not find any considerable force on the Rio Grande at all, still less, any thought of invasion.

Again, Mr. Marcy writes, "There may be other acts on the part of Mexico which would put an end to the relations of peace. p. 76. In such a case he is told that he may "cross the Rio Grande," and "take and hold possession of Metamoras."

General Taylor did not fall into the snare thus adroitly laid for him. He kept within the Texan limits. He writes that he does not want any volunteers, and hopes no more will be sent till called for; "that the consul is of opinion there will be no declaration of war" by Mexico; "the mass of the people is opposed to war with us." "I must express the hope that no militia force will be ordered to join me without my requisition." "I cannot believe that it will become necessary to employ volunteers from the United States."

After Marcy had finished his trap, set it, baited it with such instructions for General Taylor on the 30th of August, he waited till the 16th of October, as it appears from the published correspondence. Perhaps he was making arrangements for the mission to Mexico to negotiate a peace. Be that as it may, month after Mr. Buchanan had written to Mexico, desiring that "all existing difficulties should be terminated amicably by negotiation and not by the sword," stating, also, that the President "is anxious to preserve peace," and while the American government was expecting pacific overtures from Mexico he writes again to urge the General into the toils laid for him.

-

"Previous instructions will have put you in possession of the views of the government of the United States, not only as to the extent of its territorial claims, but of its determination to assert them. In carrying out these instructions, you will be left very much to your own judgment." "You will approach as near the western boundary of Texas (the Rio Grande) as circumstances will permit. . . . Ought your present position [at Corpus Christi, 'the most western point in the possession of Texas,'] to be changed? .. You need not wait for directions from Washington to carry out what you may deem proper to be done." - pp. 76, 77.

Then he speaks of "the contingency of your selecting_or being directed to take a position on the banks of the Rio Grande."-p. 77.

General Taylor, however, continued at Corpus Christi.

Perhaps he saw the snare; perhaps he thought it was not his business to take the responsibility of beginning a war with Mexico; at any rate, Nov. 7th, he writes,

"The position now occupied by the troops may, perhaps, be the best while negotiations are pending, or at any rate until a disposition shall be manifested by Mexico to protract them unreasonably. Under the supposition that such may be the view of the department, [he had not then received the note of Oct. 16th,] I shall make no movement from this point. . . until further instructions are received."

- p. 97.

After the receipt of this letter, it became plain that General Taylor was not thus to be caught with chaff. But the American government had yet other advices. On the 23d of September, Mr. Marks, a short time before American consul at Metamoras, wrote a letter to General Taylor - which of course was forwarded to the American government, from which we make the following extract:

"General Arista, [the Mexican commander,] assured me that there will be no declaration of war on the part of Mexico. General Arista pledged his honor to me that no large body of Mexican troops should cross the left bank of the Rio Grande; that only small parties, not to exceed two hundred men, should be permitted to go as far as the Arroyo Colorado, twenty leagues from the Rio Grande, and that they should be strictly ordered only to prevent Indian depredations and illicit trade. I then had no hesitation in assuring him that you [General Taylor] would not commit any aggressive act against Mexico, or her citizens, and that you would solely maintain the position you at present occupy, at or near the Nueces river. I trust, in having made this assurance to him, . . . it will meet with your approbation and be adhered to, as in a great measure peace depends on your prudent movements in this particular."

For very obvious reasons, the American government never published this letter. But what must be done?

True, Mr. Slidell was in Mexico, pretending to negotiate a settlement of all our difficulties with Mexico. He had not been refused by the actual government of Mexico. True, Congress was in session, and might have been consulted, as in the settlement of the Oregon question. Shall the government wait for the result of Mr. Slidell's mission?—No, that was "anticipated," as well it might have been. Shall Congress

be assembled? Quite as little. On the 13th of January, 1846, Mr. Marcy thus writes to the cautious General : —

"I am directed by the President to instruct you to advance and occupy with the troops under your command, positions on or near the east bank of the Rio del Norte, as soon as it can be conveniently done. . . . It is not designed, in our present relations with Mexico, that you should treat her as an enemy; but should she assume that character by a declaration of war, or any open act of hostility towards us, you will not act merely on the defensive." - pp. 77, 78.

ras.

On the 11th of March, the American army moved from Corpus Christi, and on the 21st, reached the Rio Grande, and took position on its eastern bank, opposite the town of MetamoOn the 18th of March, Senor Mejia, commander-in-chief of the forces opposed to the Americans, issued his proclamation. In this he says, "It has been reserved for the United States to practise dissimulation, deceit, and the basest treachery, in order, in the midst of peace, to appropriate to herself the territory of a friendly nation, who had honorably confided in the sincerity of her promises, and in the solemnity of her treaties. . . . What hopes, therefore, can the Mexican republic entertain of treating with an enemy who, at the very moment he endeavours to lull us into security by opening diplomatic negotiations, proceeds to occupy a territory which never could have been the object of the discussion now pending? The limits of Texas are fixed and well known; they have never extended beyond the Nueces."-p. 110. The 23d of March, Senor Cardenas sent a letter to General Taylor, protesting against his invasion of the Mexican territory, "without previous declaration of war, and without an explicit announcement of his design." He speaks of this act as "contrary to the practice of civilized countries and the clearest principles of the law of nations."

On the 12th of April, the Mexican general ordered General Taylor to retire within twenty-four hours, or war would follow. On the 24th of April, General Arista, the Mexican commanderin-chief, informed General Taylor that "he considered hostilities commenced, and should prosecute them," and on the same day a slight skirmish took place, though on the Mexican soil. The remaining history is but too well known already. message of the President, May 11th, 1846, the vote of Congress, the conduct of the democratic party and the whig party

The

-all these are well known. The President may declare that "war exists by an act of Mexico," the Congress may vote it to be true; that changes nothing. They cannot create a fact by a vote. It was the American government that made the war; unconstitutionally made a war which is unjust, mean, cowardly, and wicked even amongst wars.

Well said the Mexican commissioners, but a month ago "We must confess, not without a blush, that we are exhibiting to mankind the scandal of two Christian people, of two republics, in the presence of all the monarchies, mutually doing one another all the harm they can, by disputes about boundaries, when we have an excess of land to people and cultivate on the beautiful hemisphere where Providence caused us to be born." Which nation should blush? Let Mr. Calhoun answer. He said, in his speech in the Senate, Feb. 12th, 1847,

"If the annexation of Texas had not taken place, there would have been no war with Mexico, but that annexation was not the cause of the war. The immediate cause of the war was the marching of our troops from Corpus Christi to the Rio del Norte. If General Taylor had remained with his forces where he was, there would have been no invasion,· there would have been no conflict."*

For the statements we have made, we have not relied on the speeches of partisan leaders, delivered for the purposes of a party hostile to the administration; we have not depended on the miserable secrets of conversations, private letters, and cabinet discussions, since public and well-known documents furnish the only sure ground on which we can stand. The American Congress, Representatives and Senate, with unanimity almost unexampled, threw the blame of this iniquity upon the innocent, and declared that the war existed by the act of Mexico. Only fourteen in the House, only two in the Senate, voted against the bill which made this declaration, and which turned the treasure, the talent, the energy, and the life of this terrible American nation against the miserable and distracted people of Mexico. What shall we say of that declaration? It was a lie! War existed by an act of the American government; we think no honest man, informed of the facts, can be so simple as to doubt it. The Mexicans say that the

* But see Senator Benton's speech of Feb. 24th, 1847.

conduct of America is unparalleled in the history of modern nations. Mr. Castillo y Lanzas is here mistaken. It is not wholly so. There is one parallel to our course of aggression upon Mexico. That is the-partition of Poland. While reading anew the public documents relative to this matter, the corresponding points in that infamous parallel have forced themselves upon us. "That," says a distinguished writer on public law, was "the most flagrant violation of natural justice and international law which has occurred since Europe first emerged from barbarism." Over Mexico as over Poland, it was only necessary to stoop, and you could pick up what you would. There, too, was a territorial claim, a pretence for re-annexation. There as here the spoiler feared the interference of England and France, and employed "dissimulation, deceit, and the basest treachery." The manifestoes of Russia, Prussia, and Austria, setting forth their respective claims, are well known; the writings of suppliant slaves, who, at a tyrant's bidding, contended for their country, however bounded, their country, right or wrong-will not soon be forgot. The language of two of the chief-magistrates of America, solemnly written in their messages and sent to Congress, the nation, and the world

language professing the desire of peace, the love of justice and of right, have brought back to our memory the intense irony, cruel and malicious, of the diplomatists of that period. "The courts," says a diplomatic note dictated by the Spoilers, and sent in September, 1773, to the government of the Polish nation, "the courts [that is, of Russia, Prussia, and Austria] are so deeply interested in preserving the peace of Poland, that while they are busy in getting the treaties ready to be signed and ratified, their ministers think they ought not to lose a moment of that interval so precious for the restoration of the order and tranquillity of that kingdom." We need not point out the parallels in the messages of Presidents Tyler and Polk, or in the speeches and resolutions of their sycophants and their slaves. The democrat has learned of the despot, and American Diplomacy, though but a babe, and inexperienced, already rivals her European parents, long ago cradled at Vienna, Moscow, Rome, or Byzantium, rocked by the tyrants of the earth, and now hoary with centuries of crime — treason against mankind.

Shall we pause now, and pass judgment on the conduct of the two administrations most busy in this crime? We have stated the facts. Shall we declaim against such infamy?