seems clearly to have smuggled into a packet sent by Freaner, the
correspondent of the New Orleans _Delta_, to his paper, after Freaner
had rejected its twin (Sen. 65; 30, 1, p. 14) on the ground that it
was incorrect, and the editor, inferring that it was endorsed by
Freaner, printed it (_ibid._, 250; _Delta_, Apr. 7, 1848). When Scott
finally opened his eyes (after August 20) to the rascality of Pillow
(=335=Trist, notes, _supra_), Pillow realized he had gone too far.
He refused to ask for a court of inquiry when challenged to do so
(=335=Hitchcock to Pillow, Nov. 24, 1847, and note by H.), told Quitman
that he could not face an investigation (=335=Trist, statement),
and wrote to his wife that he was going to resign and live quietly
(=292=Oct. 27, 1847). Then, it would appear, he induced Burns (=335=ed.
of _Delta_ to Trist, May 16, 1848), a paymaster in his division, to
assume the authorship of the Leonidas letter (the worst count against
him), and became confident, even defiant, with reference to Scott
(=180=to wife, Nov. 25). The friend to whom Duncan wrote, in sending
his letter to the press, modified it freely, and inserted in it a
passage regarding the Chalco route (p. 372) taken from a letter written
by a man named Chason. So he explained to Duncan (=185=---- to Duncan,
Jan. 1, 1848).
Gen. orders 349, Nov. 12, 1847, said (Sen. 65; 30, 1, p. 455): "It
requires not a little charity to believe that the principal heroes of
the scandalous letters alluded to did not write them, or specially
procure them to be written, and the intelligent can be at no loss
in conjecturing the authors--chiefs, partizans, and pet familiars.
To the honor of the service, the disease--pruriency of fame, _not_
earned--cannot have seized upon half a dozen officers (present,)
all of whom, it is believed, belong to the same two coteries." The
next two sentences were still stronger: "False credit," "despicable
self-puffings and malignant exclusions of others," "the conceited
and the envious," "indignation" of the honorable officers. Though
in the right, Scott allowed himself to go too far in his use of
language, as he did at other times. Commenting on the order, Braxton
Bragg, though not one of Scott's friends, said in substance: Half the
reputations in the war have been made by false reports and newspaper
misrepresentations [this was to a large extent true], and it has gone
so far that Scott has at last issued a strong order (=210=to Hammond,
Dec. 20, 1847). Another correspondent of Gov. Hammond of South Carolina
said he was glad that Scott had undertaken to expose "such quackery,
charlatanry, imposture and lying braggadocio" (=210=Alvord, Apr. 21,
1848). This appears to have been the general sentiment of the officers
(numerous citations could be given).
On the publication of gen. orders 349 Worth asked Scott whether the
charge of scandalous conduct referred to him. Scott replied that it
referred to the authors and abettors of the Leonidas letter, and that
he could not be more explicit. Worth declared the reply unsatisfactory,
and handed to Scott a sort of appeal to the President that referred
insultingly to the former (=68=Scott, charges, Nov. 27). Scott
therefore charged him with "behaving with contempt and disrespect
towards his commanding officer." He was arrested for insulting Scott in
a letter to Marcy (Sen. 65; 30, 1, p. 471). The charges against Duncan
were writing a (published) letter in violation of the army regulation
no. 650, and making in it a false statement about the adoption of the
Chalco route in order to magnify himself and Worth (=68=charges, Nov.
27). "Arrest" signified confinement to the city of Mexico. The New York
_Tribune_ said truthfully with reference to the troubles between Scott
and the generals: "The duties of a Commanding General in the heart
of an enemy country, with an army flushed with victory yet inactive,
and under the influences incident to so perilous a position, are very
delicate, and can only be met by firmness and the maintenance of
rigorous discipline" (_Nat. Intelligencer_, Dec. 28, 1847).
29.32. (Conviction) Ho. 60; 30, 1, p. 1218 (Scott); _infra_. (Censures)
Ho. 60; 30, 1, pp. 1229, 1248 (Marcy); Sen. 52; 30, 1, p. 131 (Marcy).
(Relieved) =256=Marcy to Butler, Jan. 13, 1848. (Rank) =60=Butler to
Marcy, Mar. 2. (Deposed) Ho. 60; 30, 1, p. 1044. Lee, Lee, 46. (Army)
=152=Claiborne, mems.; Oswandel, Notes, 481, 483; =221=Hill, diary;
=252=Mackall, Feb. 21; _Picayune_, Mar. 23; =13=Doyle, no. 27, 1848;
Lee, Lee, 44; =210=Alvord to Hammond, Feb. 24; Hitchcock, Fifty Years,
321. (Departure) Lowell _Journal_, Sept. 14, 1852; _Picayune_, Mar. 23;
Hitchcock, Fifty Years, 328. (Looked) =327=Sutherland to father, Feb.
15, 1848.
Jan. 9, 1847, a =137=correspondent of Calhoun wrote, "Unless some
powerful influence is soon brought to bear we [in Charleston, S. C.]
fear we shall stand forth discredited and degraded in the sight of all
the world." It is hard to see how the country, without Scott, could
have avoided this.
Scott's chief complaints were a failure to supply seasonably the
desired means for waging the campaign, interference with the rights
of the commanding general (_e.g._ in Harney's case), the plan to
place a civilian (Benton) over him, the apparent intention to let
Trist interfere in military affairs, and the refusal to provide a
chief of staff satisfactory to him (Lawton, Artill. Officer, 319).
See also chapter xxvii, p. 129. All the charges except those against
Pillow were withdrawn. The latter should have been placed before a
court-martial, and so Polk and the Cabinet decided (Polk, Diary, Jan.
3, 1848). But--probably because he feared that his friend would be
convicted--Polk concluded to have first a court of inquiry in order
to ascertain what the evidence was, and perhaps dispose of the matter
(_ibid._, Jan. 8). The court was selected by Polk--doubtless with a
view to Pillow's acquittal (_ibid._, Jan. 15). The fact that Pillow was
entirely satisfied with it (=180=to wife, Feb. 27) is almost enough to
prove this. The British chargé reported that it seemed to favor Pillow
(=13=Doyle, no. 39, 1848). Two of the members were brevetted later,
though one of them (Scott publicly stated) had no other connection with
the war, and the connection of the other had been slight (Scott in N.
Y. _Herald_, Nov. 3, 1857).
The principal charges against Pillow were, first, that Pillow's claim
to have won the battle of Contreras was unfounded, on which the verdict
went against him (Sen. 65; 30, 1, pp. 317, 333); and, secondly, that he
was directly or indirectly the author of the Leonidas letter. In order
to maintain that he wrote it (which he had strongly denied on three
occasions (_ibid._, 56-7, 131), Burns had to admit that he had spoken
falsely in it (_ibid._, 33, 388-9), and he swore that he believed he
wrote certain interlineations (_ibid._, 32) which it was found had
been written by the editor of the _Delta_ (_ibid._, 250); but he stuck
to it that he had dared to steal into Pillow's private office, and
remain there long enough to copy the substance and to a large extent
the phraseology of a long document (_ibid._, 32). And therefore,
although statements substantially equivalent to those of the Leonidas
letter were brought home to Pillow (_ibid._, 389-391), Pillow had to be
acquitted. John Sedgwick, later General Sedgwick, wrote: I think the
court must acquit Pillow, "but the sentiment of the army will never
acquit him" (Corres., i, 182). Naturally a lawyer like Pillow had a
great advantage at the trial over Scott, upon whom it was incumbent
to conduct the prosecution. His handling of the case was extremely
clever. The same court was instructed to inquire into the so-called
"council" of Puebla (p. 391), and thus Scott was virtually put on
trial, yet, contrary to the articles of war, had no opportunity to
question witnesses (Mo. _Republican_, Nov. 5, 1857). Pillow was before
another court of inquiry (Sen. 65; 30, 1, pp. 338-73), and the evidence
convicted him, morally at least, of attempting to appropriate, in
violation of the articles of war, a captured Mexican howitzer. Pillow's
appeal to the government grew out of Scott's approving the findings
of this court, and his arrest resulted from the disrespect shown in
connection with the appeal.
June 4, 1847, Scott wrote to Marcy: "Considering the many cruel
disappointments and mortifications I have been made to feel since I
left Washington, or the total want of support and sympathy on the part
of the War Department which I have so long experienced, I beg to be
recalled from this army the moment that it may be safe for any person
to embark at Vera Cruz, which I suppose will be early in November"
(Sen. 52; 30, 1, p. 131). This application was denied and (since
the circumstances on which it was based appeared to change) became
obsolete. A correspondent of Governor Hammond of South Carolina said
it was "absurd, unjust, ridiculous, and impolitic, in this crisis of
events here, to remove the victorious general, whose prestige with the
Mexicans is great, very great, both for war and peace" (=210=Alvord,
Feb. 24, 1848). He attributed the recall to "Mr. Quackery Pillow." The
recall was dated January 13 (Ho. 60; 30, 1, p. 1044). Scott turned over
the command to Butler on February 18 (=65=gen. orders 59). March 14 the
British chargé reported that signs of relaxed discipline were visible
(=13=Doyle, no. 27). As early as August 7, 1847, Polk had contemplated
substituting Butler for Scott (Diary). Nov. 25 Pillow wrote that this
was to be done (=180=to wife). Early in January, 1848, some members of
the Cabinet favored giving Taylor the place, but Polk would not (Diary,
Jan. 4).
May 6, 1848, the adjutant general stated that the army under Butler
consisted of 26,785 (aggregate present), of whom 174 officers and 4611
men were sick, and that it occupied the following places: Mexico,
Toluca, Cuernavaca, Pachuca, Río Frio, Puebla, Perote, Jalapa, national
bridge, Orizaba, Córdoba and Vera Cruz. Some of the returns, however,
on which the statement was based were several months old (=62=to
Cass). By May 1 Scott, Pillow, Pierce, Cadwalader, Quitman, Shields
and Cushing had left the country. May 23 S. W. Kearny was appointed
governor of Mexico City (=65=orders 103).
XXX. THE NAVAL OPERATIONS
30.1. Sen. 187, 263; 29, 1. Ho. 60; 30, 1, pp. 774-5 (Bancroft). Sen.
1; 29, 2, pp. 377-8. (War bill) Vol. i, p. 181. Sen. 1; 30, 1, p. 973.
(Expense) Ho. 188; 29, 1; Sen. 139; 29, 2. In Jan., 1846, there were
also 3 receiving ships and 11 small unarmed vessels and storeships.
In ordinary and building there were 2 (5) ships-of-the-line, 5 (3)
frigates and razees, 6 (2) sloops-of-war, 2 (0) brigs and 3 (1)
steamers, carrying 576 (614) guns. (The figures in parentheses
represent vessels building.) The time of the crews of the _Savannah_
and _Warren_ expired before July 1 and Sloat was authorized to send
them east. Three schooners--the _Bonita_, the _Reefer_ and the
_Petrel_--built at New York for Mexico but not paid for, were purchased
(_Niles_, June 13, 1846, p. 226; see chap. xiii, note 13.31). In Oct.,
1847, there were also one ordnance transport and six storeships.
30.2. Sen. 1; 30, 1, p. 945. U. S. Naval Institute, Proceedings, xiv,
539 (S. C. Rowan, recolls.). Griffis, Perry, 200. Ho. 24; 30, 2 (Mason
to Speaker). (Reputation) =73=Bermúdez de Castro, no. 445, 1847. Sen.
69; 30, 1 (punishments). =374=Shubrick to Conner, July 17, 1845: "The
time has been when the conviction of an officer of having told a
_deliberate, premeditated, official lie_ would be fatal to him, so far
at least as the opinion of a Court Martial would go, but that time has
passed--alas! for the Navy." In the course of a short cruise, 1847-48,
Farragut had to "rid the service" of five junior officers and bring to
trial a first lieutenant for drunkenness (Mahan, Farragut, 97). Mar. 5,
1847, =120=Capt. Mervine charged a lieutenant with being intoxicated
repeatedly while commanding at S. José, Calif., amidst a hostile
population. July 10, 1847, =120=J. H. Brown, S. Francisco, Calif.,
wrote to Biddle that officers got drunk at his house and did havoc.
=120=Commander Hull informed Biddle, Mar. 4, 1847, that a midshipman
came aboard intoxicated. Many seamen were of foreign birth, but only 26
out of 853 officers.
30.3. =354=Welles papers. Ho. 188, 191; 29, 1. Howe, Bancroft, i, 292.
Polk, Diary, Sept. 9, 1846; Feb. 20, 1847. =108=Buchanan to Bancroft,
Sept. 29, 1847. =256=Marcy to Wetmore, Nov. 28, 1845. Seward, Seward at
Wash., i, 51. "Bancroft" was of course George Bancroft, the historian.
30.4. =48=Bancroft to Conner, Aug. 30, 1845, secret. London _Times_,
June 11, 1846. =52=Bancroft, no. 25, 1847. =52=King, no. 28, 1846.
=52=Martin, no. 14, 1847. _Picayune_, May 7, 1846. =58=Spofford,
Tyleston & Co., Dec. 11, 1846. =13=Bankhead, no. 79, 1845. =58=Emory,
Stetson & Co., June 5, 1847. =46=Newell to J. Y. Mason, Nov. 25, 1846.
Sen. 1; 30, 1, 945 (Mason, report). Richmond _Enquirer_, Aug. 15, 1845.
Phila. _No. Amer._, June 20, 1845. Memoria de ... Guerra, Dec. 9, 1846.
México á través, iv, 569. =13=Pakenham, no. 42, 1846. =52=Saunders
(Madrid), nos. 9, 12, 1847. =52=Littlefield to Saunders, May 2, 1847.
N. Y. _Herald_ (weekly), May 16, 1846. Ho. 60; 30, 1, p. 566 (Jesup).
Boston _Atlas_, May 18, 1846. Buchanan, Works, vii, 325-6 (to W. R.
J.), 355-6 (to T. N. C.). =49=Bancroft to Conner, Aug. 29, 1846. What
is said of Cuba applies to Porto Rico also.
30.5. (Action of Mexico) =13=Bankhead, nos. 68, 100, 147, 150, 161,
1846; London _Times_, Jan. 8, 13, 15, 1847; Dublán, Legislación, v,
161; =52=Slidell to Buchanan, Mar. 27, 1846; =52=Martin, no. 11, 1847;
=297=Mackenzie (S. Anna) to Buchanan, July 7, 1846; Semmes, Service,
80-1; México á través, iv, 569; =52=Consul Black, Sept. 28; Oct. 29,
1846; =73=Bermúdez de Castro, nos. 294, res., 368, 1846; =52=Bancroft,
no. 16, 1847; =76=Tornel, circular (regulations), July 26, 1846;
Memoria de ... Relaciones, Dec., 1846; =52=Memoria de ... Guerra, Dec.,
1846; _Diario_, July 27; Oct. 3, 1846. Irving (Madrid), no. 8, 1847.
London _Times_, Jan. 8, 13, 15, 1847. Semmes, Service, 80. Sen. 1; 29,
2, pp. 40-1. =52=Saunders (Madrid), no. 9, 1847. =76=Almonte, Dec. 10,
1846. Buchanan, Works, vii, 334-42 (to R. M. S.).
30.6. =52=Martin, no. 11, 1847. =52=Bancroft, no. 16, 1847. =52=Irving,
July 18, 1846. Richardson, Messages, iv, 495-6. Sen. 1; 30, 1, 945-6
(report). Wash. _Union_, July 22, 1847. The 29th Cong., second session,
provided for the punishment of the citizens (apprehended on privateers)
of those states having treaties with the U. S. which made their acts
piracy (Wash. _Union_, Mar. 9, 1847; =13=Pakenham, no. 26, 1847).
=108=Bancroft to Buchanan, Feb. 3, 1847. =13=For. Off. to Bankhead, no.
34, 1845. _Cong. Globe_, 29, 1, p. 811 (Berrien). Buchanan, Works, vii,
23, 52. The suggestion of commissioning American privateers excited
opposition in Europe. It was feared that they would molest neutrals.
Even in the U. S. it was opposed (Dayton in Senate, Jan. 27, 1847).
Nothing came of it.
30.7. (England) =13=Bankhead, nos. 79, 1845; 150, 1846; =13=To
Bankhead, nos. 34, 1845; 1, 1847; London _Times_, Jan. 22, 1847;
_Britannia_, Jan. 23, 1847; =52=Bancroft, no. 16, 1847; _Monitor
Repub._, Nov. 21, 1846; =52=Bancroft, no. 18, 1847; =108=_Id._ to
Buchanan, Feb. 3, 1847; =73=Bermúdez de Castro, no. 294, res., 368,
1846. (France) =52=Martin, nos. 11, 15, 1847; =52=Guizot to Martin,
Feb. 26, 1847. (Spain) =73=Bermúdez de C., nos. 294, res., 368, 1846;
=52=To Consul Campbell, May 14, 1846; =77=Mex. Consul, Havana, Dec. 10,
1846, res.; =76=Almonte, Dec. 10, 1846; =72=Instructs. to capt. gen.,
June 18, 1846; =52=Irving, July 18, 1846; nos. 5, 8, 1847; =71=docs.
relating to Cuban ports; Sen. 1; 29, 2, p. 40; Boston _Courier_, Jan.
20, 1847; Buchanan, Works, vii, 334 (to R. M. S.). Sen. 1; 30, 1, 945-6
(report). _Picayune_, Aug. 26, 1846. Conner, Home Squadron, 12.
30.8. Richardson, Messages, iv, 548-9, 561. Ho. 60; 30, 1, pp. 774-5
(Bancroft). Sen. 1; 29, 2, p. 377. Sen. 1; 30, 1, p. 951. =59=Circular
to U. S. ministers, May 14, 1846. =47=Conner to Bancroft, May 14,
1846. =52=Consul Chase, Jan. 20, 1846. =76=Parrodi, July 2, 1846.
=52=McLane (London), no. 54, 1846. =13=Giffard (V. Cruz), June 30,
1846. =162=Morris to Conner, Oct. 24, 1846. =313=Conner, instructions,
May 14.
American vessels were excluded on the score of impartiality and also
because the admission of them would have defeated the main purposes of
the blockade (Richardson, Messages, iv, 571). A particular advantage
of the blockade is that it enables a belligerent to close ports that
it is not desirable or not possible to capture and hold. Under the U.
S. regulations vessels lying in Mexican ports on the announcement of
the blockade could remain twenty days and then leave with or without
cargo. Approaching vessels could not be captured or detained unless
previously warned in writing by a cruiser (=313=Conner, instructions).
Vera Cruz and Tampico remained open for British mail packets (_ibid._).
Fishing boats were not molested. _Bona fide_ British property,
including cochineal, could be embarked on British war vessels at Vera
Cruz (=13=Bankhead, no. 23, 1847). From the end of June, 1846, Conner
permitted British mail packets to land quicksilver and take bullion.
Engagements made before the war could be fulfilled (=313=Saunders to
Callaghan, June 23, 1846). A difficult question came up concerning the
floating property of neutrals residing in Mexico (Sen. 1; 30, 1, p.
1305). Mexico decreed that since her ports of entry were blockaded,
all her other ports might give free entrance to vessels forcing the
blockade (=70="Guerra," no. 1079), and that no tonnage dues should be
charged during the continuance of the blockade (=76=Guerra, circular,
Oct. 10, 1846). England had to admit that she was the last nation to
protest against a strict blockade, but warned us that difficulties
might arise in the enforcement of it (=52=McLane, no. 50, 1846); and
she would not have our announcement published in the London _Gazette_
since, said Aberdeen, it might check trade and after all not be made
good (=52=McLane, no. 55). Spain insisted upon neutral rights with
peculiar jealousy. The Spanish commander even claimed free access to
blockaded ports under arts. 14 and 15 of the treaty of 1795, but found
that art. 16 warranted the blockade. Spain's vessels were treated
with special indulgence, but she made many complaints. For Spain:
=72=Instrs. to capt. gen. of Cuba, June 18, 1846; =52=Irving, no. 2,
1846; =52=Istúriz to Irving, Aug. 5, 1846; =71=papers relating to
complaints; Buchanan, Works, vii, 240-1, 290-2; =47=Span. commander to
Conner, June 24, 1846; reply, June 26.
30.9. =48=Bancroft to Conner, Aug. 30, 1845, secret. _Picayune_, Mar.
11, 1847. Sen. 1; 29, 2, p. 377 (Mason, report). Ho. 1; 30, 2, p. 1163
(Conner). =76=Parrodi, May 20, 1846. =76=Capt. of port, Tampico, May
20. Semmes, Service, 106. Conner, Home Squadron, 9. Negrete, Invasión,
iii, 173. =313=Conner, proclam., May 14. =313=_Id._, instructions, May
14. =313=Saunders to C., June 20; Oct. 24; to Amer. consul, May 20.
=313=C. to Saunders, July 22; Sept. 30. =164=Conner, reports, spring of
1846. Ho. 60; 30, 1, p. 525 (spec. orders 128). _Niles_, Oct. 10, 1846,
p. 85. =47=Conner, Oct. 8. (Goatzacoalcos) About 140 miles S. E. from
V. Cruz.
It does not seem worth while to follow the movements of particular
vessels. Sept. 30, 1846, the blockade was extended southeast to the
River S. Pedro y S. Pablo. (Difficulties) =47=Conner, Sept. 22, 1846;
_Picayune_, Mar. 11, 1847; Griffis, Perry, 210; =313=Saunders to Wash.
_Union_, Oct. 10, 1846; =313=_Id._ to Conner, Oct. 24; Semmes, Service,
106; =162=Conner, Jan. 28, 1847. (_Somers_) Sen. 43; 29, 2; Sen. 1; 30,
1, pp. 945, 950; =374=Semmes to Conner, Dec. 10, 1846; =13=Pakenham,
no. 151, 1846.
Just after the blockade began at Vera Cruz Gen. Bravo, commanding
there, permitted several American vessels to leave the port, and in
acknowledgment of his liberality two Mexican merchant vessels were
sent in to him with their cargoes, crews and passengers. Courteous
notes were exchanged (=76=Gacyores to Bravo, May 27; reply, May 28;
Bravo, May 26). At Tampico Capt. Saunders and the city authorities were
mutually considerate (=313=S. to Bancroft, June 6, 1846).
30.10. (Designed) London _Times_, Dec. 10, 1846. Comte. gen. V. Cruz.
July 9, 1846. Sen. 1; 30, 1, 945, 950-1. =13=Pakenham, no. 98, 1846.
=162=Conner, Dec. 18, 1846. Foltz, Report. _Niles_, Oct. 10, 1846,
pp. 84-5. =47=Conner, July 22, 1846. Semmes, Service, 100. Parker,
Recolls., 58, 62, etc. McClay, Navy, ii, 177-8. Bennett, Steam Navy,
98. Ho. 1; 30, 2, p. 1233 (Perry).
30.11. =73=Bermúdez de Castro, no. 441, 1847. Lerdo de Tejada, Apuntes,
ii, 540. Henshaw narrative, Mar. 17, 1847. Smith, To Mexico, 117-8. Ho.
1; 30, 2, p. 1233 (Perry). =13=Giffard, Jan. 31, 1847. _Picayune_, Mar.
11, 1847. Contributory tariff: pp. 261-3.
30.12. Ho. 60; 30, 1, p. 775 (Bancroft). (Mex. navy) Balbontín, Estado,
19; _Diario_, Apr. 4, 5, 1846; =70="Guerra," no. 1120; =13=Giffard,
Dec. 20, 1846. =76=Acta of naval offs., Mar. 12, 1846. Memoria de ...
Guerra, Dec, 1846. =76=Mora y Villamil, Mar. 12, 1846. =76=Orders to
Marín, Mar. 9, 1846. =76=Marín, Apr. 26, 1847. N. Y. _Sun_, June 8,
1846. _Niles_, May 1, 1847, p. 131 (Hunter).
30.13. =375=Perry to Mason, Nov. 16, 1846. Conner, Home Squadron, 9,
11, 14. Parker, Recolls., 67, 71. =162=Morris to Conner, June 24; Oct.
24, 1846. Ho. 1; 30, 2, pp. 1172 (Conner), 1191-2 (Perry). =46=Perry,
Nov. 16, 1846. Ho. 60; 30, 1, pp. 252-3. Taylor, Broad Pennant, 287,
293. =166=Perry to Conner, Dec. 27, 1846. =166=Reports on condition of
engines, boilers, etc. Bennett, Steam Navy, 93. =47=Conner, Sept. 22,
1846. Soley, Porter, 64. =165=Conner, Nov. 24, 1846.
30.14. =162=Conner's letters to his wife. Curtis, Buchanan, i, 603
(Slidell). Soley, Porter, 53-4. Semmes, Service, 114, 128. Conner, Home
Squadron, 6, 23. =162=Bancroft to Conner, Dec. 10, 1845. =162=Matson to
_Id._, Feb. 27, 1847.
30.15. =48=Bancroft to Conner, Aug. 30, 1845, secret. Polk, Diary, Jan.
17, 1846. Ho. 60; 30, 1, pp. 774-5 (Bancroft). =69=Conner to Taylor,
Feb. 4. =47=_Id._ to Bancroft, May 14. =162=_Id._, May 20. =61=Bancroft
to Conner, Jan. 17. London _Times_, June 29; Dec. 10. Semmes, Service,
100. =76=Bravo, May 4. Tampico _Eco_, June 9, 16. =76=Parrodi, June 8,
17. =76=Vilar to Parrodi, June 8. =162=Saunders to Conner, June 20.
=313=_Id._ to _Id._, June 17. =313=_Id._ to Wash. _Union_, Oct. 10.
_Niles_, May 23, 1846, p. 178. Sen. 1; 29, 2, p. 377 (Mason, report).
Conner, Home Squadron, 9. Bennett, Steam Navy, 34-5, 43, 62-3, 67-8,
71. Ho. 1; 30, 2, p. 1163 (Conner). _Picayune_, Aug. 26. For Conner's
coöperation with Taylor see vol. i, pp. 466, 469.