Rnnk PSi^ REVIEW THE MEXICAN ¥AR EMBRACING THE CAUSES OF THE WAR, "^2 7 -^ THE RESPONSIBILITY OF ITS COMMENCEMENT, PURPOSKS OF THE AJIEIUCAN GOVERNMENT TN ITS PR05- KCUTXON, ITS BKNEFITS AND ITS EVILS. BY CHARLES T. POETEE. AUT31JRN, N. Y. ALDEN & PAIISONS, 67 GENESEE STEEET, Eatered according to Act of Congress, in tlie year one thousand eight hundred and forty-nini", by ALDEN «5c PARSONS, In the Clerk's OSce of the United States, for the Nortliern District of New-York. F1:?:J & ROCKWELL riUNIERS. AUBURN. N. Y. PREFACE. It is the object of this essay to exhibit the true character of the war in which our country has lately been engaged. It aims to present in a clear and concise manner the fuels and cor.siderations v/hich will enable^^ the reader to form a coiTCct opiiiion concerning the causes of this contest, and llie motives and the excuses for its prosecution. it is it.s further design to give a view of the consequences of the war; to examine the benefit's which have been attributed to it, and the evils, near and remote, of wliich it ha? been the cause : to present tan duty and the true gloi7 and ambition of the U;.itcd States; and to point out the man- ner in Vi'hicli alone peace can bo tstdblished an'ioi.g civilized nations. It containd no allusion to political parlies. It is no part of its object to inquire v;hat share belongs to each of the giory or the shams of this war. The subjoct of slavery it has been the endeavor of tlie author to avoid. The belief that the acquisition of teiritory for the sole purpose of extending and perpetuating slavery has been the undivided purpose of our government and people i'ur tv/enty-five years ; that for this Texas was settled ; that urged by this motive alone, our -ntizens flew to the assist- ance of that State i.i her efforts to ebtablish her independence, and government winked at their participation in her struggle ; that for this alone Texas was annexed '. that for this alone war wns ui dertaken ; that government would never have sought this contest, had it apprehended that any por:ion of the teriitory which it desired would ever be secured 10 freedom ; this belief is one to which he cannot subscribe. PREFACE. It cannot be pi-oven that the war had any necessary connection with sla- very. Annexation certainly was not its cause ; it only furnished an occa- sion for it. The circumstances, so far as they are yet known, seem best to warrant the belief that it was waged for the acijuisition of territory, irre- spective of the chaiacter which after legislation might impress upon that teiTitory. It was sustained alike by the north and the south. The spirit which impelled to it was confined to no section of the country. The north rivalled the south in greediness after the possessions of another, and in causeless vindictiveness toward a weak and disti'acted nation. The war is here considered as an act, the responsibility of which rests upon the people of the United States, the whole people, the mass of whom, without distinction of section or of party, either aided in its com- , mencement or sympathized with its objects and united in its prosecution. The work must stand or fall, according to its own merits. If the views advanced in it are sound, and its arguments have weight, it v,-ill proba- bly make its way ; if not, it must suffer the consequences. If it is wor- thy of being read, it doubtless will be ; if it is unworthy, it will be unfor- tunate for the publisher. CONTESTS. CHAPTER I. Introduction. Annexation of Texas. The Occasion of the War. Influences which led to Annexation. Geographical unity. Political sym- pathy. Desinj of the South to increase her weiaht in the Union. Fear of British encroachnnent. Supposed military advantages of Texas. The resolution of Congress. CHiVrTER II. Ajjnkxation continued. Justness of the act toward Mexico. The right of Mexico to sovereignty over Texas. If possessed at all after her revolution of 1834^35, lost afiei-wards hy her neglect to enforce it. Her claim in effect ab^loned. Texas became independent of right by the Mexican i-evolution of lS34-'35. Expediency of annexation. To be considered here only so far as it effected our relations with Mexico. CHAPTER III. A View of some of the leading events in the intercourse between the two countries, from August, 1843. to October 1345; showing that the djesign of declaring war pgainst the United States on account of annexa- tion, if ever seriously entertained by Mexico, was at the last date entirely abandoned. The advance to Corpus Christi. CHAPTER IV. The Mission of Mr. Slidell. The lefusal to receive him. Political situation of Mexico on the arrival of our Minister. Her conduct con^ vi CONTENTS. sl^tent. Duty of ths United States. The coin"e adontpd by our ffov- crnment. Fiill of Herrera. Th^ rrfas'il to send a commiasioner threw upon our government the responsibihty of future hostilities. CHAPTER V. The Jidvancfi of our Army to the Rio Crando. This movement a vio- lation of the rights of jMexico. \vhit;h hud bee;: recognized by our Gov- erument it:=elf. CHAPTER VI. Th* advancp to tbf> Rio Grojide an invasion of the territory of Mexi- co. Louisiana a* ci'ded to n=. by France in 1303 exter.ded no farther we?t than to the Neuces. This river the western boundary of the vSpan- if Texas. Texn:^ after her independence never in any l=>!^al munner enlarged her teniforv. T\\p ctrin of country in ques- tion in the ex'"bi«ive po=;-;r'=!?ion of Mexico in 1H4G. Government aware at the time the order for the advance was issued that it would be an inva- sion. CHAPTER VII. The liivriiion of Mexico tlie sole cau-e of the War. Tone of the Mexican Mini^^rer. Proclamation of Mcjia. Froere^-' of General Tay- lor. Order of I'aredes. Hi> Proclamuion. Letter of Ampudia. Aris- ta gives notice that he shall prosecute hostilities. ^ CHAPTER VIII. Thp. Object of this movement of our Arniv. The reason given by tiie Executive not the real motive, as proved by the circumstance-^ « f the case, and by the dispatches to Mr. Shd^^ll. The provocations urged by our government considen'd. The war de CONTEXTS. CHAPTEil XI. T'riy. Benefilri of the War cniiflidercd. The p^ympnt of the claim* of our citizoiis ug;\inst Moxico, The n.cqiiisinon (it tcnitory. Value of this coiK|uo6t to tlio United iStates. luid to :iie cause of fieedum. CHAPTER XII. Thk Es'ii s attending- the War. Its Expense. Its Loss of Life— in bat- tle — bv disease. CHAPTER XIII. The Duty of thr- Uiiirrd St;ire=!. towmd other nations enhanced liy her nn-iirioii. Her dutv to Mexico, in parucular. 1 he su duties violuted by ins War. CHAPTER XIY. The Tnnaence of this War upon our nationnl chnracter, nrd en tha crtu^p nf Liberty and of Chri^tiaiiity at home and abroad. Jl has intro- du',:pd ciitne and vice amons: u.?. It ha:s awakened a spirit of conquesto It has lowered the standard of public inordiiiy in our countt^. CHAPTER XY. Of the csiabiishmenr of permanent peace anrion^: civih"zed nations. Thp means liy whicli this olije^t ran be attained. The necessity which will justify a iiation in resorting to artns. Piospect of tbs triumph of peace. REVIEW OF THE MEXICAN ¥AR CHAPTER I. I.NTUODUCTjo.v. Ajmexation of Texas. Tlu^ occasion of the War. In- fluences which led to annexation. Geographical Unity. Political sympathy. Desire of the Sou»h to int^rease her weight in the Union. Fear of Britisli encroachment. Supposed military advantages of Texas. The resolution of Congress. The war wdtli Mexico lias become matter of liistory. Tlie excitement inseparable from contention, wliicli few minds ai'e able to resist, lias passed away ; and calm reflection comes, as is too nsiial in liuman affairs, after tlie action whicli it should liave preceded. We intend in tlie following pages to present a review of tliis Avar, in which it shall be our aim to state historical facts v/itli accuracy, and to examine them by the principles of Christiani- ty and an enlightened statesmanship. We shall take a full survey of the causes which led to 10 REVIEW OF THE tliis contest, and point out tlie means whicli sliould liare been adopted by our government to prevent it. We sliall examine its objects, as well as its benefits and evils, botli immedi- ate and remote, and sliall endeavor to explain tlie human agencies wlilcli m:iy ba employed to hasten the time when nations shall learn war no more. And may the minds of our country- men be so seriou^l}^ led to the consideration of this event, that its history shall be an instruc- tion and a warning to us and to our children forever. The annexation of Texas to tlie United States must be regarded as the primary occasion of the war, since had that measure not been adopt- ed the circumstances out of which the war arose could never have existed. Viewing it in this light, w^e shall, before proceeding to those events w^hich were the more im.mediate causes of the contest, devote a fevv' pages to its examination. The influences wdiich led to annexation were numerous and varied. The impression had become sreneral amon^ our citizens that the United States, by the treaty of 1819, surren- dered to Spain a part of the western valley of the Mississippi, and a strong desire existed to recover it. This desire arose in part from the MEXICAN WAR. U fact tliat tlie country was contiguous to our own, and was separated from us by no natu- ral boundary, as well as from its commercial advantages, tlie mildness of its climate, and tlie fertility of its soil. It originated partly, also, in an ambition for the undivided ownership of that vast rei^ion whose waters unitinsr in the Mississippi declare iU geographical unity. The inhabitants of Texas were mostly emigi'ants from the United States. There appeared, also, otlier considerations, some of a general, others of a sectional nature, hj w^hich the country was then strongly agita- ted, and the effect of which, undoubtedly, was to hasten annexation. The southern states generally advocated the immediate adoption of the measure for two reasons. The slavehold- ing and planting interest was in the minority in congress. The admission of two new^ north- ern states w^as anticipated, and the acquisition of Texas would tend to ecjualise northern and southern representation, especially in the sen- ate. They insisted, moreover, and at the time it was generally believed, that it was the de- sign of England to procure the abolition of slavery in Texas, and that object effected, to undermine the institution in this country. It 13 REVIEW OF THE was declared, tliat witli them the question of annexation was one of self-preservation. The ultimate design of Great Britain many apj^re- hended to be no less than to establish her own authority in Texas, or at least to form an alli- ance offensive and defensive with that state ; and it was urged, that w^ere the union again refused, a wide door w^ould be oj)ened for her success ; that not only might w^e loose Texas forever, but California and the future com- merce of the Pacific, which that power was thought to aim at, might fall into her posses- sion. It was still further contended that the im- mediate possession of Texas was necessary to our future national safety ; that it would con- stitute a bulw^ai'k against foreign invasion ; and that if refused novf, Avhen offered to our accept- ance, it might be desired by us in vaiji in an hour of emergency. The effect of these arguments on the popu- lar mind was doubtless heightened by the very uncertamty in which they were wrapped, and the apparent urgency perhaps caused many objections to the measure to be lightly consid- ered which under ordinary circumstances might for the time have caused its rejection. MEXICAN WAR. 13 In February, 1845, congress by joint reso- lution consented '' tliat the territory properly included within and rightfully belonging to the republic of Texas be erected into a state" on certain conditions, one of which was, that it should be "subject to the adjustment by this government of all questions of boundary that may arise with other governments." The terms of annexation having been accepted by Texas, congress in December following declar- ed, " that the state of Texas shall be one, and is hereby declared to be one of the United States of America." 14 REVIEW OF THE CHAPTEK II Annkxation continup(3. Justness of uie act Inward Mexico. The right of Mexico to sovcroisftity over Texas. If possessed at all alter her revoiiilion of 183l-'35, lost afterwards by her ueelect to enforce it. Her cliiiin in effect tibdudoned. Texas he ;ame independent of right l>y the Mexican revolution of 1S'.3'1-'3j. Ex[:ediency cif annexation. Annexati'in to he considered here only £o fur as it effected our rela- tions with Mexico. In considering this act of our government, the question first arises, was the measure just toward Mexico. That republic contended that Texas was an integral part of her territory, a rebellious province which she intended to sub- due ; and she denounced the annexation as a violation by the United States of their neutral- ity and treaty stipulations, as a national rob- bery, and as one of the greatest outrages re- corded in history. We beheve that tliis claim and charge were entirely without foundation ; tliat in this pro- ceedino' the United States did not ^dolate their neutrality or their treaty, nor interfere in the least with any right of Mexico. This we shall endeavor to show. MEXICAN WAR. 15 Tlie common consent of mankind lias ^xed a limitation to national claims, and assigned a period to the right of re-conquest. It lias be- come a law of nations, tliat if a claim of sove- reignty is not prosecuted with adequate means, and within a reasonable period, the government asserting it must suffer the consequences of its inaction. Other nations have a right to regard its pretension as abandoned, and to consider any subsequent attempt to enforce it as a wrong- ful invasion. Mexico herself furnishes an illus- tration in point. Spain refused to acknowledge her independence for more than fifteen years after its establishment. She protested against its recognition by other powers, declaiing her determination to re-conquer her lost possessions. But the world treated her in all respects as in- dependent de jure^ and the United States in 1825, '27 and '29, considered her competent to convey a perfect title to Texas. The last was thought to be a favorable occasion to renew the offer for the purchase of that territory, as Mexico would need the purchase money in re- sisting ^' the Spanish invasion." Let us ap})ly this well-established principle to the present case. At the time of the an- nexation Texas had been independent of Mex- 16 REVIEW OF THE ico for nine years. Her independence had been recognized by tbe United States, England, France, Belgium, and Holland. Mexico bad protested against tbese acts, bad declared ber determination to re-conquer tliat state, ar.d bad waged, on paper, a furious war against it. But, mtb a single exception, Texas remained all tbat time in undisturbed tranquility, doing "all tbose acts and tilings v»diicb independent states may of rigbt do," attracting by ber equal laws, ber genial climate and fertile soil emi- grants from all parts of tbe world, developing ber resources, and increasing in strength and stability. Tbe exception to wbicb we bave alluded oc- curred in tbe year 1842, wben Mexico sent tbree marauding expeditions into Texas to pil- lage ber defenceless border settlements. Tbe first party of seven hundred took the callage of San Antonio. Tbe second, numbering about eight hundred, attacking a com23any of some two hundred emigrants, were defeated and driven out of tbe country. The third, a mot- ley collection of nearly thirteen hundred men, took San Antonio a second time by surprise. Pursued by a small body of Texans under General Somerville, they hastily retreated, car* MEXICAN WAR. if lying away, how^ever, the judges and attend- ants of tlie court tlien in session, witli otlier unarmed and peaceful citizens into capti^dty After tlie "battle of San Jacinto, these tliree barbarous, j^lundering expeditions, not one of wHcli remained in tlie country longer than eight days, were the only hostile attacks which Mexico had made on the territory of Texas. Our secretary of state, Mr. Webster, says in 1842 : " From the battle of San Jacinto the war was at an end." " Mexico may choose to consider Texas as a rebellious province, but the world has been obliged to take a very dif- ferent view of the matter." "Texas has ex- hibited the same external signs of national in- dependence as Mexico herself." " Practically free and independent, acknowledged as a po- litical sovereignty by the principal powers of the w^orld, no hostile foot finding rest within her territory for six or seven years, and Mexi- co herself refraining for all that period from any further attempt to re-establish hei' own authority, the United States must consider Texas as an independent sovereignty as mucli as Mexico." " How long, let it be asked, in the judgment of Mexico herself," he inquires, "is the fact of actual independence to be held 18 REVIEW OF THE of no avail against an avov/ed purpose of fu- ture re-conquest V Three years of continued inaction had suc- ceeded the six or seven to which Mr. Webster alludes. For nine successive years, then, Mex- ico had not niad.e a single attempt to establish her claim ; foi* the incursions before described were entirely inadequate and useless, and evi- dently not designed as attempts to effect any such object. They cannot be allowed to have had any higher purpose than injury and plun- der. Certainly, if the claim of Mexico could not tlien be considered, as abandoned, and the rii^'htful inderjendence of Texas as established, it would be very difficult to say at what period such a judgment would have been warranted. All publicists agree, that a nation's right to lost possessions ceases when all probable hope of recovery is at an enrl. And this is a rea- sonable and just rule ; l)ecause the rights of in- dividuals and states cannot be suffered to re- main suspended, while an unreasonable nation persists in indulging its spleen, and in exhibit- ing its oljstinacy. Now Mexico was notorious- ly unable to re-conquer Texas. She was as- serting a claim, the enforcement of which, al- ways hopeless, had^rown for nine years more MEXICAN WAR. 19 and more manifestly impossible. An obli- gation rests upon all nations to enforce, or to abandon tlieir claims of sovereignty. Tlie right to re-assert tliem does not descend, as Mexico contended, to children and children's children. A claim, as oiir secretary of state, Mr. Upsher, very justly declared, must be enforced seasonably, or abandoned for the peace and commerce of the rest of the world. The history of Europe presents several in- stances in which her states have united to compel obedience to this just rule. Eno-- land, at that time the greatest power in the vforld, recognized this obligation, and after vainly endeavoring to reduce the American colonies to submission, when she saw that the attempt was hopeless, immediately acknow- ledged them to be free and independent. But Mexico sat like the dog in the manger, and it was the right, nay, it was the duty of all na- tions to disregard her thi-eatening and her claims. Moreover, by an express act she ac- knowledged this o])ligation, in consenting to recognize the independence of Te^as, if the latter v»^ould stipulate not to b)ecome annexed to the United States, ^ow in viev/ of these plain fects, to what judgment can a candid % REVIEW OF THE world arrive, except tliat at tlie time of the annexation Mexico had forfeited and lost any sovereignty over Texa? which she might be- fore have possessed. But moreover, this claim of Mexico was in the beginning unfounded and unjust. Texas, by the Mexican revolution of 1834-35, became of right as Avell as in fact independent, and Mexico at that time, ])}' her ov\'n act, lost her former sovereignty over hei*. On the estab- lishment of the constitutional government in 1824, Texas, by a decree of the congress of Mexico, was united vrith Coahuila, as a " con- stituent and sovereign state of the Mexican confederacy." The principles on which that union was founded appears not to differ in any essential particular from those of our own. The con- stitution declared the ]^Iexican government to be a " popuLar, representative, federal repub- lic." The powers of its congress, and the ju- risdiction of its supreme court, were similar to those of the United States. The constitution of Coahuila and Texas, sanc- tioned by the general government, declared that state to be " free and independent of the other Mexican states," and that the sovereign- MEXICAN WAR, 21 ty of tlie state resided "originally and essen- tially in tlie great mass of tlie individuals wlio compose it." Tliat instrument also declared, tliat ''in all matters relating to tlie Mexican confederacy, tlie state delegates its faculties and powers to tlie general congix^ss ; but in all tJiat properly relates to tlie goyernment of tlie state, it retains its liberty, independence and sovereignty." In tlie year 1884, Santa Anna, tlien ])resi- dent of Mexico, at the liead of tlie army, dis- solved tlie federal congress, and abolished the council of government, whose authority he took into his o^v^n hands. A detachment of troops at the same time entered the territory of Texas, demanded the surrender of several of her principal citizens, and in accordance with a general order, attempted to disarm the inhabitants. The people of Texas resisted these demands, protected their fellows-citizens, and drove the army from their soil. They then published a manifesto, in which they de- clared that Santa Anna had broken the polit- ical compact of Mexico, tlnit the government unconstitutionally established by that usurper had no authority over Texas, and that the people of that state were no longer morally 22 REVIEW OF THE or civilly bouncl by tlie compact of union. Tliey declared that tliey liad taken np arms only to resist tyranny and to uphold the con- stitution, and that they were ready to assist the other Mexican states in re-establishing the republic. It is plain that in this Santa Anna, and not Texas, rebelled against the government. There existed no difi'erence between her obligation to defend that government and her ow^n liberties against him, and her obligation to defend them against a foreign invader, intent upon their destruction. In the following year Santa Anna, by a mil- itary edict, transformed the states into departs ments, and clothed the general government with the entire sovereignty. Many of the states declared against this outrage. Of these, some were reduced to obedience by force, and agamst others, from vrhich a more formidable resistance was apprehended, the basest treach- ery was employed to eifect their subjection. Having at length secured a supremacy in the other states, Santa Anna dissolved the le- gislature of Coahuila and Texas at the point of the bayonet, and marched to the subjuga- tion of the latter. MEXICAN WAR. 2? That state, after tlie overtlirow of tlie gov- ernmeat, tlie destruction of the federal consti- tutioii, and the final siiljmission of the otlier states to the usurper, on the 2nd of March, 1836, declared herself mdependent, and in the following month esta])lislied her declaration by overthrowing the Mexican army on the plains of San Jacinto and driving its ^'reck beyond her bord.ers. By this successful resistance against the rev- olution in Mexico, Texas preserved the sove- reignty wdiich she had possessed under the con- stitution, and of wdiich Santa Anna had failed to deprive her, and regained that which she had delegi-ted to the general congress, and thus be- came an independent sovereign state, in the fullest sense of that term. For the mere edict of Santa Anna was of no effect to talie away her rights from Texas ; she could loose them only by voluntary or necessary surrender. By the theory of the ^lexican government all sovereignty resided oi'iginally in the people, and the general government possessed such powers and such only as the people by their constitution hadi granted to it. Yv^hen the go- vernment w^hich the people had instituted vf as destroyed, the depositary of this power no Ion- 24 REVIEW OF THE ger existing, the grant, wliicli could not remain in abeyance, reverted to the people. The government established by Santa Anna could not exercise rightful jurisdiction over Texas, for no competent authority had granted to it the power. The only restraint on the entire sovereignty of Texas was contained in the constitution of the United Mexican States. The liinding force of that instrument ha^dng l:)een destroyed, the only restraint upon her was gone, and she was by the usurping act of Santa Anna free and independent. Her dec- laration Avas only the announcement of a fact that existed ^vithout her as^encv, and which undeclared would have been no less a fact. It will be o])served that the revolution was not by Texas, but against her. Its object was to change her from an independent state to a pro^dnce of a consolidated military poAver. If her independence had rested on the right of revolution, it Avould have existed subject for a time to the right of re-conquest. Her inde- pendence d^ jure would not be established un- til it had been acknowledged by her former government, or the right to re-conquer her had been lost bv neoiect. But she had never re- volted. The revolution in Mexico, failing to MEXICAN WAR 25 despoil her of the sovereignty which she pos- sessed as a state of that confederacy, and de- stroying the only political restraint, the only superior government which she had before know^n, left her entirely free and sovereign. It follows, then, that the invasion of Texas in 1836 was an attempt by a foreign tyrant to conquer an independent state, to subjugate a free peo23le ; and that the recognition of her independence by the government of Santa Anna, or its successors, was no more necessary to its completeness than would have been its acknowledgment by any other government which had never exercised sovereignty over her, and to which she had never ow^ed allegi- ance. From tjiese. considerations it follows, that the annexation of Texas to the United States was a measure which mvolved no right of Mexico, and which furnished to her no cause of complaint. It is said that war existed between the two countries, and that by the annexation we as- sumed the w^ar. It follows from what we have seen, that if Mexico had then renewed her war against Texas, it would have been an unjust invasion. However, then, the question should Ij\i 26 REVIEW OF THE have heeii considered in tlie liglit of expedi- ency, it is clear that our duty to Mexico did not require us to refrain from tlie adoption of the measure because an unjust invasion by her might be apprehended. We arrive then at the conchision that this act of our government was consistent with exact justice to Mexico. But this is not the only view of the case which our subject presents. There arises in the consideration of this measure another ques- tion scarcely inferior in interest and impor- tance: Was it the part of wisdom at that time to exercise this right which the United States possessed ? It does not belong to us in this essay, be it understood, to examine the domestic questions to w^hich annexation gave rise^ or to discuss the character of that measure as viewed in a domestic light. Its consideration lies within the province of this vrork only so far as it ef- fected our relations vrith Mexico, and w^as the occasion of the war. Was the annexation of Texas expedient and right, in view of the effects upon our relations wdth Mexico, which might reasonably have been apprehended from it ? This is the only question which remains for us to examine ; with MEXICAN WAR 27 the propriety or impropriety of tlie measure in other respects we have here nothing to do. We ]>elieve annexation at that time to have heen in this respect inexpedient and wrong. It Avas certain that its tendency wonkl be to alienate from ns the good v/ill of the Mexican people and government, to interrupt the har- mony which should exist between the two re- publics, and to arouse illiberal and unfriendly feelings. The boundary betvreen Texas and Mexico was unsettled, and it T^-as urged that by this act we should involve ourselves in a dispute with Mexico, vrhich might be productive of difficulty, and perhaps of unha]3py consequen- ces. Experience has sIio^ti that this appre- hension was too well founded. Moreover, Mex- ico had announced to the world that she should consider the proposed annexation a sufficient cause of war, and should iight for the mainten- ance of her rights. The probability that she would put her threat into execution, and actu- ally undertake a vv^ar so unjust, so idle, and for the support of which she wa^ so entirely desti- tute of resources, was certainly not very strong, but such an event was by no means impossi- ble. REVIEW OF THE It would surely have been unwise for tlie United States to liave adopted a measure from wliicli consequences sucli as tliese raiglit be ap- prehended, without an adequate reason. Did any such reason exist in this case ? The many bonds of sympathy between our country and Texas ; the unity of position, of people, of cli- mate, of products, of interests, together with the political situation of the rest of the conti- nent, rendered it evident that the cpiestion of annexation was one of time alone — that from the silent iniiuence of natural causes that new- born republic must at some early day become a portion of our own. '' As respects Texas,'' said Mr. Benton, " her destmy is fixed" Time has shown that a very undue impor- tance was attached to tlie considerations which precipitated the adoption of that measure. It is now generally admitted that the apprehen- sion of British interference in any manner which should have influenced our action on that question was entirely groundless. The idea so much dwelt upon, of the great value of the country as a means of national defence, and of the necessity of acquiring its possession instantly, was shown at the time to be unwarranted and ,^asionary, finding favor MEXICAN WAR. OQ witli tlie j)eo]:)le by its boldness and blindness, but turning out wlien examined by facts and figures to l)e only a baseless dream. Tliougli the measure cannot he I'egarded as unjust to- ward Mexico, still we must admit that we had no immediate use for the country, and that our people peiinitted \'ague and idle apprehensions to blind them against the very serious and un- liappy consequences which might reasonably have been apprehended from its annexation ; that in an hour of excitement they rushed, without cause and without leiiection, to the attainment of an object whose ultimate posses- sion was certain, and which at another time might have been secured under far better au- spices. But, besides all this, the act was wrong ; for no nation has the right knowingly to 2)ut its own tranquility, and the harmony of the world in jeopardy; to incur the danger of a war without a great necessity ; but it is its higli duty to sacrifice its own apparent intei'est, if necessary, to the pi'oinotion and perpetuation of peace. 30 REVIEW OF THE CHAPTEK III A VIEW of some of the leading events in the intiTcourse botweea the two countries, from August, 18 43, to October, 1845, siiowin^ that the design of declaring war agiiinst the United Sttites on accouut of annex- ation, if ever seriously entertained, was at t!ie last date e:itire!y aban- doned by Mexico. The advance to Corpus Christi. We liave in tlie preceding cliapters exam- in<3d the measure of annexation from every point of view from wliicli it can he considei'cd as effecting our relations witli Mexico. We liave sliown it to have ]jeen tlie primary occa- sion of tlie late nnliappy war. We have point- ed out the influences by which it was brought about. We liave e^^amined its abstract just-, ness tow^ard Mexico, and have seen that it af- forded to that republic no ground of com- plaint. We have considered its expediency, and have found it to have been, althougli not unjust, yet unwise and v/rong. Though the annexation of Texas, effected at a period of much excitement, and under the influences which we have described, must be MEXICAN WAR. 31 regarded as the occasion of tlie war, it was not its efficient cause. The war was not its necessary consequence. We shall see as we proceed that, had the subsequent conduct of the United States been marked by conciliation and forbearance, there is every, probability that ail differences growing out of this measure would have been amicably settled by negotia- tion. The Mexican government first takes official notice of the project for annexation in August 1843, T^^hen its minister of foreign relations, Mr. Bocanegra, wiites to our minister that ^' the Mexican ccovernmeiit has collected sufficient evidence from the American press that a pro- position for the incorporation of the so-called republic of Texas is to be submitted to con- gress at its next session," and adds that his '' go- vernment will consider the passage of such an act as equivalent to a declaration of war against the Mexican republic." The next month the same functionary writes again, that " Mexico will regard the annexation of Texas as a hostile act." General Almonte, the Mexican minister, resident at Washington, announces to our secretary of state, in Novem- ber following, that '' Mexico must consider such * 32 REVIEW OF THE an act as a direct asforression, and is resolved to delare war as soon as it sliall receive infor- mation of its adoption." Mr. Bocanegra, im- mediately after the treaty of annexation liad been sent to tlie senate, issues a circular to the foreign ministers ]*esident in Mexico, in whicli lie styles tlie act " a declaration of war between tlie two nations:" General Almonte, a few days after tlie resolution of congress consenting to annexation liad been approved by tlie president, demands liis passports and returns to Mexico. In tlie following month, April, 1845, Mexico breal^s off lier diplomatic relations with the United States in her own capital, declaring that the territory of Texas belonged to her by a right which she will maintain at whatever cost. In June next, pre- sident Herrera issues a proclamation, announ- cing that Mexico -^dll resist by arms the pro- posed annexation. This surely appears warlike enough. It would seem as if the indignation of Mexico had indeed been aroused, and that she was de- termined never to endure the indignity and wrongs to which she fancied herself about to be subjected. But high sounding words are very cheap in Mexico^ Her actual forcible op- MEXICAN WAR. 33 position to tlie measure was in strange contrast witli lier tlireats. We will go back in our nar- rative a year before the time of President Her- rera's proclamation, wlien the warlike farce began. In June, 1844, Santa Anna, then jjresident of Mexico, issues a requisition for thirty thou- sand men and four millions of dollars to pros- ecute the Avar against Texas. A large force is raised, and such is the despatch that before the same month is pcissed we find the invading army encamped at Mier, on the very border of the devoted state. General Woll, being- instructed by his government to wage a war of extermination, then makes a proclamation denouncing the traitor's doom against every person found beyond the distance of one league from the Rio Grande. Santa Anna at the same time publishes a decree, that every foreio-ner found on Mexican soil with arms in his hands should instantly be put to death without quarter or distinction. But no action whatever follows this exhibition of paper ferocity. Texas remains undisturbed, and the Mexican army remains at Mier. In the winter following Herrera is chosen to 2 § 34 REVIEW OF THE succeed Santa Anna in tlie presidency of Mex- ico. Tlie new administration takes no hostile step. The army still remains at Mier. In July, 1845, more than a year after the 'army of invasion had Leen raised by Santa Anna, General Taylor, under orders issued by our government at the request of the state of Texas, advances with his army to Corpus Christi, on the right bank of the Nueces, This movement revives for a time the Mex- ican proclamation fever. General Arista, com- manding one of the divisions of the ''grand army" designed for the invasion of Texas, and General Paredes, commanding the army of re- serve, issue each a furious proclamation, breath- ing vengeance and slaughter, and announcing the determination instantly to drive the inva- ders from their soil. This being over^ all sub- sides again into perfect tranquility ; the army is marched into distant parts of the republic, and its leaders turn their minds to domestic commotion. General Taylor writes thus from Corpus Christi: "No extraordinary prepara- tions are going forward at Matamoros, the gar- rison does not seem to have been increased, and our consul at that place is of the opinion MEXICAN WAH. 35 that tliere will be no declaration o f war." " The border people on both sides of the river are friendly." '^ There are no troops of any con- sequence on or near the Rio Grande." Such is the unvarying tenor of his desj)atches, up to the day on which he was ordered forv\^ard to that disputed river. The propriety of the movement of our ar- my to Cor23us Christi might on some accounts be questioned. But as the matter never as- sumed any practical importance, as Mexico did not object to it when in Octol^er following she requested our fleet to be withdrawn from the Gulf before negotiations should be opened, as it was not alluded to as a wrongful act in the subsequent correspondence between the two governments, and was soon lost sight of behind events of greater magnitude, we shall not dwell further upon it. 36 REVIEW OF THE CHAPTEE IV. The Mission of Mr. Slidell. The refusal to receive him. Political sit- uiition of Mexico on the arrival of our Minister. Her conduct con- sistent. Duty of the United States. The course adopted by our gov- ernment. Fall of Herrera. The refusal to send a commissioner threw upon our government the responsibihty of future hostilities. The annexation of Texas to tlie United States had awakened in Mexico a strong feeling of resentment. The administration of Herrera, liowever, thouofli on this account it found it necessary to continue its menaces, and keep up a show of opposition, was evidently dis- posed to peace. Our executive, convinced of the amicable disposition of the Mexican government, ad- dressed to it an inquiry in October, 1845, while General Taylor was at Corpus Christi, to as- certain W' hether " an envoy from the United States, entrusted with full powers to adjust all the questions in dispute between the two MEXICAN WAR. 37 governments" would be received. The Mexi- can minister replied, that his government was disposed to receive '•''tlie commissioiwr of the United States who might come vf ith full pow- ers to settle the present dis-imte in a peaceful, reasonable and honorable manner." The promj^tness and cordiality of this reply evince a sincere desire for the restoration of friendship. Immediately on its receipt, Mr. Slidell was appointed by the president, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to reside near the government of Mexico. That government refused to receive him in this ca- pacity, stating that they had only consented to receive a commissioner for the settlement of the present dispute, and that they could not renew diplomatic intercourse, until the dif- ficulty on account of which it had been broken off should be first adjusted. It has been attempted to charge Mexico with inconsistency in this matter, and with inten- tionally insulting the United States by \dola- ting her word. A view of the circumstances of the case will, we think, afford to every can- did mind a vindication of her conduct. The arrival of Mr. Slidell in that country • 38 REVIEW OF THE occurred at an unfortunate moment. During tlie few weeks that had elapsed since the prom- ise to receive a commissioner, a sudden storm had darkened the political sky of Mexico, and the administration of Herrera was already ben- ding' before it. Its amicable \ievrs were dis- pleasing to a majority of the people, its tem- porizing policy had disappointed the army. Taking advantage of the discontent of both, Paredes, ha\dng raised the cry for the recov- ery of Texas. wt.s threatening its overthrow. Under these circumstances the arrival of the American minister was a serious cause of alarm to the government. We have no rea- son to doubt its sincere desire to redeem its promise. Mr. Slidell himself says, that he be- lieves the president and his cabinet to be real- ly desirous to enter frankly upon a negotiation vs^hich would terminate all their difficulties with the United States. But the administra- tion appeared to be conscious that his imme- diate reception W'Ould destroy the last hope w^hich they entertained of vfithstanding the popular storm. In this state of anxiety and alarm, the gov- ernment attempted to defer his recognition MEXICAN WAR. 39 until after tlie meeting of tlie new congress on the first of January, in tlie liope tliat if they could hold over until that time, they would then be able to maintain their position. When the United States consul at Mexico an- nounced to the government the arrival of Mr. Slidell at Vera Cruz, he w^as replied to that they were not prepared for his reception. When informed by the consul, on the 8th of December, of his presence in the capital, the minister of foreign relations expressed his re- gret that his arrival had not been delayed for a month, and in a conversation marked by great frankness and sincerity, represented the difficulties and fears of the administi'ation, and stated that nothing positive could be done un- til the meeting of the new congress. This in- terview took place before the credentials of Mr. Slidell had been opened, and up to this time it was certainly the purpose of the gov- ernment to receive him, as soon as it could be done consistently with the safety of the ad- ministration, and the success of his mission. On the examination of these credentials, however, they were found to be tlie same as those which had been presented by former 40- REVIEW OF THE ministers, liaving no reference to any questions in dispute, as if the friendly intercourse be- tween the two countries had never been inter- rupted. The question of receiving a resident minister from the United States was immedi- ately laid before the council of government, and in accordance with its ad^dce, on the 21st of December, the government communicated to Mr. Slidell its refusal to receive him in that capacity ; stating that they had only consent- ed to receive a commissioner to settle the pres- ent dispute, and that to this object solely they expected the mission would have been direct- ed. The minister of foreign relations at the same time stated that the sentiments in w^hich a willingness to receive a commissioner were first expressed still remained unchanged, and that his government would still be happy to open negotiations for the peaceful settlement of the existing difficulty. Here was a change of purpose instant upon the examination of the credentials of the min- ister. There was no hesitation, no objection on any other ground, but a determination that he could not be received, for the sole and dis- tinct reason that he did not come in the char- MEXICAN WAR. 4^ acter in wMch they liacl expected Mm to come, and in v/liicli alone tliey liad promised and were willing to receive liim. Tlie probabilities of tlie case afford also a strong presumption that tlie conduct of Mex- ico was entirely consistent. 'No one under- standing the Mexican character, had he been asked at the time if that government would receive a minister from the United States, thereby abandoning openly the position which it had taken a few months before, and con- fessing that its complaints were groundless, and that its conduct had been ridiculous, would have hesitated to answer no. Our government itself must have been surprised at the readi- ness with which they imagined Mexico to have yielded her high pretensions, and to have for- gotten her ancient pride. Had this been the case, there would have been in it an inconsist- ency indeed. Now the language used by that government is incapable of any other fair construction than the one which it was intended to bear. The term " commissioner" is never applied to a resident minister. The answer evidently contemplated that the mission would be con- 42 REVIEW OF THE fined to a single object ; tlie powers of resi- dent ministers are always general. It w^ould seem, tliat without the use of a negative, lan- guage could not more distinctly express tlie meaning for wliicli Mexico contended. Tlie parties fell into a mutual mistake. Mex- ico understood " all the questions in dispute" to arise from the annexation. This difficulty engrossed her whole attention, and it never occurred to her that there was any other ; as indeed there was no other unadjusted question which a minister v/as competent to settle. She naturally supposed that it Vv^as the desire of the United States to restore friendly inter- course in the manner universal aniono^ nations. This government on the other hand seemed to imagine that Mexico only desired that the min- ister who might come to reside at her capital should possess full powers to settle the present dispute. The known disposition and previous conduct of Mexico certainly furnished a pre- sumption that she w^ould consent to no such concession. How our government could gath- er anything from her re-plj to rebut this pre- sumption we cannot understand; we will as- sume, however, that it really expected the min- MEXICAN WAR. 43. ister would be received, because to suppose the contrary Y/ould be to suppose it to have acted in bad faith. But tliis mutual error was soon to be ex- plained. Mexico found that the United States had sent a minister to her capital, expecting that he would be received, and the latter dis- covered that Mexico had intended no such submission whatever. What vras then the du- ty of the United States ? A grave question was presented to our government ; the mighty results of peace or war might hang on its de- cision. We think that the United States should have sent a commissioner, as Mexico desired. We rest this opinion on two grounds. It w^ould have been a just and conciliating po- licy, and it would in all probability have se- cured a peace. In the annexation of Texas, we had been the gainers at the expense of Mexico. How- ever acquired, the fact was that we came to possess a vast territory which once belonged to her. Her pride was wounded, and her jeal- ousy was aroused. Her government saw that it was useless to contend against the act, and its only object was to yield its high preten- 44 REVIEW OF THE sions in siicli a manner as to preserve its self- respect, and to calm tlie clamor of the people. Now under these circumstances it would surely liave been wise and just in tlie United States to have exercised toward that republic a spiiit of kindness and generosity, to have borne with her pride, and to have taken some pains to soothe her irritation and to dispel her jealousy. The existing boundary question af- forded an opportunity for that conciliating course w^hich justice required fi'om us, and which would gratify the feelings of Mexico. Had that been adjusted by a commissioner, had a comparatively small sum been paid to Mexico for that undetermined extent of territo- ry which she might be supposed to surrender and had she been treated with the forbearance due from a great nation toward a feebler one on which it was CDcroaching, how easily might the causes of difficulty have been dissipated, and all resentments brushed away. Our government indeed could hardly have adopted a course better calculated than the one which it did adopt, to deepen in the minds of the Mexican people its sense of injury, and its feel- ing of hostility. Mexico was first charged MEXICAN WAR 45 with having violated Iier word, and she was next informed that the alternative was be- fore her, immediately to abandon her position and renew her diplomatic intercourse with the United States, or to suffer the consequen- ces. Now consenting to the demand of Mexi- co would have been so perfectly in accordance with the usages of nations, it was so peculiarly proper for us to adopt a conciliatory course toward her at that time, and the unhappy consequences of this haughty and imperious conduct were so apparent, that we are driven to the conclusion that a sincere desire for peace and a renewal of friendship, and an anxiety to show to Mexico that we intended her no inju- ry, were not in the mind of our government ; but that it was impelled rather by that pride of power which generally accompanies wrong, and which can tolerate nothing but submis- sion. In a few days after the refusal to receive our minister, the administration of Herrera, who only a year before had been elected with une- qualled unanimity, yielded to the opposition which had been excited against it, and by the act of the army the supreme power passed 46 REVIEW OF THE without Lloodslied or tumult into the hands of Paredes. In the latter part of January Mr. Slidell was directed to apply to the new government for reception. As it might have been expected, Paredes declined recei^dng him on the same ground on which his predecessor had based his refusal. There ca^n be no reasonable doubt that the administration of Herrera, and probably that of Paredes also, would have received a com- missioner to settle the dispute relating to Tex- as. Had a commissioner been sent and receiv- ed, it is probable that peace and harmony w^ould have been established. Now we sub- mit, that if it appears probable that the war would, have been prevented by any just and proper act on the part of the United States which that government refused to perform, it must share at least the responsibility of the war, by whichever party it might actually have been commenced. "We shall not examine the question, whether the administration of Paredes, the attempt at negotiation having been thus broken off, would have proceeded to acts of hostility against the MEXICAN WAR. 47 United States on account of tlie annexation of Texas. Tliis at best would be only an exam- ination of probabilities, wliicli could not lead to a satisfactory conclusion, nor be of any prac- tical consequence. Our own opinion is, that it would not. We entertain but little doubt that, as the popular commotion was taken ad- vantage of by Paredes for his own personal elevation, so he would have been glad to avoid a collision with the United States, VN^hich w^ould endanger its security. Many hold a contrary opinion. As Mexico was allov»^ed no opportu- nity to solve this doubt, the question must re- main as uncertain as it is immaterial. 48 KEVIEW OF THE CHAPTER V, The fidvance of our Army to the Rio Grande. This movement a viola- tion of the rights of Mexico, which had been recognized by our Gov- ernment itself. We liave now establisliecl the fact, that war was not the necessary consequence of annexa- tion. We have seen that beyond a reasonable doubt, notwithstanding the braggadocio and haughty language of Mexico, all matters of dispute and difficulty between that country and our own might have been settled by nego- tiation, had the United States really desired to preserve harmony and peace. We now pass to the consideration of an event on which, and on which alone, the responsibil- ity of the Mexican vrar must forever rest. By refusing to negotiate in the manner that Mex- ico desired, we had estopped ourselves from ever asserting that such a negotiation would have been unsuccessful. We could not con- MEXICAN WAR. 49 tend that it was impossible for a treaty to have been made, for we had refused to treat. As against iis, the presumption is warranted that peace could have been ]3reserved by honora- ble negotiation. And novv^, by the act wdiich T/e ai'e about to examine, we in like manner deprived ourselves of any right to assert, that even after negotiations were ])roken off, vrar might have been commenced by Mexico. On the 18th of January, 1846, General Taylor was ordered to "advance from Corpus Christi as early as the season would permit, and occupy a position on or near the Eio Grande." We shall devote a considerable space to the examination of this act of our government, because it was the most impor- tant event in the history of the war, and no one can be competent to form any opinion con- cerning the causes of that unhappy contest, wdthout full}^ understanding it, Burke, in his reflections on the French rev- olution, says : "We have consecrated the state, that no man should approach to look into its defects but with due caution ; that he should approach to the faults of the state as to the wounds of a father, w ith pious aw^e and tremb- 50 REVIEW OF THE ling solicitude." This caution we have endeav- ored to exercise, and snch awe and solicitude v/e trust our patriotism inspires ; but we are unable to resist the conviction that this ad- vance was an intentional and deliberate act of war on the part of oui* government. By a law passed immediately after her inde- pendence, Texas declared her western bound- ary to be the Rio Grande, from its mouth to its source. Mexico, on the contrary, claimed that portions of Nevv-Mexico, Chihuahua, Coa- huihi and Tamaulipas, departments of her own territory, lay east of this pretended boundary, and. formed no part .of the state of Texas. Our government on several occasions recog- nized this claim of Mexico as entitled to its respect. Our secretary of state in 1844, in stating to Mexico the policy of this country, says, that "the president desires to settle the question of boundary on the most liberal and satisfactory terms." When, nearly a year after, congress consented to the annexation, they did so on the express condition that the territory should be "subject to the adjustment by this government of all questions of boundary that may arise with other governments." MEXICAN WAR. 5X But after all this, and while the question stood in precisely the same situation, our ex- ecutive assumes the claim of Mexico to be unfounded, sends its army to the utmost limit of its pretensions, where it blockades the har- bor of Point Isabel, and the mouth of the Rio Grande, and plants its cannon, " ^^dthin good range for demolishing " the peaceful town of Matamoros ; and writes to General Taylor that the attempt by Mexico to cross the Rio Grande w4th a considei-able force would be re- garded as an invasion of the United States and the commencement of hostilities. On the mere statement of these facts the United States must stand convicted of the un- just act of treating with violent disregard a claim, v>^hich they had acknowledged it their duty to respect, and which w^as made by a na- tion with whom they were at peace, and whom it w^as, under the circumstances, peculiarly their duty to conciliate. • 52 REVIEW OF THE CIIAPTEE VI. The alvancp to thn Rio Or.mrle an invasion of the torritory of Mexico. L)ui:*!aua \Xi reder! to ih V>y France in 1303 cxteiHied tio farther west th-riij to the Nui^c-.ij. Tlii* nv«i- the Wi'Stern bou;is and descriptions derived from these. They were all extremely indefinite, and nearly as inaccnrate as were descriptions of Cen- tral Africa, before the explorations of Park, Denham, Clapperton, Caille and the Landers. Thus the map of De Lisle included in Louisi- ana all the country between ]^ew-York and Pennsylvania on the east, and the Eocky moun- tains on the v>'est. The grant to Crozat cov- ered this vast extent. It was about as valid, though not cjuite so extensive in its sweep as the bull by which Pope Alexander VI. grant- ed to Spain all the heathen countries v\-hich she might discover west of the Azores, and to Portugal all Asia, Africa and the East Indies. In the year 1682, La Salle descended the Mississippi from the Illinois river to its mouth. He claimed for France all the unknown region whose waters flow in that river to the ocean, and named it Louisiana after his sovereign. Three years after, at his solicitation, the French government equipped four vessels to seek the mouth of the Mssissippi by sea, and he set out MEXICAN WAR. 57 Upon a new expedition, to establish a great colony on tlie fertile shores w^aterecl by that river. Sailing, through ignorance of the coast, one hnndi'ecl lea2:ues westward of liis clestina- tion, he was finally landed in the bay of Me- tagorda, and saw^ the ships sail away, leaving him with less than a hundred companions in that unknown land. The colony melted rap- idly away by disease and dissension, and he himself, within a few months, leaving the arms of France in the forests of Texas, met death through private treachery in the land which he had discovered for his king. The settle- ment was then abandoned, and seven men who alone escaped its numerous disasters, wandered eastward to the Mississippi, and returned to Canada. "These distresses," says the Abbe Eaynal, " soon made France lose sight of a re- gion, that was then but little known." In 1722, Bernard de la Harpe attempted to plant a French colony on nearly the same spot, which enter]3rize, as Bancroft informs us, " had no other result than to incense the natives against the French, and to stimulate the Span- iards to the occupation of the country by a fort." 58 REVIEW OF THE These were tlie only efforts ever made by France to colonize Texas. '' Slie was too feeble ever after," we are told, " to attempt extend- ing lier settlements w^est of the Sabine." The act of taking possession of the Mississippi can- not be considered as gi^ang to France a title to territory lying beyond a chain of mountains, in which were its most distant sources. Spain made her first settlement east of the Eio Grande in l^ew Mexico, about the year 1594, eighty years befoi-e a French subject ever savr the Mississippi, and held it in undis- puted possession until the Mexican revolution. All geographers have laid down the mountains v>^hich divide the valley of the Mississippi from that of the Eio Grande as the eastern bounda- ry of the Spanish province of New Mexico. Above the Passo del Norte, then, discovery and unmolested occupancy had given Spain a title to the region west of these mountains, which no nation ever seriously questioned. South of this point, the country east of the Eio Grande remained, until within a few years, almost an unbroken Vvilderness, where the forest dropped its fruit with its leaves to the ground, the undisturbed soil vras black with MEXICAN WAR. 59 the mould of ages, and tlie Indian from the mountain roamed as wild as liis fathers. The Spaniards first crossed the low^er Rio Grande in 1G90, iive years after La Salle's un- happy expedition. They discovered and took possession of the country to the Nueces, which no French adventurer is related to have seen, and into v/hich, before the Mexican revolution, no adverse settler ever wandered. Having frustrated La Harpe's attempt in 1722, they continued, until the territory came into their undisputed j^ossession by the treaty of 1819, the only rivals witli the Indians for the sove- reignty of the region quite to the Sabine. Bexar was founded by them in 1()92. They formed a settlement at Nacogdoches, on the frontier of their claim, in the early part of the last century. Goliad dates its origin in 1716. The Abbe Eaynal, the highest French au- thority of the reign of Louis XYL, describes the country as a part of New Spain, and de- signates all the towns and rivers by Spanish names, except the bay of Metagorda, where La Salle landed. He sa}^^ that the French formed no settlements upon the coast, west of the Mississippi. 60 REVIEW OF THE The claim of Spain to the Sabine was then far from being groundless ; that of France to the Kio Grande was entirely without founda- tion. There are two reasons, however, why the mountain and desert boundary should ]3e considered, not in opposition to the rightful claims of France, but rather to those of Spain, as the proper line of separation between their possessions. The discovery of Texas was by the French, and they made two attempts to settle the country, one the earliest on record, which Jefferson forcibly terms " the cradle of Louisiana," and which, as Bancroft declares, " made the country still more surely a part of her territory, because the colony found there its grave." This is also the most prominent natural boundary w^hich the country presents. Eivers in all new countries are undesirable dividing lines, as settlements are often formed by the same parties on both banks indiscriminately. Of this the Nueces and Rio Grande are them- selves examples. But the mountain and the barren plain are great natural obstacles, and broad and appropriate objects of separation. Mr. Adams, speaking not as the advocate, MEXICAN WAR. (j| but as the historian, says of tlie claim of France : " It was no right. It was a claim of all the territory to the Eio Grande, v/hen in fact there never had been an adjustment of that claim with another, and much better au- thenticated claim of Spain." He stated that President Monroe, during wdiose administra- tion the subject was most discussed, had no confidence in tlie claim to the Rio Grande. Mr. Benton, in his elocjuent language says: "The magnificent valley of the Mississippi is ours, wifli all its fountains, springs and floods." And again : " The Kio del Norte is a Mexican river by position and possession." I^ow in view of historical testimony so unanswerable and authority so high as this, of what consequence is it, that the French officer who surrendered Louisiana to the United States in 1803, in- formed the agents of our government that that province extended to the Eio Grande, or that Mr. JeHerson and other eminent men at the same time declared, even in the strongest terms, their conviction that our newly acquir- ed territory was bounded by that river ? Of what consequence is it, that Mr. Clay, attack- ing in the house of representatives the treaty of • g2 REVIEW OK THE 1819, declared tlie country to the Eio Grande to have been thrown away by that instrument, or that the executive who dechii'ed our title to fifty-four degrees forty minutes in Oregon to be clear and unquestionable, contended for the same extreme boundary ? How can the claims put forth by Mr, Adams in his corres- pondence v/ith the Spanish minister in 1819, when it was, as he declares, liis duty to 'make the best case that he could for his ovrn coun- try, be opposed for a moment to his subse- quent and opposite declaration which we have quoted ? The claim of Texas to the left bank of that river, then, so far as it has been found- ed on the title of France, falls to the ground. It folio vvs also that the president is mistaken, when, in his message of December, 1846, he says, that '' the country which was ceded to Spain by the treaty of 1819, embraced all the country now claimed by the state of Texas^ between the Nueces and the Rio Grande." It clearly embraced no part of this territory whatever. We shall now proceed to show that before the Mexican revolution the Nueces was the farthest western boundary that was ever as- MEXICAN WAR. ^3 signed to tlie Spanisli province of Texas ; for Spain erected tlie country from tlie Nueces to tlie Sa]}ine into a province under this name in tlie latter piirt of the seventeenth century, and as it will be renieinLei-ed, always maintained its exclusive possession, as well before as after the Sabine became her established boundary by the treaty of 1819. Pinkerton wrote in 1802, and is the first English geographer of his time. His atlas marks the limits of Texas very distinctly. Its v\^estern boundary foUovv^s up the Nueces a short distance, until that river inclines to the west, and then leaving it strikes further east, crossing the San Antonio and Colorado. Humboldt, the prince of geographers and travelers, spent several years in exploring Spanish America. He prepared in the royal school of Mines in Mexico, a map of that country, compiled from the best authorities in Europe and America, corrected from his own personal observation. In this map, published in Paris in 1808, the Nueces is described to be the western boundary of the province of Tex- as. Harrison, Black, Le Sage and Malte Brun, the most standard geographers since the day 64 REVIEW OF THE of Humboldt, agree in giving tlie same west- ern boundary to Texas. Lieutenant Pike was sent out by President Jefferson in 180G-'07, to explore the liead wsl- ters of the Arkansas. On his return, he was conducted by the Spanish authorities through 'New Mexico, Chihuahua and Texas. The map attached to his journal of his expedition is re- garded as the best American authorit}^ of that day. On this map the western boundary of Texas is distinctly marked, somewhat east of the Nueces. All the maps of that period rep- resent the intendencies of Nuevo S:in Tander and Coahuila extendiii^^ eujiv. aivi to iLl- Nuq- ces, and Texas embracing all the region be- tween that river, or the desert east of it, and the Sabine. And now, finally, the Nueces v/as the Vv'estern boundary of the state of Texas under theZ\Iexi- can constitution of 1824. Senator Niles, in his work on that country, says : '' The river Nueces has heretofore been considered as the western boundary of Texas, the district betvv^een this and the Pio Grande having been included in the state of Tamauiipas, while the farce of a federal republic was played off in Mexico," MEXICAN WAR. 55 General Almonte was appointed in 1834 a commissioner of tlie Mexican government to settle tlie boundary between Texas and Coa- huila, pending tlie application of tlie latter to be admitted as a separate state. In his official report be states, tbat tbe commonly received opinion tbat Texas extends to tbe Nueces was found to be an error ; tbat tbe true bne com- menced at tbe moutb of tbe Aransas, tbe first stream east of tbe Nueces, and followed it to its source. Tbe legislature of Coabuila and Texas, in tbeir legislative acts, subsequently adopted tbe same boundary. In tbe summer of 1836, President Jackson sent Henry M. Morfit to Texas to inquire into tbe political condition of tbat country, witb reference to tbe acknowledgment of its inde- pendence, perbaps also remotely witb a view to its annexation. His official letters were communicated by tbe president to congress. In one of tbese be says : " Tbe political Hm- its of Texas, previous to tbe last revolution, were tbe Nueces on tbe west," &c. Tbe original edition of Tanner's map of Texas, compiled by Stepben F. Austin, tbe first and most prominent of tbe settlers of tbat 3 gQ EEVIEW OF THB state, gives the Nueces as its western bounda- ry ; thougli in the editions issued since 1836, the colored line has been removed to the Rio Grande, the engraved line, however, remaining on the Nueces. From the mass of evidence before us, we have presented that of the highest and most conclusive authority, to show the historical fact, which no one understanding the subject now denies, that before the revolution of 1834 -35, Texas as a Spanish province or as a Mexican state had and claimed no title to the country between the Nueces and the Rio Grande. . But it is said, this does not settle the ques- tion. The repuUic of Texas held her territory by a better title than musty maps or royal records can bestow. The country which she claims was hers by a declaration of independ- ence, and a successful resistance against usur- pation, was held by her arms, and conse- crated by her blood. Let us see. The mouth of the Nueces is distant about one hundred and forty miles in a direct line from that of the Eio Grande ; but two hun- di-ed and fifty miles up the latter river, the dis- MEXICAN WAB. 57 tance between the two is only about sixty miles. Of this country, a narrow strip bor- dering the Rio Grande, and another still less in width skirting the Nueces are alone habitable. Between these lies a solitary highland desert about one hundred and ten miles in width at its southern extremity, and containing salt lakes of considerable size. At the time of the revolution of 1834-35, a few families from Texas had settled at Cor- pus Christi on the right bank of the Nueces, at its mouth, and in the immediate neighbor- hood of that place, which territory had never before been inhabited, and this was the far- thest western point which her emigrants had reached. Every battle in her struggle against Mexico was fought east of that river. Let us inquii^e how Texas proceeded, after her independence, to extend her authority across this silent and uninhabited waste. In 1836 she passed an act, declaring her Western boundary to be the Rio Grande from its mouth to its source. This harmless arrangement of words caused no commotion. It never occurred to the eastern half of New Mexico to send rep^e§,eiit^tiye$ to her new goveriimeiLt, whose 53 REVIEW OF THE laws never crossed her borders. Her twenty- towns and villages east of tlie Kio Grande did not dream of renouncing theii' allegiance to Mexico. CHliualiua exhibited no sensation, tliat a corner at tlie Passo del Norte, famous for its wine, liad been rudely severed from her state. The inhabitants of Coahuila and Ta- maulipas still crossed the great river to culti- vate their fields on its eastern bank, ignorant of any lawgiver except the government of Mexico. The Mexican collector in the latter department received his duties and his fees in undisturbed security until the very day, when burning their custom house, the authorities fled from Point Isabel at the approach of General Taylor. Mr. Morfit, in the correspondence above al- luded to, says: "The additional territory claimed by Texas since her independence, will increase her population at least fifteen thou- sand." The coolness with w^hich Texas thus attempted to transfer to herself this "vast slice of the territory of Mexico," twelve hun- dred miles in length, and containing a popula- tion of at least fifteen thousand souls, is truly very laughable. " It was the intention of this government," wiites Mr. Morfit, " to have claim- MEXICAN WAR. 69 ed along tlie Eio Grande to the thirtietli de- gree of latitude, and thence due west to the Pacific." Some inconvenience was apprehend- ed, however, and " it was thought the territory claimed would be sufficient for a young repub- lic." How modest was this political child, who knew no limit to her rights, except such as her own sovereign discretion should determine. Judge Ellis, the president of the convention that formed the constitution of Texas, and a member of the congress which adopted the above mentioned boundary, said, on a subse- quent occasion, that the only object of Texas in this proceeding was to secure a wide margin in her future negotiations with Mexico. But it is idle to say that a government can by resolution acquire title to the territory of another. There are only two ways in which such title can be acquired, and these are treaty, and conquest followed by possession. Santa Anna, president of Mexico, was taken prisoner by the Texans in the battle of San Jacinto. Before his liberation he entered into a treaty with Texas, by which the territory from the Nu- eces to the Kio Grande was ceded to that state. Now every one knows that such a treaty waa 70 REVIEW OF THE only waste paper until it should be ratified by the proper authority. Texas admitted this fact by stipulating as the condition of his liberty, that Santa Anna should procure the ratifica- tion of the treaty by the Mexican congress. The Mexican congress however instantly repu- diated the whole transaction, and this is the only treaty with Mexico of which Texas can boast. In 1839, a small marauding party of Texans crossed the Eio Grande, and signalized themselves by a masterly retreat before the pursuing Mexicans. In 1 8 4 1 , President Lamar sent three commissioners, with a strong civil force, to bring under Texan authority the east- ern half of New Mexico. These were treated as invaders, captured to a man, and marched off to the mines. The world heard with horror of their sufferings, and of the barbarity of their captors. In 1842, General Somerville, having pursued the Mexican force as far as Sal- tillo, ordered a retreat. Between five and six hundred men refused to obey him, elected a new leader, and set off down the Kio Grande to Mier. They obtained possession of that place in the night, but the next day they were all captured by Ampudia, and sent as pris- MEXICAN WAR. 7| oners to the interior of Mexico, where some were immured in the dungeons of Perote, and some were driven with common felons to pave the streets of the capital. And these are the only attemjDts ever made by Texas to bring under her authority " the additional territory " which she had resolved into her possession. All this country was included on 23aper in the western congressional district of Texas, but its representatives sat in the Mexican con- gress. She organized counties extending to the Rio Grande on paper, but their inhabi- tants who acknowledged her authority lived at Corpus Christi and in its immediate neighbor- hood, and beyond this point no judicial pro- cess from her courts was ever attempted to be served. On the other hand, the inhabitants of this " additional territory claimed by Texas " were all Mexicans, and over it the Mexican authority had never been for a moment interrupted. That government had a custom house at Point Isabel at its southern extremity, and another at Taos on its northern limit. Only three days after the resolution consenting to the an- nexation had been adopted, congress passed a 72 REVIEW OF THE law alloTvdng a drawback on goods imported into tliis country, and carried overland vkt St. Louis to the Mexican city of Santa Fe, where the United States had then a consul recog- nized by the Mexican government. Truth is always consistent, but wrong be- trays itself by contradiction. A very good il- lustration of this principle was pointed out by a question asked in congress of one of the rep- resentatives from Texas, by what right General Kearney had established a territorial govern- ment in New Mexico within the limits of his congressional district, and how his constituents there dared to resist the authority of the Uni- ted States. This w^as after the order had been given to that officer to march "to the conquest of New Mexico," and the president had con- gratulated congress upon the acquisition of that country, announcing that "the i^rovince of New Mexico, with its capital Santa Fe, has been captured without bloodshed." An officer writing from the camp opposite Matamoros says: "Our situation here is a most extraordinary one. Eight in the ene- my's country, actually occujDying their cotton and corn fields, the people of the soil leaving MEXICAN WAR, 73 tlieir homes, and we with a small handful of men marching with colors flying and drums beating under the very guns of one of their principal cities, while they with an army of twice our size at least make not the least re- sistance, not the first effort to drive the inva- ders off." Speaking of the inhabitants, the same writer says : " These people are all Span- iards, and are actuated by a feeling of univer- sal hostility against the United States ; and since our arrival nearly all of them have left this side of the river, and gone over, leaving their houses and much valuable property, notwithstanding every assurance from General Taylor that all their rights and property would be respected by our government. They quar- rel among themselves, but against a foreign foe they are united." General Le Vega said to General Worth, in an interview held at Mata- moros on the day of the arrival of our army opposite that place : " Our people are grieved to see the flag of the United States floating on the left bank of that river. There is the home of our people, there is our custom house, there are our towns and hamlets, and there stand the whitening harvests of pur citizens, 74 REVIEW OF THE and we regard your presence tliere as an act of unjustifiable invasion." And against all this, Texas lias on whicli to found her claim, neither a treaty, nor conquest, nor a moment's occupation of any part of the territory, nor the exercise of a single act of sovereignty over it; nothing except the reso- lution of her own congress, which body, had they thought it expedient, could easily have obtained the same title to the entire globe. When in 1842, Mr. Webster, as secretary of state, in vindicating the independence of Tex- as, says, " no hostile foot finding rest within her territory for six or seven years," he could not have intended to include in the term "her territory," a country inhabited exclusively by Mexicans, governed by Mexican laws and on entering which, our merchants paid duties to Mexican collectors. He plainly designed by his broad and unqualified expression, to ex- clude this " additional territory " from conside- ration, or rather esteemed the claim of Texas undeserving of notice. Mr. Benton, in a speech against the ratifica- tion of the treaty of annexation, delivered in the senate in 1844, says : " I wash my hands MEXICAN WAR. 75 of all attempts to dismember tlie Mexican re- public by seizing ber dominions in New Mexi- co, Cbibuahua, Coabuila and Tamaulipas. The treaty, in all that relates to tbe boundary of the Eio Grande, is an act of unparalleled out- rage on Mexico. By this declaration the thir- ty thousand Mexicans on the left bank of the valley of the Rio del Norte are our citizens, and standing, in the language of the presi- dent's message, " in a hostile attitude to us, and subject to be treated as invaders." Taos, the seat of the custom house, where our caravans enter their goods is ours ; Santa Fe, the capital of New Mexico, is ours ; Governor Armijo is our governor, and subject to be tried for trea- son if he does not submit to us ; twenty Mexi- can towns and villages are ours, and their peace- ful inhabitants, cultivating their fields and tending their flocks, are suddenly converted by a stroke of the president's pen into Ameri- can citizens, or American rebels." Governor Wright, of New- York, was then in the senate, and voted against the treaty. In a speech delivered the next autumn he said : " I believe that the treaty, from the boundaries that must be implied from it, embraced a coun- 76 EEVIEW OF THB try to whicli Texas liad no claim, over wliicli slie had never acquired jurisdiction, and wMcL. site liad no riglit to cede." Mr. C. J. Ingersoll said in tlie liouse of rep- resentatives : " The territorial limits of Texas are marked in the configm^ation of this conti- nent by an Almighty hand. The stuj^endous deserts between the ISTueces and the Rio Grande are the natural boundary of the Anglo- Saxon and Mauritanian races. There ends the valley of the vrest; there Mexico begins. While peace is cherished, that boundary will be sacred. Not till the spirit of conquest ra- ges, will the people on either side molest or mix with each other." We have now seen that the French province of Louisiana never extended west of the Nue- ces ; that the Spanish province of Texas lay entirely east of this boundary ; that the same river was the farthest western limit of the Mexican state of Texas ; that the authority of the republic of Texas never extended beyond the valley of the Nueces ; and that New Mex- ico and the eastern bank of the lower Eio Grande had always been, and was at the ad- vance of our army, inhabited by the Mexican MEXICAN WAR. 77 people, and under undisputed Mexican jurisdic- tion. Our position is tlius established, that the march of our army to that river, was an in- vasion of the territory of Mexico. The same evidence also establishes another fact. The eastern half of New Mexico, and the country between the desert and the lower Rio Grande we are now able to say are not the property of the state of Texas. They were obtained by the treaty of 1848, and belong to the United States. Texas cannot carry into this territory her laws and her slavery. It is a part of the free territory of the union. Her claim is the height of insolence, and should not be allowed. But, moreover, the order directing this ad- vance was issued by our government with the full knowledge that its obedience would be such a hostile invasion, and an act of aggres- sive war against Mexico. Possessing every means of information, we have a right to require and to presume in gov- ernment full knowledge on such a subject. The plea of ignorance could be no extenuation of the wrong, though it would call forth our de- • 78 REVIEW OF THE rision. To have taken sucli a step ignorantly, would have been scarcely less culjDable than to have taken it for the deliberate pui'pose of pro- voking war. But it was not taken ignorantly. Apart from the conclusive presumption to that effect, we have positive evidence that government acted with full knowledge of the rights of Mexico. Major Donelson, our charge d'affairs to Texas, informed this government officially in 1845, that Corpus Christi was the most west- ern point occupied by that state. Our mer- chants paid duties to Mexico at Point Isabel. The order to General Taylor for his advance directed that the posts and citizens of Mexico east of the Eio Grande should not be molest- ed. But besides these, there is one remarka- ble fact by which the whole question is put at rest. In October, 1845, only three months previous to the date of the order to General Taylor, Mr. Slidell was instructed by the exec- utive of the United States, to offer to Mexico five millions of dollars for this identical strip of territory east of the Eio Grande. Now, in view of these facts, the iftiad can MEXICAN WAR. 79 arrive at only one conclusion ; that the march of our army to the Eio Grande was a delibe- rate and intentional act of war against Mexico. 80 REVIEW OF THE CHAPTER VII The Invasion of Mexico the solo cause of the War. To^e of the Mexi- can Minister. Projl maiin i of Mn'jia. Progress of General Tay- lor. Order of Paredf's. His Proclamation. Letter of Ampudia. Arista gives notice that he shall prosecute hostilities. We have now advanced far enough in our investigation to see clearly that the march to the Rio Grande was an act in direct viola- tion of the rights of Mexico ; that it was not only a violent disregard of her claims which we had recognized as entitled to our respect, but was an invasion of her territory, and that too committed with the full knowledge of its hostile character. We shall in the present chapter show that this invasion was the sole cause of the hostili- ties in which we became engaged. We shall then have established the truth of our position that on this act of our government, and on this alone, the responsibility of the war must forever rest. MEXICAN WAR. gl In pursuance of his orders, General Taylor broke up Ms camp on the eleventli of March, 1846, and commenced his advance. Paredes had then been nearly two months and a half in power, and had as yet evinced no hostile dis- position. On the 12th of March, the day- after our army began its movement, the Mexi- can minister writes to Mr. Slidell that " the position of Mexico is one of defence." In this communication her determination is distinctly set forth to refrain from the commencement of hostilities, and to hold herself open for what she conceived to be honorable negotiation. On the same day General Mejia, w^ho com- manded the forces of the department of Ta- maulipas, made a proclamation, declaring that the limits of Texas were certain and recogniz- ed, and had never extended beyond the Nue- ces, and that the American army was then ad- vancing to take possession of a large j)art of Tamaulipas. On the 19th, approaching the river San Colorado, the boundary of the set- tled portion of that department, General Taylor was met by a party of rancheros, who informed him that they were instructed to oppose his passage, and that if he crossed that river, the 82 EBVIEW OF THB act would be considered a declaration of war. This was tlie first evidence of hostility that lie had met y/ith. Before his column reached Point Isabel, he was met by a civil deputation from Mata- moros, which delivered to him a formal pro- test from the prefect of the northern district of Tamaulipas against his occupation of the country. The Mexican authorities setting fire to their public buildings, fled from Point Isabel at his approach, while our fleet blocka- ded its harbor, and the 28th of March saw our army arrived at the Kio Grande. On a bluff which rises from the river opposite Matamoros, and commanding that town, General Taylor pitched his fortified camp, which afterwards, in memory of its brave defender, received the name of Fort Brown. In the conference between Generals Worth and Le Vega, above alluded to, the latter stated that Mexico had not declared war against the United States, and that the two countries were still at peace ; but added, that the march of the American troops through a large part of the Mexican territory was an act of war. On the 4th of April, President Paredes issued an order MEXICAN WAR. g^ to the Mexican commander at Matamoros, to attack our army '' by every means tliat war permits." It has been said that this order was issued before the news of the advance of our forces had reached the city of Mexico, and in accordance with a predetermination of Paredes to wage war for the recovery of Texas, Let us look at the facts. Nineteen days had elapsed since, on the 15th of March, scouting parties had been seen by General Taylor, sent out evidently, as he says, for the purpose of as- certaining his movements. The distance from Matamoros to Mexico is but a trifle over five hundred miles. The news of an invasion would probably travel not less than thirty miles in a day, at which speed the distance could be ac- complished in nineteen days and less. Un- doubtedly it flew a hundred miles a day at least. Paredes must then on the 4th have been informed of the advance of General Taylor. On the 23d of the same month, Paredes made a proclamation to the people of Mexico, which, taken in connection with the attendant circumstances, must be considered as showing conclusively the motives which led to the order of the 4th, the only one which had been is- g4 REVIEW OF THE sued by liim. In tliis proclamation lie says : " I solemnly announce, tliat I do not declare war against tlie United States of America, be- cause that power pertains to tlie august con- gress of tbe nation. But tlie defence of tlie Mexican territory, wliicli tlie United States troops liave invaded^ is an urgent necessity, and my responsibility would be immense before tlie country, did I not give command to repel tbese forces, wliicli act like enemies. I have so commanded." On the 6th of April, General Taylor wrote to the adjutant general as follows : " On our side a battery for four eighteen pounders will be completed, and the guns placed in battery to-day. These guns bear directly upon the public square of Matamoros, and are wdthin good range for demolishing the towai." On the 13th, Ampudia, the general commanding at Matamoros wrote to General Taylor, order- ing him to break up his camp, and retire be- yond the Nueces, to leave the soil of the de- partment of Tamaulipas " while our govern- ments are negotiating the pending question in relation to Texas," and declaring that his re- maining on the soil of Mexico must be consid* MEXICAN WAR. 35 ered an act of aggressive war. To tliis lie adds : " If you insist in remaining wdtliin tlie territory of Mexico, it will clearly result that arms, and arms alone, must decide tlie ques- tion." On tlie receipt of tliis communication, General Taylor issued orders to our naval com- mander at Brazos Santiago, to blockade tlie moutli of tlie Rio Grande, for the purpose of cutting off tlie supplies and trade of Matamo- ros. And not until eighteen days after this new outrage, on the 24th of April, General Arista, who had taken command of the Mexican army, gives notice to our commander that he consid- ered hostilities commenced and should prose- cute them. We have thus seen our army ordered to ad- vance one hundred and forty miles heyond the spot which government was officially informed to be the most western point occupied by Tex- as, to cross that silent solitude of sand, the boundary of the Mississippi valley, and of the Anglo-Saxon race, and to enter a territory in- habited by citizens of Mexico and governed by her laws. We have seen the army take forci- ble possession of that country, against the pro- g5 REVIEW OF [THE tests of its autliorities and its citizens. We have seen tlie inhabitants flying before our forces, two harbors blockaded by our vessels, and one of the principal tov/ns of northern Mexico invested by our batteries. On the other hand, there is not a single fact which tends to warrant any other supposition, than that the advance of our army to the Kio Grande, and its continuance on the soil of Mex- ico, was the sole cause, as it was certainly a suf- ficient cause of the hostilities which it begun. Then on that movement must rest its entire responsibility. MEXICAN WAR. 87 CHAPTER VIII The Object of this movement of our Army. The reason given by the Executive not the real motive, as proved by the circnmstancfs of the case, and by the dispatches to Mr. Slideli. The provocations urged by our government considered. The war designed to be brought about in such a manner as to throw on Mexico the odium of its com- mencement. It is natural to seek tlie reason for a measure exhibitinsr in tlie executive of tlie United States such an unconstitutional assumption of power, such a disregard of the acknowledged rights of Mexico, such a violation of the laws of natural justice, and from which such momentous conse- quences have flowed. The reason given by the president in his message of May 6th, 1846, for this movement, is, that " it became of urgent necessity to de- fend that portion of our country ;" — meaning, we suppose, the state of Texas. Now we will state a train of circmnstances REVIEW OF THE whicli give lis the riglit to suppose, nay, wMcli leave us no room to doubt, tliat protec- tion to our citizens was not its object, but tliat its expected and intended result was war with Mexico. Tlie last settlement wliicli it became of such " urgent necessity to defend" was left by the army one hundred and forty miles in their rear. We have seen that government knew that this movement would be a violent disregard of the claims of Mexico, which itself had declared en- titled to its respect, and moreover that it would be an invasion of the territory of Mexico, and a violation of the homes of its citizens. Now it is very difficult to understand why, if an in- vasion from Mexico was apprehended, a posi- tion for our army and all its stores, one hundred and forty miles from the people and territory which it w^as to defend, and which could be attacked from so many different directions, was so much more advantageous than any other, that this great outrage must be committed and war thus rushed upon to attain it. It is plain that the reason given by the ex- ecutive for this act, even if true, would not on- ly have been insufficient as a justification, but MEXICAN WAR. 89 entirely inadequate as a motive for its conduct; what shall we say then when w^e find no such reason ever in fact to have existed ? ISiow government was at that time officially informed by General Taylor, that there were but few Mexican troops on or near the Eio Grande, that the inhabitants were friendly, that aj)pearances indicated a continued quiet- ness, and that there was no reason to appre- hend an invasion by Mexico. It was yet in ig- norance of the accession of Paredes at the time that the order to advance was transmitted. Is it possible to conceive what " urgent ne- cessity" the peaceful circumstances of the times created, which rendered it imperative that our national obligations should be so disregarded, this country invaded, and the horrors of war endangered and provoked ? No, it is not possible that government could have been influenced to this course by any such considerations. But the circumstances attending this move- ment not only show that the defence of Texas could not have been its object, they also tell us what its object was. On the 20th of January, a week after the 90 eevieW of the order for his advance liad been issued to Gren- eral Taylor, the secretary of state writes to Mr. Slidell : " Should the Mexican government, by finally refusing to receive you, consummate the act of folly and bad faith of which they have afforded indications, nothmg mil remain for this government but to take the redi^ess of the wrongs of our citizens into our own hands." "The government, in anticipation of the final refusal of Mexico to receive you, have ordered the army to advance, and take a j^osition on the left bank of the Rio Grande, and have ordered the fleet into the gulf" Here we have the true reason of this movement unequivocally set forth. Congress and the people were attempt- ed to be imposed upon with the falsehood, that its object was to defend our citizens from at- tack, and our country from invasion ; but Mr. Slidell was informed, that it was done in an- ticipation of a refusal to receive him. And what was the army sent there to do if he should be refused ? The next sentence explains this also. " The president will then be enabled to act with vigor and promptitude, the moment that congress shall give him authority." Then according to the express avowal of the govern- MEXICAN WAR. gj ment, the army was sent across that great nat- ural boundary, and to the bank of "that grand and solitary river," to act A Tveek later the secretary writes again: " should that government refuse to receive you, the cup of forbearance will then have been exhausted. Nothing will then remain but a resort to arms." Mr. Slidell whites from Mexico : " The most extravagant pretensions will be made and in- sisted on, until the Mexican people shall be conraiced by hostile demonstrations, that pur difficulties must be settled promptly, either by negotiation, or by the sword." This letter was received in Washington on the 12th of Janua- ry, and the next day the order was issued for the advance of our army. The army now being prepared " to act," Mr. Slidell applies to the government of Paredes for reception ; and assuming a tone of offended dignity, he thus announces the ultimatum of his government. " The present state of quasi hostility, is incompatible with the dignity and interests of the United States, and it is now for Mexico to decide whether it shall 93 REVIEW OF THE give place to negotiation, or to an oj)en rup- ture." Keceive the minister wliicli the United States chooses to send, abandon your position and pre- tensions, acknowledge that all your acts for a year towards her have been groundless and ab- surd ; do this instantly, not a word of explana- tion, or feel the power of her arms. Such is the character and tone of this strange diplo- macy. Then the reason given by the executive for this movement was not the motive wdiich led to it, but, made with a full knowledge of all the circumstances W'hich w^e have described, the deliberate purpose w^hich prompted the act was w^ar with. Mexico in the event of Mr. Sli- dell's rejection. We feel a degree of shame in thus con^dcting the executive out of its own mouth of such a piece of duplicity, of telling in a solemn message such an untruth to the American people and to the w'orld. It becomes a matter of serious inquiry, what w^ere the provocations, which had thus worn out the patience of our government, and ex- hausted its ''cup of forbearance." As but MEXICAN WAR. 93 two causes of complaint have ever been nrged against Mexico, we mnst presume these to liave been all that existed. The first was, that at the annexation of Tex- as she ceased to pay the instalments of the debt to our citizens, which had been adjudged against her. The other injury, which was so grievous that it left no alternative '' but a resort to arms," was the refusal to receive a resident minister until the difficulty growing out of the annexation had been adjusted; "when" said Mexico, " diplomatic intercourse will follow of course." We have a right to presume that these were not sufficient grounds of war, because our government always denied the fact that it made war on their account. It exerted all its ingenuity to throw upon Mexico the odium of its commencement. And here again we see the inconsistency of wrong. The executive in its message of De- cember, 1845, and still more fully in that of the following year, recounts the injuries which our citizens had received from Mexico through a long series of years, and which still remained unredressed* Now the only tendency of this 94 EBVIEW OF THE recital would be to justify our government in commencing a war. If tlie argument is not valid for this, it cannot be for any purpose. But we are immediately told tliat Mexico be- gan the war, that we made every effort to avoid it, and that it was forced upon us by her inva- sion. Through many pages government is la- boring to justify an act, which it is all the while insisting: that it did not commit. These two strings were badly out of tune, and the performance on them together produced a hor- rible discord. We shall not consume the time of our rea- der in proving that it was a crime for a great nation to make war upon a weak and distracted state upon such pretexts as these. The pay- ment of her debt by Mexico had been suspend- ed for about two years. The claims of our citizens on France for her spoliations remained neglected by that government for twenty years, and were at last amicably settled. We have seen that in accordance with na- tional usage, and with the far higher obliga- tions of justice and magnanimity, the United States, instead of visiting Mexico with their vengeaace, on account of her refusal to receive MEXICAN WAR. 95 their minister, should have yielded to her just and proper demand. A quarrelsome people seeking a cause for hostility, a tyrant wanting an excuse for "blood, an ambitious and selfish government envying its neighbor her possessions, and watching an opportunity to despoil her of them, might take up with such imagined pro- vocation. But that a christian government, a friend of peace, a free enlightened people, should go to war on such pretexts as these, should use such language as we have read, and adopt such measures as we have witnessed, is as incomprehensible as it is disgraceful. But war with Mexico was not the only ob- ject of the movement to the Bio Grande. It was indeed its great ultimate end, but there was an incidental object which it was designed to effect, with the meanness of which the act of commencing war upon frivolous pretexts can aspire to no rivalry. We shall show, that the object of the ad- vance to that river was not only to involve this country in a war with Mexico, but was part of a deliberate contrivance to bring the 96 REVIEW OF THE war about in sucli a manner as to throw on Mexico the odium of its commencement. The facts of the case present a strange enig^ ma. This hostile act w^as committed with an eagerness w^hich led to an unconstitutional as- sumption of power by the executive. That it was aware of the unconstitutionality of this order, is evident from the fact which we have already seen, that to conceal its character a deliberate falsehood was told to congress and the peo- ple. The secretary of state informed Mr. Slidell, as w^e have seen, that, having ordered the army to the Eio Grande, the president would be en- abled to act with vigor and jDromptitude the moment that congress should give him author- ity. The army encamps on the bank of the Rio Grande. The minister is rejected. Congress remains in session ready to receive any commu- nication from the executive. But that officer never asks for authority. Nearly two months elapse, but the executive, who was to act with such vigor and promptitude, remains entirely inactive. The army meanwhile has sat quietly down on acknowledged Mexican soil, blocka- MEXICAN WAR. 97 ding her harbors, and threatening one of her cities, but instructed not to molest her posts and citizens, not to strike the first blow. Why was this strange silence ? There can be only one explanation. The purpose of the executive was accomplished when the army took up its position on the Kio Grande. It was not sent there to act, but to provoke a blow. The case admits of no other supposi- tion. The presence of the army accomplished no other object. Time has failed to disclose to us any other object for which it could have been sent there and maintained there, in the manner that it was. The most favorable interpretation that can be put on Mr. Buchanan's dispatches to Mr. Slidell is, that the army was sent to the Rio Grande for the purpose of intimidation. Thi^ object failed. Mr. Slidell was rejected. Gov- ernment knew it. He was ordered home, but the army was not moved. Of course the gov ernment who kept it there had something for it to do. It could no longer serve to intimi- date, it could only irritate and provoke. The executive must have known that hostilities would be the inevitable consequence of its 4 03 REVIEW'' OF THE presence. Then to incite Mexico to war must have been the design of the movement. If the antecedent circumstances of the case admit of no other conclusion than this, those which follow establish its truth beyond a ques- tion. During this "masterly inactivity" the plot was ripening. The carefully laid train was burning up to the mine. Mexico, having re" ceived injuries which would arouse the spirit of a slave, having seen hostilities committed against her on account of the " urgent neces- sity to defend that portion of our country," which no nation on earth would have endured, finally declares her determination to prosecute the hostilities which the United States had commenced, and sends her army across the Rio Grande to attack the invaders. On the receipt of this intelligence, the ex- ecutive sends a war message to congress. "Mexico," it declares, " has passed the bounda- ry of the United States, has invaded our ter- ritory, and shed American blood on American soil ;" and it calls upon the nation to punish this outrage, and to prosecute to " an honora- ble peace " the war thus " forced upon us." MEXICAN WAR. 99 For tlie moment we will pass over the right of Mexico, and only consider the territory to have been in dispute. While territory re- mains in this situation, and before the claims of the parties have been adjusted, the right of one claimant is always presumed to be equally good with that of the other. In the first en- counter between detachments of the two armies, the attack w^as made by the Ameri- cans. The American blood shed, in the lan- guage of the executive, on our own soil, and about which so much patriotic indignation was wasted, turned out to have been shed by a Mexican company in repelling a charge of American cavalry, in self-defence, against a wanton attack made upon it by the direction of the executive of the United States, and un- der an order from the commander-in-chief to capture and " destroy" it. Now if the invasion of that territory and the shedding the blood of Americans there by Mexico were a sufficient cause of w^ar for us, its prior invasion, the first attack and the shed- ding the blood of Mexicans there by us were at least an equal cause of war for her. But moreover, its own acts show that the ex- 100 REVIEW OF THE eciitive, wlien it made tliat declaration to the world, knew it to be totally and unqualifiedly untrue. We know tliat this is strong lan- guage ; but when the occujDation of territory by Mexico, which government knew to be her own, and for which it had just offered her five millions of dollars, is pronounced to be a suffi- cient cause of war against her, how can the in- consistency be reconciled? The one must have been squandering, or the other must be false. There appears also in the executive a desire to kindle in the minds of our people a spirit of war against Mexico. Having, in pursuit of its remorseless purpose brought the two coun- tries into collision, its next object was to enlist the enthusiasm of the people in the war which it purposed to wage. " Texas organized coun- ties extending to the Eio Grande, their inhab- itants are represented in your congress," pro- claims the government which had just been officially informed that Corpus Christi was the most western point occupied by that state. "After the battle of San Jacinto, Mexico never crossed the Eio Grande," proclaims the same authority, whose merchants paid duties to Mex- MEXICAN WAR. IQl ico at Point Isabel, and wMcli liad ordered General Taylor to respect lier posts and citi- zens east of that river. " Louisiana extended to tlie Eio Grande. Tliat was tlie boundary of our original possessions. Jefferson, Madi- son, Monroe, Pinkney, Adams, Benton and Clay, have all declared it," announces the ex- ecutive, laboring by the introduction of a blind and antiquated claim to excite the national pride and to complete the confusion in which it had involved the transaction. " Patriots of America, avenge the blood of your fellow-citi- zens shed on you own soil !" echo throughout the land the organs of that government which had just offered to Mexico five millions of dol- lars for the country. The excitable nation swallows this series of falsehoods, and rushes with a blind enthusiasm into the contest. Thus the object of government was attained, we were involved in war with Mexico, and our citizens believed the scandalous deception that she was the aggressor, and we the wronged and insulted nation, compelled to fight, but ready to sacrifice all but our honor for the sake of peace. 102 REVIEW OF THE CHAPTEE IX. The Declaration of War. The duty of Congress. The consequences which would have followed the performance of that duty. In his message of the llth of May, the president declared that war existed, and not- w^ithstanding all our efforts to avoid it, existed by the act of Mexico herself; and recom- mended the most prompt and energetic mea- sures to bring the war to a speedy and success- ful termination. An act pro\ddingfor the prosecution of "the existing war," and authorizing the president to employ the entire military force of the coun- try, and to accept the services of fifty thousand volunteers for its prosecution, was passed by congress on the 13th, the preamble of w^hich declared, that " by the act of the republic of Mexico, a state of war exists between that gov- ernment and the United States." MEXICAN WAR. ^03 Let us suppose a great and cliristian govern- ment, a friend of peace, to have become so lit- tle the slave of pride, that it is willing to ac- knowledge that it has done wrong. Let us suppose, that this government claims the title to territory which has been for a long time in the possession of another power, that it has re- cognized the claims of this power, and has pro- vided that the dispute should be settled by ne- gotiation. Let us further suppose, that while the question remains yet unsettled, the execu- tive of this government should send an ar- my to take possession of the entire territory in dispute ; that this army after being encamp- ed for a month on its farthest boundary where it had committed undisguised acts of hostility, having received protests from the inhabitants and authorities against its advance, and orders from the government to retire, is at last attack- ed, and after some bloodshed becomes placed in a perilous situation, and the executive should communicate these facts to the legislature. What course of conduct might we expect that body to adopt? Would it declare that war existed by the act of its adversary, and place means in the hands of the executive to prose- J 04 REVIE\^ OF THE cute tlie contest witli energy ? We will as- sume that it Avould not make this declaration, unless it had become satisfied that it was true ; nor take this irretrievable step, unless it was convinced that its cause v^as just. Its mem- bers would first inquire, what is the cause of these hostilities. They would not look far ofi*, and perplex themselves with speculations as to what might have been their remote oc- casion ; but would be satisfied with the obvi- ous and necessary cause which had been com- municated to them. They would then ask, was this act of our executive justifiable. And to answer this, they would only need to learn that the claim of their adversary still remain- ed unadjusted, and that their army found the country as it had ever been, inhabited by peo- ple of that nation alone, and governed by its laws. They would inquire what cause existed to warrant such an aggression. And when they were told that the only provocation which Lad " exhausted the cup of forbearance" had been a neglect for two years to pay her debt by their adveisary, and a refusal to receive their minister, they would not hesitate to say we have done wrong. We have provoked and MEXICAN WAR. 106 began a war without a cause. We cannot con- demn in our adversaries that patriotism, for the v/ant of which we would execrate our own countrymen. We cannot prosecute this war with justice. It is opposed to every princi- ple of humanity and every precept of religion. "Deity has not a single attribute that would side with us in such a contest." Their only inquiry would be how to j)revent the shedding another drop of blood. They would order the invading army to return im- mediately within their own undisputed terri- tory. They would select the greatest and. wisest of their number, and send them with- out delay to arrest hostilities and negotiate a peace. Surely the ingenuous mind can require no argument to prove the abstract justice of such a course, and the wrong which would mark any other conduct. We envy not the moral sense of that man, whose mind does not rush instinct- ively to the conclusion, that there could be no other course consistent with Christianity and justice. Such, as we have shown, was the case of the United States and Mexico, as viewed most fa- 106 REVIEW OF THE vorably for the former. This high duty de- volved upon congress. There existed no cir- cumstances which could alter or modify it. This duty they did not pei'form. Only four- teen in the house of representatives and four in the senate refused to vote for a declaration, which, being false, no one of them could have known to be true, and for an act whose conse- quences they could not foresee, founded on the assumed truth of that declaration. We say founded on its assumed truth, for we w^ould fain vindicate the common sense of congress, though at the expense of its principles, from the imputation of authorizing these vast prepa- rations which three months could not see com- pleted, and placing at the disposal of the ex- ecutive this great force, which could scarcely within the same time be brought into the field, merely to rescue General Taylor from a peril- ous position where he must be conquered or from w^hich he must be rescued almost before the vote of congress could be taken. Reflec- tion and wisdom seem to have fled frightened at the echo from the battle field. We have supposed that the action of con- gress on this subject should have been regula- MEXICAN WAB. JQT ted, not by its probable consequences, but sole- ly by a sense of duty. It may be well, how- ever, to glance at the more obvious results which would have followed such an exhibition of justice. There cannot, we think, be a reasonable doubt that such a course would have effected an immediate suspension of hostilities, and a speedy peace. Mexico surely did not desire war, and the earnest and generous manner in which these objects would have been sought would have ensured their attainment. In this peace the nti possidetis would probably have formed the basis for the establishment of the boundary ; securing to the United States every foot of territory which they became entitled to by the annexation of Texas. The claims of our citizens upon Mexico would have been ad- justed, and the most liberal commercial rela- tions would probably have been established between the two countries. Just, magnanimous and generous conduct is never lost even upon a savage. The human mind never becomes so brutalized that it can- not in some degree be softened and prompted 108 REVIB\V»OF THE to rivalry by its exhibition. Its tendency in this case must have been to dissipate the na- tional prejudices of Mexico, to liberalize her ^dews and policy, and to establish a lasting friendship toward us. There would have been a nobleness in the deed which would have en- sured for us a higher respect among foreign nations than a thousand victories. There is something in the heart of man which leads him, oftentimes unconsciously, to imitate the con- duct and the disposition which he admires in others. Who can estimate the silent influence of that nation which would not do wrong ? But more valuable than all its other conse- quences, would have been the effect of the act upon our national character. Presenting be- fore the people an example which would have tended to check their strange eagerness for war and reckless desire for the acquisition of territory, it would have exalted and refined their sense of national justice, and would have given birth to a better love for their country, a purer pride in her glory won by such acts as these, and a higher respect for her laws. We have finished our examination of the MEXICAN WAR. 109 causes which led to the Mexican w^ar, and the means which should have been adopted by onr government to avoid it. We have seen, that its occasion was the an- nexation of Texas to the United States, a mea- sure which, though not inconsistent with jus- tice to Mexico, must be acknov/leclged to have been uncalled for, and in view of its probable consequences, to have been unwise and wrong. We have seen, that the war might have been prevented by sending a commissioner to Mexi- co ; for its refusal to do which, the United States can offer no excuse. We have seen, that the advance of our army to the Rio Grande was a deliberate invasion of the known territo- ry of Mexico, and was the sole cause of the war. We have seen, that this invasion was not for the defence of our territory, but was the result of a determination to wage war against Mexico in the event of the rejection of our minister. We have seen this determination studiously concealed, and means adopted to goad Mexico to hostilities ; and when these had proved suc- cessful, w^e have seen our country incited to the contest by the falsehood that her army had in- vaded oui^ soil. And we have seen moreover, 110 REVIEW OF THE that congress might probably have stayed the war even after its commencement. Then on us must rest the whole responsibility of this un- provoked and wanton aggression, as clearly without justification as it is without remedy. This is a hard judgment, but we solemnly be- lieve that it is the voice of truth, and that when the prejudices and passions of the present hour shall have cleared away, when the causes of this w^ar shall have become more universally known, and history shall have sifted the truth from error, posterity will record the same de- cision — that the misconduct of our rulers in- volved this country in a crime for which no extenuation can be pleaded, and brought upon us a calamity whose extent we can but imper- fectly realize. MEXICAN WAR. IX]^ CHAPTER X. The Objects of the War. Conquest. Its Progress. The Treaty of peace. We come now to inquire into the objects of this war, in wliich examination we shall give a general view of its progress and events. The president, in his message of December, 1846, says: "The war has not been waged with a view to conquest, but having been be- gun by Mexico, it has been carried into the en- emy's country with a view to obtain an honor- able peace, and thereby secure an ample in- demnity for the expenses of the war, as well as to our much injured citizens, who hold large demands against Mexico." The meaning of this enigmatical expression, " an honorable peace," something which was to possess such a great value in ready money, we shall discover presently. 112 REVIEW OF THE 'Now we have seen that the war was not commenced by Mexico, but by our govern- ment. How an honorable peace could follow such a war, causeless and disgraceful to a chris- tian people, it is beyond our power to compre- hend. The wrong which marked its inception must attend every step of its progress. The obligation to arrest it which existed at its com- mencement, must be renewed every moment of its continuance. Its victories must be mur- der, its acquisitions must be robbery. We have seen a determined purpose in the executive to effect a war, a purpose for the at- tainment of which truth and the constitution were alike disregarded. And for this purpose the messages of the executive furnish us with no motive. One thing however is plain. The neglect of Mexico to pay her debt to our citizens and her refusal to receive our minister were not its causes. Had they been, had the declarations of the ex- ecutive to Mr. Slidell been sincere, had it believ- ed its own story, that the rights and honor of the country had been invaded, and that indeed nothing remained " but a resort to arms," it was clearly its duty to lay the matter before con- M1EXTCAN WAB. l|3 gress, which was then in session, and which could alone adopt the necessary measures. It would undoubtedly have done so. Deceit and unconstitutional means would not then have been resorted to. Besides, government stoutly denied that it made war at all, thereby showing its own consciousness that the reasons which it had before declared to have exhausted its cup of forbearance, were not only Ridiculous as a justification, but useless as excuses for commencing the war. No, these could not have been the reasons which led to it. Then what were they ? What was the pur- pose for which this cunningly contrived plot was laid to involve the country in a war with- out the sanction of congress, and falsehoods were employed to incite the people to its pros- ecution ? Mr. Calhoun, so late as January, 1847, de- clared in the senate, that up to that hour the causes of the war were left to conjecture. All was then involved in mystery. Since the words of Mr. Calhoun were uttered, day has dawned upon this darkness, and the mystery is revealed. The reasons given to Mr. Slidell are now shown to have been as false as was the 1]^4 rev!ew of the cry of defence by wHcli the nation was arous- ed. That amiable sympathy for " our much injured citizens" was all an imposition. The pretended necessity to take the redress of their wrongs into our own hands, was only a cloak to a darker purpose. The enigma is solved, and as at the touch of the enchanter's wand, all the contradictions which we have exposed stand in perfect har- mony. They crystalize in wondrous order around one all-pervading purpose. Conquest was the animating idea of all this scheme. The acquisition of the territory of another nation was the sole purpose for which this war was devised and carried on. All the pretended sympathy was for this. ^ This it was which so mysteriously exhausted the cup of forbearance. The country of Mexico was in- vaded for this and this alone. This fact we shall proceed to establish by proof, convincing even to scepticism itself. When we know that a person desires the possession of any particular object, and all his actions for a long time after are precisely adapted to its attainment, and finally he does obtain and possess it, and expresses his gratifica- MEXICAN WAR. n^ tion at tlie acquisition wliich lie lias made, we liave a right to suppose that its attainment was liis constant purpose during all that time, and that the adaptation of his acts to that at- tainment was but the carrying out of his origi- nal desio^n. In November, 1845, the president instruct- ed Mr. Slidell to negotiate with Mexico for the purchase of the country down to the Rio Grande, New-Mexico, and the two Californias. He was authorized to pay not more than five millions of dollars for the first, ten millions for the first and second, and twenty-five millions for the whole, and was instructed to procure them as much cheaper as possible. He was directed and encouraged by great personal prospects to use his utmost exertions to pur- chase the territory. We shall divide the war with Mexico into two acts. In the first we shall see the posses- sion of this identical country secured, and our authority established over it ; and in the sec^ ond we shall witness the process by which the title to it was extorted. The Mexican army on the Rio Grande hav- ing been defeated in two desperate and une^ ^IQ REflEW OF THE qnal contests, General Taylor moved with his column, now increased to about six thousand men, upon Monterey. He arrived before that city on the 19th of September, and after a ter- rible assault, continued through two days, and against almost insurmountable obstacles both of nature and art, made himself master of that stronghold. A division of nearly three thou- sand men under General Wool, left San Anto- nio de Bexar about the last of September for the conquest of Coahuila and Chihuahua. They entered Monclova on the 31st of October without bloodshed. General Taylor's advanc- ed position was found to command the depart- ment of Chihuahua, and it was deemed advi- sable to concentrate the different columns. General Wool's command was therefore divert- ed from its original destination, and mo\ang southward, established a communication with General Taylor at Parras, the latter at the same time occupying Saltillo with a part of his forces. General Kearney having been ordered to march to the conquest of New Mexico and Cal- ifornia, left Fort Leavenworth on the 30th of Juae,oiithat distant expedition. He reached MEXICAN WAR. II7 Santa Fe on tlie 18tli of August, after a marcli of nearly nine hundred miles, and took posses- sion of the country in the name of the United States, almost without a show of resistance. With about three hundred dragoons he then commenced his long march to the settled dis- tricts of California. Before leaving the valley of the Rio Grande, however, he was met by an express from Colonel Fremont of such a nature that he determined to send back a part of his force, and selecting only one hundred men to accompany hinl, continued on his route. On his arrival he found all that vast country in the quiet possession of the Americans, its conquest having been already completed by Commodore Stockton and Colonel Fremont. A company of regular artillery was sent by sea in August to Monterey upon the Pacific, and these were followed in the next month by a regiment of volunteers " persons of various pursuits," raised in New- York city and its neighborhood, for the express purpose of set- tling in California after they should have com- pleted its conquest. These never returned. This plan of colonizing with soldiers the terri- tory to be acquired by conquest was conceived X18 RET^EW OF THE by government among tlie earliest plans of the war, and was communicated to tlie commander of the expedition within two months after the first blow had been struck on the Rio Grande. About nineteen- twentieths of these conquests were unoccupied land. The instructions given to the commanding officers were that the coun- try was " not to be surrendered in any event, or under any contingency." Commodore Sloat, who at that time commanded our squadron in the Pacific, says in his general order of July 'Tth, 1846 : " It is not 'only our -duty to take California, but to preserve it afterwards as a part of the United States at all hazards." The secretary of war, in his instructions to General Kearney, says : " It is known that a large body of Mormon emigrants are en route for California, for the purj)ose of settling in that country. You are desired to use all pro- per means to have a good understanding with them, to the end that the United States may have their co-operation in taking possession of and holding that country." In August, the officer in command of our naval force in the Pacific, is ordered "to take, if not already done, immediate possession of Upper Califor- MEXICAN WAB. HQ nia, so that if the treaty of peace should be made on the basis of the uti possidetis^ it may leave California to the United States." The same month, Commodore Stockton made a proclamation to the people scattered over that great region, that "the territory of California now belongs to the United States." A few days after, he writes to the government : " This rich and beautiful country belongs to the United States, and is forever free from Mexican dominion." In these pro^^nces the conquerors proceeded to establish civil gov- ernments, and the inhabitants were required to take the oath of allegiance to the United States. In his message of December, 1846, the president says: "It may be proper to provide for the security of these important conquests, by making an adequate appropria- tion for the purpose of erecting fortifications, and for the maintenance of our possession and authority over them ;" and in the same paper he felicitates the American people on " the vast extension of our territorial limits," It is certain that the attention and exertions of our government were thus far exclusively di- rected to the conquest and permanent possession 120 REVIEW OF THE of Upper California and New Mexico, and to the military occupation of Tamaulipas, New Leon, Coaliuila and Cliilinahua, to be held, as was afterwards avowed, as a means of compelling the surrender of the former. We shall now examine the second act of the war, or the summary way of compelling a cession of these territories. In July, soon after the opening of the war, an offer of negotiation was made by the presi- dent. As this was not accepted, we do not know Avhat its basis would have been. In Jan- uary following, the offer was renewed and ac- cepted by Mexico, on the condition that our forces should first evacuate her territory. This condition was pronounced wholly inadmissible, and that attem]3t also failed. That the acqui- sition of this identical territory was the sole object of the war at that time is shown by the following circumstance. In January, 1847, a bill was introduced into congress, and which was finally passed on the last day of the session, appropriating three millions of dollars, for the purpose of enabling the president to conclude a treaty of peace with Mexico. The senatoi' in- troducing the bin says : '^ The president has MEXICAN WAR, X21 reason to believe, that upon a certain advance being made to Mexico to enable ber to pay ber expenses, sbe will be willing to cede to us New Mexico and California." In the meantime General Taylor, witb bis small, beroic band of about forty-live bundred men, bad burled back in confusion from tbe bill of Buena Vista tbe vast army of upwards of twenty thousand, tbat witb Santa Anna at its bead advanced like tbe billows of tbe sea to overwhelm him ; and Vera Cruz, with tbe re- nowned castle of San Juan d'Ulloa, had fallen before the science and bravery w^hich bad been combined against them. The president, mani- festing a desire and making exertions for the termination of tbe war, which, bad the inva- sion admitted of any excuse, and had tbe terms of peace been better than an outrage, w^ould have been truly laudable, appointed Mr. Trist, in April following, a commissioner to proceed to tbe bead-quarters of the army, with full powers to negotiate a treaty of peace, when- ever the Mexican government should desire to do so. He did not reach the army until after tbe national bridge had been triumphantly passed, and tbe brilliant victory of Cerro Gor- 122 REVTEVf OF THE do had crowned our arms. The dispatches which he bore, were not communicated to the Mexican government until in June, when our army had reached the populous and wealthy city of Puebla. General Scott, having been reinforced by about -^ve thousand men, left his quarters in that city early in August, and moved toward the capital. On the 19th and 20th of that month he encountered the hosts of the en- emy at Contreras and Churubusco, the first nine miles and the second four miles distant from the city of Mexico, achieving two deci- sive but costly victories. On the 24th, an armistice was concluded between the two ar- mies, to allow opportunity for negotiation be- tween Mr. Trist and the Mexican commission- ers. The former had brought the plan of a treaty with him from Washington. And what was this plan ? It asked for no indemnity for the expenses of the war, for no satisfaction for the claims of our citizens, for no atonement for the indignities of which our government had complained ; but it asked Mexico to make T)ut to the United States a bill of sale of the terri- tory to the Eio Grande, New Mexico and MEXICAN WAR. 193 the two Californias, together witli the right of way across the isthmus of Tehuantepec, for which the United States were to pay dollars, the blank beiilg left unfilled. The Mexican commissioners reply to this proposal, that Mexico having consented to surrender Texas to the Rio Grande to the United States for a proper consideration, the cause of the war has disappeared, and the war itself ought to cease. In respect to the other territories, " it is contrary to every idea of justice," say they, '^ to make war upon a people, because it refu- ses to sell territory w^hich its neighbor wishes to buy." "Mexico cannot sell her people against their vv^ill, and she declines the propo- sition." But accej)tance of the proposition, or war was the only alternative. On the 6 th of September, the armistice was broken off, and the war was renewed, to compel Mexico to part with about one-third of her territory. This was followed on the 8th, by the battle of El Mo- lino del Rey won by General Worth, with only about three thousand men. On the 13th, af- ter a cannonade and bombardment from the early morning of the day before, the citadel of Chapultej^ec, the last and most impregna- 124 REVIEW OK THE ble defence beyond tlie walls of Mexico, was carried by an assault, perhaps the most exci- ting and terrible in the history of America. Driven by the resistless onset from every low- er position, and finally from the stronghold it- self, the Mexican forces retreated along the great Belen and San Cosme causways in confu- sion to the city. Our army followed in eager pursuit, and when nightfall stopped their fur- ther progress, they had carried the batteries in the suburbs and forced the gat^s of Belen and San Cosme. Early the next morning the city surrendered to General Scott, the federal gov- ernment and the army having fled by night from its walls. Thus after ^ve desperate bat- tles in the valley of Mexico, with an army of only ten thousand men, General Scott entered this most ancient city in America, the seat of the Azt^ec empire, since the days of Cortez the splendid metropolis of the Spanish vice-royal- ty and now the capital of the Mexican repub- lic, on whose fortifications the highest military science in the world had been ex' austed, and which was held by an army of more than thirty thousand defenders. In October following, Mr. Trist was recall- MEXICAN WAH. • |25 ed. In December, 1847, the president in his message to congress, says : " I am satisfied that New Mexico and California should never be surrendered." " As Mexico refuses all in- demnity, we should adopt measures to indem- nify ourselves, by appropriating permanently a portion of her territory ;" and he proposes without further ceremony, the establishment of territorial governments over those coun- tries. He says : ''To reject indemnity by re- fusing to accept a cession of territory, would be to wage war without a purjDose or a definite object." "If we refuse this, we can obtain nothing else." And what is this for which in- demnity is required ? Why first, for the ex- penses of the war itself, and second, for the debt of Mexico to our citizens, the payment of which had been suspended on the annexation of Texas. Suppose a victorious government at the close of such a war as this, to meet its humbled ad- versary in negotiation, and the latter should ask : ' What are the grievances for the re- dress of which you have carried on this con- test?' Suppose that it should answer, 'our principal demand is for indemnity for the ex- 126 REVIEW OF THE penses of tlie war.' The conquered would re- ply, ' that is of course merely incidental, but you desire redress, we suppose, for the wrongs on account of which the war was begun.' Suppose it should say, ' these are the demands of our citizens upon you, which you ceased two years before to pay according to agreement.' ' And is it for this.' O how would they ex- claim, 'and is it for this, that you have killed our people, and ravaged our country, and im- poverished our government, and now propose to dismember our territory ? And can it be that you have even no excuse but this, for all the evils you are bringing on our land?' O no, it was not for this. We will strip off this veil of indemnity with a few plain facts, and conquest will stand naked before us. In his message of December, 1847, the president says : "As the territory acquired might be of greater value than our just demands, our com- missioner was authorized to stipulate for the payment of such additional pecuniary conside- ration as might be deemed reasonable." It will be recollected that the extreme limit prescrib- ed to Mr. Slidell, was twenty-five millions of dollars for the whole, including Lower Califor- MEXICAN WAR. 127 nia. "Our just demands," as the presideifi^ would estimate them, amounted to about eighw millions of dollars, and we were to pay t(\ Mexico for the country, of course, its excess in value over this sum. Mexico being entirely subdued, her army annihilated, her ports, her cities, her capital in our hands, and her means of resistance entirely at an end, finally consented to our terms of peace ; and after long negotiation a treaty was concluded at the city of Guadalupe Hidalgos, on the 2nd of February, 1848. By this treaty, the country to the Kio Grande, New Mexico and Upper California, were ceded to the United States. In conside- ration of this territory, the United States con- tracted to pay to Mexico fifteen millions of dollars, and to discharge the latter from all lia- bility to our citizens, assuming herself the pay- ment of their claims. These amounted accord- ing to the computation of the executive, to five or six millions more. Lower California may be considered worth four or five millions of dollars. Then we gave for the country the largest price which Mr. Slidell had been au- thorized to offer, before a sword had been 12S BEVlfiw OF THE drawn in the contest. Two-thirds of the ex- penses of the war had been incurred since Mr. Trist's appointment, and still the smallest " irb- demnity " which he was then authorized to re- ceive, was found sufficient at its close. Now in view of these facts, we ask impar- tial and reflecting men, what room there can be found to doubt that this war was carried on for the sole object, and with the undivided purpose of compelling Mexico to sell her ter- ritory to the United States ; that money was nothing, blood was nothing, but the territory must be obtained. There is a strange unity about the whole transaction, exhibiting an unwavering fixed- ness of purpose. In the instructions to Mr. Slidell, we see the original conception. This is followed by the conquest of the territory, with the determination first expressed in acts, and then avowed in words to keep it, Mexico wil- ling or unwilling. Connected with this was the military occupation of the departments on the Rio Grande, " to be held as a means of co- ercing Mexico to just terms of peace." We quote the language of the executive. This not being sufficient, our army is sent through deso- MEXICAN WAR, ^29 lation and blood to her capital, to compel ac- quiescence in the identical bargain first conceiv- ed, and inflexibly insisted on. Where now is " the indemnity for the past and security for the future," that thinest subterfuge, under which it was ever attempted to conceal a na- tional robbery ? When not a blow had been struck, when ten millions, and when fifty millions of dollars had been expended, w^hen one thousand, and when twenty thousand lives had been sacrifi- ced, when it was proposed to conquer a peace, and when it w^as proposed to purchase a peace, the same constant price w^as oifered for the same territory, the same unvarying surrender was demanded. The bargain and sale had no connection w^hatever with the war, except as the latter was the means of compelling the former. The war effected no other object but to extort from Mexico her consent to this transaction ; and as our government w^as perfectly satisfied and even gratified with the result, announcing the ^'' ho7i07xihle jpeace^'' for which we had fought to be attained, we must conclude that it proposed to itself no other object. From this alterna- 6 330 REVIEW OF THE tive there is no escape. Either tliis war was prosecuted solely to compel Mexico to sell her lands and their inhabitants at a predetermined price, or else its object remains as yet unat- tained. The blood and treasure of our people have been poured out like w^ater either to ef- fect an unjust conquest, or for a purpose which has never yet been accomplished. We have thus presented as briefly as possi- ble, the progress and objects of this war. Commenced in unjust aggression, it was prose- cuted even to the end for no other object, but to possess ourselves of the territory of another republic against her wdll. A robbery in its inception, it maintained its character to the end. We are unable to contemjolate without indignation and shame, this most unjust war, w^hose wickedness the splendor of its victories is insufficient to veil. Well and truly it was declared by a meeting of our citizens in the city of NcAv-York, in 1845, as they read in the political heavens the signs of this remorseless purpose of our government, that war w^ith Mexico would be " a w^ar for conquest, an un- just war, a war in w^hich the nation would be sustained by no sense of right, but condemned MEXICAN WAR. JgJ by the unanimous voice of the civilized and christian world." We have finished our review of the causes and conduct of this wicked and unjust wrong, in which the crime of our rulers involved our country. We shall now proceed to a view^ of its consequences. 132 EEvftiW OF THE CHAPTEE XI. The Benefits of the War considered. The payment of the claims of our citizens against Mexico. The acquisition of territory. Value of this conquest to the United States, and to the cause of freedom. Let us turn our eyes to tlie benefits of tMs conquest. Some of our citizens have cause for satisfaction at tlie certain and speedy payment of tlieir claims against Mexico. These we sup- pose tliat tlie United States miglit liave paid as well without bloodshed and the waste of other millions, as with them. The only other benefits which are said to have resulted from the war, so far as we have been able to learn, have been the acquisition of New Mexico and California, and the left bank of the Rio Grande. Executive imagination has summoned up a mighty nation on their hills, and in their valleys. We have seen in printed vision its waters w^hite with the wings of commerce, and its fields laden with MEXICAN WAR. 133 the fruits of plenty — a new home opened to mankind, to freedom and to civilization — and all this by means of the Mexican war. This, the nation has been solemnly informed, consti- tutes indemnity for the past.^ "We have no disposition to doubt the truth of this prophecy. We hope and believe that some generation not far distant will witness its fulfillment. But another question presents itself, which is of considerable consequence in this connexion, and to vfhich we are by no means so ready to yield our assent. Was the Mexican war necessary to the attainment of this result? For of course, if it was not, if this consummation would have been reached as well without the war, it cannot be regarded as its consequence, and constitutes no "indemnity for the past." We do not believe that there is an individ- ual, who in the exercise of a sober and intelli- gent judgment, will say that the Mexican war was necessary in order to plant freedom on the shores of the Pacific, or in the valleys of New Mexico. The occupation of those countries "* President's answer to a resolution of the house of representatives. Congressional Globe 1847-8, page 990. 134 REVIEW OF THE by a race of freemen, would under any cir- cumstances have been inevitable. There did not exist before the war any reason to doubt such a result. We are familiar with the ad- vance of our own race in these United States. Seventy years ago the . AUeghanies were our western wall. There is no conquest like that of the plow. The spoils of battle pass away generally with its victors, sometimes with its victims. But when the civilized and civilizing emigrant plants himself in a new country, its destiny is, in most instances, fixed forever. The tree of ^civilization roots itself deep in the soil, and in its turn bears fruit, and scatters its seed be- yond. The principle of democracy is the promi- nent feature in the character of this race. It has become an element of thought in the minds of men. It is not possible that a state should arise on our western coasts, which would not be governed according to the will of its inhab- itants. There is no one who has seen the broad river of emigration sweep away the forest and its kings, who can say that when it has flowed on to the shores of the Pacific, its w^aters will MEXICAN WAR. 135 be less pure and fertilizing tlian tliey are to- day. It is said, however, that without this war the United States might never have obtained pos- session of that country, that even if it had be- come a home of freedom, another nation might have arisen there. We confess that we should rejoice at the prospect of such a result. Such vast possessions are of no benefit to us as a na- tion. And on the other hand, if the rights of man were sure hereafter to be maintained in any event on those distant shores, as fully at least as they are here, of vrhat consequence w^ould it be to the citizens of those future states to be united under our particular organi- zation. Some spirit other than the unselfish desire to extend tlie area of freedom must surely have j)rompted to this acquisition. The day is passing away we trust, in v/hich nations sock their gain in each other's loss. Who can doubt that a sister republic in that distant region, knit to us by blood and by so- cial and political fellowship, would be so also by the bonds of peace and national attach- ment? Who can doubt that harmony and friendship would be borne from one to another 136 EEVIEW OF THE on tlie cuiTents of their waters, that the iron hands which would unite their cities would bind their hearts to eacli other also, and that s}Tnpathies and thoughts would dart together over the network of their electric nerves? Who can doubt that while each would pursue its own domestic policy, a noble confidence and generosity would mark their intercourse, rejoicing in each other's welfare, and seeking each other's good. But we can no more pretend to have attain- ed to social and political than to individual perfection. Many are conscious that we are as yet very far from that end, and that our institu- tions, though the best undoubtedly that the world has ever seen, are but the imperfect work of imperfect beings. We can hardly suppose that the freemen of that region, with the light of our experience to guide them, would fail to improve ujjon our example. We say then, that if the acquisition of this terri- tory is the only benefit attributable to the Mexican war, it has been productive of no good whatever. But if this war was wrong in its beginning and continuance, the most splendid results, the MEXICAN WAR. 137 greatest blessings following in its train would not cBange its character in tlie least. Ttougli its effect had been to consecrate that region to freedom, and though without its agency, as far as human understanding can discover, it would have been doomed to despotism, these conse- quences would afford no extenuation of its criminality. As w^e read in all the events of history that there is a power above us, who, by an ordained and inevitable chain of causes and effects punishes national sins by national calamities, how can we dare to hope, that we or our children shall enjoy that of w^hich we have despoiled another ? How can we expect but that this ill gotten possession will prove a curse to embitter our peace and to sap the foundations of our national prosperity. 138 REVIEW OF THE CHAPTER XII The Evils attending the War. Its Expense. Its Loss of Life — in battle — by disease. We have ^dewed the meager credit of this war ; let us now examine its debtor side in its account with humanity. It is estimated that the war will have cost the United States, including the price paid for the ceded territory and when arrears are liqui- dated and pensions fully paid, at least one hun- dred millions of dollars. This is so much capi- tal w^hich has been accumulated by the indus- try and enterprize of the citizens of the Uni- ted States almost entirely destroyed, as if it had been consumed in some vast conflagration. We say almost, because some part yet remains in permanent articles, useless however except for other wars, and some in the profits of con- tractors; but this amount is comparatively MEXICAN WAR. 139 very small. It is difficult for the mind to form an idea of so large a sum. According to Mr. Gallatin, it is equal to the aggregate value of .all the buildings in the city of Nevv-York, ex- cludino^ the nominal value of the lots. The entire ]3opulation of the United States is now about twenty millions. The sum thus wasted is then live dollars taken from every man, wo- man and child in the country. The number of voters in the United States does not vary much from three millions. This wickedness then has taken over thirty-three dollars from every voter in the land and destroyed it. This sum judiciously expended would have made the most perfect and durable improve- ments in every river and harbor throughout the country ; the blessing of which to com- merce, and to large classes of our fellow citi- zens whose lives and property are exposed on our inland waters, it is not possible to estimate. A tenth part of this amount expended in the cause of science would have been a self-re- warding munificence, wdiich spendthrifts are always too poor to exercise. This sum would have established two hun- di-ed institutions of learning in the United 140 REVIEW OK THE States, with endowments of half a million of dollars each, or four hundred with endowments of a quarter of a million each, suflicient to have furnished the best education, that noblest gift of one generation to another, gratuitously to two hundred thousand youth of our coun- try every year forever. It was demonstrated in the senate of the United States, that one half of the expenses of this war, if invested in six per cent stocks, and the interest arising from it applied to the carrying out of a gradual and feasible system of colonization, would in fifty yeai's exterminate the curse of negro slavery from our soil. The wealth of the United States has been created almost entirely by the labor and enter- prize of their citizens. The rapid increase and diffusion of our j3eople have required that the capital which they have created should be con- verted into many other forms of more imme- diate necessity than money ; as for instance, into buildings and the varied instruments of production. These wants of a state must be first supplied, before its circulating and availa- ble wealth can become abundant. In our more newly settled states, the wealth of the citizens MEXICAN WAR. 141 consists almost entirely in tlieir farms and stock, houses and sliops and tools and imple- ments, while money is often hardly to be found. In the older parts of the country the case is difierent to a great extent, but even in our great mercantile cities the amount of circula- ting capital is no more than is necessary for the ordinary transaction of business. Wealth does not lie idle and unproductive, seeking in vain for investment ; but all is needed and em- ployed in the growing commercial and manu- facturing transactions of the country. Gov- ernment loans have been taken mostly in this country, and it is from this circulating capital exclusively that this vast amount has been drawn ; and this in addition to the sum neces- sary for the regular administration of the gov- ernment. Although foreign causes of an un- happy nature contributed to make this exaction less severely felt at first than it would have been under ordinary circumstances, still every de- partment of business throughout our country has been crippled, and has endured a needless suffering for the want of money. This fact is best evidenced to those who are not familiar with commercial and manufacturing operations, 142 REVIEW*OF THE by tlie enormous rates of interest wliicli capi- tal commanded for a long time during and af- ter the war, even in our commercial cities, reaching often from twelve to eighteen per cent, on long: loans, and sometimes to three and even four per cent, a month on shorter time. It is trueth at the unexampled energy of our people is rapidly recovering from the blow, and re- producing their wasted capital. But the wrong to them does not depend on their ability to recover from its effects. The capital thus squandered is by far the smallest part of the pecuniary loss which this war has occasioned to our country. Upwards of one hundred thousand men were employed in various capacities in its prosecution. Sup- posing that each of these lost on the average, a year and a half, the value of their labor du- ring that time reckoned at seventy-five cents a day, would have been thirty-three million dollars. If we lost, as we doubtless did, thirty thousand lives, and each life was shortened twenty years, this would make at the same rate a loss of one hundred and forty million dol- lars. And here we have a loss of more than one hundred and seventy million dollars in produc- MEXICAN WAR. 143 tive labor alone by tlie war. Thus this wrong has prevented the production of this vast amount of wealth, which our country would otherwise have come to possess. We have resting upon us also an enormous public debt. On this the interest must be paid annually, and it will be the duty of govern^ ment to extinguish the principal as rapidly as possible. To effect this it is probable that it will become necessary to impose duties on some articles now generally esteemed necessa- ries of life, and to increase those already laid on others, and that for many years j)ublic un- dertakings of vital importance to many por- tions of our citizens and of interest to all, will necessarily be suspended. But the destruction of the wealth, the injury to the production and the neglect of the peace- ful interests of our country, are the least of the evils resulting from this conquest. There were fought during the w^ar about thirty bat- tles attended with great suffering and loss of life. This to our troops however, was but light indeed compared with the frightful ravages of disease. One of the Indiana regiments which left its native state a thousand strong, and 144 REVIE^ OF THE wliicli never saw a battle, returned at tlie close of the war witli less than four hundred m its wasted ranks. When General Childs took command of the garrison at Jalapa, eighteen hundred men lay sick in our hospitals in that city. At the city of Mexico, the deaths among our troops Avere much of the time one thousand monthly. On a parade when a certain com- pany was called which had numbered over one hundred men, a single private answered to the call, its sole living representative. Around the castle of Perote alone, are three thousand graves of soldiers who perished by disease. They lie in that great burial place. Some in the excitement of battle fell instantly dead by some almost unfelt blow ; others perished uu- der a multitude of wounds ; others still expir- ed after hours, or days, or weeks of agonizing torment. Many thousands thirsting for dis- tinction, who had left their homes with high hopes of glory on the battle field, sunk under the malignant pestilence, while thousands more dragged home their disfigured bodies, or re- turned to carry with them through life shat- tered constitutions and disease, or to hasten to their graves. MEXICAN WAR. ^ X45 If there is a time above all others when the heart yearns for the presence of affection, when its voice falls like music on the ear, when the tender ministry of those we love is felt to be O ! how precious, and when its absence wrings the heart with the bitter pang of desolation, it is when we lie on the bed of suffering and feel the approach of death. While we mourn for our own countrymen who fell victims to conquest, let us not forget those who fought against us, sacrificed by our wdckedness. Even defenceless women and children did not always escape the horrors of the war. At the storming of Monterey, a young Mexican girl w^as seen carrying water to the wounded of both armies. The battle thicken- ed around lier, but with a heroic devotion she continued her pious ministry. As she hasten- ed from one to another, binding up their w^ounds and allaying their intolerable thirst, she seemed some angel of mercy amid the scene of carnage, w^hen a cannon ball snatched away her gentle spirit, and her life-blood flow- ed mingling with the water she had brought. But who shall paint the agony of those who mourn a son, a father, a husband, a brother, 5* X46 REVIEW OF THE wlio can never return ? To liow many did tlie news of peace bring a joyful anticipation, doomed to darken into disappointment and despair. "Where is tlie indemnity tliat shall atone for crushed affections ? What ]Drice can pay for the lost treasures of the heart ? It is a terrible responsibility to have added a mite to human suffering. By what great necessity can this war be justified ? MEXICAN WAR. j^j- CHAPTER XIII The Duty of the United States toward other nations enhanced by her position. Her duty to Mexico in particular. These duties violated by this War. We sliall now examine the duty and true ambition and glory of the United States, and show the consequences of this violation of that duty upon the character of our peo- ple, and on the cause of religion and of free- dom in our own land, and throughout the world . It is a matter of doubt among many, wheth- er impartial justice ought ever to be expected from a state, seeking its own interest and ame- nable to no law This doubt appears well warranted by history, but no sound distinction can be drawn in morals between public and private obligation. A state is an ideal being. It does not act, it possesses no responsibility. It exists only in contemplation. What are X48 REVIEW* OF THE commonly called acts of tlie state are the acts of individuals. The law of right and wrong is the ultima Q^atio of human action. It is the duty of man to do whatever the moral law declares to be right, and to refrain from doing what it de- clares to be wrong ; and this for the single rea- son that one is right and the other wrong. , To whatever office in the vast machinery of government a man may be called, whether it be to legislate or to administer the laws, he is bound to obey in that, as in every other situa- tion, the same law of right. An individual ac- countability inseparable from his existence rests upon him still. Is one a legislator, and through prejudice or passion or excitement, fails to raise his voice against injustice and wrong, or seeks not with an enlarged humanity the welfare of his race ; is he a minister, and do selfishness and ambition mark his counsels ; does he hold the highest authority of the land and direct in any re- S23ect the conduct of his country, and is not the good of all mankind his supreme desire — do not justice, mercy and peace guide his steps — does resentment ever drive away forgiveness MEXICAN WAR, 149 from him ; is lie a private citizen living in a land of individual influence, and lias he ever raised his voice to require or approve at the hands of his government any but just and gen- erous measures, his is the individual wrong. There is not one law of duty to govern the conduct of men in private and another in pub- lic relations. There is no such thing as collec- tive responsibility. There are, moreover, many things which in- crease the responsibility of those engaged in the direction of public affairs. The w^rongs w^hich men commit in an official capacity ad- mit often of no redress. There exists no pow- er to enforce in legislatures or sovereigns obe- dience to justice. Their acts become, also, justifying precedents to those who follow them ; for men too often derive their notions of right from wrongs which time has rendered venera- ble. They possess, besides, far larger opportu- nity of promoting the good, or increasing the misery of mankind. The consequences of their actions must be immeasurably greater than can follow those of any private citizen. Governments sustain a twofold relation. They stand in the position of individuals 150 REVIE\f OF THE among other governments, and hence arise the same duties which devolve upon man in his in- tercourse with his fellow man. They are also the constituted protectors of their people, the guardianship of whose rights and interests is committed to their care. Revelation supplying the imperfect teachings of conscience, presents to us its simple and sublime precepts, to govern the conduct of na- tion with nation, as well as that of man with man. The institutions and precepts of men bear within them the evidence of their own falli- bility and of the imperfection of theii' authors. Every race and every age is governed by those peculiar to itself, and often differing from each other as widely as do the habits and characters of men. The laws of one people are unconge- nial with the dispositions, and unadapted to the wants of another. They change, moreo- ver, with every passmg generation. While they operate to mould society to some extent, they themselves in turn are moulded by it. The institutions and customs of one age are often too barbarous or too refined to suit the succeeding one. The laws of om* fathers, so MEXICAN WAR. 151 far as they are merely the work of the human intellect, become obsolete, and pass away with the state of society out of w^hich they grew, and to which they were adapted ; giving place to others, which at some future day perhaps will themselves be sought for only by the cu- rious. The teachings of Christianity when placed side by side with these, present a re- markable contrast. So simple that the mind of a child can comprehend it, so profound that the sage is never satisfied with its contem- plation, applying to the minutest act, embra- cing in its comprehension all the affairs in which men can engage, adapted alike to every age of time, and to every circumstance and condition of man, the source of all that is good or durable in human institutions, so suited to the nature of our being, that happiness follows ^ur obedience, and unhappiness our disobedi- ence to its every dictate, the moral law stands alone, perfect and eternal, a part of the great unity of being, and revealing in its author the same infinite One who fashioned the natm^e and the soul of man. This law must possess supreme authority over nations as well as individuals, and all hu- 152 REVIEW OF THE man institutions should be founded upon it. The laws of nations are conventional. Obedi- ence to them is entirely voluntary. Their au- thority should most of all, for this reason, be tested by the principles of the moral law, and usages should be disregarded, however sanc- tioned by authority or hallowed by age, which are not in conformity with its spirit. It would be a work of supererogation to en- ter further into an examination of the princi- ples which should govern the conduct of na- tions generally. These need only to be stated. The mind assents to them instinctively. They are moral axioms. We shall in the following observations con- fine our view to the United States, and show how their obligations are heightened by their peculiar position. We stand upon a political and moral emi- nence. Our government is undoubtedly the greatest and most prosperous republic that has ever existed, and we have attained a high rank among enlightened and virtuous nations. We are as it were, pioneers in political freedom and in individual elevation ; and we have ac- quired an influence in the affairs of the world MEXICAN WAR. 153 and over tlie thouglits of men, unprecedented in so brief a j)eriod. We are moreover re- moved beyond the entanglements of European politics, are unfettered by tlie precedents and usages by wlucli the action of those states is so greatly controlled, and are but little effected either by their struggles or their diplomacy. "We have no reasons of state opposed to the dictates of morality. It would seem as if we were called upon by the possession of many advantages denied in the same degree to others, to exalt the stand- ard of national morality. It would appear that we should not be contented in our inter- course with other nations to follow the princi- ples by which monarchies were guided in a ru- der age, to pay our blind homage to usages originating in, and adapted to a less enlighten- ed time, and to aim only to square our conduct with these imperfect standards. " We have been raised up," says a distinguished states- man, "for high and noble purposes." We should seek to realize and to accomplish our mission. Justice does not consist merely in conformi- ty with the usages, or obedience to the regula- 154 REVIlfW OF THE tions of society. He whose Mgliest principle is to diive no closer a bargain with his neigh- bor than is tolerated by the laws, is among the most contemptible of men. "We should strive in onr intercourse with other nations, to be ac- tuated by a love of right and by a noble gen- erosity ; to have our actions inspired, as it were, with the spirit of equity. " Although the hazard of transient losses," said a late pure minded statesman, " may be incurred by a rigid adherence to just principles, no lasting prosperity can be secured when they are disre- garded." It is so difficult for nations to be just, their actions are so entirely beyond con- trol, and such is the blinding influence of in- terest, that we should set our standard of na- tional conduct peculiarly high, conscious of the obstacles in the way of its attainment. Nearly a century before the multitude in Gallilee listened to the sermon on the mount, the Roman orator uttered the sentiment which we have placed at the head of this es- say. The most TOtuous character of antiquity, his writings contain 23erhaps the noblest unin- spired precepts which were ever taught to man. MEXICAN WAR. 155 " Not only," lie says, " is that declaration un- true wMcli asserts that no republic can be gov- erned without injustice, but this is most true, that without the highest justice no republic can be guided to permanent prosperity." The word ^^ justitia'''' is very comprehensive and cannot be rendered into English by any single expression. It embraces the several ideas of clemency, humanity and magnanimity, the very spirit of justice. These words possess weighty import and solemn association. They v^^ere prophetic of the downfall of Rome. They come to us with awful warning from the portals of the tomb in which her liberties w^ere buried. "The mission of the United States," says one of their best citizens, " is one of peace, of love and of good will to men." To elevate the human race, by exalting the standard of individual intelligence and virtue, to still the storms of human passion, to inculcate the prin- ciples of equality, fraternity and peace among men, these should be the objects of our ambi- tion, to set their example before the world, this is our true glory. While other nations might boast of their victories, we could then 156 REVIEW OF THE feel tliat we liad conquered ignorance, we had conquered ^Hice, we had conquered ourselves. There is a glory purer than that which is shroud- ed in the smoke of the battle-field, it illumines the path of peace ; there is a serener light than beams from the cannon's mouth, it plays around the head of wtue. Wars unhappily become sometimes necessa- ry. "The most sacred regard for justice and equity," says Mr. Calhoun, " and the most cau- tious policy, cannot always prevent them." Governments must sometimes defend by force the rights of their people. Some principle dearer than life may be invaded, wrongs may be committed which it would be ignoble to suffer and which force alone can prevent. Here the crime is with the aggressor. But it is a vast responsibility to determine up- on a war; and justice, humanity and every precept of religion teach us, that it should only be done under a controlling necessity, and when every other means of security have been ex- hausted in vain. Mexico is our sister republic. She has been aspiring to emulate our example, and endeav- oring, though with unequal steps, to follow in MEXICAN WAR. 157 our path. She is moreover a weaker nation than the United States. Her government is feeble and distracted, her people are generally ignorant and devoid of enter]3rize. By the si- lent operation of natural causes, our race has been silently but resistlessly encroaching on the Spanish- American. It is evident that it must yield before our advance. It would be contrary to all our ideas to imagine Mexico ob- taining extensive trading privileges among our citizens, or acquiring in any manner possession of our territory. The tendency of things is all the other way. In every transaction we must be the gainer and she the loser. 'No blame attaches to us on this account. It is a fact whose cause lies beyond the reach of any political policy. But while it is our duty to cultivate with all nations the relations of friendship, to exercise that regard for the rights of others, which is the best security for our own, and to exhibit that magnanimity w^hich is the foundation of the highest respect ; these circumstances would seem to require that our conduct toward Mex- ico should have been marked by an extraordi- nary forbearance and kindness. Surely we 158 REVIEW OF THE — — ^■^— "— ^^— — I I ' I II 11^^— ««p«— ^——i— — , should bear -with the pride or tlie jealousy of a feebler nation, whicli is conscious of our growth, at her expense, from causes beyond her power as well as our own to control, and pointing to consequences which she can only deprecate, but can neither avert nor stay. " I trust," said Mr. Calhoun, in March, 1846, " that we shall deal generously with Mexico, that w^e shall prove ourselves too magnani- mous and too just to take advantage of her feeble condition." We cannot resist quoting a few words from the remarks made by a sen- ator from Kentucky, on the receipt of the war message from the executive, because they con- tain true and noble sentiments, wmich could hardly be so well expressed in other language. " From the first struggle for liberty in South America and Mexico," says he, "it was the cherished policy of the United States to ex- tend to those republics sympathy and friend- ship. '' We had regarded their rising as an imita- tion of our example — as a new creation of re- publics united by strong affinity and warm sympathy. That was the kind and generous view taken. As the head of the republican MEXICAN WAR. 159 system, our policy was to cheer and clierisli them, and lead tliem in tlie way to tli at liber- ty whicli we had established, and of which we had set the example. Now we find our- selves in a state of war with one of these re- publics. We, that should naturally be looked up to as the protector of them all. These generous dispositions are all vanished, and war and bloodshed have taken their place. It is not in the amount of precious blood that has been shed, that the importance of this event consists. No, it is the great political consequences, the evil example to liberty in every place. The hand of one republic is stretched out in hostility against another! And I deprecate it the more when I reflect, that the one is feeble and impotent, that an- archy and revolutions have consumed her strength, and that she needs the force of our example and aid to sustain her, lest she fall back again into that monarchy from which we saw her with pleasure arise. The course that has been pursued cannot have been that generous and forbearing policy which ought to be exercised by this great republic. We 160 REVIEW OF THE are so mucli miglitier than they are, that our condescension would be noble." In the war which we have examined, we see all these princij)les entirely disregarded. Im- pelled by a lust of conquest, the United States have exhibited in it a spirit of injustice, ag- gression and violence. The war which they have waged has been for the redress of no vsTong, for the vindication of no human right. No principle of humanity is claimed to have been maintained by its factories. Nor are we entitled to any respect for the peace which fol- lowed. The same remorseless selfishness in- spired alike its beginning, its continuance and its end. Without a cause worthy of a civilized na- tion, or an object the hope of whose attain- ment could inspire devotion, its history does not present a single circumstance which can ex- cuse or palliate its unmitigated wrong. Pos- sessing no pretence of any moral aim, utterly at variance with every object for which the heart of this age has sympathy, men must gaze upon it only in sorrow, unillumined by a ray of faith or hope. MEXICAN WAR. JgJ CHAPTER XIV The Influence of this War upon our national character, and on the cause of Liberty and of Christianity at home and abroad. It has intro- duced crime and vice among us. It has awakened a spirit of con- quest. It has lowered the standard of public morality in our coun- try. The evil impulses of our nature constitute a law of selfishness, wliicli prompts man to seek Ms own interest or gratification, regard- less of tlie happiness or rights of others, and of hatred which impels him to seek the posi- tive evil of his fellow men. Of all the un- happy consequences which attend the exer- cise of selfish or hateful passions, the most cer- tain and terrible are those which revert upon the character of their possessor. These seem to follow their indulgence by a fixed and eter- nal moral law, in the same manner that cer- tain effects follow certain causes in the material world; by a necessity of the same nature as that by which the felled tree falls to the 6 162 REVIEW OF THE ground, or the parts of a revolving body tend jfrom their center. They are the parents of fear, of suspicion, of envy and unsatisfied desires. As the mind j)asses under their sub- jection, every generous voice is hushed, every noble prompting is stilled within it, its fac- ulty of distinguishing right and wrong becomes deadened and distorted, and it looses the capa- city for participating in the happiness of vir- tue. We would expect to find the evil consequen- ces of this great national wrong which revert upon the character of our people, on the cause of free governments, and on the interests of morality and religion, insidious in their nature, to be far more unhappy, as they are more en- during, than any others w^hich can attend or follow it. So indeed they are. This w^ar has introduced crime and vice among us. A camp is the notorious home of unbridled passions. Soldiers in a foreign coun- try feel that they are removed from all the re- straints of civil law, and whenever the bar- rier of military discipline can be passed, un- restrained indulgence is sure to be sought. 'So one can know, until he has witnessed it, MEXICAN WAR. 163 the hardening influence of war npon tlie char- acters of those who are engaged in it. He, who Tinder the name of glory can coolly blow out the brains of his fellow man, or urge a bayonet into his bosom, has taken a lesson in blood, the effects of which he has rarely the ability or disposition to shake off. When the heart has become regardless of human misery, when it is steeled against the cry of agony and the prayer for life, it is also proof against the entrance of most noble sentiments and eleva- ting impulses. Soldiers are commonly drawn, from that class of society who most need the checks of civil law\ Having been removed from its authority for a time, it is difficult for them to assume again the character of peacea- ble citizens. Martial law no longer holding them in restraint, they are too apt to feel a spii'it of reckless defiance. And this inhu- manity and lawlessness are scattered over the land. Its breath is infection, its touch is con- tagion. It breeds a moral miasma in every community which comes within its influence. This war has excited and encouraged among our people the spirit of conquest in which it had its origin. It is difficult for a people, as 154 REVi:Sw OF THE for an individual, to be convinced that their own desires and actions are uuliallowed and unjust. Vice is tlie most cunning of flatter- ers. It lulls its victim to security with, a song of his own virtue and inability to err, while it holds its temptation before him under the veil of some excellent or glorious name. Desire harbored for a moment, invents a thousand plausible excuses for its gratification, until we are convinced that its indulgence is hardly in- consistent with the severest morality. Array- ed in the garments of virtue, vice often dares to appeal even to our sense of duty, and we strive to believe that we should be guilty of wrong in refusing to obey its impulses. But if we ever free ourselves from the de- ceiver, we shall find that as far as we have fol- lowed it, just so far every moral sense has be- come deadened within us, and virtue herself has lost her beauty in our eyes. Let us not attempt to deceive ourselves. The lust of conquest has begun to rage among ns. It is called "makiDg room for the Anglo- Saxon race," " working out our manifest desti- ny," and " enlarging the area of freedom." It has assumed a garb of the noblest humanity, MEXICAN WAR. 165 and has covered its face witli a mask of wonderful virtue. But it is the spirit of con- quest still. It is nothing else but the selfish de- sire to possess that which belongs to another, and a recklessness of the means by which it may be obtained. Let us reason together, candid reader, whether this is so. Does our race need room ? The area of our country before the war was about eighteen hundred thousand square miles, capable of sus- taining a population of at least three hundred million souls. This is a moderate estimate. Its capacity is probably much greater. Vast regions of this country are as yet almost unex- plored. We are barely twenty millions scat- tered over a part of its surface. But it is our duty we are told to provide for posterity. Should our population continue to double once in thirty years as it is now doing, in one hundred and twenty years we should reach three hundred and twenty millions. But any one who reasons upon this basis will fall into a great mistake. Of course, were this reasoning correct, in thirty years from that time we should number six hundred millions, more than the continent would probably sup- 166 REVIEW OF THE port, and in another sliort thirty years we should be double that number, or more by one- third than the number of inhabitants now on the globe. It is more probable that in ^ye hundred years this comitry will hardly con- tain three hundi^ed million souls. It is a law of population, that as a people become dense they multiply more slowly, until at last the in- crease is scarcely perceptible, as in China. No one imagines that the population of the globe mil in sixty years have increased foui^fold. The earth could not sustain such swarms, and ere long men would perish of universal starvation. We have heretofore increased rapidly, because we were a young people, scattered over a great and attractive country. Probably the early colonists on our coasts often doubled their numbers in a few months. How does this mist^ in which a spirit of selfish aggrandizement has shrouded itself, fade away before the sunlight of truth. But it is truly said that it is our duty to pro- vide for posterity. The provision which wf^ should make for them should not be vast regions of the earth which they will not need, and which must be acquired by injustice and wrong. MEXICAN WAR. 1^7 We sliould bequeath to tliem an unsullied national character. Our conduct must be the example for their imitation. Happy would that people be which could look back over their history through a long succession of just and generous actions which their fathers had performed, all whose precedents had tended to elevate while they adorned humanity. We should provide for them a higher intellec- tual culture than has been bestowed upon us, and should develope in them a more exalted moral character than as a nation we now pos- sess. These would constitute the greatest wealth, the most glorious inheritance that pos- terity could receive at our hands. In our own proper heritage are exhaustless resources yet to be developed. Far above us is a civilization yet to be attained, a standard of national character yet to be striven after. There lie the true objects of our ambition, in their attainment consists our true glory. Thus should we be working out truly our manifest destiny ; this would be indeed enlarging the area of freedom. The United States appear to have acted on the assumption that they possess some divine 1%