LORD ABERDEEN'S LETTER.

17

The plan of annexation, notwithstanding these explicit declarations of the Mexican government, was anxiously and sedulously pursued by the Executive of the United States. Mr. J. C. Calhoun, who had succeeded Mr. Upshur1 as Secretary of State, signed with the Ministers Plenipotentiary of Texas (Messrs. Van Zandt and Henderson) a Treaty of Annexation, on the 12th of April, 1844. In the same month, the Secretary of State (Mr. Calhoun) advised the Chargé d'Affaires in Mexico, “that the step had been forced on the government of the United States in self-defence, in consequence of the policy adopted by Great Britain in reference to the abolition of slavery in Texas." At the same moment, there had been presented by Mr. Pakenham, (British minister,) and was on file in the Department of State, a solemn declaration of the British government, by Lord Aberdeen, that this idea of British interference was a gross mistake.3 In this declaration, Lord Aberdeen says,

"With regard to Texas, we avow that we wish to see slavery abolished there, or elsewhere; and we should rejoice, if the recognition of that country by the Mexican government, should be accompanied by an engagement on the part of Texas to abolish slavery, and under proper conditions throughout the republic. But although we earnestly desire and feel it to be our duty to promote such a consummation, we shall not interfere unduly, or with an improper assumption of authority with either

1 Mr. Upshur was killed on board the Princeton.

2 State Correspondence, April, 1844.

Lord Aberdeen's Letter was dated December 26th, 1843; and presented by Mr. Pakenham, February 26th, 1844.

party, in order to insure the adoption of such a course. We shall counsel, but we shall not seek to compel or unduly control either party.”

Did the President and Secretary of State disbelieve this declaration? In any case, upon what evidence did the Secretary declare, that the government of the United States was forced into this step, in consequence of the interference of Great Britain with slavery in Texas? Upon what principle of the Constitution did the American government interfere with Texas for such a cause?— The plan of annexation, however, was strenuously pushed by its projectors.

On the 22d of April, 1844, Mr. Tyler submitted to the Senate a Treaty of Annexation, which was soon after rejected, and the question left open for public discussion.1

In consequence of the election of President Polk in November, 1844, and the apparent approval of annexation by the people of the United States, Congress on the 1st of March, 1845, passed what is called the JOINT RESOLUTION, giving its consent that the territory "rightfully belonging to the Republic of Texas" might be erected into a new State called the State of Texas; subject, however, to the adjustment by this government of "all questions of boundary that may arise with other governments."

The terms of this Resolution admit that Texas might have claimed boundaries which were not rightfully belonging to her, and that these "questions of boundary" had yet to be settled.

To the terms of the Joint Resolution, Texas assented

1 See the Public Documents of 1844

GEN. TAYLOR ORDERED TO CORPUS CHRISTI.

19

by her ordinance of July 4th, 1845, and having formed her Constitution, became virtually a State in the American Union. Two days after this (July 7th) the same Convention requested the President of the United States to occupy the ports of Texas, and send an army to their defence. This desire the President of the United States immediately complied with.

GENERAL ZACHARY TAYLOR, then in command at Camp Jessup, was ordered to move his forces into Texas, weeks before the War Department had received information of the Texan ordinance. On the 28th of June, Mr. Donelson, then minister to Texas, and to whom General Taylor was referred for advice upon his movements, wrote him that he had best move his forces "without delay to the western frontier of Texas," and also informing him that Corpus Christi, on Aranzas Bay, was the best point for the assembling of his troops. The same letter also admitted that the country between the Nueces and the Rio Grande was in dispute, the Texans holding Corpus Christi and the Mexicans Santiago, at the mouth of the Rio Grande."

General Taylor proceeded immediately with the forces under his command to Aranzas Bay, and in the beginning of August, 1845, had taken the position assigned him by the government. All the troops in the west, the northwest, and the Atlantic which could be spared, were ordered to join him. In November, 1845, by the report of the AdjutantGeneral, his army was composed as follows:-3

1 Documents of 1845.

2 Mr. Donelson's Letter 28th of June 1845.-Public Documents.

3 Adjutant-General's Report, November 26th, 1845.

This was General Taylor's army in November, 1845, when, by the confession of the government, the territory between his position and Santiago, or rather, between the Nueces and the Rio Grande, was in dispute, and the subject of negotiation for boundaries.

What, however, was at this moment the real position of affairs in regard to the question of war? Was there any room to doubt that war was the necessary consequence of annexation? Was there any thing to justify the total neglect of all preparation for so serious a conflict, as war with a nation, however inferior, of seven millions of people? The facts, as we have reviewed them, are simple and brief.

Mexico, hearing from the United States the distant rumors of an intended annexation of Texas, announces by Mr. Bocanegra to the American minister, that she will resent such an act at the expense of the disasters of war.

In the same year, (1843,) and a few months later, the Mexican minister, General Almonte, reaffirms the same

STATE OF THE QUESTION.

21

fixed determination of his government in a letter to the American Secretary of State.

When the act for annexation is passed, Almonte declares in his final note to the Secretary of State, that it is the most unjust act recorded in the annals of history; protests against it; declares that his government will resist it by all the means in its power; and demands his passports.

The diplomatic correspondence of our government shows, that it apprehended war-that it knew well the sole cause by which war would come-and that in the minds of the President and his cabinet, the annexation of Texas, and its disputed boundaries, was the sole foundation for any rupture with Mexico.

The march of General Taylor's army was evidently and declaredly1 intended to meet the contingencies of such a rupture.

The most remarkable fact in this transaction, is that, with this apprehension of war vividly impressed upon the mind of the government, the President should never have asked Congress for one dollar of money, or one company of soldiers in addition to the provisions of the peace establishment! Upon what principle was it assumed, that an entire province could be wrested from one empire and give no cause for war? Upon what idea of prudence or sagacity was all preparation for that war neglected, till battles were already fought, and the opposing nation excited by all the worst feelings of national and martial controversy ?

The effect of this neglect we shall see in the series of subsequent events,

1 See Donelson's Correspondence.