The War with Mexico, Volume 2 (of 2)Smith, Justin Harvey
History
The War with Mexico, Volume 2 (of 2)
Smith, Justin Harvey
Mexican War, 1846-1848
These circumstances left the party to find such leadership as it
could in Congress, and the leadership it found was a triangular
fight--Benton, Cass and Calhoun. Benton had remarkable powers and
seldom failed to be a Democrat, a Senator and a patriot, but he was
egotistical, moody, overbearing, passionate; he despised Cass, he more
than hated Calhoun, and he treated his fellow-Democrats in general as
minions. Cass, a courtier and somewhat a scholar, lacked parliamentary
experience, drew more timidity than courage from his Presidential
hopes, and possessed no political convictions to reinforce his talents.
Calhoun's high character, rare intellectual strength and frank, affable
manners made him personally the most influential man at the capital;
but his judgment was erratic, and he aimed to stand aloof, with a
following of about four Senators, as a balance-of-power faction.
He was intensely narrow, too. For him there seemed to be only one
region in the world; only one state in the south, and only one public
man there. Cass was loyal to the administration, Benton helpful but
domineering, and Calhoun unfriendly. Not a very firm tripod, this, to
support a government engaged in war. With almost all the Democrats,
politics--that is to say, offices--held the stage, and country occupied
the background. Dissatisfaction with Polk's appointments increased the
confusion. Indeed, a "passion" for getting jobs invaded the sacred
halls of legislation, and the President found not less than twenty men
voting against his measures to avenge personal disappointments.[34.24]
[THE WHIGS IN CONGRESS]
Whig harmony and efficiency were happily not impaired by these
allurements of the fleshpots, for the Executive did not belong to their
party; but their numberless inconsistencies proved most embarrassing,
and the necessity of satisfying public sentiment, and throwing the
responsibility upon the administration, by voting supplies for
hostilities they denounced, weakened them. No absurdities, however,
were too glaring, no contradictions too thorny for what they termed
their "patriotic sublimity" to ignore or surmount. They denounced the
war enough to incriminate themselves when they supported it, and they
supported it enough to stultify themselves when they condemned it.
Combining the views of several groups, one discovered a line of policy
truly remarkable: the attack upon Mexico was unconstitutional and
wicked, but it should be carried on; so let us halt, send an embassy,
and proffer again the negotiations that Mexico has repeatedly and
recently spurned.[34.25]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account