was instructed by the Secretary of State to propose a resumption of diplomatic intercourse. This was done by Mr. Black on the 13th of October, 1845, in a letter to Mr. Peña Y Peña.* This note was responded to on the 15th of October, 1845, by the Mexican Secretary of Foreign Affairs, who agreed to receive a commissioner from the United States, who might come with full power "to settle the present dispute in a peaceful, reasonable and honorable manner." Upon the condition, however, that the whole naval force then lying in sight of the port of Vera Cruz should be recalled. Upon the reception of that note at Washington, our naval force was promptly withdrawn. Mr. Slidell was immediately appointed Minister to Mexico, with full power to adjust all the questions in dispute. On the 8th of December, 1845, he addressed a note to Mr. Peña Y Peña, advising him of his arrival and the object of his mission. The Mexican authorities refused to receive him. The government of General Herrera, then President of Mexico, was upon the point of being overturned by General Paredes, and the basis of this revolution was the determination of Herrera to open negotiations.

As a last des

* See note of Mr. Black, the American Consul, to Mr. Peña Y Peña, the Mexican Secretary of Foreign Affairs.

Letter of Mr. Peña Y Peña to Mr. Black, Oct. 15th, 1845. "We now turn a glance to Mexico, where will be found established the government of General Paredes. As one of the motives by which the revolutionists supported their pronunciamento, was that the administration of Herrera did not desire to carry on this war, the new government was bound to do so at any cost.”—Mexican History of the War with Mexico, p. 38.

perate expedient to maintain his position, Herrera determined to break off all negotiations with the United States, and the pretext for that course was the fact, that Mr. Slidell was commissioned with full power to adjust all questions in dispute between the two countries, instead of being appointed a special commissioner to settle the question of annexation alone, leaving all the outrages upon our flag and our people unadjusted.*

This will be the proper time to examine the grounds of complaint which the United States had against Mexico, for many years previous to the an

nexation of Texas.

The Mexicans had scarcely achieved their independence of Spain, when the United States welcomed them into the sisterhood of nations. The only return was a system of insult and aggression. Our seamen under the flag of the Union, engaged

"Thus began anew the negotiations in December, 1845, and the minister, Mr. John Slidell, presented himself in Mexico. But immediately this difficulty arose, that his Government desired him to be received as a minister plenipotentiary, ordinary or general, and ours would only admit him as a commissioner ad hoc for the question of Texas. The settled opinion of the Government Council of the 16th of December of that year, made known with clearness the difference between the two characters. By admitting Mr. Slidell as a common envoy it resulted, that, at the time of arranging the questions of Texas, he might occupy himself with other subjects proper for a plenipotentiary who exercised his functions near a government with which there were only peaceful relations. By admitting Mr. Slidell as he wished, it resulted also, that, without Mexico receiving the satisfaction due her, diplomatic negotiations would become re-established between both powers; that the business of annexation would be complicated with the pecuniary reclamations; that Mexico would withdraw her hand from making war, and the United States would follow up all the consequent advantages to her commerce and interests."-Ibid. p. 28.

in the peaceful pursuits of commerce, were thrown into dungeons and their property confiscated. Revolutions succeeded each other in rapid succession, but still there was no cessation in the spoliation of our commerce, and the insults to our flag. The Government of the United States again and again demanded redress. Promises were made by one military chieftain, only to be violated by another. A treaty of amity, commerce and navigation, was concluded between the two republics on the 5th of April, 181. It was confidently believed that a proper regard would be paid by the Mexicans to the solemn stipulation contained in that treaty. But the results proved that too much confidence had been placed in the good faith of that amalgamated race. Seven years had not elapsed after the treaty of 1831, before the injuries our citizens were subjected to had become so intolerable, that the attention of Congress was particularly called to the subject by President Jackson, in his message of February, 1837.*

Committees of both houses of Congress to which this message was referred, endorsed his opinion of the character of the outrages of which Mexico had been guilty, and recommended one more demand for redress before a declaration of war, or the issu

"The length of time since some of the injuries have been committed, the repeated and unavailing applications for redress, the wanton character of some of the outrages upon the property and persons of our citizens, upon the officers and flag of the United States, independent of recent insults to this Government and people by the late extraordinary Mexican minister, would justify in the eyes of all nations immediate war." -Message of General Jackson, February, 1837.

ance of letters of reprisal. On the 12th July, 1837, a demand was made upon Mexico, through a special messenger dispatched to that country. The reply of the Government was made on the 29th of July, in which they expressed the anxious wish that the equitable adjustment of existing difficulties might not be delayed. These pledges were solemnly made only to be broken. The attention of Congress was again called to the matter by Mr. Van Buren, in December, 1837. Another negotiation was entered upon, with the usual number of pledges upon the part of Mexico. This negotiation, after more than a year had elapsed, produced the convention of April, 1839. The Board of Commissioners to act upon the claims, met in the month of August, 1840, and by the terms of the convention they were required to terminate their labors within eighteen months thereafter. The time expired in February, 1842, leaving many claims unadjusted. Those allowed amounted to two millions twenty-six thousand one hundred and thirty-nine dollars and sixty-eight cents. Nearly a million of dollars was left without being decided upon; besides these claims, there were others, amounting to nearly three and a half mil lions, which the board had not time to act upon. The sum, however, adjudicated, was a positive debt due, about which there could be no equivocation. The Mexican government asked a postponement of the payment of this sum until a future day. This request was acceded to, on the 30th of January, 1843, upon condition that the principal and interest accruing thereon, should be paid in five years, in

equal instalments every three months. The result of this forbearance was the payment alone of the interest due on the 30th of April, 1843, and three out of the twenty instalments. A third convention was concluded at the city of Mexico on the 20th of November, 1843, for the adjustment of the claims due our citizens. As usual the terms of this convention were violated. How can the conduct of Mexico in thus wholly disregarding her treaty stipulations be excused? If these accumulated wrongs had been committed by one of the powers of Europe, war would have been the inevitable result. It renders imperative the promulgation of the doctrine, that while we will render strict justice to all nations, we will exact it from them in return.

Having thus briefly referred to the repeated insults committed by Mexico, followed by a total disregard of solemn treaty stipulations, I will proceed to show how forbearance upon our part, only tended to augment their insolence, until they consummated their national folly by the invasion of our territory

Circulars were issued by the Mexican Secretary of War to the Mexican commanders, to raise troops for the purpose of waging war against the United States. The annexation of Texas to this country was characterized as an act of perfidy. These circulars were followed, the ensuing month, by addresses to the troops under their command, by the Mexican Generals. Nothing could be more ex

* Circulars of Garcia Conde, Mexican Secretary of War, of July 12th, and July 16th, 1845.

+"Comrades: The Supreme Executive has sent to me, by express,