_Diario_, July 17, 23, 25, 31; Aug. 11; Oct. 11. _Siglo XIX_, Aug. 1.
=52=Dimond, nos. 245, 249, etc., 1845. _Journal des Débats_, Sept. 20.
=56=W. S. Parrott, July 12, 15, 22, 30; Aug. 16. _Patriota Mex._, Nov.
14. =52=Shannon, no. 3, 1844. St. Louis _Republican_, Aug. 18, 1845.
Wash. _Union_, Aug. 1, 14; Sept. 29. =297=Buchanan to McLane, priv.
and pers., Sept. 13. =77=Relaciones to mins., July 30. =52=Campbell,
Havana, Aug. 14. =76=Guerra, circular, July 16. Bankhead, no. 38, 1845.
Bustamante, Nuevo Bernal, i, 43-5.
July 30, 1845, the Mexican minister of relations wrote to the Mexican
minister at Paris: "Mexico has been left no choice except to fight the
United States"; "The campaign will soon begin"; 14,000 troops are _en
route_; 6000 will soon be organized to join them (=77=Cuevas to Garro,
res.).
4.10. _Siglo XIX_, July 27. _Picayune_, Sept. 23. St. Louis _Reveille_,
Sept. 14. =52=Black, no. 341, 1845. =56=W. S. Parrott, July 22, 30.
Dimond, nos. 249, 257, 1845. _Diario_, July 31. =297=Polk to Buchanan,
private, Aug. 7.
Spanish-American subtlety was not the only subtlety at work. Aug. 1,
1845, the Mexican agent at London reported: I have told Aberdeen that
war is inevitable; he suggests that we merely suspend relations with
the U. S., since a declaration of war would lawfully be followed by the
occupation of California, the bombardment of Vera Cruz, and a blockade
(=77=Murphy, no. 9). The view that no declaration of war was necessary
and that an attack might be made at once on Texas was well understood in
the United States, as the preceding citations show. As early as Aug. 5
the Mexican commander at Matamoros =52=proclaimed: "Comrades, the moment
has arrived to present ourselves on the field of honor."
4.11. =108=Wikoff to Bancroft, May 10, 1845. =52=Buchanan to Parrott,
Mar. 28, 1845.
In one respect this was an unfortunate appointment, for the Mexican
authorities hated Parrott; but Buchanan, who probably was not aware of
that fact, regarded him as "a discreet man, well acquainted with public
affairs," and entitled to the confidence of the President (=52=to Black,
Sept. 17). He was familiar with Spanish, had an intimate acquaintance
with Mexican politics and politicians, and was available. It is highly
improbable that any one else combined these necessary qualifications;
and, as his errand called for no public recognition and was mainly to be
executed indirectly, prejudice was likely to be disarmed. =162=Bancroft
to Conner, Nov. 20, 1845. =162=_Id._ to Latimer, Nov. 7, 10.
4.12. =56=W. S. Parrott, June 24; Sept. 6. His quoted words, added
to other declarations of a similar character, dispose completely of
the assertion, often found in Mexican and American writings, that we
offered to pay for Texas and thus admitted that we had wickedly annexed
it. Baldly and as of right, Mexico's claim could not be recognized by
this nation; but in a spirit of good-will, under cover of paying for a
satisfactory line, we were disposed to soothe her feelings with a gift.
4.13. Tyler, Tyler, iii, 174 (Green). Slidell, Dec. 17. Shannon, no.
8, 1845. Dimond, nos. 256, 259, 266, 1845. =56=W. S. Parrott, Aug. 16
(Herrera has said, "If a Minister from the United States should arrive,
he would be well received"), 26, 29. (Black, Aug. 23) Polk, Diary,
Sept. 16. =108=Kemble to Bancroft, Sept. 3: letters from men in daily
intercourse with Herrera, Almonte, and the minister of relations say the
government desires peace; and one says: "We know from good authority
that if a Minister were sent from the United States he would be well
received" (note the word "Minister").
4.14. Richmond _Enquirer_, Dec. 9. Buchanan to Larkin, Oct. 17, 1845; to
Slidell, Nov. 10. Dix in _Cong. Globe_, 30, 1, app., 176. See also pp.
136-7.
4.15. García, Juárez, 9, 12. =52=W. D. Jones, Sept. 22, 1838. (Estrada)
Valencia, proclam., Oct. 22, 1840, in Papeles Varios. London _Times_,
Mar. 13, 1845. _Picayune_, Dec. 30, 1844; Jan. 25, 1846. McLane, March
3, 1845 (Curtis, Buchanan, i, 583). Feb. 28, 1846, the British Foreign
Office transmitted to Bankhead a letter (delivered to it by the Spanish
minister by order of his court) which pointed toward the establishment
of monarchy in Mexico under a Spanish prince.
4.16. (Believed) =297=Buchanan to McLane, priv. and pers., Sept. 13,
1845.
4.17. Polk, Diary, Sept. 16, 17, 1845. (Caused) Ho. 60; 30, 1, p. 12
(Buchanan). Slidell had been born and educated at the north.
4.18. Bankhead, nos. 94, 101, 104, 1845. The British government censured
Bankhead for going so far in efforts to restore harmony between the
United States and Mexico (=13=to Bankhead, no. 36, 1845. =77=Murphy, no.
2, 1846). =13=Peña to Bankhead, Oct. 15. México á través, iv, 545. Peña
only said that Mexico would be "inclined" to hear the United States, but
of course he would not, on the ground of a passing mood, have expected
two British ministers to act for his nation.
4.19. Bankhead, nos. 101, 104. _Id._ to Pakenham, Oct. 16. Richardson,
Messages, iv, 437-43. That Mexico knew our claims counted among the
"differences" is proved by the letter of Cuevas to Forsyth, July 29,
1837 (Sen. 1; 25, 2, p. 111): The President is anxious for "that final
and equitable adjustment [of the claims] which is to terminate the
existing difficulties between the two Governments."
4.20. Ho. 60; 30, 1, pp. 12 (Buchanan); 13, 14, 17 (Black). Peña to
Black, Oct. 14 in Memoria de ... Relaciones, 1846. _Diario_, Nov. 6.
=341=Black, memorial, Dec. 20, 1847. Sen. 12; 30, 1.
4.21. Ho. 60; 30, 1, p. 12 (Buchanan). Ho. Report 752; 29, 1. _Monitor
Repub._, Aug. 1, 1846 (Herrera had been determined to settle with the
United States).
4.22. Sen. 325; 27, 2, p. 64. Sen. 337; 29, 1, p. 10. As to Slidell's
Title, cf. together Buchanan to Parrott, Mar. 28; _Id._ to Black, Sept.
17; Peña to council of state; and report of council of state. Polk,
Diary, Nov. 6, 9, 10.
In Tyler, Tyler, iii, 174, may be found a statement from B. E. Green
to the effect that Herrera sent word to him that a minister of the
usual sort could not be received, and that he transmitted this message
to Polk. But (1), if such was Herrera's attitude, why was it not made
clear to Black, who had been expressly commissioned to ascertain whether
a minister would be received; (2) Green, as a member of the Calhoun
faction, and perhaps as an official who had lost a good post in our
legation at Mexico, was not favorable to Polk, and a statement made
by a prejudiced person from memory forty-four years after the event,
regarding a delicate matter in which precision is essential, cannot be
considered at all authoritative. (3) This statement is out of harmony
with a number of material facts. =256=Marcy to Wetmore, Feb. 1, 1846:
Slidell was sent "on an express agreement that a minister would be
received."
4.23. =52=McLane, no. 8, Sept. 26, 1845. =108=Kemble to Bancroft, Sept.
3, 1845. Dimond, no. 269, 1845. _Times_, Oct. 14. (Impatience) Ho. 60;
30, 1, p. 17 (Black). Polk, Diary, Nov. 10.
4.24. Buchanan to Slidell, Nov. 10; Dec. 17. _Veracruzano Libre_, Nov.
30. =52=Comte. princ. to Dimond, Nov. 30. Slidell, Nov. 30; Dec. 17.
Ho. 60; 30, 1, p. 22 (Black). (Fleet) Conner to Dimond, Oct. 23, 1845
(Wash. _Union_, Dec. 1, 1847). Conner felt so sure of the conciliatory
spirit of his government that he withdrew without waiting for orders.
California was well known to be in a chronic state of rebellion (chap.
xvi), which Mexico had not the power to subdue, and therefore it was
natural for one who knew very little about the Mexicans to suppose they
would be willing to take a price for the practically worthless claim to
that territory.
The view that Polk explicitly instructed Slidell to give up the plan
to buy California rather than allow that plan to stand in the way of
regaining amicable relations with Mexico does not seem to be correct
(Kelsey, Consulate, 62, note 5). But Buchanan's letter of Dec. 17 to
Slidell lays stress upon his "two last alternatives," which were to
purchase northern California, including (_a_) the Bay of San Francisco
or (_b_) Monterey also; yet he instructs Slidell to drop this matter,
if pressing it would endanger success in endeavoring to obtain the
Rio Grande boundary or a line including all of New Mexico. Now such
a settlement of the Texas-New Mexico boundary would have involved
a restoration of amicable relations with Mexico. The two matters
(boundary and relations) were inextricably interwoven both in fact and
logically. Hence in effect Buchanan instructed Slidell to drop the plan
of purchasing California if pressing it would be liable to prevent the
restoration of amicable relations with Mexico. Rives (U. S. and Mexico,
ii, 69, note 2) takes a different view, but seems to have erred in more
particulars than one.
4.25. See pp. 55-6. Smith, Annex. of Texas, 423-31. =52=Slidell, Dec.
17, 27. _Amigo del Pueblo_, Nov. 1: "It is hardly possible to believe
such perfidy, such baseness and such audacity ... treason more horrible
has never been seen." _Patriota Mexicano_, Nov. 18: "To listen to
talk of peace from these men [the Americans] is to take the road to
perdition, death, ignominy." _Voz del Pueblo_, Dec. 3: "The treason has
been discovered.... We no longer own the very ground on which we walk."
4.26. Ho. 60; 30, 1, p. 22 (Black). Slidell, Dec. 29, 1845. Bankhead,
no. 127, 1845. México á través, iv, 545. Roa Bárcena, Recuerdos, 19.
Sierra, Evolution, i, 212. Black, Dec. 18.
One of Peña's minor points was that it did not appear from Slidell's
credentials that he had been confirmed by the Senate; and in fact,
since the American Congress had not been in session at the time of
his appointment, he had not been. This was not only to inquire into
our domestic affairs, but to hold that the Executive of the United
States could not appoint a diplomatic agent during a recess of the
Senate. Shannon's letter of credence had said nothing regarding his
confirmation, and Murphy had acted as our chargé in Texas for about
nine months before his name went to the Senate. Another point was that
Slidell's letter of credence did not expressly state that he had full
powers for the business in hand; but it was practically absurd, after
the United States had taken so much trouble and shown its good faith by
withdrawing our fleet, to suppose that we would send an agent to Mexico
without giving him the authority to do what we were evidently so anxious
to bring about. When this complaint was brought to his attention,
Slidell replied that his credentials described him as minister
plenipotentiary and envoy extraordinary, and also that it was not usual
to exhibit one's full powers at so early a stage in such negotiations,
adding that he would have done so, however, had any desire to see them
been suggested. Buchanan was doubtless right in calling the objection
a quibble; and one cannot suppose that under different circumstances
it would have been presented. The council of state rejected Peña's
objections in both of these cases.
4.27. Ho. 60; 30, 1, pp. 31, 58 (Peña); 28 (Black). =52=Slidell, Dec. 17.
4.28. Ho. 60; 30, 1, p. 58 (Peña). =77=Relaciones, circular to govs.,
Dec. 11. Comunicación circular. Memoria de ... Relaciones, Dec., 1848.
Sen. 337; 29, 1, pp. 21, 24, 25, 28, 32 (Slidell); 22 (Black); 25, 30
(Peña). Slidell, Dec. 17.
Even the unfriendly Mexican correspondent of the London _Times_
wrote, "For once" the United States is right, for the documents prove
that Mexico made no _ad hoc_ condition (_Times_, Mar. 13, 1846). The
matter can be viewed in another light also. Peña agreed to receive a
"comisionado"; later he said he had agreed to receive a "comisionado
_ad hoc_." If the words "_ad hoc_" added anything, they indicated a
difference between his earlier and his later positions; if not, why
were they used? Many Americans, doubtless without perceiving what the
significance of the act would have been, have insisted that the United
States ought to have humored poor little Mexico by sending an envoy _ad
hoc_. Aside from the weightier objection to so doing, such a concession
would probably have led to further demands (see note 34). Peña, instead
of recognizing our magnanimity in taking the first step to heal a breach
caused by Mexico, described our overture as "a tacit but clear and
strong confession of the rights of Mexico [and] of the wrongs done to
her" (=77=circular, Dec. 11). Gallatin stated that treaties of peace
were always negotiated by special commissioners, but this was incorrect
(see _e.g._ Jenkinson, Collection, iii, 355).
4.29. Memoria de ... Relaciones, 1846. The council of state said: From
the language in which the ministry "explains the condition of receiving
the proposed envoy (_enviado_), we cannot draw a satisfactory reason for
not receiving Mr. Slidell." Ho. 60; 30, 1, pp. 28-49, 56. Bankhead, no.
127, 1845.
In his manifesto of July 26, 1846 (_Diario_, July 30), Paredes
mentioned, as third among the causes of the war, the attempt of the
United States to induce Mexico to receive a resident minister, so as to
restore friendly relations without first making amends for the offence
[annexation of Texas] that had broken off official intercourse.
4.30. Webster, Writings, iv, 32. R. C. Winthrop, another leading Whig,
took the same ground (_Union_, Mar. 20, 1847). (Awkward) Calhoun in
Benton's Abr. Debates, xvi, 99.
4.31. _Revolution of Paredes._ Memoria de ... Relaciones, Dec, 1846
(including documents). Contestaciones (between Paredes, Arista, and the
government, 1845). Carreño, Jefes, clxiii-clxxvii. _Patriota Mex._, Dec.
23, 1845. Ramírez, México, 80-124. =77=Relaciones, circular, Jan. 3,
1846. México á través, iv, 546-56. =56=Mexican corr. of London _Times_
to W. S. Parrott, Nov. 19; Dec. 18. =76=Guerra, circular, Jan 5. Dimond,
nos. 279, 302, 1845. _Aguila del Norte_, Feb. 11; Mar. 18, 1846. Rivera,
Gobernantes, ii, 281-5, 287-8. Giménez, Mems., 91. =285=Tornel to
Paredes, Nov. 19, 1845. Bankhead, nos. 94, 97, 116, 119, 120, 124, 1845;
2, 1846. Tributo á la Verdad. =56=W. S. Parrott, Aug. 16, 29; Sept. 29,
1845. Black, June 10; Sept. 2, 1845. _Picayune_, Jan. 24, 1846. Portrait
of Herrera: city hall, Mexico. London _Times_, Feb. 10; Mar. 2, 20,
1846. _Monitor Constit._, Jan. 1, 16, 1846. Slidell, Dec. 27, 1845; Jan.
14; Feb. 6, 1846. _Memorial Histórico_, Jan. 14, 1846.
The condition of Mexico on the eve of this revolution was well described
by the _Revista Económica y Comercial_: "The country wavers, goes
backward, loses courage, and loses hope, because all the systems of
government that it has tried, one by one, have failed to give the fruits
promised by their authors, and, worn out and exhausted by so many and
varied medicines that have been applied in vain, it desires only order,
peace, and some degree of security. Our men of merit, education, and
patriotism are silent, live in retirement and sadness in their houses,
occupied solely with private affairs ... we have become a nation of
soldiers, officials, lawyers, clergymen, and smugglers, where the number
who produce bears a miserable proportion to the number of those who
live by the labor and sweat of the producers, and where the continual
political changes, the disorders, the bad administration of justice, and
the bad commercial and financial system offer more or less sustenance
to those who produce nothing, always at the expense of the toilers and
their allies, the merchants." The political situation was thus explained
by _El Siglo XIX_: "When a long series of civil dissensions, of frauds
upon the public, of treasons against the parties, of perjuries to
principles, have mixed up men and things, blotted out the line between
political groups, and confused all ideas, politics must become a genuine
chaos. Mexico is in precisely that condition." When charged with
upsetting public order Paredes replied, "None existed" (_Esperanza_,
Jan. 8, 1846). As late as Aug. 6, 1846, Texas was called upon, like the
other political divisions of the country, to elect members of Congress.
4.32. (Scheme) =52=Black, Dec. 30, 1845; =52=Slidell, Dec. 27;
=297=McLane to Polk, private, Jan. 17, 1846; _Memorial Histórico_, Jan.
26, and the Mexican press generally. Slidell saw grounds for hope: the
delay in furnishing him an escort; a possibility that Paredes might
hold that Herrera had committed Mexico; the improbability that money
to pay the troops could be borrowed while war seemed likely (hence he
sent a hint to the government that money could be obtained by accepting
a boundary satisfactory to the United States); Castillo, with whom he
had talked a number of times before he became minister of relations,
was intelligent and averse to a war with the United States. Buchanan to
Slidell, Jan. 20, 28; Mar. 12.
4.33. Ho. 60; 30, 1, p. 63 (Slidell). Memoria de ... Relaciones, 1846.
The council said that Slidell could not be received on _any_ footing,
unless Taylor (_now at Corpus Christi_) should retire. "The limiting
of the mission of the _comisionado_ to the sole question of Texas,"
it remarked, "was a tacit condition (_una condición tácita_)." This
admitted once more that the condition was not stated. The council
admitted also that _comisionado_ was not the proper term for an envoy
_ad hoc_, which refutes again the contention of a certain American
school that Mexico explicitly required us to send a "commissioner"
instead of a minister. Castillo's reply to Slidell (Mar. 12) said:
Mexico cannot have agreed to receive a regular minister, for it would
have been imprudent to do that; by fraud and violence the fair province
of Texas has been stolen; and now, after robbing and outraging Mexico,
your country seeks to obtain a pretext for war by demanding of us the
impossible humiliation of receiving you (Ho. 60; 30, 1, p. 67). At this
time Castillo did not know that Taylor was advancing toward the Rio
Grande (_Diario_, Mar. 15, 1846). =166=Slidell to Conner, Feb. 7; Mar.
15.
4.34. Mar. 17 Slidell answered Castillo at some length (Ho. 60; 30,
1, p. 72), vindicating the course of the United States in regard to
Texas. All the threats of war, he pointed out, have come from Mexico;
to suppose that the present Mexican administration in particular does
not intend to fight, would be to accuse it of declaring, in order to
overthrow Herrera, what it did not mean; so far as words can produce
war it already exists by the act of Mexico, and is the United States to
remain entirely passive, taking no precautions, till your army "shall
be prepared to strike, with due effect, the threatened blow?" Slidell
at the same time requested his passports. Castillo to Slidell, March 21
(Memoria de ... Relaciones, 1846) declared the discussion closed and
transmitted passports. April 23 Paredes said in a manifesto that he
rejected Slidell because "the dignity of the nation resented this new
insult" (México á través, iv, 559). In view of the grounds on which his
revolution had been launched (=73=Bermúdez de Castro, no. 200, res.,
1846) he could not have received Slidell without grave danger to himself
(Black, May 26, 1846; Slidell, no. 11). See chap. viii, note 24. Slidell
sailed from Vera Cruz on March 31, but at Polk's request he retained his
commission and held himself in readiness to go to Mexico again for about
a year (Moore, Buchanan, vii, 211; =52=Slidell, no. 14, 1847).
V. THE MEXICAN ATTITUDE ON THE EVE OF WAR
5.1. _Mexican feeling_. (Subjugate) =52=Consul Black, no. 349, Oct.
9, 1845; =47=Wood to Bancroft, June 4, 1846. =52=Slidell, nos. 3, 10.
=52=Consul McCall, Tampico, no. 65, Sept. 26, 1845. (All of Mexico)
=52=Shannon, no. 3, Oct. 28, 1844. (Threat) _Diario_, Mar. 25, 1845;
=77=Relaciones, circular, Nov. 27, 1846; _So. Qtrly. Rev._, Apr.,
1849, 97, 102; Thompson, Recolls., 238; London _Spectator_, Sept. 26,
1846. (Hinder) =52=Manifiesto of Vera Cruz legislature, [June, 1827];
Poinsett's reply; =52=Poinsett's reply to Méx. state legisl., Aug.,
1829; Shannon, no. 3; La Ruina de los Mexicanos. (Indians) _Mosquito
Mexicano_, Aug. 4, 1835; =75=gov. Durango, Apr. 27, 1846. (Privileged
classes) J. H. Smith in Proceeds. Amer. Antiq. Soc, Apr., 1914, and the
citations there given. (_Siglo XIX_) =56=W. S. Parrott, June 29, 1845.
(Politicians) Green, nos. 8, 103, 1844; Calhoun Corresp., 975; Shannon,
no. 3, 1844, and the Mexican press.
The following citations, which might be indefinitely extended, bear
upon various aspects of the subject. Pakenham, nos. 74 of 1828; 74 of
1829. Bankhead, nos. 38, 1845; 28, 58, 1846. =345=Ellis, Sept. 20, 1839.
Memoria de ... Relaciones, 1846. _Voz del Pueblo_, Mar. 29; May 3,
1845. _Amigo del Pueblo_, June 26; Oct. 9, 1845. _Orizaveño_, Mar. 30,
1845. _Patriota Mex._, Nov. 14, 1845. _Monitor Repub._, Jan. 28, 1847.
Reflexiones sobre la Memoria. Comunicación circular que. =77=Almonte,
no. 130, priv., 1844. =77=Arrangóiz, no. 50, res., 1845. Decree of Mex.
Cong., June 4, 1845 (broadside). =56=W. S. Parrott, June 29; July 5,
1845. =108=Kemble to Bancroft, Sept. 3, 1845.
5.2. (Danger) =76= Gov. Ibarra of Puebla, Sept. 5, 1846; _Diario_, Apr.
17, 1846; =77=Relaciones, circular, Nov. 27, 1846; law of June 4, 1845,
in Dublán, Legislación, v, 19; _Monitor Repub._, May 15, 1847; London
_Spectator_, Sept. 26, etc., 1846. C. M. Bustamante, Nuevo Bernal, i,
45. Castillo; council of state (chap. iv). (Paredes) Bankhead, no. 28,
Feb. 27, 1846. (Chief) Shannon, no. 3, 1844; Negrete, Invasión, iv,
app., 182; _Diario_, Mar. 25, 1845; Mar. 25; Sept. 26; Dec. 6, 1846;
=80=legislat. of Méx. state, address, Apr. 26, 1847; _Patriota Mex._,
Nov. 14, 1845; =77=Arrangóiz, no. 50, res., Mar. 13, 1845; _Siglo
XIX_, Nov. 30, 1845. (Clamored) _Amigo del Pueblo_, Oct. 9, 1845; _Voz
del Pueblo_, Mar. 29, 1845. (Superiority) Tornel, Tejas, 95; _Monitor
Repub._, May 12, 1846.
5.3. (Abject) Jameson, Calhoun Corresp., 993. =77=Almonte, June 19,
priv.; Sept. 20, 1844; Mar. 17, priv., 1845. (Panic) _Amer. Review_,
Sept., 1845, 222.
5.4. To precisely what extent European journals were read in Mexico
cannot be determined; but it seems probable that few important
expressions escaped notice there, and certainly the leading journals
were quoted freely.
5.5. (Differences) =77=Almonte, June 19, priv., 1844; =77=Relaciones,
circular, Nov. 27, 1846; Jameson, Calhoun Corresp., 994;
_Constitutionnel_, May 12; Aug. 5, 1845. _Times_, Apr. 15, 1845.
_Diario_, Apr. 3, 1845.
5.6. Times, Apr. 15, 1845. Negrete, México, xxi, 130. =13=Elliot, July
3, 1845. Gorostiza, Dictamen. Reflexiones sobre la Memoria. Federación
y Tejas. Tornel, Tejas, 95-7. (Elliot in Mex.) Smith, Annex. of Texas,
411-3. =77=Deffa dis, July 29, 1835.
5.7. _Britannia_, Feb. 15, 1845. (1812) Negrete, México, xxi, 130.
=13=Pakenham to Harvey, July 20, 1839. _Times_, Apr. 5, 1845.
=77=Arrangóiz, no. 65, res., Apr. 23, 1845.
5.8. =345=Poinsett to Van Buren, May 26, 1846 (Swarms of the best
irregular cavalry that I have ever seen). Watson, Taylor, 113-4 (The
British, Spanish, and Prussian ministers at Washington agreed that Scott
would be beaten; Calderón spoke as quoted in the text). (Generals) Wash.
_Union_, Dec. 18, 1846. Elliot, note 6. _Times_, July 5, 1845.
Napoleon said, "The first quality of a soldier is constancy in enduring
fatigue and hardship" (Maxims, 47). In this quality the Mexicans
excelled.
5.9. Requena in _Monitor Repub._, Mar. 9, 1846. Negrete, Mexico,
xxi, 131. (Boasted) =52=W. S. Parrott, Dec. 14, 1835. Memoria de ...
Relaciones, Jan., 1849. _Boletín Oficial_, Apr. 15, 1845. Apuntes, 168.
Thompson, Recolls., 170-1. (Self-confidence) Mofras, Explor., i, 70.
=76=Min. war, circular, Nov. 11. (Ensure) _Diario_, Sept. 25, 1845.
(_Voz del P._) Federación y Tejas.
5.10. (Texas) Tornel, Tejas, 95-7; =13=Bankhead, no. 125, Dec. 30,
1845. =77=Almonte, no. 72, priv., June 19; Sept. 20, 1844; instructions
to G. de la Vega, Apr. 10, 1844. =13=Pakenham, no. 22, Apr. 14, 1844.
Elliot, note 6. (Urged) Negrete, México, xxi, 131-2. Memoria de ...
Relaciones, Jan., 1849.
5.11. Requena in _Monitor Repub_., Mar. 9, 1846. London _Times_, June
11, 1846. =345=Poinsett to Van Buren, May 26, 1846. _Britannia_, June
10, 1844. =169=Rives to Crittenden, Feb. 8, 1847. =137=Clemson to
Calhoun, Mar. 28, 1847. Elliot, note 6.