Ypsilanti sentinel. [volume] (Ypsilanti, Washtenaw Co., Mich.) 1843-1900, 1846-12-16

fought until the present time, Mexico has never
possessed the power to re-conquer Texas. In
the language of the Secretary of State of the U.
States, in despatch to our Minister to Mexi-
CO, under the date of the 9Th July, 1912, "Mex-
leo may have chosen, and may still choose to
consider Texas as having been at all tines
since 1885, and are still continuing rebelious
Province; but the world has been obliged to take
a very different view of the matter" From the
time of the battle of San Jacinto, in 1884, to
| the present moment. Texas has exhibited the
same external vigor o. national independence
as Mexico herself, and with quite as much sta
bility of government. Practically, free and in
dependent, acknowledged as political sover-
eighty by the principal powers of the world
no hostile foot finding rest within her territory
tor six or seven years, and Mexico refraining
for all that period, from any further attempts to
re-establish her authority over that territory, it
cannot but be surprising to find Mr.. Bocanegra
the Secretary of Foreign Affairs of Mexico,
complaining that, for that whole period.citizens
of the United States, or its government have
been favoring the rebels of Texas, and supply
ing them with vessels and money, and if the
war for the reduction of Texas had been con-
stantly prosecuted by Mexico.
In the same despatch the Mexican Secretary
of State affirms that since 1887, the U. States
have regarded Texas as an independent sove-
reignty as much as Mexico. and that trade and
commerce with citizens of government at war
with Mexico cannot on that account be regard
| ed Is an intercourse 6y which assistance and
succor are given to Mexican rebels. The whole
current of Mr.. De Bocanegra's remarks were
in the same direction as if the independence of
Texas had not been acknowledged. 1t has been
acknowledged-itw was acknowledged in 1887
against the remonstrance and protest of Mex
ico-and most of the acts of any Importance of
which De Bocanegra complains flow necessari-
ly from that recognition. He speaks of Texas
as being an integral part of the MexicanRepub-
lie. But he cannot but understand that the U.
States do not so regard it. The real cause of
complaint of Mexico, therefore. is neither more
nor less than complaint against the recognition
of Texan independence.
, 1t may be thought rather late to repeat that
complaint and not quite just to confne it to the
United States, to the exemption of England,
France and Belgium; unless the United States
having been the first to acknowledge the indie
pendence of Mexico herself, are to be blamed
for setting an example for the recognition of
tqat of Texas. And he added that the consti-
tuition, public treaties, and the laws Obliged the
President to regard Texas as an indepsnpent
state, and its territory as no part of Mexico.
Texas had been an Independent state with an
organized government defying the power of
Mexico to overthrow or re-conquer her for more
than ten years before Mexico complains aginst
the United States. Texas had given evidence
of her ability to maintain herself as an indepen-
dent power, and having been formally recognis-
ed as such, not only by the United States but
by the principal powers of Esrope. These pow
ers had entered into treaties of amity, COM
merce and navigation with her. They had re-
ceived and accredited her ministers and diplo-
matte agent at their respective courts, and they
have commissioned minister's and diplomatic a
gents on their part to the government of Texas.
;. If Mexico, notwithstanding all this, and her
utter inability to subdue or re-conquer Texas,
still stubbornly refused to recognize her as an
independent nation, she was none the less so on
that account. Mexico herself had been rccog
missed as an independent nalion by the United
States, and by other powers, many years before
Spain, of which, before her revolution, she had
been a colony, would agree to recogn Use her as
such, and yet Mexico was at that time. in the
estimation of the civilized world, and in fact
none the less an Independent power because
Spain till claimed her as a colony.
IfSpain had continued until the present peri
cd 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 Annex.
alton to the United States, bore the same rela-
ton to Mexico that Mexico had borne to Spain
for many years before Spain had acknowledged
her independence with this important difference
that before the Annexation of Texas to the
to the United States was consumated, Mexico
herself, by formal act of her government, had
acknowledged the independence of Texas as a
nation. 1t is tue that in the act of recognition
she prescribed condition which she had no au-
thority or power to impose. that Texas should
not annex herself to any other power but this
could not detract in any degree from the recog
milton which Mexico then made of her actual in
dependence. Upon this plain statement of facts
it is absurd for Mexico to allege as pretext for
commencing hostilities, against the U. S. that
Texas is still a part of her territory.
But there are those who, conceding all this
to be true, assume the ground that the western
| boundary of Texas is the Nueces, and not the
Rio Grande; and that therefore, in marching
our army to the east bank of latter river we pass
ed the Texan line, and invaded the territory of
Mexico. A simple statement of facts, known
to exist, wilconclusively refute such an assump-
ton. Texas, as ceded to the u. s. by France
in 1903, has always been claimed as extending
west to the Rio Grande. or Rio Bravo. This
fact is established by the authority of our most
eminent statesmen, at a period when the ques-
ton was as well, if uot better, understood, than
it is at present. During Mr. Jefferson's admin
istration, Messrs Monroe and Pinckney, who had
been sent on a special mission to Madrid, lar-
ged among other things with the ajustmedt of
boundary between the two countries, in note
addressed to the Spanish minister of foreign aft
airs, under date of the 26th of January 1905, as
sert that the boundary of Louisiana, as ceded to
the U. s. by France, are the river Pedido on
the east, and the liver Bravo on the west; and
they and they add that "the facts and principles
which justify this conclusion, are SO satisfacto-
ry to our government as to convince 1T that the
u. S. have not better right to the island of N.
Orleans, under the cession referred to, than they
have to the whole district of territory above de-
scribed."
| Down to the conclusion of the Florida treaty
in Feb. 1919, by which the territory was cedea