The Spirit Of Democracy

The "No-more-Territory" Issue.

The Whig party, in the Northern States, in order to erect a platform upon which the Whigs of the North and South can stand, have been and are now attempting to get up the issue of "no more territory." Whether they will succeed, is yet to be determined. The Philadelphia Ledger, a neutral paper, has the following sensible article in regard to this new issue of the Whig party:

“NO MORE TERRITORY.

At the last session of Congress, a Southern senator introduced a resolution, declaring that no more territory should be acquired by the U. States. It was laid on the table. At the late 'whig' convention, in Massachusetts, for nominating State officers, a similar resolution was offered, and laid on the table. And there let them lie, will be the voice of nine in ten of all American citizens. Ever since the United States became a nation, they have been acquiring territory. Their first acquisition was Louisiana, their second Florida, their third Oregon, their fourth Texas—the whole constituting territory exceeding all that of the old thirteen east of the Mississippi. And why did they acquire these territories? Simply because they were necessary or convenient to us, and could be obtained with the consent of the owners. And from these acquisitions six new States have already entered the Union, and have now a population equal to half of the whole population of the old thirteen in 1790. At this rate of increase, fifty years will not elapse before the remainder of these acquisitions will contain as many people as those six new States now. And then where will the whole increase go?— Where will be the outlet, the drain, of our whole surplus?

No more territory! Such an idea could be entertained only by a few superannuated politicians, who, because they have stood still for forty or fifty years, and are now incapable of moving, take for granted that the nation must do likewise. But of all nations now existing, the United States are the most expansive, and therefore the last that ought to think of "no more territory." They must increase rapidly.— Natural laws, governing the energies of the Anglo American race, and the advantages of their position, continually send them forward. Can such a people be stopped in their career of expansion, and confined within certain limits? The idea is as rational as that of confining the Mississippi. The U. States will overflow; or the race must increase, and will not bear crowding. And the surplus must flow into American territory, to increase the family of the American Union, or into foreign territory, to become independent nations. No large portion flowing north or south can become Canadian colonists or Mexican slaves. The efflux to the British colonies will accelerate their independence. That to Mexico can never be absorbed by the Mexican nation. However peaceful they go forth, they will proceed as a dominant race, to overpower, absorb, or extirpate, and not to be ever absorbed by the feeble Mexicans. Hence when they are firmly entrenched on both sides of the Union, as they will be in time, they must be either friends or enemies, members of our federal family, or jealous rivals. Which is best? Common sense can give but one answer.

This raises the question, what shall we do with Mexico if no peace is made? And late accounts afford no little hope of peace. The 'no more territory' party, if the Union contains fools sufficient to constitute one, will say, let us abandon Mexico, with or without a peace, and defend our present boundary of Texas. But wiser men will say, that if we do not subdue Mexico now, we shall be obliged to do it hereafter, when it shall be involved in the toils of some European government able to give us trouble; and thus all the blood and money of the present war will be wasted, and we shall be obliged to fight these battles over again. Now that we are engaged in the work, let us finish it, especially as England will not, and France cannot interfere."