Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up free
Foreign News
November 25, 1846
Herald Of The Times, And Rhode Islander
Newport, Newport County, Rhode Island
What is this article about?
Commentary from National Intelligencer questioning U.S. administration's plans for conquering and governing Mexico, drawing parallels to Napoleon's Spain and French Algeria, emphasizing constitutional inconsistencies.
Clipping
OCR Quality
95%
Excellent
Full Text
Home Thrusts.
Few articles that meet our notice, are more pregnant with meaning, than the extract below from a communication in the National Intelligencer. The opponents of the war may well challenge the friends of the administration to answer such questions:
"What is to be done with Mexico proper if we conquer it? Is it to be under military law, as are the portions of Mexican territory now subdued, giving to the officers of our armies despotic powers?
Should the Mexicans resist with a pertinacity like that displayed by the inhabitants of old Spain in opposition to Napoleon, will it not be necessary, in order to preserve any control which may be attained, to establish fortresses in every part of their country?
Can it be necessary to insist upon the inconsistency of such a state of things with our Declaration of Independence, or with the Constitution of the United States?
Would the possession of the city of Mexico secure to us a peaceful control over the nation any more than did that of Moscow or Madrid secure an analogous result to Napoleon?
Should we have more comfort and profit in the sovereignty of Mexico than the French had in Spain, or have now in Algeria?
Is it not evident that the only portion of the Mexican empire which can become a part of our Republic are those which, being peopled by the same races, will be willing to become members of our Confederacy? Must not each member of that Confederacy be self-governed, consistently with our constitution, which has endowed our National Government only with certain limited powers, agreeable to which it cannot control any one member more than another:
Were the Mexicans to humble themselves into dust, and agree to submit as obsequiously as the most dastardly of the provinces of the Roman empire, could our National Government undertake to legislate for them?--
Could Congress, like a Roman Senate, send them a despotic Pro-consul? Evidently there could be no other alternative than that of leaving the Mexicans to govern, or rather misgovern themselves."
Few articles that meet our notice, are more pregnant with meaning, than the extract below from a communication in the National Intelligencer. The opponents of the war may well challenge the friends of the administration to answer such questions:
"What is to be done with Mexico proper if we conquer it? Is it to be under military law, as are the portions of Mexican territory now subdued, giving to the officers of our armies despotic powers?
Should the Mexicans resist with a pertinacity like that displayed by the inhabitants of old Spain in opposition to Napoleon, will it not be necessary, in order to preserve any control which may be attained, to establish fortresses in every part of their country?
Can it be necessary to insist upon the inconsistency of such a state of things with our Declaration of Independence, or with the Constitution of the United States?
Would the possession of the city of Mexico secure to us a peaceful control over the nation any more than did that of Moscow or Madrid secure an analogous result to Napoleon?
Should we have more comfort and profit in the sovereignty of Mexico than the French had in Spain, or have now in Algeria?
Is it not evident that the only portion of the Mexican empire which can become a part of our Republic are those which, being peopled by the same races, will be willing to become members of our Confederacy? Must not each member of that Confederacy be self-governed, consistently with our constitution, which has endowed our National Government only with certain limited powers, agreeable to which it cannot control any one member more than another:
Were the Mexicans to humble themselves into dust, and agree to submit as obsequiously as the most dastardly of the provinces of the Roman empire, could our National Government undertake to legislate for them?--
Could Congress, like a Roman Senate, send them a despotic Pro-consul? Evidently there could be no other alternative than that of leaving the Mexicans to govern, or rather misgovern themselves."
What sub-type of article is it?
War Report
Political
What keywords are associated?
Mexican War
Conquest
Occupation
Constitutional Issues
National Intelligencer
Where did it happen?
Mexico
Foreign News Details
Primary Location
Mexico
Event Details
Extract from National Intelligencer poses rhetorical questions on consequences of conquering Mexico, including military governance, resistance like in Spain against Napoleon, constitutional inconsistencies, parallels to Napoleon's failures in Moscow and Madrid, French experiences in Spain and Algeria, and limitations of U.S. government in incorporating Mexican territories.