelled by our 
 own; and with the 3ame advantages we have pos- 
 sessed, who can say they would not now rival us 
 in all that contributes to national renown? But 
 the Senator says, no instance can be found of any 
 race, save the Caucasian, which has established 
 and enjoyed self-government and free institutions; 
 but he does not say no other race can be prepared 
 for it. All other races have always been oppress- 
 ed — are generally ignorant — have no just appre- 
 ciation of liberty, and are for the most part unciv- 
 ilized. I do not suppose, sir, rhe Mexicans are 
 at this time fitted for an equal union with us; and 
 much is to be done before they will be. By the 
 infusion of our own population among them, (and 
 they are now there in great numbers, according to 
 the Senator of Delaware, Mr. Clayton,) together 
 with emigrants from Europe, who will not be slow 
 to avail themselves of the unsurpassed advantages 
 such a country enjoys, a gradual change in their 
 manners, customs, and language, will ensue. Ed- 
 ucation will be diffused among the masses; speech, 
 the press, and religion will be free, and high opin- 
 ions of themselves speedily generated; and consid- 
 ering the rapidity of past events, the aids to 
 knowledge, and for its rapid spread, which the 
 world now possesses, the period of their pupilage 
 will be of short duration. Sir, it has been alike 
 our pride and boast, that our institutions were 
 better calculated to elevate the masses than any 
 others which have yet existed, and we feel it to 
 be true; and it cannot be that it is the decree of 
 Heaven that none but the white race shall en- 
 joy them. It has been the abiding hope of the 
 philanthropist, that in God's good time all na- 
 tions should enjoy them, and the down-trodden 
 millions of both hemispheres be exalted by their 
 agency. There is nothing, sir, in the history of 
 that beautiful country, or in the character of its 
 people, to discourage the belief that they can, in 
 a very short time, be brought to a condition qual- 
 ifying them for admission into this great American 
 family, adorning and strengthening it by a com- 
 mingling and full development of all those grand 
 and mighty elements they possess, and thus fulfill 
 her own and our happy destiny. And, sir, it is 
 the fervent wish and hope of her most eminent 
 citizens and patriots, that this war may accelerate 
 it; and, if "coming events cast their shadows 
 before," may it not be regarded as its certain pre- 
 cursor? In my musings upon this subject, Mr. 
 President, I have been cheered by the hope, that 
 if I did not, my children would live to see lhat 
 day when our institutions shall extend over the 
 whole of this portion of our continent, all to be 
 bound by one common ligament, and all to run 
 one common career of honor, happiness, and re- 
 nown? And, sir, why should we be alarmed at 
 this contemplation? History, it is said, admon- 
 ishes us that extension of dominion by territorial 
 acquisition proved the downfall of the ancient re- 
 publics; but, sir, were they fashioned like ours? 
 Were they not, from their very nature, incapable 
 of extension? And is there no difference of con- 
 dition between us and them? They had not the 
 press, nor the compass, nor the steam-engine — 
 none of those great instrumentalities which, wielded 
 
 by freemen, are to revolutionize the world. They 
 worshipped Liberty, and sacrificed to her as to an 
 idol. We regard her as an active, moving spirit, 
 penetrating all the avenues of life, and cheering 
 and stimulating man in his progress. Sir, our 
 liberty can be preserved only by progress. Being 
 stationary it stagnates, and in that condition the 
 flame will expire. It is by action alone — by cease- 
 less, constant action — we can preserve it. Let us 
 expand to our true and proper dimensions, and 
 our liberty will be eternal; for, in the process, it 
 will increase in strength, and the flame grow 
 brighter, whilst it lights a more extensive field. 
 Does any Senator believe our attachment to lib- 
 erty would have been any stronger than it is now, 
 or that we would have been more powerful and 
 happy, had our Confederacy been confined within 
 the Atlantic coast and the range of the Alleganies? 
 Would any one of them willingly restore to their 
 former owners Louisiana, Florida, and Texas, or 
 surrender either without a deathly struggle? I 
 apprehend not. Our history shows, thus far, that 
 there is no danger in our extension. Our form of 
 government is peculiarly fitted for this — it has a 
 peculiar aptitude for expansion, a principle which 
 no other Government ever did possess, and it is 
 one of its greatest excellencies. Will any Senator 
 deny that the new States have contributed new 
 vigor to our system, and increased strength to our 
 circle? Have any symptoms of disaffection to the 
 Union been observed in any of them? Has any 
 spirit of insubordination or of restlessness under 
 the ties which bind them, ever been manifested by 
 any of them? No, sir, it is not in them where 
 man enjoys the largest liberty, only restrained by 
 laws he makes himself, that emeutes, riots, and 
 rebellions occur, but it is among a crowded popu- 
 lation, in pent up masses, easily excited by col- 
 lision, with no extended field of action to arouse 
 their energies, and no attainable objects before 
 them to guide them aright. 
 
 Let but Congress confine itself to its own proper 
 functions, each State exercising its own undoubted 
 powers within its own limits, managing its o\kti 
 legitimate concerns in its own way, without the 
 unauthorized interference of Congress, no reason 
 can be given why our Union should not be co- 
 extensive with this portion of the American conti- 
 nent. We want no rival republics here, for they 
 may become inimical, rendering it necessary to 
 maintain standing armies to defend against their 
 aggressions. If all was united in one harmonious 
 whole, such defences would not be required. 
 
 By the agency of steam operating upon the boat, 
 the railroad car, and the press, combined with that 
 great American invention — the greatest of the age 
 and of the world — the magnetic telegraph, which 
 can literally almost 
 
 " Waft a sigh from Indus to the pole," 
 
 we will be more compact, and in more constant and 
 harmonious intercourse than the old thirteen States 
 were at the period of the adoption of our Consti- 
 tution. With the seat of the common or General 
 Government at some central point, with railroads 
 and telegraphs radiating from it as from the centre 
 of a circle to its circumference, and with the press 
 as free as the air of heaven, it matters not how 
 large the number of States may be. 
 
 But it is said, sir, this war is bringing the nation 
 into debt, and the further we advance the more 
 
14 
 
 will it be augmented, and the greater burden do we 
 throw upon those who come after us. To be sure, 
 sir, all wars create debts. The expenses of a war 
 are not expected to be borne by the ordinary rev- 
 enues of peace, but by borrowing money; and if 
 we cannot replace it in our generation, the one 
 which succeeds us must do so. Arguments of this 
 kind weigh equally strong against every effort at 
 national defence, and if yielded to, will place our 
 nation at the mercy of its foes. If we do create a 
 large debt of one hundred millions, over and above 
 our revenues, for posterity to pay, we will leave 
 them increased means with which to pay it. What 
 is such a debt to us, or to them? If the calcula- 
 tions of the Secretary of the Treasury are correct, 
 and I believe they are, and the present tariff is not 
 interfered with, we will have, in less than ten years, 
 quite fifty millions of dollars annually, from duties 
 alone, to say nothing of the receipts from the pub- 
 lic lands, the receipts from which this fiscal year 
 will fully equal his expectations, and if a proper 
 graduation and preemption law is enacted, will be 
 greatly augmented. Reducing, after the war, our 
 expenses to twenty or twenty-five millions annu- 
 ally, we may have a large sinking fund, by which, 
 in less than ten years, the whole debt will be paid 
 off. Our credit was never in a better condition 
 than it now is, and promises to continue to be. 
 Our six per cent, stocks are above par; and if we 
 enter the market for more money, we will find the 
 loanable capital, so far from being exhausted, at our 
 command in abundance. The debt of the last war, 
 amounting to near a hundred millions of dollars, 
 was soon discharged, without affecting injuriously 
 
 any of the great interests of the country, and so 
 will this be. 
 
 In this view, sir, the acquisition of Mexico, with 
 its unparalleled powers of production, yielding 
 every article of luxury and necessity, save one, 
 that ministers to the wants or pride of man — whose 
 revenues can be made, under wholesome laws, 
 and with proper management, to produce annually 
 one hundred millions of dollars, and with mineral 
 wealth from which the world now draws a great 
 part of its supply, and those resources to be further 
 developed by our enterprise and skill — what can we 
 not expect when time shall have performed upon 
 her its gentle yet potent and effective office? 
 
 As I believe, sir, there are but two alternatives — 
 either to flee the country, or to hold on to our acqui- 
 sitions, the result of which may be the final ab- 
 sorption of Mexico, I have not hesitated to declare 
 for the latter, being well satisfied that great ultimate 
 good to us, to her, and to humanity, is to flow 
 from it. 
 
 The honorable Senator from South Carolina 
 [Mr. Calhoun] has said, sir, that Mexico is to us 
 as a dead body, and he is anxious to cut the cord 
 that binds us to the corpse. Sir, I prefer taking 
 her to our side, and imparting to her some of our 
 own vitality; and with her fair proportions and 
 most beautiful developments, by its magic influ- 
 ence, she will start again into life and being. If 
 she be dead — if the light is out — we have " the 
 Promethean heat that can that light relume." 
 
 Having made, sir, these desultory remarks, I 
 will now conclude, by thanking the Senate for their 
 patient and polite attention. 
 
/ 
 
\ 
 
 .p <* 
 
) 
 
/fr 4^ 
 
 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 011 446 876 9 1 
 
 / 4 » 
 arm** 
 
 I 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS