Newspaper Page Text
THE CONSTITUTIONALIST.
JAMES GARDNER, JR.
TERMS.
Daily, per annum, §8 00
Tri- vVeekly, per annum, 6 00
If paid in advance, 5 00
eekly, per annum, 3 00
If paid in advance 2 50
O'Editorial*, selections from oilier papers,
and all other matters are postponed, to make
room for the President’s Message.
PRESIDENTS MESSAGE.
Fellow Citizens of the Senate
and House of Representatives:
In resuming your laUura in the service of
the people, it is a subject of congratulation
slhal there has been no period in our past his
tory, when all the elements of national pros
perity have been so fully developed. Since
your last session, no afflicting dispensation
has visited our country: general good health
has prevailed; abundance has crowned the
toil of the husbandman; and labor in all its
branches is receiving an ample reward,while
education, science, and the arts rapidly
enlarging the means of social happiness.
The progress of our country in her career of
greatness, not only in the vast extension of
our territorial limits and the rapid increase of
our population, but in resources and wealth,
and in the happy condition of our people, is
without example in the history of nations.
As the wisdom, strength, and beniticence
of our free institutions are unfolded, every
day adds fresh motives to contentment, and
fresh incentives to patriotism.
Our devout and sincere acknowledgments
are due to the gracious Giver of all g od, for
the numberless blessings which our beloved
country enjoys.
it is a source of high satisfaction to know
that the relations of the United States with
all other nations, with a single exception,are
of the most amicable character. Sincerely
attached to the policy of peace, early adopted
and steadily pursued by this government, I
have anxiousiy desired to cultivate and che
rish friendship and commerce with every
loreign power. The spirit and habits of the
American people are favorable to the main
tenance of such international harmony. In
adhering to this wise policy, a preliminary
and paramount duty obviously consists in the
protection of our national interests from en
croachment or sacrifice, and our national
honor from feproach. These must be main
tained at any hazard. They admit of no
compromise or neglect, and must be scrupu
lously and constantly guarded. In their vi
gilent vindication, collision and conflict with
foreign powers may sometimes become una
voidable. Such has been our scrupulous ad
herauce to the dictates of justice, in all our
foreign intercourse, that; though steadily and
rapidly advancing in prosperity and power,
We have given no just cause of complaint to
any nation, and have enjoyed the blessings of
peace lor more Ilian thirty years. From a
policy so sacred to humanity, and so salutary
in its effects upon our political system, we
should never be induced voluntarily to depart.
The existing war with Mexico was neither
desired, nor provoked by the United Stales.
On the contrary, all honorable means were
resorted to to avert it. After year§ of endu
rance of aggravated and onredre>sed wrongs
on our part, Mexico, in violation of solemn
treaty stipulations, and of every principle « f
justice recognised by civilized nations, com
menced hostilities, and thus, by her own act,
forced the war upon us. Long before the
advance of our army to the left batik of the
Rio G rande, we hud ample cause of war
against Mexico", and oad the U. States resort
ed to this extremity, we might have appealed
to the whole civilized wond for the justice
of our cause.
I deem it to be my duty to present to yon,
on the present occasion, a condensed review
of the injuries we had sustained, of the causes
which led to the war, and ot its progress since
Its commencement. This is rendered the
more necessary because of the misapprehen
sions which have to some extent prevailed
as to its origin and true character. The war
has been represented as unjust and unneces
sajy, and as one of aggression on our part
upon a weak and injured enemy. Such er
roneous views, though entertained by but
few, have been widely and extensive!v cir
culated not only at home, but have been
spread throughout Mexico and the whole
world. A more effectual means could not
have been devised to encourage tiie enemy
and protract the war than to advocate and
adhere to their cause, and thus give them
**aid and comfort.”
ft is a source of national pride and exulta
tion, Dial the great body of bur people have
thrown no such obstacles in the way of the
government in prosecuting the war success
fully, but have shown themselves to be emi
nently patriotic, and ready to vindicate their
country’s honor and interests at any sacri
fice. The alacrity and promptness with
which our volunteer forces rushed to the
field on their country’s call, prove not only
their patriotism, but tbeir deep conviction
that out cause ts just.
The wrongs winch we have suffered from
Mexico almost ever since she became an in
dependent power, and the patient endurance
with which we have borne them, are without
g parallel in the history of modern civilized
nations. There is reason to believe that if
these wrongs had been resented and resisted
in the first instance, the present war nrght
haV« been avoided. One outrage, however,
permitted to pass with impunity, almost ne
cessarily encouraged the perpetration of
*nfcther, until at last Mexico seemed to attri
bute to weakness and indecision on our part
« forbearance which was the offspring of mag
nanimity, and of a sincere desire to preserve
friendly relations with a sister republic.
Scarcely had Mexico, achieved her inde
pendence, which the United States were the
first among the nations to acknowledge,
when site commenced the system of insult
and spoliation, which she has ever since pur
sued. Our citizens engaged in lawlul com
merce were imprisoned, their vessels seized,
and our flag insulted in her ports. If money
was wanted, the lawless seizure and comis
tiscation of our merchant vessels and their
cargoes was a ready resource; and it to ac
complish their purposes it became neces
•ary to imprison the owners, captains and
crews,it was done. Rulers superseded rulers
ji) Mexico in rapid succession, but still there
was no change in this system of depredation.
The government of the United Stales made
repealed reclamations on behalf of its citizens,
hnt these were answered by the perpetration
of new outrages. Promises of redress made
by Mexico in the most solemn forms were
postponed or evaded. The files and records
of the Department of State contain conclu
sive proofs of numerous lawless acts perpe
trated upon the property and persons of our
citizens by Mexico, anil of wanton insults to
our national flair The interposition ot our
government to obtain redress was again and
again invoked, under circumstances which
no nation ought to disregard.
It was hoped that these outrages would
cease, and that, Mexico would be restrained
by the laws which regulate the conduct of
ci ilized nations in their intercourse with
eac h other after the treaty of amity, com
merce and navigation of the s:h of April,
1831 was concluded between the two repub
lics; but this hope soon proved in vain. The
course of seizure and confiscation of the pro
perly of our citizens; the violation of their
persons and the insults to our flag pursued
I by Mexico previous to that time were scarce
ly suspended for a brief period, although the
treaty so clearly defines the rights and du
ties of the respective parlies that, it is impos
sible to misunderstand or mistake them. In
less than seven years after the conclusion of
that treaty our grievances had become so in
tolerable that, in the opinion of President
Jackson, they should no longer be endured.
In his message to Congress in February,
1837, he presented them to the consideration
of that body, and declared that “The length
of time since some of the injuries have been
committed, the repeated and unavailing ap
plication fur redress, the wanton character
of some of the outrages upon the property
and persons of our citizens, upon I lie officers
and flag of the United Slates, independent of
recent insults to this government and people
bv the 1 ite extraordinary would jus
t fy in theeyesof all nations immediate war.”
In a spirit of kindness and forbearance, how
j ever , lie recommended reprisals as a milder
mode of redress. He declared that war
should not be used as a remedy “ hv just and
generous nations confiding in their strength
for injuries committed, if it can be honorably
avoided,” and add'd. “ it has occurred to me
ihaf, considering the present embarrassed
condition of that country, we should act will,
bo h wisdom and moderation, bv giving to
! Mexico one more opportunity to amne for
i the past, before we take redress into our own
i hands. To avoid all misconception on the
I pait of Mexico, as well as to protect our own
national character from reproach, this oppor
tunity should be given with the avowed de
sign and full preparation to lake immediate
satisfaction, if it should not be obtained on a
repelion of the demand for it. To this end 1
recommend that an act be passed authorising
reprisals, and lhe use of ihe naval force of
the Unitrd States, by the Executive, against
Mexico, to enforce them in the event of a re
fusal by the Mexican government to come to
an amicable adjustment of the matters in
controversy between us, upon another de
; rnand thereof, made from on board one of our
i vessels of war on the coast of Mexico.”
Committees of both Houses of Congress,
I to which this message of the President was
j referred, fully sustained his views of the
I character of the wrongs which we had suf
i sered front Mexico, and recommended that
j another demand for redress should be made
j before authorizing war or reprisals. The
: Committee on Foreign Relations of the Sen
ate, in their report, say ; “ After such a de
mand, should prompt justice be refused hv the
Mexican government, we may appeal to all
! nations not only for the equity and modera
; lion with which we shall have acted towards
| a sister republic, but for the necessity which
! will then compel us to seek redress for our
i wrongs, either by actual war or by reprisals.
| The subject will then be presented before
! Congress, at the commencement of the next
| session, m a clear and distinct form ; and the
I committee cannot doubt but that such mea-
I sures will be immediately adopted as may be
: necessary to vindicate the honor of the coun
! try, and insure ample reparation to our in-
I jured citizens.”
The Committee on Foreign Affairs of the
: House ol Representatives made a similar re
j commendation, in their report, they say that
I they “ fully concur with tlie Fiesidenl that
ample cauae exists for taking redress into
our own bonds, and believe that we should
be justified in the opinion of other nations,
for taking such a step. But they are will
ing to try the experiment of another demand,
made in the most solemn form, upon (he jus
tice of the Mexican government, before any
furl tier proceedings are adopted.”
No difference of opinion upon the subject
is bel.eved to have existed in Congress at
that time. The Executive and Legislative
departments concurred; and yet, such has
been our forbearance, and desire to preserve
peace with Mexico, that t*>e wrongs of which
we then complained, and which gave rise to
these solemn proceedings, not only remain
unredressed to this day, but additional causos
| of complaint of an aggravated character,
I have ever since been accumulating.
Shortly after these proceedings, a special
message was despatched to Mexico, to make
a final demand for redress; and on the twen
tieth of July, 1837, the demand was made.
'The reply ot Ihe Mexican government bears
date on the twenty-ninth of the same monih,
and canlains assurances of the ‘"anxious
wish” of the Mexican government ‘mot to
delay the moment of that final and equitable
adjustment which is to terminate the exist
ing difficulties between the two govern
menls;” that ‘’nothing should be left undone
which may contribute to the most speedy
and equitable determination of the subjects
which have so seriously engaged the atten
tion of tiie American government, that the
“Mexican government would adopt, as tiie
only guides for its conduct, the plainest prin
ciples of public right, the sacred obligations
imposed bv international law, and the religi
ous faith of treaties;” and thal”whafever rea
son and justice may dictate respecting each
car-e will be done.” The assurance was
further given, that tiie decision of the Mexi
can government upon each cause ot com
plaint, for which redress had been demanded
should be communicated to the government
of the United Stales by the Mexican minis
ter at Washington.
These solemn assurances, in answer to
our demand for redress, were disregarded.—
By making them, however, Mexico obtained
! further delay. President Van Buren, in his
j annual message to Congress of the fifth of
December, 1837, states, that “allhough the
larger number” of our demands for redress,
and “many of them aggragaied cases of per-
I son a I wrongs, have been now for years be
j fore the Mexican government, and some of
| the causes of national complaint, and those
! of the most offensive character, admitted ot
immediate, simple, and satisfactory replies,
it is oiffy within a few days past that any
specific communication in answer to our last
demand, made five months ago, has been re
ceived from tiie Mexican minister;” and that
“fur not one of our public complaint* has
satisfaction been given or offered; that but
one of the cases of personal wrong has been
favorably considered, and that but fourcases
of both descriptions, out of all those formerly
presented,and earnestly pressed, have as yet
been decided upon by the Mexican govern
ment,” President Van Buren, believing
lliat ii would be vain to make anv further at
tempt loobam redress by the ordinary means
within the power of the Executive, commu
nicated this opinion to Congress, in the mess
aga referred to, in which he said, “On a care
ful and deliberate examination of the con
tents,” (of the correspondence with the xMexi
can government.) and considering the spirit
manifested by the Mexican government,it has
become my painful duty to return the subject
as it now stands, to Congress, to whom it
belongs, to decide upon me time, the mode,
and iha measure of redress.” Had the
United States at that time adopted compul
sory measures, and taken redress into their
own hands, all our difficulties with Mexico
would probably have been long since adjust
ed, and the existing war have been averted.
.Magnanimity and moderation on our part
only had the etfect to complicate these diffi
culties, and render an amicable settlement
of them the most embarrassing. That such
measures of redress under similar provoca
tions., committed by any of the powerful na
tions of Europe, would have been promptly
resorted to by the United Slates, cannot he
doubled. The national honor, and the pre
servation of the national character through
out the world, as well as our own self-res
pect, and iire protection due to our citizens,
would have rendered such a resort indispen-
Sibie. The history of no civilized nation in
modern limes lias presented within so brief
a period so many wanton attacks upon the
honor of its fig, and upon the property and
persons of its citizens, as had at that time
been borne by the United Stales from the
Mexican authorities and people. But Mexi
co was a sister republic, on the North Ame
rican continent occupying a territory con
tiguous to our own, and was in a feeble and
distracted condition; and these considerations,
it is presumed, induced Congress to forbear
still longer.
Instead of taking redress into our own
hands a new negotiation was entered upon
with fair promises on the part of Mexico,
but with the real purpose, as the event has
proved, of indefinitely postponing the repara
tion which we demanded, and which was so
justly due. This negotiation after more than
a year's delay, resulied in the convention of
the eleventh of April, 1839, “for the adjust
ment of claims of citizens of the United
Stales of America upon the government of
the Mexican republic.”—Tne joint board of
commissioners created by this convention to
examine and decide upon these claims was
not organized until the month August, 1840,
and under the terms of the convention they
were to terminate their duties within eigh
teen months from that time.—Four of the
eighteen months were consumed in pre
liminary discussions on frivolous and dilatory
points raised by the Mexican commissioners;
and it was not until the month of December,
1840, that they commenced the examination
of the claims of our citizens upon Mexico.
Fourteen months only remained to examine
and decide upon numerous and com
plicated cases. In the month of February,
1842, the term of ttie commission expired,
1 -aving many claims undisposed of lor want
of time. The claims which were allowed
by the board, and by the umpire authorized
by the convention it) decide in case of dis
agreement between the Mexican and Ameri
can commissioners, amounted to two million
twenty-six thousand one hundred and thirty
nine dollars and sixty-eight cents. There
were pending before the umpire when the
commission expired, additional claims which
had been examined and awarded by the
American commissioners, and had not been
allowed by the Mexican commissioners,
amounting to nine hundred and twenty-eight
thousand six hundred and twenty-seven dol
lars and eighty-eight cents, upon which he
did not decide, alleging that his authority had
ceased with the termination of the joint com
mission. Besides these claims, there were
others of American citizens, amounting to
three million three hundred and thirty-six
thousand eight hundred and thirty-seven dol
lars and rive emits, which ha 1 been submitted
to the board, and upon which they had not
lime to decide before their final adjournment.
The sum oft wo million twenty-six t housand
one hundred and thirty-nine dollars and
sixty-eight cents which had been awarded to
the claimants, was a liquidated and ascer
tained debt due by Mexico, about which
there could be no dispute, and which she was
bound to pay according to the terms of the
convention. Soon after the final awards lor
this amount had been made, the Mexican
government asked fora postponement of the
time of making payment, alleging that it
would be inconvenient to make the payment
at the time stipulated. In the spirit of for
bearing kindness towards a sisier republic,
which Mexico has so long abused, the
United States promptly complied with her
request. A second convention was according
ly concluded between the two governments
on the thirtieth of January, 1843, which upon
its face declares, that “this new arrangement
is entered into for the accommodation of
Mexico.” By the terms of this convention,
all the interest due on the awards which had
been made in favor ofthe claimants under
the convention ofthe eleventh of April, 1839,
was lobe paid to them on the thirtieth of
April, 1843, and “the principal ofthe said
awards, and tlie interest accruing thereon,”
was stipulated to “be paid in five years, in
equal instalments every three months.”
Notwithstanding this new convention was
entered into at the request of Mexico, and
for the purpose of relieving her Irom ein
birrassmenf, the claimants have only receiv
ed the interest due on the thirtieth of April,
1843, and three ofthe twenty instalments.
Although the payment of the sum thus liq
uidated, and confessedly due by Mexico to
our citizens as indemnity for acknowledged
acts of outrage and wrong, was secured by
treaty, the obligations of which are ever he Id
sacred by all just nations, yet Mexico has
violated this solemn engagement by failing
and refusing to make the payment. The two
instalments due in April and July, 1844,
under the peculiar circumstances connected
with them, have been assumed by the United
States and discharged to the claimants, but
they are still due by Mexico. But this is
not all of which we have just cause of com
plaint. To provide a remedy tor the claim
ants whose cases were not decided by the
joint commission under the convention of
April the eleventh, 1839. it was expressly
stipulated by the sixth article of the conven
tion of the thirtieth of January, 1843, that “a
new convention shall be entered into for the
settlement of all claims of the government
and citizens of the United Slates against the
republic of Mexico which were not finally
decided by the late commission, which met
in the city of Washington, and of all claims
of the government and citizens of Mexico
against the United States.”
In conformity with this stipulation, a third
convention was concluded and signed at the
city of Mexico, on the twentieth of Novem
ber, 1843, dy the plenipotentiaries of the two
governments, by which provision was made
lor ascertaining and paying these claims.
In J *nnary, 1844, this convention was rat
ified by the of the United Stales with
two amendments, which were manifestly
reasonable in their character. Upon a refer
ence of the amendments proposed to the gov
ernment of Mexico, the same evasions, diffi
culties, and delays were interposed which
have so Jong marked the policy of that gov
ernment towards the United Slates, T has
not yet even decided whether it would or
would not accede to them, ah hough the sub
ject has been repeatedly pressed upon its
consideration.
Mexico has thus violated a second time
the laith of treaties, by failing or refusing to
carry into effect the sixth article of the con
vention of January, 1843.
Such is the hisiory of the wrongs which
we have suffered and patientlv endured from
Mexico through a long series of years. So
far from affording reasonable satisfaction for
llie injuries and insults we had borne, a great
aggravation of them consists in the fact, that
while the United Stales, anxious to preserve
a good understanding with Mexico, have
ben constantly, but vainly, employed in seek
ing redress tor past wrongs, new outrages
were constantly occurring, which have con
tinued to increase our causes of complaint
and to swell the amount of our demands.
While the citizens of the United States were
conducting a lawful commerce with Mexico
under the guaranty of a treaty of “amity,
commerce, and navigation,” many of them
have suffered ail the injuries which would
have resulted from open war. This treaty,
instead of affording protection to our citizens,
; has been the means of inviting them into the
i ports of Mexico, that they might be, as they
have been in numerous instances, plundered
of their property and deprived of their per
sonal liberty if they dared insist on their
rights. Had the unlawful seizures of Amer
ican property, and the violation of personal
liberty of our citizens, to say nothing of the
ihsulis to onr flag which have occurred in
the ports of Mexico, taken place on the high
seas, they would themselves long since have
constitute);! a stale of actual war between
the two countries. In so long suffering
i Mexico to violate her most solemn treaty
obligations, plunder our chizens of their pro
perty, and imprison their persons without af
fording them any redress, we have failed to
perform one of the first and highest duties
which every government owes to its citizens ;
and the consequence has been, that many of
them have been reduced from a state of affln
eece to bankruptcy. The proud name of
American citizen, which ought to protect all
who bear it from insult and mjury’throughont
tiie world, has afforded no such protection
to onr citizens in Mexico. We had ample
cause of war against Mexico long before the
breaking out of hostilities. But even then
we forebore to lake redress into our own
hands, until Mexico herself became the ag
gressor by invading onr soil in hostile arrav,
and shedding the blood of our citizens.
•Such are ihe grave causes of complaint on
the part of the United States against Mexi
co—causes which existed long before the an
nexation of 'Texas to the American Union ;
and yet. animated by lie love of peace, and a
magnanimous moderation, we did not adopt
those measures of redress which, under such
circumstances, are the justified resort of in
jured nations.
'The annexation of Texas to the United
Slates constituted no just cause of offence to
Mexict , Ihe pretext that it did so is wholly
inconsistent, and irreconcileable with well
authenticated tacts connected with the revo
lution by winch Texas became independent
of Mexico. 'That this may be the more man
ifest, it may be proper to revert to the causes
and to the history of the principal events of
that revolution.
'Texas constituted a portion of the ancient
province of, ; Louisiana, ceded to the United
Biates by France in the year 1803. In the
year 1819, the United States by the Florida
treaty, ceded to Spam ail that part of Louisi
ana within the present limits of 'Texas; and
Mexico, by the revolution winch separated
her from Spain, and rendered tier an inde
pendent nation, succeeded to the rights of
the mother country over tins territory. In
the year 1824 Mexico established a federal
constitution, under which the Mexican re
public was composed of a number of sover*
I eign States, confederated together in a fede
ral Union similar to our own. Each of
these Slates had its own executive, legisla
ture, and judiciary, and lor all,except federal
purposes, was as independent ofthe general
government, and that of the other States, as
is Pennsylvania or Virginia under our con
stitution. Texas aud Coahnila united and
formed one of these Mexican States. The
State constitution which they adopted, and
which was approve by tbe Mexican cunted
eraev, asserted that they were -free and in
dependent of the oilier Mexican United
Stales, and of every other power and domin
ion whatsoever,” and proclaimed the? great
principle of human liberty, that “the sover
eignty of the States resides originally and
essentially in the general mass of tire indivi
duals who compose it.” To the govern
ment under this constitution, as well as to
that under the federal constitution, the
people of Texas owed allegiance.
Emigrants from foreign countries, inclu
ding the United States, were invited by the
colonization laws of the State and of the
■ federal government to settle 'Texas. Advan
tageous terms were offered to induce them
to leave their own country and become
Mexican citizens. The invitation was ac
cepted by many of our citizens, in the full
faith that in their new home they would be
governed by laws enacted by representatives
elected by themselves, and that their lives,
liberty, and propeny would be protected by
constitutional guarantees similar to those
which existed in the republic they had left.
Under a government thus organized they
continued until the year 1835, when a mili
tary revolution broke nut in the city of Mexi
co, which entirely subverted the federal and
State constitutions, and placed a military
dictator at the head of the government.
By a sweeping decree ot a Congress sub
servient to the will of the dictilor, the several
Stale constitutions were abolished, and the
States themselves converted into mere de-?
partinents of the Central Government. The
people of Texas were unwilling to submit to
this usurpation. Re istar.ee to such tyranny
became a high duly. Texas was fully ab
solved from all allegiance to the Central Go
vernment of Mexico from the moment that
government had abolished her State consti
tution, and in its place substituted an arbitra
ry and despotic Central Government.
Such were the principal of the
Texas revolution. The people of 1 exas at
once determined upon resistance, and flew to
arms. In the midst of these important and
exciting events, however, they did not omit
to ptaee their liberties upon h secure and !
permanent foundation. They elected mein- i
bers to a convention, who, in the montlv'of
M arch, 1836, issued a formal declaration
that their "political connexion with the Mexi
can nation has forever ended, and that the
people of i exas do now constitute a free,
SOVEREIGN, and INDEPENDENT REPUBLIC, ami
are fully invested with all the rights and at
tributes which properly belong to independ
ent nations.” They also adopted tor their
government a liberal republican constitution.
About the same time, Santa Anna, then the
dictator of Mexico, invad* d Texas with a
numerous army for the purpose of subduing
her people, and enforcing obedience to his
arbitrary and despotic government. On the
twenty-first of April. 183 d, he was met by
the Texan citizen-soldieis* and on that day
was achieved, by them, the memorable victo
ry of San Jacinto, by which they conquered
their independence. Considering the num
bers engaged on the respective sides, history
does not record a more brilliant achievement.
Santa Anna himself was among the captives.
In the month of May, 1836, Santa Anna
acknowledged by a treaty wi h the Texan
authorities, in the most solemn form, “ihe
full, entire, and perfect independence of the
republic of Texas.” It was true he was
then a prisoner of war, but it is equally true
that he had failed to reconquer Texas, and
had met with signal defeat; that his authori
ty had not been revoked, and that by virtue
of this treaty he obtained his personal re
lease, By it hostilities were suspended, and
the army which had invaded Texas under
his command returned in pursuance of this
arrangement unmolested, to Mexico.
From the day that the battle of San Jacinto
was fought until the present hour, Mexico
has never possessed the power to reconquer
Texas. In the language of the Secretary
of Stale of the United States, in a despatch 1
to our minister in Mexico, under date oi the
eighth of July, 1843, “Mexico may have
chosen to consider, and may still choose to
consider Texas as having been at all times
since 1835, and as siill continuing, a rebel- |
li province; but the world has been obliged
to take a very different view of the mailer.
From the time of the battle of San Jacinto, i
in April, 1836, to the present moment,Texas
lias exhibited the same external signs of
nations independence as Mexico herself, and
with quite as much stability of government.
Practically free and independent, acknowl
edged as a political sovereignty by the
principal Powers of the world, no hostile fool '
finding rest within its territory for &ix or !
seven years, and Mexico herself refraining :
for all i hat period from any furl her attempt |
to re-eslabliMi her own authority over that j
territory, it cannot but be surprising to find
Mr. de Bocanegra” fthe Secretary of Foreign
Affairs of Mexico,) “complaining that tor
that whole period citizens of tiie United
States, or its government, have been favoring
the rebels ot Texas, and supplying them
with vessels, ammunition, and money, as if
the war for the reduction of the province of
Texas had been constantly prosecuted by
Mexico, and her success prevented by these
influences from abroad.” In the samedes
pitch the Secretary of Mae affirms that
“since 1837 the Um'ed Sla es have regarded
Texas aa an independent aoveieigniyyas much
as Mexico; and that trade and commerce
with citizens of a government at war with
Mexico cannot, on mat account, be regard
ed as an intercourse by which as-istance and
succor are given to Mexican rebels. The
whole current of Mr. de Bocanegra’s remarks
runs in the same direction as if the independ
ence of Texas iiad not been acknowledged.
It has been acenowledged—it was acknowl
edged in 1837 against me remonstrance and
protest of Mexico; and most of the acts of any
importance, of winch Mr. de Bocanegra
complanis, flow necessarily from that recog
nition. lie speaks of Texas us still being
‘an integral part of the territory of the Mex
ican republic,’ but he cannot but understand
that the United Slates do not so regard it.
The real complaint of Mexico, therefore, is
in sub-tance, neither more nor less than a
complaint against the recognition of Texan
independence. It may be thought, rather
late to repeat that, complaint, and not quite
just, to confine it to the United .Slates, to ttie
exemption of England, France, and Belgium,
unless the United Slates having been the
first to acknowledge the independence of
Mexico herself, are to be blamed for setting
an example for the recognition of that of
Texas,” And he added, that “the constitution,
public treaties, and the laws oblige the Pres
ident to regard Texas as an independent
Male, and its territory as no part of the ter
ritory of Mexico.” Texas had been an in
dependent Stale, with an organized govern
ment, defying the power of Mexico to over
throw or reconquer her lor more than ten
years before Mexico commenced the present
war against the United Slates.
Texas had given such evidence to the
world of her ability to maintain tier separate
existence as an independent nation, (hat she
had been formally recognised as such, not
only by the United Mates, but by several of
the principal powers of Europe. These
powers had entered into treaties of amity,
commerce, and navigation with her. Tney
had received and accredited her ministers
and other diplomatic agents on their part to
Hie government of Texas. If Mexico, not
withstanding all this and her utter inability
to reconquer Texas, still stubbornly refused
to recognise Iter as an independent nation,
she was none the less so on that account.
Mexico herself had been recognised as an in
dependent nation by the United Stales, and
by other powers, many years before Spam, of
which, before her revolution, she had been a
colony, would agree to recognise her as such;
and yet Mexico was at that time, in the esti»
(nation of the civilized world, and in fact,
none the loss an independent power because
Spain still claimed her as a colony. If Spain
had continued to the present period to assert
that Mexico was one of her colonies in re
bellion against her, this would not have made
her so, or changed the fact of tier independent
existence, Texas, at the period ot tier an
nexation to the U. S„ bore the same relation
to Mexico that Mexico had borne to Spain tor
many years before Spain acknowledged her
independence, with this important difference
,—that, before the annexation of I exas to
the United States was consummated, Mexico
herself, bv a forma! act of her government,
had acknowledged the independence of Tex
as as a nation, ft is true, that in her act of
recognition she prescribed a condition which
she had no power or authority to impose, that
Texas should not annex herself to any other
power; but this could not detract in any de
gree from the recognition which Mexico then
made of her actual independence. Upon this
plain statement of facts, it is absurd for Mex
ico to alledge, as a pretext for commencing
hostilities against tiie United Stales, that
Texas is still a part of her territory.
But there are those who, conceding all this
to be true, assume the ground that the true
western boundary of Texas is the Nueces,
instead of the Rio Grande; and that, there
fore, in marching our army to the east bank
of the latter river, we passed the Texan line,
and invaded the territory of Mexico. A sim
ple statement of tacts, known to exist, will
conclusively refute such an assumption.——
Texas, as ceded to I lie United Males by
France in 1803, has been always claimed as
extending we.-4 io the Rio Grande or Rio
Bravo. This fact is established by tlie au
thority of our most eminent statesmen at a
period when tiie question was as well if not
belter understood than it is at present. Du
ring Mr. Jefferson’s administration, Messrs.
Muurue and Pinckney, who had been sent
on a special mission to Madrid, charged,
among other things, with the adjustment of
the boundary between the two countries, in
a note addressed to the Spanish Minister of
Foreign Affiirs, under date of the twenty
eighth of January, 1805, assert that the
boundaries of Louisiana, as ceded to the U.
•Stales by France,“are the river Perdido on
the east, and lae nver Bravo on ttie west;”
and they add that “the tacts and principles
which justify this conclusion are so satisfac
tory to our government as to convince it that
tiie United Mates have not a betier right to
the island of New Orleans under the cession
referred to, than they have to tiie whole dis
trict of territory which is above described.”
Down to the conclusion of the Florida taeatv,
in February, 1811), hy which this territory wan
ceded to Spain, the United Mates asserted and
maintained their territorial rights to this extent,
in the month of June, 1818, during Mr. Monroe’s
administration, information having been receiv
ed tliat a number of foreign adventurers had
landed olGaiveslon with the avowed purpose of
forming a settlement in that vicinity, a special
messenger was despatched try the government
of the United Scales, with instructions from the
Secretary of Stale to warn them to desist, should
they be iound there “or any other place north of
the Rio Bravo, and within the territory claimed
by the United States.” lie was instructed,
slioUid they be found in the country north cf that
river, ly make known to them "the surprise with
winch me President has seen possession tiius ta
ken, without authority from tiie United States,
ot a place within their territorial limits, and upon
Which no tawtui settlement can be made without
their sanction ” lie was instructed to call upon
them to “avow under wuat national authority
they profess to act,” and to give them due warn
ing “that the place is within the United States,
who will suffer no permanent settlement to he
made there, under any authority oilier tiian their
own.” As late as the eighth of July, 1842, tiie
Secretary of Stale of the United Slates, in a note,
addressed to our minister in Mexico, maintains
that, hy the Florida treaty of 1819, the territory
as far west as the Rio Grand was conlimed to
Spain. Jn that note he states that, “by the treaty
ofihe twenty-second of February, 1819, between
the United Stales and Spain, the Sabine was
adopted as the line of boundary between the two
Powers. Up to that period, no considerable col
onization had been effected in Texas; hut the
territory between the Sabine and the Rio Grande
being confirmed to Spain by the treaty, applica
tions were made to that Power tor g r ants of land,
and such grants, or permissions of settlement,
were in fact made by the Spanish authorities in
favor ofcitiz ns ofthe United States proposing to
emigrate to Texas in numerous families, before
the declaration ofthe independence of Mexico.”
The Texas which was ceded to Spain by the
Florida treaty ot 1819, embraced all tiie country
now da uied by the Mate of Texas between the
Nueces and trie Rio Grande. The republic of
Texas always claimed lliis river as Her western
boundary, and in her treaty made with Santa
Anna in May, l»3o, he recognised it as such.
By ttie constitution which Texas adopted in
March, 1835, senatorial and representative dis
tricts were organized extending west of the
Nueces. 'The Congress of 1 exas, on tiie 19lh
ct December, passed ‘An act to Refine the
boundaries ofthe republic of Texas,” in winch
they dedared the Rio Grande from its mouth to
its source to he their boundary, and by the said
act they extended their “civil and po ilicai juris
diction” over the country up to that boundary.
During a period of more than nine years, which
intervened between the adoption of her oonslitu
ton and her annexation as on a ot the States of
our Union, Texas asserted and exercised many
acts of sovereignty and jurisdiction over the ter
ritory and inliabitalo west of the Nueces. Sbo
organized and defined the limits of counties ex
tending to tiie Ria Grande. Mie established
courts ofjusticeand exh nded her judicial system
over the territory. She established a custom
couse, and collected duties, and also post offices
and post roads in it. She established a land
office, and issued numerous grants for land with
in its limits. A senator and a representative re
siding in it were elected to the Congress of tho
republic, and served as such before tiie act of an
nexation took pla< e. in both tile Congress and
convention of 'Texas, which gave their assent to
the terms ofannexation to the United States; pro
posed by our Congress, were representatives re
siding wu st of the Nueces, who took patt in tho
act of annexation itself This was tiie Texas
which, hy the act of our Congress of the twenty
ninth of December, 1845, was admitted as one
ol tho Mates of our Union. That the Congless
ofthe United Stales understood the State of
Texas which they admitted into the Union to
extend beyond the Nueces is apparent from tho
fact that on thirty-first of December, 1815, only
two days after the act of admission, they passed
a law “to establish a collection district in the
Stale of Texas,” hy which they created a port of
delivery at Corpus Chris!;, situnted west of the
Nueces, and being the same point at which the
Texas custom-house, under the laws of that re
pu >iic, had been located, and directed that a sur
veyor to Collect tiie revenue should he appointed
for that p irt by the President, by and with the ad
vice and consent of tiie Senate. A surveyor was
accordingly nominated and confirmed by the
Senate, and has been ever since in the per
formance his duties. Ail these acts ot the
republic of Texas, and of oir Congress, prece
ded the orders for the advance of our army to the.
east bank of the Rio Grande. Subsequently,
Congress passed an act “establishing certain post
routes,” extending west ot tiie Nueces. Iho
country west of that river now constitutes a part
hi one of the congressional districts ot Te.’pts, and
is represented in the House ot Representatives,
The senators from that State were chosen hy a
legislature iq wlijch the country west of that
river was represented in view ot all these tacts,
.t is difficult to conceive upon what ground it car*
be maintained that, in occupying the country
west of the Nueces with our auny, with a view
solely to its sec.oniy and detenee, we invaded tho
territory of Mexico. But it would have been
still more difficult to justity the Executive, whoso
duly it is to soe that the laws be faithfully execu
ted, if in the face of all these proceedings, both ot*
the Congress of Texas anu of4,he United States l
fie had assumed the responsibility of yielding uj\
the territory west ofthe Nueces to Mexico, or
refusing to protect and defend this territory amt
its inhabitants, including Corpus Cnristi. as well
as the remainder of Texas, against the threaten
ed Mexican invasion.
But Mexico herself has never placed the war
which she has waged upon the ground that our
army occupied the immediate territory be
tween the Nueces and the Rio GranJe. Her
refused [iretcnsion that Texas was not in tact
an independent State, but a rebellious pro
vince was obstinately |>ersevered in; and her
avowed purpose in commencing a war with the
United States was to jeconquer Texas, and to
restore Mexican authority over the whole territo
ry—not to the Nueces only, hut to the Sabine.
Jn view of the proclaimed menaces of Mexico to,
this effect, 1 deemed it my duty, as a measure ot
precutinn and defence, to order our army to oc
cupy a position on our frontier as a military post,
from which our troops could best resist and repe!