ciation. 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 sovereignity 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 General Arista, suspected of kindness to our country, was superceded in the north by General Ampudia, who arrived at Matamoros on the 11th of April, 1846, with two hundred cavalry, followed by two thousand men to be united with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.

CHARACTER OF GENERAL PAREDES.

333

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.

An. Loper a

Anta Anna

3Sane

CHAPTER VIII.

1846.

GENERAL TAYLOR ORDERED TO THE RIO GRANDE.
ORIGIN OF THE WAR.

TEXAN BOUNDARIES.

MATAMOROS - TAYLOR'S ADVANCE.

PARATIONS

COMMENCEMENT OF HOSTILITIES.

WHILST Slidell was negotiating, and, in consequence of the anticipated failure of his effort to be received, as was clearly indicated by the conduct of the Mexican government upon his arrival in the capital, - General Taylor, who had been stationed at Corpus Christi, in Texas, since the fall of 1845, with a body of regular troops, was directed, on the 13th of January, 1846, to move his men to the mouth of the Rio Grande. He, accordingly left his encampment on the 8th of March, and, on the 25th, reached Point Isabel, having encountered no serious opposition on the way. The march to the Rio Grande has been made the subject of complaint by politicians in Mexico and the United States, who believed that the territory lying between that river and the Nueces, was not the property of Texas. But inasmuch as Mexico still continued vehemently to assert her political right over the whole of Texas, the occupation of any part of its soil, south of the Sabine, by American troops, was in that aspect of the case, quite as much an infringement of Mexican sovereignty, as the march of our troops, from the Nueces to the Rio Grande.

As it is important that the reader should understand the original title to Louisiana, under which the boundary of the Rio Grande, was claimed, first of all for that state, and, subsequently, for Texas, we shall relate its history in a summary manner.

Louisiana had been the property of France, and by a secret contract between that country and Spain in 1762, as well as by treaties between France, Spain, and England, in the following year, the French dominion was extinguished on the continent of America. In consequence of the treaty between this country and England in 1783, the Mississippi became the western boundary of the United States, from its source to the thirty-first degree of north latitude,

HISTORY OF TEXAN BOUNDARIES.

335

and thence, on the same parallel, to the St. Mary's. France, it will be remembered, had always claimed dominion in Louisiana to the Rio Bravo del Norte, or Rio Grande; by virtue :

1st. Of the discovery of the Mississippi from near its source to the ocean.

2d. Of the possession taken, and establishment made by La Salle, at the bay of Saint Bernard, west of the river Trinity and Colorado, by authority of Louis XIV. in 1635— notwithstanding the subsequent destruction of the colony.

3d. Of the charter of Louis XIV. to Crozat in 1712.

4th. Of the historical authority of Du Pratz, Champigny and the Count de Vergennes.

5th. Of the authority of De Lisle's map, and of the map published in 1762, by Don Thomas Lopez, Geographer to the king of Spain, as well as of various other maps, atlases, and geographical authorities.

By an article of the secret treaty of San Ildefonso in October, 1800, Spain retroceded Louisiana to France, but this treaty was not promulgated until the beginning of 1802. The paragraph of cession is as follows: "His Catholic majesty engages to retrocede to the French republic, six months after the full and entire execution of the conditions and stipulations above recited, relative to his royal highness the Duke of Parma, the colony and province of Louisiana, with the same extent that it already has in the hands of Spain, and that it had when France possessed it, and, such as it should be, after the treaties passed subsequently between Spain and other powers." In 1803, Bonaparte, the first consul of the French republic, ceded Louisiana to the United States, as fully, and in the same manner, as it had been retroceded to France by Spain, under the treaty of San Ildefonso; and, by virtue of this grant, Messrs. Madison, Monroe, Adams, Clay, Van Buren, Jackson, and Polk, contended that the original limit of the new state had been the Rio Grande. However, by the third article of our treaty with Spain, in 1819, all our pretensions to extend the territory of Louisiana towards Mexico on the Rio Grande, were abandoned by adopting the river Sabine as our boundary in that quarter.

The Mexican authorities upon this subject are either silent or doubtful. No light is to be gathered from the geographical researches of Humboldt, whose elucidations of New Spain are in many respects the fullest and most satisfactory. In the year 1835, Stephen Austin published a map of Texas, representing the Nueces as the western confine,—and in 1836, General Almonte the former

336

ORIGIN OF THE WAR.

minister from Mexico to the United States, published a memoir upon Texas in which, whilst describing the Texan department of Bejar, he says "That notwithstanding it has been hitherto believed that the Rio de las Nueces is the dividing line of Coahuila and Texas, inasmuch as it is always thus represented on maps, I am informed by the government of the state, that geographers have been in error upon this subject; and that the true line should commence at the mouth of the river Aransaso, and follow it to its source; thence, it should continue by a straight line until it strikes the junction of the rivers Medina and San Antonio, and then, pursuing the east bank of the Medina to its head waters, it should terminate on the confines of Chihuahua.” 1

The true origin of the Mexican war was not this march of Taylor and his troops from the Nueces to the Rio Grande, through the debatable land. The American and Mexican troops were brought face to face by the act, and hostilities were the natural result after the exciting annoyances upon the part of the Mexican government which followed the union of Texas with our confederacy. Besides this, General Paredes, the usurping president, had already declared in Mexico, on the 18th of April, 1846, in a letter addressed to the commanding officer on the northern frontier, that he supposed him at the head of a valiant army on the theatre of action; and that it was indispensable to commence hostilities, the Mexicans themselves taking the initiative!

We believe that our nation and its rulers earnestly desired honorable peace, though they did not shun the alternative of war. It was impossible to permit a conterminous neighbor who owed us large sums of money, and was hostile to the newly adopted state, to select unopposed her mode and moment of attack. Mexico would neither resign her pretensions upon Texas, negotiate, receive our minister, nor remain at peace. She would neither declare war, nor cultivate friendship, and the result was, that when the armies approached each other, but little time was lost in resorting to the cannon and the sword.

As soon as General Taylor reached the Rio Grande he left a command at the mouth of the river, and taking post opposite Matamoros erected a fort, the guns of which bore directly upon the city. The Mexicans, whose artillery might have been brought to play upon the works, from the opposite side of the river, made no hostile demonstration against the left bank for some time, nor did they interrupt the construction of the fort. Reinforcements, how

1 Memorias para la historia de la Guerra de Tejas, vol. ii, p. 543.