1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Katena32 [7]
3 years ago
12

in opposition to the declaration of war against Mexico, what did first term u.s congressman Abraham Lincoln demand to be shown?

History
1 answer:
Vilka [71]3 years ago
4 0
<span>Elected as a Whig to Congress in 1846, Abraham Lincoln gained notoriety when he lashed out against the Mexican War, calling it immoral, proslavery, and a threat to the nation's republican values. President James K. Polk had called for war, accusing Mexico of shedding of "American blood on American soil.” Lincoln responded by introducing a series of resolutions demanding to know the "particular spot of soil on which the blood of our citizens was so shed." One of Lincoln's constituents branded him "the Benedict Arnold of our district," and he was denied renomination by his own party.
Document: Whereas the President of the United States, in his message of May 11, 1846, has declared that "the Mexican Government not only refused to receive him, [the envoy of the United States,] or listen to his propositions, but, after a long-continued series of menaces, has at last invaded our territory and shed the blood of our fellow-citizens on our own soil:" And again, in his message of December 8, 1846, that "we had ample cause of war against Mexico long before the breaking out of hostilities; but even then we forbore to take redress into our own hands until Mexico herself became the aggressor, by invading our soil in hostile array, and shedding the blood of our citizens:" And yet again, in his message of December 7, 1847, that "the Mexican Government refused even to hear the terms of adjustment which he [our minister of peace] was authorized to propose, and finally, under wholly unjustifiable pretexts, involved the two countries in war, by invading the territory of the State of Texas, striking the first blow, and shedding the blood of our citizens on our own soil." And whereas this House is desirous to obtain a full knowledge of all the facts which go to establish whether the particular spot on which the blood of our citizens was so shed was or was not at that time our own soil: Therefore, Resolved By the House of Representatives, That the President of the United States be respectfully requested to inform this House --1st. Whether the spot on which the blood of our citizens was shed, as in his messages declared, was or was not within the territory of Spain, at least after the treaty of 1819, until the Mexican revolution.2d. Whether that spot is or is not within the territory which was wrested from Spain by the revolutionary Government of Mexico.3d. Whether that spot is or is not within a settlement of people, which settlement has existed ever since long before the Texas revolution, and until its inhabitants fled before the approach of the United States army.4th. Whether that settlement is or is not isolated from any and all other settlements by the Gulf and the Rio Grande on the south and west, and by wide uninhabited regions on the north and east.5th. Whether the people of that settlement, or a majority of them, or any of them, have ever submitted themselves to the government or laws of Texas or the United States, by consent or compulsion, either by accepting office, or voting at elections, or paying tax, or serving on juries, or having process served upon them, or in any other way.6th. Whether the people of that settlement did or did not flee from the approach of the United States army, leaving unprotected their homes and their growing crops, before the blood was shed, as in the messages stated; and whether the first blood, so shed, was or was not shed within the enclosure of one of the people who had thus fled from it.7th. Whether our citizens, whose blood was shed, as in his message declared, were or were not, at that time, armed officers and soldiers, sent into that settlement by the military order of the President, through the Secretary of War.8th. Whether the military force of the United States was or was not sent into that settlement after General Taylor had more than once intimated to the War Department that, in his opinion, no such movement was necessary to the defence or protection of Texas.Source: Abraham Lincoln, “Spot Resolutions,” December 22, 1847Copyright 2016 Digital History         

this is the site i got it from does this help you or no?



</span>
You might be interested in
Which of the following three side lengths would form a triangle
Deffense [45]

Answer:

C)10 ft, 5 ft, and 7 ft

Explanation:

For a triangle sum of two small sides are grater than third side.

So,

A)2 ft + 3 ft < 7 ft

NO

B)1 ft + 2 ft = 3 ft

NO

C)5 ft + 7 ft > 10 ft

Yes

D)10 ft + 5 ft < 20 ft

7 0
3 years ago
What do architectural achievements in early civilizations indicate?
Aliun [14]

Answer:

It indicates the ability to evolve and improve.

Explanation:

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Books that are published soon after a well-publicized event are known as
AnnZ [28]
These books are called Period pieces
7 0
3 years ago
The study of how people satisfy unlimited wants with limited resources is called? Group of answer choices Circular Flow Sociolog
Natalka [10]

The correct answer is C) Economics.

The study of how people satisfy unlimited wants with limited resources is called Economics.

Economics studies the production, distribution, and how people consume products and services in a determined market. Economics based its studies on the belief that resources are limited but people in a society have many wishes, desires, wants, and needs. So Economics studies all the factors involved in the process of getting raw materials and natural resources, fabrication, supply, delivery and the prices people pay to get something they want or need.

3 0
3 years ago
Why are the some of the people in manifest destiny picture looking back?​
JulijaS [17]

Answer: "The painting serves as an allegory for Manifest Destiny and American westward expansion. ... The figure of Progress is ushering an era of modernization, development, and advancement to the West, which in the painting is portrayed as a dark and savage place, especially when compared to the eastern side of the painting."

    If you have any questions please comment on my answer. Thank you.

3 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • the two main groups in decolonized iraq are the A. sonnys and chers B. sunnis and shi'ites C wahabbists and worcestershires
    15·1 answer
  • Why did pope innocent II ban the use of the crossbow
    7·2 answers
  • Select all examples of non-market distribution methods.
    8·1 answer
  • Which English/British policies affected colonial attitudes?
    5·2 answers
  • Which of the following is true about Mussolini's rise to power?
    5·2 answers
  • What is the difference in the way that a scientist and a historian use time periods?
    6·2 answers
  • What are some creative article titles for jim crow laws?
    13·1 answer
  • Living in the suburbs and living in the cities was made possible by
    9·1 answer
  • Many people today use credit cards and charge accounts to buy on credit. Is this practice as dangerous now as it was in 1929? Wh
    10·1 answer
  • In 5-8 sentences, respond to the inquiry question, “Was Lincoln a racist?” using cited evidence from the documents and your hist
    15·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!