American Republican and Baltimore daily clipper., 1844-12-04

severe in the war, and no other alternative
was left the Executive but to take advantage
of the well-known disposition Of Texas, ant
to invite her to enter into a treaty for annex
ing her territory to that of the u. States
Since your last session, Mexico has threaten
cd to renew the war, and has either made, or
proposes to make, formidable preparations for
invading Texas. She has issued decrees anC
proclamations, preparatory to the commence
ment cf hostilities, full of threats, revolving t,
humanity; and which it carried into effect
would arouse the attention Of all Christcndcm
This new demonstration of feeling, there is to,
much reason to believe, has been produced il
consequence Of the negotiation of the late trea-
tv Of annexation with Texas The Executive
therefore, could not be Indifferent to such pro-
cecdings; and it felt ii to be due, as well to it.
self as TO the honor Of the country, that a
strong representation should be made to the
MeNican Government upon the subject. This
was accordingly done; as will be seen by the
copy OF the accompanying despatch from the
Secretary of State to the L, s. Envoy at McNi-
co. Mexico has no right to leopard the peace
of the world by urging any longer, q useless
and iruitless contest Such a condition of things
would not be tolerated ON the Europcan conii-
ncnt. Why should il be this? A war OF de-
ISOLATION, such as is now threatened by Mexico,
cannot be wagCd without involving cur peace
and tranquility. It is idle to believe that such
war could be looked upon with indifference by
our own cit izcns, inhabIting adjoining States
and our neutrality would be violated in despite
of all efforts on the part of the Government to
prevent 1t. The country is settled by emigrants
from the U. States, under invitations held out
TO them By Spain and Mexico. Those cmi-
grants have left behind them friends and rcla-
tivcs who would not fail TO sympathise with
them III their difficulties, and who would be led
by those sympatbies TO participate in their
struggles, however energetic the action of Go
vcmment to prevent it. Nor would the numc-
rous and formidable bands of Indians, the most
warllke TO be found III any land, which occupy
the extensive regions contiguous TO the States of
Arkansas and Missouri, and who are in posses
sion of large tracts of coun ry within the linz
lis Of Texas, be likely to remain passive. Tie
inclination Of these numerous tribes lead them
invariably to war whenever preteXts exist.
Mexico had no just ground Of displeasure
against this government or people for nego-
ciatlne the treaty. What interest of hers was
effected by the treaty; She was despoied Of
nothing, since Texas was forever lost to her.
The independence of Texas was recognised
by several Of the leading powers Of the earth,
She was free to treat-tree to adopt her own
line of policy-free to take the course which
She believed was best calculated to secure
her happiness. Her government and people
decided on annexation to the United States;
and the Executive saw, in the acquisition Of
such territory, the means of advancing
their permanent happiness and glory. What
of good faith then was violated;
What rule Of political morals trampled ul-
der foot So far as Mexico herself was con-
cerned, The measure should have been regard
ed by her as highly beneficial. Her lnabili.
ly to reconquer Texas had been exhibited,
repeat, by eight-now nfne-years of fruit
less and ruinous contest. In the meantime,
Texas has been growing in population and
resources. Emigration has flowed into her
territory, from all parts of the world, in cur
rent, which continues to increase in strength
Mexico requires permanent boundary To-
tween that young republic and herself. Tex
as, at no distant day, if she continues sepa-
rate and detached from the United States,
will inevitably seek to consolidate her strength
by adding to her domain the contiguous pro-
vinces of Mexico. The spirit Of revolt from
the control of the Central Government has,
heretofore, manifested itself in some of those
provinces; and it is fair to infer that they
would be inclined to take the first favorable
opportunity to proclaim their independence,
and to form close alliances with Texas. The
war would thus be endless; or, if ceSSationS
OF hostilities should occur, they would only
endure for a season. The interests of MeXi-
co, therefore, could in nothing be better con-
suited than in peace with her neighborS,
which would result in the establishment of a
permanent boundary. Upon the ratification
of the treaty, the Executive was prepared to
treat with her on the most liberal basis
Hence the boundaries Of Texas were left un-
defined by the treaty. The Executive pro-
posed to settle these upon terms that all the
world should have pronounced just and rea-
Sonable. No negotiation upon that point
could have been undertaken between the
United States and Mexico, in advance of the
ratification of the treaty.
We should have had no right-no power,
no authority, to have conducted such nego-
tiaton; and TO have undertaken it, would
have been an assumption equally revolving TO
the pride of Mexico and Texas, and subject
ing us to the charge of arrogance: while to
have proposed in advance of annexation, to
satisfy Mexico for any contingent interests
she might have in Texas, would have been to
have treated Texas, net as an independent
power, but as mere dependency of Mexico
This assumption could not have been acted
on by the Executive, without setting at def
ance your own solemn declaration that that
Republic was an independent State. Mexico
had, it is true, threatened war against the U.
States, in the event the Treaty of Annexation
was ratified The Executive could not per-
nit itself to be influenced by this threat. 1t
in this, the spirit of our people,
who are ready TO sacrifice much for peace,
but nothing to intimidation. A war, under
any circumstances, is greatly to be deplored,
and the United States is the last nation to de-
sire it; but if, as the condition of peace, it be
required of us to fore9o the unquestionable