托馬斯‧科溫
(THOMAS CORWIN)

反對墨西哥戰爭
Against the Mexican War

倘若我是墨西哥人，我就會告訴你：「在你們自己的國家裏沒有埋葬死人的空間嗎?」

美國向西域擴展時，其疆土的增加是以墨西哥為代價的。在德克薩斯的美國開拓者們反叛墨西哥當局。於1836年宣佈獨立，成為一個共和國。1845年夏，當議會辯論是否兼併德克薩斯時，《民主論壇報》的編輯，約翰‧愛羅‧歐薩利文極力主張兼併，因為什麼也不能干擾美國「明擺著的命運──為我們每年都成倍增長的數百萬民眾的自由發展，擴展上蒼賜予的疆土」。同年晚些時候，德克薩斯共和國成了一個州。同時，由約翰‧西‧弗裏蒙特帶領的美國開拓者進軍加利福尼亞，於1846年宣告熊旗共和國成立。

由於墨西哥與美國在邊界問題上意見相左，詹姆斯‧科‧波爾克總統派了一位代表到墨西哥，並將軍隊派遣到有爭議的邊界地區。談判破裂後，戰爭便爆發了。戰爭受到了普遍的支特，因為，民眾擁護所謂「明擺著的命運」這種觀點。但是，有些勇士──如丹尼爾‧韋伯斯特，弗萊德裏克‧道格拉斯和一位年輕的、名叫亞伯拉罕‧林肯的伊利諾依的國會議員──譴責這場戰爭。

最善辯的反對墨西哥戰爭的托馬斯‧科溫(1794─1865)是來自俄亥俄的輝格派參議員。作為自學成才的律師和前俄亥俄州的州長，科溫在1847年2月11日公開譴責這場戰爭時，正是在他的第一屆參議員任期內。科溫預言墨西哥戰爭將加劇讚成奴隸制與反對奴隸制力量之間的緊張局勢，並將導致美國的內戰。

科溫在辯論中敗北，美國贏得了那場戰爭。於1848年2月，美國與墨西哥簽署了瓜達盧佩伊達爾戈和約。該和約將大片墨西哥土地割讓給美國，包括現在的加利福尼亞、內華達和猶他，以及亞利桑那、懷俄明、科羅拉多和新墨西哥州的部分地區。五年後，美國從墨西哥購買了一塊帶狀的位於現在新墨西哥和亞利桑那的土地，於是便完成了現在的西南部邊界。

總統先生，你提議從墨西哥奪取的領土是什麼?是墨西哥古老的卡斯提長老通過多少次浴血奮戰才獲得並成為墨西哥神聖核心的土地。墨西哥人的邦克山、薩拉托加和約克敦全在這一帶!墨西哥人會說：「我在這兒為了自由流血！我能把我心愛的神聖的家園拱手交給盎格魯‧撤克遜入侵者嗎?他們要這土地幹什麼?他們已經把德克薩斯弄到手了。他們已經擁有從新亞西斯河到格蘭德河之間的土地，他們還要什麼？如果我將失去這些戰場，那麼我能傳給兒孫哪些獨立之豐碑呢?」

先生，倘若有人向麻塞諸塞州的人民索取邦克山，倘若英國獅在那兒露面，又有哪個年齡在十三歲到九十三之歲之間的人不會毅然決然地去迎戰他呢?這片土地上的哪一條江河不會被鮮血染紅呢?倘若要把這些神聖的自由之戰的戰場從我們手中奪走，又有哪一片土地不會堆起一層又一層被殺戮而又來不及掩埋的美國人的屍骨呢?但就是這些美國人踐踏姐妹鄰邦，對貧窮軟弱的墨西哥人說：「放棄你們的國土吧，你們不配擁有它。我已經有了一半了，我向你要的不過是那另一半！」英國人，在上述情況下，可能吩咐我們說：「放棄大西洋坡地吧──放棄從阿勒格尼山到海邊的那片不起眼的土地，那只不過從曼思到聖‧馬雷，不到你們共和國的三分之一領土又是令人最不感興趣的那部分領土。」那麼，我們將如何回答呢?他們會說，我們必須把這土地讓給約翰‧布林。為什麼?「他缺少空間」。密西根的參議員說他必須要這片土地。天哪，我尊敬的基督徒兄弟，這是根據那條正義的原則呢?「我缺少空間！」

先生，瞧瞧這條缺少空間的藉口吧。兩千萬人口，擁有一億公頃的土地。以各種能夠想像出來的理由招募人去開發，每公頃的地價低到二十五美分，並且允許任何人選擇他喜歡的任何地方。但是，密西根的參議員說，數年內，我們的人口將達到兩億，所以我們缺少空間。倘若我是墨西哥人，我就會告訴你，「在你們自己的國家，沒有埋葬人的空間嗎?如果你們到我的國家來，我們將用帶血的雙手迎接你們，歡迎你們到好客的墳墓中去。」…

前些日子，我有點驚訝地聽那位來自密西根的參議員宣稱，歐洲已經快把我們忘得乾乾淨淨了，除非用這些戰爭來喚醒他們的注意力。我想，參議員先生很感激總統先生，因為他「喚醒」了歐洲。我希望總統先生通曉民事與軍事的知識，他是否記得有人說過他曾長期思考過歷史，長期思考過人類、人的本質和人的真正命運。孟德斯 鳩對這種「喚醒」方式沒有什麼好感。他說：「如果一個民族的年鑑是枯燥無味的話，那麼這個民族就有福了。」

密西根的參議員先生的觀點則不同。他認為，一個民族除非以戰爭著稱，否則就不是一個傑出的民族。他擔心酣睡的歐洲無能力察覺這兒有兩千萬盎格魯‧撤克遜人，在鋪鐵路、開運河，正飛速地將所有和平的手段發展到優秀文明的最完美的程度！他們對此一無所知！那麼，為了使我們聲名遠揚，這種創造歷史的民主方武將採取的絕妙手段是什麼呢?轟炸城市，摧毀和平、幸福的家園，槍殺男人──唉，先生，這就是戰爭──而且還槍殺婦女……

有一個與這個問題相關的話題，每次提及這話題，便使我發抖。可是，我卻忍不住要留意它。你每採取一個步驟都會碰到它，無論你以何種方式發動這場戰爭，它都威脅著你。我指的是奴隸制問題。顯而易見，反對奴隸制的進一步漫延是一個深深植根在我們稱之為非蓄奴州的所有黨派人士心中的決心。紐約、賓夕法尼亞、俄亥俄這三個最強大的州已經把他們的法律指令送交到此。我相信，所有其他州也會這樣做。現在推測其緣由毫無用處。南方的先生們可能會稱之為偏見、慾望、虛偽和狂熱。在這一點上、我現在不與他們爭論。事實的確如此。我們關切的是瞭解這一個重要的事實。你我都無法變更或改變這個觀點，即使我們願意的話。這些人只會說，我們不會、也不能同意你在不存在奴隸制的地方實行奴隸制。如果你們州裏存在奴隸制，他們不想打擾你，你就好好受用吧，如果你想而且能夠的話。這就是他們的語言；這就是他們的打算。南方的情況如何呢?指望他們同樣流血出資來謀取那片廣 大的土地，然後，又指望他們心甘情願地放棄他們把奴隸帶到那兒、並居住在那被征服的國土的權利。如果他們想那樣於的話。這怎麼可能呢?先生，我太瞭解南方人的感情和觀點了。我對他們絲毫不抱這種指望。我相信，他們會竭盡全力爭取這種權利，即使他們並不想行使這種權利。我相信，在這可怕的問題上，雙方都同樣固執己見。(我承認，當我想到這一點的時候，我顫抖了。)

那麼，如果我們堅持發動戰爭，如果戰爭不是僅僅以無端浪費生命與財富而告終，就必然(正如此議案所提議的那樣)以取得領土而告終，而這場爭論必然立刻與這片領土聯繫在一起。──那麼，這項議案就似乎是徹頭徹尾的一項引發內部混亂的議案。倘若我們再延長這場戰爭一分鐘，或再多花上一美元來購買或佔領哪怕是一公頃墨西哥的土地的話，北方和南方便將被帶入一場雙方都不會妥協的衝突之中。誰能預見或預知其後果！誰會如此大膽或魯莽以至於面對這種衝突而無動於衷！如果一個人能意識到這種衝突的可能性，而又不至於被痛苦的感情所折服，那麼，我決不會羨幕這種人的心靈。那麼，我們作為合眾國各主權州的代表，作為被挑選來捍衛合眾國的人們，為什麼我們明知道戰爭的結果必然迫使我們立刻面對一場內戰，卻要繼續這場戰爭以加速這場可怕的衝突的來臨呢?先生，確切地說，這是背叛，是對合眾國的背叛，是對我們選民的最寶貴的利益、最崇高的理想、最珍惜的希望的背叛。冒引起這種衝突的風險是一種犯罪，一種十惡不赦的罪孽，任何邪惡與之相比，都將昇華為美德。哦，總統先生，在我看來，如果地獄能夠張口吐出囚禁在它煉獄中的妖魔，吩咐他們來破壞這世界的和諧，來搗碎人們憧憬的最美好的幸福前景的話，那麼完美實現這個魔鬼意圖的第一步便將是點燃內戰的戰火，將合眾國的姐妹州全都拋進這無底的內亂的深淵。今天，我們就站在這深淵的正在崩潰的邊緣之上──我們看它血腥的浪潮在我們跟前翻滾──趁現在還來得及，我們為什麼不能停下來呢?在這兒，道路是明擺著的。我可以說，這是唯一負責任的、謹慎的、真正愛國的路。讓我們拋棄一切進一步獲取領土的念頭，進而立刻停止發動這場戰爭。讓我們把軍隊召回來吧，立刻把他們召回到我們自己承認的邊界內。向墨西哥表明，當你們說你們不希望佔領任何東西時，你們是真誠的。墨西哥知道她無法同你們訴諸武力。如果她不曾訴諸武力話，那是因為她大軟弱了，不能在這兒打攪你們。給與她和平，我以性命擔保，她就將接受和平。不過，不論她同意與否，你們沒有她的同意，照樣還會有和平。你們的侵略導致了這場戰爭；你們的撤軍將會恢復和平。那麼，讓我們永遠地封閉通往內部敵對的途徑，回到古老的和諧和古老的通往民族昌盛和水恆的光榮的道路上來。讓我們在這兒，在這奉獻給合眾國的神聖殿堂裏，舉行莊嚴的驅除邪惡的儀式；洗去我們手上沾著的墨西哥人的鮮血，在這聖壇上，在這庇佑我們的聖父的神像前，發誓保衛光榮的世界和平，保衛彼此間永恆的兄弟之情。

Against the Mexican War

What is the territory, Mr. President, which you propose to wrest from Mexico? It is consecrated to the heart of the Mexican by many a well-fought battle with his old Castilian master. His Bunker Hills, and Saratogas, and Yorktowns are there! The Mexican can say, "There I bled for liberty! and shall I surrender that consecrated home of my affections to the Anglo-Saxon invaders? What do they want with it? They have Texas already. They have possessed themselves of the territory between the Nueces and the Rio Grande. What else do they want? To what shall I point my children as memorials of that independence which I bequeath to them, when those battlefields shall have passed from my possession?"

    Sir, had one come and demanded Bunker Hill of the people of Massachusetts, had England's lion ever showed himself there, is there a man over thirteen and under ninety who would not have been ready to meet him? Is there a river on this continent that would not have run red with blood? Is there a field but would have been piled high with unburied bones of slaughtered Americans before these consecrated battlefields of liberty should have been wrested from us? But this same American goes into a sister republic, and says to poor, weak Mexico, "Give up your territory, you are unworthy to possess it; I have got one half already, and all I ask of you is to give up the other!" England might as well, in the circumstances I have described, have come and demanded of us, "Give up the Atlantic slope--give up this trifling territory from the Allegheny Mountains to the sea; it is only from Maine to St. Mary's--only about one third of your Republic, and the least interesting portion of it." What would be the response? They would say we must give this up to John Bull. Why? "He wants room." The Senator from Michigan says he must have this. Why, my worthy Christian brother; on what principle of justice? "I want room!"

    Sir, look at this pretense of want of room. With twenty millions of people, you have about one thousand millions of acres of land, inviting settlement by every conceivable argument, bringing them down to a quarter of a dollar an acre, and allowing every man to squat where he pleases. But the Senator from Michigan says we will be two hundred millions in a few years, and we want room. If I were a Mexican I would tell you, "Have you not room enough in your own country to bury your dead? If you come into mine, we will greet you with bloody hands, and welcome you to hospitable graves." . . .

    I was somewhat amazed the other day to hear the Senator from Michigan declare that Europe had quite forgotten us, till these battles waked them up. I suppose the Senator feels grateful to the President for "waking up" Europe. Does the President, who is, I hope, read in civic as well as military lore, remember the saying of one who had pondered upon history long: long, too, upon man, his nature, and true destiny. Montesquieu did not think highly of this way of "waking up." "Happy," says he, "is that nation whose annals are tiresome."

    The Senator from Michigan has a different view. He thinks that a nation is not distinguished until it is distinguished in war. He fears that the slumbering faculties of Europe have not been able to ascertain that there are twenty millions of Anglo-Saxons here, making railroads and canals, and speeding all the arts of peace to the utmost accomplishment of the refined civilization! They do not know it! And what is the wonderful expedient which this democratic method of making history would adopt in order to make us known? Storming cities, desolating peaceful, happy homes; shooting men--ay, sir, such is war--and shooting women, too. . . .

    There is one topic connected with this subject which I tremble when I approach, and yet I cannot forbear to notice it. It meets you in every step you take; it threatens you which way soever you go in the prosecution of this war. I allude to the question of slavery. Opposition to its further extension, it must be obvious to everyone, is a deeply rooted determination with men of all  parties in what we call the nonslaveholding states. New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, three of the most powerful, have already sent their legislative instructions here. So it will be, I doubt not. in all the rest. It is vain now to speculate about the reasons for this. Gentlemen of the South may call it prejudice, passion, hypocrisy, fanaticism. I shall not dispute with them now on that point. The great fact that it is so, and not otherwise, is what it concerns us to know, You and I cannot alter or change this opinion. if we would. These people only say we will not, cannot consent that you shall carry slavery where it does not already exist. They do not seek to disturb you in that institution as it exist in your states. Enjoy it if you will and as you. will. This is their language; this their determination. How is it in the South? Can it be expected that they should expend in common their blood and their treasure in the acquisition of immense territory, and then willingly forgo the right to carry thither their slaves, and inhabit the conquered country if they please to do so? Sir, I know the feelings and opinions of the South too well to calculate on this. Nay, I believe they would even contend to any extremity for the mere right, had they no wish to exert it. I believe (and I confess I tremble when the conviction presses upon me) that there is equal obstinacy on both sides of this fearful question.

    If then, we persist in war, which, if it terminates in anything short of a mere wanton waste of blood as well as money, must end (as this bill proposes ) in the acquisition of territory, to which at once this controversy must attach--this bill would seem to be nothing less than a bill to produce internal commotion. Should we prosecute this war another moment, or expend one dollar in the purchase or conquest of a single lore of Mexican land, the North and the South are brought into collision on a point where neither will yield. Who can foresee or foretell the result! Who so bold or reckless as to look such a conflict in the face unmoved! I do not envy the heart of him who can realize the possibility of such a conflict without emotions too painful to be endured. Why, then, shall we, the representatives of the sovereign states of the Union--the chosen guardians of this confederated Republic, why should we precipitate this fearful struggle, by continuing a war the result of which must be to force us at once upon a civil conflict? Sir, rightly considered, this is treason, treason to the Union, treason to the dearest interests, the loftiest aspirations, the most cherished hopes of our constituents. It is a crime to risk the possibility of such a contest. It is a crime of such infernal hue that every other in the catalogue of iniquity, when compared with it, whitens into virtue. Oh, Mr. President, it does seem to me, if hell itself could yawn and vomit up the fiends that inhabit its penal abodes, commissioned to disturb the harmony of this world, and dash the fairest prospect of happiness that ever allured the hopes of men, the first step in the consummation of this diabolical purpose would be to light up the fires of internal war and plunge the sister states of this Union into the bottomless gulf of civil strife. We stand this day on the crumbling brink of that gulf--we see its bloody eddies wheeling and boiling before us--shall we not pause before it be too late? How plain again is here the path, I may add the only way, of duty, of prudence, of true patriotism. Let us abandon all idea of acquiring further territory and by consequence cease at once to prosecute this war. Let us call home our armies, and bring them at once within our own acknowledged limits. Show Mexico that you are sincere when you say you desire nothing by conquest. She has learned that she cannot encounter you in war, and if she had not, she is too weak to disturb you here. Tender her peace, and, my life on it, she will then accept it. But whether she shall or not, you will have peace without her consent. It is your invasion that has made war; your retreat will restore peace. Let us then close forever the approaches of internal feud, and so return to the ancient concord and the old ways of national prosperity and permanent glory. Let us here, in this temple consecrated to the Union, perform a solemn lustration; let us wash Mexican blood from our hands, and on these altars, and in the presence of that image of the Father of his Country that looks down upon us, swear to preserve honorable peace with all the world and eternal brotherhood with each other.