The New York herald., 1873-06-26
General Grant and His Mexican Pol
icy-What II May BE and What 1t
Should BE.

should BE.
1t appears to be generally understood that
there will be no trouble between our govern
ment and that of Mexico in consequence OF
General Mackenzies recent invasion of Mex-
can territory in pursuit Of thieving band OF
Kickapoos from Texas. 1t is presumed that
President Lerdo, considering the repeated
provocations given our people and troops on
the Rio Grande by the Kickapoos in their
numerous raids from Mexico upon Texas, looks
indulgently upon this overt act of General
Mackenzie and it is supposed that if Mr..
Secretary Fish has not already voluntarily
explained he will, upon o hint from the Mexi-
can government, explain to its satisfaction
this unlawful proceeding of General Macken-
zie, and that thereby the friendly relations so
long cultivated between the two governments
will still be maintained.
We cannot dismiss this subject, however,
upon these presumptions. Our history, like
that of other nations, justifes the fear that,
as was the case with England in the Russian
war, we may drift into international compli-
cations that the honest mind of the country
so much accustomed to exciting rumors from
our Indian and Mexican frontiers; and our
history shows SO many armed raids upon the
rich, inviting tropical countries of the Gulf
and the Caribbean Sea; we have had such
imperfect international observances at times
with regard to Cuba, and this all led to such a
spirit of immortality in the old times in the way
of iibustering, that even now hasty adven-
ture across the Rio Grande makes q limited
impression upon our public mind. We are
strong, and these neighboring Spanish nations
are weak, and their weakness has been sup
posed to justify any unusual proceeding upon
our part, even to the invasion of their sover-
eign domain.
Remembering these national tendencies in
other days, let us see where we stand in the
light of recent notable transactions upon the
Rio Grande. We can better pursue this
inquiry also when we read the sketch we
print Of events antecedent to our war with
Mexico. Impartial readers now see that the
Mexican war, although pressed to an honor
able and triumphant conclusion, and although
in it's results largely impressing our national
character, educating us for the supreme
struggle that came after, giving us o new
empire the control of the vast Pacific seas
and, perhaps, greater empires beyond was
not war in every way worthy of the United
States. 1t was an expedient Of the audacious
and powerful pro-slavery party to dominate
the Union and extend slavery over the Cont
nent. Notwithstanding the strength of the
pro-slavery party in those days, we do not
gone deliberately into the Mexican war. We
drifted into it. Event followed event.
aggression came upon aggression, until war
became fact, and the martial spirit of our
people, easily aroused and ever ready to
respond to the bidding Of arrogance and ambi-
ton, could not be controlled. So the war
began and came to an end. And, while we do
not disparage any Of its glory or patriotic
self-denial, we could wish that the causes ante
cedent and the transactions leading to the
strife were more to the credit Of Mr.. Polk and
his administration.
We observe that before the war began Pres
ident Polk violated Mexican sovereignty.
| There can be doubt, think, that Gen.
eral Mackenzie has in like manner violated
Mexican territory by crossing the Rio Grande.
We can understand that every provocation to
| this step existed. We know the General to be
q gallant soldier. But the way to redress
wrongs Committed upon our people on our
own territory is not to violate international
law. International law is not meant for the
strong natpns at the expense of the weak.
There is notone law for Mexico and another
for Great Htain. We must remember that
: when an ansy naval commander took Mason
I'D Slidell Dm the cover of the English flag
, weveturnedAem. When General Dix, exas-
pera>d at t. St Alban's raids from Canada
curing Nhe rsellion, commanded our troops
10 cross he riish frontier and pursue the
reoeis VINO ha made the Canadian dominions
q Dase OF opetions for war President Lin
, com formally ,nulled aud countermanded his
order. Ihls W done because International
law gave Great litain the right to demand that
we should do it. Nor did the reasoning mind
OF the country ce,ure Mr. Lincoln for any
, concession to lglish influences. What
Captain Wilkes d. with Mason and Shdell,
what General Dix commanded his troops to
DO against the raidt, from Canada, General
Mackenzie has done a the Rio Grande. The
difference is this. NJ. Lincoln disavowed the
acts OF his subordiItes, while, we under
stand, General Grah through Secretary
Belknap, approved the enterprise Of General
Mackenzie. The other Inference is that in
one case the nation of1ded was England,
while in this case it is MeIo-
The first point that arises,herefore, is that,
as strong nation, with reat history and
we trust an illustrious and spludid future it
is our duty to be, if possible, oe~-scrupulous
in our international relations. he second is
that we cannot in honor treat wax Mexico