Tehuantepec and its Title. for the nation, adopting such form of government as shall appear to conform to the national will. It shall also take cognizance of all that relates to the war of the United States, to the question of Texas, and to the frontier departments. It shall exclude a monarchial government, which the nation evidently detests." On the 22d August, 1846, Salas, "exercising supreme executive power," published a proclamation, containing the following provisions: "1. Until the new constitution shall have been adopted, the constitution of 1824 shall govern in every thing which does not conflict with the plan proclaimed in the citadel, on the 4th of the present month, and the anomalous position of the republic will permit. "2. The continuance of the assemblies of the departments, and of the acting counsel of government not being compatible with the fundamental code referred to, the exercise of their functions will terminate from this period." The same decree authorizes the governors of the states to continue, the exercise of their office, and directs the governors of the territorial departments who are without a constitution, to act in the exercise of their duties, in conformity to that of the nearest state. The decree also adds, "that as the functionaries to whom reference has been made, have no legal authority, but owe their existence only to the political movement which is intended to regenerate the nation, and consequently that every interest must co-operate for the same purpose, they will be appointed or replaced by the general-in-chief, charged with the general executive power." General Salas publishes other decrees, in which he defines certain powers of the Congress about to assemble, and prescribes the method in which their election and assemblage shall take place. It is very plain, from an examination of the plan of the citadel, that the hostility of the army was directed against the acting Congress. The Congress summoned for the purpose of preparing a constitution, was limited to that duty, with certain others, defined in its appointment. Indeed, the minister of relations, in his report of 1846, uses the following language: "Conformably to the plan of the cita 7 del, the Congress could exercise no other powers than those which were necessary to prepare a constitution, and provide for the prosecution of the war." It would seem, then, that the powers of Salas were unlimited, and those of Congress restricted. We have seen Salas decree a constitution for the government of the country. He limited this constitution in every particular in which it should conflict with the plan of the citadel. He organized state governments, and published decrees of a general character. All this was done during the interregnum occasioned by the overthrow of one form of administration, and the preparation of another, in accordance with the popular will. During the interval between the 4th August, 1846, and the 6th December, 1846, the power of Salas prescribed a special and organic rule of government. Were the proclamations which we have cited measures of military defence? They were acts of extraordinary and supreme power. The courtly apologist who compiled the Statement, says, in regard to these events, "that the political change was only in determining the constitution that ought to rule." But this change is said by a Mexican historian to have been "the only revolution since 1835. The rest were revolts." But who made this change? Who conducted and completed this revolution? Salas decreed the constitution of 1824 as a law ad interim, and gave effect to the will of the people by a voluntary and patriotic abdication. During the interregnum he was a dictator. It cannot be said that his power was merely to provide for the military defence of Mexico. He passed many decrees, none of which were annulled, except that of Garay. But with the undisputed power to revive a dead constitution, and decree a new form of government, it certainly is not respectful to the intellect to assert that his powers were limited. If they were, then his decrees organizing the government must be void, and all the subsequent acts of the government must be tainted with illegality. A military ruler is amenable to none, except his armed followers. The limit of his power is his own will, or their obedience. It is idle to speak of the restraints of a promise, or the weight of a precedent. But we continue the proofs, that the the Congress of Mexico repealed a law of powers of Salas were dictatorial and un- the State of Sonora, because it was in limited. conflict with one of them. "General Salas," says a Mexican author, "was a veritable dictator. It was the result of his pronunciamento to reverse the system of government, the proclamations of the government, the official documents, and, indeed, everything which has been done and executed, without the least contradiction, on account of its legitimacy." In this proclamation of the 6th August, 1846, General Salas says: "The termination of all original obligations is indispensable, because all are either tainted with illegality, or offensive to a part of the nation. But the common law will continue in force, and those which the provisional government propose to publish will fill, in a certain measure, the demand which circumstances may occasion.” In another proclamation of the 16th August, 1846, General Salas declares: "That he does not deem it necessary that Congress, when it assembles, shall employ itself in organizing the country, and negotiating in regard to the western frontier. Since there remains to him (Salas) the powers necessary to organize every branch of administration, he adds, that he will be compelled, whilst organizing the Republic, to use for everything else discretionary power." But the minister of relations reports to the Congress, convened under the decree of Salas, that Salas had "exercised a true and ample DICTATORSHIP, which should continue until the publication of the new constitution; and that, when the fundamental law should be published, General Salas would conform to it as well as circumstances would permit." The minister then reports all the decrees made by Salas, and terminates with these words: "A federalist in good faith, I have made every effort to observe the constitution whenever circumstances would permit, and I have hastened, as soon as it depended on me, the meeting of the sovereign Congress, to the end that, the dictatorial period having terminated, the nation might at once realize those hopes which are born of every revolution, but which are always extinguished by the government." No one, then, contested the absolute authority of Salas. His decrees were numerous, and upon various subjects, and But it so happens that we may appeal to contemporaneous testimony of the purposes of the government of Salas in granting an extension of the grant of Garay. On the 14th, 15th and 16th December, 1846, the Minister of Relations-Lafragua-read before Congress a report of the acts of the government during the dictatorship of Salas. This report affords a temperate narrative of the political history of Mexico, from the Bases of Tacubaya, in 1841, to the abdication of Salas. It is well worth the attentive perusal of the historian or student. It has been already cited, to show that the government of Salas was authorized to exercise such power as the emergency might require. We shall therefore refer to so much of it as will show that the motives of Salas, in decreeing the renewal of the Garay grant, were connected with the promotion of a great and general measure of policy, the object of which was the safety and independence of the Republic of Mexico. In the report of the "Relations with the Republics of South America and the Empire of Brazil," occurs the following explanation of the policy pursued by the administration of Salas: "The nations of South America, the descendants of one and the same race with ourselves, professing the same faith, and speaking the same language, born, like ourselves, to sustain the same principles, and impressed with the same misfortunes, nothing can be more important to them and to us than to bind closer, and extend the relations which those common bonds and mutual interests have established. "The prosperity, the existence of the Spanish and American republics depend upon their union. That will be the surest guarantee of their prosperity, and the bulwark of their freedom-the most harmonious means of quieting their internal conflicts, and the most irresistible power for sustaining their rights against foreigners. "To this high purpose the organization of a general American alliance will contribute effectually. It is now more than ever necessary, because of the manifest tendencies of the northern races, as well in Europe as in America, to overrun that Tehuantepec and its Title. 9 of the Middle region, these tendencies warlike race of colonists, who should augmented, upon the continent, by the become the defenders of their adopted natural course of events, and the rapid country against foreign aggressions, and and immense immigration from Europe against the savage enemies upon the by the attractions of a fertile soil, a be- northern frontier. nign climate, the riches and sparse population of the new world-can be alone resisted by an alliance, which, from the identity of origin and interests, may be formed between the beforementioned republics, and will establish this American league as a centre of union, and a point of defence. I regret that I cannot add anything more to the important memorial referred to, (of 1844,) except to recommend it earnestly to Congress; for this alliance will not only serve to protect us in the present crisis, but by giving to America the political importance to which she is entitled, enable her to contend with the impoverished nations of Europe; and perhaps, by the proposed policy, to become the centre of civilization. "In such a result, what position will be due to Mexico, it is unnecessary to state, nor will I indicate it, since nature herself has pointed it out. "One of the considerations which decided the government to grant the decree of November, 1846, was, that the opening the canal of Tehuantepec would promote a commerce with some of the aforesaid republics, by rendering our relations with them more intimate and active. Persuaded of the importance of every thing connected with this policy, it is left to the wisdom of this august body to provide the means essential to form a more intimate connection with the Southern republics, and which the existing government had not been able to effect, as well for the few days of existence which were left it, as because it was obviously obliged to consecrate its energies exclusively to the regulation of our interior affairs, and to sustain the unjust and unprovoked war of the North, which has occupied us to the exclusion of other things." In pursuance of this policy, Texas was opened to immigrants, and the most liberal donations of land made to empresarios and actual settlers. The government of Salas seems to have adopted the same policy, confining, however, the invitation, as far as possible, to Europeans. After having descanted upon the extent and fertility of the Republic, the minister asks, Of what value is all this without population? He then affirms that the development and defence of the Republic alike demand the introduction of foreign immigrants. A plan had been proposed to the government to encourage desertion from the army of the United States, because it "was composed, in great part, of foreigners who would enter with alacrity that service which should present the greatest inducements." "This would weaken the invading army, and people the invaded country with a race generally devoted to industrial pursuits." Upon this theory a decree was published, offering to deserters rights of citizenship and employment in the army or navy of Mexico. In pursuance of this attractive policy, the government ordered land to be allotted to "Rollan, a deserter from the American army." In respect to the decree of the 5th November, 1846, regulating the colonization of the lands conceded to the grantee of the way of communication across Tehuantepec, the minister goes on to say: "The government in publishing this decree, as in regard to that respecting the liberty of the press, carried out the purposes of the Congress of 1845." "The decree of Salas, in relation to Tehuantepec, not only confirmed those of the 1st March, 1842, the 9th February and 6th October, 1843, but by postponing for two years the term fixed for the commencement of its construction, promoted the completion of the enterprise, which had been retarded by the consequences of Independently of the merits of Garay's application for an extension of the term within which he was required to commence the construction of his work, the government of Salas was actuated by a wish to provide for the defence of the Republic, by the encouragement of immigration. It is well known, that after the decla- The minister then explains in detail ration of Mexican Independence, it be- the motives of the several provisions of came the policy of the government to en- the decree in relation to the colonists. courage the immigration of a hardy and The exemption from any obligation to our revolution." bear arms for twenty years, was intended colonies, to restrain the "usurpations" of to counteract the apprehension amongst the United States of the North, and the Europeans that immigrants would be in- "irruptions" of the savages. volved in the revolutions of the Republic, which were understood to be perennial. For a similar reason colonists were exempted from paying Federal taxes during the same period upon implements of agriculture or of the arts. This system of defence perfected, and the war with the United States "decorously" terminated, the minister considers that the foundation of a power will have been laid that will establish the independence of his country. The same exemption was granted There was, however, an obvious diupon the material necessary to construct lemma in the scheme of colonization. and preserve the way of communication, The minister had proved that the Reand for the term of six years articles of subsistence, clothing and provisions, were admitted duty free. All these privileges were granted to attract immigration. The grantee was prohibited from introducing the subjects of any nation at war with Mexico; and it was enacted as an express condition, that colonists should renounce their citizenship, and subject themselves to the laws upon the subject of colonization. "The object of this condition was to close the door against reclamations, and because that would constitute the best policy for augmenting the permanent population of the Republic." The decree provides further, that the enterprise shall submit, for the approval of the government, the contracts (of colonization) which it shall make. Provision is also made in regard to the "streams necessary for the enterprise, and indemnity is decreed to the proprietors of the waters taken for that purpose." "The government believes that it has effected a positive good by completing the arrangement of this important business, which will bring so much honor upon the Republic, and whose completion will secure such immense advantages to our country and to the world." The argument of the minister is throughout worthy of a statesman. He has boldly affirmed that the true policy of the Republic is to invite foreign defenders. He has contended that the most powerful obstacles to be anticipated are religious intolerance and the insecurity of private rights. He expects the new constitution to obviate these objections. He expects the Tehuantepec proprietors to construct a canal which will facilitate a defensive alliance with the South American states. He thinks that the same liberal system of exemption and protection provided for in the general law of colonization will create military public was not safe without additional population. There was a natural fear that the introduction of foreigners might be followed by the same results as in the settlement of Texas. The latter consequence was to be prevented by the scrupulous exclusion of slavery, and of all persons whose government was at war with Mexico. With the object of competing for that immigration to which, it was alleged, the United States of the North owed so much of their prosperity, the price of public land in Mexico was fixed at just half the minimum price charged by them. It is very plain, from the testimony furnished by the document referred to, that the renewal of the grant to Garay was with no purpose of favoritism. It was done because of the meritorious efforts of the grantee; because of the "revolutionary interruptions" to this work; because it would "place in the hands of Mexico the commercial key of two continents." The grant of a way of communication would constitute the source of commercial prosperity, and the means of promoting a great American league for the defence of its members against foreign aggression. The provisions regarding the colonists, to be introduced by the grantee, were common to other colonists immigrating into other parts of the Republic. It was, therefore, part of a great system, designed by the government of Salas, to defend the country, and to "sustain with honor the national flag." We are satisfied, that it will appear from the document referred to, and also from the report of the Commissioners of Colonization, that the true motives of the extension of Garay's grant have been herein set forth.* Nor was there any intention of entrapping the colonists into a renunciation of their citizenship that * Report of Committee on Colonization. Tehuantepec and its Title. 11 they might be subjected to peculiar dis- amendments, was adopted, and constitutes In continuing our review of the Statement, we shall adopt the condensed exposition of its contents, prepared by Mr. Benton. It will save quotation, and present the allegations in a form to which Mexico can have no objection. Such was the policy of the government then; and if it has changed in regard to the present proprietors of the Garay 1. That the Garay grant is defunct grant, it is because they are citizens of upon its own limitations, and so declared the United States, and apprehensions by the Mexican Congress. may be entertained that their acquisition The grant was renewed on the 5th of the rights accorded to others may be November, 1846, for two years, and the inconsistent with the interests of Mexico. Statement admits that "Garay endeavored The foregoing views have been based to prove that he had been occupied on upon the report and accompanying docu- the work, with few interruptions, until ments of an officer of the Mexican go- the 26th October, 1848; in proof of which, vernment, of unusual ability and of un- he inclosed a note from the Prefect of doubted patriotism. Acayucan, dated 25th November, 1848, to the Governor of Vera Cruz, in which he states that the engineer, D. Cayetano Moro, had returned to undertake the work." The report is a witness at once impartial and conclusive. It was written with no anticipation of the present controversy -with no eye to the rights of Garay. In explanation of a system of policy, he has incidentally told the motives which actuated the government of Salas in decreeing the identical bill of extension passed by the Chamber of Deputies. This explanation totally disproves the insinuation that the decree was the result of favoritism, or that it was the purpose of the government to resume the grant or entrap the proprietors into such a renunciation of their rights as would only render necessary a decree of confiscation to make them the unprotected victims of avarice or jealousy. Mexico, however, has made a distinct admission that Salas was competent to decree an extension of the grant to Garay. The government sanctioned the transfer of certain rights derived from the grant by its assent to the contract, July, 1847. It acknowledged the validity of some transfer of rights derived from the same grant by the declaration of its commissioners, September, 1847. The authority of Salas was then adequate to authorize a valid transfer of rights derived under his decree of extension. But all the rights claimed and conceded by Garay resulted from the same instrument. How, then, could the transfer of one right be void for want of authority in the grantor, whilst another derived from the same deed is admitted to be valid? We will only add, that during 1847, the constitution of 1824, with certain Then follows the assertion, that the works had been prosecuted negligently, and not in good faith; consequently the condition of prosecution had not been complied with. Under a constitutional government, a question affecting the rights of a private individual, ought, upon an allegation of forfeiture, to have been submitted to some impartial' arbitrament, a quo warranto should have been issued, the parties should have been cited before a judicial tribunal, and the truth of the allegation should have been inquired into with all the solemnity of legal form. Here, however, the government repeals its contracts, stigmatizes the grantee as unworthy of credence, and impresses her own version upon the controversy between them. But the charter was not forfeited, for certain conclusive reasons. A public war was waged by the act of Mexico, from April, 1845, to June, 1848. During the war, Mexico was invaded by a foreign power, which obtained possession of her capital, and blockaded her coast. In accordance with the terms of a treaty, under which Mexico ceded away nearly half her actual territory, the invading army was withdrawn, and peace was declared. During this war the efficient prosecution of a work of internal improvement within the invaded country was impossible. Now it is a maxim of common law, that where a condition is rendered H |