THE WAR AVITII MEXICO. SPEECH 1 HON. JOHN A. DIX, OF NEW YOEK, IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, JANUARY 26, 1848, On the Bill reported from the Committee on Military Jlffairs to raise, for a limited time, an additional Military Force. Mr. DIX said : Mr. President, it was my wish to address the Senate on the resohuions ofi'ered by the Senator from South Carohna, [Mr. Calhou.v,] and not on tliis bill. I should have preferred to do so, because I am always unwilling to delay action on any measure relating to the war, and because the resolutions afford a wider field for inquiry and discussion. But as the debate has become general, and extended to almost every topic that can well be introduced under either, the force of the consid- erations by which I have been influenced, has be- come so weakened, that I have not thought it neces- sary to defer longer what I wish to say. Two leading questions divide and agitate the public mind in respect to the future conduct of the war with Mexico. The first of these questions is. Shall we withdraw our forces from the Mexican territory, and leave the subject of indemnity for injuries and the adjustment of a boundary be- tween the two Republics to future negotiation, re- lying on a magnanimous course of conduct on our pait to produce a corresponding feeling on the |iart of Mexico .' There are other propositions, subor- dinate to this, which may be considered as parts of the same general scheme of policy, such as that of withdrawing from the Mexican capital and the interior districts, and assuming an exterior line of occupation. I shall apply to all these propositions the same arguments; and if I were to undertake to distinguish between them, I atn not sure that I should make any difference in the force of the ap- plication. For whether we withdraw from Mex- ico altogether, or take a defensive line which shall include all the territory we intend to hold pertna- nently as indemnity, the consequences to result from it, so far as they affect the question of peace, would, it appears to mc, be the same. The second question is, Shall we retain the possession of the territory we liave acquired until Mexico shall consent to make a treaty of peace which shall piovide ample compensation for the wrongs of which we complain, and settle to our satisfaction the boundary m dispute.' Regarding these questions as involving the per- roancnt welfare of the country, I have considered thecal with the greatest solicitude; and though nevei more profoundly impressed with a sense of the resiponsibility which belongs to the solution of problems of such magnitude and difficulty, my Priiitedat ihe^CongressioimTGlobe Oflice^ reflections have, nevertheless, led me to a clear and settled conviction as to the course which just- ice and policy seem to indicate and demand. The first question, in it-selfof the highest importance, has been answered afiirmatively on this floor; and it derives additional interest from the fact, that it has also been answered in the afiirmative by a statesman, now retired from the busy scenes of political life, who, from his talents, experience, and public services, justly commands the re.spect of his countrymen, and whose opinions on any subject are entitled to be weighed with candor and deliberation. 1 have endeavored to attribute to his opinions, and to those of others who coincide with him wholly or in part, all the importance which belongs to them, and to consider them with the deference due to the distinguished sources from which they emanate. I believe I have done so; and yet I have, after the fullest reflection, come to conclusions totally diflerent from theirs. I believe it would be in the highest degree unjust to ourselves, possessing, as we do, well-founded claims on Mexico, to withdraw our forces from her territory altogether, and exceedingly unwise, as a matter of policy, looking to the future politi- cal relations of the two countries, to withdrav^ from it partially, and assume a line of defence, without a treaty of peace. On the contrary, I am in favor of retaining possession, for the preaent, of all Vk'e have acquired, not as a permanent con- quest, but as the most effective means of bringing about, what all most earnestly desire, a restora- tion of peace; and I will, with the indulgence of the Senate, proceed to state, with as much brerity as the magnitude of the subject admits, my objec- tions to the course suggested by the first question, and my reasons in favor of the course suggested by the other. I desire, at the outset, to state this proposition, to the truth of which, 1 tliink, all will yield their assent: that no policy which does not carry with it a reasonable assurance of healing the dissensions dividing the two countries, and of restoring, per- manently, amicable relations between them, ought to receive our support. We may difier in opinion, and, perhaps, hopelessly, as to the measures best calculated to produce this result; but if it were pos- sible for us to come to an agreement in respect to them, the propriety of their adoption could r arcely udmit of controversy. This proposition ^ciiiy conceded, as I think it will be, it follows, that if tlie measure proposed — to witlulraw our forces from Mexico — be not calculated to bring about a speedy and permanent peace; but, on the contrary, if it be rather calculated to open a field of domestic dissension, and possibly of external interference, period exceeding fifteen thousand men, and against forces from three to five times more numerous than those actually engaged on our side, in every conflict since the fall of Vera Cruz. I had occasion, on presenting some army peti- tions a few weeks ago, to refer to the brilliant suc- cesses by which these acquisitions were made; and in that distracted country, to be followed, in all I will not trespass on the attention of the Senate probability, by a renewal of active hostilities with us, and under circumstances to make us feel se- verely the loss of the advantage which we have gained, and wliich it is proposed voluntarily to surrender, — then, it appears to me, it can present no claim to our favorable consideration. I shall endeavor to show, before I sil down, that the pol- icy referred to is exposed to all these dangers and evils. I do not propose to enter into an examination of the origin of the war. From the moment the collision took place between our forces and those of Mexico on the Rio Grande, I considered all hope of an accommodation, withoutafuU trial of strength in the field, to be out of the question. 1 believed the peculiar character of the Mexicans would ren- der any such hope illusive. Whether that colli- sion was produced in any degree by our own mis- takes, or whether the war itself was brought about by the manner in which Texas was annexed to the Union, are questions I do not propose to dis- cuss now; and if it were not too late, I would sub- mit whether the discussion could serve any other purpose but to exhibit divided councils to our ad- versary, and to inspire him with the hope of ob- taining more favorable terms of peace by protracting his resistance. No one can be less disposed than myself to abridge, in any degree, the legitimate boundaries of discussion. But I am not disposed to enter into such an investigation now. The urgent concern is to know, not how the war origi- nated, not who is responsible for it, but in what manner it can be brought to a speedy and honor- able termination; whether, as some suppose, we ought to retire from the field, or whether, as ap- fiears to me, the only hope of an accommodation ies in a firm and determined maintenance of our position. The probable consequences of an abandonment of the advantages we have gained may be better un- derstood by seeing what those advantages are. I speak in a military point of view. While address- ing the Senate in February last on an army bill then under consideration, I had occasion to state, that the whole of northern Mexico as far south as the mouth of the Rio Grande and the 26th parallel of latitude was virtually in our possession, com- prehending about two-thirds of the territory of that republic, and about one-tenth of its inhabitants. Our acquisitions have since been augmented by the reduction of Vera Cruz and the Castle of San Juan by repeating what I said at that time.* But I can- not forbear to say, that there is a moral in the con- test, the eflect of which is not likely to be lost on our.selvcs or others. At the call of their country our people liave literally rushed to arms. The cnuilation has been to be received into the service, not to be excused from it. Individuals from the plough, the counting-house, the law-office, and the workshop, have taken the field, braving inclement seasons and inhospitable climates without a mur- mur; and, though wholly unused to arms, with- standing the most destructive fire, and storming butteries at the [loint of the bayonet with the cool- ness, intrepidity, and spirit of veterans. I believe I may safely say, there has been no parallel to these achievements by undisciplined forces since the French revolution. I am not sure that his- tory can furnish a parallel. As to the regular army, we always expect it to be gallant and heroic, and we are never disappointed. The whole con- duct of the war in tiie field has exhibited the highest evidence of our military capacity. It con- *The reference alluded to is contained in the rollowing extract: " 1 will not detain the Senate by entering Into any detailed review ol' these events with a view to eiilbice the appeal contained in th« petition on the atlenlion. I hope, however, I may be indulged in saying, in jusliee to those who bore a part in them, tliat the first conquest of Mexico cannot, as it appears to nie, be compared with the second, either as totlie ob-itaeles overcome, or as to the relative strenjjth of the in- vaders. The triumphs of Cortez were achieved by policy and by superiority in discipline and in the implements of warfare. The use of fire-itrma, until then unknown to the inhabitants of Mexico, was sufficient in itself to make hia force, small as it was, irresistible. In the eyes of that sim- ple and superstitious people he seemed nrnied with super- human power. Other circumstances combined to facilitate his success. The native tribes, by whom the country was possessed, were distinct counnunities, not always acknowl- edgini; the same head, and often divided anions themselves by implacable hostility and resentments. Cortez, by his consummate prudence and art, turned these dissensions to his own account ; he lured the parties to them into his own service, and when he presented himself at the aates of the city of Mexico, he was at the head of four thousand of the most warlike of the natives, as auxiliaries to the band of Spaniards, with which he commenced his n;arch t'rnm Vera Cruz. Tlius his early successes were as much the triinnph of policy as of arms. General Scott, and the gallant band he led, had no such advantages. The whole population of the country, from Vera t'ruz to Mexico, was united .is one man against him, and animated by the fiercest animosity. He w:\.i opposed by military forces armed like his own, of^cn better disciplined, occupying positions chosen by them- selves, strong by nature, and fortified according to the strictest rules of art. These obstucles were overcome by his skill as a tactician, aided by a corps of otTiccrs unsur- de Ulua, the capture of Jalapa, Perote, and Puebia, passed for their knowledge of the art of attack and defence, the surrender of the city of Mexico, and the occu- \ •■">'' '>>' '•>« indomitable courage of their followers. With pation of the three States of Vera Cruz, Puebia, ''"ILl'l'fr^^J^-^V.ho''''" ''l""'' '''•''' "' *" ".'« 'I'fP"-'"' »"^ r , ,. . . , , .... ,' , ,^1 with less than SIX thousand ineti, alter a series of desperate and Mexico, with nearly two millions and a half of contests, he took posses-iim oi the city of Mexico, coniain- :80uls. It is true, our forces have not overrun every ing nearly two hundred ilidusand inhabitants, and defended .portion of the territory of tho.se States; but their •'V the remnant of an army of more than thirty thon.sanrt .iL ;„<•.„..,„„ u„.,„ I,, ..„ 1 ,1 .1 :i:.,_ . e „ 1 soldiers. I confess I know nothing in modern warfare which chief towns have been i educed, the military forces ^^^^^^^ ;„ brilliiu.cy the movemel.ts of the .\merican army which defended them captured or dispersed, their i from the Gulf to the city of Mcvico. I shall not attempt tc civil authorities superseded, their capital occupied, speak of them in the language ofciiiogium. They are niya and the whole machinery of government within the 'V ""•"";,f"^ '""''' eominent. Like the achiev-emen/s of , o. . • . 11 . r 1 • LI (Jeiieral I aylor and Ins brave men on the Kio Gia»nth century, denied its existence. Fenelon, who wrote about half a cen- tury later, denied it, except as a means of self-pre- servation, and then only when the danger was real and imminent. Vuttel, who wrote neariy a century afier Fenelon, and a century before our own times, regarded the States of Europe as forming a political system, and he restricted the right of entering into confederacies and alliances for the purpose of inter- vention in the affairs of each other, to cases in which such combinations were necessary to curb the ambition of any power which, from its superi- ority in physical strength, and its designs of op- pression or conquest, threatened to become Jangcr- ows to ifs neighbors. De ATnrtrns, who wrote half a century ago, acknowledges, witli Vatlel, tlic ex- istence of the right under c(^rtnin conditions, lliough he liardly admits it to be well settled as a rule of infernulional law; and lie limits its exercise to neighboring states, or states occupying the same quarter of the globe. But, according to the two last writers, who have, perhaps, gone as far as any other public jurists, of equal eminence, towards a two or more weaker states to protect themselves against the designs of an ambitiou.s and powerful neighbor. In its practical application, ii has more fre(juently resulted in a combination of powerful states to destroy iheir weaker neighbors for the augmentation of their own dominions or those of their allies. From a mere riglit to combine for self-preservation, they have made it in practice a ri«ht to divide, dismonil)er, and partition states at 1 the strenirth of a poweiful adversar -Imt under formal recognition of the right, it only justifies a 1 their pleasure — not for the purpose of diminishing union of inferior states within the same imniediate sphere of action, to p'-event an accumulation of power in the hands of a single sovereign, which would be too great for the common liberty. I am confident, Mr. President, that no one can rise from a review of the iiistory of modern Eu- rope, and from an examination of the writings of her public jurists, without being satisfied that the right of intervention, as recognized by civilized nations, is what I have stated it to be — a mere right, on the jiart of weaker states, to combine for the purpose of preventing the subversion of their independence, and the alienation of their ter- ritories, by a designing and powerful neighbor; a right to be exercised only in cases of urgent and immediate danger. It is simply a right of self- preservation, undefined, undefinable, having no set- tled or permanent foundation in public law, to be asserted only in extreme necessity, and when arbi- trarily applied to practice, a most fruitful source of abuse, injustice, and oppression. One clear and certain limitation it happily possesses — a limitation which, amid all its encroachments upon the inde- pendence of sovereign Slates, has never until our day been overpassed. By universal consent, by the unvarying testimony of abuse itself, it is not to be exercised beyond the immediate sphere of the nations concerned. It pertains rigidly and ex- clusively to states within the same circle of politi- cal action. It is only by neighbors, for the pro- tection of neighbors against neighbors, that it can, even upon the broadest principles, be rightfully employed. When it traverses oceans, and looks to ttie regulation of the political concerns of other continents, it becomes a gigantic assumption, which, for the independence of nations, for the interests of humanity, for the tranquillity of the Old World and the New, should be significantly repelled. Mr. President, a review of the history of Eu- rope during the last two centuries will bring with it another conviction in respect to the right of in- tervention — that no reliance can be placed on its restriction in practice to the objects to which it is limited by every public jurist who admits its ex- istence at all; and that nothing could be so dis- couraging to the friends of free government as an extension of the system to this continent, if the power existed to introduce it here. Though the combinations it is claimed to authorize m;iy, in some instances, have protected the coalescing par- ties from the danger of being overrun by conquer- ing armies, the cases are perhaps as numerous, in which their interposition has been lent to lireak the pretence of creating a system of balances, which is artificial in its structure, and, in some degree, incongruous in its elements, and which a single political convulsion may overturn and destroy. Do we need examples of the abuse of the j)ower, I will not call it a right.' They will be found in the dismemhermentofSaxony ,thcannexation of the re- publicof Genoa to the kingdom of Sardinia, and the absorption of Venice by Austria. There is another and a more aggravated case of abuse to which re- cent events have given new prominence. In 1772, Russia, Prussia, and .Austria, under the pretence that the disturbed condition of Poland was dangerous to their own tranquillity, seized upon about one-third of her territories, and divided it among themselves. In 1793, notwithstanding her dimini.^-hed propor- tions, she had become more dangerous, and they seized half of what they had left to her by the first partition. Sir, she continued to grow dangerous as she grew weak ; and in two years after the sec- ond partition, they stripped her of all that remained, fu 1815, the five great Powers, at the Congress of Vienna, from motives of policy, and not from a returning sense oi" justice, organized the city of Cracow and a portion of the surrounding territory, with a population of about one hundred thousand souls, into a republic, under the protection of Aus- tria, Russia, and Prussia, v.'ith a guarantee of its independence in perpetuity. Russia pledged her- self, at the same time, to maintain her share of the spoil, as the kingdom of Poland in name and form, with a constitutional government. She kept her pledge seventeen years, and then virtually incor- porated it as an integral part into the Russian em- pire. The little republic of Cracow was all that remained as a monument of the dismembered king- dom. A year ago, it was obliterated as an inde- pendent state by the three great powers of eastern and northern Europe, in violation of their solemn guarantee, and assigned to Austria. The name of Polcinci, the fountain of so many noble and ani- mating recollections, is no longer to be found on the map of Europe. The three quarters of a cen- tury which, intervened from the inception to the consummation of this transaction are not sufficient to conceal or even to obscure its true character. The very magnitude of the space over which it is spread only serves to bring it out in bolder and darker relief from the pages of history. If the United States, in the progress of these usurpations, has not remonstrated against them, and contributed by her interposition to maintain the integrity of the states thus disorganized and down the independence of states, and to throw | dismembered in violation of every rule "of right, whole communities of men into the arms of govern- j and every suggestion of justice and humanity, it ments to which their feelings and principles were is because we have been faithful, against all move- alike averse. The right, as has been seen — (and | ments of sympathy, against the very instincts of it cannot be too often repeated) — with the utmost j nature, to the principle of abstaining from all inter- Lit itude claimed for it by any public jurist, goes no i ference with the movements of European powers, further than to authorize a league on the part of' which relate exclusively to the condition of the r 6 - quarter of the globe to which they belong. But when it is proposed or thrciiteiicd to extend to this continent and to ourselves a similar system of bal- ances, with all its danger of abuse and usurjiation, I hold it to be onr duty to inquire on what grounds it rests, that we may be prepared to resist all prac- tical application of it to the independent states in this hemisphere. Mr. President, the declaration of M. Guizot could hardly have been made without the previous approbation of the goverrmient, of which he was the organ. Tiie same sovereign occupies the throne of France — the same minister stands before it as the exponent of his opinions. Is the declaration to be regarded as a mere idle annunciation in words of a design never intended to be carried into prac- tice? Let me answer the question by the briefest possible reference to circumstances. France was the coadjutor oi' England in the attempt to induce Texas to decline annexation to the Union. Failing in this, she attempted to accomplish the same ob- ject indirectly, by persuading Mexico to recognize the independence of Texas, on condition that the latter should remain an independent state. These terms were offered to Texas, and rejected. In the year 1844, I believe less than twelve months before M. Guizot's declaration was made, (and the coin- cidence in point of time is remarkaljle,) a book on Oregon and California was published in Paris by order of the King of France, under the auspices of Marshal Soult, President of the Council, and M. Guizot, Minister of Foreign AfTairs, and written by M. de Mofras, who was attached to the French legation in Mexico. The first part of the work is devoted to Mexico, and certainly contains some remarkable passages. He speaks of the establish- ment of a European monarchy as a project which had been suggested as the only owi calculated to put an end to the divisions and annihilate the fac- tions which desolated that Ijeautiful country.* He says the Catholic religion and family relations, with the ancient possessors of the country, would be the first conditions required of the princes, who should be called to reconstruct there a monarchical government. He then adds: "The iiifantns of S|i:iiM, the French princes, and the archiiuljes' of' Aii>tii:i, fulfil thrsc condition.*, luid wt; may atTirni that, fmni vvliichevcr ([uartcr a competitor slioiihl present hihiselt, he would l)e ununtinoujiy welcuincd by tlie Mexican people. " What, then, are the interests of France in these ques- tions ? * The day after tliis speech was delivered, Mr. D. received from a friend in New Yorlc, who rnuld have had no knowl- ed;;i: of liis intention to speak, niiieli less of the topics he desisned to discuss, a translation iVoni a speech delivered to tlve Cortes of tSpain on the 1st of Diceniber, 1847, by Seiior Olo7.oj;a, a man of distinction, and supposed to he the same individual who was a few year.s sinec fir.-t minister of the Crown. By this sp^'ceh it appears that as reeently as 1846, a year after M. Guizot's declaration was made, and two years after M. de Mofras's book was published, Inr^e sums were expended by Spain for the purpose of estaiilisli- inji a monarehy in Mexico, and of placing a Spanish prince on the throne. The close eonnection uftlie governments of France and Spafn by the marriage of the Duke of Montpen- sier, the son of Lcmis Philippe, to the sister of Queen Isa- bella, gives additional imporiaiice-to these developments: " No one, either on this floor or elsewhere, ran deny that the project has been enteitaiind of establishiny a mon.inhy in Mexico, and to plaee a .Sp:ini-li priiici' on the Ihroiie. This project, conceived in the lime of the Conde Aramla, would have saved our colojiies from the sad late they have suffrred ; hut l>rou.'lit forward on this ocea-ioti, it was the most absurd idea that could have bc^en conceived. IJiit we have not only todeplon; havin;; I'xeited political airimosili>:s a nd the conseciuenees this has produced in that country ; we " The estidilishment in Mexico of a monarchy of any de- scription whatever, restin-; upon a solid basis, should be the lirst object of our policy; for we know that the instubility attached to the actual form of its government, brini;s with it disadvanta^jes for our commerce, and inconvenieneea for our people." He adds, that if Mexico is to preseiT^e her re- publican form of government, her incorporation nito the Union of the North would seem more favorable to France than her existing condition, on account of the development of commerce and al! the guarantees of liberty, security, and justice, which his compatriots would enjoy; and that Eng- land would lose, under such an order of things, what France would gain. Thus, though the dis- memberment and absorption of Mexico by the Uni- ted States, are regarded by M. de Mofras as prefer- able to the commercial monopoly and the " species of political sovereignty," as he denominates it, which Englitnd has exercised in that coimtry, the first object of France, according to him, should be a reconstruction of monarchy in Mexico, with a for- eign prince on the throne, and thisprince from some branch of the Bourbon family. The opinions con- tained in this book are not put forth as the mere speculations of a private person. They are the opinions of an agent of the government: the pub- lication is made by order of the king, and under the auspices of his two chief ministers, and so stated in the title page. I do not mean to hold the government of France responsible for all the opin- ions contained in that work ; but, can we believe that those I have quoted, concerning as they do so grave a subject as the international relations of France with Mexico, and of Mexico with the United States, would have been put forth without modification under such high official sanctions, if they had been viewed with positive disfavor.' It appears to me, that we are constrained to view them, like the declaration of M. Guizot, though certainly to a very inferior extent, as possessing an official character, which we are not at liberty wholly to disregard, when we consider the one in connection with the other. And now, sir, 1 ask, do not these opinions and declarations, especially when we look to the open and direct interference of Great Britain and France, by force of arms, in the domestic affairs of some of tlie South American republics within the last two years, furnish a just ground of apprehension, if we should retire from Mexico without a treaty and as enemies, that it might become a theatre for have also to lann^nt the money lost and tlirown away upon Mexican soil. And in order that the Cortes may not believe I am about to make accusations of so grave a character with- out possessing proofs to corroborate tlicwi, 1 now hold in my hand a statement of the sums expended and drawn from (he treasury in Havana in the year 18^6, signed by the Senor Navairo as auditor, and Musica as treasurer. In this state- ment there is an item which says: ' Paid bills of exchange remitted by the minister plenipotentiary ol her Majesty id Mexico foi" matters bi'longing to the service, $100,000.' But much greatir than this was the authority our minister in Mexico po-sessed for disposinjj of the public funds. I do not know wiiether he has made use of it. I do not t-ven know his name. I suppose ho. will employ them with scrupu- Imis honesty; but is the Spanish iieiple so bounlifully sup- plied with millions that they can atiord to srnil ilnin to the New World, for the purpose of sustainiiiL' political intrii'iies in tliatdistant region i" How many meritorious military men, who have shed their blood for the good of their country, and whose means of support have been cut down to the lowest possible point, might have been aided by these large sums? How much misery miiiht have been alleviated by the money which has been thrown away in this maniieri' And where do tlK^y find authority for squaadcring imlUuns to laster for- eign intriguus ?" the exercise of influences of a most iinfricndly character to us? Witii the aid of the monarchical party in Mexico, would there not be dariger that the avowed design of establishing a throne, might be realized ? The chances of open interposition are unquestional)ly diminished by the results of the war; but I am constrained to believe the chances of secret interference arc increased by the avidity imputed to us for territorial extension. Ought not this danger to influence, to some ex- tent, our own conduct, at least so far as to dis- suade us from abandoning, until a l)etter pros- pect of a durable peace shall exist, the advantage we have gained as belligerents? We know a great majority of the Mexican people are radically averse to any other than a republican form of gov- ernment; but we know, also, the proneness of a peo|ile among whom anarchy reigns triumphant, to seek any refuge which promises the restoration of tranquillity and social order. Mr. President, any attempt by a European power to inter|iose in the affairs of Mexico, either to estab- lish a monarchy, or to maintain, in the language of M.Guizot, " the equilibrium of the great political forces in America, would be the signal for a war far more important in its consequences, and inscru- table in its issues, tiian this. We could not sub- mit to such interposition if we would. The public opinion of the country would compel us to resist it. We are committed by the most formal decla- rations, first made by President Monroe in 1823, and repeated by the present Chief Magistrate of the Union. We have protested, in the mostsolemn manner, against any further colonization by Euro- pean powers on this continent. We have protested against any interference in the political concerns of the independent states in this hemisphere. A pro- test, it is true, does not imply that the ground it assumes is to be maintained at ail hazards, and if necessary, by force of arms. Great Britain pro- tested against the interference of France in the affairs of Spain in 1823; she has more recently protested against the al)sorption of Cracow by Austria as a violation of the political order of Europe, settled at Vienna by the allied sovereigns, and against the Montpensier marriage as a viola- tion of the treaty of Utrecht; but I do not remem- ber that in either case she did anything more than to proclaim to the world her dissent from the acts against which she entered her protest. It lias always seemed to me to be unwise in a government to put forth manifestoes without being prepared to maintain them by acts, or to make declarations of abstract principle until the occasion has arrived for enforcing them. The declarations of a President having no power to make war without a vote of Congress, or even to employ the military force of the country except to defend our own territory, is very different from the protest of a sovereign hold- ing the issues of peace and war in his own hands. But tlie former may not be lesseffectual when they are sustained, as I believe those of Presidents Monroe and Polk are, in respect to European in- terference on the American continent, by an undi- vided public opinion, even though they may not have nei'eivcd a formal response from Congress. I hold, therefore, if any su-eh interposition as that to which I have referred should take place, resist- ance on our part would inevitably follow, and we should become involved in controversies, of which no nvda could foresee the end. ■e to 1 Before I quit this part of the subject, I desire advert to some circumstances recently made public, and, if true, indicating significantly the extent to which Great Britain is disposed to carry her other encroachments on this continent, as in every other quarter of the globe. On the coast of Honduras, in Central America, commonly called the Musquito coast, there is a tribe of Indians bearing the same name, numbering but a few hundred individuals, and inhabiting some miserable villages in the neighborhood of Cape Gracias a Dios, near the fifteenth parallel of north latitude. Several hun- dred miles south is the river San Juan, running from Lake Nicaragua to the Caribbean sea, a ' space of about two degrees of longitude, with the town of Nicaragua at its mouth, and a castle or fort about midway between the town and the lake. The lake is only fifteen leagues from the Pacific, and constitutes, with the river San Juan, one of the proposed lines for a ship canal across the isthmus. Great Britain has recently laid claim to the river San Juan and the town of Nicaragua, if she has not actually taken possession of the latter. I have seen a conmiunicalion from the British consul-general at Guatemala, asserting the inde- pendence of the Mosqnitos as a nation. 1 have al.so seen a communication from the British con- sul at Bluefield, on the Mosquito shore, asserting that " the Mosquito flag and nation are under the special protection of the crown of Great Britain," and that " the limits which the British Govern- ment is determined to maintain as the right of the King of the Mosquitos" "comprehend the San Juan river." By Arrowsmith's London Atlas, published in 1840, the Mosquito territory covered about 40,000 square miles, nearly as large an area as that of the State of New York; but it did not extend below the twelfth parallel of latitude, while the river San Juan is on the eleventh. I have seen the protest of the State of Nicaragua against the occupation of the town of Nicaragua on the river San Juan, which, as the protest declares, has been from time immemorial in her quiet ^nd peaceable possession. The state of San Salvador, one of the Central American republics, also unites in • the protest, and declares her determination, if the outrage shall be carried into effect, to exert her whole power until the usurper "shall be driven from the limits of Central America." I understand, for I speak only from information, that Great Britain has for some time claimed to have had the Mosquitos, a mere naked tribe of In- dians of a few hundred persons, under her protec- tion.* Through her influence they appointed a king, who was taken to Belize, a British station on the bay of Yucatan, and there crowned. It is said, also, that on the decease of the king, he was found to have bequeathed his domhiions to her Britannic Majesty. It appears to be certain that she has, under this pretence of protection, extend- ed her dominion over an immense surface in Cen- - Extract of a letter from the Supreme Government of the State of Nirara^ua to the Sujircme Government of tile State of San Snlcitt: life, is suddenly uiiide use of liy enliiilitened Eiiglaiid for the pur- pose of plantiuK one of liiT fi'it in)on the Atlantic coat^t of this i^tiite; or nilhcr, Inr the purpo.-eof taking possession of the port for connnunicaiion lictwcen Europe, .Vnioriea, and Asia, and other iiMpiirtiint i oinitrics at the point where the gianil inlcroccanic canal is most practicable." 8 tral America; that s'le has at least one vessel of war, the Sun, commanded by an officer hearing an English name, " CommandcrTroUer, of tlie Mos- quito navy," as he is styled in a letter written by the British consul at Bluefield, and that she is still further extending herself, against the remonstrance of the Central American States. But these states, besides being physically weak, are distracted by internal feuds; and if the proceedings complained of be not the unauthorized acts of British agents, which Great Britain will disavow, it is hardly to be expected that a usurpation, so unjustifiably con- summated, will be abandoned on an appeal to the justice of the wrong-doer. Whether our govern- ment should remain quiescent under this encroach- ment upon near and defenceless neighbors, is a question worthy of consideration. Under any circumstances, it seems to me to afford little assu- rance of non-interference with the affairs of Mexi- co, if our forces were to be withdrawn without a treaty. There is another consideration which ought not to be overlooked. In July last, Lord George Ben- tinck made a motion for an address to her Britan- nic Majesty, praying her to take such measures as she might deem proper to secure the payment of the Spanish government bonds held by British sub- jects. Those bonds amount to about three hun- dred and eighty millions of dollars, and on about three hundred and forty millions no interest what- ever has been paid; and including this debt nearly seven hundred and thirty millions of dollars are due to British subjects by foreign governments — a sum equal to about one-fifth of her national debt. He contended, that " by the law of nations, from time immemorial, it has been held that the recov- ery of just debts is a lawful cause of war, if the country from which payment is du° refuses to listen to the claims of the country to whom money is owing." He quoted authorities to show that the payment of the debt, or the interest on it, might be enforced without having recourse to arms, though asserting the right to resort to force to compel it. 'He referred to the rich colonies of Spain, and especially Cuba, to show that there was wealth enough in its annual produce and rev- enue " to pay the whole debt due by Spain to British bond-holders." He referred to the naval foi-ce which Spain possessed to show that there would not be '-any very effective resis:ance," and that " the most timid minister" need not fear it. Having, in the course of his remarks, called the attention of the Minister of Foreign Affairs to the subject. Lord Palmerston, in responding to his call, entered into an extended statenient in respect to the foreign debt due to British subjects. He drew a distinction between transactions by one government with another, by British subjects with a foreign government, by British sulijecls with the subjects ofanother government, and between debts and acts of injustice and oppression. This dis- tinction, however, he treated as matter of expedi- ency and established practice. He assented to the doctrine laid down by the noble lord who made the motion for an .-iddrcss, and he said, if it were the wi.^e policy of England to lay down a rule that she would crtfjrce oljligations of this character with the same rigor as those of a different charac- ter, she would have a full and fair right, according to the laws of nations, to do so. And he conclud- ed by saying that England had not refrained from liking the steps urged by his noble friend, because she was " afraid of these stales, or all of ihem put together;" that it was not to be supposed the Brit- ish Parliament, or the British nation, would long remain patient under the wrong, and that they had am|>lc power and means to obtain justice. I pass over the doctrines put forth in the speech of Lord George Bentinck, and sanctioned by Lord Palmerston, though I believe it not perfectly clear that they can be maintained to the full extent, by an appeal to (jny well established principles of in- ternational law. You know, sir, that we have sometimes found British statesmen, even those holding places nearest to the tlirone, at fault, both in respect to matters of principle and matters of fact, though it is certainly but justice to concede to them the possession of more enlarged views of policy, combined with greater practical talent and tact, than is often to be found in the councils of European sovereigns. I pass over also an offen- sive allusion to the failure of two or three of the Slates of this Union to pay their debts, " a.s a stain upon the national character," (I use his own language,) when it is well known that the suspen- sion of payment was, temporary, and fi'om over- ruling necessity; that in most instances resump- tion has taken place; and that, in all, the most earnest efforts have been made to resume the dis- charge of their obligations. This imputation was cast upon us at the moment when our people, with one heart, were sending abroad their agricultural surplus to feed the famished population of Ire- land, not merely in the way of commercial ex- change, but in the form of donations, in ship-loads, public and private. And so far as the commercial portion is concerned, I believe our merchants have for months been draining our banks of specie, to send abroad to meet their own pecuniary obliga- tions, while for a time at least they were unable to draw on their debtors in England for the proceeds of the breadstuffs by which her subjects had been fed. But I pass by all this, and come to the important fact that Mexico was among the indebted foreign States enumerated in a report, on which the mo- tion of Lord George Bentinck was founded. What is the extent of her indebtedness I do not know, but I understand about seventy millions of dollars — and I believe it was but recently that the j^ublic domain in California was mortgaged to the credit- ors for a portion of this amount, though the lien is now said to be discharged. I appeal to honorable Senators to say, with these facts before them — with this public and offi- cial assertion of a principle, which, according to Lord Palnterston, the British government has only abstained from practically enforcing through mere considerations of policy — whether, if our forces were withdrawn from Mexico, and that country should become a ytrey to the anarchy and confusion which has reigned there so long, and which, if renesved, would iri all probability become univer- sal and hopeless — whether, I say, there would not be a temptation too strong to be resisted to reduce the principle tlius proclaimed to practice.' whether some portion of the Mexican territory might not be occupied as a guarantee for the payment of the debt due to British subjects, and thus another prin- ciple be violated, whicli we are committed to maintain? I do not mean to say that this consid- eration, if it stood alone, should absolutely con- trol our conduct. But as auxiliary to the graver 9 considerations to wliicli I liave referred, it appears to me that it may properly be allowed some weight — enough, sir, pcrlinps, to turn the scale, if it were already balanced — though, 1 tiiink, there is suffi- cient without it to incline us decisively to the side of continued occupation. Besides, British subjects have other extensive pecuniary interests in Mexico: they have large commercial establishments and lieavy investments of capital in the mining districts. If the political affairs of that country sliould fall into inextricable confusion, it is not to bo supposed that these great interests will be abandoned by Great Britain; and yet it is extremely dillicult to sec by what interpo- sition on her part they could be secured without the danger of collision between her and us. Mr. President, in what I have said in respect to the danger of foreign interposition, I have not re- lied upon the ephemeral opinions of the day, or on opinions expressed in public journals abroad, how- ever intimately those journals may be supposed to be connected with governments, as the organs of the views which it is deemed advisable to throw out, from time to time, for the public considera- tion or guidance. I have resorted to no irrespon- sible sources. I have presented opinions and dec- larations proclaimed with more or less of official sanction, and for the most part, with the highest — I mean the declarations of ministers, speaking for their governments to the popular body, and as the responsible representatives of sovereigns, holding in their own hands the authority to enforce, or attempt to enforce, what they proclaim. How far these declarations, taken in connection with the acts referred to, should influence our conduct, is a question on which we may not all agree. But it appears to me that it would be a great error in statesmanship to treat them as wholly unworthy of our consideration. Jealousy of our increasing power, commercial rivalry, political interests, all combine to give them importance. It is the prov- ince of a wise forecast to provide, as far as possible, that these adverse influences shall find no theatre for their exercise. To abandon Mexico would, it seems to me, throw wide open all the avenues for their admittance — one power for commercial mo- nopoly, and the other for political control — and perha|is impose on us the difficult and dangerou.'^ task of removing evils which a proper vigilance might have prevented. ft may be, Mr. President, that we shall have an early peace. I sincerely hope so. In this case, we must willulrav/ from Mexico; and it may per- haps be said that the dangers I have referred to as likely to result from our absence at the present moment may possibly be realized. These dangers, whatever they may be, we must incur whenever she shall tender us a peace, which we ought to accept. But there is a wide dilVerence between retiring as belligerents and enemies without a treaty, and as friends under an amicable ar- rangement, with solemn obligations on both sides \ to keep the peace. In the former case, probably : one of the first acts of ?vIexico would be to re- assemlde her army, anil her government might fall under the control of her military leaders. In the latter, amicable relations being restored, and military forces being unnecessary, at least to act against us, the peace party would have better hopes of maintaining themselves, of preventing the army, which is now regarded as responsible for the national disasters, from gaining the ascendency, and also of excluding influences from abroad, which would be hostile to her interests and fatal to the common tranquillity of both countries. In the references I have made to France and Great Britain, I have been actuated by no feeling of unkindness or hostility to either. Rapid" and wide-spread as lias been the progress of the latter, we have never sought to interfere with it. She holds one-third of the North American continent. She has established her dominion in the Bermu- das, the West Indies, and in Guiana, on the South American continent. She holds Belize, on the bay of Yucatan, in North America, with a district of about fourteen thousand square miles, if we may trust her own geographical delineations. We see her in the occupation of territories in every quar- ter of the globe, vastly, inordinately extended, and still ever extending herself. It is not easy to keep pace with her encroachments. A few years ago the Indus was the western boundary of her Indian empire. She has passed it. She has overrun Afighanistan and Beeloochistan, though I believe she has temporarily withdrawn from the former. She stands at the gates of Persia. She has discussed the policy of^ passing Persia, and making the Tigris her western boundary in Asia. One stride more would place her upon the shores of the Mediterranean; and her armies would no longer find their way to India' by the circumnavi- gation of Africa. Indeed, she has now, for all government purposes of communication, except the transportation of troops and munitions of war, a direct intercourse with the east. Her steamers of the largest class run from England to Alexan- dria; from Alexandria there is a water communi- cation with Cairo — some sixty miles; from Cairo it is but eight hours overland to Suez, at the head of the Red Sea; from Suez her steamers of the largest class run to Aden, a military station of hers at the mouth of the Red Sea, from Aden to Cey- lon, and from Ceylon to China. She is not merely conquering her way back from Hisdoostan. She has- raised her standard beyond it. She has en- tered the confines of the Celestial Empire. She has gained a permanent foothold within it; and who that knows her, can Ijelieve that pretexts will long be wanting to extend herdominion there? Though it is for commerce mainly that she is thus adding to the number and extent of her dependencies, it is not for commerce alone. The love of power and extended empire is one of the efficient principles of her gigantic efforts and movements. No island, however remote, no rock, however barren, on which the- cross of St. George has once been un- furled, is ever willingly relinquished, no matter how expensive or inconvenient it may be to main- tain it. She may be said literally to encircle the globe by an unbroken chain of dfpeiidencies. Nor is it by peaceful means that she is thus extending herself. She propagates commerce, as Moham- medanism propagated religion, by fire and sword. If .she negotiates, it is with fleets and armies at the side of her ambassadors, in order to use the language of her diplomacy, " to give force l:o their repre- sentations." She is essentially and eminently a military power, unequalled on the sea and unsur- passed on the land. Happily, the civilization, which distinguishes her at home, goes wiili her and obliterates some of the bloody traces of her march to unlimited empire. •^ / 10 ,' Much less has any unlciml fceliii"; dictated my --TcfertMicc to Fmnee. Our relations with her have usually liocii (if the innst friciuily character. From the foundation of our Government there has exist- ed, on our side, a strong feeling of syinpathy in litr prosperities and lier misfortunes, which no tem- porary interru[)tion of our friendship has been ahle to eradicate. There is reason for this feeling: it would not have been creditable to us as a people if it had proved a transient sentinient. She stood forth at a critical period in our contest for inde- pendence, and rendered us the most essential ser- vice by her cooperation and aid. The swords of AVashington and Lafayette were unsheathed on the same battle-fields. Our waters and our plains have been crimsoned with tiie generous blood of France. The names of Rochambeau, De Grasse, and D'Estaingare identified with our struggles for freedom. They have become, in some degree, American, and we give them to our children as names to be remembered for the gallant deeds of those who bore them. It is tiot surprising, under such circumstances, that in the survey of the European system, we should have been accustomed to regard France as the power most likely, in the progress of events, to become the rival of England on the ocean as she has been on the land : and with a laree portion of our people, if the wish has not been "parent," it has, at least, been companion "to the thought." For this reason, the declara- tion of M. Guizot was considered, independently of all views of right, as peculiarly ungracious, and as a demonstration of feeling totally inconsistent with the ancient friendship by which the two countries have been united. I have never believed it to be in accordance with the sentiments of the French people. And so strong has been my reli- ance on their right judgment and feeling, that I confess I have thought it not unlikely that an inter- position in our affairs, so completely at variance with aniicalile relations, which ought to be held sacred, might be arrested by a more decisive inter- position at home against its authors. I rcjicat, I have spoken in no spiritof unkindness either towards Great Britain or France. I desire nothing but friendship with them — close, cordial, constant, mutually beneficial friendship. 1 speak of them historically, as tiiey exist and exhibit themselves to the eyes of the civilized world. Thus far, I have considered the probable conse- quences of retiring from Mexico, as they are likely to affect our political relations with her, and pos- sibly with other States. I now turn, for a single moment only, to a different class of considera- tions — I mean considerations arising out of our claims to indemnity for injuries. Although the war was not cotvimenced to secure it, this is one of the avowed objects for which it has been pros- ecuted. Shall we. abandon the position we have taken, and leave this object unaccomplished? Shall we not rather retain what we have acquired, until our just claims -are satisfied.' To do otherwise would be to have incurred an enormous e.xpendi- ture of treasure and blood to no purpose^ — to have prosecuted the war till we had the means of in- demnifying ourselves in our own hands, and then voluntarily to relinquish them. Such a course seems to me utterly irreconcilable either with jus- tice to ourselves or with sound policy. If I am not mistaken in the views I have expressed, it would be an abandonment of indemnity without getting rid of the war, on which we must now rely lo procure it. These considerations do not apply to the policy suggested by the honorable Senator from South Carolina. FIc proposes to take indem- nity into our own hands by occupying a portion of northern or central Mexico, and holding it without a treaty. My remarks are only applicable to the policy of withdrawing from Mexico altogether, and leaving the adjustment of differences to future negotiations. Having thus declared myself in favor of the oc- cupation of Mexico until she shall con.sent to make peace, I deem it proper to say, in connection with this subject, that I have been uniformly opposed, and that I am still opposed, to all schemes of con- quest for the acquisition of territr)ry. In this re- spect, I concur in what the Senator from South Carolina has said, and for nearly the same reasons. I arn opposed to all such schemes, because they would be inconsistent with the avowed objects of the war ; because they would be incompatible with justice and sound (lolicy; and because, if success- ful, they would be utterly subversive of the funda- mental principle of our political system, resting as it does on a voluntary association of free and inde- pendent States. I have been uniformly in favor of the most energetic measures in the prosecution of the war, because I believed them most likely to bring it to a close. In carrying our arms to the enemy's capital and occujiying his territory, I can see nothing inconsistent with the principles of jus- tice or the usages of civilized Slates. In the pros- ecution of a war undertaken to procure a redress of injuries, the territories or property of an enemy may he seized for the express purpose of conijiel- ling him to do justice. More may be taken than would constitute a fair indemnity for actual inju- ries, provided it be done with the intention of re- storing the surplus when he shall consent to make peace on reasonable terms. It is in this spirit, and with this intention, that my cooperation has been given to the vigorous prosecution of the war. We have a right to jnsist on a fair boundary; we may exact indemnity for injuries ; we may demand in- demnification for the expenses of the war, if we please. But here all right ceases; and if, when this is conceiled, we have more on our hands, we are bound, on every principle of law and good con- science, to make restitution. It is admitted on all hands that Mexico is incapable of indemnifying us in money. But she may do so by ceding to us territory which is useless to her, which she has not the ability to defend, and which may be useful to us. I have always been in favor of acquiring territory on just terms. The acquisition of Cali- fornia has always appeared to me very desirable, on account of its ports on the Pacific. I have uniformly voted for acquiring it, when the propo- sition has come before us. I believe, on the first occasion, 1 was in a minority of ten or eleven. .My opinion is unchanged. Indeed, it is confirmed by the fact, that California has, by our military operations, become forever detached from Mexico, if it were to be abandoned by us, its forty thou- sand inhabitants would undoubtedly establish an independent government for themselves, and they would maintain it if undisturbed by foreign inter- ference. I take the actual condition of things as I find it, and with an earnest desire to fulfil all the obligations it devolves on us in a spirit of justice to- wards Mexico and towards the people of California. 11 I concur also in what the honorable Senator from South Carolina has said in relation to the in- fluence of war on our political institutions. No man can deplore it under any circumstances, more than myself. Independently of the evils which it always brings in its train, there are considerations connected with our political organization and the nature of our social progress, which render it doubly pernicious in its tendencies. The final suc- cess of the experiment we are making in free gov- ernment may depend, in some degree, on a steady maintenance of the spir t of peace, in which our political system had its origin, and in which it has thus far been administereH. Great as is our ca- pacity for war, our whole scheme of goveriiment is averse to it. The greatest possible economy in expenditure; the least possible patron£ige in the hands of the Executive; the smallest pecuniary exactions from the people, consistent with our ab- solute wants; the aJisence of all demands on the public treasury, which call for unusual contribu- tions of revenue or promote excessive disburse- ments; the exemption of the country from all exigencies which devolve on the legislative and executive departments of the government the ex- ercise of extraordinary powers; — these are the con- ditions under which the ends of our political or- ganization are most likely to be fulfilled. Sir, none of these conditions belong to a state of war. Ex- travagant disbursements; extraordinary contribu- tions of revenue, present or prospective — present, in augmented burdens of taxation, prospective, in the shape of loans and anticipations of income, leading ultimately to taxation; extraordinary pow- ers summarily, and sometimes arbitrarily exer- cised; — these are the inseparable companions of war; and they are inimical to the very genius of our social system. There are considerations, which, in my judg- ment, render a war with Mexico peculiarly unfor- tunate, and which justify^ all the efforts we have made to bring it to an amicable termination. We are mutually engaged in carrying out on this con- tinent the experiment of free government, which in all other ages has proved aljortive. We are try- ing it under eminently auspicious circumstances. We have no strong Governments around us, found- ed upon antagonist principles, and adverse in their e.xample and influence to the success of ours. We are sustained by the faculty of popular representa- tion, which was unknown, or at least imperfectly known, to the free states of antiquity, and by force of which we have been enabled to carry out, on geographical areas of indefinite extent, an organization which had previously been deemed applicable only to communities of limited popula- tion and territory. It is natural, under these cir- cumstances, that the friends of free government, wherever they are to be found, should turn to us as the last hope of liberal institutions. They look to us for examples of moderation and forbearance in our intercoiu'se with foreign nations — especially those having forms of government analogous to our own — and for an exemption from the evil pas- sions which have embroiled the countries of the Old World, and involved them, century after century, with brief intermissions, in wars of ambition and revenge. In asserting the superiority of our own form of government, the strength of the argument will be weakened, if we shall be found no more exempt than those, which are less popular, from strife and contention with neighboring States. Re- garding the success of our institutions as affecting deeply the welfare of our race, and vindicating the competency of mankind to self-government, I have always esteemed it peculiarly unfortunate that any cause of alienation should have existed of sufft-^ cient magnitude to induce the two principal repub- lics of the western hemisphere to turn their arms against each other. The cause of liberal govern- ment is injured, and far more deeply injured, than it has been by the dissension of the republics in the southern portion of the American continent. These are considerations which it were well for us always to keep in view — in peace, that we may not rush hastily into war; in war, that we may spare no honorable effort for a restoration of peace. There is yet another consideration of a kindred character. While the monarchies of Europe are at peace with each other, and social improvement is advancing, on the continent at least, with unpar- alleled rapidity, almost the only wars now waging among neighboring States are between us and Mexico, and between some of the South American republics. I desire, as much as anyone can, to see these dissentions composed, and to see these republican States resume the fulfilment of their great mission among the nations — the maintenance of the principles of political liberty, and the culti- vation of the arts of civilization and peace. In these views I concur with the Senator from South Carolina. But here I am constrained to separate from him. When we come to practical measures, our paths lie wide apart. It is for the very reasons I have just stated, that I cannot assent to the policy he proposes. I believe it calculated to prolong the war, not to terminate it; to keep alive the spirit of animosity which divides us from Mexico, instead of restoring the friendly relations which ought to exist between us. I am in favor, then, of standing as we are. And, sir, if she shall refuse to make peace; if we must continue in the occupation of her capital and three-fourths of her territory, it may be in the order of Providence that we shall, through this very necessity, become the instruments of her po- litical and social regeneration. In the party con- flicts which distract her, the means may be found of consolidating her government on a republican basis, of healing her dissensions, and of^ uniting her to us in bonds of friendship by an exercise of magnanimity and forbearance in the final adjust- ment of our difficulties with her. I believe even now something of the salutary influence of our presence in. her capital and principal sea-ports, begins to be felt. The abolition of transit duties, the reduction of the impost on foreign articles of necessity and convenience, and a freer commerce among the Mexican State.?, may, if continued, strike a fatal blow at the anti-commercial system by which her people have been oppressed, and the internal abuses by which her rulers have grown rich — a system of mal-administration not even equalled by that which exists in old Spain. The higher improvement in government, in the arts, and in civilization under all its forms, which dis- tinguishes our own people, may, by force of actual contact, be communicated to tlie Mexicans, and lay the foundation of an improved social order. Startling as the reflection is, it is ne\ertheles3 true, that civilization, and even Christianity, have 12 /nrtimos been propagated by arms, wlierc they /iuUI oihcrwisc liave been liopelessly excluded. Thus, the very passions wliitdi suein filled only to desolate human society, may, in the hands of Providence, become ihe agents of its advancement. Let u-s, then, hope and trust that the contest in which we are engaged with a neighboring |Mnvor, deplorable as we all consider il, may be an instru- ment of social and political amelioration to our adversary. The Senator from South Carolina has said, in his emphatic language, that we are "tied toacorpse." It is a .striking figure, Mr. President, and partakes strongly of the boldness in which the ilUi.jtrations of that disunguished Senator are always conceived. Mexico is, indeed, prostrate — almost politically inanimate, if you please — under the oppressions which have been heaped upon her, year after year, by unscrupulous rulers. Ikit I should be sorry to believe her beyond the power of resuscitation, even by human means. I do not expect, as our contact with her becomes more intimate, to see her, like the dead body touched by the bones of the prophet, spring, at a single bound, to life and strength. Dut 1 hope to see her — possibly through our instrumentality — freed fioui the despoticsway of her military rulers, and risini^, by sure degrees, to the national impiirtance I wish lier to possess — Older and tranquillity first, next social improve- ment and stable government, and at last an honor- able rank among the nations of the earth. I con- template no direct interference with her govern- ment — no permanent system of protection to be exercised over it — no alliance with her beyond what may be necessary to secure to us the objects of peace. But [ do contemplate a treaty, stipulat- ing for commercial arrangements, for protection and security to our own citizens in their future in- tercourse with her, and no withdrawal of our forces without il, at least until all chance of obtaining one shall prove hopeless. If we were to retire now, all commerce between her and us would cease and be transferred to our rivals, our frontier would be a line of war, not a boundary between peaceful neighbors; and unless the tide of conquest should be poured back upon her under the provocations such a condiliou of our relations would almost ne- ces.sarily superinduce, no citizen of the United Stales could be expected, for years to come, to plant his foot on Mexican soil. War dissolves the political and commercial relations of independent States, so far as they rest upon voluntary agree- ment. It is only by a treaty of peace that tiiey can be revived, or new relations be substituted for the old. _ Mr. President, advocating as I do the occupa- tion of Mexico until she shall consent to make peace, it may be incumbent on me to slate in what manner I think it can best be maintained. And here I must say, I think the estimates of the effect- ive force in the field have been greatly overstated. I propose no specific plan for adoption. I leave all practical measures in the hantis of those to whom they belong. I only purjiose to state what suggests itself to my mind, as advi.sable. I think we should find it most advantageous to remain much as we are, cxcc|:iting to occupy such ports on the Pacific as our fleet ni:iy reduce and maintain as commercial avenues to the interior. It may, however, become necessary to occujiy San Luis Potosi and Zacatccas for the protection of the mining operations in those Slates, and the agricul- tural districts near the city of Mexico, to command supplies for the army. 1 should consider an army of twenty-five thousand wetl-disciplined, effective men, the smallest number adequate to the purpose of maintaining positions, keeping open communi- cations from the coast to the interior, and dis|iers- ing the enemy's troops if they shall be recm- bodied; but in order to keep up such a force, we should require a nominal organization of at least forty thousand men, with full thirty thousand un- der pay. Without the general staff, ilie twenty- five regiments of regulars now in service, and the ten new regiments proposed by the bill, will con- siitute such a force; and when the latter shall be raised and brought into the field, a portion of the volunteers may be discharged, if it shall be found prudent to do so. Many of the regiments are greatly reduced in numbers, and, as I under- stand, are anxious to return home. I doubt now whether there are more than twenty-five thousand effective men in. all Alexico, though the rolls show over forty thousand. [General Cass, chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs, here said, the Adjutant General was of opinion that they did not exceed twenty-four thousand.] Some of the returns, on which the Adjutant General's report is founded, are of as early a tfate as August last. It will be recollected that last summer, when there was great anxiety in relation to General Scott, statements of the number of his troops were pub- lished here. Tliey were founded on the returns in the Adjutant General's oflice — and in his official report of the battles before the city of Mexico, General Scott complained that his force had been greatly overstated. He said it had been " trebled" in these returns, if I recollect rightly, and that the army had been " disgusted" by the exag2:eration. The returns of the army now should, in like man- ner, be subjected to great deductions in order to obtain the real effective force. If the ten regiments proposed by the bill are authorized, months will be required to raise them; they will not proliably, as the chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs has stated, give many more than seven thousand men, and in the mean time the 'army will become constantly diminished by the casualties of service. For these reasons, and for those ijiven — and so ably given — some days since by my honora- ble friend f^i-om Mississippi, [Mr. Davis,] I support the bill. I support it for another reason, which has governed me from the Cfunmenccment of the war: to place at the control of the Executive the men and means deemed necessary to bring it to an honorable termination. As hostilities are now suspended, the chief prov- ince of the army will be to maintain internal tran- quillity, support the civil authorities in the execu- tion of the laws, to free the country fi'Oin the robber and guerrilla bands by which it is infested, ani sub- serve the great purposes of government by aftnrd- ing security to liberty, property, and life — a security the Mexicans have not often fully enjoyed. The very exercise of these beneficent agencies will tend to disarm hostility towards us with the thinking portion of the population. It will place our armies m a most favorable contrast with hers, which have been scourges i-alher than pi'otectors to their own countrymen. I would, if possible, have no more bloodshed. I would make our armies the protect- ors, not the enemies of the Mexican people, and 13 render them siil^servientto theeradication of abuses and to tlie institution of a belter civil administra- tion, under Mexican magistrates, al)staitiii)g from ail interference with the frame of the government, and changfng in its action only what, b)' uiiiver^^al consent, requires to be changed. If this course were to be adopted and steadily pursued, I should earnestly hope its effect would be, at no distant time, to make the capital, under our protection, the centre of an influence which would lead to the reestablishment of the federative system on a du- rable basis, and give to that distracted country the settled order which is alcne necessary to make her happy and prosperous. To abandon the city of Mexico would, I fear, put an end to all these prospects and liopes. That city is the political as well as the financial centre of the Repul)lic. It is there governments have been instituted and deposed, armies levied, revenue sys- tems devised and carried into execution. So long as we hold it and control the adjoining districts, 1 believe nothing but imprudence or mismanagement can raise uj) a formidable opposition to us. If we abandon it, all the resources of the country, which it commands, will again be at the control of its rulers, to be employed against us in the renewal of active hostilities. Before it was captured, en- ergetic movements seemed to me our true policy. Now that it is in our undisputed possession, our leading object should be to introduce better com- mercial and financial systems, and let them work out under our protection their legitimate results. Great qualities are necessary in him who is charged with the execution of these delicate and responsible functions. He should have prudence, self-control, a knowledge of civil affairs, of the country, of the people, and their character, and, if possible, their language. Established institutions, existing usages, sometimes prejudices, even, must be respected. Some of the most disastrous re- verses which have befallen armies of occupation, have had their origin in violations of the prevailing customs and feelings of the people. To avoid this fatal error, everything depends on the discretion and wi.sdoin of the directing authority. It may be, that all reasonable expectations will be disappointed; that the hostility of Mexico will prove unappeasable; that she will prefer the politi- cal disorganization, which now exists, to an ami- cable arrangement with us. If so, circumstances must dictate the course to be pursued when this conviction shall be forced on us. But, sir, let us not adopt such a conclusion hastily. Let us rely on the influence of more rational motives to give us peace. And now, sir, I submit whether this course had not better be pursued for a while, if I am right in supposing the temporary occupation of Mexico, under discreet officers, may lead to a stable peace, rather than to withdraw our forces, and leave the adjustment of difficulties to the uncertain chance of a restoration of a responsible government, to be terminated at last, perhaps, by the renewed arbit- rement of arms. I liave thus stated with frankness the views I en- tertain in respect to the future conduct of the war. Notwithstanding the anxious consideration I have given to the sulyect, they may be erroneous. It is a question of great difficulty, on which difl'erences of opinion may well exist, and on which a mis- taken course of policy may lead to the most un- pleasant, consequences. Whatever faith I may entertain in tlie soundness of the opinions I have advanced, I certainly should liave more if they were not totally at variance with those of gentle- men possessing, from longer experience, much higher claims than myself to puMie confidence. But I have not on this account thought proper to withhold them, knowing, as we do, that, from the very contrariety and conflict of thou^'ht and con- viction, valuable deductions may sometimes be drawn. Mr. President, I feel that I have already tres- passed toolongon the indulgcnceof the Senate; but I am unwilling to close without askitig its attention for a very few moments to some considerations connected with our future growth and progress, and with the influence we must, in spite of our- selves, exert over the destinies of Mexico. They arc no new opinions: they have been expressed years ago, both in public and private. Sir, no one who has paid a moderate degree of attention to the laws and elements of our increase, can doubt that our population is destined to spread itself across the American continent, filling up, with more or less completeness, according to at- tractions of soil and climate, the space that inter- venes between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. This eventual, and, perhaps, in the order of time, this not very distant extension of our settlements over a tract of country, with a diameter, as we go westward, greatly disproportioned to its length, becomes a subject of the highest interest to us. On the whole extent of our northern flank, from New Brunswick to the point where the northern bound- ary of Oregon touches the Pacific, we are in con- tact with British colonists, having, for the most part, the same common origin v/ith ourselves, but controlled and moulded by political influences from the Eastern hemisphere, if not adverse, certainly not decidedly friendly to us. The strongest, tie which can be relied on to bind us to mutual oflices of friendship and good neighborhood, is that of commerce; and this, as we know, is apt to run into rivalry, and sometimes becomes a fruitful source of alienation. From our northern boundary, we turn to our southern. What races are to border on us here, what is to be their social and political character, and what their means of annoyance? Are our two frontiers, only seven parallels of latitude apart when we pass Texas, to be flanked by settlements having no common bond of union with ours? Our whole southern line is conterminous, throughout its whole extent, with the territories of Mexico, a large portion of which is nearly unpopulated. The geographical area of Mexico is about ],. 500,000 square miles, and her population about 7,000,000 snuls. The whole norihern and central portion, taking the twenty-sixth parallel of latitude as the dividing line, containing more than 1,000,000 square miles, has about 650,000 inhabitants — • about two inhabitasils to three square miles. The southern portion, with less than 500,000 square miles, has a population of nearly six and a half millions of souls, or thirteen inhabitania to one square mile. The aboriginal races, which occupy and overrun a portion of California and New Mex- ico, must there, as everywhere else, give way be- fore the advancing wave of civilization, either to be overwhelmed by it, or to be driven upon perpetu- ally contracting areas, wliere, from a diminution of their accustomed sources of subsistence, they must ultimately become extinct by force of an invincible 14 We soc tlie opcrnlion of tliis Inw in every )n of this continent. We Imve no power to iriA it, if we would. It is the behest of Pri>vi- ^enee that idleness, mid ifjnorance, iind harharism, shall give plaee lo inrtions will cross our south- ern boundary. Settlements will be formed within the unoccupied and sparsely-peopled territory of Mexico. Uncongenial habits and tastes, differ- ences of political opinion and principle, and num- berless other elements of diversity will lead to a separation of these newly-formed societies from the inefficient government of Mexico. They will not endure to be held in subjection to a system, which neither yields them protection nor offers any incentive to their proper development and growth. They will form independent States on the basis of constitutions identical in all their lead- ing features with our own; and they will naturally seek to unite their fortunes to our.s. The fate of California is already sealed: it can never be re- united to Mexico. The operation of the great causes, to which I have alluded, must, at no dis- tant day, detach the whole of northern Mexico from the southern portion of that republic. It is for the very reason that she is incapable of de- fending her possessions against the elements of disorder withm and the progress of better influences from without, that I desire to see the inevitable political change which is to be wrought in the condition of her northern departments, brought about without any improper interference on our Fart. I do not speak of our military movements. refer to the time when our difficulties with her shall be healed, and when she shall be left to the operation of pacific influences — silent, but more powerful than the arm of force. For the reason that she is defencelsss, if for no other, I should be opposed to all schemes of conquest. Acquisition by force is the vice of arbitrary governments. I desire never to see it the reproach of ours. For the sake of the national honor, as well as the per- manency of our politic^il institutions, I desire not to see it. The extension of free government on this continent can only be arrested, if arrested at all, by substituting war for the arts of peace. Leave it to itself, and nothing can prevent tlie progress of our population across the continent. ^tr. Ji-fforson, with liis prophetic forecast, foretold this result forty years ago. He prophesied the peaceful progress of our peojile to the Pacific. He foresaw them forming new settlements, qnd, when strong enough to maintain themselves, organizing independent societies and governing themselves by constitutions and laws analagous to bur own. It is true, he believed the area of freedom might be enlarged, advantageously to ourselves and others, without extending to the same broad limits the area of our jurisdiction. It was the progress and the triumph of great principles of political right, to which his philoso])hical mind instinctively turned as to the legitimate aim and boundary of our am- bition and desires. Since his day the public mind in this country has greatly outrun his anticipations of our progress. It looks to the extension of our Constitution and laws over regions which were formerly considered beyond our reach as integral portions of the same system of government. Mod- ern improvements have given great strength to this prevailing sentiment. It is possiljle by steam power, if we can succeed in making the proper ap- plication of it, over so broad a surface, to reach the Pacific ocean from Lake Michigan, or the Mis- sissippi, in eight or nine days — a period of time less than that which was required to travel from Boston to Pliiladelphia, when the Congress of the American colonies first assembled in the latter city. Under these circumstances, the extension of our political boundary so as to embrace all territory we may justly call our own, seems no longer to be considered a questionable policy. If other dis- tricts, not now within the territories of the Union, shall found independent governments, and shall desire to unite themselves to us on terms mutually acceptable, it is a question which concerns only them and us, and in which no stranger can be per- mitted to intrude. When the time comes for the settlement of any such questions, they will doubt- less be considered with all the solemnity which belongs to propositions involving the public wel- fare. To those with whom the decision belongs let us leave them, with the assurance that the wis- dom which has governed and guided us so long, will still point out to us the path of liberty, tran- quillity and safety. One position we have assumed, and I trust it will be maintained with inflexible firmness — that no Power beyond this continent can be permitted to interfere with our progress, so long as there is on our part no violation of its own rights. I would resist, at the outset, as matter of the gravest offence, all indications of such interference. If the abstract right could be asset ted on grounds of in- ternational law, there has been nothing in the nature of our extension, or the means by which it has been accomplished, to warrant its application to us. From the formation of our Government, for nearly three-quarters of a century, military {lower — brute force — has had no agency in the con- quests we have achieved. We have overrun no provinces or countries abounding in wealth. Our capital has witnessed no triumphal entries of re- turning armies, bearing with them the spoils and tro{>hies of conquest. Our ships have not been seen returning from subjugated districts, freighted with the tributes of an extended commerce. In the extension of our commercial intercourse, we have not, like our Anglo-Saxon mother, been seen hewing down with the sword, with unrelenting and remorseless determination, every obstacle 15 whicli opposed itself to Iicr progress. Our career thus far lias been stained by no such conipanioii- sliip with evil. Our conquests have been the peace- ful achievements of enterprise and industry — the one leading the way into the wilderness, the other following and com])leting the acquisition by the formal symbols of occupancy and possession. They jiave looked to no objects beyond the con- version of uninhabited wilds into abodes of civili- zation and freedom. Their only arms were the axe and the ploughsliare. The accumulations of wealth they havebrouirhl were all extracted from the bosom of the earth by the unc (lending hand of labor. If, in the progress of ourpeoplc westward, they shall occupy territories not our own, but to become ours by amicable arrangements with the governments to which they belong, which of the nations of the earth shall venture to stand forth, in the face of the civilized world, and call on us to pause in this great work of human improvement ? It is as much the interest of Europe as it is ours, that we should be permitted to follow undisturbed the path which, in the allotment of national fortunes, we seem ap- pointed to tread. Our country has long been a refuge for those who desire a lai-ger liberty than they enjoy under their own rulers. It is an outlet for the political disaffection of the Old World — for social elements which might there have be- come sources of agitation, but which are here si- lently and tranquilly incorporated into our system, ceasing to be principles of disturbance as they at- tain the greater freedom, which was the object of their separation from less congenial combinations in other quarters of the globe. Nay, more; it is into the vast reservoir of the western wilderness, teeming with fruilfulnessand fertility, that Europe is constantly pouring, under our protection, her human surplusses, unable to draw from her own bosom the elements of their support and repro- duction. She is literally going along with us in our march to prosperity and power, to share with us its triumphs and its fruits. Happily, this con- tinent is not a legitimate theatre for the politi- cal arrangements of the sovereigns of the eastern hemisphere. Their armies may range, undis- turbed by us, over the plains of Europe, Asia, and Africa, dethroning monarchs, partitioning kingdoms, and subverting republics, as interest or caprice may dictate. But political justice demands that in one quarter of the globe self-government, freedom, the arts of peace, shall be permitted to work out, unmolested, the great purposes of hu- man civilization Mr. President, I trust there will be nothing in the final adjustment of our difficulties with Mexico to impair, in any degree, the moral of our example in the past. Our course, heretofore, has been one of perpetual exertion to bring about an amicable arrangement with her. I trust we shall persevere in the same course of conduct, whatever unwilling- ness she may exhibit to come to terms. Etiter- taining the opinions which 1 have expressed, I naturally feel a deep solicitude, as an American citizen, that our pul)lic conduct should comport with the dignity of the part we seem destined to ferform in the great drama of international politics, desire to see our good name unsullied, and the character we have gained for moderation, justice, and scrupulousness in the discharije of our na- tional obligations, maintained unimpaired. In these, let us be assured, our great strength consists: for it is these which make us strong in the opinion of mankind. In what I have said concerning the progress of our people over the unpopulated regions west of us, and in respect to our responsibilities as a nation, I trust I shall have incurred no imputation of in- consistency. On the contrary, I trust I shall be considered consistent in all I have said. I regard our extension, as I have endeavored to fore- shadow it, to be the inevitable result of causes, the operation of which it is not in our power to arrest. At the same time, I hold it to be our sacred duty to see" that it is not encouraged or promoted by improper means. While I should consider it the part of weakness to shrink from extension, under the apprehension that it might bring with it the elements of discord and disunion, as our political boundaries are enlarged, I should hold it to be the part of folly and dishonor to attempt to accelerate it by agencies incompatible with our obligations to other nations. It is the dictate of wisdom and of duty to submit ourselves to the operation of the great causes which are at work, and which will work on in spite of us, in carrying civilization and freedom across t^je American continent. In advocating a continued occupation of the cities and territory we have acquired in Mexico, until she shall assent to reasonable terms of peace, I trust also that I shall be deemed consistent with myself. Deprecating war as the greatest of ca- lamities, especially for us, I desire to see this war brought to a close at the earliest practicable day. I am in favor of whatever measures are most likely to accomplish this desirable end. I am opposed to an abandonment of our position: 1st. Because I believe it would open a field of domestic dissension in Mexico, which might be fatal to her existence as an independent state, or make her take refuge in the arms of despotism; 2d. Because it might lead to external interference in her affairs of the most dangerous tendency both to her and us; and 3d. Because I fear that we should only gain a tem(iorary suspension of hostilities, to be renewed undergreatdisadvantagestous,and with every pros- pect of a longer and more sanguinary contest. Mr. President, it is this last consideration, which weighs most heavily upon my own mind. I hold it to be indispensable to the public welfare, under all its aspects, that we should have, at the termi- nation of this contest, a solid and stable peace. Unpromising as the condition of things seems at the present moment, my hope still is, that firmness tempered with pruden'-e, will give us, not a mere outward pacification with secret irritation rankling within, but substantial concord and friendship, which shall leave no wound unhealed. And, sir, we should be satisfied with nothing short of an accommodation of diiTerences which will enable the country with confidence to lay aside its armor, and to resume the peaceful pursuits to which, by the inexorable law of our condition, we must look for prosperity and safety. My advice, then, (if I may presume to advise,) is, to stand firm, holding ourselves ready at all times to make a peace, and carrying into our nego- tiations for that purpose a determination to cement a future good understanding with our adver.sary, by an adjustment of our differences on terms of jus- tice, moderation, and magnanimity. LTBRftRV OF CONGRESS 111 lii ll lili iili III" I'l^l I ^' S' e A 011 445 849 6 •