History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 5/Chapter 30
CHAPTER XXX.
TRIUMPH OF THE CONSTITUTIONALISTS.
1859-1861.
United States Recognition of Juarez — Miramon's Action — Confiscation of Church Property — Interior Campaign of 1859 — Treaties Miramon's Second Expedition to Vera Cruz — United States Armed Intervention — Interior Campaign of 1860 — Miramon's Return to Mexico and Resignation — President Pavon — Miramon's Title to the Presidency — Approach of Constitutionalists — Miramon's Defeat and Escape — Juarez Triumphant Entry into Mexico
The victory of Tacubaya, though important for the reactionists, did not dishearten their opponents. The latter were further encouraged by the recognition of Juarez government on the part of the United States, which accredited Robert M. McLane near it as minister, the appointment having been confirmed by the senate on the 6th of April, 1859. Soon after his arrival Juarez sent José M. Mata to Washington as Mexico's representative, with the same diplomatic rank.[1] This interchange of relations created a deep impression, not so much in Mexico as in Europe. Miramon's minister of relations solemnly protested against it, declaring null all attendant arrangements.[2] Bonilla went further: he cancelled the exequatur of Consul Black in Mexico, and of all other Ünited States consuls and vice-consuls in the republic. This was, however, made nugatory by Ocampo's circular of April 23d, to governors, confirming anew the exequaturs of all those consular officers.[3]
Mexico had now reached a state of chronic anarchy, and there seemed to be no remedy for it. The socalled conservative party favored an absolute rule with all its sequences; and though holding to a republican form, it was in fact a military dictatorship. It contemplated the establishment of a monarchy. The clergy, which was the most influential wing of that party,[4] and whose chief was Padre Miranda, one of Miramon's ministers, were working for a foreign prince to reign in Mexico, and to that end opened relations with Gutierrez Estrada, of whom more hereafter.[5] The policy of the party was to restore the fueros that the ley Juarez had suppressed; to keep the press under restraint; to have prohibitory tariffs; and to prevent the incoming of foreigners, which might endanger the church. The constitutional government was opposed to all this; and moreover resolved to deprive the clergy of the means to prolong the war.
The reactionists were much exercised to find relief for their great malady — impecuniosity. The minister of the treasury, Sagaceta, was blamed, and then superseded by a young man, Cárlos G. de la Peza, under whose management the confusion in the finances was greater than ever. That change caused the resignations of Diez de Bonilla, Larrainzar, and Marin. They were succeeded July 7th by Octaviano Muñoz Ledo, minister of fomento, who assumed ad interim the portfolio of relations; Isidro Diaz became minister of justice; and Antonio Corona, who had succeeded Castillo in the war department, took temporary charge of that of government.[6]
Miramon issued a manifesto on the need of reforms, claiming that his motto was to go forward, for not to advance was retrogression. He spoke of wise measures and not bloody victories as the means of extricating the country; expressed himself liberally in regard to the press, and used other fine platitudes; but failed to present any well-defined plan of administration.[7]
An effort was made at this time to arrive at an understanding between the belligerents on some matters of general interest, such as guaranteeing the safety of the mails; but all such projects were abandoned on the publication by Juarez, July 12, 1859, of a law to confiscate and nationalize the property of the clergy, and of his decree of the next day regulating the mode of carrying it into effect.[8] This was soon followed by other enactments directly affecting the church, namely, on civil marriage, prescribing the formalities, and declaring null all marriages contracted without having first complied with them; on capellanías, declaring them included in the property to be nationalized under the law of July 12th; on the personal civil status, intended to fully establish independence between church and state; on cemeteries, taking the control of them from the church and giving it to the civil authorities; and finally, a despatch was sent to Manuel Castillo Portugal, attaché having in his charge the archives of the Mexican legation in Rome, apprising him that the president had ordered that legation suppressed, as useless after the independence of state and church had been declared; and directing him to leave Rome and bring with him the archives, to be preserved in the department of relations.[9]
The law of nationalization of the ecclesiastical estates greatly contributed toward the ending of the civil war. The government at Vera Cruz, having staked upon that measure the existence of the liberal party, lost no time in developing its effects by the sale of such property. Against contracts of that nature an energetic protest was made by Miramon's minister, Muñoz Ledo, who addressed himself to the foreign ministers. Similar protests were also filed by reactionary corporations and authorities.[10] Owing to the difficulties in the way, there was not activity enough in conveyances of ecclesiastical property to meet the expectations of the liberals at Vera Cruz. It was evident that speculators preferred to postpone to a more suitable time operations in that line. As to the reactionary government, it increased the poverty of its treasury by the suppression of a number of established taxes without providing means to replace the sums thus lost. It also decreed, on the 16th of July, many financial measures that were entirely in applicable under the existing circumstances.[11] The idea contemplated at Mexico of levying thirty million dollars was an absurd one; the departments could not bear such a tax, as the property holders and merchants were ruined, and the other classes in the utmost indigence. The ayuntamientos petitioned for the suspension of the so-called ley de hacienda, which helped to bring on the reaction a further loss of prestige.
The reactionary press made the most of the laws enacted at Vera Cruz, asserting that religious unity was on the point of destruction, and that the people were about to be forcibly deprived of their catholic worship;[12] insisting, to give still greater warmth to the question, that the asking by the liberals of aid from the United States was treason. But what kept the reactionists in considerable alarm was the lack of activity they began to notice in Miramon, who appeared to have devoted himself entirely to conjugal felicity.[13] Military operations had by no means been neglected, as on their result depended the triumph of one or the other contestant. Miramon despatched Marquez and Mejía, on the 19th of April, with a strong army to operate in Michoacan. They occupied Morelia, which had been abandoned by the liberals on the 29th, and were received with open arms, particularly by the ecclesiastics.[14]
Most of the liberal forces had marched toward Guanajuato to reënforce Hinojosa, Ortega, and Zaragoza. Marquez tarried but a few days in Morelia, marching with his whole force to Guadalajara, and then Pueblita and other liberals reoccupied Morelia May 3d.[15] Huerta and Doblado, who had escaped from Mexico, had conferences on the 9th of May.[16] Huerta still got more resources from the place, though the state had contributed already one and a half million dollars.
Marquez went on undisturbed to Guadalajara, and entered it on May 15th, being received under a triumphal arch, and crowned with a golden wreath. Other high honors were also paid him.[17] Marquez made a trip to Tepic, which had been captured by the reactionists June 29th, shot some citizens, and returned to Guadalajara with twenty loads of silver, taken while being clandestinely exported.
Most of the central towns were the prey of malefactors, among whom must be included many chiefs of guerrillas, who had adopted the appellation of or the other contending party. Carbajal, on the liberal side, had a party made up mostly of robbers and assassins, whose outrages were innumerable. Tlascala was a great sufferer. Carbajal's tyranny is said to have been insufferable, but no one dared oppose him.
Miramon, recovering his wonted activity, started in November for the interior. Many women of Morelia had asked him to free them from the constitutionalists.[18] To oppose the liberal forces which, under Degollado, were marching on Querétaro, Miramon concentrated those of Velez and Mejía, and hurried on to that city, accompanied only by his aides-de-camp, and adopted the requisite measures to inflict another of his damaging blows on the enemy. Marching by the Celaya road he appeared before the liberal force in the afternoon of the 12th of November, and after rejecting at a conference Degollado's proposals to leave him the command in chief of the army, if he would swear to support the constitution of 1857, coupled with the agreement that a congress should be convoked to reform that code, he signally routed him in the morning of the 13th, at La Estancia de las Vacas, capturing thirty pieces of artillery, 500 stand of arms, amınunition, wagons, and 420 prisoners, among, whom were generals Santiago Tapia and José J. Alvarez, both wounded.[19]
Degollado had in May given up the command for a time to bring supplies from abroad, which he landed in June or early in July at Tampico, and took at once to San Luis Potosí. Huerta had also received large quantities of arms, with which he reopened the campaign in Guanajuato.
The appearance of the liberal forces at La Estancia de las Vacas had been the first step of a well-arranged plan whose chief objective point was Mexico, but the want of simultaneous action resulted in the defeat at La Estancia, and the plan had to be abandoned. Fortune was frowning on the liberals, who met with disaster at Tulancingo, Maravatío, and Toluca. They had lost in the different encounters, since July, 10,000 men, 62 pieces of artillery, 7,300 muskets, 3,000 sabres, 3,000 accoutrements, and a large quantity of other effects.[20]
The defeat at La Estancia was not considered in Vera Cruz a crushing blow, because of a wrong impression that Marquez had revolted against Miramon for suspending him from command and ordering him into arrest for his seizure of a money conducta. So much credence was given to the report that Juarez allowed semi-official commissioners to hold conferences with Robles Pezuela, which afterward assumed an official character, grounded on the belief that the latter would accept the constitution and reform laws. He denied it on the 11th of November, and finally declined negotiating without express instructions from Miramon. Marquez had taken in Guadalajara $600,000 from a conducta of $1,964,000, pleading extreme need of funds for the troops, which were becoming demoralized, and Jalisco might be lost. Shortly before he had levied a forced loan of $100,000. In a manifesto he tried to justify his acts. Miramon disapproved the affair of the conducta,[21] from fear of consequences, repaired to Guadalajara, suspended Marquez, and ordered him to report in Mexico, where he was placed under arrest.[22] The reactionary president was enthusiastically greeted at Guadalajara by his partisans, and started with about 3,000 men and a few artillerymen for Colima, where the liberals under Ogazon, Rocha, and others, to the number of about 5,000, were concentrated in the barrancas of Atenquique and Beltran. He flanked the position on the 18th of December at a place called Èl Perico with two battalions, went to Tuxpan River defended by Rojas' forces, whom he defeated, and on the 22d entered Colima. The next day Miramon attacked his opponents on the opposite height of the barranca of Tonila, and on the 24th drove them hence, capturing prisoners and artillery.[23] After that Miramon hastened on to Mexico, where he arrived on the 7th of January, 1860, and began preparations for a campaign in Vera Cruz. The reactionists now believed themselves invincible. At the end of 1859 they held sway as far as Aguascalientes, Zacatecas, and San Luis Potosí; at the lastnamed place Vega's brigade of Woll's division had arrived on the 25th of November. Woll himself had reoccupied Zacatecas the 21st.
President Juarez began to fear that he would be left without the means to cure the maladies of his country. This apprehension brought him at last to give a willing ear to the proposals of the American minister, McLane, and to accept United States volunteers in the liberal ranks. President Buchanan and his cabinet, setting aside the neutrality laws, permitted the exportation of war material, giving further evidence of their protection to the liberal party in the treaty that bore the name of McLane-Ocampo, signed the 14th of December, 1859 — a treaty that underwent several amendments.[24] Its most objectionable clause, in the estimation of a large number of Mexicans, was that giving the United States the right of protecting their citizens and interests by force of arms, in certain events, within Mexican territory. This condition placed Mexico at the mercy of her sometimes overbearing sister. There was another clause, it is asserted, in which the Mexican government expressed its willingness to accept in a certain form the protectorate of the United States, should circumstances in the future render it necessary for Mexico to assume such an obligation.[25] Miramon's government protested against the treaty, and sent the protest to European governments as well as to the department for foreign affairs at Washington. Even in Vera Cruz the treaty caused some displeasure, several officers of the national guard resigning, and the artisans and soldiers manifesttheir displeasure. Doblado preferred a compromise ing with the reaction to foreign intervention; and the minister, Juan Antonio de la Fuente, refused to approve it. The reactionists made a great outcry over it, alleging that national territory had been sold; that independence and religious unity had ceased to exist; commerce and industry were forever ruined; national honor and dignity trampled upon; and protestantism given the freedom of the country. The liberals, in general, on the other hand, saw in the treaty nothing but an amplification and extension of the treaties of 1831 and 1853. Be this as it may, though confirmation was warmly urged by Buchanan and others with powerful arguments, the senate did not deem it wise to burden the country with such obligations, and rejected the treaty.
Almonte, Miramon's minister in Paris, made a treaty in eight articles, on the 26th of November, 1859, with the Spanish ambassador Mon, binding Mexico to prosecute and punish the authors of outrages against Spanish subjects in the haciendas San Vicente and Chiconcuac; and though it was acknowledged that Mexicans were not amenable for those acts, Mexico agreed to indemnify those subjects; Spain, on her part, consenting that such indemnities should not be held as precedents for other cases of the same nature that might occur. The 6th article gave full force and vigor to the treaty of November 12, 1853,[26] without even an incidental mention of the revision of non-Spanish claims. Juarez and his cabinet, on the 30th of January, 1860, protested against the validity of such a treaty, and it never became a law.[27]
On the other hand, Miramon, in a circular to the foreign diplomatic corps, endeavored to refute Buchanan's statements in his last message to congress, protesting against the pretensions of his government.
[28] Some changes occurred soon after the conclusion of the McLane-Ocampo treaty in Juarez' cabinet.[29]
Meanwhile both belligerents had been swelling their ranks and carrying on an active campaign. The constitutionalist forces were quite numerous early in 1860, and Miramon made preparations for a second campaign against the city of Vera Cruz. On the 8th of February, 1860, he started from the capital, accompanied by his minister of war, Diaz, to place himself at the head of Robles' division, timing his movements by a prearranged combination by which a small squadron under Mexican colors, and commanded by General Marin, was to sail from Habana to coöperate in the attack on Vera Cruz. The squadron was expected off that port about the end of February. Juarez on the 23d made a proclamation declaring it a piratical expedition,[30]and the United States naval forces had orders from their government to prevent the intended coöperation.
Each contending faction used its best endeavors to injure its adversary. The reactionists raised parties on the coast to prevent supplies reaching Vera Cruz; and the liberals procured the desertion of the enemy's soldiers, before whose minds was constantly kept the fear of death by black vomit.
Miramon marched slowly, having with him about 3,000 men with a large supply of artillery and ammunition. He was incessantly harassed by guerrillas. At Paso de Ovejas he granted amnesty to all who would retire to live peaceably, and promised death to every man taken in arms three days after the date of the proclamation. Negrete marched from Orizaba, by the Tejería road, and joined Miramon, who now had about 5,000 men, and established headquarters at Medellin on the 2d of March, awaiting Marin's arrival to begin his attack. Success was by no means certain, for the reason that the steamer Indianola — under the United States flag — which had been chartered by Juarez to watch Marin's squadron, came into port and anchored with other vessels of the same nationality under the fortress of San Juan de Ulúa, thus indicating their intention to take part in the defence.
At this time negotiations were opened between Medellin and Vera Cruz that came to no result, the proposals of both presidents being rejected. These negotiations were initiated by Captain Aldham of the British war ship Valorous, who obtained a pass from Juarez to visit Miramon and hand him a note from the British foreign office, in which was manifested a desire that an armistice of six months or a year should be agreed to by the belligerents, to allow time for a general assembly empowered to give the country a government of respectability and order, together with civil and religious freedom. The British government threatened, if its proposition were unheeded, to demand reparation of damages to its subjects inflicted by either belligerent. Miramon assented to the armistice, under the joint mediation of England, France, Spain, and the United States.[31] Juarez rejected the proposition, and issued a declaration against compromise in any form.
There were lying in Vera Cruz, besides the steamers Indianola and Wave, under charter to the liberal authorities, the United States frigate Savannah, and corvettes Saratoga and Preble. Marin's squadron, composed of the steamers General Miramon and Marqués de la Habana, was descried in the offing at half-past two o'clock in the afternoon of March 6th. The ships steamed along the coast from La Antigua and anchored in Anton Lizardo at four. On passing San Juan de Ulúa, they had been signalled to show their colors, which they did not do till opposite the Spanish vessels. By the time they reached the anchorage, they were boarded by several of Miramon's officers. The Indianola and Wave had been ready to tow the Saratoga. Captain Jarvis, commander of the frigate and senior officer present, sent a lieutenant and 80 men to the Indianola, and another officer with an equal number of men to the Wave, each officer at once assuming command of the steamer he was on. La Llave went on board one of the steamers. The attack on Marin's ships was successful; at midnight the two vessels were a prize of the United States naval force. The General Miramon made some resistance, and then, in trying to escape, got aground. The Marqués de la Habana attempted no defence. The Saratoga fired 90 shots.[32] The prizes were afterward sent to New Orleans to be adjudicated on by the admiralty court.
Captain Jarvis' proceedings were protested against by the commander of the Spanish war brig Habanero, on the 13th of March, claiming the Marqués de la Habana as Spanish property. The commander also claimed the captured ship Concepcion, but no heed was paid to the demand. The commander of the French naval force protested against the Saratoga's interference in the affairs of Mexico, which he called an unlawful precedent. Marin was put in jail in New Orleans, and subsequently released on bail. On the 27th of March, calling himself a jefe de escuadra, or rear-admiral of the Mexican navy, he entered a similar protest.[33]
The action of Captain Jarvis had been in obedience to the orders of his government to recognize no blockade of Mexican ports by the reactionists. He was also instructed to land from his ships such an armed force as might be deemed sufficient to afford protection to United States citizens.
The right of the United States government to interfere between the belligerents to hinder their free action, or of their war ships to attack and capture Marin's squadron, is not at all clear. Notwithstanding the approval of Jarvis' course by the president, the United States district court at New Orleans declared the capture of Marin's ships illegal, and decreed immediate restoration. Nothing was said of damages, Marin having waived them. That was right enough, but meanwhile Miramon had been deprived of the services of the ships as well as of the war material they had brought for him.[34]
The besiegers prosecuted their operations without interruption from sallies of the besieged, though small guerrilla parties gave them much annoyance in waylaying their supplies. The plan of a fusion was fostered by the few remnants still left of the moderate party and by property holders, most of the latter for their own private ends. Miramon listened to them, and sent a communication to General Ramon Iglesias, commander of the forces in Vera Cruz, offering to pursue the most rational course to bring about a peaceful arrangement. Negotiations followed, but no understanding was arrived at, because of Juarez' refusal to do anything that was not in accord with the constitution of 1857, under which he was acting as president. Moreover, he would not give his consent to foreign intervention in the adjustment of the country's affairs.[35] Miramon, on his part, accepted no amendment.
The besiegers threw bombs into the city, and continued the exercise fro the 15th to the 20th of March, doing but little damage.[36] Miramon's casualties from warfare and disease had been large. At last he saw that he was foiled, and concluded to retreat. The retreat commenced in the morning of the 21st, Miramon's object being to reoccupy his lines of Orizaba and Jalapa, where the guerrillas allowed him no peace and many of his men deserted and joined the liberal ranks.
Miramon reached Mexico on the 7th of April, and both there and on the route avoided unusual honors, which, under the circumstances, appeared to him as nockery. The constitutionalists had been taught by reverses how to inflict injuries. The campaign in the interior had been somewhat brisk, and advantageous for them. Early in April Ortega entered Aguascalientes, the reactionist Ramirez retreating, threatened by Uraga, who joined Zaragoza near San Luis Potosí. Ortega next went to Zacatecas; Ramirez had gone to Fresnillo. Uraga was on his way to concentrate at Zacatecas when the reactionist Rómulo Diaz de la Vega attacked him at Loma Alta, north of San Luis, on the 24th of April, and was defeated, falling prisoner, together with General Calvo and others;[37] in consequence of which San Luis Potosí was evacuated by the reactionists. After this several chief interior cities were either taken or besieged by the liberals. Oajaca had been besieged ninety-eight days, when, on the approach of a reactionist brigade, the siege was raised.[38]
Degollado was sent back into the interior, and he appointed Uraga quartermaster-general of the army. Large bodies of liberals were concentrated to attack places occupied by their foes, whose resources were becoming low. Guadalajara was closely pressed by Ogazon, and its commander, Woll, despaired of making a successful defence. Miramon repaired to the interior early in May 1860, with the double object of relieving that place and attacking Uraga. Taking with him from Querétaro the troops of Mejía and Castillo, he advanced to Irapuato and Šalamanca. Uraga, who had his headquarters in San Felipe, sent some troops to Guanajuato and left the rest in Silao. Miramon marched against the last place, and Uraga retreated to Leon, stationed his main army and trains in Lagos, and tried to draw the enemy to the Cerro Gordo. His movements were such that Miramon could not detect his purpose. The latter, being unable to divide his force, had to change his plan repeatedly. Thus went Miramon, advancing to Guadalajara, which was threatened by Uraga, whose aim was to widen Miramon's distance from Ramirez' brigade, leaving the latter isolated and surrounded by superior hostile forces. But Uraga committed the blunder of assaulting Guadalajara with Miramon in his rear. The attack was made on the 25th of May with 7,000 men. The garrison of that place was 3,000 strong. He was repulsed, seriously wounded in the thigh, and taken prisoner. At one o'clock in the afternoon Miramon arrived to aid in completing the victory. The assailants, who were under Ogazon, Valle, Zaragoza, and others, left 300 wounded in the streets of the city, and hastily retreated to the ravines, carrying away twenty pieces of artillery. This mishap to the liberal cause postponed its triumph for several months.[39]
In Jalisco took place other occurrences worthy of mention. March 14th San Blas was attacked by several small vessels in the service of the liberals, and the schooner Ipala was captured. In April the foreign residents of Tepic asked protection from British war ships at San Blas against the threats of the liberal chief Colonel Rojas, who had attempted to levy a forced loan of $60,000. The Amethyst landed a force and held the place. The Pylades prevented the entry into the port of armed vessels that the governor of Sinaloa had fitted out to transport troops and artillery.[40]
On the 9th of May a reactionary force of 2,500 or 3,000 men under Calatayud was defeated at Ixcuintla, after thirteen hours' fighting.[41] It is recorded to the discredit of the liberal cause that one of its forces on the 29th of April visited Bermejillo's haciendas, San Vicente, Dolores, and Chiconcuac, sacked them, and shot four Spanish subjects, which tended to complicate the difficulties with Spain.[42]
Ramirez reoccupied Zacatecas early in June, and on the 15th was routed by Ortega at the hacienda of Peñuelas.[43] The action lasted two and a half hours. Whole battalions were captured, artillery, trains, small arms, and ambulances fell into the victor's hands.[44]
Miramon marched to southern Jalisco with 6,000 men and 32 cannon, having with him Mejía and Castillo, and found the constitutionalists to the number of 8,000 under Zaragoza intrenched on the height of Zapotlan. After a few days' hesitation, he concluded that it would not be safe to attack the eneny in his stronghold, and retreated to Guadalajara. The defeat at Peñuelas had some influence in checking his impetuosity. Leaving Castillo there, he retreated to Lagos, which had been occupied and then evacuated by Ortega, where he reorganized and augmented his army; but he could no longer communicate with the capital, owing to the activity of the guerrilla parties.[45] He afterward repaired to Leon, where Zuloaga, whom he had been virtually holding as a prisoner, effected his escape. This flight much alarmed Miramon and his supporters. The council of state was called upon for a decision. The disappearance of the president, that emanated from the plan of Tacubaya and gave a legal status to Miramon, was a serious matter. He might recall his decree of January 31, 1859, and want
to reassume his position or make some one else his substitute. The council of state slurred over the plan of Tacubaya that created it, declaring that under any circumstances Miramon should continue as president.[46] His partisans alleged that on assuming the presidential office he had limited his tenure of it till the republic should be pacified; which not having been as yet accomplished, he was to continue holding the supreme power.
The liberal party now felt certain that the reactionist government could not hold out much longer. After its defeats at Pinos, Ixcuintla, Loma Alta, and Peñuelas, and the retreats from Vera Cruz and Sayula, the triumph of the constitutional cause could not be a doubtful matter. Many hopeful advantages for the country in the enjoyment of free institutions, law, and order were expected from the present political situation, despite the hostile attitude toward Juarez' government of England, France, and Spain, and a large portion of the American press. Prussia also, and the two most retrogressive governments in America at that period, Guatemala and Ecuador, continued recognizing Miramon's government until its collapse.
Miramon's star was now in the descendent. The constitutionalists, under Gonzalez Ortega, Zaragoza, Antillon, Doblado, Berriozábal, and other chiefs, marched against him on the Silao hills and completely routed him, on the 10th of August. The victorious army under the chief command of Ortega was entitled 'Divisiones Unidas de Zacatecas y Michoacan.' He remained on the field till he saw there was no retrieval,[47] and then started for Querétaro, where he arrived on the 11th, reaching Mexico that same night at 10 o'clock. He forthwith summoned his ministers to discuss the situation, and it was resolved that he should give up the presidency for a few days, during which interregnum the president of the supreme court, Ignacio Pavon, would act.[48]
Miramon insisted on a new choice of president, as Zuloaga could not hold the office for an indefinite period. The junta of departmental representatives created by Zuloaga's law having been installed with Teodosio Lares as president, and Manuel Larrainzar and Mariano Icaza as secretaries, they chose on the 14th of August Miramon, by a majority only, it having been so arranged to give the farce a little semblance of impartiality. After that there was much show of enthusiasm, and the usual formalities of taking possession of the presidential office were gone through.[49]
Pavon, during his tenure of only two days, did nothing except to publish the act of Miramon's election. He returned to his post in the supreme court, and held it till the political problem was solved. After that he retired to private life.
Miramon soon after his installation as president ad interim, on the 18th of August, appointed his cabinet.[50] Meanwhile the forces victorious at Silao advanced upon Querétaro, constantly swelling their ranks and increasing their resources, having an abundance of artillery; but against public expectation, they retreated to the interior on discovering that there was no movement at the capital on behalf of the constitution. The reactionary government, nothing daunted by the terrible disaster at Silao, actively reorganized its forces, resorting to forced levies, and procuring resources to meet its urgent needs. The troops stationed in the east were concentrated at the capital, and other measures adopted for a campaign, which Miramon determined should be in the valley of Mexico. He now resolved to release Marquez from his arrest.[51] The capital by the end of August saw all communication with the rest of the country cut off. The guerrilla parties had also dug a trench on the road between Mexico and Puebla. Amidst all the turmoil Joaquin Francisco Pacheco, Spanish ambassador accredited to the government of the republic, who had arrived at Vera Cruz on the frigate Berenguela on the 23d of May, chose to present his credentials to Miramon, first obtaining, through devices not altogether honorable, permission from Juarez to travel into the interior.[52]
The ceremonial of official reception would be called magnificent by some and ridiculous by others. The ambassador and his suite went in solemn procession around the plaza, the carriage conveying Pacheco and Mangino, the introductor of foreign ministers, being drawn by six fine horses. In his speech Pacheco spoke of Mexico's independence, hoping that she and Spain would look upon one another as sisters.[53]
Miramon had now every reason to believe that the constitutional army would soon make another attempt to capture the capital.[54] Ortega had concentrated at Querétaro 7,000 men, among whom were the prisoners taken at the last three important actions lost by the reactionists, and 28 pieces of artillery. The constitutional contingent from Tamaulipas was called away, which had much influence to postpone the plan of attacking Mexico, where the reactionist brigades of Chacon, Gutierrez, Robles, and Negrete were already in position.[55] Miramon organized his army in three divisions, under the respective commands of Robles, Marquez, and Mejía, with Oronoz, Negrete, Velez, Cobos, Cruz, and Chacon in charge of the brigades.[56] Ortega went to Guanajuato after resources, which were so scarce that it became an absolute necessity to seize at Laguna Seca, near San Luis Potosí, the conducta bound to Tampico, amounting to $1,100,000, which had already paid eight per centum for duties on leaving Guanajuato, Zacatecas, and San Luis.[57] The seizure of the conducta by Degollado's order was disapproved of by the government at Vera Cruz, which well knew what complications and embarrassments it would entail on Mexico; for a convention had been already signed by Spain, France, and England, in which Prussia was also to have a share, for interfering in the affairs of Mexico, even without the consent of the United States.[58] It was stipulated that the mediators should propose a general armistice for a year's time, during which the Mexican people should be called upon to fix the principles, or basis, for their government, the mediating powers sanctioning what the congress should determine. Those governments represented to that of the United States the motives prompting their course, which they based on the weakness manifested by the two contending parties, and on the circumstance that neither Spain nor the United States had assented to exercise a sole intervention. They pretended that it was a humanitarian mission they were about to perform.[59] Nothing came out of the mediation, because Juarez adhered to his answer given in the spring of the year to proposals of the British foreign office.[60] But the political troubles that disturbed the United States in the latter end of 1860, and preceded her gigantic sectional war, augmented the agitation of the European courts on Mexican affairs. Toward the end of November arrived Dubois de Saligny, the new French minister, whose instructions were to recognize Miramon's government.[61] Juarez had on the 6th of that month decreed the election of representatives to a general congress, and of president of the republic. At this time he felt so sure of his triumph that he made preparations to transfer himself and his government to the valley of Mexico, and made arrangement for resuming the payment of the foreign debt in January 1861. But we must now retrace our steps, and make ourselves acquainted with the military situation on which Juarez grounded his hopes of immediate success.
Gonzalez Ortega had in October concentrated 17,000 men around Guadalajara, whilst the garrison was of less than 7,000. Marquez made rapid marches to relieve the place, reaching Guanajuato with his force considerably increased. Huerta, Ögazon, and Rojas were detached to hold him in check; they at first suffered some reverses, but finally defeated him. The garrison, under Severo del Castillo, expected no relief; and being destitute, Castillo entered into a parley with the enemy, and was allowed to leave the place with his troops on the 20th of October.[62] His force x marched by way of Santa Ana to Tepic, without ammunition, and with unloaded arms, whilst the constitutionalists marched upon Tolotlan, and on the 10th of November at Calderon utterly routed the army of Marquez, who was not aware of Castillo's arrangement till a few hours before being attacked.[63] Marquez and Velez took to Querétaro and Mexico the news of their disaster.
Miramon then frankly set forth the situation in a manifesto, and summoned a junta of prominent citizens residing in the capital to determine what ought to be done. The junta, among whom were the archbishop, bishop of Monterey, other ecclesiastics, and several generals, met on the 3d of November, but no result was arrived at on that day; two days later it was resolved to defend the city to the last.[64] Miramon's government had been unable to establish any financial system, its only resources being obtained from the clergy, or by forced loans, which together with those levied by the liberal party ruined many fortunes and put others in great jeopardy. Having now no means to support his troops, he permitted the chief of police, Lagarde, on the 16th of November, to enter the house of Mr Barton, in the calle de Capuchinas, with an order from Marquez, under the pretext of arms being hidden there. The next day an armed force under Colonel Jáuregui invaded the house with a number of workmen, who forced open the doors on which were the seals of the British legation, and carried away nearly $700,000, in disregard of all protests, and of the fact that the money belonged to British bondholders.[65] With these funds Miramon organized new troops to fight the numerous hosts that were approaching the valley, including Ampudia's force from Vera Cruz.
A large number of reactionists had now forsaken their sinking cause and joined the liberal party. The liberal forces, having defeated their adversaries at every encounter, marched on toward the capital with the eclat that prosperity always imparts, swelling their ranks with officers and men of the other party.
The city of Mexico, being threatened on all sides by the constitutionalists, was placed under martial law on the 13th of November. At the end of the month Carbajal's forces were in Zumpango de la Laguna and Villa de Gudalalupe, Berriozábal's in Toluca, and Ampudia's in Tlalpam. The army from Guadalajara was advancing under the commander-in-chief, Gonzalez Ortega.[66] Miramon made arrangements to move his forces with great rapidity, forced a portion of Ampudia's to retire from Cuautitlan, and sallying out on the first of December, struck the constitutionalists a blow at San Bartolo. With the continual movement of his troops he managed to get supplies into the city. But with all his extraordinary energy he could not check the discouragement of his party nor the repeated defection of his troops. Nothing daunted, however, he resolved to strike another blow, selecting as his objective point Toluca, the headquarters of the liberals, where a great many of their prominent men were assembled. He had not been misinformed about Berriozábal's lack of precaution. Leaving Mexico at dawn of the 8th of December, on the next day he gained a victory over the liberal forces, which were almost totally captured, together with Degollado, Berriozábal, and Benito Gomez Farías, as well as fourteen pieces of artillery, trains, a large supply of small arms, etc. The prisoners were kindly treated.[67] Miramon's success facilitated the arrival of provisions in Mexico, and his friends became very enthusiastic, not being willing as yet to believe that their chief's star was on the wane. But partial successes could not prevent the steady approach of Gonzalez Ortega's army of about 9,000 or 10,000 men, with 44 pieces of artillery, which left Querétaro on the 10th of December, and was to be further reënforced from Morelia and elsewhere. Miramon, with the double object of saving the capital from the effects of a siege and assault, and of defeating the enemy before the concentration of all his forces, started from Mexico on the 20th of December, at the head of his best troops, 8,000 strong, with thirty pieces of artillery, the brigades being respectively commanded by Marquez, Velez, Negrete, Ayesteran, Cobos, and others. On the morning of the 22d he was between Arroyozarco and San Francisco Soyaniquilpan, establishing his lines, and trying unsuccessfully to cut off the liberal left wing. The fight began at eight o'clock in the morning on the heights of San Miguel Calpulalpan, and had terminated at ten, and with it the reaction and the three years' war.
Ortega's army was 16,000 strong, Miramon's about one half that number[68] The latter made so vigorous an attack that it dislodged the Juaristas from many positions. The combatants gained or lost ground only foot by foot.[69] Ortega steadily reënforced weak positions. Mariano Miramon, the general's brother, charged with the cavalry, but a number of his men went over to the enemy; the rest fled, running against their own infantry, and general confusion followed. Miramon's centre was then broken; the rest followed, artillery, trains, ammunition, wounded — all was abandoned. Miramon was utterly routed.[70] He went back to Mexico at 2 o'clock in the morning of the 23d, and summoned his ministers for eight o'clock to consult on the situation, after which he retired to snatch a little rest till the appointed hour. The representatives of France and Spain attended the council of ministers, and as a result of their deliberations repaired, accompanied with generals Berriozábal and Ayesteran, to Gonzalez Ortega's headquarters, to treat on terms of capitulation. Miramon had an intention of retiring to Puebla. The whole day passed in discussions, and in adopting precautions to prevent desertions, alarming symptoms of defection being noticed in the several barracks. At last it was resolved that the only course left was to capitulate. But Gonzalez Ortega would listen to nothing but unconditional surrender;[71] and when the commissioners returned, on the 24th, the cry then was, each one for himself; the ministers went into hiding, and Miramon surrendered the city to Degollado and Berriozábal, who had been chosen by the ayuntamiento for the preservation of public order till General Ortega's arrival; after doing which, the remaining troops, and many prominent reactionists, among them Miramon and Zuloaga, assembled in the Ciudadela, and after dividing among themselves $140,000, started together by the Toluca road, Miramon disappearing after a while. In his attempt to reach the coast, he narrowly escaped capture at Jico, in the vicinity of Jalapa; his companions, Isidro Diaz and Ordoñez, were taken. Miramon remained in concealment at Jalapa, and finally was conveyed by a French man-of-war's boat on board a vessel of that nation, called Le Mercure, that took him to Europe.[72] Miramon's flight put an end to the deadly strife and unheard of vicissitudes of the last three years. The victorious liberal army, of about 25,000 men, entered the capital on new-year's day amid the joy and enthusiasm of the people, who had draped their houses in white, and poured upon the men a rain of flowers and laurel wreaths. The greeting was one worthy of the army that had fought so bravely to restore the reign of justice and law, as well as the magna charta of the country's liberties, reform and future progress.[73]
After the severe punishment of some malefactors by Quartermaster-general Zaragoza, Juarez arrived at the national capital on the 11th of January, 1861. He had hastened his journey because Gonzalez Ortega was exercising supreme powers in decreeing measures which were of the exclusive province of the executive. The president was enthusiastically greeted by his partisans, as well as by the high military and civil officers, as far out as Guadalupe, and on entering the city in an open carriage, amid the popular acclamation, his presence was further announced by the salvos of artillery. He at once published a manifesto.[74]
and the British naval commander Aldham, with the commanding officer of the French naval forces, Le Roy. Later, on the 22d of March, 1861, complaint was raised in the British house of commons that Miramon, who had stolen money from the British legation, had been favored to escape on a French ship. Juarez ordered that Miramon, Marquez, and all others who were implicated in these affairs should be arrested, prosecuted, and punished, with confiscation of their properties included; of which the British representative was officially apprised. Boletin de Notic., Jan. 27, 28, Feb. 9, 10, 22, 1861; Archivo Mex., Col. Ley., v. 194-5; Dublan and Lozano, Leg. Mex., ix. 16; Hansard's Parl. Deb., clxii. 250; El Amigo del Pueblo, Feb. 26, 1861; Le Trait d'Union, Feb. 8, 16, 22, Apr. 24, May 1, 1861. All that, however, did not prevent that Miramon should be received and honored at the Spanish court by the queen on the 2d of Dec. of that year. The war of independence achieves for Mexico autonomy; but much remains to be done before she can fit herself for this new sphere — before she can be relieved of the fetters and encumbrances worn by her during three centuries of despotic tutelage. Řelief comes only in another struggle between the new and old order of things; against superstition and class supremacy, protracted through nearly half a century, and forming a probationary transition period to the era of development under Porfirio Diaz.
The period of independence opens auspiciously, with the country recovered from the ravages of war; but prudence is cast to the winds in framing plans for the future, and in carrying them out. The formation of a republic is the natural outcome of a rising by the people for the people, as indicated in the speedy fall of Iturbide's empire; and equally natural is the eagerness to imitate the constitution of a sympathizing neighbor, the successful prototype of the new evolution. The conditions of the two nations, however, are widely different in race characteristics, climatic and other environments, and in interests and leanings; and while Mexico's adopted institutions are modified somewhat by French ideas, the new culture standard for Anáhuac, yet they are hardly suited to a people just out of leading-strings-a people so far unschooled in the self-control required for the enjoyment of true liberty. Moreover, it seems hazardous to separate a hitherto united country into semi-independent states, especially when there exist large bodies of ignorant aborigines, who, constituting a class of minors, require the care of one supreme guardian. On the other hand, the federal system is encouraged by the diversity of races, based to some extent on ancient tribal differences and distribution, and fostered by the isolated or sectional warfare of the independence struggle; and it soon becomes apparent that in the division of states lies a source of strength for the people in the conflict now beginning with the conservative element; while the gradual spread of education and liberal ideas serves to lessen and control the dangerous elements among the masses, and to bring the needful training and self-restraint. The federal system is therefore well enough for Mexico, and time and experience are alone needful to fit her for its design and scope
The primary obstacle and mistake lie in exaggerated ideas of liberty, interpreted as license, with might as right. The people copy the letter, not the spirit, of the United States constitution; and disregarding as they do the relative duties of states and general government, the letter only hampers the administration. They grasp too readily at any plausible project without weighing its value and ulterior effect; and, unguided by leading principles, they neglect to carry out its commendable features with any degree of reasonable consistency. The people of the United States are men of order, who wait patiently till judge or ballot shall decide a question. The wide-spread interest among all classes, in houses, land, savings banks, is an element that binds them to such order. In Mexico climatic influence and indolence of character tend to diminish the importance of home, with its all-modifying influence, and hinder the acquirement of property among the masses. Having, therefore, less to risk, they hesitate less in yielding to the appeal of turbulent and designing leaders, who feel no compunction in plunging the country into tumult and civil war for the attainment of private ends. Impetuous by nature and impatient under restraint, they are readily fired by flaming and plausible outcries to turn against the salutary and corrective limitation of reform, allowing no time for testing its value or letting it take root.
Warned of the looming danger, and observing the heterogeneous and discordant elements among the people, the conservative party, composed mainly of the wealthy and privileged classes, begins early to take steps for securing predominance, by striving for a government centralized at the capital in one strong hand and encircled by aristocratic bulwarks, as instanced already in the empire of Iturbide. This resolve stands redeemed to some extent by the conviction that the masses are as yet unfitted for an equal share in the administration. The people, however, who have achieved the independence, and founded upon it bright hopes of equality and self-rule, are not disposed to surrender the fruits of their efforts to a class which has contributed little or nothing toward the great object. The result is a bitter strife between the two great parties, known in course of time under the different names of reactionists and progressionists, conservatives and liberals, aristocrats and democrats, and so forth, with numerous subdivisions, which, under various disguises and pretensions, manage to win over or unite for a time upon a common issue a more or less strong representation from the opposite side.
In the heat of conflict little hesitation is shown at the means for sustaining excitement or attaining success; and so we behold now a persecution of individuals and classes, as instanced notably in the expulsion of Spaniards, which has an effect not unlike that of the huguenot expatriation in France; anon a deplorable pillage or massacre, involving innocent persons, and staining the honor of the nation; and again, a goading and rousing of race feeling which threatens a deluge of blood. And so the country is racked and torn by a series of inflictions that retard progress and imperil national existence. The prime mover in the struggle is the growing mestizo element, with its lofty ambition and intelligent energy. The oppressed and neglected Indian, ever the prey of the victor, still holds aloof, regarding the issue with mingled indifference and suspicion, for he has so frequently been deceived in his hopes.
A leading factor in the strife is the army; at times a mere instrument, but only too often the arbiter. Inflated by self-importance since the war of independence, it readily develops into a cormorant feeding on the vitals of the nation. It becomes the pliant instrument of its ambitious spirits-men who, impelled by vanity and greed, seize a favorable moment, and, assisted by distance from the centre or by the preoccupied or enforced situation of the authorities, swing themselves by a series of frequently bloodless revolutions from corporals and lieutenants to generals, meanwhile hiding defalcations and extorting concessions. With growing strength they become party leaders, menace the supreme government itself, and either dictate terms or install more compliant rulers. The result is an administration at once spiritless and inefficient, depending on the caprice of selfish factions, and unable, from lack of stability and means, to carry out the policy of reform with which it has deluded the people and gained consent to a tenure of power. Frequently the new heads aim only at a division of spoils, in view of their precarious position, and promote maleadministration by surrendering places of trust to those who have helped to install them, to favorites, and to opponents who must be conciliated. Corruption extends into every department; officials abuse their power by extortion and oppression, intent only on making the most of their prospectively brief term. Half the national revenue is absorbed ere it reaches the treasury; justice is sold to the highest bidder; and the army, the main reliance of the powers that be, becomes demoralized under officers who depend on its good-will. The people themselves encourage abuses by an indolent good nature that objects to harsh though wholesome restraint.
One striking result of the disorder is foreign intervention and invasion, based on unfulfilled promises and obligations, lured by thirst for trade and spoliation, and favored by anarchy; all of which give cause and opportunity for secession. A powerful neighbor bestirs herself to goad the nation to a war for which it is wholly unprepared, with undisciplined and poorly armed troops, and with jealous and incapable officers, who drive veterans to despair, needlessly sacrifice the raw recruits bravely offering their blood for home and liberty, and encourage the foe to become more and more exacting. Even in the midst of evil may be found some good, however; for while half the national domain is ceded, the region is really a wilderness, so far as Mexico is concerned, and a source of weakness by demanding a costly defence against white and Indian invaders. Its loss is merely precipitated, to serve more speedily to open the portals for an elevating intercourse.
The church stands side by side with the army in being a prime mover in the turmoil. It is no longer the great bond between the races. Its influence has been sadly lessened, its holiness sadly battered during the war of independence, dimming the sacred character of its servants; while its wealth, to the very altar vessels, lures an ever-swelling host of hungry spoilers. Its very existence is threatened, prompting to steps for defence, in an alliance with the aristocratic party, with similar motives and sympathies. But this action only exposes it to a double buffeting. Its wealth is not only subjected to a heavy drain in support of revolutions fostered by the clergy, but the hostile factions find herein an excuse for carrying out their schemes of spoliation and reform, thus cutting off resources which have served to feed desolating wars, and restricting privileges employed to keep the masses in superstitious subjection and deplorable ignorance. The church assumes at last its true position, as a consolatory, humanizing medium, subordinate to the state and depending on the government; divested of dangerous fueros, and purged of noxious drones in the shape of religious communities. This may be regarded as the greatest triumph of the people, bringing as it does tolerance, civil marriage, and freer education to crush superstition and lift the mind from bondage. A phase of the decline in ecclesiastical influence is the absence from the rank of national leaders of priests who shed such lustre on the preceding period. The chiefs are now military men, as may be judged from the character of the period, with a sprinkling of lawyers, who owe their elevation partly to the accident of vice-presidential positions, partly to opportunities in the legislative field. Prominent among presidents are several heroes from the war of independence, beginning with Victoria and Guerrero, both pure, unselfish patriots, unaffected and amiable, but little fitted to direct the experimental steps of a young nation along a new path, in the face of bitter opposition. In contrast to these stand educated men with aristocratic tendencies, like Bustamante and Pedraza, the former long a pillar of centralism, and with a certain administrative ability. Gomez Farías achieves distinction in being the first president to openly assail the detrimental influence of the church; and he survives to triumph two decades later, while his opponent, Lúcas Alaman, the great leader of the conservatives, dies in the midst of his plans for establishing a monarchy. In the course of ever-seething revolutions, rulers succeed one another in rapid succession, some holding their positions only for a few days, to leave hardly a trace, while a few manage to complete a full term of office. Among them are too often mere creatures of the moment, the toys of military caprice; now vacillating and procrastinating, anon rash with defective projects, with occasional spurts of stronger and redeeming but unsustained efforts. But there are also able and patriotic men, who effect some good, only to rouse the storm by their plans for reform, and fall under the ruins of their noble though unstable structures. Among them figure prudent and well-meaning men like Herrera, the man of peace, and Comonfort, who proclaims the final federal constitution; worthy judges like Peña y Peña and Ceballos; the financier Echeverrí; instruments of the army in Canalizo and Lombardini; brilliant soldiers like Miramon, Bravo, and Anaya; the hot-headed Paredes; the reformed conservative Arista, and the converted democrat Almonte. The most conspicu ous personage of the period, however, is Santa Anna, arch-intriguer, political juggler, brazen blusterer. A worshipper of success, to which he sacrifices honor and true patriotism; using men and institutions as means for his own ends; prostituting an ability which, com bined with energy, raises him to the category of a genius, while lack of principle and firmness lower him to abject baseness. Ever dissimulating and obedient alone to the political barometer, he stands ready to desert a cause or patron at the first indication of fail ure; to parade now as a reformer w r ith dazzling promises and scanty fulfilment, anon as a despot with iron heel and regal pomp. In diplomacy, an unsustained Talleyrand; in war, a sorry Napoleon.
He it is whose ambition tends to revive at inter vals the centralist idea of the conservatives, that relic of colonial days and of Iturbide, only to strengthen opposition to it by abuses and oppression, and foster appreciation of and fitness for the federal system. One more bloody ordeal is required, one more purify ing patriotic struggle, ere the people are permitted to establish full liberty in the dear-bought constitution of 1857, under which a Juarez and a Diaz are unable to loosen the still binding fetter and inaugurate the era of advancement.
Cárlos Bustamante was a man of no ordinary talent; but so ill balanced was his mind that he was constantly going astray. His ardent imagination and uncurbed enthusiasm, together with a childlike credulity, made him too much the tool of designing demagogues. As a statesman he was unswerving in his patriotism, but his fixed views only embraced the two broad and general principles of independence and republicanism. In all other respects he was variable and inconstant, and would desert his party for trifling causes. In his enmities, as well as his friendships, he was more consistent. He never forgave Iturbide for his neglect of the old revolutionists. Simple-minded and disinterested, his line of conduct was never guided by selfish motives or by greed of gain. In spite of his many errors, it can never be denied that his in tentions were good.
The ruling passion of Bustamante was the publication of his works, for collecting material for which he had a mania. Archives were ransacked; documents were gathered in from all quarters; and persons were consulted who might throw light on particular events; while every dollar that he could spare outside the requirements of his household was devoted to pushing his works through the press. The most important of these is Cuadro Uistorico de la Revolucion de la América Mexicana, Mexico, 1823, 32. This production was commenced on the 15th of Sept., 1810, and was published in six small 4to volumes, the first of which was issued in 1823 and the last in 1832. No regular plan is observed in the Cuadro Histórico, which consists of a series of letters without order or regularity with regard to the sequence of events. The author seems merely to have added letter after letter as fast as he could gather material for the narration of incidents, whether they were connected or not. Although a vast amount of valuable documents are reproduced and a great many others referred to, his statements must always be taken with the utmost caution. He is in no sense a reliable author. Accepting without reflection any tale that fell in with his own views, many of the occurrences he relates are exaggerated, warped, or utterly false. But worse than this: Bustamante is not a thoroughly honest writer, and by the suppression of facts in some cases and the perversion of them in others, he lays himself open to the most serious censure. Other less heinous offences are noticeable in the Cuadro Histórico. Perorations are frequent, and the rancorous spirit and bitterness which they display do not make the perusal of them pleasing. With regard to style, it is easy, fluent, and clear; sometimes marked by a degree of elegance, but too often Bustamante's language is disfigured by low expressions; while the frequent occurrence of forensic and obsolete words exposes him to the charge of affectation. This work has been severely criticised by his countrymen, but no one has applied more ungenerous terms to it than Zavala, who qualifies it as a farrago of false, absurd, and ridiculous statements, while he charges the author with continual perversion of the truth, and with putting his country to shame by affording evi dence of the want of candor and honesty in a writer of its annals. Hist. Rev. Mex., 2. This attack elicited from Bustamante an equally sweeping and unjust condemnation of Zavala's work. In his indignation he gives that author the lie direct, and declares that he had written a history without knowing even the names of the principal persons who figure in it. Cavo, Tres Siglos, iii. sup., Prol. vi., and p. 318-21. On the other hand, Mendívil and Alaman speak in terms of high appreciation of the services rendered by Bustamante. And not without justice. The greatest credit is due to the member for Oajaca — for during his whole congressional career Bustamante was a deputy for that state, with rare exceptions — for the untiring zeal with which he prosecuted his literary labors during a life-time of political turmoil. Had he only possessed the qualities which would have enabled him to use rightly the large accumulation of authentic material which he succeeded in laying his hands on, he would have been the greatest Mexican historian of modern times. As it is, he can hardly be regarded as having advanced much beyond the grade of an industrious compiler.
A second edition of the Cuadro Histórico was issued in five 4to volumes, comprising 2,284 pages, during the years 1843 to 1840, inclusive. As a, continuation to the above work, Bustamante published, in 1846, Historia del Emperador D. Agustin de Iturbide, an 8vo volume of 293 pages of text, with an index. This book displays the feelings with which the writer regarded that unfortunate leader. I have referred to various works of Bustamante in this and previous volumes, and to enumerate all the others would be uninteresting. Mention, however, must be made of La Galeria de Antigos Príncipes Mexicanos; Mañanas de la Alameda, ó Conversaciones sobre la Historia Antigua de México, Mexico, 1835 and 1836, 2 vols, which was published with the object of assisting the young women of Mexico in acquiring a knowledge of the history of their country; El Gabinete Mexicano, Mexico, 1842, being a history of President Bustamante's government from 1836 to the elevation of Santa Anna to the presidency; Apuntes para la Historia del Gobierno de Victoria; Id. de Santa Anna; and La Aparicion Guadalupana de Mexico. Mexico, 1843. This last work illustrates the author s fanaticism, it being a defence of the authenticity of the miraculous appearance of the virgin of Guadalupe, in dis proof of the doubts cast upon it by Doctor Juan Bautista Muñoz iii an essay which he read before the academy of history at Madrid in 1794.
Bustamante did not confine himself to original productions, but published a large number of the works of other authors, whose manuscripts he rescued from oblivion. The most notable of these are: La Historia de Hernan Cortés, which Bustamante began to publish in 1826, believing it to be an original un edited history in the Mexican language, written by Juan Bautista de San Anton Muñoz Chimalpan, a native Mexican. He soon discovered, how ever, that it was only a translation of Gomara s history. The same year he published in a 4to volume El Descrubrimiento de la América por Colon, which he attributed to the Franciscan friar Vega, and Texcoco en los Ultimos Tiempos de sus Antiguos Reyes, by Veitia. In 1832 he produced Description de las dos Piedras Antiguas Mexicanas, que se Hallaron en la Plaza de Mexico en 1790, con Ocasion del Nuevo Empedrado, by Leon y Gama. Still later in 1841 he brought to light Historia de la Compañia de Jesus en Nueva Espana, by Padre Alegre. The historians of Mexico are greatly indebted to Bustamante for his discovery and publication of these and other valuable manuscripts, but it is to be lamented that he could not desist from interpolating in the text observations of his own, without distinguishing them from the original, and from suppressing portions that appeared to him of no value. Yet, where comparison of his publications with the originals has been possible, he has been proved frequently guilty of this literary crime. The litterateur José Fernando Ramirez has exposed his dishonesty in this respect, particularly in Sahagun's large work, which Bustamante published during 1829 and 1830, in three 4to volumes, the first under the title of Historia de la Conquista de México, pp. 330, and the two following containing respectively 397 and 339 pages, under that of Historia General de las Cosas de Nueva España. Sahagun's manuscript had lain for two centuries in the Franciscan library at Tolosa in Spain. Discovered by Juan Bautista Muñoz, Lord Kingsborough obtained a copy, and published it in London in 1830. Another copy had been obtained by Brigadier Diego García Panes and brought to Mexico. Bustamante availed himself of the latter. But Ramirez compared Bustamante's edition with that of Lord Kingsborough, and the discrepancies were found to be of the gravest importance, with every presumption in favor of the correctness of the London, edition. I must not omit to mention the Historla Civil y Politica de México, of Padre Andrés Cavo, written at Rome in the 18th century, and giving a chronological history of Mexico from the time of the conquest to 1766. This work might forever have remained unpublished had it not fallen into the hands of Bustamante, who brought it out in 1836-8 in four volumes, comprising 1,174 pages, under the title of Los Tres Siglos de Mexico durante el Gobierno Español hasta la Entrada del Ejército Trigarante. The history is continued from June 1767 down to the independence in 1821, in a supplement written by the editor. Bustamante s zeal may be imagined when it is con sidered that to write this supplement he searched, according to his statement, 174 volumes of the secret correspondence of the viceroys. Tres Siglos, iii. sup., Prol. ii. In all Bustamante s publications of this class, he inflicts upon the reader a multitude of unnecessary notes of his own, many of them being use less or irrelevant.
Among the periodicals edited by Bustamante I may mention, besides those already alluded to, La Abispa de Chilpancingo, 1821-2; and La Voz de la, Patria, 1831-2, which contains the history of presidents Victoria and Guerrero. He moreover published in other periodicals a multitude of articles on differ ent subjects, besides innumerable separate pamphlets. His writings frequently exposed him to disagreeable consequences, and on more than one occasion were the cause of his being imprisoned.
Cárlos Bustamante was of medium height, with a pleasing expression of countenance. In early life he became bald and his hair turned gray, which gave him the appearance of being older than he really was. He spoke with great facility in public, but his voice was harsh and disagreeable. This fault, together with his habit of introducing trivial ideas, had an unpleasant effect upon his audience, and not unfrequently while he was addressing the house the benches would become deserted. In 1833, being in danger of political persecution, he published in his defence his autobiography, under the title, Hay tiempos de hablar y tiempos de callar; and soon after his death an anonyimous writer, un amigo de Don Cárlos y mas amigo de la verdad, issued Noticias Biográficas del Licenciado D. Cárlos Maria de Bustamante, y Juicio Crítico de sus Obras, Mexico, 1849, pp. 56.
Manuel Larrainzar, in his Algunas Ideas sobre la Historia, supplies a brief sketch of Bustamante s life, with a short review of his principal works. Larrainzar treats him with more generosity and justice than many critics have done. He also informs us that the collection of Bustamante's works comprise 19,142 pages, and cost between $40,000 and $50,000. Soc. Mex. Geog. Bolet., xi. 514-19. Bustamante kept a diary, in which all notable events were entered. Shortly before his death he deposited this manuscript in the archive of the apostolical college of Guadalupe at Zacatecas. It consisted of a great number of volumes — as many as 80 — according to some but the con tents are of no unusual value, as all essential parts of it were used in his printed works. Most of Bustamante s manuscripts after his decease fell into the possession of José María Andrade, a publisher and bibliophilist of Mexico, who laid the foundation of what was intended by Maximilian to be the imperial library of Mexico. After the fall of that prince, the collection of books was transported to Europe and sold. Bustamante's manuscripts formed an interesting portion of this collection, and I fortunately secured most of them, including eight heavy 4to volumes of Memorandum, ó sea Apuntes pa escribir la historia de la principalmente occurrido en Mexico, 1844 to 1847; nine volumes of Voz de la Patria; four volumes of the Gabinete Mexicano; Medidas para la Pacificacion de la América Mexicana; the histories of Victoria s and Santa Anna's administrations, besides others. All these writings are in the author's own. handwriting. They are much more complete than the printed works with which they correspond, or for which they supplied the material. But the most interesting is Mexico en 1848, a frag ment of 44 leaves written on both sides, and representing the last effort of this untiring worker. It contains a series of notes of the principal military and political events in Mexico during the middle of 1848. The first 38 leaves, with the exception of one, are in Bustamante s handwriting, then, as his strength failed, an amanuensis was employed. This fragment was begun March 17th, and ends abruptly on the 24th of June, barely three months before the author s death.
Manuel Rivera, Historia Antigua y Moderna de Jalapa y de las Revoluciones del Estado de Vera Cruz. Mexico, 1869-1871, 8vo, 5 vols. A history of Mexico, but confined principally to the state of Vera Cruz and the town of Jalapa. It begins with the occupation of the territory now called Vera Cruz, by the Ulmecas, previous to the arrival of Cortes, and concludes with the year 1868, by far the larger portion of the work being taken up with the period from 1808 down to the latter date. It was originally intended to divide the work into five parts, but this plan was not adhered to, as the 4th completes the work in vol. v. The promise, too, of an appendix of statistical information at the end is not carried out. Each chapter embraces three histories, namely, the national, the state history, and the local history of Jalapa; generally, but not always, in the above order. Numerous plates, chiefly portraits of governors of Vera Cruz, views, and plans of the principal towns, illustrate each volume. The author derived his information from the writings of Sahagun, Motolinia, Herrera, Betancourt, and Torquemada for the conquest; for the history of later times, from the work of Boturini and some others, who profited by the still fresh remains of Indian history; the works of Humboldt, and the Diccionario de Geografia y Estadística, by Orozco y Berra. For modern history, the writings of Alaman, Bustamante, and Zavala were consulted. The most interesting data, however, were derived from manuscripts furnished by the archives of some of the towns in the eastern part of the republic, and by private individuals. Beginning with 1808 the years are printed on the margin of each page. As a rule, after 1809, each chapter includes the history of a single year, but otherwise there is much confusion, repetition, and want of connection. Public documents are not given, excepting in one or two instances, although the more important ones, as the constitutions of 1824 and 1857, etc., and the numerous plans and acts, are supplied in a condensed form. The author s style is concise and generally clear. In the first part of the work the general history is very much condensed, receiving more attention from the revolution of Morelos to that of Juarez of 1858-00, but gradually becoming condensed again in recording the latter events of the French intervention. The state and local history of Jalapa is given with the same degree of fulness throughout the first four vols, but in the fifth is more brief.
Juan Suarez y Navarro, Informe sobre las Causas y Carácter de los Frecuentes Cambios Políticos Ocurridos en el Estado de Yucatan, etc. Mexico, 1801, 4to, pp. 193. A report of General Suarez on the condition of Yucatan, drawn up by order of the Mexican government. The three subjects especially dealt with are the division of the peninsula into two states; the cause and character of the frequent political changes; and the sale of Indians as slaves to Cuban planters. This report contains much valuable information, more than 100 pages being occupied by official documents. Attention is first called to the comparative independence of Yucatan under the viceroys, the decline of the power of the priesthood, and consequent loss of property. Then follows a political and historical sketch of events during the period from 1829 to 1801, supported by documentary evidence. No details of battles are given, general mention of them only being made. As regards the question of Indians being sold as slaves, the fact appears fully established; as late as 1859 even captured Mexican soldiers were sold. Notice is, moreover, made of the condition of the highways, of the army, of education, agriculture, and the judicial courts. A brief historical sketch of Belize is added, with remarks upon its. detrimental effect upon Yucatan by the introduction of contraband goods. Campeche is regarded as affording an asylum to Cuban slave-ships. Suggestions are made for the amelioration of affairs. The same author previously published, in 1850, Historia de México y del General . . . Santa Anna. It is stated on the title-page that events included in the period from 1821 to 1848 are narrated, but as they are only carried down to 1833 the book may be regarded as incomplete. The writer seeks to defend Santa Anna.
Luis Manuel del Rivero, Mejico en 1842, Madrid, 1844, sm. Svo, pp. 321, is the production of an unprejudiced Spaniard. Though it would appear from the title-page that the work is a description of Mexico in 1842, the author gives a philosophical review of her history from the time of the conquest, portraying the^ social and political positions of the monarch, the Spanish aristocracy in Mexico, the church, and the native population; the gradual production of a great monarchical power, but at the same the development of a society democratic in its latent principles; the slowly increasing hatred of immigrant Spaniards by the Creoles, and the ultimate result, the independence of the colony. The war of independence is cursorily but critically discussed; and then all branches of the community are in turn submitted to the same analysis. The intellectual and political faculties of the people are examined, their conditions detected and placed before the reader in a fair light.
Emil Karl Heinrich Freiherr von Richthofen, Die Äusseren und Inneren Polítischen Zustände der Republik von Mexico, etc. Berlin, 1854, 8vo, pp. 499. An account of the internal and external political condition of Mexico since the independence down to the year of date, by an ex-Prussian envoy and minister resident to the republic. The imprint seems to indicate that its publication was the work of the Prussian government, and apparently intended as a hand-book to modern Mexico. The title, gauged by the contents, is a little misleading, as the author devotes no space to the many events which make up the political history of the republic during the years covered by his volume, except, indeed, a list in chronological order of the administrations since Iturbide. But his general information is various and pertinent; his book is a compend of useful information about Mexico, its resources, industries, general administration, church, army, etc., being succinctly treated of and intelligently grouped. His impulse as a writer is honest, judging, where he thinks that comments are opportune, the Mexican people with much insight. Except for a paragraph in his preface which points to considerable faith in Santa Anna, he seems to lean toward no party or opinion of the country he describes. As an appendix to his work, he gives copies of the constitution, with two reform acts, and a treaty with England.
Beltrami (J. C.), Le Mexlque. Paris, 1830, 8vo, 2 vols, 443, 431 pp. Account of travels through Mexico. Beltrami was a royal counsellor and member of the medico-botanic society of London, and of other scientific associations. Ill health and the abolition of his court caused him to become a traveller; and as such he issued several works relating to his pilgrimage in Europe and America (see ii. 19G-8, and other places), wherein he displays a republican and anti-church spirit. He promises other works on different countries in America. The present book is a continuation of A Pilgrimage in Europe and America, which docs not pass outside of the U. S., and like that written in form of letters addressed from different places to a countess. He opens with the voyage from New Orleans to Tampico, whence he proceeds into the interior through San Luis Potosi and Querétaro to Guadalajara; thence by way of Guanajuato to Mexico City and Vera Cruz, when the work ends. During this trip he gives his observations on cities and country, on institutions, industries, manners and races, and political occurrences, interspersing the narrative with frequent learned allusions, analogies, and historic anecdotes. As a naturalist and savant he devotes attention to line arts; as an anti-churchman he wages bitter warfare on the ignorant and immoral friars; and as a moralist he discourses on popular characteristics. His classic and other similes, and quotations in Latin, etc., are perhaps too frequent, but much useful information is given. The style is admirably suited for letters, and throughout runs the French piquancy which is always so attractive.
Mathieu de Fossey, Le Mexique. Paris, 1857, 8vo, pp. viii. and 281. The author entered Mexico with the Goatzacoalco colony, and remained in the country as a trader, travelling extensively through the republic in that capacity. He gives an account in this volume of his travels and residence in Mexico during the period from 1831 to 1856, describing in the easy French style the politics and people, the country and its resources; in fact, everything of interest that fell beneath his eye. Of good education and connections, he was able to form the acquaintance of prominent persons, and consequently to gain a higher insight into society and politics. Being a fair observer and vivacious writer, he has imparted zest and interest to his narrative. He rather flatters the Mexicans, and finds foreigners more objectionable than others; nor does he spare his own people. Where views are expressed, they appear impartial and sound. A second edition of his work was published in Paris in 1862. Fossey also published in Mexico in 1844 his Viage a Méjico, 12mo, pp. 359, originally written in French and translated into Spanish.
José Ferrer de Couto, Cuestiones de Méjico, Venezuela y America en General. Madrid, 1861, 8vo, pp. 660. This work contains much valuable historical and political matter. The author vindicates the administration of the Spaniards in the new world from the time of the discovery, and urges that the reorganization of Mexico should be effected by European intervention. Indeed, the whole work was written with that object. During the same year Ferrer published Comentarios sobre la Cuestion dc Mexico, a small work of 48 pages in pamphlet form, designed to be a supplement to the above. It contains the same political views with regard to the relations between Mexico and the U. S. After entering into an explanation of the different races and political parties in Mexico, and giving a brief sketch of events from the time of the independence, the writer proceeds to state his views regarding the political events which took place in Mexico during the three years previous to the French intervention, condemning the action of the U. 8. with respect to Mexico, and disapproving of the sluggish action of his own nation, Spain. A second edition of the large work was issued in 1802.
Bazancourt (Baron de), Le Mexique Conlemporain. Paris, 1802, 12mo, 388 pp., map. A brief history of Mexico under republican rule, chiefly with a view to explain the causes and need for the allied intervention of 1801-2. The latter episode occupies the last ICO pages. The remaining pages, from 71 to 285, relate to the republican rule from 1821 to 18GO. The previous pages are occupied with the revolution and conquest. The book is too brief in its outline to be of value for any but the intervention period.
Evarislo Escalera and Manuel Gonzalez Llana, Méjico Histórico-Descriptivo, Seguido de la Crónica Miiitar de la Espedicion Española. Madrid, 1802, Svo, pp. 330. An historical and descriptive account of the Mexican republic from a Spanish point of view. The revolution is briefly sketched; the rela tions with the U. S. are more fully entered into. Nearly one half of the volume is devoted to description of the country, its people and productions.
Fuller references for the last five chapters are: Cortes, Diario Senado, i.Cortés, Diario Senado, i.ii. passim; Id., Diario Congreso, i. passim, ii. 402-4, 754-5, 773, vi. passim; Romero, Hist. Intr. Europ., 24-00, 84-94, 180-9,225-30; Id., Basque jo Hist., 20; Id., Tabla Sinóp., 1-78; Id., Sit. Mex., 3-12; Suarez y Navarro, Informe, 20-8, 05-107, 132-70; Zamacois, Hist. Méj., xi. 1, 997-1009, xiir. 873-80, xiv. 308-12, 1002, xv. passim; Dublan and Lozano, Leg. Mex., ii. 185-90, iii. 1439, vii.-ix. passim, x. 23-4, 208, 770-7; Zarco, Hist. Congreso, f i.-ii. passim; Mex, Col. Leyett Fund., 315-22, 353-79; Id., Col. Ley., Dec. y Ord., iv. 31, vi. 102-3, 135-0, vii. 3-8, 12-13, 75, 84-5, 115, 134-5, 151, 187-95, viii. 37, 5800, 288-9, 299-300, 331-2; Id., Col. Leyes, 1801, i. 1-18, 201, ii. 19-00; Id., Legist. Mej., 1854-0, passim;, 1873, annex no. 2. 71-3; Id., Mem. Guerra, 1857, 1-134, and annexes 1-29; Id., Mem. Hacda, 1857, 3-13, annex no. 149, pp. 531-2; Id., 1868, annex no. 45, pp. 5-9; Id., 1870, passim; Id., Mem. Fomento, 1868, 6; Archivo Mex., Col. Leyes, i.-vi. pasbim; U. S. Govt Doc., Cong. 33, Ses. 1, H. Ex. 109; Sen. Jour., 920-1; H. Jour., 1082; Id., Cong. 35, Ses. 2, Sen. Jour., 017; Id., Cong. 30, Ses. 1, Sen. Jour., 9823, Sen. 29, 1-13, vol. ix.; H. Ex., Mess, and Doc., pt i. 13-18, 30-51, pt 1017, 354-80; Id., Cong. 30, Ses. 2, Sen. 1, 19-21, vol. i.; Id., Cong. 37, Ses. 2, Sen. 1, 50; H. Ex. 50, 100, 120; H. Jour., 1252; Id., Cong. 38, Ses. 2, Sen. 11, 33; Id., Cong. 39, Ses. 1, Sen. 17; H. Ex. 73, 70; Rivera, Hist. Jalapa, ii. 594, iii. 30, iv.-v. passim, vi. 828-9; Id., Gob. de Mex., ii. 435, 441, 453-042, 686; Id, Mex. Pint., 22, 27-8, 03-4, 220-7, 385-0; Rosa, Ensayo, 4-15; Raigosa, Negocio promov., 1-110; Rivero, Mex. en 1842, 110-18; Rosas Landa, Manifest., 164; Revelador fidedigno, 1-10; Mex., Revol. contra Sta Anna, passim; Id., Mex. Legacion Circ., i. 400-48. ii. 397; Id, Codigo Reforma, 378, 02-9, 187-8, 197-200, 202-3, 211-13, 338-41, 301-2. 398; La Razon, Dec. 1857-Jan. 1858, passim; Eco de Occidente, Apl. 13, 20, 27, May 2, 11, 1859; Lefevre, Le Mex. et l'Interv., passim; Id., Doc. Ofic. Maximo, i. 23-9, 40-57, 09-125, 135-77, ii. 314-31; Mex. Scraps, ii. 47, 50-7, 03, 455; Mex. y la Interv., 1-122; Mex., La Interv. Europ., 1-8; Mexique, L'Intervention Française (Paris, 1808), 1-29, 39-49, 59-120; Rosas, El Clero y las Revol., 1-11; Mex., Diario Ofic., Mich. 31, 1870, 1-3; Masseras, Essai d'Empire, 1-30; Cuadro Sintipt., fol. 3-7, in Vega, Doc.; Dicc. Univ. Hist. Geog., x. 751-2; Baz, Vida de Juarez, 51-93, 104-8, 120-35, 189-228; Id., Ley de 12 de Julio de 1859, 1131; Id., Manif., 1-10; Graham s Mag., xlvii. 309-70, 404-5, xlviii. 175, 403; Lazo Estrada, Oracion Civ., 1-10; Brocklehurst's Mex., 03-4; Dudas de tin Estud., 1-20; Martin, Precis, 109-372; El Español, Apl. 6, 20, 23, 1853; Coronado, Manif., 1-15; Nat. Dem. Quart. Rev., Mich. 1800, 230-40; Payne's Hid. Europ. Col, 310-17; Barbachano, Mem. Camp., 99-120, ap. 139-44; Escalera y Liana, Mex. Hist. Descript., 141-5; Nayarit, Los Pueblos del Est., 12; Estado Mayor Oral. Ejer., 2, 4; Hall's Life Max. 1st, 20-8, 04-7; El Constituc., Feb. 29, Apl. 13-14, June 8, 1808; Adorno, Anal. Males Mex., 3-32, 144-52; Gonzalez, Hist. Aguasc., 209-320; Id., Relac. Marcha Brigada, 1-16; Ober, Mexico, 477-503; N. Am. Rev., ciii. 108-20, 137-42; Atlantic Monthly, v., 1860, 487-9; Richthofen, Die Mex. Frage, 1-95; Gutierrez, Leyes de Ref., 31-3, 340; El Eco Nac., 1857-8, passim; Annals Brit. Legisl., xii. 277-82, xiii. 45-68, 288-96; Bazancourt, Mexique, 246-388; Perez, Dicc. Geog., i. 47-52, ii. 41-4, 141-224, 488-536, iii. 72-4, iv. 167-75; Gutierrez de Estrada, Méx. y el Archiduque, 1-38; Suarez y Navarro, Informe, 21-8, 65-75, 97-103, 12470; Tornel, Voto Partic., 6; Mexique, Le Général Prim', 1-8, 32-4; Hidalgo, Apunt. Hist. Proyectos Monarq., passim; Cañedo, La Revol. en Mex., 15-39; Méx., Estatuto Org. Provis., 9-16; Méx., Imperio, 1-83; Id., Col. Dec., 1861-8, vi. 7, 19-20, 25-32, 40-90; Cucullu, Vérité sur Miramon, 3-44; Parrodi, Mem. Present'., 34-6; Reseña Hist, y Esplic., 9-83; Limantour, Répres. Adressée, 1-55; Arroniz, Tratado Mac-Lane; Olmedo, Represent., 1-16; Alvires, Reflex, sobre Decr. Episc., 1-58; Intervention Europ., 1-8; Tacubaya, Represent. Súbditos Ingl., 1-14; Flores, Decreto 25 de Junto, 1-80; Observ. al Discurso Pacheco, 1-46; Bienes Ecles., Expos., 1-8; Mexique, Revol., 17-43; Miramon, Á la Nacion, 1-19; Peña, Ligeras Reflex., 1-15; Proceso Instruido, 1-220; Revueltas, Artículos Publ., 1-28; Piña y Cuevas, Espos. al Trib. Sup., 1-29; Mexique et l'Esp., Mem., 1-242, 264-6, 280-359; Mexique, Mem. Négoc. Pend.; Mex. et la Monarchie. 9-12; Méx., Rev. Filós., Hist., Polit., 55-72; Doc. Hist. Méx., 1832-75, no. 10; Le Mex., l'Empire et l'Interv., 1-55; Méx., Informe Comis. Pesquis., 1874, 15-30, 69-70, 122-6, ap. xliv.-vi.; Miramon, Defensa Minist., 1-221; Id., A la Nacion, 12 de Julio de 1859, 1-12; Mex., Proy. Reglam. Deb. Cong., 1-116; Id., Derecho Mej. Ag. Com.; Id., Ley Org., 1-17; Id., Const. Fed. EE. UU. Mex., 1-208; Id., Corresp. Leg. Mex. en Washington; Id., Tratado entre Rep. Mex. y Rey de Cardeña, 1-10; Id., Gob. Sup. Rep. á los Mex., 1-9; Id., Mexicanos y su Pais, 3-28; Id., Manif. Gob. Const, á la Nac,, 1-50; Id., Cosas de Méx., 1-90; Mensaj. Españ. (El), Jan. 26, May 5, June 8, etc., 1860; Juicio de Impr., Doc. rel. Barron, 1-56; Villa-Amor, Biog. Gen. Sta Anna, 32-5; Centinela (El), Chih., Aug. 18, 1855; Overland Mthly, v. 26-30; Arciniega, Elogio Fún. Ocampo, 1-9; Kératry, Kaiser Max., 1-17; Hist. Mag., ix. 154; Hobbs Wild Life, 266-73; Hunt's Merch. Mag., xlvi 172-3; Dubois, Le Mex., 132-40; Evans' Sister Rep., 106-8; Derecho (El), v. 15-16, 30-2, 46-8; Berriozábal, Causa Mandada, 1-88; Armin, Heutige Mex., 169-86; Aguirre, Escrito Contest., 1-28; Diario Deb. 8 Cong., i. 60-2, 74-8, ii. 50-2; Id., 9 Cong., i. 30-2, 107-8; Id., 8 Constit. Legisl., i. 438-41, iii. 203; Ariz., Howell's Code, 486-8; Chevalier, Le Mexique, 475-533, 547-68; Camp's Year-book, 1869, 530; Union de Nic. (La), Feb.-July 1861. passim; Traidores Juzgados, 1-80; Testimonio Averig. Practicada, 1-40; Cuevas, El Imperio, 8-14; Le Saint, Guerre Mex., 12-34; Chynoweth's Max., 30-47; Méx., Sentencias de la, 2a, y 3a Instancia, 1-31; Robertson's Hand-book, 10; Orellana, Manif. Junta Liquidatoria, 1-43; Robinson's Mex. and her Milit. Chieft. 305; Lempriere's Notes in Mex., 30-45, 242, 437-48, 456-61; S. Fr. Golden Era, Apl. 20, 1856; Casasola, Acusadon Fiscal, 1-87; Paz (La), Jan. 1, 2, 3, etc., 1858; Aim. Calendario, 1858, iii. 21-49; Alm. Calend. Man. y Guia, 1854, passim; Alm. Calend. Galvan., 1856. 60-72; 1857, 50-60; 1858, 54-74; 1859, 47-74; 1860, 48-71; 1862, 45-93; 1864, 51-65; 1865, 51-83; Aim. Calend. Iturbide, 1857, passim; Diario de Avisos (El), series Apl. 14, 1857, to Dec. 22, 1860, passim; Salm-Salm's Diary, i. 213-14, ii. 173; Marquez (Leonardo), Manif., 1-42; Marquez de Leon, Refutac., 24-7; Id., Mem. Póst., MS., 89-90, 103-6, 111-17, 122-3, 148-84; Noriega, Funestos Rec., 5; San Luis Potosí, Protesta del Obispo, 1-34; Id., Constit. Polit., Proy. de, 1861, pp. 36; Id., Proy. de Constit., 1861, pp. 55; Id., Constit., Proyecto de, 1857, pp. 37; Id., Constit. Politica, 1861, pp. 38; Pensamiento Nac. (El), Nov. 1855 to May 1856, passim; Castro's Republic Mex., 1-3, 11-12; Gaceta de los Trib., Jan.-Dec. 1861, passim; Mex., Laws and Courts, MS., 8; Mex. and the Monroe Doctrine, 14-24, in Imperio de Mex., iv.; Soto, El Nuevo Estado, 1-117; Tiempo (El), Aug.-Nov. 1857, passim; Shepard's Land Azt., 171-3; El Sonorense, Mch. 18, Apl. 15, 22, 29, May 6, etc., 1853; Tovar, Hist. Parl., iv. 924-36; Universal (El), Feb. 11, Mch. 9, Apl. 14, 18, 22-3, etc., 1853; Valdovinos, Verdad para todos, 1-26; Órgano del Gob. (El), Sept. 1, 15, 1855; Veritas, Nuevas Reflex. Cuest. Franco-Mex., 1-214; Bullock's Across Mexico, 10; Manero, Doc. Inters., 81-2; Trait d'Union (Le), Jan.-Dec. 1861, passim; Duvernois, Französ. Interv. in Mex., 43-91; Commerc. Relat., Flagg's Rapt,. 579-92, iv. 523, 531; Fossey, Mexique, 261-2; Viele's Following the Drum, 197-217; Charnay, Cités et Ruines, 232-3; Doc. Diplom. Present, por el Gob. Españ., 1-262; Soc. Mex. Geog. Bolet., vii. 135, ix. 177; Democr. Rev, i. 489; Vargas, Constit. Est. Puebla, 1-32; Froebel's Cent. Am., 390-1; Loiza, Viet. Xuchitepec, 1-136; Doc. Intercept. Tampico, 1-41; Revilla, Discurso, 1-15; Valadez, Orac. Patriótica, 1-15; Caldaño, Sermon Polit., 1-12; Prieto, Improvis., 1-13; Id., Oration Civ., 1-14; Gevin's Memoirs, 206-15; Vigneaux, Mex., 284; Gagern, Apelac. de los Mex., 18-35; Müller, Reisen in Mex., iii. 482-513, 520-3; Montiel y Duarte, Estud. Garant. Indiv., 471; Gallardo, Cuadro est., p. ii.; Id., Breve Reseña, 5-70; Vigil, Ensayo Hist., 1-62, 86-9; El Siglo XIX., series Jan.-Dec. 1853, Aug. 1, 1855, to July 31, 1858, Jan. 15 to Dec. 31, 1861, passim; Ortega (Jesus Gonzalez), Apunt. Biog., 11-52; Conservador (El), Aug. 16-18, 27, etc., 1859; Vivó, Memorias, 171-272; Miscel. ó Sea Colec., ii. 1-4, 30-81; Ahrens, Mex. und Mex. Zust., 91-3; Dunbar's Mex. Papers, 3-18, 43-59, 83-105, 133, 145-8, 173-5; Eco Hispano-Am. (El), Apl. 1, May 15, 31, June 15, Jul. 15, Aug. 15, Sept. 15, Dec. 15, 31, 1854; Jul. 15, 1856; Nov. 15, 30, 1857; Feb. 15, Mch. 31, May 1, Aug. 31, Sept. 30, Oct. 31, Nov. 30, Dec. 15, 1858; 1859-61, passim; Guerrero, Bolet. Ofic., June 9, 1854; Möllhausen, Tagebuch, 478-83; Correo del Pacif. (El), May 13, 1868; Guzman, Cuatro Palab., 3-21; Mier y Terán, Apuntes Biog., 8-13; Flint's Mex. under Max., 27-36, 165-98; Martinez, El Pontificado, 113-14; Id., Sinóp. Hist. Revol. Mex., i. 175-6, 196-212, 275; Defensa, Manifest. Arzob. y Obispos, 1-95; Voz de Méj. (La), May 16, 1863; Cabalfero, Hist. Aim., 23-38; Juram. Constit., Caso de Cone, sobre, 1-32; Interv. Europ. en Méj., Alg. Indicac., 1-27; Lassepas, Baja Cal., 246; Wilson's Mex., its Peasants, etc., 136-7, 398-402; Wapäiaus, Mex. und C. Amer., 124-32; Zac., Mem., 1871, 5-6; Villareal, Parte Ofic.; Tylor's Anahuac, 19-20, 286, 329-30; Zerecero, Rev. Mex., 528-9; Id., Observac., 1-53; Vallejo, Col. Doc. Mex., i. no. 32; Zavala, Rev. Mex., ii. 179-80; Oaj., Mem., 1858, 2-9, and annexes 1-7, 38; Id., Mem., 1861, 2-15; Guerra España con Méx., 1-52; Cea (Rus de), Observ. Interv. Europ., 1-183; Estrada y Zenea, Manual Gobern., 165-314; Domenech, L'Empire Mex., 25; Id., Jour d'un Miss., 382-94; Id., Hist, du Mex., ii. 242-412; Masson, Olla Podrida, 421-31, 453-9, 673-5; Niox, Expéd. du Mex., 9-12, 18, 21, 39-81, 715-32; Niles' Reg., xxxii. 151, xxxviii. 371-2; Berendt, in Smithsonian Rept, 1867, 422-3; Apunt. Def. Gen. Echeagaray, 3-62; Puebla, Parte Gen.; Harp. Mthly Mag., xii. 118, xiv. 117, 263, 404, xvi. 259, 401, 545, 689, 833, xviii. 114, 401, 544, xix. 695-6, xx. 117, xxi. 259, 693, xxii. 112, xxxvii. 520-5, 667-8; Farragut, Life of, 196-9; Carrera, Vindicac., 1-72, Amigo del Pueblo (El), Feb.-June 1861, passim; Butterfield's U. S. and Mex., 27, app. 147-55; Pacheso, Guerra España con Méx., 1-58; Apunt. Hist. Guerra Europ., 5-171; Zaremba's Merchant, 5-6, 15-16; Progreso (El), May 16, July 4, 18, Nov. 28, 1857; Bolet. de Notic. (El), Dec. 1860 to Apl. 1861, passim; Bolet. Ofic. Est. Sin., June 23, 1871, Jul. 7, 1872, Mch. 1, 8, June 14, 1873; Bandera de Ayutla (La), Jan. 12, 19, Feb. 9, 16, 23, Apl. 12, 19, June 14, 21, July 3, 12, Nov. 29, Dec. 20, 29, 1856; Jan. 3, 17, 24, 31, Feb. 7, 1857; Gac. de Guat., May 20, Sept. 23, Dec. 2, 1853; Apl. 12, May, 5, 12, 19, June 2, Sept. 7, 1854; Nov. 9, 23, 1855; Gac. de Costa Rica, Jan. 21, June 17, Aug. 5, 1854; Costa Rica, Bol. Ofic., Dec. 23, 1854; Gac. de Nic., Dec. 7, 1867; Gac. de Salv., Apl. 3, 1856; Cent. Amer. Papers, i., iv., passim; Hansard's Parl. Deb., cliv. 878, clxi. 339-41, 2065-75, clxii. 250, clxv.-viii., index 'Mex.'; Losada, Cuestion Mex., 6-67; Mackay's Life and Lib., 78-87; Nacion (La), 1856-7, passim; Arellano, tilt. Horas, 20-2; Id., Oracion Mem. Gen. Osollo, 15-21; Id., Mex. en la Frontera, 1-32; Id., Apunt. Camp. Oriente, 1-65, ap. 1-28; Lafragua, Mem. Neg. pend. Mex. y Esp., pp. 347; Id., Negoc. pend. Méx. y Esp., últ. Comun., pp. 15; Estandarte Nac. (El), 1857, passim; Convencion Esp., Contest. Mem., pp. 136; La Cruz, i. 1, ii. 25, 328, 392, 486, 621, iii. 126, iv. 91, 125-6, 251-2, 322, 581-95, v.-vi., passim, vii. 94-5, 354, 415 16, 432, 448, 640; El Grijalva, Mch. 11, 1857; Pinart Coll; Apuntam. sobre Derecho Púb. Ecles., 8-11; Fenix (El), Dec. 28, 1872; Eco de España (El), Aug. 13, 20, Nov. 12, 1883; Jan. 7, 14, 28, Feb. 15, Mch.-Apl. 1854, passim; Peterson's Mil. Heroes, ii. 26; Ceballos y del Conde, De Méjico, 1-126; Cuevas, Informe, 1-114; Nic., Bolet. Ofic., Mch. 11, 1857, Nov. 30, 1861, Feb. 15, Oct. 4, 1862; Rubio, Biog., MS., 546-7; Davis' Glimpses, MS., 260-2; Barreiro, Diario Oper.; Barajas, Persecution, 3-32; Bordonova, Conducta Ob. Puebla, 1-104; Regen, de Sin. (La), May 5, 29, 1869; Lazcano, Manifest., 1-16; Voz de Son (La), Nov. 9, 16, 1855; 1856-9, passim; Cor. de Esp., 1854-5, passim; Luz de let Libertad (La), Colima, Sept. 6, 1859; Estrella de Occidte, June-Dec. 1859, passim; Jan. 4, Feb. 22, Mch. 22, Apl. 12, July 5, Oct. 18, 1861; Jan. 10, 17, Oct. 10, 1862; Feb. 6. 1863; July 19, 1867; Sociedad (La), Sept. 18, Oct. 10-11, 24, 1867; Papeles Varios, xvi. pt 18, xxiv. pt 1, xxv. pts 1. 3, 4, xxvi. pt 9, lviii. pts 11, 12, 19, xcii. pts 1-4, 8, 9, 12, xciii. pts 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 13, 10-17, xciv. pts 3, 5, 6, xcviii. pts 2, 8, 10, cii. pts 1, 3-5, 7-11, 13, ciii. pt 9, cvi. pt 1, cviii. pt 9, ex. pt 3, cxv. pt 1, cxxi. pt 1, cxxvi. pt 14, cxxxv. pt 3, ccxxiv. pt 11, ccxxvii. pt 1, ccxxviii. pt 4; Haro, Á sus Compat., 1-43; Ocampo, Espos., 1-24; Id., Mis. Quince Dias de Minist.; Payno, Lettre, 3-67; Id., Mem. Rev. Dic., 1-137; Id., Cuentas, Gastos, etc., 600-1, 749-58, and i.-xxxvi.; Id., Méx. y Guest. Finan., 99-138, 313-46; Id., Conv. Espagnole, 1-71, and i.-xxviii.; Id., Cartel sobre Asuntos Méx., 21-70; Id., Defensa, 1-15; Id., Méx. y el Sr. Embaj.; Juarez, Biog. del Ciud., 12-13, 17-34, 40-8; Vega (Plácido), Ligera Reseña, 9, 13-15; Id., Doc., iii. 705; Portilla, Episodio Hist., 1-204; Id., Méjico en 1856 y 1857, 32, 54-60, 96, 109-60, 229-40, 245-51, 288-300, 310-49; Garza y Ballesteros, Pastorales; Id., Contestac., 1-54; Santa Anna, Correspond, recogida, 1-20; Id., Á sus Compatr., 1-20; Id., Sueldo del Contest., 1-13; Id., Manif., 1-24; Munguia, Circular, 1-28; Id., Sermon, 140; Miranda, Aly. Reflex. Guest. Paz, 1-22; Alvarez, Manif., 1-71; Id., A sus Conciud, 33-55, 68-70; Atristain, Espos., 1-60; DegoUado (Santos), Reseña, 1-39; Elguero, Alegato, 1-60; Pardo, Informe, 1-24; Carrillo, El Orígen de Belice; Comonfort, La Politica de, 1-30; Id., Manif., 1-118; Id., Manifesto del Gob., 96-119, 168-84, 207-8; Id., Defence of Policy, 1-24; Ferrer y Couto, Cuest. de Mex., 23-48; Id., Cuest. Mex., Ven. y Am. Gen., passim; Abbot's Mex. and U. S., 116-40, 183-6, 283-310, 369-77; Bustamantc, Ensayo, 26-38, 163-9, 103-5; Diaz, Biog., MS., 432, 440-3; Hernandez, Estad. Mej., 55-6; Cong. Globe, 1853-4, 2234, 2258; 1859-60, 636, 1444; Buenrostro, Hist. Prim. Cong. Const., passim; Hist. Segundo Cong. Const., passim; Arroniz, Tratado Mac-Lane; Arrangoiz, Méj., ii. passim, iii. 3-85, 180; Derecho Intern. Mex., 1st pt, 258-83, 333-50, 660-99; 2d pt, 169-75, 213-29, 247-53, 321-44; 3d pt, 5-19, 324-5, 542-3, 695-706, 826-8, 903-68, 1154-63.
- ↑ On 29th April. Diario de Avisos, May 27, July 1, 1859.
- ↑ Diez de Bonilla impartially details the relations between the two countries since Zuloaga s occupancy of the executive chair at the capital, whose government the U. S. minister, Forsyth, had at first recognized. He then alleges that Forsyth proposed the cession to the U. S., for a pecuniary consideration, of a large portion of Mexican territory, as well as an irrevocable privilege of passage through the isthmus of Tehuantepec. Forsyth's proposals being rejected, he broke off relations, and his government supported him in it. He concludes that the recognition of Juarez government by the U. S. is intended to give it legitimacy and authority that it may aid them to despoil Mexico of her territory. McLane, in a note to Minister Ocampo of the 26th of April, denies Bonilla's charges, adding that his government looked on Juarez as the legal and de facto authority recognized by four fifths of the states and a large portion of the citizens; which was particularly the case in the seaports on both seas, and in the five or six Mexican states contiguous to the U. S. as well as in those of the south through which U. S. citizens have the right by treaty to trade. Archivo Mex., Col. Ley., iv. 25-35; Dublan and Lozano, Leg. Mex., viii. 669; Ferrer, Cuest. de Méx. Ven. Amer. Gen., 429, 438-42.
- ↑ Ocampo dubs Bonilla's statements hypocritical; the loss of territory under the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, being caused by the stupid course of the conservatives, and the sale of Mesilla being the act of the imprudente Sr Bonilla.'
- ↑ Diaz, Datos Biog., MS., 440-3.
- ↑ The correspondence between the two men on this plan was intercepted by the liberals, according to Degollado's circular of May 20th to the governor. Árchivo Mex., Col. Ley., iv. 38.
- ↑ Diario de Avisos, July 12, 1859; Méx., Mem. Hacienda, 1870, 1059.
- ↑ This document was issued at Chapultepec on the 12th of July, and published in Mexico on the same day and the 13th. Diario de Avisos, July 13, 19, 20, 1859.
- ↑ It was passed with the unanimous approval of the ministers, all of whom countersigned it. In the preamble the clergy are accused of being the promoters of the war; of their open rebellion against the legitimate authority representing the national sovereignty; and also of their wasting away the funds intrusted to their care for pious purposes in supporting the fratricidal strife, and all for the sole purpose of rendering themselves independent of the civil authority. The law confiscates all ecclesiastical property, excepting churches and their contents. All convents of friars, and religious brotherhoods or congregations, are suppressed, and no new ones are to be established. Existing nunneries are allowed to continue, but all under the exclusive jurisdiction of the respective diocesan. Nuns quitting their convents to return to secular life are to be reimbursed at once the money they took with them as dower to the convents. Those who took no dower are to be paid $500, and to cover such claims and the requirements of public worship, four million dollars are appropriated from the general fund. Archivo Mex., Col. Ley., iv. 82-114; Méx., Cód. Reforma, 145-60; Diaz, Datos Biog., MS., 432.
- ↑ Passed respectively July 23, 28, 31, and August 3, 1859. Méx., Cód. Reforma, 161-8S; Archivo Mex., Col. Ley., iv. 116-32, 136-60; Dublan and Lozano, Leg. Mex., viii. 705. x on the manner of carrying out the laws on civil status and cemeteries, lays much stress on the need of the state governments providing decent cemeteries; he lays serious charges at the door of a portion of the parish priests for refusing Christian burial to the indigent who could not pay the church dues, as well as to the exconmmunicated, which was done with the remains of the distinguished citizens Pedraza and Farías. On the first point he says: 'La sórdida é insensible avaricia del clero, la repugnante y bárbara frialdad con que algunos de sus miembros tratan á la pobre viuda o al desvalido huérfano. . .el increible pero cierto cinismo con que dicen cómetelo, á quien necesitaría-ayuda y consuclo.' Archivo Mex., Col. Ley., iv. 163-72.
- ↑ The execution of the law encountered an energetic resistance on the part of the clergy, the archbishop and his suffragans preaching and writing against Minister Ocampo in his circular of August 6th, it. Padre Miranda published a pamphlet. Even a number of liberals disapproved of the enactment.
- ↑ Suppressed the board of public credit; issued new bonds to the amount of eighty millions, to exchange them for a certain class, of claims with a premium of from five to eleven per centum on the face of the bond; established a class of bonds without interest; and laid an impost of thirty millions on the departments and territories, laborers and others of the poor class, and the internal trade being left unencumbered; the interior custom-houses were to be used only as warehouses; and foreign merchandise was to pay duties at the place of consumption. Rivera, Gob. de Méx., ii. 564-5; Diario de, Avisos, July 20, 1859.
- ↑ On their publication at Zacatecas by Gonzalez Ortega there was a riot, in which many were killed and wounded.
- ↑ Notwithstanding which, a conspiracy having been discovered in Sept., the parties implicated were executed. But it seems that in August he had pardoned a number of political prisoners. El Eco Hisp.-Am., Oct. 31, 1859; Diario de Avisos, Aug. 17, 1859.
- ↑ The cathedral was reopened, and a te deum chanted. Religion was again ascendent.
- ↑ Some reactionists' houses were stoned. Morelia was left without horses or money, Marquez having drained it of $60,000 within a few days.
- ↑ The few remaining church bells with which the reaction had been hailed were now brought to the ground, and religion was again at a discount.
- ↑ The ayuntamiento presented him a magnificent bâton, on the gold head of which was an inscription in memory of his victory at Tacubaya. A te deum formed also a part of the programme.
- ↑ It was in August. Diario de Avisos, Aug. 25, 1859.
- ↑ Miramon told Degollado, on leaving him, that the liberals would be defeated before the expiration of twenty-four hours. The cannonading began at 7 o'clock. At 9 the liberals attacked the enemy's left flank, sustained by Mejía's brigade. The reactionists were likewise assailed on the right and in the centre, and being defeated at the latter point, were in danger of losing the battle, when Miramon made a simultaneous effort, commanding the centre in person, which turned the tide. Although the liberals fought desperately, it was all over at eleven o'clock. Doblado and Arteaga, with about 1,000 men, fled to Morelia, where new forces were raised. Degollado, arrived alone at Guanajuato, in the night of the 14th, and the next day started for San Luis Potosí, whither some of the scattered liberal troops found their way.
- ↑ Rivera, Hist. Jalapa, v. 260-2; Id., Gob. de Méx., ii. 566; Archivo Mex., Col. Ley., iv. 38-9; Diario de Avisos, Nov. 15, 18, 19, 24, 26, 1859; La Estrella de Occid., Aug. 12, Nov. 25, Dec. 2, 9, 1859.
- ↑ It was finally shipped at San Blas on the British man-of-war Amethyst.
- ↑ Marquez had been angry because many of his troops had been taken from him. He wanted each general to do his part. 'De lo contrario,' he said in one of his despatches which was intercepted, 'se perderá el gobierno, y_nos llevará á todos en su caida.' Marquez, Manif., 1-42; Diario de Avisos, Dec. 12, 1859; Rivera, Hist. Jalapa, v. 264-5. It seems, however, that Miramon's visit to Guadalajara on that occasion had been mainly caused by the attempt of Marquez to proclaim Santa Anna president. See Miramon's letter to Maximilian at Querétaro, in Zamacois, Hist. Méj., xviii. 1022-3.
- ↑ La Opinion de Sinaloa, Jan. 29. 1860.
- ↑ It granted the U. S. or their citizens the right of transit ad perpetuam by three great highways across the Mexican republic, namely: 1. By railway or other means of communication across the isthmus of Tehuantepec from ocean to ocean; 2. By railway from some point on the Rio Grande across the states of Tamaulipas, Coahuila, and Nuevo Leon, Durango, and Sinaloa, to the port of Mazatlan on the Pacific; 3. By railway from the territory of Arizona across the state of Sonora to Guaymas in the gulf of California. It granted also, in connection with that right of transit, the following privileges: To establish warehouses at the termini of all those roads; to navigate the waters communicating with them; to transport effects and merchandise from Arizona or California, or more distant points, to other parts of the U. S. free of duty, through all and each of said routes, whatsoever might be their class or place of production or manufacture. Such goods might be warehoused, paying only cartage and storage, and no duties unless imported into Mexico for consumption. A large number of U. S. manufactures or productions might be imported into Mexico at the termini of the several transit routes on the basis of perfect reciprocity; the congress of the U. S. to determine whether the goods were to be admitted free of duty, or pay a fixed rate. Art. 8 gave the U. S. the right of conveying troops and military supplies across the republic of Mexico by the Sonora and Tehuantepec routes, as if they were Mexican troops, etc. Art. 9 authorized the U. S. to protect, by force of arms if necessary, all these transit routes, if Mexico failed to do so. Art 10. guaranteed freedom of religion and of worship to citizens of the U. S. in Mexico, whether in temples or private houses. Art. 11 declared that no forced loan should ever be levied on U. S. citizens. To compensate Mexico for the import duties she thus deprived herself of, the U. S. agreed to pay her four million dollars, of which sum two millions were to be retained to cover claims of U. S. citizens against Mexico. There was also a convention to enforce treaty stipulations, and to maintain order and security in the territory of the republics of Mexico and the U. S., stipulating that, in consideration of the disordered state of the frontier, the forces of the two republics might act in concert and coöperation to enforce the stipulations of their treaties, if the lives or property of the citizens of one of them were imperilled, and their government unable to protect them. Rivera, Gob. de Méx., ii. 599-600; Id., Hist. Jalapa, v. 239-40, 269-75; Diario de Avisos, Jan. 9, 1860; Zamacois, Hist. Méj., xv. 337-42, Domenech, Hist. du Méx., ii. 312-14.
- ↑ The treaty was deemed by the European press of serious import for Mexico if it ever went into operation. The London Times expressed the belief that the country would virtually become in a short time an appendage of the U. S. The U. S. papers manifested great surprise at the magnitude of the concessions made by Mexico for so small a sum as four million dollars, when twelve years before the U. S. had offered fifteen millions for the transit across Tehuantepec, and later paid ten millions for the Gadsden purchase.
- ↑ A convention for the adjustment of Spanish claims made by Santa Anna's administration. Méx., Derecho Intern., 1st pt, 409-14; Córtes, Diario Senado, i. no. 8, 65, no. 9, 76, ii. no. 95, 1124.
- ↑ On two grounds: 1st. Its injustice; 2d. Its execution by persons having no authority to bind the republic. Méx., Derecho Intern., 2d pt, 247-53; Dublan and Lozano, Leg. Mex., viii. 734-6; Archivo Mex., Col. Ley, iv. 243-50; Lefêvre, Doc. Ofic. Maximiliano, i. 27-8.
- ↑ Arrangoiz, Méj., ii. 362-70; Rivera, Gob. de Méx., ii. 570.
- ↑ Miguel Lerdo de Tejada became minister of the treasury, Dec. 22, 1859; Ignacio de la Llave, of government, Dec. 14th; José de Empáran, of fomento, Jan. 21, 1860; José Gil de Partearroyo, of war, Jan. 10, 1860; and Santos Degollado, of relations, Jan. 23, 1860. Méx., Mem. Hacienda, 1870, 1055-7. Ocampo's resignatien was owing to his dislike of Lerdo on account of his political record; in fact, they hated one another with a cordial hatred. Rivera, Hist. Jalapa, v. 283.
- ↑ Marin and his officers acting under commissions that had been cancelled for their desertion to a foreign country. Archivo Mex., Col. Ley., iv. 335-6.
- ↑ Much correspondence passed from March 12th to Apr. 21st between Miramon's government and the legations of England and France as well as Captain Aldham. Diario de Avisos, Apr. 20, 1860. The proposed assembly was to be composed of men that had filled public trusts from 1822 to 1853.
- ↑ The casualties on both sides were 40; one of the wounded was La Llave.
- ↑ The Spanish legation at Washington also protested, and demanded the restitution of the Marqués de la Habana, and satisfaction to his flag. Full particulars on this affair may be obtained in Rivera, Gob. de Méx., ii. 572-3, 600; Córtes, Diario Cong., i. ap. 5, no. 4, 30, ii. no. 28, 402-4; U. S. Govt Doc., Cong. 36, Ses. 1, Sen. 9; Diario de Avisos, March 17, 19, 24, Apr. 10-30, May 3, 4; Lefêvre, Le Mexique, 132-59; Zamacois, Hist. Méj., xv. 373-89, 963-73.
- ↑ Their cargoes consisted of 1,000 fourteen-inch bombs, 2 brass mortars, 4,000 stand of arms for infantry, and upwards of 60,000 rations. The expenses of the expedition were no less than $300,000, the Marqués de la Habana costing $130,000, and the General Miramon $70,000. Rivera, Hist. Jalapa, v. 301-6; Diario de Avisos, July 10, 14, 23, 1860.
- ↑ It had been agreed that there should be a truce under the guarantee of the U. S., England, France, Spain, and Prussia, who were also to say what was to be done with the treaties entered into with foreign powers by both contending parties. The whole nation was to decide the points at issue. Here was the stumbling-block. Juarez demanded that the constitution of 1837 should be recognized as the supreme law, and that every act done should be pursuant to its requirements. Miramon could see in this only delay in military operations, without any advantage for his party, or the least probability of the civil war coming to an end. The French govt had instructed its minister to attempt a pacification through a national convention, leaving out the religious question, as the English proposition had been unpalatable to the conservatives. Juarez would not trust European mediators, whose partiality for the reaction had been marked.
- ↑ It was calculated that 5,000 balls and 500 bombs were thrown, and that the besieged hurled about 6,000 grenades.
- ↑ It is understood that Vega lost 1,000 men, 18 pieces of artillery, and 30 wagons.
- ↑ Cobos, with 3,000 men, had withstood double that number; he made an able defence, aided by Trejo, the man who made the gallant fight at Perote.
- ↑ This was one of the most interesting episodes of the three years' war. Uraga's forced retirement was not much deplored by the liberals, his heart not being in their cause. x 1857, for Juarez' government, or Degollado's authority. Rivera, Gob. de Méx., ii. 577-8: Gonzalez Ortega, Apunt. Biog., 44-6; Diario de Avisos, May 29, 30, June 5-23, July 18, 1860; Arrangoiz, Méj., ii. 364.
- ↑ Whatever the British officers intended, they certainly aided the reactionists.
- ↑ He lost 300 killed, 500 wounded, 4 cannon, all his ammunition, and He had never cared much for the constitution of other supplies. Cuadro Sinóp., 4, 5, in Vega, Doc., MS., 4; Vega, Lig. Reseña, 14-15, in Vega, Doc., iii. no. 765.
- ↑ El Mensajero Esp., May 5, 1860.
- ↑ It is said the latter attacked against Degollado's express orders.
- ↑ Ortega had the enemy's dead officers buried in Aguascalientes with military honors. The others he released on parole; but shortly after their return to Mexico they were serving under Miramon, who had shown little interest for them. Gonzalez Ortega, Apunt. Biog., 35-9.
- ↑ The reactionists under Alfaro experienced a reverse in Los Cerritos at the hands of I. M. Carbajal and F. Antillon.
- ↑ The grounds of their decision were: that the nation's welfare demanded it; that it was a necessity and the public will; that the absence of the one did not imply the cessation of the other. Rivera, Gob. de Méx., ii. 579; Diario de Avisos, June 16, Aug. 16, 1860.
- ↑ It was imprudent to face an army three or four times larger than his own. He lost all his artillery, and only his personal courage saved him from capture. Arrangoiz, Méj., ii. 366. According to the Opinion de Sinaloa of Sept. 11, and La Estrella de Occidente of Sept. 28, 1860, besides the artillery and trains, he lost upwards of 2,000 prisoners, among them many officers of all ranks, one of whom was Tomás Mejía. All the prisoners were released, and a safe-conduct given them. Generals Cruz, Hernandez, and Pacheco were among the reactionary officers that perished in the battle. Gonzalez Ortega, Apunt. Biog., 41-3; Diario de Avisos, Aug. 13-20, Sept. 7, 12, 25, Oct. 4, 1860.
- ↑ He had been a public servant since 1822 or 1823, beginning his career in the judiciary and continuing it in the financial department. Between 1841 and 1851 he held high positions in the judiciary, and in the latter year he was retired on full pay, having served thirty years. At the beginning of the three years' war he was presiding over the national supreme court, and had been retained in that post.
- ↑ The vote of the junta was published by edict; there was the regular te deum, the archbishop receiving Miramon at the door of the cathedral. At the felicitations, Miramon said it was not becoming noble souls to be cast down by misfortune: 'Animo, señores, ya triunfará la causa santa que defendemos; ya se pondrá Méjico en canino de ocupar un lugar distinguido entre las naciones cultas'; and so she is certainly doing, but not by the road Miramon and his political coöperators were misleading her.
- ↑ Juan N. Almonte, then abroad, minister of relations and president of the cabinet; Teodosio Lares, Teófilo Marin, Isidro Diaz, Antonio Corona, and Gabriel Sagaceta, holding the other portfolios. Lares was also placed in charge pro tem. of the department of relations. Méx., Mem. Hacienda, 1870, 1060.
- ↑ Oajaca was taken by the liberals, which released a large number of men of their political creed who had been confined there. The same thing had occurred at Guadalajara.
- ↑ On his arrival he disclaimed any intention to meddle with the dissensions of the country. In a private letter to Juarez he expressed sympathy for Mexico in her distressed condition, manifesting his wish to go to the capital to fulfil 'mi mision, que no tiene por objeto el dañarle ni hostilizarle. He then asked for a pass through the region under Juarez' control, and for an escort for himself and his suite of fourteen persons, which requests were courteously acceded to the next day. After visiting McLane and De Gabriac, who was on his way to Europe after laying by in five years the snug sum of $150,000, he went on to Jalapa, where the authorities extended every mark of consideration. He arrived in Mexico on or about the 1st of June, and was received with high honor. Arrangoiz, Méj., ii. 302-4; Rivera, Hist. Jalapa, v. 326; Córtes, Diario Congreso, i. ap. 5, no. 4, 17-20, 50-1; Lefévre, Mex. et l'Interv., 159-62; El Mensajero Esp., June 8, 1860.
- ↑ Glowing descriptions of the whole affair may be found in Diario de Avisos, Aug. 24, 1860; Córtes, Diario Congreso, i. ap. 5, no. 4, 21-2.
- ↑ Gonzalez Ortega, whose forces had advanced as near as Cuautitlan, addressed a circular to the foreign representatives on the 24th of August, apprising them that he had orders to take the city by force of arms, and that his government would not be responsible for injuries and damages suffered by foreign residents. Córtes, Diario Congreso, i. ap. 5, no. 4, 22-3.
- ↑ Other reasons given were, that the season rendered military operations in the valley impracticable. There was, besides, a respectable reactionary force in Guadalajara which it was expedient to destroy before marching on Mexico. Gonzalez Ortega, Apunt. Biog., 43.
- ↑ The liberals experienced another disaster at Toluca. Having heard that Miramon was coming upon them in force, they abandoned the place; but as the enemy made no movement, they returned to meet with a surprise, losing as prisoners many of their chief officers.
- ↑ It was done on the 9th of Sept., 1860, by order of Degollado and Doblado. It was an unfortunate step, as it created much alarm among the merchants; besides, the funds belonged mostly to foreigners. The foreign merchants hitherto had favored the liberal cause; but the affair at Laguna Seca made enemies of them, the most excited being the Spaniards, French, and Germans, who did not get back their money. Arrangoiz, Méj., ii. 370; Payno, Мех. у Сuest. Financ., 103-16; Мéх., Мmm. Насіenda, 1870, 530-1; Rivera, Gob. de Méx., ii. 582-3. The money was distributed at Lagos, notwithstanding the protests of the foreign consuls. However, Degollado returned them $100,000, promising that the balance would be paid after the triumph of the liberal cause. Juarez on the 24th of October decreed the repayment of that sum out of the proceeds of convents, for the sale of which his decree afforded greater facilities than the original law of July 13, 1859. That decree was also published in Mexico by his order, Jan. 10, 1861. Another decree of Dec. 17, 1860, applied to the payment of claims for damages caused by the existing war not only the sums provided for on the 24th of Oct., but also further amounts out of the funds proceeding from sales of national property, and out of the proceeds from customs at Tampico. Méx., Cód. Reforma, 202-3, 211-13.
- ↑ A letter dated July 31, 1860, from No. 9 Rue Roqueplan, Paris, and attributed to Juan N. Almonte, was published by the newspaper La Revolucion on the 7th of October; it says: This point [that of mediation] being arranged in Madrid, I forthwith returned to this city, where I prevailed on the French government to invite Prussia, so that France, Spain, England, and Prussia are agreed to offer the mediation. Mons. de Saligny has been already despatched, and in the early days of the coming month he will leave here for Mexico, via the United States, to arrive in Vera Cruz early in Sept. On his arrival in Mexico he will find there Señor Pacheco, Herr Wagner, and perhaps Sir Charles Wyke. . .Saligny has orders to act without waiting for Sir Charles Wyke; so that the representations of Spain, France, and Prussia being in accord, . . . the mediation may be officially tendered. The mediation being accepted, a general armistice will be agreed upon, and then will be determined the mode of assembling an extraordinary congress to reconstruct the nation. . .In the event of Juarez and company refusing to accept the mediation, which I do not think they would refuse now, it seems to me that the powers aforesaid, specially Spain and France, will adopt other more efficacious means to force the red party to listen to reason. The U. S. have been invited to cooperate on behalf of the mediation; but they have refused to lend their support, though opposing no obstacle, which is quite an advantage, 'pues asi va la Europa amansándolos, y mas tarde vendrá la intervencion.'
- ↑ In the latter part of 1860 there were five Spanish war ships opposite Vera Cruz, that had gone to back the demand for the return of the Spanish bark Concepcion, condemned as a good prize by the admiralty court at Vera Cruz, as also a demand for the suspension of the decree to stop payment of the money stipulated to be paid under the international conventions, which decree had been issued because the government had not the means to meet the obligations. These Spanish vessels might have used force, and thus the reactionary party would have again proudly lifted its head; but there were also seven or eight U. S. men-of-war moving along the coast, that might have taken a part in the performances.
- ↑ Matthews, the British representative, left Mexico after he lost all hope of bringing about an arrangement between the belligerents. Juarez pleaded that the constitutional government could accede to nothing whatever not grounded on the constitution of 1857, from which he derived his authority, and whereby he exercised the executive functions. Córtes, Diario Congreso, i. ap. 5, no. 4, 24-40. Degollado essayed a plan of his own, supposed to have been influenced by the British minister, Matthews, which he formed at Lagos and entitled Plan de Pacificacion, to bring about a compromise with those who were dissatisfied with the constitution of 1857. He proposed that a congress should within three months decree a constitution, on the basis of the reform laws; that the diplomatic corps together with delegates of the two rival parties should name a president, who was to be neither Miramon nor Juarez. The plan was sent to Gonzalez Ortega, then besieging Guadalajara, who, like all other chief officers before whom he laid it, rejected it with indignation. It was almost inconceivable that a man who had been such a steadfast champion of the legal government should have, at the very time when its triumph was almost certain, turned round to modify its principles and set up another standard. Juarez deplored as well as became indignant at such a stultification, and at once, Oct. 17th, removed Degollado from the command which he held only nominally, for Ortega had been for some time the virtual commander-in-chief of the forces in the north. Archivo Mex., Col. Ley., iv. 377-80; Juarez, Biog. del Ciud., 31-2; Baz, Vida de Juarez, 185-7; Dublan and Lozano, Leg. Mex., viii. 754-5, 762; Córtes, Diario Congreso, i. ap. 5, no. 4, 33-7; Arrangoiz, Méj., ii. 380.
- ↑ It was rumored that he was a man of liberal opinions, and it was held to be certain that he would act in accord with the U. S., having had conferences with the government at Washington, and obtained its consent to join the tripartite convention to establish a provisional government in Mexico, to which object McLane had been directed to coöperate.
- ↑ That day the besiegers had taken Santo Domingo and El Cármen. Castillo made an arrangement with Zaragoza, which was approved by Gonzalez Ortega, by which both belligerent forces were to retire in opposite directions, the besieged toward the west, the besiegers toward the east, till they were twelve leagues beyond the city; meantime Castillo's artillery would be left in the town. Commissioners from both parties were then to arrange the terms for the incorporation of the reactionary forces into the constitutional army to march together upon the capital, and if they could come to no agreement, the armies were to go back to their positions, and hostilities should be resumed. This truce gave the constitutional army an immense advantage, as will be seen in the text. Gonzalez Ortega, Apunt. Biog., 44-6; Rivera, Gob. de Méx., ii. 583-4. A portion of the reactionary forces joined Doblado and Antillon; others, violating the armistice, went with Castillo to Tepic, and many disbanded themselves. Rivera, Hist. Jalapa, v. 360.
- ↑ It was said that Marquez had 7,000, and his adversary fell upon him with at least 10,000; and that the former lost all his ammunition, baggage, and trains, and 2,000 or 3,000 prisoners.
- ↑ Diario de Avisos, Nov. 6, 1860. From the time of the second failure to capture Vera Cruz, the reactionists met with a series of reverses, whereby they lost all the departments excepting Mexico and Puebla.
- ↑ Marquez had asked Whitehead, their agent, for a loan from these funds, and had been refused, the agent pleading that he had no authority to accede to the request. Zamacois, Hist. Méj., xv. 1039-42.
- ↑ He moved slowly, strengthening his ranks, and replacing the military supplies expended in Jalisco. He wanted to besiege Mexico with 25,000 men, and expected to reach the valley on December 15th.
- ↑ The Spanish minister stated to his government that Miramon had resolved so to act before he started to assail Toluca. He also said that among Degollado's captured papers was a plan of attack against Mexico, in the handwriting of Matthews, the British charge. Arrangoiz, Mej., ii. 371-2; Archivo Mex., Col. Ley., v. 4; Córtes, Diario Cong., ap. 5, no. 4, 90; Diario de Avisos, Dec. 17, 1860.
- ↑ Arrangoiz, Méj., ii. 372, would have it believed that Miramon's men were most of them demoralized, which cannot be true, judging from their prowess in the battle.
- ↑ Domenech says: 'Miramon se multiplie; lui, ses généraux Marquez, Negrete, Cobos et autres font des prodiges de valeur.' Hist. du Mexique, ii. 346.
- ↑ Gonzalez Ortega, Apunt. Biog., 47-50; Boletin de Notic., Dec. 25, 1860,
- ↑ However, he cheerfully acceded to foreigners arming themselves for their own protection till the government could afford it to them. Córtes, Diario Congreso, i. ap. 5, no. 4, 93-l; Arrangoiz, Méj., ii. 374-6.
- ↑ This assistance rendered by the French navy to Miramon called for and gave rise to a warm correspondence on the part of the Mexican government Jan. 7, 1861; Córtes, Diario Congreso, i. ap. 5, no. 4, 90; Córtes, Diario Senado, i. no. 12, 128; Archivo Mex., Col. Ley., v. 11-16; Zamacois, Hist. Méj., xv. 520-2.
- ↑ A tragic and bloody episode sealed the end of the reactionary rule. Among the unfortunate victims was Vicente Segura, who had been a forcible writer in favor of the reaction as chief editor of the Diario de Avisos, so often quoted in connection with the last three years' events.
- ↑ Dated Jan. 10th. After congratulating the nation on the success of the constitutional régime over so many difficulties, he solemnly pledges himself to surrender the executive authority to the elect of the people. as he had considered it a deposit intrusted to his responsibility. Archivo Mex., Col. Ley., v. 23-6; Dublan and Lozano, Leg. Mex., ix. 9; Córtes, Diario Congreso, i. ap. 5, no. 4, 93.