Jump to content

History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 5/Chapter 3

Add links
From Wikisource
←
Chapter 2
History of Mexico (Bancroft) (1886)
by Hubert Howe Bancroft
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
→

Table of Contents

2931892History of Mexico (Bancroft) — Chapter 31886Hubert Howe Bancroft
​

CHAPTER III.

DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN RELATIONS.

1823-1829.

Recognition by Foreign Powers — Negotiations with the Pope — Treaties with United States — Poinsett's Public Career — His Notes on Mexico — Diplomatic Relations With Great Britain And France — Treaties with European Nations — Hostility to Spaniards — Royal Plan of Reconquest — Arenas' Plot — Executions And Banishments — Expulsion of Spaniards — Siege of San Juan de Ulúa — The Spanish Commander Capitulates — Departure of the Spanish Garrison — Commodore Porter and Naval Operations — The War Brig Guerrero — Surrender of Spanish Ships on the Pacific

Before proceeding further with the internal affairs of the country, I will give an account of her foreign relations during the first few years following the establishment of the independence. The earliest diplomatic act of the new nation was the recognition of the Colombian republic as a free and independent power.[1] Her accredited minister was Miguel Santa Maria, whose unpleasant relations with Iturbide have been already mentioned, as well as his reinstatement in his position.

Congress having authorized the appointment of envoys to foreign governments, their instructions were given them by the regency, and did not require the sanction of the congress. Those, however, given to the envoy accredited to the holy see were specially framed by and with the advice and consent of the archbishops and bishops, and afterward submitted to ​the approbation of congress.[2] The government's choice fell on a most learned and worthy ecclesiastic, Pablo Francisco Vasquez, a canon of Puebla, Luis G. Gordoa being made his secretary. The pope, however, refused to receive him, or even allow him to pass the gates of Rome. The envoy continued his efforts, though without avail. Worldly interests swayed the papal counsels. Leo XII. valued too much the good-will of the sovereign, who after the events of 1814 and 1815 restored the pope to his states in Italy. The death of Leo XII. and accession of Pius VIII. did not improve matters, and Mexican affairs remained stationary for several years.[3]

Early in January 1823 the separate independence of Central America was recognized, and in July the executive was empowered by the congress to enter into such relations with foreign powers as it might deem expedient and conducive to the recognition by such powers of Mexican independence.[4] A treaty of amity, league, and confederation was entered into with the republic of Colombia, which with some amendments was approved by the Mexican congress the next year, and a minister appointed to that republic.[5] The opportunity for opening relations with foreign powers was now favorable. The government of the United Stateś gave a courteous reception to José Manuel Zozaya, the minister accredited thereto by Agustin I., but took no action beyond the general declaration recognizing the independence of all the new American states, two years before England did so.[6] President John Quincy Adams despatched on a visit to ​Mexico Joel R. Poinsett to study the condition of public affairs. In Poinsett's report, after his return, though with a certain prudent reserve regarding the men in power and the state of the country, he clearly predicted the end of the imperial rule, and the government at Washington acted accordingly.[7] Mr Poinsett returned as minister to Mexico early in 1825, and became very influential.[8] The first treaty concluded between the two republics was on the 12th of January, 1828, to fix the boundary line. The matter was negotiated by Sebastian Camacho and José Ignacio Esteva for Mexico, and Poinsett for the United States. Its real aim was to declare and confirm the validity of a treaty made in Washington on the 22d of February, 1819, between Spain and the United States, before Mexico had ceased to be an appendage of the Spanish crown. That treaty established the Sabine River, at the ​extreme east of Texas, as the dividing line. The period for the ratification of the new treaty having elapsed, an additional article validated it on the 5th of April, 1831, and the whole was ratified by the two governments in 1832. A treaty also of amity, commerce, and navigation was entered into April 5, 1831, which was ratified by the high contracting parties respectively January 14, and April 5, 1832.[9] Several questions occurred in the years 1826 and 1827 that were subjects of discussion between the two governments, such as claims of American citizens for robberies, impressiment of seamen, and seizure and confiscation of vessels by Mexican authorities, of which it is unnecessary to give details here.[10]

Great Britain at the congresses convened in Europe to treat of Spanish American affairs had reserved her right to act as best suited her interests, manifesting a resolve to prevent the intervention of any power save Spain, to which she had left the priority of right. to obtain by negotiation what advantages she could.[11] Had it not been for the energetic and timely declarations of England and the United States against interference by the European powers, constituting the so-called holy alliance, France, in view of the successes obtained in Naples, Piedmont, and Spain, would ​have attempted to accomplish in America what she had effected in Spain by restoring Fernando's absolute power. Mexico would of course have been among the first to experience the effects of Spain's vindication of her supposed rights. England, in view of the victories won by the Colombians over the Spanish forces in Peru, and of the prospect of a stable peace, concluded that the time had come to make a formal recognition of the independence of the Spanish colonies in America. Accordingly Mr Canning, the principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, instructed the diplomatic agents of his government at foreign courts to make known its resolve to enter into direct relations with the new governments of America, and to negotiate with them treaties of amity, commerce, and navigation,[12] to which effect instructions were issued to commissioners previously appointed. Prior to such action, early in January 1824, Lionel Hervey, H. G. Ward, and Charles O'Gorman[13] had been sent out as commissioners to study and report upon the political condition of Mexico. The agents were received in Vera Cruz with high honors by Victoria. On their transit to the capital the route through Puebla was avoided, that city being still agitated and manifesting hostility to foreigners. In Mexico they were entertained by the executive. Unfortunately, they were present during Lobato's revolt, and it is understood that they sent the government a note to the effect that they would leave the country if those disorders were not forthwith quelled, and protection afforded to foreigners.[14]

The British court soon after frankly entered into ​relations of friendship and trade, and its diplomatic agent was received in Mexico with every mark of respect, the Mexican minister in London having an equally friendly reception.[15]

Mr Canning's treaty instructions were given in a draught which was to serve for all the Spanish American republics. In the negotiations conducted by Alaman and Esteva on the part of Mexico they prevailed on the British commissioners to embody in the treaty certain clauses which were then repugnant to British policy, such as that the flag covered the merchandise. Moreover, the time the treaty was to be in operation was limited, and privileges were stipulated for Mexican and other Hispano-American vessels and merchandise. Mexico also reserved the right of conceding advantages to the Spanish flag whenever Spain should recognize her independence. The clause to allow Great Britain the same benefits as should at any future time be granted to the most favored nation was omitted. Such terms proved inadmissible in London, and the treaty was not approved. The English government next sent Mr Morrier, the historian of Persia, and a distinguished diplomate, to make a treaty according to the original draught. Morrier succeeded in having the negotiations transferred to London, though President Victoria was well satisfied with the course pursued by his negotiators. Sebastian Camacho was now intrusted with the business on the part of Mexico at the British court. A treaty was concluded establishing ​reciprocity, and leaving unlimited the time it was to be in force.[16] Thus was Mexico placed at great disadvantage for the future development of a national marine, and maritime trade.

France sent to America in January 1823 two secret agents, Julien Schmaltz and Achille de la Motte, to procure information on the political state of Colombia and Mexico, and to work in favor of erecting therein thrones for members of the French reigning family; or if such a scheme should prove impracticable, to enter into treaties of commerce with the two countries. The agents' plans were not detected in Colombia, it seems, but in Mexico, where they presented themselves as tourists, they were arrested, their papers were seized, and though nothing was actually discovered that could be detrimental to Mexico, the government treated them harshly.[17] The French could not be indifferent to England's superior influence in Mexico; and though closely allied with Spain by the interests of their reigning families, the needs of her commerce demanded some sort of communication with the new republic. In the endeavor to gain this point, the commander of the French naval forces stationed at Martinique was instructed to appoint a provisional commercial agent to reside in Mexico, which was done; but the Mexican government refused to recognize him, and in future paid no heed to credentials of such a nature. In fact, no proposition from any government would be entertained unless based upon an absolute recognition of Mexican independence.[18] Finally the Mexican ​minister in London, Sebastian Camacho, was invited by the French government to enter into a sort of arrangenent, to which it would not give the name of treaty, but merely that of provisional convention. By this means the chief points were arranged for the regulation of trade between the two countries. It was equally important to France, whose commercial interests were daily growing larger in Mexico, and to the republic, as a preliminary step toward the formal recognition by the former, and the conclusion of a treaty embodying the usual words and forms of such instruments. Affairs remained in this state till 1828, when the French government concluded to despatch to Mexico a commissioner of the same character as that first sent out by England, to obtain data that might serve as a basis for future action. A serious political disturbance, however, in Mexico, prevented the agent from going to his destination. Then followed the political changes of 1830 in France. Meantime, Señor Gorostiza, Mexican minister in London, under instructions of his government, went to Paris, and negotiated a treaty which the Mexican government afterward failed to ratify.[19] Treaties of amity, commerce, and navigation were, however, concluded with several European nations during this period.[20] ​The policy of Mexico toward foreigners showed a marked distrust of them; and indeed, the masses of the population were anything but friendly to aliens in general, and to Americans in particular. Foreigners were subjected to constant annoyance, little protection being afforded to their persons or property.[21] The position of Spaniards in Mexico became more perilous every day, and the system of despoiling them was constantly gaining supporters. The question was brought to a climax by a motion made in congress by Ramos Arizpe in 1824, to deprive all Spaniards of their public offices. The consideration that they had embraced the American cause, and had been guaranteed the rights and privileges of Mexican citizens, was ignored; their enemies were also unmindful of the evil consequences to the country, both in a moral and material point of view, which would result from such an act of injustice, as well as from the needless loss by persecution of so many citizens, a large number of whom had Mexican wives and children, while the greater portion were engaged in some useful industry productive of wealth to the young nation. Blind hatred caused justice and policy alike to be disregarded.[22]

The passions of the rabble were constantly kept at fever heat by a portion of the press, and all efforts of the government to check it were unavailing.[23] The utmost vigilance was practised to prevent disturbances of the peace, notwithstanding which, on the night of the 28th of May, 1824, a revolution was on the point ​of breaking out in Mexico, headed by a lieutenant, Basiliso Valdés, to overthrow the government, plunder and slaughter the Spaniards, and set fire to the Parian. The plot was fortunately detected, Valdés being arrested and executed, though much influence was brought to bear on Bravo, then president, to save the prisoner's life.

In the midst of the electoral agitation in 1824, the comandante general of Oajaca, Antonio Leon, a man who had rendered good service in the war of independence, and his brother Manuel, attempted there to. carry out Lobato's plan of removing the old Spaniards from office, but in a more alarming way, for the attempt was begun with the murder of Cayetano Machado, collector of taxes at Huajuapan, while journeying with his family toward Oajaca. He was assailed by Sergeant Trinidad Reina, and put to death in the most shocking manner. The executive looked on this movement as a most dangerous one, and Victoria was sent to quell it,[24] leaving Mexico on the 8th of August. While on his march he learned that a Spanish fleet with reënforcements for San Juan de Ulúa was off the coast, and immediately despatched a considerable part of his troops to Vera Cruz, proceeding with only 250 infantry and 50 horsemen to Huajuapan, the birthplace of Leon, whose influence there was great. Leon, though at the head of a force three times that number, listened to reason, and the trouble was ended without further bloodshed. This happy result increased the esteem in which Victoria was held by his countrymen.[25]

​A number of discontented Cubans sojourning in Mexico had urgently appealed to the government in 1823 to despatch 1,500 men to their island, which they declared was ripe for independence; but they gave so much publicity to their plans that even if Mexico had been able to furnish the men, fleet, and a competent leader, a failure might be reasonably expected.[26] The project was consequently abandoned as impracticable.

It will be remembered that the Spanish commissioners, Ranon Osés and Santiago Irisarri, had arrived at San Juan de Ulúa shortly before the fall of Iturbide. The circumstances connected with that event prevented the imperial government from coming to any arrangement with them. Afterward Victoria was commissioned to treat with Osés and Irisarri, with whom he held conferences at Jalapa, but the only result obtained was a provisional treaty of commerce, for which Victoria had been duly empowered by the government and congress. The Spaniards returned to San Juan de Ulúa with Mexican passports, and the constitutional régime being shortly after upset in Spain by the king with the aid of a powerful French army under the royal duc d'Angoulême, all efforts toward a peaceful solution of the difficulties between the mother country and Mexico were discontinued. Soon after, rumors came from Habana of an expedition about to sail for the invasion of Yucatan, which the deputies of that state assured the government would be well received by the inhabitants. The people of Yucatan, especially those of Campeche, suffered by the interruption of trade with Cuba, and were for this reason dissatisfied with the political change. Santa Anna, then governor and comandante general, heeding the demands of the merchants and others, permitted trade to be carried on, in Spanish ​vessels, between that peninsula and Cuba, though contrary to law; it is even asserted that a number of such vessels arrived, August 18, 1824, at Sisal, escorted by Spanish men-of-war to the entrance of the port.[27]

Fernando was no doubt planning the reconquest of his former colony, and conferred upon the ex-viceroy Apodaca the appointment of-captain-general of Cuba, to carry out the scheme. The count, however, did not come out to Cuba.[28]

A few days after the constituent congress began its labors, a plot was divulged, at the head of which was a friar named Joaquin Arenas.[29] This individual, on the 19th of January, 1827, approached Ignacio Mora, comandante general of the federal district, inviting him to join in a plan for the restoration of the Spanish government, and the protection of the true faith, which he claimed to be imperilled by the freedom of the press and the introduction of heretical books. He threatened Mora with death if he divulged the plot to the government, assuring him that it had ramifications throughout the country, and was on the eve of execution. Mora, of course, at once apprised the president, and it was arranged that he should invite Arenas to a second interview, and that Colonel Tornel, the president's private secretary, and Molinos del Campo, the governor of the federal district, hidden from sight, should be present at the conference. The ​friar was caught in the trap and arrested. He stated in prison that the plot had been formed in Madrid, and that King Fernando VII. had sent out a comisario regio, who was already on Mexican territory. The royal commissioner's name was not divulged.[30] Another friar, a Dominican named Martinez, and two other men, Segura and David, were also arrested as accomplices,[31] and soon after, March 22d, orders were issued that generals Echávarri and Negrete should be taken as prisoners, the former to the castle of Perote, and the latter to that of Acapulco. General Gregorio Arana, and many other officers, the priests Torres, Hidalgo, and Friar José Amat, as well as a number of civilians, were implicated. All of them were 'old' Spaniards. Their trial was by court-martial, and Arenas, Martinez, Segura, David, Arana and others were sentenced to death.[32] Many officers were degraded or lost their commissions, and a number of the prisoners were sentenced to various penalties.[33] Generals Echávarri and Negrete, deprived of their rank, were sent into exile.[34]

​The political party known as the escoceses, who were accused of complicity in the plot, made no answer to the charge, but denied in toto the existence of the conspiracy; and in their turn asserted that the ministers Gomez Pedraza and Ramos Arizpe, and the yorkinos, had made a mountain out of a mole-hill for the purpose of effecting their long-meditated schemes against the Spaniards, and of destroying at the same time their political rivals. The escoceses even absurdly accused Poinsett of having suggested the idea to Arenas. Possibly the conspiracy would hardly deserve more than a passing notice in history, but for its results. As a fact, it was the precedent, if not the very origin, of the long series of disturbances and violations of personal rights which distracted the country during so many years.[35]

At this time the question of expelling the Spaniards was moved in the legislature of Mexico. Old wounds were reopened, and every means resorted to for keeping up the excitement against the Spaniards, who were accused of being incessant conspirators against the national independence, and for that reason ought to be forced to leave the country. Victoria did nothing to allay the excitement, and Guerrero promoted that measure with all his influence; Gomez Pedraza did the same, though less openly. Serious tumults occurred in Ajusco, Apam, Toluca, and Acapulco, which served as bad examples for the rest ​of the country, since no armed force was sent to put them down. Governor Zavala of the state of Mexico was also accused of favoring the hostility toward the Spaniards, but he explicitly denied it in the lodges and in official addresses to the legislature. [36] The rioters of Ajusco and Toluca retired to their homes, but those of Apam and Acapulco continued in arms. Even the state of Vera Cruz decreed the dismissal of Spaniards from public office.[37] Leaving the subject of Spaniards to the legislative authority was tantamount to a decision against them. The legislature of Jalisco was the first to decree their expulsion; that of Mexico imitated it, and in the course of time the legislatures of all the other states followed the example.[38]

The final decree of expulsion, dated December 20, 1827, was issued by the national congress in obedience to the demands of the state legislatures, but not without opposition in both houses on the part of some prominent members. But for the pressure of state governors, there would have been no majority in favor of the bill. The law as passed, fortunately for the country s good name, contained no clause confiscating property or prohibiting its exportation by the owner.[39] ​President Victoria was not hostile to the Spaniards from the mere fact of their nationality; he had, on the contrary, shown favor to many of them who served under him. He abhorred supporting severe measures against them, and only did so when his ministers represented the necessity of such measures for the safety of the nation, and even of the Spaniards themselves, whose lives were often in great peril from popular violence. It is doubtful if the government could have guided the masses into the path of right and justice. Nevertheless, the president endeavored to allay the convulsion, but his feeble efforts availed nothing — instance the results of his intercession when the Parian was sacked in December 1828. The consequences of that scandalous occurrence were that large amounts of capital were taken out of the country, and the merchants of Europe suspended their operations in Mexico. [40]

​With the overthrow of the constitution in Spain, a change had also taken place in the conduct of Lemaur, the commandant of San Juan de Ulúa, who had at one time manifested liberal ideas toward Mexico. Under the pretext that the Spanish envoys had been dismissed, he assumed a hostile attitude, opening fire upon the city of Vera Cruz, September 25, 1823. The Mexican government then resolved upon active war.[41]

In July 1824 a law was passed to issue letters of marque to national and foreign vessels to prey upon Spanish commerce; and orders were given to reënforce the army besieging San Juan de Ulúa, to prevent the landing and march of Spanish invaders into the interior, and at the same time to compel the speedy surrender of that fortress.

The command of the fort had devolved in 1825 on José Coppinger, and the comandancia general and governorship of Vera Cruz had been placed by the Mexican executive in charge of Miguel Barragan. The fortress since September 1823 had kept up more or less vigorously a bombardment of the city, without other results than the destruction of buildings, and depriving itself of the resources which the merchants of Vera Cruz had been wont to supply for the support of the garrison.

A little before this some of the armed ships arrived, which had been purchased in England with the ​proceeds of the second loan. They were commanded by British and American officers; to coöperate with them a squadron of gun-boats was formed, under command of Post-captain Pedro Saenz de Baranda, a native of Yucatan. The siege was now closely pressed;[42] all communication between the fort and the shore was cut off, and the garrison found itself reduced to great straits. Food became scarce, and disease was decimating the men. Unless relief came immediately, the fort would have to surrender.[43] A Spanish fleet arrived from Cuba with troops and supplies to relieve the fort, but its commander, not considering himself sufficiently strong to attack the Mexican blockading squadron, returned to Habana.[44] Coppinger thus found himself compelled to sign a capitulation on the 18th of November,[45] 1825, under which the Spanish garrison was allowed to depart with the honors of war, being conveyed to Habana at the expense of the Mexican government. The latter received with the fortress all the artillery and other arms and ammunition existing therein.[46] Both ​the besiegers and besieged were entitled to much commendation for their bravery and constancy.

The whole nation received with enthusiastic joy the news of the capture of the sole point of Mexican territory which had remained in the possession of Spain. The officers, soldiers, and sailors, to whose good services was justly credited this result, were duly rewarded;

Vera Cruz Harbor.

and the Spanish flag that had waved over San Juan de Ulúa was deposited on the 12th of December in the Santuario de la Vírgen de Guadalupe. ​But the expulsion of this last force did not end the strife between the mother country and the republic, though henceforth, for a considerable time, it was confined to maritime operations, in which Spanish commerce was the only victim. The Spaniards could not retaliate in this warfare, as there was no Mexican marine to prey upon.

A Mexican squadron, consisting of the frigate Libertad, and the brigs Bravo, Victoria, Guerrero, and Hermon, under the command of Commodore David Porter, sailed on the 5th of December from Vera Cruz for the coasts of Cuba, where a number of Spanish merchant vessels were captured. In order to play still greater havoc with Spanish commerce, already much harassed by Colombian privateers, Porter issued letters of marque, and even approached the coasts of Spain, causing damage to several of the enemy's ships.[47] The Spanish government in retaliation despatched some men-of-war to the gulf of Mexico, and on the 11th of February, 1828, an action occurred between the frigate Lealtad of 50 guns and 300 men, and the Guerrero of 22 guns, the latter being captured after her commander, David H. Porter, a relative of the commodore, had been killed. From an official report of Lieutenant Charles E. Hawkins, commanding the Hermon, to the commodore, it appears that on the previous day the Guerrero met a number of small craft conveyed by the brig Marte and schooner Amalia, of fourteen and five guns respectively, and opened fire on them off Mariel on the north coast of Cuba, and a short distance from Habana. The assailed sought the protection of a battery, which the Guerrero bombarded. But on the 11th the Lealtad came and chased the Guerrero, which kept up a running fight till she was overtaken and forced to haul down her colors.[48] This gallant action produced much ​enthusiasm in Mexico. Money was freely subscribed to build another vessel, to be also called the Guerrero.[49]

Notwithstanding this misfortune, the Bravo and Hermon continued their cruise for some time; and it is asserted that the latter captured an armed schooner.[50]

Privateers were fitted out to prey upon Spanish commerce, and schemes to prosecute this kind of warfare were contemplated as late as 1831.[51] Nothing was effected, however. In 1825 the remnant of the Spanish navy in the Pacific Ocean fell into the possession of Mexico. The ship of the line Asia and the brig Constante escaped from Callao when that place was surrendered to the patriot forces of Colombia. On their way to Manila the crews mutinied, landed their chief officers in the Marianas Islands, and then brought the vessels to Monterey in California, already under the republican flag, where they were given up to Governor Luis Antonio Argüello.[52] ​ ​ ​ ​

  1. ↑ April 29, 1822, Mex. Col Leyes, Órd. y Dec., ii. 38-9.
  2. ↑ May 4, 1822. Id., ii. 40, 95-6, iii. 63-4, 113; Suarez y Navarro, Hist. Méx., 71.
  3. ↑ Tornel, Breve Reseña Hist., 59-73; Santangelo, Cong. Pan., 73-5.
  4. ↑ Colonel Anastasio Torrens was then sent on a diplomatic mission to the United States, and Francisco de B. Migoni commissioned as consul general in London. Mex. Col. Leyes, Órd. y Dec., ii. 152, 163, iii. 2, 63; Bustamante, Hist. Iturbide, 247.
  5. ↑ October 3, 1823. Mex. Col. Leyes, Ord. y Dec., iii. 6, 10, 14; Niles' Register, xxix. 256-7.
  6. ↑ Particulars may be seen in Zozaya, Apelacion, 5; Am. St. Pap., iv. 848-50; Gaz. Imp. Mex., ii. 237-8; Mora, Rev. Mex., i. 317.
  7. ↑ Pablo Obregon was accredited later as Mexican minister to Washington, where he won the respect of all.
  8. ↑ Poinsett had travelled in Europe and the holy land. Wherever he went he left pleasant memories. He had been in South America, and proved himself a good soldier in the war of Chilian independence. As a member of the American congress from South Carolina he advocated the recognition as independent nations of the former Hispano-American colonies. Liberty with him was no Utopia. As a diplomate he was an able one, uniting frankness with a moderate circumspection, never resorting to untruth or mental reservation. He was keen-sighted, could see into characters, measure men's abilities, and weigh their value. Zavala, Revol. Mex., i. 339-40; Id., Manif. de los principios polít., 1-23. Tornel, Breve Reseña Hist., 39, while acknowledging Poinsett's fine talents and soldierly merits, like many other Mexicans, accuses him of having taken advantage of an inexperienced people to mislead them, so that later in life numbers who had trusted him had reason to regret their infatuation. Poinsett's service in the American congress lasted from 1821 to 1825; he was secretary of war under Van Buren, and died Dec. 14, 1851. Lanman's Dict. U. S. Cong., 384. Poinsett published a work entitled Notes on Mexico, an 8vo vol., containing such statistical data as he gathered on his first journey in 1822, with descriptions of the places he hurriedly visited, and also a sketch of the revolution and translations of official reports on the condition of the country at the time of his visit. The book likewise gives the judgment he formed of men and affairs. His sojourn there was a short one, but long enough to enable him with his remarkable keen-sightedness to foresee coming events, and to pave the way for his country to have a greater influence in Mexico than the commercial nations of Europe. He also later on published in Mexico, 1827, a pamphlet of 16 pp., entitled Exposicion de la conducta política de los Estados Unidos para con las nuevas repúblicas de America; its object being to defend his government and his own course in Mexico against certain charges preferred against them by the legislature of Vera Cruz, whose suspicions he declared to be entirely unfounded.
  9. ↑ Both treaties officially published by the Mexican government, March 7, 1833. Mex. Derecho Intern., 1st pt 122-50; Am. St. Pap., For. Rel., iv. 422-626, 630-703, v. 907-10; Id. (new set), vi. 366, 578-613, 946-02, 1006-14; U. S. Govt, cong. 19, ses. 1, H. Ex. Doc., 142, vol. viii.; Id., cong. 22, ses. 1, H. Ex. Doc., 225, 22-7, in Mex. Treaties, i. no. 1; U. S. Pap., ii. no. 25, cong. 19, ses. 2; Cong. Debates, 1825-6, i. ind. p. viii.; U. S. Acts and Resol., 141-2, App. 24-30, 22d cong. 1st sess.; U. S. Govt., cong. 16, scs. 2, H. Jour. (Index Spain and S. Am.); Niles' Reg., xxvii. 270, 334, xxix. 384, xxx. 202, 421, xxxi. 136, 301, xxxiii. 19, xxxiv. 245, xxxv. 20, 41, 71, 213, 242, xl. 228-9; Am. Ann. Reg., 1831-2, Pub. Doc. 76-91; Mex. Mem. Rel., 1827, 10-113; Id., 1828, 6; Id., 1831, 2-5; Mex. Mem. Hacienda, 1831, 113-5; Gaz. de Mex., 1826, May 16, 2-3, and June 6, 3-4; Arrillaga, Recop., 1836, Jan. to June, 453-60; Cor. Fed. Mex., 1827, Feb. 19, 3; 1828, Jan. 13, 4; Dublan and Lozano, Leg. Mex., ii. 456-69; Tornel, Breve Reseña Hist., 79-80; Mora, Revol. Mex., 358-68; Bustamante, Voz de la Patria, ii. no. 33, 3-4, vi. 160-7; Poussin's The United States, 358-68; Id., De la Puissance, i. 412-3; Santangelo, Cong. Pan., 145-61; Cuevas, Porvenir Mex., 373-82; Mofras, Explor. Oregon, ii. 464-6; Filisola, Mem., i. 90-108.
  10. ↑ Niles' Reg. . xxxi. 23, 178, 310, xxxii. 79.
  11. ↑ In 1822 the Spanish court addressed itself to foreign powers deprecating precipitancy in their decision on the subject. Manif. Gob. Esp., 1-8.
  12. ↑ Alaman, Mem., 3-4; Tornel, Breve Reseña Hist., 32; Zavala, Revol. Mex., i. 322-8.
  13. ↑ Ward was subsequently accredited as chargé d'affaires to Mexico, and O'Gorman made consul-general.
  14. ↑ Judging by results, their reports to the British government must have been encouraging. Alaman, Hist. Méj., v. 782; Bustamante, Cuad. Hist., MS., viii. 217, 221; Id., Hist. Iturbide, 195; Zavala, Revol. Mex., i. 269; Ward's Mex., ii. 171-2, 175-7, 256, 262; Suarez y Navarro, Hist. Méj., 51; Gaz. de Mex., 1825, 177; Gregory's Hist. Mex., 46.
  15. ↑ José Mariano Michelena was appointed minister when he ceased to act for the executive. Vicente Rocafuerte, a native of Ecuador, became the secretary of the legation. Bustamante and several others objected to both appointments for good reasons, the chief against Michelena being that he would prove objectionable to the British government, as turned out to be the case. Rocafuerte cost the nation many thousands of dollars. The legation went to England on the British frigate Valorous, April 21, 1824. Michelena had orders to buy ships, arms, and clothing. Though neither he nor Rocafuerte showed the best judgment in their purchases and other money transactions, their integrity was not impeached. They both defended their conduct. Bustamante, Cuad. Hist., MS., viii. 231-2; Alaman, Hist. Méj., v. 783; Tornel, Breve Reseña Hist., 78; Michelena, Esplic., 8-9, 29, 133-5; Rocafuerte, Regalo, 8-13.
  16. ↑ Ratified by Mexico Oct. 27, 1827. Gaz. de Mex., 1826, May 13, Sept. 7, 3; Alaman's Rep. to Cong., in Niles' Reg., xxviii. 169-71, xxix. 7, 39, 139, xxx. 340-1, 368, xxxiii. 18; Mex. Mem. Rel., 1826, 4-10; Id., 1827, 3-11; Zavala, Revol. Mex., ii. 13-15; Tornel, Breve Reseña Hist., 55; Santangelo, Cong. Pan., 145-7; Macgregor's Prog. Am., i. 684-7; Annals Brit. Leg., 1866, 333; Cor. Fed. Mex., 1827, Nov. 26, 2-4; Bustamante, Voz de la Patria, ii. no. 7, 3, no. 9, 3, no. 20, no. 26, 3-4; North Am. Rev., xxxii. 319-26; Arrillaga, Recap., 1829, 128-9, 160; Dublan and Lozano, Leg. Mex., ii. 19-25; Mora, Revol. Mex., 345-84; Ocios Españ. Emigrad., iv. 242-3, v. 213-14; Cuevas, Porvenir Mex., 287-8; Ortega, Mem. Rel. Dept., 55-6.
  17. ↑ Mora, Revol. Mex., i. 347; Rivera, Hist. Jalapa, ii. 295.
  18. ↑ On the 4th of May, 1826, the congress passed an act enjoining that policy. Gaz. de Mex., 1826, May 18, 2-3; Bustamante, Voz de la Patria, ii. no. 12, 6; Ramirez y Sesma, Col. Dec., 299; Dublan and Lozano, Leg. Mex., i. 781.
  19. ↑ Mexico's equality with other sovereign nations was at stake, the alternate priority in the heading of the two drafts of the treaty having been refused by the French minister of state. Bustamante, Voz de la Patria, ii. no. 12, 5; Mora, Revol. Mex., i. 340-52; Suarez y Nararro, Hist. Méx., 71; Gaz. de Mex., 1826, Nov. 25, 3; Cor. Fed. Mex., 1827, Aug. 18, 1-3; La Palanca, 1826, Dec. 11, 4; Niles' Reg., xxvii. 218.
  20. ↑ Prussia in 1826 had attempted the subterfuge of keeping a commercial agent in Mexico without a treaty having been entered into between the two nations, but it was not permitted. In following years treaties of amity, commerce, and navigation were made with that kingdom and others, namely, Hanover, Denmark, and the Netherlands; and later with the Hanseatic cities, Wurtemburg, Bavaria, etc. Gaz. de Mex., 1826, May, 13, 4; Mex. Col. Ley., 1829, 30, 35-16, 55-73; Arrillaga, Recop., 1833, 63-73, 137-56, 226, 273-322, 464; Dublan and Lozano, Leg. Mex., ii. 136-9, 143-9, 184-94, 331-3, 431-4; Mex. Mem. Rel., 1833, 1-5, 16-20; Bustamante, Voz de la Patria, MS., vi. 102;, Niles' Register, xxxii. 74-85.
  21. ↑ June 5, 1826, the government showed its distrust in a most stringent passport law. Gaz. de Mex., 1826, June 13, 1-2. Reiterated in March, 1828. Dispos. Var., iii. 141-2.
  22. ↑ Guadalajara in June 1823, and the congress of Yucatan on the 10th of August, 1824, attempted to defeat these projects. Dispos. Var., iii. 116; Yuc. Manifiesto del Cong. del Est., p. xiii.; Navarro, Iturbide, 224-7.
  23. ↑ The most virulent was one whose motto was, 'Ó se destierra el coyote, ó mata nuestras gallinas;' hence the Spaniards' nickname of coyotes. The editor was brought to trial; but the jury, intimidated by a mob, acquitted him. Another paper of the some stamp was 'El Borbonismo sin máscara.' However, a Frenchman who edited the Archivista was expelled for making remarks against the government, which was an arbitrary measure. Bustamante, Cuad. Hist, MS., viii. 234-6; Id., Hist. Iturbide, 233-4.
  24. ↑ Tornel, Breve Reseña Hist., 22-3, accuses Alaman and Mier y Teran of having caused this selection with a sinister object. Alaman denies the charge, asserting that Victoria asked for the appointment, and Bravo acceded, feeling it to be out of place to oppose him. Hist Méj., v. 809.
  25. ↑ Before returning to Mexico, Victoria, on the 5th of September, at Huajuapan, in a proclamation congratulated the people of Oajaca on peace secured without bloodshed. Gac. Gob. Sup., 1824, Sept. 18, 169-70. Sergeant Reina and Guadalupe La Madrid, who appeared as the instigators of Machado's murder, were executed. They implicated the brothers Leon, who were tried in Mexico. Antonio vindicated himself, and Manuel was pardoned by congress. Alaman, Hist. Méj., v. 810.
  26. ↑ Santa Anna was thought of as the proper leader; and it was said that he contemplated leading an expedition against Cuba from Yucatan. Bustamante, Voz de la Patria, ii. no. 6, 7, no. 11, 5; Id., Hist. Iturbide, 231; Zavala, Revol. Mex., i. 295–9; Pedraza, Manif., 28-9; Tornel, Breve Reseña Hist., 77.
  27. ↑ The same men-of-war that had brought relief to the garrison of San Juan de Ulúa. Yuc. Manif. Cong. del Est., 39-53, 78-85; Yuc. Comp. Hist., 14-25; Beltrami, Mex., ii. 355-8; Вarbachano, Mem. Саmр., 4-3, ар. 9-14; Suarez y Navarro, Hist. Méx., 67-70; Bustamante, Cuad. Hist., MS., viii. 23S; Id., Voz de la Patria, ii. no. 6, 2-3. Under the pretext that the invasion of Yucatan would imperil Mexico's nationality, a motion was made in congress to empower the governors to remove from their homes all persons suspected of hostility to independence. The motion was rejected. Bustamante, Voz de la Patria, ii. nos. 5 and 8.
  28. ↑ King Fernando, by his ambassor in London, the duque de San Cárlos, according to the statement of the latter's agent, José Mariano Torrente, solicited the aid of Iturbide, but without avail. Torrente, Revol. Hisp. Am., iii. 365; Bustamante, Hist. Iturbide, 228, 252-3; Id., Cuad. Hist., MS., viii. 255.
  29. ↑ A barefooted Dieguino from Spain with a bad record; his last offence being that of counterfeiting coin at a place that was disguised as a soap factory in Mexico.
  30. ↑ His name was afterward understood to be Eugenio Aviraneta, who entered the country in 1825, and worked in the office of the Veracruzano Libre. It was never known where he got his appointment, whether from Madrid or from the captain-general of Cuba, or only assumed it to give himself importance. Alaman, Hist. Méj., v. 827. Aviraneta escaped. The friendly reception given him in Cuba by the authorities, and his subsequent coming to Mexico with the rank of intendente de ejército of Barradas' expedition, tend to confirm the friar's statement.
  31. ↑ The men arrested as chief conspirators were mere agents, not the masters. The plan and other details may be seen in Suarez y Navarro, Hist. Méx., 390-5. This authority maintains that the conspiracy existed, and that the trials were perfectly in order.
  32. ↑ Arana to the end, and with his last breath, declared his innocence. Able and impartial lawyers could find in the evidence nothing to justify the penalty that was inflicted on him. Zavala, Revol. Mex., ii. 35; Antepara, Defensa legal, 1-77.
  33. ↑ Many cases were still pending August 29, 1829, when President Guerrero, in use of his extraordinary powers, ordered them closed, as they then were commuting the penalty of death, where it had appeared to be merited, for others that the courts should designate. Dublan and Lozano, Legis. Mex., ii. 153.
  34. ↑ Echavárri found refuge in the United States, where he eked out a support by giving Spanish lessons. He would have died in misery but for the assistance afforded him by Iturbide's widow. It is hard to believe that Echávarri threw away his past services to become a traitor to his adopted country. Spain always paid those who worked for the restoration of her sway in America. How is it, then, that Echávarri was not the recipient of her favors? Negrete resided for some years in New York, leading a quiet life, without communicating with the Spanish authorities, as Tornel, then Mexican minister in Washington, afterward testified. Later he went to live in Bordeaux, where he indignantly rejected a proposition from his former rival, General Cruz, to reenter the Spanish service. May 23, 1835, the Mexican congress restored them to their rights and rank, and permission was given Negrete to return to Mexico. Dublan and Lozano, Legis. Mex., ii. 52.
  35. ↑ The following authorities have been consulted on this episode: Padre Arenas, Causa Contra, 1-117; Zavala, Revol. Mex., ii. 6-11, 17-18, 34-5; Tornel, Breve Reseña Hist., 86-108, 114, 163; Alaman, Hist. Méj., v. 825-34; Gac. Gob. Mex., 1827, Feb. 8, 1-2; El Amigo del Pueblo, vol. i.-iii. passim; El Observador de la Rep. Mex., i. 87-108, 151-76, 187-213, 415-49, ii. 37-74; Bustamante, Voz de la Patria, ii. nos 18, 20; Correo Semanario, i. 136-42, 168-9, 188-91, 236-7; Cor. Fed. Mex., 1827, Jan. to June, 1823, June 28; La Palanca, 1827, Jan. to June, ii. nos 14, 36, 42; Arenas (El Padre), Causas, 1-128; Rivera, Gob. de Méx., ii. 126-7; and a large number of others.
  36. ↑ He declares that he was the only one of the yorkino party to oppose the general ostracism. Revol. Mex., ii. 30-4. Tornel, while acknowledging that Zavala made such an assertion, says that he acted differently, and when Vice-governor Veramendi and some deputies made use of the poisoned weapon, he regretted that they deprived him of the fatal popularity that arbitrary measures would have secured him. Breve Reseña Hist., 166.
  37. ↑ It was also provided that all Spaniards should be registered and kept under surveillance. Cor. Fed. Mex., 1827, Dec. 6 and 13; La Palanca, 1827. Dec. 5, 3-4; iii. 98-9.
  38. ↑ The Spaniards found themselves ostracized throughout the country before the federal congress adopted a final action regarding them. Tornel, Breve Reseña Hist., 166; Mora, Obras Sueltas, ii. 254-6, 260-2; Cor. Fed. Mex., 1827, June 19 to Dec. 28; Dispos. Var., iii. 137; Alvarez, Manif., 115-16; Puebla, Dec. y Órd, 149-52.
  39. ↑ The law required the expelled Spaniards to leave the country within six months. The exceptions from the effects of the law were: 1. Spaniards having Mexican wives and living with them; 2. Those having children not natives of Spain; 3. Those over 60 years of age; 4. Those physically and permanently incapacited. The general government could also, after consulting the governor of the respective state, except such Spaniards as had rendered distinguished services to the national independence, and shown themselves well disposed to the country's institutions; also their sons, if they followed the example of their fathers, and resided in the republic; likewise those practising some science, art, or useful industry therein, and free from suspicion. A previous law of May 10th had suspended all Spaniards from office. The other allowed pensions to such as did not go to reside in the enemy's country. The government from time to time, notably on the 20th of March, 1829, issued most stringent laws and orders against these subjects of Spain. A few were excepted, however, among whom were those who had served in congress, and had remained loyal to Mexico, and the officers and crews of the line-of-battle ship Asia. Dublan and Lozano, Legis. Mex., ii. 12, 47-8, 66, 98-106; Mex. Col. Ley. y Dec., 1829-30, 9-10, 15-16; Bustamante, Cuad. Hist., MS., viii. 151; Id., Voz de la Pairia, i. nos. 4, 5, 11-19, ii. no. 16, iii. nos. 20-4, iv. nos. 2-9; Arrillaga, Recop. 1828, 35-206; 1829, 47-195, 205; Tornel, Breve Reseña Hist., 166-71; Zavala, Revol. Mex., ii. 125; Gaz. de Mex., 1826, May 13; 1827, May 10; Mex. Mem. Est. Libre, 1828, p. 3.
  40. ↑ The constitution was thus shattered, and the germ of illegality became finally rooted. Tornel, Breve Reseña, Hist. 310-12, 332-424; Alaman, Hist. Méj., v. 839-43; Dublan and Lozano, Legis. Mex., ii. 90-1; Suarez y Navarro, Hist. Méx., 92-134; El Espíritu Púb., 1828, Nov. 2 to Dec. 28; 1829, Jan. 1 to Feb. 28; Arrillaga, Recop., 1828, 250, 252, 258, 273; 1829, 4-6, 45-6; 1830, 83-5, 113-14; Gaz. de Mex., Extr., 1828, a, 1-4, b, 1; Mex., Col. Leyes, 1829-30, 1-2, 8-14; Dispos. Var., ii. 55-6, iii. 144, 149, 151; Figueroa, J., Observ. de un Ciud., 1-2; Alvarez, J., Manif., 116-18; Puebla, Mem. al Cong., 11-14; Bustamante, Voz de la Patria, i. nos 2-10, 15-19, 25, 27, 29, 30, 35, iii. nos 1-5,8-17: Id., Hist. Iturbide, 149-50, 241-2; Id., Hist. Gob. Victoria, MS., 555-76; Pedraza Manif., 52-92; Zavala, Revol. Mex., ii. 76-79, 83-149; Id., Manif. del Gobr., 1-39; Id., Viage á los E. U., 6; Santa Anna, Pronunc., 1-124, and 54 pp. of annexes; Rincon, M., Justificado, 1-89 and 1-108; Unda, P. V., Esposic., 1-32; Id., Sorpresa del Campo, 1-19; El Parian, Prim. Represent, del Com., 1-65; Molinos, Prision; Méx., Juicio Impar., 1-32; Méx. Manif. Disput., 4-7; Cuevas, Porvenir Méx., 472-80; Martinez, Revol. Méx., i. 146-8; El Atleta, 1829, Dec. 30; Montesdeoca, Procl., in Pap. Sueltos, no. 13; Arrangoiz, Méj., ii. 185-91; Rivera, Gob. de Méx., 128-30; Id., Hist. Jalapa, ii. 481-506, 509-10, 514-20.
  41. ↑ Lemaur's action led to grave consequences, not only for the two nations, but notably for the Spaniards residing in Mexico. Mex. Col. Leyes, Órd. y Dec. ii. 151-2, 205, iii. 3. Mex. Manif. del Sup. Poder Ejec., 1-4; Guia de Hac., iv. 297-300; Alaman, Hist. Méj., v. 703-775; Bustamante, Hist. Iturbide, 182-3; Id., Cuad. Hist., MS., viii. 151-2, 202; Zavala, Revol. Mex., i. 248; Mora, Revol. Mex., i. 348, 370-1; Mex. Mem. Rel., 1823, 6-9, 57; Mex. Mem. Guerra, 1823, 9-12, 15; Am. St. Pap. (new set), Naval Aff., ii. 290-1; Cuevas, Porvenir Méx., 273; Pap. Sueltos, no. 1; Rivera, Hist. Jalapa, ii. 294-5, 303-4; Id., Gob. de Méx., ii. 107; Niles' Reg., xxiv. 217, 282-3, xxv. 155, 213-14, xxvi. 100. Yucatan opposed the prohibition of trade with Cuba, her very existence almost depending on that trade, but at the same time declared her submission to the national decree. Yuc., Manifiesto del Cong. del Est., ix.-xi. 34-39.
  42. ↑ As early as Sept. 1823 a Mexican flotilla had taken the island of Sacrificios, though the possession was disputed by the fort. In Dec. 1824 the Spanish garrison was strictly confined within the walls of the fortress, and suffered for want of many of the necessaries of life. Méx. Mem. Marina, 1824, 6-7.
  43. ↑ Alaman, Hist. Méj., v. 820, assures us that at this crisis Victoria despatched his friend and minister of the treasury, José Ignacio Esteva, to Vera Cruz, to push the operations of the blockade, or as it was generally understood, 'para que la gloria de la rendicion recayese en él,' thus depriving Barragan of the part that rightfully belonged to him. This must be taken with reserve. Tornel, Breve Reseña Hist., 42, without detracting from Barragan, gives Esteva much credit for the success obtained.
  44. ↑ The delay in sending relief to the fort has been attributed to a Col Montenegro, said to have been a friend to the American cause, who had a position near the captain-general of Cuba. El Veracruzano Libre, 1828, June 8, 3, in Pinart, Coll.
  45. ↑ Tornel, Breve Reseña Hist., 43, and Zavala, Revol. Méx., i. 252, commit the error of giving the date of surrender on the 15th of September. The preliminaries of the capitulation 'en fuerza de las imperiosas circunstancias' in which the Spaniards were situated was signed in the city of Vera Cruz on the 17th by Miguel Suarez del Valle and Domingo Lagrú, commissioned therefor by Coppinger, and on the 18th ratified by Barragan and the Spanish commander. Mex. Gaz. Extra., 1-3; Gaz. de Mex., Prim. Ép. Fed., i. 1825, no. 184, 1-3.
  46. ↑ Including also several launches, barges, boats, and a small schooner, also medicines, and the silver and other paraments of the church. Alaman, Hist. Méj., v. 820-1; Pedraza, Manif., 27-8; Liceaga, Adic. y Rectif., 614-15; Vallejo, Col. Doc., i. no. 14, 1-2; Ward's Mex., ii. 262; Niles' Req., xxix. 182, 231, 259, 276, 355-6, 390; S. L. Potosí, Rel de las Demost., 1-10; Cor. Fed. Mex., Dec. 2, 1826, 1-3; Gaz. de Mex., 1826, May 2, 2-3; Suarez y Navarro, Hist. Méx., 73. The sick Spaniards, namely, 148 soldiers and sailors, one treasury officer, and six others, were cared for in the hospitals of Vera Cruz.
  47. ↑ Cor. Fed. Mex., 1827, Feb. 20, April 14; Gaz. de Mex., 1827, Feb. 22; La Palanca, ii. no. 21; Niles' Reg., xxxiii. 356.
  48. ↑ Cor. Fed. Mex., 1828, March 24; Niles' Reg., xxxiv. 8-9.
  49. ↑ What became of those funds is unknown; 'las desgracias de cuanto tenia el nombre de Guerrero comenzaron á ser fatídicas.' Tornel, Breve Reseña Hist., 270-3. The widows and orphans of the slain on the brig were pensioned. Dublan and Lozano, Legis. Mex., ii. 65-6.
  50. ↑ The Mexican navy being disabled in 1829, Commodore Porter retired and went back to his home in Pennsylvania. President Guerrero, on the 14th of August, conveyed to him the warm thanks of the Mexican nation for his valuable services. Niles' Reg., xxxvii. 119. While the commodore and his friend Doctor Boardman were on their way to the city of Mexico in May 1829, they were assailed by three armed bandits. The commodore shot the chief dead, upon which the other two fled. The doctor received a sabre-wound in his left arm. Id., xxxvi. 381.
  51. ↑ Cor. Fed. Mex., 1828, Aug. 1. General Basadre took out 25 or 30 letters of marque issued by President Guerrero, and when he had already fitted out five vessels to attack the Spanish convoy taking silver to Spain, the British admiral at Jamaica under the supposition, it is presumed, that the letters were apocryphal, gave orders to arrest and treat as a pirate a 'certain Basadre.' Alaman, Proceso, 39; Id., Defensa, 81.
  52. ↑ Alaman, Hist. Mej., v. 819, says the surrender took place in Acapulco, which is a mistake; they were taken there from Monterey by officers in the Mexican service. Full particulars on this episode are given in Hist. Cal., ii. this series.

    The following authorities have been consulted in writing the foregoing chapters: Mex., Acta Constitut., 1-12; Id., Diario Congr. Constituy., ii. 680-98; Id., Col. Constituciones, i. 1-101, 320-473, ii. 66-151, 294-368, iii. 165-235, 328, 403-84; Id., Col. Leyes, Ord. y Dec., ii. 89-207, and iii. 1-163, passim; Id., Col. Leyes Fund., 116-64; Id., Col. Leyes y Dec., 1844-6, 414–20; 1847, 35-8, 76-153; Id., Col. Leyes, 1829-30, 33-46, 53-85, 90, 151; Id., Col. Decretos Sob. Congr. Mex., 92-5, 108-11, 134-79, 189, 219-21; Id., Constitucion Fed., 1-28; Id., Constituc. Polít., 1-47; Id., Código Fund., 1-92; Id., Plan Constituc. Polít., 1-83; Gac. Imp. Méx., ii. 213, 267-8; Gaz. de Méx., 1823, i. 10-11, 49-50, 171-4, ii. 11-12; 1824, iii. 15-16, iv. 173-258, 323; 1825, v. 177; 1826, passim; 1827, Jan. 2, 4, 30, Feb. 3, 8, 13, 22, 27, March 8, April 3, 10, 14, May 1, 10, 19, 24-29, etc.; Gaz. de Méx., Prim. Ép. Fed., 1825, i. nos. 69, 184, 210; Soc. Mex. Geog. Bol., i. 56, 188, iii. 102-21, 132, 143, 350, 303, v. 95-112, xi. 343; Liceaga, Adic. y Rectific., 324-5, 614-18; Guia de Hac. Rep. Mex., i. 35, 122-61, ii. 109-55, iv. 34, 49-51, 207-303, v. 30-9, 196, 21718, 283-4, 304-6, vi. 43-5, 62-5, 96-138, 245-58; Mex., Gaz. Extraord. Feder. Mex., 1-3; Derecho Intern. Mex., 1st pt, 109-50, 177-80, 372-83, 427-564, 597-608, 2d pt, 1-145, 181-96, 234-69, 301-21, 3d pt, 327-49, 495, 825-6, 1159; Dublan and Lozano, Leg. Mex., i. 665-6, 673-6, 684-710, ii. passim, iv. 250, 254, 412, v. 260-1; Alaman, Hist. Méj., iii. 61-3, iv. 141, 724, v. passim; Id., Defensa, pp. ix.-xxii.; Id., Noticias Biog. Necrológ., 10; Id., Memor. Presentada á la Cámara, 1-5l; Id., Esposic., 1-67; Id., Apuntes Biog., 19, 21-2; Dispos. Varias, iii. passim, v. fol. 5; Bustamante, Cuad. Hist., ii. 176-80, iv. 175-6, 222-33, v. 207-8, 268, vii. 77-9, viii. passim; Id., Hist. Iturbide, 62-88, 99-101, 139-50, 158-291; Id., Voz de la Patria, i.-ii. passim; Id., Hist. Gob. Victoria, MS., 555-76; Id., Hist. Sta Anna, 126-7; Id., Garza Vindicado, 5, 30-52; Id., Gabinete Mex., ii. 225-9, 248-9; Id., Resistencia Corte Esp., 1-32; Id., Medidas Pacific., MS., i. 114-18; Id., Mem. para la Hist. Mex., MIS., ii. 13; Id., Necesidad de Union, 1-44; Id., Diario Mex., MS., xlv. 203; Zincunegui, Respuesta, 1-36; D'Orbigny, Voy. Deux Amér., 450-3; Larrainzar, Soconusco, 31-194; Martinez, Sinóp. Hist. Revol. Mex., i. 117-241; Correo Semanario, i. 136-42, 168-9, 188-91, 236-7; El Tiempo, 1834, July 29, Aug. 1, Oct. 3; 1846, Feb. 22, etc.; Wappus, Mex. and Cent. Am., 83, 134; Southern Quart. Rev., xv. 104-7; Zerecero, Rev. Mex., 73, 109-10; Richthofen, Rep. Mex., 19-32, 44-65, 463-89; Michelena, Esplicacion, 8-9, 29-35; Gonzalez, Hist. Aguascal., 89-106; Id., Dict. Comis. Hac., 1-7; Bárcena, Catecismo Hist., 215-40; Carbajal, Vindicac., 10-13; Voz de Méj., April 19, 1864; Falconer's On the Discov. Mississippi, 41-54; Lizardi, Advertencias Necesar., 1-8; Proclama, El Gobernador del Distrito; Proclama del Gen. Montesdeoca; Guerrero, Notic. Extraord.; Democratic Rev., i. 488-92; White's Coll. Laws, i. 375-410, 594-5, 622; Mod. Trav. Mex. and Guat., i. 153-61, 322-5, ii. 169-73; Ramsey's Other Side, 12-14; Ocios Espa. Emigrados, iv. 122, 242-67, 377-90, v. 307-21, 405-13, 487-505, vi. 8-21, 107-17, 302-13, vii. 237; Beltrami, Mex., i. 10-12, 42, 63-5, ii. 239-56, 355-8; Semblanzas de los Miembros, 1-28 Dec. y rd. Puebla, 149-53; Rocafuerte, Consid. Gen., pt 2, 7-10; Id., Cuad., 14; Id., Regalo, 8-13; Lempriere's Notes in Mex., 176, 426-7; Montiel y Duarte, Estul. Garant. Individ., 144; Otero, Ensayo Cuest. Polít., 109-12; Zozaya, Apelacion, 5; Revue Américaine, i. 93-107, 190-215, 240-6, ii. 552-4; Yuc., Pacificacion, pp. iv.-ix.; Crichton, Méx. despues la Indep., 1-91; Ariz., Acts, 1875, app.; Id., Howell's Code, 455-69; Manero, Doc. Interes., 15-16; Rosario, El Payo del, 1-8; Juicio de un Patr., 1-32; Santa María, Expos. Pretext., no. ii. 12; Patton's Hist. U. S., 685; Thompson's Recoll. Mex., 60-1, 178-80; Beaufoy's Mex. Illustrations, 103-17, 273-82; Poinsett, Manif. de los Principios, 1-23; S. Am. and Mex., i., 201; Villa-Amor, Biog. Gen. Sta Anna, 7-9; Suarez y Navarro, Hist. Méx., 79-91; Cuts' Conq. Cal. and N. Mex., 9; Mier, Profecia Polít., 1-15; Puebla, Mem. Present. al Congr., 3-40, annexes 1-37; Id., Constituc. Polít., 1-54; Juarez, Biog., 12; Alejandro VI., Bula del Sto Padre, 1-8; Ferry, Revol. du Mex., 231-55; Poussin, De la Puissance, i. 402-13; Siliceo, Mem. Foment. Col. Ind., 74-8; Olarte, Declar. Legal, pp. i.-viii. 1-38; Löwenstern, Mex., 290-1; Terranova y Montelcone, Esposic.; Dubois, Le Mexique, 112-31; Guadal., Esposic. del Cabildo, 81; La Minerva, May 15, 1845, 1; Unda, Sorpresa del Campo, 1-19; Id., Esposic. al Pbl., 1-32; Poussin's The U. S., 278-9; El Filántropo, No Esperemos, 1-3; Abispa de Chilpancingo, 284-5; Payno, Cuentas, Gastos, 599-600; Id., Mem. sobre Convenc. Esp., 1-62; La Cruz, vi. 524-5, vii. 690-1; Perez, Dicc. Geog., i. 95-106, 670-708, ii. 754-71, iii. 358-61; Vera Cruz, Contest. del Gen. Guerrero 3-16; Id., El Plan Republ., 1-27; Id., Estadíst., 3-64; Id., Manif. del Congr., 1-23; Amer. State Pap., iv. 422-626, 650-703, 848-50, v., Foreign Relat., 21, 127, 507, 907-10, vi., Foreign Relat., 366, 578-613, 946-62, 1006-14; Carrington's Affairs, MS., 1-3; Guanaj., Mem. que Presenta el Gobern., 1-37; Id., Constit. Polít., 1-78; Id., Informe, 4 11.; Muzquiz, Decr. del 13 de Marzo de 1824, 1; Id., Dict., 1-25; Romero, Bosquejo Hist., 48-65, 321-462, 495-795; Id., Mich., 150-1; Espíritu Públ., 1828, Nov.-Dec., passim; 1829, Jan. 11; Estrella, Escalante and Gaxiola, Informe, 12-13; Mosaico Mex., i. 229, 265; Dewees' Letters from Texas, 73-112; Santana, Manif. á sus Conciud., 11-14; Santa Anna, Pronunciam. de Perote, 124-54; Suarez, Informe, 5-6; Suarez y Navarro, Hist. Méx., 34-5, 50-76, 86-134, 226-41, 390-5, 407-14; Quedarán los Gachup., 1-8; Negrete, Defensa Legal, 1-55; Alpuche é Infante, Seg. Grito, 1-8; Giordan, L'Isthme de Tehuan., 110-22; Becerra, Voto Partic., 1-16; Atleta, 1829-30, 47, 84, 254, 322, 476-7; Salv., Diario Ofic., Jan. 26, May 23, 1875; Lesur, Ann. Hist. Univ., 1827, 172-7, 571-7; Domenech, Hist. du Mex., ii. 71-91, 105; Arrangoiz, Méj., ii. 152-91, iii. ap. 3-5, 7; Young's Hist. Mex., 209-28; Arroniz, Biog. Mex., 21-30, 272; Id., Hist. y Crñn., 259-68; Contest. al Artíc. Infam., 1-16; Nat. Dem. Quart. Rev., i. 231-6; Reflex. Artic. Proyecto Constit.; Grattan's Civil. America, ii. 267, 289; Cajiga, Mem. Oaj., 19-20; Haynes' Scraps, Mexico, 2; Bravo, Vindicac.; Id., Esped. Instruct., 1-52; Id., Manif., 2 l1.; Id., Espos. del Vice-presid., 1-7; San Miguel, Seg. Guia, 189-91; Armin, Heutig. Mex., 113-19, 248-50; Mayer's Mex. Azt., i. 307-14, 327-36, ii. 152; Id., Mex. as It Was, 338; S. L. Potosí, Relac. Demonst., 5 11.; Id., Gobernac. del Est.; Política, Col. Art. Select., 12-28, 39-78; Rivinus, Atlantis, iv. 342-7; North Am. Rev., xx. 77-80, xxi. 461-4, xxiii. 475-7, xxxi. 112-14, 118-54, xxxii. 317-29, xliii. 228-33; Dur., Exámen Analit.-Crít., 6-11; Id., Despertada de los Durang., 3; Free American, Nov. 27, 1847, 2-4; Holley's Texas, 316-21, 365-92; Jenkins' Mex. War, 20-1; Sepúlveda, Oracion Patr., 1-23; Liberalismo, 1-14; Chevalier, Expéd. du Mex., 43-8; Beechey's Voy., ii. 323; Dicc. Univ. Hist. Geog., i. 42-9, 468-9, iii. 84-6, 740-9, viii. 689, x. 1032, 1109; Gutierrez, Carta y Opin., 6-18, 28-34; Id., Leyes de Ref., 94-9; Maillard's Hist. Texas, 43-52; Congress. Debates, 1825-6, i. p. vii.; 1826-7, 334-5, 1161-76, 1214; García, Reflex. sobre Acta Constitut., 1-8; Ahrens, Mex. und Mex. Zustñnde, 12-19, 45-51; Oajaca, Constituc. Polít., 1104; Rendida Sñpl.; Figueroa, Observac. de un Ciud., 1-2; Salazar, Pedim., 3; Ortega, Mem. Relac. Dipl. Mex., 22-3; Zamacois, Hist. Méx., iv. 25-6, vi. 437, vii. 504, viii. 186-7, 196, 298, 524-6, 562, 618, ix. 17, 349-51, 550, x. 396, xi. passim; Calderon's Life in Mex., i. 42-3, ii. 121-2; Gleeson's Hist. Cath. Church, ii. 106-7; Payne's Hist. Europ. Colonies, 308-14; Abbot's Mex. and U. S., 87-90, 256-8, 277-8; El Tribuno, 1827, Aug. 2, Sept. 6; Pretensiones Anglo-Amer.; Cuest. del Dia; Bazancourt, Mexique, 83ñ97; Derrotero Isl. Ant., 1826, 515-16; Cuevas, Esposic. Dif. Francia, 1-60; Id., Porvenir Méx., 257-494; Marure, Bosq. Hist. Cent. Am., 120-32; McGregor's Prog. Amer., i. 684-7; Baz, Vila Juarez, 31-9; Rincon, Gen. Justific., 1ñ108; Id., Vindicac., 1-56; Onys, Mem. sobre Negoc., 5-10; Villaricencio, Manif. del Payo, 1-16; Newell's Revol. in Texas, 3-10; Hernandez, Estad. Mex., 187-8; Alm. Calend. Galvan, 1848, 45-62; Alm. Calend. Man. y Guia, 1828, 64-6; 1852, 300-16; Dávila, El Toro, i. passim; Filisola, Circular á los Ayunt., 1-4; Id., Mem. Hist. Guerra Tex., i. 90-108; Tornel, Nac. Mej., 24-134, 163-424; Id., Breve Reseña, 24, 29, 56; Id., Tejas Estad. Unid., 78-98; Id., Carta; Museo Mex., ii. 105-10; Baqueiro, Ensayo Yuc., iii. ap. 4-11; Ancona, Hist. Yuc., iii. 259-325, 508-13; Rouhaud, Régions Nouv., 13; Frost's Pict. Hist. Mex., 28, 142-7, 165-6; Casaus Navarrete, Discurso, 1-7; Annals Congr., 1818-19, ii. 1629-2136; 1819-20, 948-9; 1820-1, 1293, 1337-1469; La Sociedad, Oct. 29, 1867; Blanchard, San Juan, 494-5; Mex., Diario Ofic., Jan. 20, 1879; Oct. 15, 1881; Vallejo, Doc., xxviii. no. 80, xxix. nos. 221, 263, 268; Id., Col. Doc. Mex., i. nos. 14, 18, 19; Id., MS., no. 22; Fossey, Mex., 152-5; Paz, Ley, Justic. y Verdad; La Palanca, 1826-8, passim; Peña y Peña, Voto Fund.; Escalera y Llana, Mex. Hist. Descript., 28-33; U. S. House Ex. Doc., 142, vol. viii., 19 cong. 1 sess.; U. S. House Journ., 15 cong. 1 sess., index 'Meade,' 'Spain;' Id., 16 cong. 2 sess., index 'Spain,' 'South Amer.;' Id., 17 cong. 2 sess., index 'Spain;' U. S. State Pap., vol. ii. no. 25, 19 cong. 2 sess.; U. S. Acts and Resol., pp. 141-2, app. 24-30, 22 cong. 1 sess.; Arenas, Causas, 1-117; Id., Arrepentim., 1-4; Guerra entre Mex. y los Est. Unid., 10-13; Cuarto Trueno Libert.; Buenrostro, Hist. Prim. y Seg. Congr., 52-5, 14850; Id., Hist. Seg. Congr. Constit., 147; Antepara, Defensa Legal., 1-77; Gregory's Hist. Mex., 45-6; Noticioso Gen., June 30, 1819, 4; Argüelles, Vindicac., 1-16, i.-xv.; Santangelo, Congr. Panamá, 73-5, 145-61; El Veracruzanо Libre, June 8-11, 1828; Вeulloch, Le Mеxique, ii. 141-273, 322-64; Amer. Ann. Reg., 1825-6, 97-124, 167-71; 1826-7, 157-76; 1831-2, 88-91; Rivero, Мех. еn 1848, 13-21, 61-103, 118-19; Robinson's Mex. and Her Mil. Chieftains, 141-4, 174-5, 188-94, 221, 236-42; Amer. Quart. Reg., i. 208-9; Democr. Rev., i. 485; Bolet. Geog. Estad. Mex., i. 96; Mendoza, Nociones Cronol., 159-60, 291-2; Horacio, Carta á Porcio, Ortiz de la Torre, Discurso; Revista Mex., 415-24; Gagern, Apelac., 36-47; Estrada, Reflex., 36-9; El Observ. de la Rep. Mex., i. 36-8, 87-108, 151-213, 302-14, 343-6, 415-49, ii. 3-24, 77-127, 161-252, iii. 37-64, 135–99; Rasyo Hist. Conducta Alpuche, 1 1.; Lafond, Voy. aut. du Monde, i. bk i. 288-90, 300; Foote's Texas, i. 300-9; Cambas, Atlas, 8; Conder's Mex. and Guat., 153-6; Repertorio Amer., i. 231-53; Caballero, Hist. Alm., 6-9; Emigrado Observ., 79, 161, 198, 237; El Republicano Libre, June 12, 1828, 1-2; Barbachano, Mem. Camp., 40, 43, ap. 9-14; Amigo del Pueblo, i. 3-27, ii. 97-103, 135-9, 200-1, 228-9, iii. 19, 33-74, 97-119, 149-60, 186, 307-18, iv. 1-4; Chateaubriand, Congrès de Vérone, ii. 244-464; Linati, Costumes, pl. 13; Bolet. Ofic. Estado Sin., June 20, 1871, 95; Farol, 278–9; Pedraza, Manif. ó sea, 21-9, 30-92; Id., Púb. Resp., 4-16; Id., Contest., 1-38; Id., Impug. Contest., 1-14; Maclure's Opinions, i. 237, 296-8; Castillo, Dicc. Hist., 152; Hassel, Mex. and Guat., 100-7, 135; Colima, Represent., 7; Navarro, Iturbide, 224-7; Dunbar's Mex. Papers, 234; Congreso Constituy., Manif. á los Pueblos, 1-16; Congreso Gen., Manif. á los Mejicanos, 1-6; Espinosa, Mem. Rep. Mex., 1-37; Kennedy's Texas, i. 12, ii. 421-43; Bolet. del Institut., i. 96; Ober, Mexico, 420-2; Mex., Bosq. Hist. Revol. Tres Dias, 1-13; Méx. como Nac. Indep., 1-32; Mex., Juicio Imparc. sobre Acontec. en 1828-9, 1-32; Mexicano Libre, 1-4; Mex., Ya en Oax., 1-3; Id., Gran Jurado, 149-56; Id., Dict. Com. Ocur. Yuc., 1-4; Id., Dict. Com. Puntos Constit., 1825, 1-6; Id., Dict. Com. Relac. Enviado á Roma, 1824, 2 11.; Id., Dict. Com. Constit. Sesion Secreta, 1823, 1-11; Id., Dict. Com. Espec. Сámara Diput., 1827, 1-22; Id., Dict. Com. Espeс. de Convoc., 1823, 1-22; Id., Dict. Com. Gob., 1826, 4, 7; Méх. (Est. de) Mem., 1828, 1-66, annexes 1-26; Mex. Mem. Sec. Estado, 1823, 1-59; Id., Mem. Minist. Ester., i. 4-33; Id., Mem. Sec. Estado Relac. Ext., 1825, 3-18; Id., Mem. Relac., 1823, 5-9, 57; 1826, 1-33; 1827, 1-37, annexes 1-3; 1828, 1-22, annexes 1-2; 1829, 1-23, annexes 1-3; Id., Mem. Justicia, 1834, 26; Id., Mem. Мarina, 1826, 1-5; Id., Mem. Сuerra y Мar., 1840, 1-53, annexes 1-17; Id., Mem. Hacienda, 1827, annexes 1-2; 1870, 76-7, 1027-8; Id., Mem. Estado Libre, 1826, 1-60, annexes 1-21; 1829, 2-4; Mich., Mem., 1830, 3, 6-7; Id., Constit. del Estado, 1-78; Id., Árancel General, 1-26; Mex. and U. S., 5-6; Noriega, Estadist. Dep. Méx., 57; Mexico and Mr Poinsett, 1-13; Michaus, Certám. Cient., 1-72; Montes, Oracion Fún., 35-8; Mesa y Leompart, Hist. Amér., ii. 328-59; Mex. Legisl. Mej., April-July, 1853, 238-42; Mex., Notes оn Mеx. Мade in 1822, 294-335; Мех. et la Моnarchie, 19-29; Мех., Маnif. Diput., 4-7; Id., Manif. Supr. Poder Ejec., 1823, 2 11.; Id., Manifestac., 1-4; Lista de Ciudadanos Elegid., 1823, 1 1.; Mex., Gob. Dist. Fed., Circular, 1826, 2 11.; Id., Constit. Polít. Est. Méx., pp. i.-x., 1-41; Id., Represent. Ayunt. sobre Dist. Fed., 1-12; Id., Laws and Courts, MS., 13-17; Id., Mem. Gob. Estado, 3-60, annexes 1-23; Id., Cuest. Monarq. Constituc., 24-5; Id., Propos. Leida Prim. Cong., 1-4; Id., Proyect. Decr. Orgán.; Id., Proyect. Ley 28 de Nov. de 1827, 1 sht.; Méx. (Estado de), Decr. del Congr. Constit., 1-136; Manif. de Nic. Bravo, 2 11.; Fajardo, Informe al Minist. Relac., 3-17; Poinsett, Esposic. Conducta Polít., 1-16; Zavala, Manif. Princip., 1-23; Yuc., Comp. Hist., 14-32; Pedraza, Notas al Manif., 1-42; Lista Fidedigna, 1 1.; Aviso al Públ.; Michelena, Contest. que Dió, 1-23; Horacio, Carta á Porcio, 1-20; Calderon, Derrota; Velez, Discurso; Plan Constit. Polít., 1-83; Claridades al Congr.; Austin, Esposic. Asuntos Tej., 11-15; Jal., Mem. Admin. Públ., 5-6; Mich., Decr. Congr. Constit., 1-83; Portugal, Princip. Sistem.; Quiere el Ministro Alaman, 1 1.; Barragan, Prision; Puebla, Reflex. sobre Proyecto; Tezmelucan, Impugn.; Cañedo, Acusacion contra Alaman; Sobrearias, Defensa Coronel Castro; Unda, Sorpresa del Campo, 1-19; Parian, Prim. Represent. del Comercio, 1-65; Hidalgo, Apuntes Hist. Proy. Monarq., 19-23, 41-3; Рronunc. Heróicа, 1-20; Guardamino y Hоуо, Еjecuc. Justic., 1-8; Supl. No. 54, Mexicano Libre Potosin., 1-4; Facio, Mem., 103-13, 196-211; Ibar, Muerte Polít., 4-5; Manif. Gob. Esp., 1-8; Bravo, Esped. Instruct. del Gran Jurado, 1-25; Id., Las Razones del Senado, 1-11; Id., Destierro, 1-4; Id., Represent. Ayunt. y Vec. Chilpanz., 1-8; Id., Manif. que un Ofic., 1-8; Siurob, Breve Ojeada, 1-8; Id., Seg. Ojeada, 1-8; Sentim. de un Patr., 1-4; El Sol., no. 1773; Bustamante (C. M.), Honor del Gen. Bravo, 1-96; Id., Campaña sin Gloria, 13-14, 38; Pedraza, Prision, 2 11.; Gachup., Lista; Id., Traicion Descub., 1-2; Derrota de Montaha, 1-4; Рауnо, Мех. еt M. L'Ambassadeur, 40-7; Bravo and Alvarez, Manif. sobre que se erija el Depart. de Acapulco, 6-7; Fisiolog. Cosa Públ., 52-3; Gutierrez, Contest. al Libelo, 13; Tenemos Constitucion?; Méx., Doc. Relac. Ult. Ocurr. N. Esp., 18; Méx., Dict. Com. sobre Elecc. Residencia Supr. Poderes, 1 1.; Méx., Voto Partic. del Señor Marin, 1 1.; Id., Discurso Casáres sobre Declarac. Ciudad Fed., 1-10; Papeles Varios, i. pt 1, xiv. pt 1, xvi. pt 6, xxiv. pt 4, xxvi. pt 2, xxvii. pts 1-27, ххvii. pts 2-5, 17, 19, 21, 23, ххxi. pts 3-6, 8-10, 12, 15, 26-7, хххiv. pts 2-4, 6, 10, 28, 49, xxxvi. pts 117-19, xli. pts 17, 19, xlviii. pts 1-2, xlix. pt 15, lxvii. pts 3, 4, 10, 13, 14, lxviii. pts 5, 8, 9, 15, 18, lxix. pts 6-10, 12, 15, lxx. pts 1, 2, 4-7, 10, 12, 14, lxxi. pt 8, lxxii. pt 1, lxxiii. pt 9, lxxvii, pts 2, 6, lxxviii. pt 1, lxxxii. pt 7, lxxxv. pt 10, xciii. pt 5, cvi. pt 1, cviii. pt 1, cxii. pt 8, cxv. pt 2, cxviii. pts 8, 11, 19, 20, cxxii. pt 2, cxxvii. pt 1, cxxix. pt 5, cxl. pts 6, 9, 12, cxli, pts 7, 10, 11, cxlii. pts 1-4, 8, 19, cxliii. pt 3, cxliv. pts 7, 8, 11, 12, 15, 17, 18, cxlv. pt 1, cxlviii. pt 6, 8, cxlix. pts 8, 10, cl. pt 22, clv. pt 5, clvii. pt 4, clxiii. pt 2, clxiv. pts 3, 4, 7, clxvi. pts 5, 8, clxvii. pts 4, 5, 10, clxviii. pts 3, 4, 7, clxx. pts i, 2, clxxviii. pt 2, clxxxi. pt 1, clxxxvi. pt 2, cxcvi. pt 2, ccii. pt 4, ccx. pts 2, 4, 8, ccxi. pts 2, 3, ccxv. pt 14, ccxxvi. pts 7-9; Papeles Sueltos, nos i., ii., iv., v. vi. ix., xi., xii., xiii., xiv., xxii.; Pinart Coll., nos 2, 43, 48, 78, 119, 137; ''Arrillaga, Recop., 1828, 37-45, 86-93, 184-231, 250-8, 273–9, 295-6; 1829, 128-60, 224, 273-322; 1830, 83-5, 102, 113-14, 131-2, 496; 1833, 56; 1836, Jan.-June, 455-60; Ramirez y Sesma, Col. Dec., 6-14, 31, 200-8, 272, 299, 307; Mora, Obras Sueltas, i. pp. viii.-xiv., 157-68, ii. 7-34, 45-103, 122-52, 167-83, 198-213, 244-62, 280-305, 303-408, 450-76; Id., Rev. Mex., i. 345-84, 419-20; Rivera, Hist. Jalapa, i. 463-72, ii. passim; Id., Gob. de Méx., ii. 56, 67-72, 98-159, 184-6, 196-9; Id, Mex. Pint., i. 231-3; Ward's Mex., i. 281-306, 328-30, 341, ii. 171-7, 262; Zarala, Voto del Diput., 1-7; Id., Rev. Mex., i. 196-210, 248-75, 290-9, ii. 7-48, 72-105, 201, 244-5, 272-3; Id., Viaje á los E. U., 6; Niles' Reg., xiv. 5-8, 58-88, 105-6, 344, 376, хv. 6-7, хvii. 285-6, хіх. 39-45, ххiі. 474-8, ххiv. 149-50, 216-17, 282-3, 294, ххV.-ххxv. рassim, ххxvi. 105, 332, 355; Id., S. Am. and Mex., i. 159-212; Cor. Fed. Mex., 1826, Nov. 1, 2, 10-11, 16, Dec. 1, 2, 16-17, 22, etc.; 1827-8, passim; Correo Seman., i. 10-14, 47-8, 217-21, 285-8; Córtes, Diar. Ofic., iv. 217; Córtes, Diar. Ses., 1823, 46, 293, 412.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)/Volume_5/Chapter_3&oldid=9673570"