provisions and was turned back; but an explanation came promptly from
Santa Anna. The next day a similar train, while waiting in the main
plaza of the city (=76=Tornel, Aug. 27), was attacked by the populace
because the teamsters appeared to gaze with indifference, if not
insultingly, at a religious procession (Carreño, Jefes, cccxv; Henshaw
narrative). Immediately the prevailing hostility against the Americans
and a suspicion that Santa Anna was planning to introduce Americans in
this way and betray the capital (_Arco Iris_, Nov. 29, 1847) led to
a riot, in which six or seven of the Americans were injured and two
killed. Tornel, now governor of the Federal District, tried without
effect to quell the mob; but Herrera, comandante general, succeeded
(Apuntes, 271). Mexican troops defended the wagons (Davis, Autobiog.,
211). Santa Anna felt and expressed deep regret for the incident
(=76=to Relaciones, Aug. 27), and some Mexican officers were punished
for imprudence (=76=to comte. gen. Mex., Aug. 27). Scott viewed the
affair philosophically. After this Herrera and Tornel took precautions
(=76=Tornel, Aug. 29), the business was done at a very early time in
the morning, the wagons did not actually go into the city (=76=to
comte. gen. Mex., Aug. 29), and an officer of the American commissary
department, disguised as a peasant, had charge of them. Minor riots
occurred later, however, and after a time the place where the supplies
intended for Scott were kept was discovered and sacked (Hitchcock,
Fifty Years, 291). Owing to the non-success of the negotiations, about
$300,000 of American cash had to be left in the town. Both cash and
provisions had been arranged for by the indefatigable Hargous (_ibid._)
During the armistice the American equipments, artillery, etc. were put
into the best possible order.
27.16. Santa Anna had much difficulty in persuading good men to serve
as commissioners. Trist met the Mexican commissioners first on Aug. 27
at Atzcapuzalco, about eight miles from Tacubaya (Sen. 52; 30, 1, pp.
191, 195), but at the second session (Aug. 28) it was agreed to meet
at the house of Alfaro (_Casa Colorada_) near Tacubaya and within the
Mexican lines. The instructions drafted for the Mexican commissioners,
Aug. 24 and 29, were avowedly drawn as if Mexico had "triumphed," and
represented merely a basis for bargaining (Sen. 52; 30, 1, pp. 313-5,
369-71). The commissioners were authorized at first only to receive and
transmit the American propositions; but, believing they would be given
(as they were on Aug. 31: _ibid._, 335) full powers, like his own, to
negotiate, Trist laid his projet (_ibid._, 326-30) before them on Aug.
27 (see Roa Bárcena, Recuerdos, 389, note 1). Aug. 29 Santa Anna and
his Cabinet discussed this (Sen 52; 30, 1, 330). Aug. 30 he discussed
it with his generals (_Diario_, Aug. 31). Sept. 1 the Mexicans
presented to Trist their full powers, and the discussion of his terms
began. Sept. 2 they were discussed further, and, as agreement was found
to be impossible, Trist proposed that the armistice be extended. A
large gathering at the palace then discussed the situation (Apuntes,
278). Sept. 3 Santa Anna ordered that no more provisions and other
articles that could be useful to the Americans should leave the city
(=76=to comte. gen. Mex.). Sept. 4 Pacheco, the minister of relations,
issued a =77=circular intimating that unless Trist should moderate
his terms, negotiations would be broken off. Cabinet consultations
followed, however (Sen. 52; 30, 1, p. 202). Sept. 5 Pacheco notified
the Mexican commissioners that the Nueces-Rio Grande district and New
Mexico would not be surrendered (_ibid._, 373-5). Sept. 6 the final
meeting was held and the Mexican counter-projet presented (_ibid._,
375-80). The Spanish chargé had thought that, owing to Santa Anna's
disposition to jockey, the negotiations would last a long time. This
was prevented by Trist's frank, direct methods. Trist was now in good
health except for a severe toothache. He and Scott worked in perfect
harmony.
Santa Anna was extremely anxious to gain foreign support and, if
possible, a foreign guaranty of the boundary (=73=Lozano, no. 3, res.,
Aug. 25). Seiffart, the Prussian minister, who had felt annoyed by
the insignificant rôle to which the negative policy of his government
and his own lack of capacity had condemned him, now broke out with
an unauthorized expression of sympathy for Mexico, and Santa Anna
endeavored to use this as a lever on his colleagues (=73=Lozano, no.
8, res., Sept. 17). But France had no representative on the scene.
Bankhead, besides entertaining considerable displeasure because his
advice and the British offer of mediation had not been effective,
had been for some months, and still was, too ill to take a strong
position (=73=Lozano, no. 5, res., Aug. 28); and Ramón Lozano, the
Spanish chargé (the minister having left for home on the conclusion
of the armistice), would not act without instructions, and personally
expressed the opinion that it would not be easy to obtain a European
guaranty of the new line (=73=nos. 5, res., 8, res.).
27.17. _The negotiations (including S. Anna's difficulties)._ Sen.
52; 30, 1, must be studied closely by any one desiring to investigate
the subject, and hence citations of the documents that it contains
need not be given. =52=Trist to Buchanan, nos. 13, Aug. 24; 15, Sept.
4, confid. =335=Thornton to Trist, July 29. Sen. Report 261; 41, 2.
Sen. 20; 30, 1. Ho. 40; 30, 1. Ho. 69; 30, 1, pp. 43, 47, 56, 59.
=52=Contestaciones Habidas, 1847, with Trist's notes, throughout.
_Delta_, Nov. 13. _Picayune_, May 12; June 30; Sept, 9; Oct. 1, 15, 16,
17. Apuntes, 264-9, 277-9, 283, 286. =52=Buchanan to Trist, no. 3, July
13. =13=Bankhead, nos. 83, Aug. 29; 87, Sept. 28. _Constitutionnel_,
Aug. 17. Ramírez, México, 234, 241, 271-2, 274, 278, 303. Hitchcock,
Fifty Years, 287-9. Davis, Autobiog., 209. =224=Intercepted letters
(Hitchcock, ed.). =108=Buchanan to Bancroft, Sept. 29. =224=Letter
from member of Congress (intercepted), Aug. 21. Henshaw narrative.
Pacheco, Exposición. =284=Comunicacion que sobre ... dirigió ...
Otero. Negrete, Invasión, iii, app., 483 (Otero). Roa Bárcena,
Recuerdos, 388-408. México en 1847, 34. London _Times_, May 10; Oct.
26. Polk, Message, Dec. 7, 1847; Feb. 2, 1848 (Richardson, Messages,
iv, 536-9). =291=Pierce to Appleton, Aug. 27. =47=Private letter from
Orizaba, undated. Lawton, Artill. Officer, 240, 271. =13=Thornton to
Addington, June 29. _Arco Iris_, Sept. 16. _Opinión Pública_, Aug.
29. _Diario_, Aug. 31. =335=E. E. Smith to Trist, Aug. 31. =83=Gov.
Querétaro to Relaciones, Sept. 4. =83=Gov. Jalisco to Relaciones, Aug.
31. =83=Farias, Otero _et al._, declaration, Aug. 22. =83=Querétaro
legislature to Rel., Sept. 4. Semmes, Service, 414, 426, 446. Sen. 65;
30, 1, p. 540. =80=Gov. S. L. Potosí to Olaguíbel, Aug. 28. =80=Gov.
Querétaro to O., Aug. 21; reply, Aug. 27. =80=Relaciones, circulars,
Aug. 23, 30. =80=Olag. to Relac., Aug. 26. =80=Olag., proclam., Aug.
26. =80=Relac. to Olag., Aug. 31, res.; Sept. 6, 8. =80=Proceedings of
Coalition junta, Aug. 4, 25. =80=México legisl., Aug. 27. _Porvenir_,
Aug. 24, supplmnt, =199=MS. written by a leading person. =82=Gov.
Oaxaca to gov. Puebla, Sept. 9. =73=Bermúdez de Castro, no. 550, Aug.
21. =73=Lozano, nos. 3, res., Aug. 25; 5, res., Aug. 28; 6, Sept. 10;
8, res., Sept. 17. Encarnacion Prisoners, 83. =80=Coalition junta
to México state, Aug. 14. =92=Mexico ayunt. to gov. Fed. District,
Sept. 3. N. Y. _Herald_, Feb. 5, 1848. _Nat. Intelligencer_, Aug. 31.
_Monitor Repub._, May 26, 31; Oct. 8. =132=Atocha to Buchanan, Sept.
4. _Amer. Hist. Review_, x, 319 (Reeves). _Amer. Review_, Jan., 1848,
5-14. _So. Qtrly. Review_, July, 1852, pp. 114-5. _Republicano_, May
11. =181=Buchanan to Donelson, Jan. 29. Prieto, Mems., 236. =364=Worth
to S., July 29; to Marcy, Oct. 30. =221=Hill, diary. S. Anna, Detall,
16. S. Anna, Mi Historia, 74. =86=Relaciones, circular, Sept. 4. and
from =76= the following (and many others). Cosío, Sept. 6. J. Y.
Gutiérrez, Sept. 2. To Herrera, Aug. 25. To Bravo, Aug. 31. To comte.
gen. Mexico, Sept. 3. To Canalizo, Aug. 12. To comte gen. Querétaro,
Sept. 4. Gov. Michoacán, Sept. 3. Alvarez to Olaguíbel, Oct. 30. To
Alvarez, Aug. 21.
Santa Anna said in his manifesto: "A perpetual war is an absurdity;
because war is a calamity, and the instinct of self-preservation, which
is even stronger and more powerful in nations than in individuals,
recommends that no means whatever should be omitted that may lead to an
advantageous arrangement. To adopt this course the constitution gives
me competent authority. Consecrated to interests so noble and highly
privileged, it is my duty to maintain at all cost the respect and
reverence due to the supreme authority with which I am invested ....
I will be yet more explicit: sedition and attempts at subverting the
government shall be exemplarily punished" (Sen. 52; 30, 1, p. 250).
(Trist's "vague remark") _Ibid._, 253.
The Mexican commissioners were instructed (Sen. 52; 30, 1, pp. 314,
369-71) to draw Trist into discussions that not only would have given
them opportunities to create awkward dialectic situations, as Rejón and
others had done with reference to Texas, but might have excited fresh
discord in the United States regarding our treatment of Mexico. For
example, they were to ask the motives and aims of the war, and whether
the United States based its expectations upon force or upon friendly
negotiation. The ground was taken that since Mexico was now ready to
give up Texas, all reason for the war had ceased to exist [as if the
fighting that had already occurred, its loss of life, triumphs and
expenses, signified nothing]. It was urged that since no title except
to Texas had been claimed by the United States, we could continue the
war only for the odious sake of conquest or the unheard-of purpose
to punish Mexico because she was unwilling to sell her lands and her
people (see Roa Bárcena, Recuerdos, 391, 400-1, 588, note 3).
In justification of his plan to extend the armistice, Trist pointed
out that the American sick and wounded would recover, the rainy reason
end, the inundations diminish, the roads improve and the temperature
fall (Sen. 52; 30, 1, p. 259). Ripley, on the other hand, asserts (_op.
cit._ ii, 350) that the Americans would have been "dependent upon the
good faith of the Mexicans for all of the conveniences and many of
the necessaries of life," and, at the end of forty-five days, after
living in unhealthy villages, would hardly have been fit to act. But
had Santa Anna accepted Trist's proposal he would have done so with the
strong expectation of peace and American assistance, and hence would
have treated our army well; and Tacubaya, S. Angel and S. Agustín were
not only salubrious but delightful in comparison with the capital, and
free from its temptations. With reference to Trist's departing from his
instructions by proposing to refer a point back to Washington, it is
interesting to recall Napoleon's dictum (which bears also on Scott's
action _supra_ regarding the sealed despatch): "A general-in-chief
cannot exonerate himself from responsibility for his faults by pleading
an order of his sovereign or the minister, when the individual from
whom it proceeds is at a distance from the field of operations, and
but partially, or not at all, acquainted with the actual condition of
things" (Maxims, p. 59).
27.18. There was probably some basis for certain of Santa Anna's
charges against the American troops. Scott allowed a day to pass, it
was said, in order to enable Americans in town to get away. Ripley
(_op. cit._, ii, 352) says this was done to allow unarmed inhabitants
to do so. But it was good policy to prevent such persons from leaving,
and such had been Scott's course at Vera Cruz (chap. xxii, p. 32).
Naturally Santa Anna wavered back and forth, and Trist believed that at
about three o'clock, Sept. 5, he almost decided to accept the American
terms (Sen. 52; 30, 1, p. 251).
27.19. _The termination of the armistice._ Sen. 52; 30, 1, pp. 195-203,
231-66 (Trist); 307, 346, etc. =52=Trist to Buchanan, no. 15, confid.,
Sept. 4. Sen. 20; 30, 1, pp. 9, 14. Contestaciones Habidas (1847),
22, 26, 28, 30, 34. _Picayune_, Oct. 16. Sen. 1; 30, 1, pp. 354, 360.
=303=H. L. Scott to Quitman, Aug. 31. _National_, Nov. 14. Hitchcock,
Fifty Years, 291-4. Haynes, Gen. Scott's Guide. =217=Henshaw to wife,
Sept. 13. London _Times_, Nov. 13. Sen. 34; 34, 3, pp. 21, 37-9. Ho.
40; 30, 1. =291=Pierce to wife, Aug. 23. Lawton, Artill. Officer,
309. =335=Trist to Thornton, confid., Nov. 24 (the Americans kept the
armistice faithfully). =335=Memo. in Spanish, Aug. --. Semmes, Service,
415. Sen. 11; 31, 1 (Hardcastle). =80=Relaciones to Olaguíbel, Aug. 31,
res.; Sept. 6, 8. =73=Lozano, no. 7, Sept. 16. Negrete, Invasión, iii,
app., 448. =92=Tornel to Méx. ayunt., Aug. 30. =187=Thomas to Eddy,
Aug. 26. N. Y. _Sun_, Oct. 5. Sen. 65; 30, 1, p. 67. Ramsey, Other
Side, 330, note. And from =76= the following (chiefly showing orders
contrary to the armistice). To Alvarez, Aug. 28. Tornel, Aug. 27, very
res.; Sept. 3. Bravo, Sept. 5. Acuerdos, Sept. 3, 4. Orders to Tenth
Infantry, Aug. 28. To govs. Puebla and four other states, Sept. 6. To
govs. México, Guanajuato, Jalisco, Sept. --. To Relaciones, Aug. 27. S.
Anna, proclam., Sept. 7.
27.20. _The armistice as viewed in the United States._ Sen. 52; 30, 1,
pp. 138 (Marcy); 231 (Trist, no. 22). Sen. 20; 30, 1, p. 14 (Trist).
Apuntes, 278-9. Polk, Diary, Feb. 7, 19; Mar. 16, 1848. London _Times_,
Oct. 29, Ramírez, México, 241. Polk, Message, Dec. 7, 1847 (Richardson,
iv, 536). =13=Crampton, no. 42, Oct. 13. Wash. _Union_, Oct. 4-6.
=256=Marcy to Wetmore, Oct. 21. =58=Jones to Polk, May 2. Negrete,
Invasión, iii, app., 448. =354=Welles papers. =191=Fairfield to wife,
Jan. 10. N. Y. _Herald_, Dec. 15. _Monitor Repub._, Dec. 21. Baltimore
_Sun_, Oct. 5. Ho. 69; 30, 1, p. 56 (Buchanan). =335=Buchanan to Trist,
Oct. 24-5, 1847.
It has been said with truth that the war was waged on the theory that
Texas extended to the Rio Grande, but the United States could have
neutralized (and this is the most that was considered by Trist: Sen.
52; 30, 1, p. 258) the region between that river and the Nueces without
implying in the least that our claim to it had not been valid. The fact
that Santa Anna and Pacheco thought that an extension of the armistice
would benefit the Americans (_ibid._, 260) is a striking, though by no
means the only, answer to Polk's charge that it would have been greatly
to our disadvantage (_ibid._, 259). Ramírez (México, 241) pointed
out that inaction was bad for the Mexicans, since they lacked funds
to support troops long. Santa Anna could not materially increase his
army after Sept. 1, and he subsisted it with extreme difficulty (Sen.
52; 30, 1, pp. 259-60). The armistice in general was regarded by the
Mexicans as an American trick. The _American Review_ (Whig) argued
that the rejection of the counter-projet (which conceded to us Texas as
far as the Nueces and California down to 37 degrees) proved that Polk
was fighting, not for peace, but for conquest; but the counter-projet
did not recognize the American claim to the Rio Grande line nor to an
indemnity for the costs of the war, which Mexico had forced upon us.
Any one interested in the equity of the matter should read the reply to
the Mexican commissioners drafted by Trist (Sen. 20; 30, 1, p. 14).
27.21. _Army feeling._ =252=Mackall to wife, Feb. 21, 1848.
_Picayune_, Oct. 17. =221=Hill, diary. Hitchcock, Fifty Years, 271,
290. _291_Pierce to wife, Aug. 23; Sept. 1. Robertson, Visit, ii,
344. Lawton, Artill. Officer, 309. Diccionario Universal (_Mixcoac_).
Semmes, Service, 414, 427. Calderón, Life, i, 142, 146. N. Y. _Sun_,
Sept. 16. Such scenes were noted with keen appreciation not only
by officers but by privates, as diaries and letters attest. Clear
afternoons and evenings occur now and then even at the height of the
rainy season.
XXVIII. MOLINO DEL REY, CHAPULTEPEC, MEXICO
28.1. Hardcastle's map (Sen. 1; 30, 1, p. 312) and (as elsewhere)
the author's observations. _So. Qtrly. Rev._, Oct., 1852. Negrete,
Invasión, iv, app., 295-6. Balbontín, Invasión, 126. Grant, Mems., i,
149. =66=J. L. Mason to J. L. Smith, Sept. 25. =66=Stevens to Smith,
Sept. 25. Semmes, Service, 436, 440. Apuntes, 290-1. _Picayune_, Aug.
8. _Delta_, Oct. 14. Sen. 1; 30, 1, pp. 355 (Scott), 373 (Sumner),
425-6 (Smith). Wise, Gringos (N. Y., 1849), 259. =269=Molina, recolls.
The foundry was decreed in July, 1846 (=76=report on artillery, Nov.,
1846; Memoria de ... Guerra, Dec.). The building it occupied had been
a powder mill. The principal entrance to El Molino was by an archway
near the south end. Sept. 5 Scott heard that bells had been sent to El
Molino to be cast into cannon (Sen. 1; 30, 1, p. 355). Santa Anna did
in fact call for gifts of bells, etc. to be used for military purposes
(=76=Carrera, Sept. 6).
28.2. Sen. 52; 30, 1, pp. 381-2 (S. Anna to Scott, Sept. 6). =76=To
Herrera, Sept. 6. =100=Guerra, circular, Sept. 11. Apuntes, 290-2.
S. Anna, Mi Historia, 75. _Id._, Detall, 23. =76=Acuerdo, Sept. 4.
Giménez, Memorias, 266. =76=Alvarez to S. Anna, Sept. 25. Negrete,
Invasión, iv, app., 293. Balbontín, Invasión, 125-6. Grant, Mems., i,
151. Mason to Smith: note 1. =76=Alvarez, Sept. 6. Sen. 1; 30, 1, app.,
134-5 (Duncan). Roa Bárcena, Recuerdos, 424.
28.3. Ramírez, México, 299. =73=Lozano, nos. 2, 8, res., 1847.
=199=Anon. MS. Kenly, Md. Vol., 346. S. Anna, Apelación, 49.
Giménez, Memorias, 111. =358=Williams to father, Oct. 1. Exposición
dirigida. =179=Diario Esactísimo. Negrete, Invasión, iv, app., 295-6.
=100=Alcorta, circular, Sept. 11. _76_Tornel, decree, Sept. 7.
28.4. Smith, Co. A, Corps of Engineers. =221=Hill, diary. Hitchcock,
Fifty Years, 296. =260=Henshaw, comments on map. =217=_Id._ to wife,
Sept. 13. =65=Scott, gen. orders, Sept. 7. Sen. 1; 30, 1, pp. 354
(Scott), 361 (Worth), 425 (Smith). =178=Davis, diary. Sen. 65; 30,
1, p. 298 (Scott). Mason to Smith: note 1. =66=Foster to Smith,
Sept. 8. =66=Beauregard to Smith, Sept. 20. =224=Hitchcock, introd.
to intercepted letters. _So. Qtrly. Rev._, Oct., 1852, 302. Semmes,
Service, 431-4.
Under Scott's orders, Pillow with the Ninth and Fifteenth Infantry
was at S. Borja and Riley's brigade (Twiggs's division) at Nalvarte
on Sept. 7, evening (Ripley, War with Mexico, ii, 363). Late on Sept.
7 Quitman's division also was sent to the south front of Mexico.
Reconnoitring was done there on rather an extensive scale during the
night, and the Mexicans were thoroughly roused.
28.5. _The battle of Sept. 8._ Sen. 1; 30, 1, pp. 354, 375 (Scott),
361 (Worth), 368 (return), 373 (Sumner), 374 (Huger), 425 (Smith),
430 (Hitchcock); app., pp. 134-165, 192 (officers). Ho. 1; 30, 2, p.
1237 (Perry). =179=Diario Esactísimo. Stevens, Stevens, i, 204-7.
Sedgwick, Corresp., i, 170. Semi-weekly N. Y. _Courier and Enquirer_,
Mar. 1, 1848. Elderkin, Biog. Sketches. _So. Qtrly. Rev._, Oct.,
1852, 298-315. Negrete, Invasión, iii, app., 463-9; iv, app., 295-9.
S. Anna, Detall, 23-5. Balbontín, Invasión, 125-9. Hitchcock, Fifty
Years, 296-9, 303. Grant, Wems., i, 152-3. Ballentine, Eng. Sold.,
ii, 238, 240. =217=Henshaw to wife, Sept. 13. =218=Henshaw narrative.
=61=Letter from Mexico, Sept. 11. =69=May to Harney, Nov. 17, 1848.
=69=Steele to Harney, --, 1848. =69=Harney to Marcy, May 22, 1848.
=66=Mason to J. L. Smith, Sept. 25, 1847. =66=Stevens to _Id._, Sept.
25. =66=G. W. Smith to Stevens, Sept. 20. Claiborne, Quitman, i,
352. Raleigh _Star_, Oct. 27. =221=Hill, diary. =304=Kirby to Mrs.
E. K. Smith, Sept. 12. =60=Andrews to Daniel, Dec. 10. Louisville
_Democrat_, Dec. 17. =68=Testimony at Bonneville court martial. London
_Times_, Nov. 13. Semmes, Service, 436-449. Sen. 65; 30, 1, p. 503.
Apuntes, 210, 294-304. =100=Relaciones, circular, Sept. 8. =199=Anon.
MS. _Correo Nacional_, Dec. 10. Gamboa, Impug., 52. =70="Guerra,"
no. 155 (testimony of Garay). =70="Guerra", no. 274 (testimony at
the trial of Andrade and Jáuregui). _Picayune_, Oct. 14; Nov. 3.
=350=Weber, recolls. _Delta_, Oct. 14, 26. Ramírez, México, 304-6.
México á través, iv, 687-9. Davis, Autobiog., 271. Wash. _Union_,
Nov. 3. _Diario_, Sept. 8. =364=Worth to daughter, Sept. 28; to S.,
Dec. 27. Prieto, Memorias, ii, 238-9. =73=Lozano, no. 7, 1847. Moore,
Scott's Camp., 155-63. Steele, Amer. Camps., i, 117. _Niles_, Oct.
30, p. 137. Bartlett, Pierce, 153. Wise, Gringos (N. Y., 1849), 259.
Giménez, Memorias, 112, 266. =205=Graham, memo. book. =178=Davis,
diary. Diccionario Univ. (_León_). Sen. 19; 30, 2 (M. L. Smith, Nov.
30, 1848). Molina, El Asalto. =291=Pierce to Hooker, Sept. 15. Stevens,
Vindication. =328=Sweet, statement. =69=Huger, Sept. 9. Lawton, Artill.
Off., 311-4, 323, 326. Roa Bárcena, Recuerdos, 426-7, 437-9, 447-53.
=76=Herrera to Relaciones, Oct. 14. =76=Ortega, Sept. 13. =76=To
comte gen. Mex., Oct. 29. =76=M. Andrade, Sept. 9; Nov. 3. =76=J. Y.
Gutiérrez, proclam., Sept. 11. =76=Noriega, Nov. 19. =76=Alcorta,
circular, Sept. 11. =76=Comte gen. Oaxaca, Sept. 15. =76=_Id._ of
Querétaro, Sept. 14. Calderón, Rectificaciones.
REMARKS on the battle of Sept. 8. In forming an opinion of the battle
as a military operation one must ignore the fact that the position
gained was used later as a stepping-stone, for at this time Scott
was not planning to capture Chapultepec. It appears surprising that
Scott, knowing that heavy Mexican forces were on the spot, apparently
desiring to fight there, should have thought that a place as valuable
to the enemy as he deemed El Molino (Sen. 1; 30, 1, p. 355) ought to
be attacked at night, and could be taken easily (Sen. 65; 30, 1, p.
579) by men unacquainted with ground and buildings familiar to the
enemy, and should have neglected to have more of his troops near at
hand; but we do not know what details were included in the information
upon which he so confidently relied, nor do we know the source of
it (_ibid._, 298). Pillow reported, apparently during the evening of
September 7, that the cannon and machinery had been removed (_ibid._,
298, 579); no smoke appeared to issue from the mill; no sound of
boring could be heard (Semmes, Service, 431). It has been suggested
that Scott felt over-eager to punish Santa Anna for disappointing his
expectations of peace; but he doubtless had learned from Trist of Santa
Anna's political difficulties. He was, however, angry on account of
the violations of the armistice. The principal information on which
Scott acted was understood to have come through Trist; it _had_ been
correct; but Scott seems to have erred in overlooking the chance that
conditions might change in two or three days. Rives (U. S. and Mexico,
ii, 528) states that the attack was based on a "rumor." This is an
error. On account of the apparent incorrectness of Scott's information
and the massing of Mexican troops in and near El Molino, some Americans
suspected that Santa Anna set a trap for him. But the fact that Santa
Anna left this quarter and took away a considerable part of his troops
early in the night of Sept. 7--leaving behind, according to Roa Bárcena
(Recuerdos, 427) 4000 infantry and artillery privates--disposes of
that idea. It has been said that Scott might have stopped work at the
foundry (had work been then proceeding) by cutting off the supply of
water (_i.e._, power); but he wished to seize the finished cannon
supposed to be there (Sen. 65; 30, 1, p. 298) and the large quantity of
powder that he had heard was at Casa Mata.