1843-1846.
RECONQUEST OF TEXAS PROPOSED.--CANALIZO PRESIDENT AD
INTERIM.--REVOLUTION UNDER PAREDES IN 1844.--SANTA ANNA
FALLS--HERRERA PRESIDENT--TEXAN REVOLT.--ORIGIN OF WAR WITH
THE UNITED STATES.--TEXAN WAR FOR THE CONSTITUTION OF
1824--NATIONALITY RECOGNIZED--ANNEXATION TO THE UNITED
STATES.--PROPOSITION TO MEXICO.--HERRERA OVERTHROWN--PAREDES
PRESIDENT--OUR MINISTER REJECTED.--CHARACTER OF GENERAL PAREDES.
After the foundation of the new system in 1843, the country continued
quiet for a while, and when the Mexican Congress met, in January 1844,
propositions were made by the executive department to carry out Santa
Anna's favorite project of reconquering Texas. It is probable that
there was not much sincerity in the president's desire to march his
troops into a territory the recollection of which must have been, at
least, distasteful to him. There is more reason to believe that the
large sum which it was necessary to appropriate for the expenses of
the campaign--the management of which would belong to the
administration,--was the real object he had in view. Four millions
were granted for the reconquest, but when Santa Anna demanded ten
millions more while the first grant was still uncollected, the members
refused to sustain the president's demand. The congressmen were
convinced of that chieftain's rapacity, and resolved to afford him no
further opportunity to plunder the people under the guise of patriotism.
Santa Anna's sagacious knowledge of his countrymen immediately
apprised him of approaching danger, and having obtained permission
from congress to retire to his estate at Mango de Clavo, near Vera
Cruz, he departed from the capital, leaving his friend General
Canalizo as president _ad interim_. Hardly had he reached his
plantation in the midst of friends and faithful troops, when a revolt
burst out in Jalisco, Agnas Calientes, Zacatecas, Sinaloa and Sonora,
against his government, headed by General Paredes. Santa Anna rapidly
crossed the country to suppress the rebellion, but as he disobeyed
the constitutional compact by taking actual command of the army whilst
he was president, without the previous assent of congress, he became
amenable to law for this violation of his oath. He was soon at enmity
with the rebels and with the constitutional congress, and thus a three
fold contest was carried on, chiefly through correspondence, until the
4th of January, 1845, when Santa Anna finally fell. He fled from the
insurgents and constitutional authorities towards the eastern coast,
but being captured at the village of Jico, was conducted to Peroté,
where he remained imprisoned under a charge and examination for
treason, until an amnesty for the late political factionists permitted
him to depart on the 29th of May, 1845, with his family, for Havana.
Upon Santa Anna's ejection from the executive chair, the president of
the council of government, became under the laws of the country,
provisional president of the republic. This person was General José
Joaquim de Herrera, during whose administration the controversies rose
which resulted in the war between Mexico and the United States.
The thread of policy and action in both countries is so closely
interwoven during this pernicious contest, that the history of the war
becomes, in reality, the history of Mexico for the epoch. We are
therefore compelled to narrate, succinctly, the circumstances that led
to that lamentable issue.
* * * * *
The first _empresario_, or contractor, for the colonization of Texas,
was Moses Austin, a native citizen of the United States, who, as soon
as the treaty of limits between Spain and our country was concluded in
1819, conceived the project of establishing a settlement in that
region. Accordingly, in 1821 he obtained from the Commandant General
of the Provincias Internas, permission to introduce three hundred
foreign families. In 1823, a national colonization law was approved by
the Mexican Emperor Iturbide during his brief reign, and on the 18th
of February, Stephen F. Austin, who had succeeded his father, after
his death, in carrying out the project, was authorized to proceed with
the founding of the colony. After the emperor's fall, this decree was
confirmed by the first executive council in conformity to the express
will of congress.
In 1824 the _federal_ constitution of Mexico was, as we have narrated,
adopted, by the republican representatives, upon principles analogous
to those of the constitution of the United States; and by a decree of
the 7th of May, Texas and Coahuila were united in a _state_. In this
year another _general_ colonization law was enacted by congress, and
foreigners were invited to the new domain by a special state
colonization law of Coahuila and Texas.
Under these local laws and constitutional guaranties, large numbers of
foreigners flocked to this portion of Mexico, opened farms, founded
towns and villages, re-occupied old Spanish settlements, introduced
improvements in agriculture and manufactures, drove off the Indians,
and formed, in fact, the nucleus of an enterprizing and progressive
population. But there were jealousies between the race that invited
the colonists, and the colonists who accepted the invitation. The
central power in the distant capital did not estimate, at their just
value, the independence of the remote pioneers, or the state-right
sovereignty to which they had been accustomed at their former home in
the United States. Mexico was convulsed by revolutions, but the lonely
residents of Texas paid no attention to the turmoils of the
factionists. At length, however, direct acts of interference upon the
part of the national government, not only by its ministerial agents,
but by its legislature, excited the mingled alarm and indignation of
the colonists, who imagined that in sheltering themselves under a
republic they were protected as amply as they would have been under
the constitution of the North American Union. In this they were
disappointed; for, in 1830, an arbitrary enactment--based no doubt
upon a jealous dread of the growing value and size of a colony which
formed a link between the United States and Mexico by resting against
Tamaulipas and Louisiana, on the north and south,--prohibited entirely
the future immigration of American settlers into Coahuila and Texas.
To enforce this decree and to watch the loyalty of the actual
inhabitants, military posts, composed of rude and ignorant Mexican
soldiers, were sprinkled over the country. And, at last, the people of
Texas found themselves entirely under military control.
This suited neither the principles nor tastes of the colonists, who,
in 1832, took arms against this warlike interference with their
municipal liberty, and after capturing the fort at Velasco, reduced to
submission the garrisons at Anahuac and Nacogdoches. The separate
state constitution which had been promised Texas in 1824, was never
sanctioned by the Mexican Congress, though the colonists prepared the
charter and were duly qualified for admission. But the crisis arrived
when the centralists of 1835, overthrew the federal constitution of
1824. Several Mexican states rose independently against the despotic
act. Zacatecas fought bravely for her rights, and saw her people
basely slain by the myrmidons of Santa Anna. The legislature of
Coahuila and Texas was dispersed by the military; and, at last, the
whole republic, save the pertinacious North Americans, yielded to the
armed power of the resolute oppressor.
The alarmed settlers gathered together as quickly as they could and
resolved to stand by their federative rights under the charter whose
guaranties allured them into Mexico. Meetings were held in all the
settlements, and a union was formed by means of correspondence. Arms
were next resorted to and the Texans were victorious at Gonzales,
Goliad, Bejar, Conception, Lepantitlan, San Patricio and San Antonio.
In November they met in consultation, and in an able, resolute and
dignified paper, declared that they had only taken up arms in defence
of the constitution of 1824; that their object was to continue loyal
to the confederacy if laws were made for the guardianship of their
political rights, and that they offered their lives and arms in aid of
other members of the republic who would rightfully rise against the
military despotism.
But the other states, in which there was no infusion of North Americans
or Europeans, refused to second this hardy handful of pioneers. Mexico
will not do justice, in any of her commentaries on the Texan war, to the
motives of the colonists. Charging them with an original and long
meditated design to rob the republic of one of its most valuable
provinces, she forgets entirely or glosses over, the military acts of
Santa Anna's invading army, in March, 1836, at the Alamo and Goliad,
which converted resistance into revenge. After those disgraceful scenes
of carnage peace was no longer possible. Santa Anna imagined, no doubt,
that he would terrify the settlers into submission if he could not drive
them from the soil. But he mistook both their fortitude and their force;
and, after the fierce encounter at San Jacinto, on the 21st of April,
1836, with Houston and his army, the power of Mexico over the insurgent
state was effectually and forever broken.
After Santa Anna had been taken prisoner by the Texans, in this fatal
encounter, and was released and sent home through the United States in
order to fulfil his promise to secure the recognition of Texan
independence, the colonists diligently began the work of creating for
themselves a distinct nationality, for they failed in all their early
attempts to incorporate themselves with the United States during the
administrations of Jackson and Van Buren. These presidents were
scrupulous and faithful guardians of national honor, while they
respected the Mexican right of reconquest. Their natural sympathies
were of course yielded to Texas, but their executive duties, the faith
of treaties, and the sanctions of international law forbade their
acceding to the proposed union. Texas, accordingly, established a
national government, elected her officers, regulated her trade, formed
her army and navy, maintained her frontier secure from assault, and
was recognized as, _de facto_, an independent sovereignty by the
United States, England, France and Belgium. But these efforts of the
infant republic did not end in mere preparations for a separate
political existence and future commercial wealth. The rich soil of the
lowlands along the numerous rivers that veined the whole region soon
attracted large accessions of immigrants, and the trade of Texas began
to assume significance in the markets of the world.
Meanwhile Mexico busied herself, at home, in revolutions, or in
gathering funds and creating armies, destined, as the authorities
professed, to reconquer the lost province. Yet all these military and
financial efforts were never rendered available in the field, and, in
reality, no adequate force ever marched towards the frontier. The men
and money raised through the services and contributions of credulous
citizens were actually designed to figure in the domestic drama of
political power in the capital. No hostilities, of any significance,
occurred between the revolutionists and the Mexicans after 1836, for
we cannot regard the Texan expedition to Santa Fé, or the Mexican
assault upon the town of Mier as belligerant acts deserving
consideration as grave efforts made to assert or secure national rights.
Such was the condition of things from 1836 until 1844, during the
whole of which period Texas exhibited to the world a far better aspect
of well regulated sovereignty than Mexico herself. On the 12th of
April of that year, more than seven years after Texas had established
her independence, a treaty was concluded by President Tyler with the
representatives of Texas for the annexation of that republic to the
United States. In March, 1845, Congress passed a joint resolution
annexing Texas to the union upon certain reasonable conditions, which
were acceded to by that nation, whose convention erected a suitable
state constitution, with which it became finally a member of our
confederacy. In the meantime, the envoys of France and England, had
opened negotiations for the recognition of Texan independence, which
terminated successfully; but when they announced their triumph, on the
20th of May, 1845, Texas was already annexed conditionally to the
United States by the act of congress.
The joint resolution of annexation, passed by our congress, was
protested against by General Almonte, the Mexican minister at that
period in Washington, as an act of aggression "the most unjust which can
be found in the annals of modern history" and designed to despoil a
friendly nation of a considerable portion of her territory. He
announced, in consequence, the termination of his mission, and demanded
his passports to leave the country. In Mexico, soon after, a bitter and
badly conducted correspondence took place between the minister of
foreign affairs and Mr. Shannon, our envoy. And thus, within a brief
period, these two nations found themselves unrepresented in each other's
capital and on the eve of a serious dispute.
But the government of the United States,--still sincerely anxious to
preserve peace, or at least, willing to try every effort to soothe the
irritated Mexicans and keep the discussion in the cabinet rather than
transfer it to the battle field,--determined to use the kindly efforts
of our consul, Mr. Black, who still remained in the capital, to seek an
opportunity for the renewal of friendly intercourse. This officer was
accordingly directed to visit the minister of foreign affairs and
ascertain from the Mexican government whether it would receive an envoy
from the United States, invested with full power to adjust all the
questions in dispute between the two governments. The invitation was
received with apparent good will, and in October, 1845, the Mexican
government agreed to receive one, commissioned with full powers to
settle the dispute in a peaceful, reasonable and honorable manner.
* * * * *
As soon as this intelligence reached the United States, Mr. John
Slidell was dispatched as envoy extraordinary and minister
plenipotentiary on the supposed mission of peace; but when he reached
Vera Cruz in November, he found the aspect of affairs changed. The
government of Herrera, with which Mr. Black's arrangement had been
made, was tottering. General Paredes, a leader popular with the people
and the army, availing himself of the general animosity against Texas,
and the alleged desire of Herrera's cabinet to make peace with the
United States, had determined to overthrow the constitutional
government. There is scarcely a doubt that Herrera and his ministers
were originally sincere in their desire to settle the international
difficulty, and to maintain the spirit of the contract they had made.
But the internal danger, with which they were menaced by the army and
its daring demagogue, induced them to prevaricate as soon as Mr.
Slidell presented his credentials for reception. All their pretexts
were, in reality, frivolous, when we consider the serious results
which were to flow from their enunciation. The principal argument
against the reception of our minister was, that his commission
constituted him a regular envoy, and that, he was not confined to the
discussion of the Texan question alone. Such a mission, the
authorities alleged, placed the countries at once, diplomatically,
upon an equal and ordinary footing of peace, and their objection
therefore, if it had any force, at all, was to the fact, that we
exhibited through the credentials of our envoy, the strongest evidence
that one nation can give to another of perfect amity! We had, in
truth, no questions in dispute between us, except boundary and
indemnity;--for Texas, as a sovereignty acknowledged by the acts, not
only of the United States and of European powers, but in consequence
of her own maintenance of perfect nationality and independence, had a
right to annex herself to the United States. The consent of Mexico to
acknowledge her independence in 1845, under certain conditions,
effectually proved this fact beyond dispute.
Whilst the correspondence between Slidell and the Mexican ministry was
going on, Paredes continued his hostile demonstrations, and, on the
30th of December, 1845, president Herrera, who anxiously desired to
avoid bloodshed, resigned the executive chair to him without a
struggle. Feeble as was the hope of success with the new authorities,
our government, still anxious to close the contest peacefully,
directed Mr. Slidell to renew the proposal for his reception to
Paredes. These instructions he executed on the first of March, 1846,
but his request was refused by the Mexican minister of foreign
affairs, on the twelfth of that month, and our minister was forthwith
obliged to return from his unsuccessful mission.
All the public documents, and addresses of Paredes, made during the
early movements of his revolution and administration, breathe the
deadliest animosity to our union. He invokes the god of battles, and
calls the world to witness the valor of Mexican arms. The revolution
which raised him to power, was declared to be sanctioned by the
people, who were impatient for another war, in which they might avenge
the aggressions of a government that sought to prostrate them.
Preparations were made for a Texan campaign. Loans were raised, and
large bodies of troops were moved to the frontiers. General Arista,
suspected of kindness to our country, was superceded in the north by
General Ampudia, who arrived at Matamoros on the 11th of April, 1846,
with two hundred cavalry, followed by two thousand men to be united
with the large body of soldiery already in Matamoros.
These military demonstrations denoted the unquestionable design and
will of Paredes, who had acquired supreme power by a revolution
founded upon the solemn pledge of hostility against the United States
and reconquest of Texas. His military life in Mexico made him a
despot. He had no confidence in the ability of his fellow-citizens to
govern themselves. He believed republicanism an Utopian dream of his
visionary countrymen. Free discussion through the press was
prohibited, during his short rule, and his satellites advocated the
establishment of a throne to be occupied by an European prince. These
circumstances induced our government to believe, that any
counter-revolution in Mexico, which might destroy the ambitious and
unpatriotic projects of Paredes, would promote the cause of peace, and
accordingly, it saw with pleasure, the prospect of a new outbreak
which might result in the downfall, and total destruction of the
greatest enemy we possessed on the soil of our sister republic.
[Illustration: (Signature--Ant. Lopez de Santa Anna)]