The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1897-05-16

President Polk goes on to recount that about
the same time, Santa Anna, then the Dictator
Of Mexico. invaded Texas with a large army, for
the purpose of subduing her people and enforce
ing obedience to his arbitrary government. On
April 2l, 1886. he encountered the Texan clti-
zen soldiers, and on that day was gained by
them the memorable victory of San Jacinto, by
which they achieved their independence.
Santa Anna himself was made a captive. In
the ensuing month OF May Santa Anna acknowl-
edged. by a treaty concluded with the Texan au-
thorltics, 1.-THE full, entire, and perfect indie
pendence Of the republic OF Texas" 1t is true
that he was then a prisoner OF war, but it In
equally true that he had failed to reconquer
Texas and had met with signal defeat; that his
authority had not been revoked, and that by vir
tue OF this treaty he obtained his personal release.
By 1t hostilities were suspended and the army
which had invaded Texas under his command
returned, in pursuance of this arrangement, I'M
molested. to Mexico. From the day that the
battle of San Jacinto was fought Mexico never
possessed the power to reconquer Texas. Texas,
then. had been an independent State, with an
organized Government, defying the power OF
Mexico to overthrow or reconquer her, for more
than ten years before Mexico became engaged
in war with the United States. We quote
once more from the Presidents message: Texas
had given such evidence to the world of her
ability to maintain her separate existence as an
Independent nation. that she had been formally
recognized as such not only by the United States,
but by several OF the principal powers of Europe.
These powers had entered into treaties of amity.
commerce, and navigation with her. They had
received and accredited her Ministers and other
diplomatic agents ut their respective courts. and
they had commissioned Ministers and diplomatic
agents on their part to the Government OF
Texas. II Mexico, Notwithstanding all this and
her utter inability to subduc or rcconquer Texas.
still tubbornly refused to recognize her AS an in
dependent nation. she was none the less so on that
account. Mexico herself had been recognized as an
independent nation 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 recognize 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 still claimed
her as a colony. II Spain had continued until
tho 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. AZ
the period OF her annexation to the United
States, bore the same relation 10 Mexico
that Mexico had borne to Spain for many
years before Spain acknowledged her indepen.
dence. with this important difference. that. be-
forc the annexation of Texas 10 the United
States was ~consummated, Mexico herself, by
formal act of her Government, had aCknowi'
edged the independence OF Texas MS a nation.
1t is true that, in the act OF recognition, she pro-
scribed a condition which she had no power or
authority to impose-that Texas should not an
mex herself to any other powcr-but this could
not detract In any degree from the recognition
which Mexico then made OF her actual indcpch'
dence. Upon this statement of facts, it is absurd
for NaNrp In aln1a 10 m ~ for commencing
hostilities against the United States, that Texas
10 still Il part of her territory
All this must now be conceded to be true, al
though 1t was once disputed, and 1t is equally
undeniable that tho true western boundary OF
Texas was the Rio Grande. and not tho
Nucces. as was asserted by Folks political
opponents, who alleged that when our army
marched TO the cast bank Of tho Rio Grands
they passed the Texan frontier and invaded mo
territory OF Mexico. In the message from when
We have just quoted the President proves. ~
Il historical review OF treaties, that there was
no ground for the assertion. and he points ont
in addition that Mexico herself never placed
the wal, which she had declared. upon the ground
that the American army occupied the in,"rme'
date territory between the Nucccs and the no
Grande. What she persevered in was Tho pre-
tension that Texas was not an independent Sih'e'
but a rebellious province, and her ay0wcd p"r-
pose in beginning a war with the United S'"icH
was to reconquer Texas and TO restore M"Ai'an
authority over the whole Texan TERRITORY, not
to the Nueces only, hut 10 the sabine. II il m
portHnt that the present generation should Scb
clear ideas regarding the circumstances under
which the war with Mexico took place, for these
have often been misconstrucd. To that end We
have reason TO welcome the messages and papers
Of James X. Polk n. W. IL