Mexican-American War and the Media

Sir, - I have laid your dispatch No. 1 before the President, who instructs me to make known to you that he has read it with much pleasure, especially the portion which relates to your cordial reception by the King, and his assurance of friendly feelings towards the United States. The President in particular highly appreciates the declaration of the King, that in no event would any steps be taken by his Government in the slightest degree hostile or which would give to the United States just cause of complaint. It was the more gratifying from the fact that our previous information was calculated to make the impression, that the Government of France was prepared to unite with Great Britain in a joint protest against the annexation of Texas, and a joint effort to induce her Government to withdraw the proposition to annex, on condition that Mexico should be made to acknowledge her independence. He is happy to infer from your despatch that the information, as far as it relates to France, is, in all probability, without foundation. You did not go further than you ought in assuring the King that the object of annexation would be pursued with unabated vigor, and in giving your opinion that a decided majority of the American people were in its favour, and that it would certainly be annexed at no distant day. I feel confident that your anticipation will be fully realized at no distant period. Every day will tend to weaken that combination of political causes which led to the opposition to the measure, and to strengthen the conviction that it was not only expedient, but just and necessary.

You were right in making the distinction between the interests of France and England in reference to Texas - or rather, I would say, the apparent interests of the two countries. France cannot possibly have any other than commercial interests in desiring to see her preserve her separate independence; while, it is certain, England looks beyond, to political interests, to which she apparently attaches much importance. But, in our opinion, the interest of both against the measure is more apparent than real; and that neither France, England, nor even Mexico herself, has any in opposition to it, when the subject is fairly viewed and considered in its whole extent and in all its bearings. Thus viewed and considered, and assuming that peace, the extension of commerce, and security are objects of primary policy with them, it may, as it seems to me, be readily shown that the policy on the part of these Powers which would acquiesce in a measure so strongly desired by both the United States and Texas, for their mutual welfare and safety, as the annexation of the latter to the former, would be far more promotive of these great objects than that which would attempt to resist it.

It is impossible to cast a look at the map of the United States and Texas, and to note the long, artificial, and inconvenient line which divides them, and then to take into consideration the extraordinary increase of population and growth of the former, and the source from which the latter must derive its inhabitants, institutions, and laws, without coming to the conclusion that it is their destiny to be united, and, of course, that annexation is merely a question of time and mode. Thus regarded, the question to be decided would seem to be, whether it would not be better to permit it to be done now, with the mutual consent of both parties, and the acquiescence of these Powers, than to attempt to resist and defeat it. If the former course be adopted, the certain fruits would be the preservation of peace, great extension of commerce by the rapid settlement and improvement of Texas, and increased security, especially to Mexico. The last, in reference to Mexico, may be doubted; but I hold it not less clear than the other two.

It would be a great mistake to suppose that thus Government has any hostile feelings towards Mexico, or any disposition to aggrandize herself at her expense - the fact is the very reverse. It wishes her well, and desires to see her settled down in peace and security; and is prepared, in the event of the annexation of Texas, if not forced into conflict with her, to propose to settle with her the question of boundary and all others growing out of the annexation on the most liberal terms. Nature herself has clearly marked the boundary between her and Texas, by natural limits too strong to be mistaken. There are few countries whose limits are so distinctly marked; and it would be our desire, if Texas should be united to us, to see them firmly established, as the most certain means of establishing permanent peace between the two countries, and strengthening and cementing their friendship. Such would be the certain consequence of permitting the annexation to take place now, with the acquiescence of Mexico; but very different would be the case if it should be attempted to resist and defeat it, whether the attempt should be successful for the present or not. Any attempt of the kind would not improbably lead to a conflict between us and Mexico, and involve consequences, in reference to her and the general peace, long to be deplored on all sides and difficult to be repaired. But, should that not be the case, and the interference of another Power defeat the annexation for the present, without the interruption of peace, it would but postpone the conflict, and render it more fierce and bloody whenever it might occur. Its defeat would be attributed to enmity and ambition on the part of the Power by whose interference it was occasioned, and excite deep jealousy and resentment on the part of our people, who would be ready to seize the first favourable opportunity to effect by force what was prevented from being done peaceably by mutual consent. It is not difficult to see how greatly such a conflict, come when it might, would endanger the general peace, and how much Mexico might be the loser by it.

In the meantime, the condition of Texas would be rendered uncertain, her settlement and prosperity in consequence retarded, and her commerce crippled, while the general peace would be rendered much more insecure. It could not but greatly affect us. If the annexation of Texas should be permitted to take place peaceably now (as it would, without the interference of other Powers) the energies of our people would, for a long time to come, be directed to the peaceable pursuits of redeeming and bringing within the pale of cultivation, improvement, and civilization, that large portion of the continent lying between Mexico on one side, and the British possessions on the other, which is now, with little exception, a wilderness, with a spare population, consisting, for the most part, of wandering Indian tribes.

It is our destiny to occupy that vast region; to intersect it with roads and canals; to fill it with cities, towns, villages, and farms; to extend over it out religion, customs, constitution, and laws; and to present it as a peaceful and splendid addition to the domains of commerce and civilization. It is our policy to increase, by growing and spreading out into unoccupied regions, assimilating all we incorporate; in a word, to increase by accretion and not through conquest - by the addition of masses held together by the cohesion of force. No system can be more unsuited to the latter process or better adapted to the former than our admirable federal system. If it should not be resisted in its course, it will, probably, fulfil its destiny without disturbing our neighbours or putting in jeopardy the general peace; but if it be opposed by foreign interference, a new direction would be given to our energy, much less favourable to harmony with our neighbours and to the general peace of the world.

The change would undesirable to us, and much less in accordance with what I have assumed to be primary objects of policy on the part of France, England, and Mexico.

But, to descend to particulars: it is certain that while England, like France, desires the independence of Texas, with the view to commercial connexions, it is not less so, that one of the leading motives for England desiring it is the hope that through her diplomacy and influence negro slavery may be abolished there, and ultimately, by consequence, in the United States, and throughout the whole continent. That its ultimate abolition throughout the entire continent is an object ardently desired by her, we have decisive proof in the declaration of the Earl of Aberdeen, delivered to this department, and in which you will find a copy among the documents transmitted to Congress with the Texan treaty. That she desires its abolition in Texas, and has used her influence and diplomacy to effect it there, the same document, with the correspondence of this department with Mr. Pakenham, also to be found among the documents, furnishes proof not less conclusive. That one of the objects of abolishing it there is to facilitate its abolition in the United States, and throughout the continent, is manifest from the declaration of the abolition party and societies, both in this country and in England. In fact, there is good reason to believe that the scheme of abolishing it in Texas, with the view to its abolition in the United States and over the continent, originated with the prominent members of the party in the United States; and was first broached by them in the (so called) World's Convention, held in London in the year 1840, and through its agency brought to the notice of the British Government.

Now, I hold not only that France can have no interest in the consummation of this grand scheme which England hopes to accomplish through Texas, if she can defeat the annexation; but that her interest, and those of all the continental Powers of Europe, are directly and deeply opposed to it.

It is to late in the day to contend that humanity or philanthropy is the great object of the policy of England in attempting to abolish African slavery on this continent. I do not question but humanity may have been one of her leading motives for the abolition of the African slave trade, and that it may have had a considerable influence in abolishing slavery in her West Indian possessions - aided, indeed, by the fallacious calculation that the labour of the negroes would be at least as profitable, if not more so, in consequence of this measure. She acted on the principle that tropical products can be produced cheaper by free African labour and East Indian labour than by slave labour. She knew full well the value of such products to her commerce, navigation, navy, manufactures, revenue, and power. She was not ignorant that the support of her political preponderance depended on her tropical possessions, and had no intention of diminishing their productiveness, nor any anticipation that such would be the effect when the scheme of abolishing slavery in her colonial possessions was adopted. On the contrary, she calculated to combine philanthropy with profit and power, as is not unusual with fanaticism. Experience has convinced her of the fallacy of her calculations. She has failed in all her objects. The labour of her negroes has proved far less productive, without affording the consolation of having improved their condition.

The experiment has turned out to be a costly one. She expended nearly $1000,00,000 in indemnifying the owners of the emancipated slaves. It is estimated that the increased price paid since, by the people of Great Britain, for sugar and other tropical productions, in consequence of the measure, is equal to half that sum; and that twice that amount has been expended in the suppression of the slave trade; making together $250,000,000 as the cost of the experiment. Instead of realizing her hope, the result has been a sad disappointment. Her tropical products have fallen off to a vast amount. Instead of supplying her own wants and those of nearly all Europe with them, as formerly, she has now, in some of the most important articles, scarcely enough to supply her own. What is worse, her own colonies are actually consuming sugar produced by slave labour, brought direct to England, or refined in bond, and exported and sold in her colonies, as cheap or cheaper than they can be produced there; while the slave trade, instead of diminishing, has been in fact carried on to a greater extent than ever. So disastrous has been the result, that her fixed capital vested in tropical possessions, estimated at nearly $500,000,000, is said to stand on the brink of ruin.

But this is not the worst. While this costly scheme has had such ruinous effects on the tropical productions of Great Britain, it has given a powerful stimulus, followed by a corresponding increase of products, to those countries which have had the good sense to shun her example. There has been vested, it is estimated by them, in the production of tropical products, since 1808, in fixed capital, nearly $4,000,000,000, wholly dependent on slave labour. In the same period the value of their products has been estimated to have risen from about $72,000,000 annually to nearly $220,000,000; while the whole of the fixed capital of Great Britain vested in cultivating tropical products, both in the East and West Indies, is estimated at only about $830,000,000, and the value of the products annually at about $50,000,000. To present a still more striking view of three articles of tropical products (sugar, coffee, and cotton), the British possessions, including the West and East Indies and Mauritius, produced, in 1842, of sugar only 3,993,771lb., while Cuba, Brazil, and the United States, excluding other countries having tropical possessions, produced 9,600,000lb.; of coffee the British possessions produced only 27,393,003, while Cuba and Brazil produced 201,590,125lb.; and of cotton, the British possessions, including shipments to China, only 137,443,446lb., while the United States alone produced 790,479,275lb.

The above facts and estimates have all been drawn from a British periodical of high standing and authority, and are believed to be entitled to credit.

This vast increase of the capital and production on the part of those nations who have continued their former policy towards the negro race, compared with that of Great Britain, indicates a corresponding relative increase of the means of commerce, navigation, manufactures, wealth, and power. It is no longer a question of doubt, that the great source of the wealth, prosperity, and power of the more civilized nations of the temperate zone (especially Europe, where the arts have made the greatest advance) depends, in a great degree, on the exchange of their products with those of the tropical regions. So great has been the advance made in the arts, both chymical and mechanical, within the last few generations, that all the old civilized nations can, with but a small part of their labour and capital, supply their respective wants, which tends to limit within narrow bounds the amount of the commerce between them, and forces them all to seek for markets in the tropical regions and the more newly settled portions of the globe. Those who can best succeed in commanding those markets have the best prospect of outstripping the others in the career of commerce, navigation, manufactures, wealth, and power.

This is seen and felt by British statesmen, and has opened their eyes to the errors which they have committed. The question now with them is, how shall it be counteracted ? What has been done cannot be undone. The question is, by what means can Great Britain regain and keep a superiority in tropical cultivation, commerce, and influence ? Or, shall that be abandoned, and other nations be suffered to acquire the supremacy, even to the extent of supplying British markets, to the destruction of the capital already vested in their production ? These are the questions which now profoundly occupy the attention of her statesmen, and have the greatest influence over her councils.

In order to regain her superiority she not only seeks to revive and increase her own capacity to produce tropical productions, but to diminish and destroy the capacity of those who have so far outstripped her in consequence of her error. In pursuit of the former, she has cast her eyes to her East India possessions - to central and eastern Africa - with the view of establishing colonies there, and even to restore, substantially, the slave trade itself, under the specious name of transporting free slave labourers from Africa to her West India possessions, in order, if possible, to compete successfully with those who have refused to follow her suicidal policy. But these all afford but uncertain and distant hopes of recovering her lost superiority. Her main reliance is on the other alternative - to cripple or destroy the productions of her successful rivals. There is but one way by which it can be done, and that is by abolishing African slavery throughout this continent; and that she openly avows to be the constant object of her policy and exertions. It matters not how or from what motive it may be done - whether it may be by diplomacy, influence, or force; by ecret or open means; and whether the motive be humane or selfish, without regard to manner, means, or motive. The thing itself, should it be accomplished, would put down all rivalry, and give her the undisputed supremacy in supplying her own wants and those of the rest of the world; and thereby more than fully retrieve what she has lost by her own errors. It would give her the monopoly of tropical productions, which I shall next proceed to show.

What would be the consequence if this object of her unceasing solicitude and exertions should be effected by the abolition of negro slavery throughout this continent, some idea may be formed from the immense diminution of productions, as has been shown, which has followed abolition in her West India possessions. But, as great as that has been, it is nothing compared to what would be the effect if she should succeed in abolishing slavery in the United States, Cuba, Brazil, and throughout this continent. The experiment in her own colonies was made under the most favorable circumstances. It was brought about gradually and peaceably, by the steady and firm operation of the parent country, armed with complete power to prevent or crush at once all insurrectionary movements on the part of the negroes, and able and disposed to maintain to the full the political and social ascendancy of the former masters over their former slaves. It is no at all wonderful that the change of the relations of master and slave took place under such circumstances without violence and bloodshed, and that order and peace should have been since preserved. Very different would be the result of abolition, should it be effected by her influence and exertions, in the possessions of other countries on this continent - and especially in the United States, Cuba, and Brazil, the greatest cultivators of the principal tropical products of America.

To form a correct conception of what would be the result with them, we must look, not to Jamaica, but to St. Domingo, for example. The change would be followed by unforgiving hate between the two races, and end in a bloody and deadly struggle between them for superiority. One or the other would have to be subjugated, extirpated, or expelled, and desolation would overspread their territories, as in St. Domingo, from which it would take centuries to recover. The end would be, that the superiority in cultivating the great tropical staples would be transferred from them to the British tropical possessions.

They are of vast extent, and those beyond the Cape of Good Hope possessed of an unlimited amount of labour, standing ready, by the aid of British capital, to supply the deficit which would be occasioned by destroying the tropical productions of the United States, Cuba, Brazil, and other countries cultivated by slave labour on this continent, so soon as the increased price, in consequence, would yield a profit. It is the successful competition of that labour which keeps the prices of the staples so low as to prevent their cultivation with profit in the possessions of Great Britain by what she is pleased to call free labour. If she can destroy its competition she would have a monopoly in those productions. She has all the means of furnishing an unlimited supply; vast and fertile possessions in both Indies, boundless command of capital and labour, and ample power to suppress disturbances, and preserve order throughout her wide domains.

It is unquestionable, that she regards the abolition of slavery in Texas as a most important step to this great object of policy, so much the aim of her solicitude and exertions; and the defeat of the annexation of Texas to our Union as indispensable to the abolition of slavery there. She is too sagacious not to see what a fatal blow it would give to slavery in the United States, and how certainly its abolition with us would abolish it over the whole continent, and thereby give her a monopoly of the productions of the great tropical staples, and the command of the commerce, navigation, and manufactures of the world, with an established naval ascendancy and political preponderance. To this continent the blow would be calamitous beyond description.

It would destroy in a great measure the cultivation and production of the great tropical staples, amounting annually in value nearly $300,000,000, the fund which stimulates and upholds almost every other branch of its industry, commerce, navigation, and manufactures. The whole, by their joint influence, are rapidly spreading population, wealth, improvement, and civilization over the whole continent, and vivifying, by their overflow, the industry of Europe; thereby increasing its population, wealth, and advancement in the arts, in power, and in civilization.

Such must be the result, should Great Britain succeed in accomplishing the constant object of her desire and exertions - the abolition of negro slavery over this continent, and towards the effecting of which she regards the defeat of the annexation of Texas to our Union as so important. Can it be possible that Governments so enlightened and sagacious as those of France and the other great continental Powers can be so blinded by the plea of philanthropy as not to see what must inevitably follow, be her motive what it may, should she succeed in her objects ? It is little short of mockery to talk of philanthropy, with the examples before us of the effects of abolishing negro slavery in her own colonies, in St. Domingo, and the northern states of our Union, where statistical facts, not to be shaken, prove that the freed negro, after the experience of 60 years, is in a far worse condition than in the other states, where he has been left in his former condition. No: the effect of what is called abolition, where the number is few, is not to raise the inferior race to the condition of freemen, but to deprive the negro of the guardian care of his owner, subject to all the depression and oppression belonging to his inferior condition. But, on the other hand, where the number is great, and bears a large proportion to the whole population, it would be still worse. It would be to substitute for the existing relation a deadly strife between the two races, to end in the subjection, expulsion, or extirpation of one or the other: and such would be the case over the greater part of this continent where slavery exists. It would not end there; but in all probability would extend, by its example, the war of races over all South America, including Mexico, and extend to the Indian as well as to the African race, and make the whole one scene of blood and devastation.

Dismissing, then, the stale and unfounded plea of philanthropy, can it be that France and the other great continental Powers - seeing what must be the result of the policy for the accomplishment of which England is constantly exerting herself, and that the defeat of the annexation of Texas is so important towards its consummation - are prepared to back or countenance her in her efforts to effect either ? What possible motives can they have to favour her cherished policy ? Is it not better for them that they should be supplied with tropical products in exchange for their labour from the United States, Brazil, Cuba, and this continent generally, than to be dependent on one great monopolizing Power for their supply ? Is it not better that they should receive them at the low price which competition, cheaper means of production, and nearness of market, would furnish them by the former, than to give the high prices which monopoly, dear labour, and great distance from the market would impose ? Is it not better that their labour should be exchanged with a new continent, rapidly increasing in population and the capacity for consuming, and which would furnish, in the course of a few generations, a market nearer to them, and of almost unlimited extent, for the products of their industry and arts, than with old and distant regions, whose population has long since reached its growth ?

The above contains those enlarged views of policy which, it seems to me, an enlightened European statesman ought to take in making up his opinion on the subject of the annexation of Texas, and the grounds, as it mat be inferred, on which England vainly opposes it. They certainly involve considerations of the deepest importance, and demanding the greatest attention. Viewed in connexion with them, the question of annexation becomes one of the first magnitude, not only to Texas and the United States, but to this continent and Europe. They are presented that you may use them on all suitable occasions, where you think they may be with effect in your correspondence, where it can be done with propriety, or otherwise. The President relies with confidence on your sagacity, prudence, and zeal. Your mission is one of the first magnitude at all times, but especially now; and he feels assured nothing will be left undone on your part to do justice to the country and the Government in reference to this great question.

I have said nothing as to our right of treating with Texas without consulting Mexico. You so fully understand the grounds on which we rest our right, and are so familiar with the facts necessary to maintain them, that it was no thought necessary to add anything in reference to it.
I am, Sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
J.C. CALHOUN
William R. King, Esq., &c.

--------------

The following is the bill suitted by Mr. Benton to the Senate, providing for a conditional annexation of Texas to the United States: -

"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that the President of the United States be, and he hereby is, authorized and advised to open negotiations with Mexico and Texas, for the adjustment of boundaries, and the annexation of the latter to the United States, on the following bases, to wit: -

"1. The boundary of the annexed territory to be in the desert prairie west of the Nueces, and along the highlands and mountain heights which divide the waters of the Mississippi from the waters of the Rio del Norte, and to latitude 42 degrees north.

"2. The people of Texas, by a legislative act, or by any authentic act which shows thw will of the majority, to express their assent to said annexation.

"3. A State, to be called 'the State of Texas,' with boundaries fixed by herself, and an extent not exceeding that of the largest State of the Union, be admitted into the Union, by virtue of this act, on an equal footing with the original States.

"4. The remainder of the annexed territory to be held and disposed of by the United States as one of their territories, and to be called 'the South-west Territory.'

"5. The existence of slavery to be for ever prohibited in the northern and north western part of said territory, west of the 10th degree of longitude west from Greenwich, so as to divide, as equally as may be, the whole of the annexed country between slaveholding and non-slaveholding States.
"6. The assent of Mexico to be obtained by treaty to such annexation and boundary, or to be dispensed with when the Congress of the United States may deem such assent to be unnecessary.

"7. Other details of the annexation to be adjusted by treaty, so far as the same may come within the scope of the treaty-making Power."

The bill was read twice, and referred, on motion of Mr. Archer, to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

[GLP]

LT January 2, 1845

LONDON, THURSDAY, JANUARY 2, 1845.

In spite of the prolixity of the message of the President of the UNITED STATES, that document conveys a very imperfect notion of the conduct and policy pursued by the Cabinet of Washington with reference to the annexation of Texas during the last autumn; and, in order to form a just appreciation of Mr. TYLER's and Mr. CALHOUN's real proceedings, we must examine the diplomatic correspondence of the past year, which has been annexed to the message, and communicated to Congress. Our analysis of these very extensive documents must unavoidably be of the briefest kind, but we shall be able to show by what means the two States have been brought to the verge of actual war during the recess of Congress, and we shall find, before we conclude, that the interests and honour of our own country, and one of our most important European relations, are mixed up in this important discussion.

Although the Senate of the United States rejected Mr. TYLER's treaty of annexation, and, consequently, put its constitutional veto on the transaction, thePRESIDENT and his Secretary of State (Mr. Calhoun) appear not to have taken the slightest account of that decision, but to have gone on in all their instructions to their agents abroad to announce the progress of their scheme, and to speak of the question of annexation as one that was still pending before the people of the United States. In every constitutional and legal sense this assertion was false. The question had been negatived by the Senate, principally on the ground of avoiding a rupture with Mexico; and the only matter which was pending at all was the election of a President, which was still so doubtful that it was impossible for Mr. TYLER to have foreseen last August whether his successor would be disposed to promote annexation or refuse it. We now discover, however, that he had in hand a surer and a swifter scheme, and in this he was marvelously seconded by SANTA ANNA's absurd intention of re-invading Texas, and by General WOOLL's ferocious intimation of the ruthless manner in which the war was to be carried on.

As early as the 20th of June, 1844, Mr. SHANNON, who had recently been appointed United States' Minister at Mexico, received his instructions from Mr. CALHOUN. These instructions contain a list of demands for the adjustment of various long-standing claims against the Mexican Government, which the Minister was directed to urge in a tone more suitable to a hostile manifesto than to an amicable communication with a neighbouring State. After a long series of representations of this character, Mr. SHANNON was to enter upon the question of annexation. He was to deny in the most formal terms that Mexico could even discuss the right of the United States to make that treaty, and to declare that "the "United States could not deterred by menaces from adopting a measure which, after mature deliberation, "they have determined they have a right to do, and which they believe to be essential to their safety and "prosperity." Such was the language of the American Executive, immediately after this very measure had been deliberately rejected by the Senate, in whom the ultimate control of the foreign relations of the Union resides ! We shall shortly see that the same policy was actively pursued in Europe.

The preparation for further hostilities on the part of Mexico gave a further pretext for continuing this extraordinary demonstration; and President HOUSTON, who was still in office in Texas, hastened to claim (August 6, 1844) the direct assistance of military forces from the Union. This, however, was held to be too great a stretch of constitutional powers even for Mr. TYLER; and in declining to accede to the demand, the Cabinet of Washington acknowledged that the treaty was not in reality any longer pending. A month later, however, Mr. CALHOUN wrote to Mr. SHANNON, at Mexico, directing him to remonstrate against the renewal of hostilities in stronger language than had been used before.

"There can be but one object (said he) in renewing the war at this time, and that is, to defeat the annexation of Texas to the Union. Mexico knows full well that the rejection of the treaty has but postponed the question of annexation. She knows that Congress adjourned without finally disposing of it; that it is now pending before both houses (!), and actively canvassed throughout the wide extent of the Union; and that it will in all probability be decided in its favour, unless it should be defeated by some movement exterior to the country." . . . . "No measure of policy has been more steadily or longer pursued, and that by both of the great parties into which the Union is divided. Many believed that Texas was embraced in the cession of Louisiana, and was improperly, if not unconstitutionally, surrendered by the treaty of Florida in 1819. Under that impression, and the general conviction of its importance to the safety and welfare of the Union, its annexation has been an object of constant pursuit ever since."

We have no space to comment on the shameless effrontery of this avowal, which is made as if the declaration of "this long-cherished and established "policy" sufficed to justify it, and to cancel all the intermediate declarations and treaties of the American Government, by which they have denied and renounced all such claims. As well might Russia boast that her long-cherished policy has been to possess herself of Constantinople, or France to declare that she has for more than a century established her views on the Rhine, and then proceed to act on such a declaration.

Well might the Mexican Minister say in his answer to this note (31st of October, 1844), that "it "thoroughly reveals the deceit with which Mexico has so long been treated," before he proceeded to expose the fallacies of legal construction, and the gross violation of all the duties of heighbourhood and of amity, by which alone Texas was wrested from the Mexican Government. This reply led to the angry correspondence to which we on Tuesday alluded; and the result is, that during the recess of Congress, in defiance of a formal vote of the Senate, and by the assertion of claims which that vote had negatived, President TYLER has brought the relations of the two Republics into a state in which a collision appears to be inevitable, and the occupation of Texas itself will probably be the first consequence of a rupture. If this view of the case be correct, the triumph of the annexation party in Mr. POLK's election has alone saved Mr. TYLER from impeachment and the highest punishment known to the law, for he has assuredly been guilty of the highest abuse of the powers confided by the law to his charge.

Meanwhile, and this is not the least important part of the case, the American agents were not inactive in Europe. It appears from a despatch, which we print in another column, addressed (12th of August, 1844) to Mr. KING, the American Minister at the Court of France, that on the arrival of that gentleman at Paris he at once received a personal declaration from the KING, "that in no event would any steps be "taken by his Government in the slightest degree hostile, or which would give the United States just cause "of complaint."

In a subsequent conversation between Mr. KING and M. GUIZOT, that Minister is reported to have declared, that France had not agreed to unite with England in a protest against annexation; and the American Government inferred that France was not disposed, in any event, to take a hostile attitude with reference to annexation. France was, therefore, understood by the Cabinet of Washington to abandon the principle of Texan independence as completely as if she had never recognized it, or had recognized it only for the purpose of abetting the United States in the plunder of the Mexican territory. Mr. KING was, therefore, to inform LOUIS PHILIPPE that the object of annexation would be pursued with unabated vigour, and to give his opinion that a decided majority of American people were in its favour, and that it would certainly be annexed at no distant day. Such a transaction as this at Paris afforded the most powerful encouragement which the scheme could receive from Europe, since it left Great Britain to maintain the independence of Texas single-handed; and we must add, that it places the good faith of the French Government in a very equivocal light. We require to be informed, categorically, whether or not the French Government was not at the same time affecting to join in our endeavours to maintain the status quo in Texas, whilst it was in reality giving these assurances to Mr. KING?

The charge is a serious one, and we await the answer.

Mr. CALHOUN, however, hastened to avail himself of this opening. He at once placed the question on its true basis - the existence and interests of slavery; and he appeals to France with a confidence which we would fain believe to be misplaced, to combine with him in defeating a policy which tends to the abolition of slavery on the American continent. Admitting that one of the main objects of British policy in this question is to check the progress and ascendancy of slave institutions, he contends that "France can "have no interest in the consummation of this grand scheme, but that her interests, and those of all the "continental Powers of Europe, are directly opposed to it." In other words, he argues explicitly that the interest of the European Powers demands that they should not only tolerate, but encourage and promote slavery in America, and therefore assist America in unparalleled acts of spoliation and bad faith, on which the permanence of slavery on that continent avowedly depends. Thus is the question stripped by its own advocate of all disguise; and the odious motives in which this abominable scheme have originated - namely, the aggrandizement of the United States, for the express purpose of perpetuating the servivlity of the negro race - are laid bare to the wonder and execration of mankind. On these grounds Mr. CALHOUN appeals to civilized France and civilized Europe for encouragement and support. The principal interest (though it is not the only one) we have in deprecating the annexation of Texas, is our hatred and resistance to that violation of human rights and divine justice, which we have eradicated from the colonies of Britain; and it is by a laboured defence of slavery and slave-interests that Mr. CALHOUN courts the sympathy of the French Government.

We leave unnoticed his sarcasms on our philanthropy and fanaticism; we smile at the motives ridiculously imputed to us of acquiring by free labour a monopoly of tropical productions, and the command of commerce, navigation, and manufactures of the world. The policy of England is sacred in the eyes of the people of England because it is the policy of freedom, justice, and civilization. To measure it by the mere rules of temporary interest is a folly and a deceit; although, if we do stand alone in the defence of these great principles, we stand armed with the most terrible power ever placed by Providence in the hands of a great nation. We know not what part may be assigned to us by the course of events in this contention; nor do we forget that the maintenance of peace is the highest duty of enlightened statesmen, and that the crimes and frauds of the western hemisphere do not rest on the conscience of Britain. But there never was an instance in which our policy was more unjustifiably impugned than in this despatch of an American Minister, written for the express purpose of being used against us at the Court of one of our nearest allies; and we are persuaded that this mention of it will suffice to rouse the just indignation of this country, and to show the real nature of these scandalous proceedings to the whole world.

[GLP]

LT January 8, 1845, 6a

MR. POLK AND HIS POLICY

Mr. Polk has delivered the following, his first speech, we believe, since his election to the Presidency of the United States, in reply to the address presented to him by the citizens of Nashville. The only allusion which he makes to the policy which shall guide him for the future will be found in the last paragraph. It is, however, exceedingly vague and indefinite: -

"I return to you, Sir, and to my fellow-citizens whose organ you are, my unfeigned thanks for this manifestation of the popular regard and confidence, and for the congratulations which you have been pleased to express to me upon the termination and result of the late political contest. I am fully sensible that these congratulations are not, and cannot be, personal to myself. It is the eminent success of our common principles which has spread such general joy over the land. The political struggle through which the country has just passed has been deeply exciting. Extraordinary causes have existed to make it so. It has terminated - it is now over - and I sincerely hope and believe has been decided by the sober and settled judgment of the American people.

"In exchanging mutual congratulations with each other upon the result of the late election, the Democratic party should remember, in calmly reviewing the contest, that the portion of the fellow-citizens who have differed with us in opinion have equal rights with ourselves; that minorities as well as majorities are entitled to the full and free exercise of their opinions and judgments; and that the rights of all, whether of minorities or majorities, as such, are entitled to equal respect and regard.

"In rejoicing, therefore, over the success of the Democratic party, and of their principles, in the late election, it should be in no spirit of exultation over the defeat of our opponents; but it should be because, as we honestly believe, our principles and policy are better calculated than theirs to promote the true interests of the country.

"In the position in which I have been placed by the voluntary and unsought suffrages of my fellow-citizens, it will become my duty, as it will be my pleasure, faithfully and truly to represent, in the executive department of the Government, the principles and policy of the great party of the country who have elevated me to it; but, at the same time, it is proper that I should beware that I should not regard myself as the representative of a party only, but of the whole people of the United States: and I trust that the future policy of the Government may be such as to secure the happiness and prosperity of all, without distinction of party."

[GLP]

LT January 11, 1845, 6f

AN OLD FRIEND IN A NEW CHARACTER

It is generally supposed in this neighbourhood that Duff Green has had a great deal to do with the recent diplomatic goings on of Mr. Shannon in Mexico, and we have no doubt he will have his finger as deeply in the Texas pie now that he has got to that republic. Duff is a most remarkable and original character. Two or three years ago he went to London and resided there for many months, sustaining with more or less dignity, success, and effect, the original and characteristic position of American Minister on his own hook. He engaged in a series of important and highly interesting, if not remarkably profitable, negotiations, relative to a commercial treaty between the United States and Great Britain, and had actually a correspondence with Sir Robert Peel, the Prime Minister, and many other distinguished men in both Houses of Parliament. He also visited Paris, discussed matters and things in general with Guizot, and drank tea and toasted his shins, if we are not mistaken, with Louis Philippe himself. Having failed in his negotiations to a considerable extent, he then started the enterprise of a newspaper in the city of New York, which was to regulate the whole affairs of this continent, and overtop the other newspapers by being a sort of organ of both Europe and America. In this grand scheme Wikoff, the chevalier, was his principal aid, being the capitalist - save the mark! Of the concern. Failing in this also, Duff started for Mexico with dispatches, and has created a crisis in that country. Now he is back in Texas, and no doubt before he returns to Washington he will raise a highly respectable dust in that direction. Duff is, indeed, one of the most interesting characters of the present age. He has a singular mixture of tact, bronze, and plausibility, which give him more weight than people are apt to attach to him. We have some notion of writing the history of his negotiations in London, Paris, Texas, and Mexico. It would be as intensely interesting, and vastly more amusing, than the Adventures of Puss in Boots. - New York Herald [GLP]

LT January 14, 1845, 4a

LONDON, TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, 1845.

President TYLER has exceeded himself in the fifth act of his performance. Whenever we have ventured on a prediction as to his future conduct, which if applied to any other ruler of nations would have been fantastical and injurious, he has not only justified all our expectations, but surpassed them. The end of his Presidency is a multum in parvo of diplomatic craft and political violence; and setting out of account the importance of the questions under discussion with reference to Mexico and Texas, we are divided between amazement and sheer diversion at the language and demeanor of this personage, speaking as never man spoke before in the name of the Executive Government of twenty millions of civilized beings.

The scheme for getting up a quarrel with Mexico has been most actively carried on; but in order to avoid the difficulties which might attend an actual declaration of war by the President of the UNITED STATES - that power being in fact vested by the Constitution in Congress - Mr. TYLER has endeavoured by the conduct of his agents in Mexico, and more recently by his own extraordinary Message of the 19th of December, to throw open the Mexicans the odium of this last and most disastrous step. The Congress of the United States might still have sufficient penetration to see through Mr. TYLER's designs and sufficient power to control them. The desire to avoid a war with Mexico was the main ground on which not only Mr. CLAY and his party, but even Mr. VAN BUREN and his friends, opposed the annexation treaty; but if Mexico can be provoked into taking the first step in hostilities, no part in the United States will be more able to recede or to stop the war than Mr. TYLER is himself. It will be remembered that the angry correspondence between Mr. SHANNON, the United States Minister at Mexico, and Senor REJON, the Foreign Secretary of that Republic, was begun by the former gentleman, who communicated under his own name a note which was, in fact, no more than a repetition of Mr. CALHOUN's own despatch to him. An attempt was made to show that because the United States Government has negotiated at various times in the last twenty years for the purchase of the territory of Texas from Mexico for a price varying from one to six millions of dollars - all which negotiations the Mexican Government steadily and uniformly rejected - that therefore Texas being now a free and independent state, she has a perfect right to dispose of herself as she pleases. It is evident that such an argument as addressed to Mexico was utterly worthless and even insulting, since Mexico never had acknowledged that Texas is an independent state at all; and to admit such an argument was to admit more than the independence of Texas - namely, a right to make over her territories to a foreign Power. Mr. SHANNON, however, pressed it for the purpose for which it was intended and our readers have had before the Mexican Minister's able and temperate answer. Of these Mr. SHANNON presumes to say, in an official communication to Mr. CALHOUN, that -

"They were written for the purpose and with the view of arousing the jealousies, and exciting the prejudices, of the people against the Government and southern people of the United States, and thereby to make political capital for the party in power. To accomplish this object you will see that Mr. Rejon has not hesitated deliberately and purposely to misrepresent, in the most gross and palpable manner, both of my notes, and to charge the Government and southern people of the United States with acts and motives highly dishonourable."

The acts and motives of the American Government in this and too many other transactions stand in needle of no "deliberate misrepresentation" to incur the censure and the scorn of every other political community in the world. Even their intrigues are as patent and flagrant as other men's crimes. In this instance the whole correspondence is public; and as the matter is really only indirectly connected with the interests of this country, some weight may be attached to our solemn conviction - a conviction shared by every man in Europe who has examined the particulars of this transaction - that from first to last the proceedings of the United States to effect the annexation of Texas are a scandal and a dishonour not only to their country, but to the age we live in.

We proceed, however, with the narrative of the events. No sooner had Mr. SHANNON's despatch announcing his suspension of the intercourse with the United States Government been received at Washington, than it brought down Mr. TYLER's astonishing Message, which had doubtless been prepared in full expectation of the event. The language held by the American Minister at Mexico could have no other result; and the part of the PRESIDENT was to endeavour to kindle as much exasperation at home as he had already occasioned abroad. The Message is a mere rhetorical artifice for this purpose; it is full of fierce epithets and appeals to the passions and sympathies of the American people; and it once mor misstates the case with the most unblushing pertinacity.

In his Message on the opening of the Congress the PRESIDENT had declared that as it was Texas which had sought this union, was the Union to reject her prayer ? In this Message, sent down within a fortnight of the last, he says, "Texas had entered into the Treaty of Annexation upon the invitation of the "Executive; and when, for that act, she was threatened with a renewal of the war on the part of Mexico, "she naturally looked to this Government to ward off the threatened blow." The contradiction is direct and in terms, and it is accompanied with a gross inaccuracy. Texas was not threatened with a renewal of war on the part of Mexico for that act, namely, the Treaty of Annexation, but because Mexico had never relinquished her very impracticable design of reconquering her former province.

Mr. TYLER recapitulates, with all the vehemence of a manifesto of war, the grievances complained of by his Government; but having the fear of a hostile Senate before his eyes, he drops his tone as he approaches the close of his effusion, and "contents himself with re-urging upon Congress prompt and "immediate action on the subject of annexation. By adopting that measure the United States will be in the "exercise of an undoubted right; and if Mexico, not regarding that forbearance, shall aggravate the "injustice of her conduct by a declaration of war against them, upon her head will rest all the "responsibility."

The distracted condition of the Mexican Republic itself is now the chief ground for hoping that war may be avoided; but even that hope depends on little more than the apparently entire inability of Mexico to defend her territories. What argument which has ever been deployed to defend the annexation of Texas does not apply with equal forces to the conquest of the whole of the ancient colonies of Spain ? Is not one act of rapine and violence invariably the prelude to another ? If Mr. TYLER covets Texas, who

will set bounds to Mr. TYLER's descendants ? These, indeed, are questions of serious moment to all the world; but most of all to such honourable and patriotic citizens of the United States themselves who still respect, though they cannot maintain, the principles of their fathers. This question has already proved fatal to the integrity and prudence of the American Government; it will hereafter prove equally fatal to their national interests; it has blasted their honour, it will hereafter dissolve their power, divide their country, and impose a dreadful burden on their children's children, for it is the first step they will have made in foreign conquest for the gratification of popular ambition. [GLP]

LT January 15, 1845, 6a

MEXICO

We take the following article from the New York Commercial Advertiser of the 31st ult. It was furnished to that journal by Mr. Cushing, the late American Commissioner in China, who has returned from the scene of his mission by way of Mexico: -

"The revolution of Mexico was rapidly approaching a decisive crisis, and the utmost confusion and disorder exist in all parts of the republic. The great object of the revolution is to decide whether SANTA ANNA shall be precipitated from power, or whether. on the other hand, he shall be the permanent dictator and arbitrary master of the Government. In order to understand well the actual state of things it is necessary, in the first place, to give a brief explanation of the previous state of things.

"At the head of the Government in 1841 was General Anastasio Bustamente, under the constitution which then regulated the Mexican Republic. In August, 1841, General Paredes and the department of Jalisco pronounced against the Government of Bustamente. A civil war of brief duration ensued, which was terminated on the 28th of September, 1841, by an arrangement, in virtue of which the preexisting constitution was abolished, and General Santa Anna was invested with the powers of dictator, for the purpose of re-organizing the constitution and the Government. This temporary arrangement is known by the name of the Bases of Tacubaya and the agreements of La Estenzuela. Under the auspices of Santa Anna a Congress assembled in June, 1842, and proceeded to deliberate on a new constitution. Santa Anna himself retired to Manga de Clavo, leaving General Bravo as President ad incrim; and the proceedings of Congress not being agreeable to Santa Anna, it was dissolved by General Bravo in December, 1842, and a National Junta, or Assembly of Notables, was convened in its place. On the 12th of June, 1843, a new constitution was completed and made public, by which (among other things) the supreme power was lodged in the hands of a President, to be elected for five years; of an elective body called the Council of Government, and of a Congress composed of a Senate and Chamber of Deputies, and Santa Anna himself was immediately elected President under the new constitution. During this period the republic had been distracted, not only by the civil war which displaced Bustamente and elevated Santa Anna to power, but also by the insurrection of Yucatan and the long civil war which ensued in that quarter, by an extensive rising of the Indians in the extreme south, by incursions of the Indians in the north, by controversies with foreign powers, by the question of Texas, and above all by incompetency and corruption in all members of the Government.

"By the 6th of the Bases of Tucubaya it was provided that 'The provisional Executive shall answer for his acts before the constitutional Congress;' and this was confirmed by the agreement of La Estenzuela. Nevertheless, by a decree of Santa Anna, issued on the 3d of October, 1843 (before assuming the office of constitutional President), it was declared that, as the power exercised by him under the Bases of Tucubaya was, by its very tenour, without limitation, the responsibility referred to in the 6th of the said Bases of Tucubaya was merely a 'responsibility of opinion;' that all the acts of his dictatorship were of the same permanent force as if performed by a constitutional Government, and must be observed as such by the first constitutional Congress. The new Government was completed and installed in January, 1844, when the first Congress under the new constitution assembled. Its early acts seem to have been in accordance with the views of Santa Anna, for it voted on an extraordinary contribution of four millions with which to prosecute the war against Texas. But on his requiring authority for a loan of ten millions, the Congress hesitated to give its assent, though it was notorious that but a small portion of the extraordinary contribution had been realized, and that the Treasury, so far from being competent to supply the means for carrying on a war against Texas, was in fact incompetent for the ordinary daily necessities of Government. Meanwhile, as affairs proceeded, a heavy opposition to Santa Anna began to manifest itself in Congress and throughout the republic. He had been raised to power, though apparently with great unanimity, yet, as the event has shown, by a military revolution, rather than by the spontaneous choice of the people. For, on his expressing a wish to retire a short time to Manga de Clavo for the care of his private affairs (as he had done in 1842), in which case the new constitution required that the Senate should make choice of a President ad interim, to officiate during his absence from the seat of Government the Ministerial candidate, General Valentin Canalizo, prevailed by one vote over his opponent, General Rincon.
"Such then was the position of things in October, 1844, Santa Anna being President propictario, Canalizo President interino, and the Congressassembled in special session, occupied with the foreign relations and the financial embarrassments of the republic, when the revolution broke out in the large and powerful department of Jalisco.

"On the 1st of November, 1844, the Departmental Assembly of Jalisco adopted and published what is called an Initiative, being an act provided for by the constitution, in virtue of which the Assembly suitted the proposition following: -

" 'The National Congress will make effective the responsibility of the Provisional Government, to which it was subjected by the 6th of the Bases of Tucubaya, which it swore to, and caused to be sworn to by the nation

" '2. The law of Aug. 21, 1844, imposing extraordinary contributions, is repealed.

" '3. The Congress will occupy itself by preference in reforming the articles of the constitution, which experience has demonstrated to be contrary to the prosperity of the departments.

"This act was adopted by all the authorities of the department, civil and military, and made known by public documents issued under the signatures of the civil governor (Escovado), and of the commandant-general (Galindo), with his principal officers; and thus far it was in Mexico a constitutional and not a revolutionary act - for in Mexico the military participate equally with the civil authorities in all political proceedings. But though nominally a constitutional act, it was in reality a revolutionary one, skillfully arranged and combined for the overthrow of Santa Anna. To this intent General Mariano Paredes, who had commenced the revolution of 1841 inthe same department of Jalisco, and who had since that time acted with Santa Anna, was pitched upon to be the agent of his overthrow. The secret movers of the new revolution obtained for General Paredes the command of the department of Sonora, to reach which it is necessary to march through that of Jalisco. On the way to his government Paredes stopped at Guadalajara, the capital of Jalisco, with the troops under his command, and there pronounced openly and directly against Santa Anna, and assumed the functions of military chief of the revolution. The four departments of Zacatecas, Aguascalientes, Sinalva, and Sonora concurred in the pronunciamiento of Jalisco; and thus the five north-western departments were in arms at once against Santa Anna. Between these and Mexico there intervene the two departments of Guanajuato and Queretaro. Paredes advanced to Lagos, on the frontier of Jalisco, and there established his head-quarters, with an army of 1,400 men, to await the progress of events. In the contiguous department of Guanajuato was General Cortazar with 2,000 men, on whom Paredes depended for support; but the rapid movements of Santa Anna himself prevented Corazar from joining Paredes (if he had the intention), and compelled him, for the present at least, to declare for Santa Anna. For instantly on hearing what had taken place in Guadalajara, Santa Anna, who was then at Manga de Clavo. in the department of Vera Cruz, and in whose neighbourhood was a large body of troops, professedly collected for an expedition against Texas, set out for Mexico, being invested by the President ad interim with the conduct of the war against Paredes. He set out from Jalapa on the 7th of November at the head of 8,500 men, crossed rapidly the department of Puebla, where he received some additional troops, and on the 18th arrived at Guadalupe, a town near Mexico, where he fixed his head-quarters.

"He had left the departments of Vera Cruz and Puebla full of professions of loyalty to his Government; and he found the same professions in that of Mexico, and similar professions came to him there from Queretaro and Guanajuato; and he prepared to march from Guadalupe, and to assemble at Queretaro a force of 13,000 men, with which to overwhelm the little army of Paredes.

"But even at this moment, all powerful as he appeared, at the head of a great army, and with all the departments behind him loyal, symptoms began to appear at the uncertainty of his cause, for though the Congress did not professedly support Paredes, yet it insisted that Santa Anna should proceed constitutionally, which the latter was unable or indisposed to do. The Mexican Constitution provides expressly that the President cannot command in person the military force, either by sea or land, without the previous permission of Congress. Santa Anna had taken the command, without even pretending to ask the consent of Congress; and in so doing had himself performed a revolutionary act quite as positive and serious as that of Paredes. Nevertheless, on the 22d he proceeded on his march to Queretaro, and on the same day the Chamber of Deputies voted the impeachment of the Minister at War (General Reyes), for signing the order under which Santa Anna held the command of his troops. Congress also voted to receive and print the pronunciamientos of the revolutionized department - in all this indicating a disposition, not to be mistaken, of hostility to Santa Anna. On arriving at Queretaro, Santa Anna found that, although the military authorities were professedly in his favor, yet the Junta departmental had pronounced for the initiative of Jalisco. Therefore, he made known to the members that if they did not repronounce in his favour, he would send them prisoners to Perote.

"They refused; and three of them were immediately arrested by his order, and sent off under a strong guard in the direction of Mexico and Perote. When the report of these proceedings reached Mexico, the Congress immediately summoned before it the Ministers of War and Government, to know whether they had authorized the General Santa Anna to imprison the members of the Junta Departmental of Queretaro.

"This subject occupied the Chambers on the 29th and 30th of November; and their attitude had now become so menacing, that the President ad interim, Canalizo (after consultation with Santa Anna), took the high-handed step of deciding to close the session of Congress by force, and declare Santa Anna Dictator of the Republic.

"Accordingly, on repairing to the Palace on the 1st of December, the members found the doors shut against them and guarded by soldiers; and on the 2d appeared the proclamation of Canalizo, as Presidento interino, declaring the Chamber dissolved indefinitely, and conferring all the powers of Government, legislative as well as executive, on Santa Anna, as Presidento propietario, the same to be exercised by Canalizo as Presidento interino until otherwise ordered by Santa Anna. For some days this forcible demolition of the constitutional Government by the creatures of Santa Anna remained without producing any apparent effect in Mexico. But on the very

day when the news reached Puebla, General Inclan, Commandant-General of that department, in concert with the civil authority, pronounced against Santa Anna; and in a few days (on the 6th) the garrison and people of Mexico rose against the Government, imprisoned Canalizo and his Ministers - Congress re-assembled - the President of the Council of Government, General Herrera, assumed the exercise of the functions of President according to the constitution - and new Ministers were appointed the next day, whose authority was immediately acknowledged in Vera Cruz.

"At the latest dates there from Vera Cruz (December 12th) affairs stood thus: -

"The departments of Sonora, Sinalva, Jalisco, Zacatecas, and Aguascalientes were in a state of revolution, and in military possession of General Paredes."General Santa Anna (with Cortazar) had military possession of the departments of Guanajuata and Queretaro.

"Santa Anna's Preident interino, Canalizo, and his Ministers, were imprisoned in Mexico. Congress had re-assembled, and a temporary constitutional Government was installed there, composed as follows, viz.: -

"General Jose Joaquim de Herrera, President of the Council of Government, charged temporarily with the Supreme Executive authority.

"Don Luis Gonzaga Cueva, Minister of Foreign Relations, State, and Police.

"Don Mariano Riva Palacios, Minister of Justice, Public Instruction, and Industry.

"Don Pedro J. Echeverria, Minister of Finance.

"Don Pedro Garcia Conde, Minister of War.

"And it was already known that the departments of Puebla and of Vera Cruz had declared their adhesion to the Provisional Government; and there is no doubt that most of the other departments will also support the Congress.

"Meanwhile Santa Anna is constitutional President of the republic, but unconstitutionally in command of the troops against Paredes. The new Minister of War has ordered him to give up his command. If he refuses, he becomes undoubtedly a rebel and a traitor; because the new Provisional
Government in Mexico is constitutionally constituted. If he consents, he ceases to have any troops for his support; he is placed at the mercy of his enemies. His position is now an extremely critical one therefore. Everything depends on whether his troops adhere to him against the Congress and the constitutional Government. If they do, he becomes the military dictator of the country. Reports were current at Vera Cruz that a part of his troops had already proclaimed him Dictator, and that another part had declared against him; but upon this point no information in an authentic
form had reached the public ear.

"If any sufficient portion of troops adhere to him, to enable him to continue the war, still he is surrounded with difficulties, being in the very heart of the republic, with Jalisco and its concurrent departments to the Pacific against him on the one hand, and Mexico with its concurrent departments to the Gulf against him on the other hand.

"He may recover himself by some new turn in the wheel of fortune, and resume his place as the constitutional President propietario of the republic; but this is hardly probable, as the public sentiment is almost unanimous against him in nearly all departments.

"It seems more likely that he will have to yield to the storm; and if not deprived of his life, he may escape to the United States by a sudden march on Tampico, or to South America by way of the Pacific."

Later accounts state as follows: -

"The Government paper of the 2d of December contains a proclamation signed by Canalizo, Rejon, Barando, and other Ministers of the Government, suspending the session of Congress, and appointing Santa Anna Dictator, with powers to use any means he may think necessary to restore the integrity of the republic, this power to extend as well to foreign as domestic affairs.
[GLP]

DATE?
"A REVOLUTION IN MEXICO"

"We learn from Captain Biscoe, of the bark Eugenia, arrived on Monday, that the principal towns, and indeed all the country, have pronounced against Santa Anna, who, with a small force was at Queretaro.

"The revolution passed off quietly, no blood having been shed. The former revolution being carried on by one party of military against another, resulted in much loss of life; but this movement coming from the people, as well as from the soldiery, makes the thing general, and hence the little commotion of a disagreeable nature.
"Santa Anna has but little chance of overcoming this movement, and it was a matter of conjecture whether he would attempt to escape or deliver himself up. He will very probably endeavour to gain over the opposite General by bribery or similar means, but in this it is thought he will not succeed. In case that he is taken prisoner, the people will probably demand his execution, as they deem his liberty dangerous to the public safety.

"The commandments of Chilmahua, Durango, and New Mexico have notified to the Central Government that large bodies of Camanches and other prairie Indians are hovering about the frontier, evidently with hostile intentions. The commandments have been requested by the Indian Chiefs to liberate certain prisoners of their tribes, with which request they had complied.

"Large bodies of troops were quartered at Jalapa, four regiments of the line, a picket of Sappers, and two regiments of horse."Afterwards follows a proclamation of Canalizo and of Rejon, ordering all the constituted authorities to pay the fullest obedience to Santa Anna.
"Also one similar by each of the other Ministers. Santa Anna has accepted his charge without comment.

"Furthermore, the chiefs of various departments, among them General Ulloa, have assembled juntas of their officers, and pronounced in opposition to the scheme of Paredes.

"This took place at Vera Cruz. At Jalisco and the other cities between Mexico and the seaboard, similar scenes appear to have been transacted, and anta Anna appears master of the whole of that portion of the nation."The department of Oajaca, or at least the leaders, have pronounced in favor of Santa Anna.

"The markets were in a very bad state, with little prospect of improvement.

"There were at the Island of Sacrificios the British frigates Spartan, just arrived from New Orleans, and Inconstant and two French brigs of war, but no United States vessels.

"The Courrier Francais of December 7 has just reached us, containing in a nut-shell the result of the Mexican news.

"Santa Anna was proclaimed Dictator, and all seemed to go on well, but about mid-day the troops barracked in the Accordada St. Francis and the citadel pronounced against Santa Anna and Canalizo. At the head of the movement was General Don Jose J. Herrera, President of the Council, who addressed a proclamation to the city, calling on it to sustain him.

"The whole Congress immediately threw itself into the arms of Herrera, who immediately took possession of the National Palace without bloodshed.

"The Congress constituted its sessions permanent. The ex-Ministers fled. Canalizo is in arrest in his own house.

"The statue of Santa Anna in the peristyle of the theatre was broken, and a wish exhibited to break the bronze one in the market-place, but this was prevented by the authorities. On the next night, General Herrera had it privately removed.

"The new authorities maintained perfect quiet.

"The Chambers are occupied in devising means to remedy the incalculable injury the country has suffered.
[GLP]

LT January 23, 1845, 5e

THE AMERICAN BOUNDARY QUESTION.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES

Sir, - It appears by The Times of the 18th inst., that some of the party of Royal Sappers and Miners lately employed upon the survey of the boundary between British America and the United States, as settled by the Ashburton treaty, have arrived in England. It may fairly be inferred from their arrival that the work upon which they were employed approaches to completion. It is satisfactory to know that this causa beli is removed - that a bone of contention is withdrawn from our grasping and not very conciliatory neighbours. Much praise is due to the present Government for their promptitude in bringing to an amicable adjustment this boundary question which helped to perpetuate national jealousies, retarded the progress of civilization and colonial prosperity, and has more than once threatened to disturb the peace of the mother country. The question of ceding or retaining a few square miles of profitless wilderness must appear in the eyes of reasonable men as dust in the balance, when compared with the incalculable advantage of having established in the minds of our transatlantic fellow-subjects confidence in the existence of a desire and power on the part of the mother country to afford them protection, and to remove the demoralizing system of barbarian violence, mutual reprisals, and the spreading among our colonists of that system of overreaching cunning peculiar to the squatters and sympathizers of the United States. No dispassionate man acquainted with the interests of the two countries can doubt the importance of a good understanding between Great Britain and the United States. No honest man can wish to see that understanding lightly interrupted. The interests of the civilized world, of mankind at large, are indissolubly mixed up with the preservation of peace - firmly-established peace upon equitable, honourable, and high-minded principles - between two such important countries.

Is it premature to offer suggestions upon another subject which may affect our relations with our jealous and unscrupulous neighbours - a question which appears to present considerable difficulty of arrangement - namely, the joint occupancy or the equitable division of the vast Oregon territory?

It may be said, and with some show of reason, that if Oregon were blotted out of the map of the American continent, there would still be ample room and verge enough for emigration from both parent States for centuries to come. Who can doubt this, when we consider the vast unexplored resources of the north on the one hand, and the unoccupied regions of the Missouri on the other ? Still, when we see existing in our republican neighbours an ambition more boundless than their unoccupied wilderness, a spirit of unprincipled encroachment almost unexampled in modern times, with but one exception; and when we know that the spirit of the English nation sympathizes in matters affecting the national honour with that of the haughty Percy, who would "give thrice so much land to a deserving friend," but "would cavil at the ninth part of a hairbreadth" at what appeared an unjust assumption of rights, it must scarcely be ascribed to pusillanimity, or distrust in the resources of our country, to assert and maintain her just claims, when we hear sober-minded men express a wish that the cause of our differences with the United States were permanently removed.

There appear two obstacles to the satisfactory settlement of the Oregon question. The first is the unmistakable desire of two branches of the Government, and the vast majority of the people, of the States to possess the whole territory, and to admit of no counter claims: their right to the whole appears to be a foregone conclusion. However, as the British Minister at present at Washington for the purposes of negotiating upon the subject may possess discretion and abilities equal or superior to a Pottinger, and as there is still an appearance of some reason and sense of justice existing on the majority of the Senate, it is to be hoped that this difficulty will be surmounted. The second obstacle to the speedy settlement of this important question is the ignorance which confessedly exists upon everything connected with the vast region in question. Our Envoy may possess all the knowledge possible to be attained from the past and existing treaties, but what can he know of the country itself? He may succeed in obtaining an extension of the present treaty, but is not this only staving off the evil day - a day which must sooner or later, come at last ? If he found the American Government perfectly willing to fix a definite boundary, has he sufficient knowledge - has any man sufficient knowledge - of the country, even to suggest a feasible direction for that boundary ? Empires and states may have their boundaries fixed by nature, but it is necessary that men should know them before they can negotiate upon them. What, for instance, do we know of the actual existing boundary between our colony and the United States from "the Lake of the Woods" to the Rocky Mountains ? And from this point in the Rocky Mountains, if any human being knows it, who can tell how our boundary should proceed ? If extended due west to the Pacific, we are cut out of the Oregon altogether. The main artery of the country, the Columbia, in that case comes into the possession of our rivals, and we sacrifice the rights of British subjects already in the country. If it is to proceed south by the chain of the Rocky Mountains, surely it should have some defined specified direction. The Rocky Mountains may be said to divide the two countries by nature; so do the Pyrenees divide France and Spain, but the Pic du Midi must be in either France or Spain. If the Rocky Mountains are to divide our territories from those of the States, one part of these mountains must belong to Britain, and another part to the States.

Who possesses the knowledge to decide which part should in justice, expediency, or sound policy belong to each ? Further, if our boundary is to proceed south by the Rocky Mountains, from what point in the chain is it to depart in a westerly direction ? It must take a westerly direction from some point in these mountains before it comes to the confines of Mexico, otherwise we monopolize the whole disputed territory to ourselves. Who possesses the knowledge where this point of departure should be, and the subsequent directions of the boundary until it reach the Pacific Ocean ? No man living. The crude knowledge of the agents of hunting companies, the journals of travellers who estimate distances by days' journeys, and by the pressure of their privations, together with the painted hunting grounds of American novelists, will scarcely supply authentic data for enlightened men to legislate upon; and yet these are the sources from which the inchoate knowledge of our Government is drawn.

Two questions naturally arise from the above considerations - first, should this state of ignorance, where the national interests and honour may be vitally concerned, be allowed to continue ? And, secondly, what available means are there of acquiring more precise information upon the subject ?

Our country is foremost among the nations of the earth in fitting out expeditions where the interests of science or humanity can be advanced by them, or even where a slight addition to our geographical knowledge can alone be expected to result from them. Large sums of public money, and many valuable lives, have been sacrificed in endeavouring to penetrate the regions of eternal winter within the Arctic and Antarctic circles, and in exploring the deadly swamps and burning sands of Central Africa. I mean not to disparage these laborious and dangerous operations, nor to impugn the motives of those who originate them; but it not fairly be asked, why are not properly qualified men appointed to explore the countries through which our national boundaries run ? And, above all others, why should we be left in doubt or ignorance of the country for the possession of which, or even a portion of it, we may at no distant day be menaced with open hostilities ?

When it is considered that men eminently qualified for this work are now almost upon the spot where their labours would commence, it will be apparent that the present opportunity of acquiring much, if not all, the necessary information, should not be thrown away. If the present means within the reach of the Government are not made use of, equal means will not readily present themselves again, at least without a sacrifice of much time and expense in preparatory training.

It is a well-known fact that Her Majesty has at present in Canada Boundary Commissioners and scientific officers for marking out and fixing by astronomical observations the Ashburton boundary. If this work is drawing to a close, why should not the same persons, who from their experience in these matters, as well as from their previous characters, must be presumed to be most competent persons - why should they not be employed to extend the knowledge of our Government upon those subjects where ignorance may be most mischievous ? Colonel Escott, one of the Commissioners, is nearly related to the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs; but it is not to be supposed that Lord Aberdeen, upon whom the responsibility of the appointments devolve, has selected him on this account. Mr. Featherstoneaugh, another commissioner, is well known to the public as a man of high talent and an intelligent American traveller. The officers for conducting the scientific operations having, according to Professor Airy's statement last year in his address to the "visiters," been trained at the Royal Observatory, Greenwich, must be presumed to be highly qualified for their important duties; the Astronomer Royal would not risk his high reputation by sanctioning an improper appointment, when the training was, as he says, in his own hands.

Where could such means be found for removing official and public ignorance on the momentous pending question of determining the international boundaries ? Where can such means be collected again, if the whole of the party on the boundary works are permitted to return to England without
investigating and ascertaining on the ground, what should be, if not of determining what shall be, our share of the Oregon territories ? Better know what we should claim, and then claim it as it becomes our country, than procrastinate until the invaded rights of our fellow-subjects imperatively
demand the presence of a British fleet in the North Pacific.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
Jan. 21
W.C.

[GLP]

LT January 31, 1845, 4a

LONDON, FRIDAY, JANUARY 31, 1845.

The news from America is amusing. Preceding accounts had left Texas hanging in the middle air - suspended between independence and annexation; though there were pretty significant indications which way the question was likely to incline. Now we see the sequel.Having achieved the election of Mr. Annexation POLK, our American friends appear to be considering that they may have thereby achieved also the thorough and final decision of the question itself, whereof their choice is the hero. Texas and the Oregon they have now decided to be theirs. Nothing beyond the scruples of their own citizens seems now, in the shape of an obstacle, even to occur to them. They think that they have nobody but themselves to ask. Having asked themselves, and got themselves to answer themselves as themselves most wished, they evidently imagine the idea of all further objection to be ludicrous. Mr. POLK's election is to silence all questioners. Texas and the Oregon are already, in the active imaginations of our transatlantic brethren, undisputed territories of the States: the only doubt or difficulty with them now is about the how and the when, and the where, possession is to be taken. That the morsel is to be swallowed is settled. The licking of lips has commenced. The gentlemen of the United States are about enlarging their boundaries, and they are evidently resolved that the world shall know what it is for people to be engaged in so pleasing a task. But there seems to be a hitch or two still, as indeed might probably have been anticipated, as to the way in which, and the means by which, the prey is to be secured. The politicians of the United States have "resolved" that Texas and the Oregon ought to be, and therefore are, standing ready to be killed and eaten; but they seem now to be very considerably at a loss to know, as the boys say, "where to have them."The predicament is a pleasing one. Anticipation is always more pleasant than enjoyment. With or without slavery - whether by cajoling Mexico or by bullying her, - these are the practical alternatives now before the American Congress, and to be decided by it in its course towards the annexation of Texas. So many phases and variations of deglutition seem to have presented themselves, that actual delay, if not danger, seems threatened to the prospective capture itself. With worse fortune than the donky in the proverb, brother JONATHAN appears to be distracted from his anticipated meal by, not two, but several distinct bundles of hay. "It seems by no means certain," writes our correspondent, "that the annexation "of Texas measure will pass even the Lower House this session. There seems to be such a variety of "opinion as to the quo modo of admission, that no plan may be agreed upon on to command the majority "of the dominant party.

Almost each one is ready to suit a plan, which almost every other one is ready "to denounce." No less than half a dozen separate and conflicting plans for "admitting," "annexing," or appropriating, the Texan territory into the American union are now before the House of Representatives. The absolute and plenary "cession" of the territories of Texas to the United States, to be effected by the (of course) purely voluntary act of Texas herself, and, in consideration thereof, the gracious extension to the new republic of the membership and privileges of the Union, - this is one scheme of proceedings - that of Mr. INGERSOLE. Another proposal is simply to "declare" Texas annexed; another to furbish up an old treaty with France, made during the war in 1803, whereby a part only of the present Texan territory was ceded by France to the United States; and upon this title is now proposed to be "extended" to the whole. A fourth is for splitting the difference about slavery, by making half the new State slave-holding and half free, and for disregarding altogether the consent of Mexico; while others again have different nostrums for both of these difficulties; and one illustrious statesman, to crown the whole, "threatens to propose a "bill to satisfy all parties, factions, or sections, who are willing to allow of 'admission.' "All these various proposals proceed upon the comfortable assumption that the prey is secure. Texas is considered to be already "caught," and the question is, how to cut it up.
Nor is the squabbling about Texas either one degree more or one degree less imposing or edifying than the cool quietness which hangs over despatching of the Oregon affair. Resolutions in favour of the immediate "occupation" of the Oregon territory have long since passed both Houses. There was no difference of opinion here. Slavery, Mexico, or the necessity of throwing the seizure into some form of international law, interposed no difficulties here. A bill was introduced, on the resolutions, and is now pending, in the Senate of the United States, for appropriating and occupying the whole line of sea coast on the Pacific, from between the 54th and 55th degrees of north latitude (more than 300 miles north of the most northerly settled part of Canada) downward, and as far inland as the Rocky Mountains.

This valuable acquisition (supposing it is acquired) is to be connected with the Missouri River by a line of stockade forts, "not exceeding 5 in number." And various enactments are further in contemplation for encouraging settlers, and consolidating them when settled. This quiet proposal is now before the Senate.

It is probable that the wiser and more practised portion of American statesmen of all parties, and especially those of them who have the practical management of public affairs, and are conversant with the popular modes of thinking, speaking of, and transacting business, know what all this means, and what it really amounts to, better than we do. Public men in America probably know better how to give their countrymen rope, and how to rely on the usual and ultimate, though not at first apparent, result of such a proceeding, than we do on this side of the water. Debates in the Senate, and quarrels about the mode and manner of any given project, are useful in more ways than one; and in American politics it is premature to jump to a conclusion until all these hitches are settled. It is not to be denied, however, that brother JONATHAN has already, to his own perfect satisfaction, "cast up his accounts" for Texas and the Oregon, however it may be certain that "he has been reckoning without his host." There are as our friends in the United States will probably learn before very long, if they have not learnt it already. Mere unprincipled, profligate, self-aggrandizement is all that the United States have to allege in support of the monstrous breach of all natural justice and positive treaty which would be involved in either of the measures in which they seem so deeply engaged. In neither one nor the other could the States reasonably expect this country to acquiesce; and the annexation of Texas would involve a disturbance of the settled relations of the American continent, in which all the chief European Powers would be more or less interested; yet there seems to be no pause on the part of the States in a headlong adoption of them; and though it would be premature until the measures have passed the Legislature to speculate on them as accomplished, yet they certainly appear to have been already pushed to a point that demands the most serious attention to them.

[GLP]

LT February 1, 1845, 8f

THE REVOLUTION IN MEXICO.

We find in the New Orleans papers of the 29th and 30th of December very full of particulars of recent intelligence from Mexico, brought by the schooner Ventura, which sailed from Vera Cruz on the 13th day of December, and reached New Orleans on the 28th. The news is but one day later than that brought by Mr. Cushing; but as more copious details of the recent important events which have transpired in Mexico are given than were included in his statement, we present a full and careful abstract, made up from the various New Orleans papers, chiefly the Bee and Picayune: -

In the city of Mexico it seems that on the 1st of December a manifesto was issued, protesting against the orders issued by Santa Anna, and denouncing the Government for not having deposed him. This was signed by 55 deputies on the 1st, by 10 others on the 2d, and all the senators except 4. On the 3d Santa Anna's General Canalizo, issued a decree dissolving Congress, Santa Anna being at the head of 8,000 men on his march against the rebels in Jalisco. The decree created intense excitement in Mexico.

Congress made three protests and an address to the people, but before they could be printed General Canalizo closed all the printing offices except Santa Anna's official paper, and forbade all publications. These arbitrary measures increased the excitement, and crowds of the people assembled in the public places. Canalizo shut himself up in the Palace with some 2,000 troops. Baranda, Rejon, and Salas took refuge with him.

In the meantime both the Liberals and clergy in the Capitol united in the revolutionary movement, and began to make preparations against the common enemy. Congress, as well as the Ayuntamiento, succeeded, in spite of Canalizo's decree, in having secret circulars printed, which were actively disseminated among all classes. The Government troops about the Palace, seeing symptoms of the coming storm, began to waver.

During the 4th and 5th the excitement continued, and on the 6th multitudes of the people, armed, assembled at the Convent of San Francisco. Here the members of Congress were assembled, and among them Generals Herrera, Garcia, Conde, and Cespedes. The whole body marched from the convent to the square in front of the Palace, which is near the centre of the city, and summoned Canalizo to surrender, giving him two hours to reflect. Canalizo prepared to attack the citizens, when one of his officers, exclaiming that he was the soldier of no tyrant, but of the people, shouted "Long live the Congress !" The cry was taken up by nearly all the troops, and Canalizo fled in terror to his apartments.

Before leaving the convent General Herrera had prepared a letter, which he now sent to Canalizo, requesting him, in order to spare the effusion of blood, to recognize the government of the Constitution and of Congress, and to allow it to exercise its full powers.

To this Canalizo returned in quick succession the following answers: -"Excelentissimo Senor, - In order to avoid any unfortunate scenes or events in this capital, I am ready immediately to deliver up the command, and to evacuate this place at once, if guarantees are conceded to me.

"God and Liberty !
"National Palace of Mexico, Dec. 6, 1844,
"Half-past 2 o'clock in the afternoon.

"VALENTIN CANALIZO.

"To his Excellency General of Division Don J. Joaquin de Herrera."

In half an hour afterwards, General Canalizo sent another despatch as follows: -"Excelentissimo Senor, - The guarantees of which I spoke in my last despatch, which I have just sent, are, that passports to leave the republic shall be given to myself, to the four Ministers, and to the Commandant-General.

"God and Liberty.
"National Palace of Mexico, Dec. 6, 1844,
3 o'clock in the afternoon.

"VALENTIN CANALIZO.

"To the Senor General of Division Don J. Joaquin de Herrera."

After receiving these notes General Herrera, with his troops, forced their way into the Palace, seized Canalizo, and detained him, with Salas, prisoner in the Palace, the Ministers of War and the Home Department being released on giving security, and Rejon and Baranda making their escape.

General Herrera then issued the following important proclamation: -

"JOSE JOAQUIN DE HERRERA, PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENT, TO

THE INHABITANTS OF THE CAPITAL.

"Mexicans ! - A blind and audacious Government had violated the laws, believing that society was wholly dependent upon its decrees. But I, having been invoked by all classes and by the principal commanders and chiefs of the garrison, have re-established constitutional order, and am proud of having spared to Mexico and her vast population the anarchy and dissensions arising

The Mexican-American War and the Media, 1845-1848