Transcriber's Note
For this version of the text, italics are denoted with _underscore_
characters, and bold text with =equal= signs. The ligature for 'oe' is
separated into its two letters, e.g., 'manoeuvre'.
Please consult the notes at the end of this text for a detailed
discussion of the various footnotes, endnotes, and navigation through
this text, as well as any other textual issues.
Right-side page headers contained descriptions of the current topics
covered by the two open pages. These were retained and are placed on
separate lines prior to the paragraph where the topic is introduced, and
enclosed in brackets, as [Sidenotes]. The choice of that position is
not always obvious and should be regarded as approximate. Should the
topic persist over multiple pages, any redundant headers have been
removed.
Illustrations, all but one of them maps, are denoted with square
brackets as [Illustration: <caption>] at approximately the point
where they were printed. The captions are usually printed on the maps
themselves. Where there is no obvious title to the map, the caption
has been provided from the table of illustrations.
THE WAR WITH MEXICO
+----------------------------------------+
| BY THE SAME AUTHOR |
| |
| The |
| Annexation of Texas |
| |
| _Octavo ix + 496 pages_ |
| |
| _By mail, postpaid, $3.00_ |
| |
| ------------------------ |
| This is the only work attempting to |
| deal thoroughly with an affair that |
| was intrinsically far more important |
| than had previously been supposed, |
| and was also of no little significance |
| on account of its relation to the war |
| with Mexico. |
| ------------------------ |
| |
| THE MACMILLAN COMPANY |
| _PUBLISHERS_ |
+----------------------------------------+
THE
WAR WITH MEXICO
BY
JUSTIN H. SMITH
FORMERLY PROFESSOR OF MODERN HISTORY
AT DARTMOUTH COLLEGE
AUTHOR OF "THE ANNEXATION OF TEXAS," "OUR
STRUGGLE FOR THE FOURTEENTH COLONY,"
"ARNOLD'S MARCH FROM
CAMBRIDGE TO QUEBEC,"
ETC.
VOLUME I
New York
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
1919
_All rights reserved_
COPYRIGHT, 1919,
BY THE MACMILLAN COMPANY.
Set up and printed. Published December, 1919.
Norwood Press
J. S. Cushing Co.--Berwick & Smith Co.
Norwood, Mass., U.S.A.
TO
HENRY CABOT LODGE, LL.D.
SENATOR OF THE UNITED STATES
HISTORIAN
PRESIDENT OF THE MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL SOCIETY
WHO GAVE THE AUTHOR INVALUABLE ASSISTANCE
IN THE COLLECTION OF MATERIAL RELATING
TO THE WAR WITH MEXICO
THIS WORK
IS VERY RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED
PREFACE
As every one understands, our conflict with Mexico has been almost
entirely eclipsed by the greater wars following it. But in the field
of thought mere size does not count for much; and while the number of
troops and the lists of casualties give the present subject little
comparative importance, it has ample grounds for claiming attention. As
a territorial stake New Mexico, Arizona and California were of immense
value. National honor was involved, and not a few of the Mexicans
thought their national existence imperilled. Some of the diplomatic
questions were of the utmost difficulty and interest. The clash of North
and South, American and Mexican, produced extraordinary lights and
shades, and in both countries the politics that lay behind the military
operations made a dramatic and continual by-play. The military conduct
of the governments--especially our own--and the behavior of our troops
on foreign soil afforded instruction worthy to be pondered. While vast
concentrations of forces and complicated tactical operations on a great
scale were out of the question, the handling of even small armies at a
long distance from home and in a region that was not only foreign but
strange, created problems of a peculiar interest and afforded lessons of
a peculiar value, such as no earlier or later war of ours has provided;
and the examples of courage, honor and heroism exhibited in a conflict
not only against man but against nature merited correct appreciation and
lasting remembrance.[P.1][A]
[A] The notes to which this and the other "superior figures" invite
attention will be found immediately after the text of the volume.
In the notes only brief titles of books are given, but these may be
supplemented by reference to the list of printed sources given in
the appendix of the second volume. Citations (in the notes)
preceded by a number in black type refer to the list of MS. sources
standing at the end of the notes.
The warrant for offering another work on the subject rests primarily
on the extent and results of the author's investigations. His
intention was to obtain substantially all the valuable information
regarding it that is in existence, and no effort was spared to reach
his end. The appendix of volume II gives a detailed account of the
sources. By special authorization from the Presidents of the United
States and Mexico it was possible to examine every pertinent document
belonging to the two governments. The search extended to the archives
of Great Britain, France, Spain, Cuba, Colombia and Peru, those of
the American and Mexican states, and those of Mexican cities. The
principal libraries here, in Mexico and in Europe, the collections of
our historical societies, and papers belonging to many individuals in
this country and elsewhere were sifted. It may safely be estimated that
the author examined personally more than 100,000 manuscripts bearing
upon the subject, more than 1200 books and pamphlets, and also more
than 200 periodicals, the most important of which were studied, issue
by issue, for the entire period.[B] Almost exclusively the book is
based upon first-hand sources, printed matter having been found of
little use except for the original material it contains or for data
regarding biography, geography, customs, industries and other ancillary
subjects.[P.2]
[B] These figures cover also the author's "Annexation of Texas," which
is virtually an introduction to the present work.
The author also talked or corresponded with as many of the veterans as
he could reach, and he spent more than a year, all told, in Mexico,
where he not only studied the chief battlefields but endeavored, through
conversations with Mexicans of all grades and by the aid of foreigners
long resident in the country, to become well acquainted with the
character and psychology of the people. As the war was fought almost
exclusively among them, and its inception, course and results depended
in large part upon these factors, the author attaches not a little
importance to his opportunities for such personal investigations and to
his Mexican data in general.[P.2]
Probably more than nine tenths of the material used in the preparation
of this work is in fact new. No previous writer on the subject had been
through the diplomatic and military archives of either belligerent
nation, for example. Virtually a still larger percentage is new, for
the published documents needed to be compared with the originals. In
the printed American reports relating to the battles of September 8 and
13, 1847, for instance, over fifty departures from the manuscripts,
that seemed worth noting, were found. Nor did the additional documents
prove by any means to supply mere details. A great number of unprinted
statements from subordinate officers, who were nearer to the facts than
their superiors could be, were discovered. The major official reports
needed both to be supplemented and to be corrected. Such reports were in
most instances colored more or less, and in some radically distorted,
for personal reasons or from a justifiable desire to produce an effect
on the subordinates concerned, the army in general, the writer's
government, the enemy, and the public at home and abroad; while, as
General Scott stated in orders, unintentional omissions and mistakes
were "common." Taylor's account of the battle of May 9, 1846, for
example, failed completely to explain his victory. It has been only by
obtaining and comparing a large number of statements that approximate
verity has been reached. The same has been true of the diplomatic and
political aspects of the subject. The reports of the British, French and
Spanish ministers residing at Mexico, to cite one illustration, proved
indispensable. In reality, therefore, aside from its broader outlines
the field presented ample opportunities for study; and while no doubt
so extended an investigation included many facts of slight value, La
Rochefoucauld was right when he said, "To know things perfectly, one
should know them in detail."[P.3]
As a particular consequence of this full inquiry, an episode that has
been regarded both in the United States and abroad as discreditable to
us, appears now to wear quite a different complexion. Such a result, it
may be presumed, will gratify patriotic Americans, but the author must
candidly admit that he began with no purpose or even thought of reaching
it. His view of the war at the outset of his special inquiries coincided
substantially with that prevailing in New England, and the subject was
taken up simply because he felt convinced that it had not been studied
thoroughly. This conviction, indeed, has seemed to be gaining ground
rapidly for some time, and hence it is believed that new opinions,
resting upon facts, will be acceptable now in place of opinions resting
largely upon traditional prejudices and misinformation.
Some might suggest that only a military man could properly write this
work. But, in the first place, the author did not wish to prepare a
technical military account of the war. His aim was to offer a correct
and complete view of it suitable for all interested in American history,
and it will be found that politics, diplomacy and other phases of the
subject required as full investigation as did its military aspects.
Secondly, the author took pains to qualify himself for his task. The
real difficulty of the commanding general consists in applying the
principles of war under complicated, obscure and changeful conditions,
and in overcoming "friction" of many sorts. The intellectual side of the
art is readily enough understood. "In war everything is very simple,"
wrote Clausewitz, the fountainhead of the modern system. "The theory of
the great speculative combinations of war is simple enough in itself,"
said Jomini; "it only requires intelligence and attentive reflection."
"Strategy is the application of common sense to the conduct of war,"
declared Von Moltke. Arnold in his Lectures on Modern History said: "An
unprofessional person may, without blame, speak or write on military
subjects, and may judge of them sufficiently;" and the eminent military
authority, G. F. R. Henderson, endorsed this view. "The theory of war
is simple," wrote another expert, "and there is no reason why any man
who chooses to take the trouble to read and reflect carefully on one or
two of the acknowledged best books thereon, should not attain to a fair
knowledge thereof." As may be seen from the list of printed sources,
the present author--beginning with the volumes recommended by a board
of officers to the graduates of the United States Military Academy--did
much more than is here proposed.
Finally, during the entire time occupied in writing this work he
fortunately enjoyed the advantage of corresponding and occasionally
conferring with Brigadier General Oliver L. Spaulding, Jr., of the
United States Field Artillery, formerly instructor at the Army Service
Schools, Fort Leavenworth, and more recently Assistant Commandant of the
School of Fire, Fort Sill, who had distinguished himself not only in the
service but as a writer on professional subjects. General Spaulding has
kindly discussed with the author such military questions as have arisen,
and has read critically all the battle chapters. No responsibility
should, however, be attached to him, if a mistake is detected.[P.4]
A word must be added with reference to the notes. These have been placed
at the ends of the volumes because the author believes the best plan
will be to read the text of each chapter before looking at the notes
that bear upon it, and also in part because he did not wish any one
to feel that he was parading his discussions and citations. The notes
contain supplementary material designed to make the work a critical
as well as a narrative history, and contain also specific references
to the sources on which the text is based. These references involved
a most annoying problem. When one's citations are limited in number
and proceed in single file, as it were, they can be handled easily.
But in the present instance as many as 1800 documents were used for a
chapter, not a few of which were cited more than once; and each sentence
of the text--to speak broadly--resulted from comparing a number of
sources. Under these conditions the usual method would have produced a
repellent mass of references, perhaps greater in extent than the text
itself, which would have been very expensive to print and from their
multiplicity would have been extremely inconvenient. Where that method
appeared feasible it was adopted, but as a rule the references have
been grouped by paragraphs or topics. In many cases, however, pains
have been taken to indicate in the text itself the basis of important
statements, and further hints will be found in the notes. The reader can
thus always ascertain in general the basis of the text, and will find
specific references wherever the author has thought it likely they would
be desired. The special student will wish to look up all the citations
bearing on any topic that interests him. No doubt the plan is somewhat
unsatisfactory, but after studying the subject for a dozen years the
author feels sure that any other would have been more so.[P.5]
To thank all who kindly assisted the author to obtain material is
practically impossible; but a number of names appear in the list of
MS. sources, and others must be mentioned here. Without the cordial
support of Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Porfirio Diaz, Secretary of
State Elihu Root, Minister of Relations Ignacio Mariscal, and Senator
Henry Cabot Lodge this history could not have been written; and the
author acknowledges with no less pleasure his special obligations to
Whitelaw Reid, American Ambassador to Great Britain, Joseph E. Willard,
Ambassador to Spain; Henri Vignaux, First Secretary of our embassy at
Paris; J. J. Limantour, Minister of Hacienda, Mexico; Major General
J. Franklin Bell, Chief of Staff; Major General F. C. Ainsworth, Adj.
Gen.; Admiral Alfred T. Mahan; Admiral French E. Chadwick; Brigadier
General J. E. Kuhn, Head of the War College, Washington; Dr. J. Franklin
Jameson, Director of the Department of Historical Research, Carnegie
Institution; Dr. Gaillard Hunt, Chief of the Division of MSS., Library
of Congress; Dr. St. George L. Sioussat, Brown University; Dr. Eugene
C. Barker, University of Texas; Dr. Herbert E. Bolton, Professor
Frederick J. Teggart and Dr. H. I. Priestley of the University of
California; Dr. R. W. Kelsey of Haverford College; Dr. J. W. Jordan,
Pennsylvania Historical Society; Dr. Worthington C. Ford, Editor for the
Massachusetts Historical Society; Dr. Solon J. Buck of the Minnesota
Historical Society; R. D. W. Connor, Secretary of the Historical
Commission of North Carolina; Dr. R. P. Brooks of the University of
Georgia; Dr. Dunbar Rowland, Director of the Archives and Historical
Department of Mississippi; T. M. Owen, Director of the Historical
Department of Alabama; Dr. George M. Philips, State Normal School, West
Chester, Pa.; Waldo G. Leland, Secretary of the American Historical
Association; W. B. Douglas and Miss Stella M. Drumm, Librarian, of the
Missouri Historical Society; Dr. Clarence E. Alvord of the University of
Illinois and Mrs. Alvord (formerly Miss Idress Head, Librarian of the
Missouri Historical Society); Ignacio Molina, Head of the Cartography
Section, Department of Fomento, Mexico; Charles W. Stewart, Librarian
of the Navy Department; James W. Cheney, long the Librarian of the War
Department; Major Gustave R. Lukesh, Director, and Henry E. Haferkorn,
Librarian of the United States Engineer School, Washington Barracks; D.
C. Brown, Librarian of the Indiana State Library; Victor H. Paltsits,
Department of MSS., New York Public Library; W. L. Ostrander of the
library at West Point; Lieutenant James R. Jacobs, 28th United States
Infantry; Dr. Katherine J. Gallagher; Dr. Martha L. Edwards. To the
widow of Admiral Charles S. Sperry and their son, Professor Charles
S. Sperry, the author is particularly indebted for an opportunity to
examine important papers left by William L. Marcy. Valuable suggestions
were most kindly given by Dr. William A. Dunning of Columbia University
and Dr. Davis R. Dewey of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who
read portions of the text, by Francis W. Halsey, Esq., of New York, who
read nearly all of it, and by Dr. Edward Channing of Harvard University,
who was so good as to look over more or less closely all of the proofs.
To the helpers not mentioned by name the author begs leave to offer
thanks no less sincere.
Finally, the author desires to mention the enterprise and public spirit
shown by the publishers in bringing out so expensive a work at this time
of uncertainty.
THE CENTURY CLUB, NEW YORK,
September, 1919.
CONTENTS OF VOLUME I
PAGE
MAPS AND PLANS IN VOLUME I xvii
CONSPECTUS OF EVENTS xix
PRONUNCIATION OF SPANISH xxi
CHAPTER
I. MEXICO AND THE MEXICANS 1
II. THE POLITICAL EDUCATION OF MEXICO 29
III. THE RELATIONS BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND
MEXICO, 1825-1843 58
IV. THE RELATIONS BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND
MEXICO, 1843-1846 82
V. THE MEXICAN ATTITUDE ON THE EVE OF WAR 102
VI. THE AMERICAN ATTITUDE ON THE EVE OF WAR 117
VII. THE PRELIMINARIES OF THE CONFLICT 138
VIII. PALO ALTO AND RESACA DE GUERRERO 156
IX. THE UNITED STATES MEETS THE CRISIS 181
X. THE CHOSEN LEADERS ADVANCE 204
XI. TAYLOR SETS OUT FOR SALTILLO 225
XII. MONTEREY 239
XIII. SALTILLO, PARRAS, AND TAMPICO 262
XIV. SANTA FE 284
XV. CHIHUAHUA 298
XVI. THE CALIFORNIA QUESTION 315
XVII. THE CONQUEST OF CALIFORNIA 331
XVIII. THE GENESIS OF TWO CAMPAIGNS 347
XIX. SANTA ANNA PREPARES TO STRIKE 370
XX. BUENA VISTA 384
NOTES ON VOLUME I 402
APPENDIX (MANUSCRIPT SOURCES) 565
MAPS AND PLANS IN VOLUME ONE
As equally good sources disagree sometimes, a few inconsistencies are
unavoidable. Numerous errors have been corrected. An asterisk indicates
an unpublished original. Statements, cited in the notes, have also been
used.
PAGE
1. Mexico in 1919. Based upon standard maps xxii
2. Profile of the Route between Vera Cruz and Mexico 2
Drawn by Lieut. Hardcastle (Sen. Ex. Doc. 1; 30 Cong.,
1 sess.).
3. Matamoros and Fort Brown 159
Sketch map based on a *map drawn by Luis Berlandier,
Arista's chief engineer (War Dept., Mexico); Meade,
Letters, i, 73; McCall, Letters, 444; New Orleans
_Picayune_, June 28, 1846; *sketch by Mansfield,
Taylor's chief engineer (War Dept., Washington); and
an anonymous plan (Mass. Hist. Society).
4. Fort Brown to Brazos Island 162
Sketch map based principally upon the map in Apuntes para
la Historia de la Guerra entre México y los Estados-Unidos
and a map by Eaton of Third Infantry (Ho. Ex. Doc. 209;
29 Cong., 1 sess.).
5. Battle of Palo Alto 164
Sketch map drawn by a U. S. army officer. Based on Eaton's
plan (Ho. Ex. Doc., 209; 29 Cong., 1 sess.); a *sketch by
Berlandier (War Dept., Mexico); Apuntes; México á través
de los Siglos, iv, 562; _El Republicano_ (Berlandier);
a map in Campaña contra los Norte-Americanos; a map by
Lieut. Dobbins in Life of General Taylor; and _Journal of
Milit. Service Institution_, xli, 96.
6. Battle of Resaca de la Palma (_i.e._ Resaca de Guerrero) 170
Sketch map based on Apuntes; New Orleans _Picayune_,
June 25, 1846, from official drawings; a plan by Dobbins
in Life of General Taylor; a map in Campaña contra, _etc._;
a plan by Berlandier in _El Republicano_; a plan by
Eaton (Ho. Ex. Doc. 209; 29 Cong., 1 sess.); French, Two Wars,
52; and _Journal of Milit. Service Instit._, xli, 100.
7. From Matamoros to Monterey 210
Based on an official Mexican map prepared by the Fomento
Dept. and on Gen. Arista's map.
8. Battles of Monterey: General Map 232
Based on *three plans drawn by Lieut. Gardner from surveys
of Lieut. Scarritt (War Dept., Washington); _Picayune_
Extra, Nov. 19, 1846 (Lieut. Benjamin); a *drawing by
Adjutant Heiman (Tennessee Hist. Society); a map in
Apuntes; and a plan by Balbontín (Invasión Americana).
9. Battles of Monterey. Central Operations 240
Based on the same sources as No. 8 _supra_.
10. General Wool's March 271
Based on reconnaissances of Capt. Hughes, Lieut. Sitgreaves,
and Lieut. Franklin (Sen. Ex. Doc. 32; 31 Cong., 1 sess.).
11. Tampico and Its Environs 276
Based on a sketch by Lee and Gilmer (War Dept.,
Washington); and a Fomento Dept. Map (_see_ No. 7
_supra_).
12. General Kearny's March to Santa Fe 287
From a sketch drawn by A. Wislizenus (Sen. Misc. Doc.
26; 30 Cong., 1 sess.).
13. El Paso to Rosales, Mexico 305
From a U. S. War College map, Washington.
14. Battle of Sacramento 307
Based on a map in Sen. Ex. Doc. 1; 30 Cong., 1 sess.; and
a plan in México á través de los Siglos, iv, 644.
15. California in 1846 316
Based on a map in Sen. Ex. Doc. 1; 30 Cong., 1 sess.
16. Northern California 317
From a sketch by Lieut. Derby (Sen. Ex. Doc. 18; 31 Cong.,
1 sess.) and recent maps.
17. Fight at San Pascual 341
From a plan in Sen. Ex. Doc. 1; 30 Cong., 1 sess.
18. Fight near Los Angeles 344
From a plan in Sen. Ex. Doc. 1; 30 Cong., 1 sess.
19. General Patterson's March 360
From a map in Ho. Ex. Doc. 13; 31 Cong., 2 sess.
20. From Mexico City to Agua Nueva 381
From a Fomento Dept. map.
21. From Monterey to La Encarnación 382
Based on a map in Rápida Ojeada sobre la Campaña, _etc._;
and a *sketch by Lee and Gilmer (War Dept., Washington).
22. Battle of Buena Vista 387
Based on a map drawn by Capt. Linnard from the surveys of
Capt. Linnard and Lieuts. Pope and Franklin (Sen. Ex. Doc. 1;
30 Cong., 1 sess.); *two plans by the same officers (War
Dept., Washington); a *map based on a sketch by Dr.
Vanderlinden, chief Mexican surgeon (War Dept., Mexico);
a map by Balbontín (Invasión Americana); a *map drawn by
Stanislaus Lasselle (Indiana State Library); a plan by Lieut.
Green (Scribner, Campaign in Mexico); *Croquis para la
intelligencia de la Batalla de la Angostura (War Dept.,
Washington).
CONSPECTUS OF EVENTS
1845
March. The United States determines to annex Texas; W. S. Parrott
sent to conciliate Mexico.
July. Texas consents; Taylor proceeds to Corpus Christi.
Oct. 17. Larkin appointed a confidential agent in California.
Nov. 10. Slidell ordered to Mexico.
Dec. 20. Slidell rejected by Herrera.
1846
Jan. 13. Taylor ordered to the Rio Grande.
Mar. 8. Taylor marches from Corpus Christi.
21. Slidell finally rejected by Paredes.
28. Taylor reaches the Rio Grande.
Apr. 25. Thornton attacked.
May 8. Battle of Palo Alto.
9. Battle of Resaca de la Palma.
13. The war bill becomes a law.
June 5. Kearny's march to Santa Fe begins.
July 7. Monterey, California, occupied.
14. Camargo occupied.
Aug. 4. Paredes overthrown.
7. First attack on Alvarado.
13. Los Angeles, California, occupied.
16. Santa Anna lands at Vera Cruz.
18. Kearny takes Santa Fe.
19. Taylor advances from Camargo.
Sept. 14. Santa Anna enters Mexico City.
20-24. Operations at Monterey, Mex.
22-23. Insurrection in California precipitated.
23. Wool's advance from San Antonio begins.
25. Kearny leaves Santa Fe for California.
Oct. 8. Santa Anna arrives at San Luis Potosí.
Oct. 15. Second attack on Alvarado.
24. San Juan Bautista captured by Perry.
28. Tampico evacuated by Parrodi.
29. Wool occupies Monclova.
Nov. 15. Tampico captured by Conner.
16. Saltillo occupied by Taylor.
18. Scott appointed to command the Vera Cruz expedition.
Dec. 5. Wool occupies Parras.
6. Kearny's fight at San Pascual.
25. Doniphan's skirmish at El Brazito.
27. Scott reaches Brazos Id.
29. Victoria occupied.
1847
Jan. 3. Scott orders troops from Taylor.
8. Fight at the San Gabriel, Calif.
9. Fight near Los Angeles, Calif.
11. Mexican law regarding Church property.
28. Santa Anna's march against Taylor begins.
Feb. 5. Taylor places himself at Agua Nueva.
19. Scott reaches Tampico.
22-23. Battle of Buena Vista.
27. Insurrection at Mexico begins.
28. Battle of Sacramento.
Mar. 9. Scott lands near Vera Cruz.
29. Vera Cruz occupied.
30. Operations in Lower California opened.
Apr. 8. Scott's advance from Vera Cruz begins.
18. Battle of Cerro Gordo; Tuxpán captured by Perry.
19. Jalapa occupied.
May 15. Worth enters Puebla.
June 6. Trist opens negotiations through the British legation.
16. San Juan Bautista again taken.
Aug. 7. The advance from Puebla begins.
20. Battles of Contreras and Churubusco.
Aug. 24-Sept. 7. Armistice.
Sept. 8. Battle of Molino del Rey.
13. Battle of Chapultepec; the "siege" of Puebla begins.
14. Mexico City occupied.
22. Peña y Peña assumes the Presidency.
Oct. 9. Fight at Huamantla.
20. Trist reopens negotiations.
Nov. 11. Mazatlán occupied by Shubrick.
1848
Feb. 2. Treaty of peace signed.
Mar. 4-5. Armistice ratified.
10. Treaty accepted by U. S. Senate.
May 19, 24. Treaty accepted by Mexican Congress.
30. Ratifications of the treaty exchanged.
June 12. Mexico City evacuated.
July 4. Treaty proclaimed by President Polk.
THE PRONUNCIATION OF SPANISH
The niceties of the matter would be out of place here, but a few general
rules may prove helpful.
_A_ as in English "ah"; _e_, at the end of a syllable, like _a_ in
"fame," otherwise like _e_ in "let"; _i_ like _i_ in "machine"; _o_, at
the end of a syllable, like _o_ in "go," otherwise somewhat like _o_ in
"lot"; _u_ like _u_ in "rude" (but, unless marked with two dots, silent
between _g_ or _q_ and _e_ or _i_); _y_ like _ee_ in "feet."
_C_ like _k_ (but, before _e_ and _i,_ like [C]_th_ in "thin"); _ch_ as
in "child"; _g_ as in "go" (but, before _e_ and _i_, like a harsh _h_);
_h_ silent; _j_ like a harsh _h_; _ll_ like [D]_lli_ in "million"; _ñ_
like _ni_ in "onion"; _qu_ like _k_; _r_ is sounded with a vibration
(trill) of the tip of the tongue (_rr_ a longer and more forcible sound
of the same kind); _s_ as in "sun"; _x_ like _x_ in "box" (but, in
"México" and a few other names, like Spanish _j_); _z_ like [C]_th_ in
"thin."
Words bearing no mark of accentuation are stressed on the last syllable
if they end in any consonant except _n_ or _s_, but on the syllable next
to the last if they end in _n_, _s_ or a vowel.
[C] In Mexico, however, usually like _s_ in "sun."
[D] In Mexico usually like _y_.
[Illustration: MEXICO IN 1919]
THE WAR WITH MEXICO
I
MEXICO AND THE MEXICANS
1800-1845
Mexico, an immense cornucopia, hangs upon the Tropic of Cancer and opens
toward the north pole. The distance across its mouth is about the same
as that between Boston and Omaha, and the line of its western coast
would probably reach from New York to Salt Lake City. Nearly twenty
states like Ohio could be laid down within its limits, and in 1845 it
included also New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, California and portions
of Colorado and Wyoming.[1.1]
On its eastern side the ground rises almost imperceptibly from the Gulf
of Mexico for a distance varying from ten to one hundred miles, and
ascends then into hills that soon become lofty ranges, while on the
western coast series of cordilleras tower close to the ocean. Between
the two mountain systems lies a plateau varying in height from 4000 to
8000 feet, so level--we are told--that one could drive, except where
deep gullies make trouble, from the capital of Montezuma to Santa Fe,
New Mexico. The country is thus divided into three climatic zones, in
one or another of which, it has been said, every plant may be found that
grows between the pole and the equator.[1.1][E]
[E] It will be seen that occasionally the same "superior figure" is
attached to several paragraphs, and that sometimes these reference
numbers are not in consecutive order. The reasons will be
discovered when the reader consults the notes, which follow the
text of each volume.
Except near the United States the coast lands are tropical or
semi-tropical; and the products of the soil, which in many quarters is
extraordinarily deep and rich, are those which naturally result from
extreme humidity and heat. Next comes an intermediate zone varying in
general height from about 2000 to about 4000 feet, where the rainfall,
though less abundant than on the coast, is ample, and the climate far
more salubrious than below. Here, in view of superb mountains and even
of perpetual snows, one finds a sort of eternal spring and a certain
blending of the tropical and the temperate zones. Wheat and sugar
sometimes grow on the same plantation, and both of them luxuriantly;
while strawberries and coffee are not far apart.[1.1]
[Illustration: PROFILE OF THE ROUTE BETWEEN MEXICO AND VERA CRUZ]
The central plateau lacks moisture and at present lacks trees. The
greater part of it is indeed a semi-desert, though a garden wherever
water can be supplied. During the wet season--June to October--it is
covered with wild growths, but the rains merely dig huge gullies or
_barrancas_, and almost as soon as they are over, most of the vegetation
begins to wither away. The climate of the plateau is quite equable,
never hot and never cold. Wheat, Indian corn and maguey--the plant from
which _pulque_, the drink of the common people, is made--are the most
important products; and at the north great herds of cattle roam. In the
mountains, finally, numberless mines yield large quantities of silver,
some gold, and a considerable amount of copper and lead.[1.1]
The principal cities on the eastern coast are Vera Cruz, the chief
seaport, and Tampico, not far south of the Rio Grande River. In the
temperate zone between Vera Cruz and Mexico lie Jalapa and Orizaba,
and behind Tampico lies Monterey. On the central plateau one finds the
capital reposing at an elevation of about eight thousand feet and, about
seventy miles toward the southeast, Puebla; while on the other side of
the capital are the smaller towns of Querétaro and San Luis Potosí
toward the north, and Zacatecas and Chihuahua toward the northwest.
In the middle zone of the Pacific slope rises the large city of
Guadalajara, capital of Jalisco state; and along the coast below may be
found a number of seaports, the most important of which are Guaymas, far
to the north, Mazatlán opposite the point of Lower California, San Blas
a little farther down, and Acapulco in the south.[1.1]
[THE PEOPLE]
Exactly how large the population of Mexico was in 1845 one cannot
be sure, and it included quite a number of racial mixtures; but for
the present inquiry we may suppose it consisted of 1,000,000 whites,
4,000,000 Indians, and 2,000,000 of mixed white and Indian blood.[1.2]
The Spaniards from Europe, called Gachupines in Mexico, were of two
principal classes during her colonial days. Many had been favorites of
the Spanish court, or the protégés of such favorites, and had exiled
themselves to occupy for a longer or shorter time high and lucrative
posts; but by far the greater number were men who had left home in
their youth--poor, but robust, energetic and shrewd--to work their way
up. With little difficulty such immigrants found places in mercantile
establishments or on the large estates. Merciless in pursuit of gain yet
kind to their families, faithful to every agreement, and honest when
they could afford to be, they were intrinsically the strongest element
of the population, and almost always they became wealthy.[1.3]
Their sons, poorly educated, lacking the spur of poverty, and finding
themselves in a situation where idleness and self-indulgence were their
logical habits, commonly took "_Siempre alegre_" (Ever light-hearted)
for their motto, and spent their energy in debauchery and gambling.
To this result their own fathers, while disgusted with it, usually
contributed. Spanish pride revolted at the ladder of subordination by
which these very men had climbed. They felt ambitious to make gentlemen
of their sons, and some easy position in the army, church or civil
service--or, in default of it, idleness--was the career towards which
they pointed; and naturally the heirs to their wealth, whose ignoble
propensities had prevented them from acquiring efficiency or sense of
responsibility, made haste, on getting hold of the paternal wealth,
to squander it. If the pure whites, with some exceptions of course,
fell into this condition, nothing better could fairly be expected of
those who were partly Indian; and before the revolution it was almost
universally felt in Spain and among the influential class of colonials
themselves, that nothing of much value could be expected of Creoles, as
the whites born in Mexico and the half-breeds were generally called.
The achievement of independence naturally tended to increase their
self-respect, broaden their views and stimulate their ambition; but the
less than twenty-five years that elapsed between 1821 and 1846, when
the war between Mexico and the United States began, were not enough to
transform principles, reverse traditions and uproot habits.[1.3]
The pure-blooded Indians--of whom there were many tribes, little
affiliated if at all--had changed for the worse considerably since
the arrival of the whites. In their struggles against conquest and
oppression the most intelligent, spirited and energetic had succumbed,
and the rest, deprived of strength, happiness, consolation and even
hope, and aware that they existed merely to fill the purses or sate
the passions of their masters, had rapidly degenerated. Their natural
apathy, reticence and intensity were at the same time deepened. While
apparently stupid and indifferent, they were capable of volcanic
outbursts. Though fanatically Christian in appearance, they seem to
have practiced often a vague nature worship under the names and forms
of Catholicism. Indeed they were themselves almost a part of the soil,
bound in soul to the spot where they were born; and, although their
women could put on silk slippers to honor a church festival and every
hut could boast a crucifix or a holy image, they lived and often slept
beside their domestic animals with a brutish disregard for dirt.[1.3]
Legally they had the rights of freemen and were even the wards of the
government, and a very few acquired education and property; but as
a rule they had to live by themselves in little villages under the
headship of lazy, ignorant caciques and the more effective domination
of the priests. As the state levied a small tax upon them and the
Church several heavy ones, their scanty earnings melted fast, and if
any surplus accumulated they made a fiesta in honor of their patron
saint, and spent it in masses, fireworks, drink, gluttony and gambling.
When sickness or accident came they had to borrow of the landowner
to whose estate they were attached; and then, as they could not leave
his employ until the debt had been discharged, they not only became
serfs, but in many cases bequeathed their miserable condition to
their children. Silent and sad, apparently frail but capable of great
exertion, trotting barefooted to and from their huts with their coarse
black hair flowing loosely or gathered in two straight braids, watching
everything with eyes that seemed fixed on the ground, loving flowers
much but a dagger more, fond of melody but preferring songs that were
melancholy and wild, always tricky, obstinate, indolent, peevish and
careless yet affectionate and hospitable, often extracting a dry humor
from life as their donkeys got nourishment from the thistles, they went
their wretched ways as patient and inscrutable as the sepoy or the
cat--infants with devils inside.[1.3]
[THE CLASSES]
At the head of the social world stood a titled aristocracy maintained by
the custom of primogeniture. But as the nobles were few in number, and
for a long time had possessed no feudal authority, their influence at
the period we are studying depended mainly upon their wealth. Next these
came aristocrats of other kinds. Some claimed the honor of tracing their
pedigree to the conquerors, and with it enjoyed great possessions; and
others had the riches without the descent. The two most approved sources
of wealth were the ownership of immense estates and the ownership of
productive mines. On a lower level stood certain of the rich merchants,
and lower still, if they were lucky enough to gain social recognition,
a few of those who acquired property by dealing in the malodorous
government contracts. To these must be added in general the high
dignitaries of the church, the foreign ministers, the principal generals
and statesmen and the most notable doctors and lawyers. Such was the
upper class.[1.4]
A sort of middle class included the lesser professional men, prelates,
military officers and civil officials, journalists, a few teachers,
business men of importance and some fairly well-to-do citizens without
occupations. Of small farms and small mines there were practically
none, and the inferior clergy signified little. The smaller importing
and wholesale merchants came to be almost entirely British, French
and German soon after independence was achieved, and the retailers
were mostly too low in the scale to rank anywhere. The case of those
engaged in the industries was even more peculiar. Working at a trade
seemed menial to the Spaniard, especially since the idea of labor was
associated with the despised Indians, and most of the half-breeds and
Indians lacked the necessary intelligence. Skilled workers at the
trades were therefore few, and these few mostly high-priced foreigners.
Articles of luxury could be had but not comforts; pastries and ices
but not good bread; saddles covered with gold and embroidery, but not
serviceable wagons; and the highly important factor of intelligent,
self-respecting handicraftsmen was thus well-nigh missing.[1.4]
The laboring class consisted almost entirely of half-breeds and
Indians. In public affairs they were not considered, and their own
degraded state made them despise their tasks. Finally, the dregs of the
population, especially in the large cities, formed a vicious, brutal and
semi-savage populace. At the capital there were said to be nearly 20,000
of the _léperos_, as they were called, working a little now and then,
but mainly occupied in watching the religious processions, begging,
thieving, drinking and gambling. In all, Humboldt estimated at 200,000
or 300,000 the number of these creatures, whose law was lawlessness and
whose heaven would have been a hell.[1.4]
[THE CHURCH]
The only church legally tolerated was that of Rome; and this, as the
unchallenged authority in the school and the pulpit, the keeper of
confessional secrets and family skeletons, and the sole dispenser
of organized charity, long wielded a tremendous power. The clerical
_fuero_, which exempted all ecclesiastics from the jurisdiction of the
civil courts, reinforced it, and the wealth and financial connections
of the Church did the same. In certain respects, however, the strength
of the organization began to diminish early in the nineteenth century;
and in particular the Inquisition was abolished in Mexico, as it was
in Spain. Soon after the colony became independent, a disposition to
bar ecclesiastics from legislative bodies, to philosophize on religious
matters and to view Protestants with some toleration manifested itself.
Ten years more, and the urgent need of public schools led to certain
steps, as we shall see, toward secular education. Political commotions,
the exactions of powerful civil authorities under the name of loans,
and various other circumstances cut into the wealth of the Church; and
the practical impossibility of selling the numberless estates upon which
it had mortgages or finding good reinvestments in the case of sales,
compelled it, as the country became less and less prosperous, to put up
with delays and losses of interest.[1.5]
Moreover the Church was to no slight extent a house divided against
itself. Under Spanish rule and substantially down to 1848, all the high
dignities fell to Gachupines, who naturally faced toward Spain, whereas
the parish priests were mainly Creoles with Mexican sympathies; and
while the bishops and other managers had the incomes of princes, nearly
all of the monks and ordinary priests lived in poverty. There was,
therefore, but little in common between the two ranks except the bare
fact of being churchmen, which was largely cancelled on the one side by
contempt and on the other side by envy; and the common priests, having
generally sided against Spain during the revolution and always been
closely in touch with the people, exercised, in spite of their pecuniary
exactions, an influence that largely balanced the authority of their
heads. Finally, the ignorance of most ecclesiastics and the immorality
of nearly all greatly diminished their moral force. A large number,
even among the higher clergy, were unable to read the mass; and the
monks, who in the early days of the colony had rendered good service as
missionaries, were now recruited--wrote an American minister--from "the
very dregs of the people," and constituted a public scandal.[1.5]
Still, the Church wielded immense power as late as 1845, and this was
reinforced by the type of religion that it offered. High and low alike,
the Mexicans, with some exceptions, lived in the senses, differing
mainly in the refinement of the gratifications they sought; and the
priests offered them a sensuous worship. Sometimes, almost crazed by
superstitious fears, men would put out the lights in some church,
strip themselves naked, and ply the scourge till every blow fell with
a splash. It was pleasanter, however, and usually edifying enough, to
kneel at the mass, gaze upon the extraordinary display of gold and
silver, gorgeous vestments, costly images and elaborately carved and
gilded woodwork, follow the smoke of the incense rolling upward from
golden censers, listen to sonorous incantations called prayers, and
confess to some fat priest well qualified to sympathize with every
earthy desire. A man who played this game according to the rule was
good and safe. A brigand counting the chances of a fray could touch his
scapularies with pious confidence, and the intending murderer solicit a
benediction on his knife. Enlightened Catholics as well as enlightened
non-Catholics deplored the state of religion in Mexico.[1.5]
Next after the Church came the "army," which meant a social order, a
body of professional military men--that is to say, officers--exempted
by their fuero from the jurisdiction of the civil law and almost
exclusively devoted to the traditions, principles and interests of their
particular group. As the Church held the invisible power, the army held
the visible; and whenever the bells ceased to ring, the roll of the drum
could be heard. Every President and almost every other high official
down to the close of our Mexican war was a soldier, and sympathized
with his class; and as almost every family of any importance included
members of the organization, its peculiar interests had a strong social
backing. By force of numbers, too, this body was influential, for at
one time, when the army contained scarcely 20,000 soldiers, it had
24,000 officers; and so powerful became the group that in 1845, when
the real net revenue of the government did not exceed $12,000,000, its
appropriation was more than $21,000,000.[1.5]
Under Spanish rule, although the army enjoyed great privileges, it
had been kept in strict subordination, and usefully employed on the
frontiers; but independence changed the situation. Apparently the
revolution was effected by the military men, and they not merely claimed
but commonly received the full credit. Not only did a large number of
unfit persons, who pretended to have commanded men during the struggle,
win commissions, but wholesale promotions were made in order to gain
the favor of the officers; and in these ways the organization was both
demoralized and strengthened. Over and over again military men learned
to forswear their allegiance, and at one time the government actually
set before the army, as a standard of merit, success in inducing
soldiers of the opposite party to change sides.[1.5]
[THE ARMY]
In the course of political commotions, to be reviewed in the next
chapter, the armed forces were more and more stationed at the cities,
where they lost discipline and became the agents of political schemers;
and naturally, when the government admitted their right to take part as
organized bodies in political affairs, the barracks came to supersede
the legislative halls, bullets took the place of arguments, and the
military men, becoming the arbiters on disputed points, regarded
themselves as supreme. Moreover, every administration felt it must have
the support of this organization, and, not being able to dominate it,
had to be dominated by it. Political trickery could therefore bring the
officer far greater rewards than professional merit, and success in a
revolt not only wiped away all stains of insubordination, cowardice and
embezzlement, but ensured promotion. A second lieutenant who figured
in six affairs of that sort became almost necessarily a general, and
frequently civilians who rendered base but valuable services on such
occasions were given high army rank. No doubt some risk was involved,
but it was really the nation as a whole that paid the penalties; and
anyhow one could be bold for a day far more easily than be courageous,
patient, studious, honest and loyal for a lifetime. All true military
standards were thus turned bottom-side up, and some of the worst
crimes a soldier can perpetrate became in Mexico the brightest of
distinctions.[1.5]
Of course the discovery that rank and pay did not depend upon deserving
them set every corrupt officer at work to get advanced, while it drove
from the service, or at least discouraged, the few men of talents and
honor; and as all subordination ceased, a general not only preferred
officers willing to further his dishonorable interests, but actually
dreaded to have strong and able men serve in his command. In 1823 the
Mexican minister of war reported to Congress, "Almost the whole army
must be replaced, for it has contracted vices that will not be removed
radically in any other way," and four years later a militia system
was theoretically established with a view to that end; but the old
organization continued to flourish, and in April, 1846, the British
minister said, "The Officers ... are, as a Corps, the worst perhaps to
be found in any part of the world. They are totally ignorant of their
duty, ... and their personal courage, I fear, is of a very negative
character."[1.5]
In 1838, a German visitor stated there were a hundred and sixty generals
for an army of thirty thousand, and this was perhaps a fair estimate
of the usual proportion; but out of all these, every one of whom could
issue a glowing proclamation, probably not a single "Excellency"
could properly handle a small division, while few out of thousands
of colonels could lead a regiment on the field, and some were not
qualified to command a patrol. A battle was almost always a mob fight
ending in a cavalry charge; and Waddy Thompson, an American minister to
Mexico, said he did not believe a manoeuvre in the face of the enemy
was ever attempted. Naturally the general administration of military
affairs became a chaos; and, worst of all, a self-respecting general
thought it almost a disgrace to obey an order--even an order from the
President.[1.5]