The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1844-08-10

4
republic on this continent, We have always acted To-
| wards her with great forbearance. trust we shall
| continue 10 pursue this course and ! now mereI,
| refer the subject, lest il might be inferred from
our silence. that we have newer had any just cause oil
| complaint against Mexico
| But the Senator from Missouri does not consider
the consent Of Mexico To be Indispensable II, after
the expiration Of the alleged srmstce, Mexico should
| cease To prosecute the war against Texas, :" on
scale commensurate TO the conquest of the country,
| he would then consent 10 the Reunion. How much
longer must Mexico cease TO prosecute this war
upon such scale before the can be effected
shall be one, two, ten years. She has already
ceased TO prosecute this war upon q scale commen-
surate with the conquest Of Texas from the day
when the battle Of ST. Jacinto fought until the
| present moment Has not eight years been Pc
Rod sufficiently long for this purpose In my opin-
ion il has; and, therefore, | am willing TO act with
out further delay.
| But the alleged armistice between these two pow
| ers has been interposed as objection and II has
been urged that this ackno Wedges a state Of war
TO have existed its date and that time ought To
be allowed to Mexico after its termination, TO
quer Texas, before we should consent TO annexa-
ZION.
| We have heard much Of this armistice, which
shall show hereafter, never had an existence; but
admitting, for The sake Of the argument, that 1t did
exist what consequences would flow from il ! an
swer, preudicial TO the of xaton.
| This armistice could only have suspended the war
as it existed at its date and what war war
ring period Of more than years and that had
literally died out, and then been suspended by
| armistice of indefinite duration. This would have
been our position and better position il is than
even that which occupy. What is the
doctrine Of the law Of nations upon this subject! "a
general truce, says Vatel, made for many years,
differs from peace in little else than in leaving the
question, which was the original ground OF the war,
! still undecided. When two nations are weary of
hostilii's, and yet cannot agree upon the point
which constitutes The subject Of their dsI ute, they
generally have this kind of agreement
Such was precisely the relative position of Mexico
and Texas towards each other at the date Of Pres-
dents Houston's proclamation. They were both
weary Of hostites, and yet could not agree upon
the subject OF their dispute, which in the indie
pendence Of Texas. President Houston on the 18th
| Of June, l643, proclaimed armistce indefinite in
It's duration; and had this been assented to by Mex-
co, 1t would have amounted to general truce, diff
ering but little from general peace. By the terms
OF tins procla alton, the armistce not limited to
any number Of years but was to continue during the
tendency OF nj gotiaions for peace, and until due
notice Of intention to resume hostilities should
such an intention hereafter be entertained by either
party, shall have been formally announced through
her Britannia Majesys charges des afares at the
spectve governments and the revocation OF this pro-
clsmation." In addition to its indefinite DURATION it
| was to continue until England, the mediaiing power
intent upon ending the war between Mexico and
Texas, should consent to become the instrument of
reminding 1t, by meaps OF q notice for that purpose
given through her charges des ahsires That this
time never would have arrived, is most certain.
But, unfortunately, this armIstice had any
tual existence. My friend, the editor Of 20 Globe,
has got into fog this branch of the subject and
1t is but an act OF friendship my part 10 restore
4 him to clear sunshine.
Was any proclamation of an armistice correspon-
| ding with that OF General Houston ever issued by
the President of Mexico J This is a most important
| inquiry, because no principle Of public private
law is better settled than that to make any contract
| binding between parties, it must be mutual. Both
must oe bound, or neither The prov slonaI Presi
dent of Mexico, far from having issued cores
ponding proclamat'onso far from having agreed TO
the stipulatons Of the armstice announced BY Geu-
eral Houston-expressy declined to assent to them |
the moment they were communicated to him BY the |
British charge d. sfares. The proclamation Of
President Houston declaring armstlce, was thus |
anDuiled within few day. after it had issued, by
the refusal Of the Mexican President TO accede to its
terms, and 10 issue a corresponding proclamation -
Thus ended the first attempt to establish an arms
tice between the parties.
The Mexican government, through Mr.. Tornel, |
their minister If war, Afterwards ,sousd military
order TO General Vol, the comma nde chief OF
the army OF the north, bearing date July T. lS43 in
which they refuse to recognise General Houston
| even as President de tacto of Texas bat to make |
him sensible Of his nierority, insultingy style him
merely Mr. Samuel Houston. So far from recog-
nising President Houston's proclamation as an cx-
ising armisce between the two countries, Mr.. Tor |
| mel informs General VOL that the Mexican govern
ment chad resolved TO admit in the name of the ma
tion the proportions fer armstice and that such
armIstice be concluded between the two parties |
agreeably TO The laws Of war" Thus while on the |
one SIDE an absolute armistice had been proclaimed
on the other President Santa Anna merely agreed |
To cons der this proclamation as proposal for an
armistice TO be concluded thereafter Accordingly |
Mr. Tornel proceeds, by his military ORDER to M
struct General Wo that, Fin order that the armis-
uce may be concluded on the terms fixed by the |
usage and practice OF war you will give official no.
tice TO Mr. Samuel Houston that he should appoint |
,L. ,...ssI
YOURSELF may form tue stpuations, according to the
following rules TO be observed your pat &c. In
pursuance oil Tins order from the Mexican Minister
OF War, commissioners we're appointed by General |
VOL and President Houston, respectively who held |
Their last meeting at the town Of Sabnas in the re-
public of Mexico, on the 18th February ls4i and |
on That day signed an agreement for arms ice the
! FIRST tcle OF which is 70 lows
There shall be an mistce between Mexico and
Texas, during the pending Of negotiation. at the
capital oil The republic, relative to the pacific ,ton Of
The department OF Texas and which are TO be con-
cluded at the larthest, by the LIST day of MAY 1874
and can only be prolonged in there should then
be probability OF speedy and pacific termination
| OF the matter.
Thus, il is evident, that even IL this arms,ice had
been approved by President Hou ton /, would have
terminated by its Imitation on the first day of
the last month, as contains stipulation whate
requiring the respective parties 10 give any other no
tce Of their intention 10 resume hostilitcs But the
truth Is, that the proposed srmist never was in
force single moment, for want of the approval of
President Houston. We are informed by Messrs
Van Zandt and Henderson, in their letter to Mr. Cal
houn of May 10Th, 1874, that " they 1.-The Texan
commissioners, were instructci that no arrangement
made by them would be binding until approved by
the President. Whfn the agreement entered into
by them submitted TO the President Of Texas.
he declined approving it. Referring 10 Tsras a,
department If Jverioo sufficient reason for its
prompt rejection, and preciuded all possibility of
official aclIop under it,"
1.-THE negotiations having thus terminated and this
agreement being held TO be null and void there is n,
present no suo'stIng arrangement Of any character
between Mexico and Texas