These broad views were strongly supported by more limited and often by less justifiable ones. The trade interests of the entire Mississippi valley required not only to be freed from danger, but also to have the plan of non-intercourse, which Mexico had practically put into force, given up. A Mexican army would march into Texas, it was remarked, "as avowed abolitionists," and slaveholders may naturally have preferred to meet this peril in the enemy's territory. Political considerations of a personal sort, and one especially, doubtless had an influence. Calhoun, the dominant figure of the South, contemplating a possible withdrawal from the Union, desired the people of that section to husband their strength. "We need our young men for other troubles," he said with reference to their fighting Mexico. Besides, he naturally could not welcome a great disturbance that would interfere necessarily with his plans, and lead to political results of an unpredictable sort. Now there were men, particularly in Mississippi, by no means unwilling to embarrass and possibly unhorse that overshadowing leader by forcing him to antagonize a popular movement; and a war with Mexico seemed obviously well-suited for such a purpose.[6.10] [AMERICAN DESIRE FOR TERRITORY] A wish to extend the Union was undoubtedly a factor.[6.11] As the _American Review_ said, Burr had planted in the lower Mississippi valley the seeds of ambition for southern conquest, and the soil proved very fit for their germination and growth.[6.12] As early as 1830 the British consul at New Orleans believed the people would support an attack upon the territory of Mexico. In 1835 a French visitor of some prominence concluded that every American held two ideas firmly: that our prosperity resulted from our republican institutions, and that Providence intended the new world for the Anglo-Saxon. In 1843 Captain Elliot, mistaking an instinct for a determination, felt satisfied that the United States had resolved to push south. By 1845 the appetite for more territory was pronounced. "There appears to be no limit to the insatiable lust of territorial acquisition which pervades the minds of many of our citizens," lamented the New Orleans _Tropic_. When the annexation of Texas appeared to be certain, the New York _Morning News_ exclaimed, "Who's the next customer, California or Canada?" To this question the _Tribune_ replied, that its neighbor had tasted blood and growled for more. No, we don't growl, retorted the _News_; more "will come soon enough--come of its own accord," for our destiny is to possess the whole continent. Believers in this convenient theory felt bound to go forward, and should Mexico oppose the decree of Heaven, so much the worse for her.[6.13]