...."President [James K. Polk] in his message, as a pretext for sending our army to invade and conquer the country upon the Rio Grande, says: "Texas by its [legislative] act of December 19, 1836, had declared the [Rio Grande] to be the boundary of that [formerly independent] republic.' . . . The truth is that Texas had agreed upon the Nueces [River] as her boundary. . . ."If [Mexico] be ours, why does he seek to justify the taking possession of it by references to the fact that Mexico is indebted to some of our people? If it be not ours, and he has taken possession of it in order to compel Mexico to pay those debts, why not say so? The fact that Mexico has not paid the debts due to our citizens can have no legitimate connection with taking possession of [it as] our own soil. But [the president] was obviously conscious that this invasion of the Mexican territory could not be justified. . . ."When the Executive and Congress openly and avowedly took upon themselves the responsibility of extending and perpetuating slavery by the annexation of Texas, and by the total overthrow and subversion of the Constitution, . . . my confidence in the stability of our institutions was shaken, destroyed. . . . Our Union continues, but our Constitution is gone. . . .". . . No man regards this war as just. We know, the country knows, and the civilized world are conscious, that it has resulted from a desire to extend and sustain an institution on which the curse of the Almighty most visibly rests."Joshua Giddings, congressman from Ohio, speech in the United States House of Representatives, 1846Which of the following comparisons best describes Whitman's and Giddings' arguments about the Mexican-American War?

Then try StudyFetch, the AI-powered platform that can answer your questions and teach you more about it!