of the very rights guaranteed to them by the Constitution of their country, ventured to express the opinion, that the war in which he had involved the nation, was unjust, un- necessary, and aggressive. Mr. Polk did not deem it pru- dent to denounce in plain terms, the opponents to his measures as traitors to their country, and meriting an ignominious death, but preferred doing it by implication ; and hence applied to all such as pronounced his war un- just, unnecessary, and aggressive, the technical terms, "giving aid and comfort" to enemies, used by the Con- stitution of the United States (Art, III. Sect. 1), in de- fining the crime of treason. If this gentleman did indeed believe, that a conscientious opposition to an existing war, is inconsistent with patriotism., and equivalent to the crime of giving aid and comfort to the enemy, he is ignorant not merely of the first principles of ethics, but of the course pursued by some of the most illustrious statesmen and patriots who have adorned the pages of modern history.
What said Lord Chatham, the celebrated Prime Minis- ter of England, who had led his nation to victory and power, and whose memory is embalmed in the grateful remembrance of his countrymen ? This great man during the American war, declared in Parliament, " If I were an American, as I am an Englishman, while a foreign troop was landed in my country, I Would never lay down my arms—never—never—never." Fox even refused to con- cur in a vote of thanks to officers for the victories they had achieved, in what he believed, to be an unjust war. Numerous distinguished members of the British Parliament were active and persevering in their opposition to the war. So again, the war waged >by Great Britain against the French Pvepublic, was freely denounced as unjust and unnecessary, by statesmen high in the confidence of the nation. The recent war against China, frequently called the Opium War, was sternly denounced by a large portion of the British public as most iniquitous. At a public meeting in London, at which a British peer, the Earl of Stanhope, presided, it was resolved : " That this meeting deeply laments that the moral and religious feehngs of the country should be