time she has contracted treaties with other powers in both hemispheres and has been making progress in the arts of peace. Events have detached her from Mexico and existing circumstances can not fail to indicate to all intelligent observers that her ultimate reannexation is among the things most to be doubted. It is notorious that the language, the laws and the habits of the people of the two countries are dissimilar, that in these and in other respects differences exist so wide, as not to promise happiness to a union between the population of the two states. Texas was heretofore the remotest northeastern province of Mexico, its distance from the Mexican capital is very great, and the character and population of the intervening country are such that Mexico could hardly hope to exercise over Texas an efficient authority. Without Texas, Mexico would still be not only one of the largest sovereignties of the world, but would possess territory which, for its position and other great natural advantages, would be difficult to be surpassed. Her jurisdiction would still extend over a vast space, embracing even in the same latitude, in consequence of the different. degrees of elevation belonging to its different parts, almost every climate and every production of the habited globe, while with ports on both oceans, she offers facilities of commerce to the whole world. On the other hand Texas is sufficiently large for a respectable community. Her limits are defined and peace, with an opportunity of improving her resources, are much more important to her than any chances of territorial acquisition. The Government of the United States feels a strong interest in the welfare of both countries. Both are our neighbors, they are among the newly organized governments, the regenerated systems of this hemisphere. For their own prosperity as well as for the convenience and advantage of neighboring States, they require repose, security, and vigorous application to the arts of peace. Under these circumstances the President directs that if you should receive from the Mexican Government any intimation of its desire for the interposition or mediation of this Government for the purpose of bringing about peace between Texas and Mexico, you wi state that such interposition or mediation will be cheerfully granted. So long, however, as either of those parties shall be resolved to remain at war with the other, and unless both of them shall request the mediation of the United States, the President would not be inclined to interfere. The opinion of this Government was expressed in a letter from Mr. Forsyth to Mr. Dunlap, late representative of Texas here, and in the letter of General Jackson to General Santa Anna, therein referred to, a copy of both of which is now transmitted. "Although policy and duty dictate this reserve on our part, it is not to be disguised that the immediate and permanent interests of the « It is "are" in the record, but this doubtless is a copyist's error for “is," unless, indeed, the word "with," in the preceding line, should be "and," H. Doc. 551---29 United States call loudly for the cessation of hostilities between Texas and Mexico. So long as the war continues, our extensive commerce and navigation in the Gulf of Mexico are liable to vexations and interruptions from one or the other belligerent; our citizens who may desire to trade with or travel to Mexico across the Texan frontier may be driven back or be seized and their property confiscated, if for no other cause, from the difficulty if not impossibility for the Mexican local authorities to distinguish between them and Texans. "It is proper to advert to another consideraiion, which has no small weight in the President's mind. It is the danger, should the war between Mexico and Texas be renewed and prosecuted by the use of considerable military forces, that citizens of the United States would be inclined to take part, either on the one side or the other, to such an extent as might possibly compromit the neutrality and peace of this country, or at least create jealousy and dissatisfaction. Nothing is more probable than that the renewal of the war between Mexico and Texas, and the known fact of the invasion of the latter country by the former, with a large force, would be an occasion for crowds of persons to enter Texas and take their share in the chances of the war. This is a topic upon which you can not, perhaps, very well speak fully and at length, to the Mexican Government, but a remote and delicate intimation of the probability of such occurrences might be made and ought to produce in the counsels of that government great caution and deliberation. The more general ground, which I have already stated, may be exhibited without reserve: that is the President's clear and strong conviction that the war is not only useless, but hopeless, without attainable object, injurious to both parties and likely to be, in its continuance, annoying and vexatious to other commercial nations. The President consequently relies upon your address to bring about the object desired, which he hopes may be accomplished within the limits which have been assigned." Mr. Webster, Sec. of State, to Mr. Thompson, June 23, 1842, MS. Inst. Mexico, XV. 179. "By the treaty of the 22d of February, 1819, between the United States and Spain, the Sabine was adopted as the line of boundary between the two powers. Up to that period no considerable colonization had been effected in Texas; but the territory between the Sabine and the Rio Grande being confirmed to Spain by the treaty, applications were made to that power for grants of land, and such grants, or permissions of settlement, were, in fact, made by the Spanish authorities in favor of citizens of the United States proposing to emigrate to Texas in numerous families, before the declaration of independence by Mexico. And these early grants were confirmed, as is well known, by successive acts of the Mexican Government, after its separation from Spain. In January, 1823, a national colonization law was passed, holding out strong inducements to all persons who should incline to undertake the settlement of uncultivated lands; and although the Mexican law prohibited for a time citizens of foreign countries from settling, as colonists, in territories immediately joining such foreign countries, yet even this restriction was afterwards repealed or suspended, so that, in fact, Mexico, from the commencement of her political existence, held out the most liberal inducements to immigrants into her territories, with full knowledge that these inducements were likely to act, and expecting they would act, with the greatest effect upon citizens of the United States, especially of the Southern States, whose agricultural pursuits naturally rendered the rich lands of Texas, so well suited to their accustomed occupation, objects of desire to them. The early colonists of the United States, introduced by Moses and Stephen Austin under these inducements and invitations, were persons of most respectable character, and their undertaking was attended with very severe hardships, occasioned in no small degree by the successive changes in the Government of Mexico. They nevertheless persevered and accomplished a settlement. And, under the encouragements and allurements thus held out by Mexico, other emigrants followed, and many thousand colonists from the United States and elsewhere had settled in Texas within ten years from the date of Mexican independence. Having some reasons to complain, as they thought, of the government over them, and especially of the aggressions of the Mexican military stationed in Texas, they sought relief by applying to the supreme Government for the separation of Texas from Coahuila, and for a local government for Texas itself. Not having succeeded in this object, in the process of time, and in the progress of events, they saw fit to attempt an entire separation from Mexico, to set up a government of their own, and to establish a political sovereignty. War ensued; and the battle of San Jacinto, fought on the 21st of April, 1836, achieved their independence. The war was from that time at an end, and in March following the independence of Texas was formally acknowledged by the Government of the United States." Mr. Webster, Sec. of State, to Mr. Thompson, Min. to Mexico, July 8, 1842, See, as to Mexican complaints as to the course of the United States toward "I transmit a copy of two notes addressed to this Department by the chargé d'affaires of Texas. The first, dated the 14th ult., requests the interposition of this Government for the purpose of inducing that of the Mexican Republic to abstain from carrying on the war against Texas by means of predatory incursions, in which the proclamations and promises of the Mexican commanders are flagrantly violated, noncombatants seized and detained as prisoners of war, and private property used or destroyed. This Department entirely concurs in the opinion of Mr. Van Zandt that practices such as these are not justifiable or sanctioned by the modern law of nations. You will take occasion to converse with the Mexican secretary, in a friendly manner, and represent to him how greatly it would contribute to the advantage as well as the honor of Mexico to abstain altogether from predatory incursions and other similar modes of warfare. Mexico has an undoubted right to subjugate Texas if she can, so far as other states are concerned, by the common and lawful means of war. But other states are interested and especially the United States, a near neighbor to both parties, are interested not only in the restoration of peace between them, but also in the manner in which the war shall be conducted, if it shall continue. These suggestions may suffice for what you are requested to say, amicably and kindly, to the Mexican secretary at present. But I may add, for your information, that it is the contemplation of this Government to remonstrate in a more formal manner with Mexico, at a period not far distant, unless she shall consent to make peace with Texas, or shall show the disposition and ability to prosecute the war with respectable forces. “The second note of Mr. Van Zandt is dated the 24th instant and relates to the mediation of the United States for the purpose of effecting a recognition by Mexico of the independence of Texas. You will not cease in your endeavors for this purpose, but it is not expected that you will deviate from the instructions which have heretofore been given to you upon the subject.' Mr. Webster, Sec. of State, to Mr. Thompson, No. 26, Jan. 31, 1843, MS. Inst. "In the instruction to you No. 26 of the 31st ult. you were directed to take occasion to converse with the Mexican Secretary of State upon the character of the war waged, by Mexico against Texas. You will avail yourself of a similar occasion to acquaint him in the same way that this Government intends to take steps for the purpose of remonstrating with the Texan Government upon the subject of marauding incursions into Mexico, whether with a view to retaliation or otherwise. The duty of the United States as a neighbor to both those countries and as an impartial friend to both demands that no proper efforts should be omitted by us to induce them, so long as they continue in a state of war with one another, to carry that war on openly, honorably, and according to the rules recognized by all civilized and Christian states in modern times. We owe this duty to them; we owe it to the interest and character of this continent, we owe it to the cause of civilization and human improvement, and we shall discharge it with impartiality and with firmness." Mr. Webster, Sec. of State, to Mr. Thompson, No. 28, Feb. 7, 1843, MS. Inst. 66 Near eight years have elapsed since Texas declared her independence. During all that time, Mexico has asserted her right of jurisdiction and dominion over that country, and has endeavored to enforce it by arms. Texas has successfully resisted all such attempts, and has thus afforded ample proofs of her ability to maintain her independence. This proof has been so satisfactory to many of the most considerable nations of the world, that they have formally acknowledged the independence of Texas and established diplomatic relations with her. Among those nations the United States are included, and, indeed, they set the example which other nations have followed. Under these circumstances the United States regard Texas as in all respects an independent nation, fully competent to manage its own affairs and possessing all the rights of other independent nations. The Government of the United States, therefore, will not consider it necessary to consult any other nation in its transactions with the Government of Texas." Mr. Upshur, Sec. of State, to Mr. Almonte, Dec. 1, 1843, MS. Notes to Mexico. See, also, Mr. Upshur, Sec. of State, to Mr. Thompson, Oct. 20, 1843, MS. ... "Great Britian has recognized the independence of Texas; and having done so, she is desirous of seeing that independence finally and formally established, and generally recognized, especially by Mexico. We have put ourselves forward in pressing the Government of Mexico to acknowledge Texas as independent. But in thus acting, we have no occult design, either with reference to any peculiar influence which we might seek to establish in Mexico or in Texas, or even with reference to the slavery which now exists, and which we desire to see abolished in Texas.' " Earl of Aberdeen, British For. Secretary, to Mr. Pakenham, British minister at Washington, Dec. 26, 1843, Br. & For. State Papers, XXXIII. 232. For Mr. Calhoun's reply of April 18, 1844, see the same volume, p. 236. In this reply Mr. Calhoun animadverted upon the antislavery views expressed by Lord Aberdeen. Mr. Calhoun, in a long instruction of Aug. 1, 1844, to the United States minister to France, refers to a declaration made by the King at the minister's reception, of friendliness toward the United States. This was, said Mr. Calhoun, the more gratifying as previous information was calculated to create the impression "that the Government of France was prepared to unite with Great Britian in a joint protest against the annexation of Texas and a joint effort to induce her Government to withdraw the proposition to annex, on condition that Mexico should be made to acknowledge her independence." (MS. Inst. France, XV. 8.) Annexation. A treaty for the annexation of Texas to the United States was signed at Washington, by Mr. Calhoun, on the part of the United States, and Messrs. Van Zandt and Henderson, on the part of Texas, April 12, 1844. It was rejected by the Senate." a S. Ex. Doc. 341, 28 Cong. 1 sess.; Br. and For. State Papers, XXXIII. 252, 262. H. Ex. Doc. 271, 28 Cong. 1 sess.; Br. and For. State Papers, XXXIII. 258. |