Since 1837 the United States have regarded Texas as an independent
sovereignty as much as Mexico, and that trade and commerce with citizens of
a government at war with Mexico can not on that account be regarded as an
intercourse by which assistance and succor are given to Mexican rebels. The
whole current of Mr. De Bocanegra's remarks runs in the same direction, as
if the independence of Texas had not been acknowledged. It has been
acknowledged; it was acknowledged in 1837 against the remonstrance and
protest of Mexico, and most of the acts of any importance of which Mr. De
Bocanegra complains flow necessarily from that recognition. He speaks of
Texas as still being "an integral part of the territory of the Mexican
Republic," but he can not but understand that the United States do not so
regard it. The real complaint of Mexico, therefore, is in substance 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 States to the exemption of
England, France, and Belgium, unless the United States, 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.