Mississippi Democrat. (Carrollton, Miss.) 1844-18??, 1846-12-23

the time Of the battle of San Jacinro. in
April, 1886, TO the present moment, Tex.
as has exhibited the same external sicns
Of national independence as Mexico her.
self, and with quite as much stability of
government. Practically free and indie
pendent, acknowledged rs political soye.
reIgnty by the principal Powers Of the
world, no hostile foot finding rest within
her territory for six or seven years, and
Mexico herself retaining for all that peri
cd from any further attempt 10 re establish
her own authority over that territory. Il
cannot but be surprising TO find Mr.. de
Bocanegra," (;he Secretary of Foreign
Affairs Of MeXico) complaining that for
that whole period citizens Of the United
| States, or its government, have been ia.
voring the rebels Of Texas, and supplying
them with vessels, ammunition, and mon.
ely, as if the war for the reduction of tho
province of Texas had been constantly
prosecuted by Mexico, and her success
! prevented by these influences from
abroad" In the same despatch the Sec
rotary Of State aliirms that "since 1897
the United States have regarded Tcyasos
an Independent sovereignty, as much as
| Mexico; and that trade and commerce
with citizens Of government at war with
Mexico cannot, on that account, be re-
garded as an intercourse by which assig-
lance and succor are given to Mexican re.
| bells. The whole current OF Mr.. De b.
canegra's remarks runs in the same di.
recton, as if the independence Of Texas
had not been acknowledged. Ii has been
! acknowledged was acknowledged in
! 1887, against the Renaissance and pro.
test of Mexico; and most of the acts, of
any importance, of which Mr.. de Bocane.
gra complains, flow necessarily from that
recognition. lie speaks Of Texas as y,i,l
being IAN integral part Of the territory Of
the Mexican republic; but he cannot but
understand that the United States do not
50 regard it. The real complaint of Mex.
leo, therefore, is in substance, neither
more nor less than n complaint against the
recognition Of Texan independence. 1t
may be thought rather late TO repeat that
complaint, and not quite uSt to confne
II 10 the United STATES, 10 the exemption
Of England, France, and Belgium, unless
the United States, having been the first 10
acknowledge the Independence of Mexi-
CO herself, are TO be blamed for setting an
example for recognition of that Of Texas"
| And he added, that "the constitution, pub
lie treaties, and the laws oblge the Presi-
dent TO regard Texas as an independent
State, and lis territory as no part OF the
territory of Mexico" Texas had been an
independent State, with an organized 60
yernmenl; defying the power of Mexico
10 overthrow Or reconquer her, for more
than ten years before Mexico commenced
| the present war against tie United States.
! Texts had givcu such evidence tt'v
world of her ability TO maintain her sepe-
rate existence as an independent nation,
that she had been formally recognised as
such, not only by the United States, but
by several of the principal Powers of Eu-
rope. These Powers had made treaties of
amity, commerce, and navigation with her.
They had received and accredited her
ministers and diplomatic agents at their
respective courts, and they had commits
stoned ministers and Diplomatic agents on
their part TO the government Of Tex
as. If Mexico, notwithsl andiHg all This,
and her utter inability to sublue or recon.
quer Texas, still sIubbornly refused TO re.
cogniss her as an independent nation, she
was none the less so on that account
Mexico herself had been recognised a. an
independent 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 re.
cognise her as such, and yet Mexico was
at that time, in the estimation of the civil
zed world, and in fact, none the less an
Independent power because Spain sui
claimed her as a colony. Ii Spain had
continued until the present period to as
Sert that Mexico was one of her colonies,
in rebellion against her, this would not
have made her so, or changed the fact OF
indeDendent existence. Texas, at the pc.
riod of her annexation 10 the United Sta.
tes. bore the same relation to Mexico that
| Mexico had borne 10 Spain for many wears
before Spain acknowledged her indepen.
dence, with this important difference
that. before the annexation of Texas 10 the
United States was consummated, Mexico
herself, by formal act of her govern
ment, had acknowledged the indepeG-
dencc OF Texas as nation. Ii Is true,
that IN the act of recognition she prescrlD-
ed condition, VIII ch she had no power OF
authority to impose, that Texas should not
annex herself 10 any other Power; but
this could not delracl in any degree from
the recognition which Mexico then made
OF her actual Independence. Upon this
plain statement of facts, it is absurd tor
Mexico 10 alege as preieXt for com
menclng hostiIitles against the United Sta
les, that Texas is still part OF her terri
tory.
Rit fhnrn oro tL,eo ~, .o,cajilr all