Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1845-1854, 1846-12-16

Mexico has never possessed the power to I
reconqusr Texas.
In the language Of the Secretary of
State Of the United States, in a despatch
10 our minister in Mexico, under date of
July g, 1912, "Mexico may have chosen
TO consider and may still choose to con-
sidef Texas as having been at oil times
aimee 1886, and as still continuing, a
rebellious province; but the world has been
Obliged to take different view OF the mat
ter. From the time Of the battle Of San
Jacinto. in April, 1886, to the present mo-
ment, Texas has exhibited the same ex-
ternal signs Of national independence, as
Mexico herself, and with quite as much
stability of Government. Practically free
and independent, acknowledged as pol.t-
ical sovereignty by the principal Powe RS
of the world, no hostile foot finding rest
within her territory for six or seven years
and Mexico herself refrainlng for all
that period from any further attempt to re-
establish her own authority over that ter
ritory-it cannot but be surprising to find
Mr.. de Bocanegra (the Secretary Of. For
eign Affairs of Mexico) complaining that
for that whole period citizens Of the Uni
ted States, or its government, have been
favoring the rebels Of Texas, and supply
ing them with vessels, ammunition, and
money, as if the war for the reduction OF
the province Of Texas had been constant
" prosecuted by Mexico, and her success
prevented by these influences from a.
broad"
In the same despatch the Secretary Of
State affirms that "sincs 1887 the United
States have regarded Texas as an lnde-
pendent sovereignty, as much as Mexico;
and that trade and commerce with citizens
Of government at war with Mexico can.
not on that account be regarded as an in
tercourse by which assistance und succo
are given to Mexican rebels. The whole
current Of MI. de Bocanegra's remark
runs in the same direction as if the indie
pendence of Texas had not been acknowl
edged. 1t has been acknowledged; it wa.
acknowledged in 1887 against the renon'
STRANGE and protest of Mexico; and mos
Of the acts OF any Importance, of which
Mr.. de Bocanegra complains, flew neces
sarily from that recognition. He speaks
of Texas as still being an integral par: o
the territory Of the Mexican republic, bu
he cannot but understand that the United
States do not So regard il. The real com
piaint Of Mexico, therefore, is,in substance
neither more nor less than complaint a
gainst the recognition Of Texan independ
ence
1t may be thought rather late 10 repeat
that complaint, and not quite just to con-
fine it 10 the United States, to the exemp
ton OF England, France and Belgium, un-
less the United States, having been the
first TO acknowledge the independence Of
Mexico herself, are to be blamed for set
ting an example for the recognition of that
of Texas" And he added that ''the con-
stitution, public treaties, and the laws obige
the President to regard Texas as an indie
pendent State, and lis territory Us no part
Of the territory Of Mexico"
Texas had been IN independent State,
with an organized government.delying the
power of Mexico 10 overthrow or recon-
quer her for more than ten years before
Mexico commenced the present war against
the United States. Texas had gwen such
evidence 20 the world Of her ability to
maintain her separate existence as an in
dependent nation, that she had been for
mally recognised as such, not only by the
United States, but by several of the prn-
cipal powers OF Europe. These powers
had entered into treaties Of amity, COM
inerce and navigation with her. They
had received and accredited her ministers
and other diplomatic agents at their re-
spective courts, and they had commission
ed ministers and diplomatic agents on their
part to the government Of Texas.
If Mexico, Notwithstanding all this. and
her utter inability to subdue or reconquer
Texas, still stubbornly refused TO .ecog-
mise her as an independent nation, she was
none the less so on that account. Mexico
herself had been recognised as an irde-
pendent nation by the United States, and
by other powers, many years before Spain
Of which, before her revolution, she had
been colony, would agree to recognise
her as such; and yet Mexico was at the
time in the estimation of The civilized
world, and in fact, none the less an indie
pendent power because Spain still claimed
her as no colony.
II Spain had continued until the present
period to assert that MEXICO was one Of
her COLONIES in rebellion against her, this
would not have made her SO, or changed
the fact Of her independent existence.
Texas, at the period Of her annexation to
the United States, bore the same relation
TO Mexico that Mexico had borne to Spain
for many years before Spain ocknowledg-
ed her independence, with this importan,
diference-that, before the annexation Of
Texas TO the United States was consumma-
ted, Mexico herself, by formal act Of
her government. had acknowledged the in
dependence of Texas as nation. 1t is
true, that in the act Of recognition she