ELLIOT TO KENNEDY 167
[Enclosure.] Copy. Charles Elliot. Confidential Galveston, Feby. 15th 1846 Sir,.
If the Master of any British Vessel (arriving at this Port after the Custom House Authorities appointed by the Government of the Republic have retired from the performance of their duties) should apply to you for advice, you will guide yourself by these instructions.
You will counsel him to proceed to the Custom House accompanied by the Mate of the vessel admonished to be heedful of any conversation that may pass at that place between the Chief person engaged in the Collection of Customs duties and himself. If he should find that he is permitted to enter under any other authority than that of some existing revenue or Navigation law of the Republic of Texas, you will advise him to state that he had arrived here to trade under the treaty of Commerce and Navigation between Her Majesty The Queen of Great Britain and Ireland and the Republic of Texas, signed at London November 13th 1840, and whereof ratifications were exchanged at London June 28th 1842, that he claims the rights privileges, liberties, favours, immunities and exemptions secured to Her Majesty's Subjects trading in Texas under that Treaty, and enters protest against all proceedings taken, or to be taken contrary thereto, as respects the Ship of which he is Master, and the goods of her lading.
You will further advise him, as soon as any duties shall be charged against the Ship or Cargo under the authority of any other than some existing law of the Republic of Texas to pay the same, and extend his protest, causing it to be served upon the Chief person engaged in the Collection of such duties. For your more complete guidance herein I forward a Memorandum of the particulars which it may be needful to specify in the protest, together with any others which may occur on the occasion.
You will govern yourself in all matters of Commerce and Navigation affecting British Subjects at your Consulate who may apply to you for advice, upon the understanding that the stipulations of the treaties in existence between Her Majesty and this Republic remain in the same position as if Texas had continued an independent Power, but you will carefully observe that this view is confined to the subject matter of those treaties, and offer no objection or remark upon any other change of authority or jurisdiction.
In case of any refusal upon the part of the persons in authority at your Consulate to extend to you all the rights, privileges, and immunities accorded to Officers in your station by the law of Nations, and stipulated in the 7th Article of the treaty of Commerce and Navigation of the 13th November 1840, you will report the particulars to Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs; but you are particularly cautioned to conduct yourself with the utmost circumspection, and to avoid as far as may be possible consistently with a due discharge of your duty, any discussion or correspondence with the persons in Authority at Your Consulate.
Till you are further instructed you will be pleased to forward all letters or despatches which may reach you to my address to the care of H. M. Consul, New Orleans.
Charles Elliot. P.S. You will be so good as to hand the accompanying letter to the Commander of any of Her Majesty's Ships who may arrive at Galveston during my absence. C. E. To Wm Kennedy, Esqr. H. M. Consul. Galveston.
MEMORANDUM BY ELLIOT 168
Memorandum respecting particulars of protest adverted to in Captain Elliot's despatch to Consul Kennedy, dated Galveston Feby. 15th 1846.
The Ship's name, tonnage, owners, British port of registry, last British port cleared from, general description of Cargo, to what place or places bound, the names of any ports She has touched at during her voyage, date of arrival in the Port of Galveston, statement of communication with the persons declaring themselves to be engaged in the collection of revenue their proceedings, amounts of money charged by, and paid to them on account of the Ship or Cargo, and finally Master and Mate to protest as well as any Consignees of Cargo if they see fit on their own behalf and on the part and behalf of the Owners and all others interested or in any respect concerned in the Ship or her Cargo against.
(Specify here, the name and declared offices of the chief person and any other person or persons engaged in the Collection of the required duties or charges, or put on board the ship by the authority of the Collector.)
And against all others whom it doth or shall concern for all losses, damages, costs, expences and prejudices actually suffered or which may hereafter ensue by reason of charging upon and requiring from the said ship, or the goods of her lading in the Port of Galveston in Texas any duty of Customs or imports under any authority other than that of some existing law of the Republic of Texas, and for all and every violation, as respects the said ship and her Cargo, of the stipulations of the treaty of Commerce and Navigation between the Queen of Great Britain and Ireland and the Republic of Texas signed at London November 13th 1840, and whereof Ratifications were exchanged at London Juen 28th 1842.
(Signed) Charles Elliot. [Endorsed.] In Captn Elliot's of Feb. 15/46.
ELLIOT TO ABERDEEN 169
No 14. Galveston, Feby. 16th 1846. My Lord,
By information from Corpus Christi of the 14th Inst. we learn from what I think may be taken to be an authentic source that the American force there has been ordered to advance upon the Rio Grande as soon as possible. It seems probable that the main body will be directed in the first place upon Point Isabel, and that the Brassos Santiago will also be occupied. These are the avowed objects of the movement, but if any pretext should present itself, I think there can be no doubt that Matamoros will be immediately seized.
In my former despatches I have had the honour to remark to Your Lordship that it seemed to me it would have been proper, on military principles, to keep this small force assembled at some convenient points on the American side of the Sabine, and I feel assured that if that were the case at the present moment, they could be taken to the Mouth of the Rio Grande, and landed there in a much stronger and more effective condition than they are now, much sooner than they can arrive from their present position.
I do not believe that their moveable Column will exceed 3,000 Men, and the health and spirit of the troops must have necessarily suffered considerably from a long and unnecessary exposure in a very ineligible position, on extremely bad water. They could not move before the 1st Proximo, and unless the beach is practicable the whole way, which remains to be ascertained, not before a considerably later period, owing to the condition of the praries. Some uneasiness seemed to be felt respecting a small detachment of dragoons.
Charles Elliot. To the Right Honourable. The Earl of Aberdeen., K. T.
ELLIOT TO ABERDEEN 170
No. 15. Galveston. Feby. 16th. 1846. My Lord,
The Government of this Republic will be dissolved this day, and suffering from a recent attack of indisposition I shall take the liberty to proceed to New Orleans for change of air, and wait there for my next instructions from Her Majesty's Government unless any thing should transpire in the mean time requiring my return to this place.
Charles Elliot. To The Right Honourable The Earl of Aberdeen, K. T.
ELLIOT TO ABERDEEN 171
No. 16. Galveston. February. 16th 1846. My Lord,
Before the dissolution of this Government I think it may be convenient to submit some remarks to Your Lordship on an error which has been prevalent in this Country and in the United States respecting the late negotiations between Mexico and Texas.
In the United States especially it has been generally supposed that it was Mexico which proposed to Texas to acknowledge her independence on the condition that Texas should not Annex herself to that Country in particular, and it was urged that Texas could not have accepted that condition without discredit. Her Majesty's Government are aware that this is a complete mistake in point of fact and form. It was the Government of Texas which proposed, not Mexico, and the proposed condition did not mention the United States. The language was general, and the French Minister at Mexico particularly remarked that that circumstance was important, for a stipulation so shaped could give no just offence in any quarter.
Texas had a right to maintain her separate existence, and it will be admitted that such a course would have been in accordance with her formal declarations to the world, and her pledges, direct and implied, to those Powers, which had only acknowledged it upon the assurance, that she would With that right, and that obligation of self respect, it is not easy to see why she should not offer to make the stipulation in question for peace sake, in the final treaty with Mexico. It would have been justifiable and honourable, and that cannot be said of this repudiation of independence and Nationality. If the people of Texas had been left to their deliberate choice there is ground to believe that they would have ratified the worthier policy; but intrigue, and factitious excitement, and haste prevailed, compassing an act of folly and discredit; which, however, it is only just to repeat that two thirds of the voters of the Country have failed to support at the polls.
The President of the United States in his opening Message to Congress, has fallen into an aggravated degree of misconception on the subject of this condition, deciding that Mexico had no right or authority to prescribe restrictions on the form of Government which Texas might afterwards choose to assume. Without dwelling on this exposition of the right and authority of Mexico to look to her safety with what care she can, it is impossible to miss the observation of her great need to do so; and it is also requisite to come back to the facts of the case in this particular, not distinguishable from President Polk's account of them.
It was Texas that was proposing, not Mexico that was prescribing, and there was no question of form of Government at all, before or after, but of the much more vital consideration to Mexico of who was to be conterminous with her. It is a very inacurate and arbitrary expression of the circumstances of the case, and the motives which influenced Mexico to say that she was prescribing restrictions on the form of Government that Texas might choose to assume. Mexico did no more than accept the exact conditions proposed by the Government of Texas, and execute an additional Act, reserving her rights if those conditions should not be ratified by the people of Texas.
That Act was perhaps superfluous, for the rejection of the Conditions by the Legislature of Texas restored the statu quo, but it is plain that Mexico had a perfect right and some need to provide beyond the possibility of fair question, that her assent to particular conditions offered by Texas was not to be construed into a surrender of a totally different nature and extent, to a third party. If the Act did nothing else, it proved that Mexico had a clear foresight of the pretension and augumentation that might be looked for in the quarter to which the transaction had reference.
Your Lordship will remember that one of the preliminary conditions provided that limits and other conditions should be matter of arrangement in the final treaty. It appears, however, from another part of the Message that the limits of the United States are peacefully extended to the Del Norte already, which expression it is to be apprehended may complicate the difficulty of settlement with Mexico, for in their construction it will be taken to be no more than a formal mode of announcing that the Countries are appropriated, and the treaties violated, though indeed, there is to be no violence for the mere sake of violence. Mexico will hardly consider this to be any thing else than a plain declaration that the dismemberment of their Country has been commenced by the United States, peacefully if possible, violently, if necessary. “Care “will be taken Mr. Donelson writes to Mr. Buchanan on the 11th “June 1845” to throw “the responsibility of aggressive measures on “the Government of Mexico”.
I cannot but remark, My Lord, that the purposes respecting this out lying territory, and the kind of care which has been taken to cast the responsibility of aggressive measures upon Mexico are copiously developed in the Official correspondence lately laid before Congress by President Polk. With that, and the other evidence before the world respecting these affairs it is certainly sanguine to hope that mankind will join in general sentence of condemnation against Mexico for aggressive and wrongful conduct towards the United States if the Mexican Government and people should see fit to defend their Country against what is not less than invasion, because it is called peaceful extension.
Mr. Polk's judgment of the conclusiveness against Mexico of an agreement to acknowledge the independence of Texas, with or without conditions, at once sweeps over broad spaces of latitude and longitude. It involves the conclusion, not only that Mexico has by her own Act (in a directly contrary spirit and letter) surrendered all right to object to the assignment to the United States by the Texians, of the territory in their actual occupation, but that she has forfeited all claim to immense Mexican regions beyond these limits in which the Texians have never yet had a settler, which have always formed a part of other Mexican States, and which are occupied by a Mexican population scarcely less numerous than the population represented in the Texian Legislature. If such decisions prove conclusive against Mexico, their force will not be the force of justice and reason.
In closing this despatch I venture to say that I was prepared for the disclosures, in the correspondence between Messr. Donelson and Buchanan respecting the preliminary treaty acceded to by Mexico. Speaking of it in a letter to Mr. Buchanan (August 16th 1845) Mr Donelson complains that “But for that treaty and the “proclamation which grew out of it, our position on the question “of boundary would have been less embarrassed”.—. And in another letter to the same quarter (July 16th 1845) he was still more explicit upon the obstructions thrown in the way of particular purposes respecting this important point, by the preliminary treaty and the suspension of hostilities proclaimed by the President of Texas. I had for some time been sensible that the disposal of this coveted Mexican territory was the single consideration left of real moment in these affairs, and that it was highly desirable that colourable Texian occupation should not be suddenly obtruded within it, before this Republic formally signified it's willingness to join the North American Confederacy. The Country in the actual occupation of the Texians is of little value in their condition of a State of the Union, possessing Millions of unoccupied acres of better land, or at least of equal fitness for the same products, and incomparably more conveniently situated for Markets.
Neither can the possession of this territory add to the political strength of the United States, for it is almost bereft of the resources which would help that object, having neither eligible harbours, nor easily navigable rivers, nor any other natural elements of Military power. At all events it had been lost to Mexico long since. Your Lordship however is aware that I was informed of the plots in preparation at that very moment for the seizure of the territory which was not lost to her, nominally to the Texian Militia; really by other Agency, and arms and funds. In view of that circumstance, a suspension of hostilities on the part of the Government of Texas was no doubt an object of importance at that conjuncture. Fully alive to the necessity of speed I travelled without resting from Galveston to Washington after my arrival in the “La Peronne”, for I was aware that Mr Donelson would immediately proceed to the same destination, and it was urgent that the acceptation of the preliminaries by Mexico should be communicated to this Government before his arrival there. We met at Houston on my return from seeing the President, and Mr. Donelson must have probably received the proclamation on his way up the Country. This correspondence confirms the impression I entertained and communicated to Mr Bankhead at the time, namely, that the suspension of hostilities by proclamation of this Government had disturbed the fulfilment of dangerous purposes against Mexico.
My share in these transactions has been at once exaggerated, and the source of considerable irritation and complaint in the correspondence here noticed. I shall merely say that I was acting in a sense of duty to Her Majesty's Government, willing to be helpful in effecting a peaceful settlement between Mexico and Texas upon terms of security, honour and advantage to both. But so far as I was entrusted with the execution of these wishes of Her Majesty's Government, it was incumbent upon me to take every proper precaution in my power, that their efforts in the behalf of one of the ostensible principals of this dispute should not facilitate the intentions of a third party to despoil Mexico of vast regions secured to her by treaty, to which Texas had not a shadow of just claim for Herself, and still less, if less were possible, to assign them to the United States. Contiguity between Mexico and the United States on that frontier will be attended with imminent danger to the stability of the first, and the desert nature of the country between the Rio Grande and Nueces make it almost vital to Mexico that those regions should continue to belong to her.
The safest separation between the Countries that circumstances now admit of, may probably be the course of the Nueces from Mouth to source, a right line from that point to the present South West limit of the United States, and thence continued along the present dividing Meridian.
I avail myself of this occasion to forward to Your Lordship the Copy of a Veto Message by General Houston on a Bill which passed both Houses of the Texian Congress at the beginning of his last Administration, extending the frontier of Texas to the Pacific in the parallel of the Mouth of the Rio Grande; which it may probably be one purpose of Mr Slidell's Mission to Mexico to attempt now for the United States. I have alluded to this subject in my former despatches, but have only recently succeeded in procuring a Copy of this Message.
Charles Elliot. To The Right Honourable. The Earl of Aberdeen, K. T.
[Enclosure]. 172 Copy. Charles Elliot. Executive Department. City of Austin. Feby. 1st 1842. To the Honourable the House of Representatives
Impressed as I am with a sense of duty and the true situation of the Country I cannot yield my assent to the Bill “to amend an “Act to define the Boundaries of the Republic of Texas”. I trust your Honourable body will bear with me while I assign my reasons for the course which I feel compelled to adopt.
Texas has heretofore declared by the law of 1836 that her limits should [be] bounded on the West by the principal stream of the Rio Grande to it's source, thence due North to the 42d degree of latitude and the boundary line of the United States. This formed our limits with Mexico, and agreeably to this we have been recognized as independent by the United States, and also by those European Governments with which we have established relations. From these facts it seems to me that until Texas has it in her power to exercise jurisdiction it can be of no possible advantage to her, that she should assert any claim which would subject her to derision, or evince her wish to extend her claim to territory by mere assumption of a right which she might not be able to enforce. The recognized limits of Texas are greater than either her population or resources will enable her at the time to occupy.
To extend our limits according to the provisions of the Bill would embrace a region of Country larger than the United States of the North, and include two thirds of the Republic of Mexico. It would take in portions of the States of Tamaulipas, Coahuila, Durango, Sinaloa, and all of Chihuahua, New Mexico,—Sonora and upper and lower California. It is also but reasonable to calculate that the inhabitants of those vast regions would not number less than ten Millions. It would then appear curious to Nations in amity with us that a people destitute of means to meet their most pressing wants, and numbering less than one hundred thousand, should assume by a declaratory law that they have a right to govern a Country possessing a population of more than thirty to one. Thus far I am inclined to believe other nations would regard the Measure as visionary, or as a legislative jest, inasmuch as it would assume a right which it is utterly impossible to exercise.
But other considerations of a most grave and solemn character impress themselves on my mind.
The mediation of England has been invoked between the Governments of Texas and Mexico, the exercise of which has only been delayed in consequence of the want of the ratification and exchange of Treaties.
This difficulty will however soon cease to exist. So soon as the exchange of ratifications can take place at London there can be no doubt but that the British Minister at Mexico will be authorized to interpose on behalf of Texas; and unless some obstacle should intervene, we may at no distant period anticipate the most favourable result from the Mediation of that Power in our favour. Should the present Measure, however, be adopted and a proposition be submitted to the Mexican Government we cannot expect that this extraordinary assumption of right by Texas will be overlooked in the negotiation, but would present an insuperable barrier not only to our recognition by Mexico, but would annihilate every hope of an amicable adjustment of our differences. The British Minister would not be authorized to enter into any arrangement, but such as would present Texas with the limits avowed at the time of her recognition and declared by her law, Approved 19 December. 1836.
The promulgation of this Bill if it were to become a law, would suspend all action on the part of Great Britain. To assume a right which we cannot exercise would only work evil, and could produce no salutary result. It would be useless in itself. Indeed a proposition of this character is calculated to irritate and arouse the indignation of every man within the limits of Mexico. And whilst we would thus pursue phantoms as profitless as the present is dangerous, our character for policy, sagacity, and forecast would suffer serious detriment.
I need not assure Your Honorable Body of the ardent desire which I entertain for peace and friendly intercouse with all Nations. So long as we are not on amicable terms with Mexico, so long we will suffer hindrance to our prosperity. The constant cry of invasion will be sounded, not only throughout Texas, but throughout all Nations to whom we are known; and while this is the case we may feel confident that emigration will be impeded, if not entirely prevented. From this source we are to draw both population and wealth, and no matter how desirable our soil and climate might be to foreigners, nor how great their anxiety to make our Country their home, it could certainly be no additional inducement to families that Texas should remain in hostile relations with Mexico; which might and would at all times render their situation one of unpleasant excitement, if not of danger.
We may regard Mexicans as we may think proper, but still they are men, and entertain ideas of Nationality and some sense of shame and injury. If then they do, the present project must have a powerful influence upon them. Indignity always inspires feelings of revenge. The very thought of suffering a partition of their Country will give them adhesion, and union may render them more formidable than we have found them in times past. It will at all events arouse their energies, incite them to the last effort, inflict great annoyance upon us, and withdraw the attention of our Citizens from the pursuits and profits of husbandry.
Texas only requires peace to make her truly prosperous and respectable. Peace will bring with it every advantage. All that is needful to secure individual wealth is well directed industry, and the policy that will permit the farmer and the mechanic to employ their labour in peace is the only policy that can establish our Country. Without peace, labour and industry, we must with all the boundless natural advantages of Texas, remain comparatively poor and embarrassed.
The present moment is to my apprehension the most unfortunate of all others for the awakening of this subject.
Our fellow Citizen's taken at Santa Fe, if they still survive, are prisoners in the City of Mexico at the mercy of Mexicans. Every possible means at my command have been employed to obtain their release and restoration to their friends and Country. Should the proposed project reach the Mexican Capital in the character of a legislative act, no earthly interposition can secure their liberation, and I should deem it the most probable of all other events that they would be executed by order of the Authorities of the Country, and should they escape even this, I would apprehend their destruction by the populace. In a Country like Mexico, demagogues are never wanting to excite the fury and stimulate the bad passions of those to whose favour they seek to commend themselves.
I am therefore satisfied that if any measure could produce injury to Texas, and endanger the lives of our noble, generous and brave fellow Citizens, whose cruel captivity we now deplore, it would be the passage of this bill. Surely their circumstances invoke of the honourable Congress calm and careful deliberation.
(Signed) Sam Houston. [Endorsed.] Inclosure in Captain Elliots Despatch No 16 to the Earl of Aberdeen. Galveston Feb. 16th. 1846.
ELLIOT TO ABERDEEN 173
No 17. New Orleans. March 4th. 1846. My Lord,
I have the honour to transmit the “Texas Democrat” newspaper of the 20th Ultimo 174 containing the particulars of the dissolution of the Government of the Republic of Texas.
General Houston and Mr Rusk have been elected to the Senate of the United States.
Charles Elliot. To The Right Honourable. The Earl of Aberdeen., K. T.
ELLIOT TO ABERDEEN 175
No. 18. New Orleans. March 10th 1846. My Lord,
I learn that the Government of the United States is taking up some light vessels at this port for the service of the force at Corpus Christi, and also that a small steamer hitherto employed as a passage vessel between that point and Galveston has been chartered by [the United States] for the same object. These indications dispose me to think that the Material at all events, will be re-embarked at Corpus Christi, and transported by sea to the Brassos and Norte. Detachments have been thrown forward in the direction of the Rio Grande, but we have not yet heard that the Head Quarters and Main body have moved.
Unless the American Government has some understanding with leading persons in Tamaulipas and the contiguous Mexican States, the advance of this small and enfeebled force still further from their resources and communications, and within the perfectly unquestionable limits of Mexico, may prove to be a dangerous movement. If they advance to any distance from their depôts on the Sea shore, they may be cut off without difficulty, and if they remain there during the ensuing hot weather the climate and exposure will be disastrous to them.
I avail myself of this opportunity to transmit a Texian Newspaper of the 3d Instant, 176 containing some extracts from a paper published at Corpus Christi which merit Your Lordship's notice. It is no doubt probably that his tone is attributable to the dislike of the parties interested at Corpus Christi to lose the profits of the continuance of the force at that point; But be the motive what it may, nothing can be better founded than this exposure of the worthlessness of these pretensions to the Country beyond the “Nueces”
Charles Elliot. The Right Honourable. The Earl of Aberdeen, K. T.
ELLIOT TO ABERDEEN 177
No 19. New Orleans. March 14th 1846. My Lord,
I have the honour to transmit the Corpus Christi Gazette Extraordinary of the 8th Instant, containing the General orders issued by Brigadier General Z. Taylor respecting the immediate advance of the American force from that point, to the Rio Grande.
Charles Elliot To The Right Honourable. The Earl of Aberdeen, K. T.
KENNEDY TO ABERDEEN 178
No 4. Her Majesty's Consulate. Galveston. March. 16th 1846. My Lord,
I have the honour to enclose herewith printed Copies of the last Public Address of President Jones, the Inagural Address of the Governor of Texas, the first Message of the Governor,—and certain Newspaper Articles communicating political rumours, and intelligence of the Movements of the United States troops, heretofore stationed at Corpus Christi. 179
Generals Houston and Rusk—(as was pronounced likely in my Despatch No 34 of the 8th of December, last) have been elected to the Senate of the United States, by the Legislature of Texas. There were 70 Votes for Rusk, and 69 for Houston. Ex-President Jones was a candidate, and not an unwilling one, as I am told, but his nomination was set aside in preliminary “Caucus.”
Officers high in the Engineer Service of the United States have been employed in examining the Coast of Texas, with a view to its defence.—They have, it is said, reported favourably of connecting, by Canals, the lagoons, that fringe the Coast,—for the purpose of opening thereby a line of interior Navigation from the Sabine to the Rio Grande.
In reference to the Movement of the United States Troops to the Rio Grande, mentioned in Enclosure No 4, the “Galveston Civilian,” of the 4th Instant, observes:—
“We have no idea that they,” (the U. S. troops) “will be opposed in their present movement by the Mexican forces; nor do we think expectation of such an event is entertained by well-informed persons upon the frontier.
One result desired, and pretty confidently anticipated, from this Military movement, by the United States, is a declaration of independence by the North Eastern Provinces of Mexico, seconded by the influence of the Mexican General Arista.—After a brief term of probation, these most valuable Provinces are to be admitted to a participation of the advantages arising from an incorporation with the Federation of the North.—Such is the language of American politicians, and I cannot doubt its earnestness.
Whatever may be the issue of the Negotiations respecting Oregon, the United States seem resolved to possess themselves of Upper California. Large parties of armed settlers are proceeding thither from the Western and South Western States, and it is within my knowledge that a number of the most daring and intelligent Americans in Texas are making arrangements for journeying, with like purposes, to the same quarter.
In the meantime, it is hoped that Great Britain's devotion to— “peace, at any price,”—and the satisfaction with Mr Walker's quasi-liberal Tariff, 180 will restrain her action until the United States, are prepared, at all points, to contest her supremacy by land and sea.
William Kennedy. The Earl of Aberdeen, K. T.
ELLIOT TO ABERDEEN 181
Private. New Orleans. March 27th 1846. My Lord,
The subjoined letters from Galveston reached me this morning and I think it right to communicate them to Your Lordship. I should mention that Mr. W. D. Miller was General Houston's private Secretary and was with him at this place, when the Speech in question was delivered.
Charles Elliot. The Right Honourable. The Earl of Aberdeen, K. T.
JOHNSON TO ELLIOTT
To. Captain Elliott. Galveston March 24th 1846. My Dear Sir,
At the request of General Houston I forward to you the Copy of a letter 182 written by W. D. Miller, which was intended to be published in the “Galveston Civilian”
Signed. R. D. Johnson A.
ABERDEEN TO ELLIOT 183
No 1. Foreign Office. April. 3d. 1846. Sir,
I have received your Despatch No 13, of the 15th of February enclosing Copy of a Note addressed to you on the 4th of that Month by the Texian Secretary of State in reply to your Note of the 4th of January to him on the subject of the continued Treaty engagements betwen Great Britian and Texas when the latter should have ceased to be an independent State, and also conveying a Copy of a Confidential instruction which you had addressed to Her Majesty's Consul at Galveston directing him to recommend to all British Subjects trading to Galveston to pay under protest whatever duties might be required of them subsequently to the Annexation of Texas to the United States.
With regard to this latter point Her Majesty's Government consider that the general declaration recommended in the first part of your instruction is quite sufficient for every useful purpose, and that the more detailed protest enjoined in the subsequent part of your Letter might, if constantly acted upon, be productive of inconvenience. I have therefore to desire that you will further confidentially instruct Mr Kennedy not to insist on such detailed protest being recorded on the part of British Traders; but to confine his recommendations to entering a general protest, if such protest should be found necessary. Her Majesty's Government do not desire to incur the risk of an unnecessary controversy with the United States on the legal existence, or otherwise, of the Treaty engagements with Texas, after Texas shall have been merged in the Federal Union, although they considered it desirable to enter their general caveat on that point with the government of Texas, prior to the extinction of the Republick.
Aberdeen. Captain Elliot. R. N.
ABERDEEN TO ELLIOT 184
No 2. Foreign Office April 3d. 1846. Sir,
Your Despatch No 15 of the 16th of February (received at this Office on the 27th Ultimo) having announced to Her Majesty's Government that the Government of the Republick of Texas as an independent State would be dissolved on that day, I have to state to you that Her Majesty's Government consider your functions as Her Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires and Consul General to the Republick of Texas to have ceased by the fact of the dissolution of the independence of that State.
You will accordingly return to England as soon as you may find it convenient to do so, and you will bring with you the Archives and papers of your Mission, with the exception of such as you may deem it right to leave at Galveston for the benefit of Her Majesty's Consulate at that place.
Aberdeen. Captain Elliot. R. N.
ELLIOT TO ABERDEEN 185
No. 20. New Orleans. April 19 1846. My Lord,
No latter tidings from the American force in Tamaulipas have reached this place than I have recently forwarded to Mr Pakenham, and requested him to transmit to Your Lordship; namely of the 1st Instant from the Brassos Santiago. Our last dates from Galveston are of the 15th Instant, but it is possible that the accounts from General Taylor's Head Quarters may in future come sooner, direct to this place or Pensacola, than by the way of Texas.
There was very tempestuous weather with heavy rains between the 2d and 6th of this month, as far to the Westward on the Coast of Texas as we have yet heard from, and if it extended to the Coast of Mexico as far as the Mouth of the Rio Grande (which is probable, being an equinoctial gale) mischance may have befallen some of the transports, ill provided with ground tackle, and insufficiently manned. At all events the difficulty of discharging and transporting the Material to General Taylor's position, about 24 Miles from Point Isabel, will have been much increased, and the advancing Mexican reinforcements will have had more time to arrive at Matamoros before the supplies from the Brassos Santiago had reached the American force. Their separation from their resources has certainly given the Mexicans, particularly if they are in the strength reported, a favourable chance of compelling the invading force to retire rapidly, if not of striking a still more decisive blow.
The U. S. Vessel of War “Porpoise” sailed from Pensacola a few days since, ostensibly to Haiti, but it has occurred to me that her destination may have been Chagres, with instructions to the American Naval force in the Pacific.
Charles Elliot. To The Right Honourable. The Earl of Aberdeen, K. T.
ELLIOT TO ABERDEEN 186
No. 21. New Orleans. April 21, 1846. My Lord.
The accompanying intelligence 187 from the American force in Tamaulipas reached this City late last night, and I forward it without delay in the hope of catching the Mail of the 1st Proximo from Boston.
Charles Elliot. To the Right Honourable, The Earl of Aberdeen, K. T.
ELLIOT TO ABERDEEN 188
Secret. New Orleans. April 21. 1846. My Lord,
In my despatches from Texas in the early part of 1845 I had the honour to communicate to Your Lordship the general scope of a strange and dangerous plot against Mexico which it was hoped to set on foot through the Government and Legislature of Texas.
A main feature of that scheme, Your Lordship will perhaps remember, was to induce the removed Indians on the Western frontier of the United States (Cherokee and other tribes) by bribes of land in the outlying Mexican regions legislatively appropriated by Texas, to press on into New Mexico; and thence into California; following up that movement with other emigration as circumstances and policy might suggest.
I have grounds for thinking that this part of the scheme has been strenuously urged at Washington, that it has found favour with the present administration, and that they are disposed to do what they can to carry it out. In fact it seems a treaty has been recently concluded between the United States Agents and the Camachee and kindred tribes guaranteeing to them large tracts of these Mexican regions. The motive for such a compact at present is transparent, and I need not suggest to Your Lordship that it will not be better respected than any other of these treaties when it suits the convenience of other Settlers to replace the Indians, and press them farther on into Mexico. Indeed I may remark incidentally that a resolution has been passed by the House of Representatives at Austin (March 31st) asserting the exclusive right of the State of Texas to all the soil within the limits of the Republic of Texas, refusing to recognize any Indian title in those regions, and denying the right of the United States to make any treaty of limits with the Indian tribes ranging therein, without the consent of the Government of the State of Texas.
It is probable that this resolution was aimed directly at the treaty in question, and by that means to compel some satisfactory settlement of the Texian debt in exchange for this spoliation of Mexican territory
It is a strong impression in the quarter from which I derive this information, that the leaders of the Southern democracy will endeavour to defeat the notice by sending it back to the House in such a form as will ensure it's rejection there, and he believes that a main motive of their desire for the adjustment of the present difficulty 189 with Great Britain is to be able to turn with more safety and effect to the dismemberment of Mexico. The person who has furnished me this information has afforded me proofs of fidelity at various times during my Service in Texas, and has good means of knowing what is really intended respecting Mexico, by prominent personages at Washington.
Charles Elliot. To the Right Honourable. The Earl of Aberdeen, K. T.
ELLIOT TO ABERDEEN 190
No. 22. New Orleans. April. 25th 1846. My Lord,
I have the honour to acquaint Your Lordship that a Bill is pending at Austin entitled “An Act to ascertain and establish the public debt, and to define how the same is to be paid.”
It had not passed at the last accounts but I think it may be convenient at once to report the principles on which it is proposed to make adjustments, and generally all that has yet transpired concerning the disposition of the public lands claimed by the Republic of Texas.
With that view I have the honour to forward a newspaper of yesterday's date 191 in which the subject is succinctly exhibited, and I would also submit to Your Lordship's notice, in the same newspaper, a letter written by General James Hamilton to General Burleson of Texas.
I have no knowledge of the nature of the communication of the Texian Commissioners to Her Majesty's Government during the Negotiations in England, preceding the treaty of 1840, or of any subsequent communications from them in Your Lordship's possession, but I conclude that the point of possible Annexation to the United States must have received attention at that time. There could hardly have been any failure of earnest assurances by the Commissioners, of the capacity and steady purpose of Texas to maintain her independence, and it is possible there may be much similarity between the argumentation to Her Majesty's Government in 1840, in support of the acknowledgment, and to the people of Texas in 1844, in recommendation of the sacrifice of that independence.
I think Your Lordship will also pause upon the paragraph respecting the difficulties which might have ensued respecting Mexican obligations to British Subjects, in part security for which, as is correctly stated by General Hamilton, many millions of acres of the domain claimed by Texas had been mortgaged to the Mexican bond holders. But the acknowledgment of the independence of Texas by Great Britain was simply and singly the admission of what was solemnly declared by Texas to be a fact, and which it was believed upon the faith of that declaration would remain a fact; namely, that Texas had, and would preserve a Sovereign, separate, and independent existence. The limits of Texas were not a matter of question, and the acknowledgment of independence had no connexion with, or bearing upon the public debt of Mexico to British Subjects, and the inherent liability of all the territory constituting Mexico at the period of the contract of those debts, to a fair share of the responsibility for them. If every State in Mexico, one after the other, had declared their independence, the public debt of Mexico would still remain to be adjusted, and with the debt, the justice and necessity that each Member should assume it's proportion of the charge.
It is altogether shadowy to hint that when Texas agreed to hold herself responsible for a certain amount of the Mexican debt, if Mexico consented to acknowledge her independence within a specified period, that Great Britain by being a party to that arrangement consented to forego all claim upon the territory claimed by Texas (four fifths of which have never been in her possession) if Mexico did not acknowledge the independence within that period. As I understand that subject, that was a specific agreement in the event of the occurrence of a given state of things, a definite settlement of the proposition for which Texas was to be responsible, in that state of things. If it did not obtain matters reverted to their former attitude.
That agreement too was necessarily made with reference to the territory in the actual occupation of the Texians, for I am of course perfectly aware that Her Majesty's Government never attached any weight to the extravagant territorial pretensions of the Republic of Texas. The legislative branches of that Government involved, as Your Lordship knows, the whole territory to the line of the Pacific, between the parallels of the Mouth of the Rio Grande and the 42 of North Latitude. It can hardly be pretended in any quarter that the approval of their President would have completed a title to those limits, yet in point of fact there is no better title to the immense regions now claimed, than one word more, and another signature. Texas might as justly have annexed the Country to the Isthmus of Darien as to the Rio Grande and upwards to 42 N.; and the pretensions of the United States founded upon the law of Texas, or upon any other pretext, to those regions, followed by force, are undisguiseable violations of treaty, and invasion of the Mexican territory
The sacrifices of the separate existence, and independence of Texas are sacrifices of those particular things by the people in the actual occupation of a particular territory, not a warrant for the invasion and further spoliation of Mexico by another power, and still less a discharge of the obligations and liens upon territory as completely free of control by Texas as the Coast of California. General Houston [Hamilton?] in his letter appears to have reasoned for the benefit of the Creditors of the Republic of Texas respecting debts contracted by that Republic, on the doctrine that the existing Sovereignty is responsible for the debts of the former.
That no doubt is a sound principle, but it may be remarked that there is a difference between the former and inherent liabilities of the territory constituting Texas, and the liabilities contracted by the Government of that Republic. Both the first and the last remain to be provided for, but the last, so far as the people of Texas are concerned, are subject to the effect of an express stipulation between the United States and the Republic of Texas, that the former shall under no pretext be liable for them. The contract between these parties is, that Texas shall keep the debts of the Republic, and that the United States shall leave Texas her domain, necessarily not defining the limits of that domain, which the United States had no more title or power to do than to define the domain of Guatemala. The United States, also, with the permission of Texas, reserved the exclusive right of making and concluding treaties of limits.
Her Majesty's Government are aware that Mexico would never have concluded a definitive treaty of peace with Texas, unless Texas had agreed in the final treaty to such money stipulations as would have partially compensated Mexico for being left with the whole burden of obligations contracted by the Confederacy of which Texas formed part of the domain.
Charles Elliot. To The Right Honourable. The Earl of Aberdeen, K. T.
ELLIOT TO ABERDEEN 192
No. 23. New Orleans. May 1st 1846. My Lord,
I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of Your Lordship's despatches No 1 and 2 of this year.
The inclosure is the Copy of a letter which I have written to Mr Consul Kennedy in pursuance of the instructions in Your Lordship's despatch No 1.
I proceed to New York this evening and shall repair to England from thence with all convenient dispatch.
Charles Elliot. To the Right Honourable. The Earl of Aberdeen, K. T.
ELLIOT TO KENNEDY 193
[Enclosure.]. Copy. Charles Elliot. Confidential. New Orleans. May 1. 1846. Sir,
Having reference to the Confidential letter which I left you on the 16th February last, I have now to acquaint you that I have had the honour to receive a despatch from The Earl of Aberdeen dated on the 3d Ultimo, directing me to instruct you, confidentially, to confine your advice to British Subjects at your Consulate who may consult you upon the subject of payment of duties, to the general declaration recommended in the first part of my instructions, and to omit any advice to make the more detailed protest recommended in the following part of those instructions.
To prevent misconception I recite below the portion of my former instructions to which you are now directed to confine yourself in any advice that may be sought of you upon this point, by British Subjects trading at your Consulate.
“If he” (the Master) “should find that he is permitted to enter under any other Authority than that of some existing revenue or navigation law of the Republic of Texas you will advise him to state that he had arrived here to trade under the treaty of Commerce and Navigation between Her Majesty The Queen of Great Britain and Ireland and the Republic of Texas, signed at London Novr. 13th. 1840, and whereof ratifications were exchanged at London June 28th 1842, that he claims the rights, privileges, liberties, favours, immunities, and exemptions secured to H. M. Subjects trading in Texas under that treaty, and enters protest against all proceedings taken, or to be taken contrary thereto, as respects the Ship, of which he is Master and the goods of her lading.”
(Signed) Charles Elliot. [Endorsed] Inclosure in Captain Elliot's despatch to the Earl of Aberdeen No. 23. New Orleans, May 1, 1846. To William Kennedy Esquire. H. B. M. Consul. Galveston
ELLIOT TO ABERDEEN 194
36 Wilton Cresent June 18th. 1846. My Lord,
I have the honour to report that I arrived here on the 16th Instant.
Deprived of my post by circumstances in Your Lordship's knowledge, I beg to express my readiness, and I hope I may add my earnest desire for early re-employment, for I have no fortune, and a large family entirely dependant upon me. So far as my Services and career may properly derive advantage from a very kind as well as just estimation by the Head of the Department under which I have had the honour to serve for the last 12 years, I certainly submit this application to Your Lordship with feelings of perfect confidence.
Charles Elliott. To the Right Honourable. The Earl of Aberdeen, K. T.
KENNEDY TO PALMERSTON 195
Private. 24. Rue de Villiers Neuilly, Paris. March 27th. 1847. My Lord,
I have the honor to submit to your Lordship the following extracts from a communication which I have recently received from a Correspondent at Galveston. The writer, is a native of North Carolina—of the Democratic party—and a professor of liberal opinions in regard to trade. He has filled situations of trust in Texas, and is, I doubt not, a faithful echo of persons well-informed, with respect to the Matters to which he adverts.—As to the war with Mexico, he observes.
... “I do not believe we shall end the War short of the occupation of the City of Mexico by our troops, or of clearly manifesting that its occupancy is, beyond all doubt, within our power. When we do this, we shall be enabled to demand and secure a peace on such terms as will be both honourable and just—And not before.—In making peace, I presume the Government will insist on, and exact, full indemnification for the expenses of the war, and that the compensation will be in territory South of Oregon and the Rio Grande.”
He thus notices the prospects of a liberal Commercial policy in Congress.
... “The factious party spirit—to call it by no more opprobrious a name—Manifested by prominent Members of the Whig party in the United States, relative to the war, is discreditable to us as a Nation.—A spirit almost as censurable, is also manifested by a portion of the Democratic party in opposing the levying of certain Moderate duties on foreign Articles, (now admitted free of duties) until the establishment of peace. You are aware of my warm advocacy, as an American politician, of the freest possible commercial intercourse of my Country with the world. One of the most essential differences, as you know, of the two great parties in this Country is in reference to the wisdom and policy of Government in this respect. The Manufacturers of the United States have been, and still are, attempting to exercise the same power and control in causing to be protected by Government their interests that the landholders in Great Britain have so long profited by, in the protection afforded them by the existence of your Corn Laws. Necessity, added to the experience of an enlightened public, has, at length, caused this principle to be abolished in England. I ardently hope its downfall is permanent, as the new System not only affords greater benefits to much the largest number of British Subjects, but to Britain herself as a nation, and to the civilized World generally,—especially the United States, by the sale of her surplus bread stuffs etc.—Indeed one of the principal causes of our success in being enabled to adopt a system of ad valorem revenue duties, was the enactment of your liberal Tariff. Those in this Country with whom I concur in political opinion have never since 1817 until the last Congress been enabled to pass a Tariff for Revenue purposes without admitting the principle of fostering, by protection, the interests of our Manufacturers.—And—I regret to say—that it is very questionable whether that Tariff, will be sustained by a Majority of the Nation at the next Presidential election. The recent Whig Majorities in the large and influential States of Pennsylvania and New York give the advocates of untrammelled intercourse cause for apprehension and alarm.—I am certain that nothing will be left undone by the Manufacturers which can be accomplished by them to fix upon the United States, as a permanent system, this unjust taxation—a taxation which affords a bounty to one part of the community and entails an impoverishing result upon the other.”
So much for my correspondent: for my own part, I have never regarded the existing Tariff of the United States as any thing more than a bait for the Calhoun Section and—above all—as a sop to quiet Great Britain during the Annexation of Texas and the dismemberment of Mexico. I have officially recorded, for the satisfaction of my conscience, my conviction that the policy which reconciled the Union to the acquisition of Texas was the extension of the home-market—or what may be termed the home-market—and an Anti-European Tariff. We might have prevented Annexation—such at least is my opinion—without a war—not having done so, we must prepare for its consequences.—Aggression against British North America it seems not too much to anticipate as among probable Contingencies, should the general state of affairs be favourable, and an American Army amounting to fifty or sixty thousand men return home flushed with the subjugation of Mexico.
At the period of the Annexation of Texas, it occurred to me that European Powers might some day take advantage of the precedent. From what I now see, it seems to me perfectly clear that the four great Continental States will act more closely than heretofore upon a similar System.—Even at present, how few of the Minor States have more than a quasi independent existence!—. Policy propels, and necessity may propel, some of these States towards the Shores of the Mediterranean, and there English interests demand vigilance as keen and action yet more direct and peremptory than even in North America. I venture to advert to these points with a full recollection of Your Lordship's Statesmanship in 1841—which had then—and has, (more intelligently) now, the cordial admiration of one whose judgment may be of little weight but is, at all events, unbiassed and independent. In opposition to prevailing opinion at the time, my regret was that more had not been done in the same direction. Why should not we attach the Arabs to our Standard—looking to the inevitable war—and by Colonizing thinly settled islands relieve our people and, ultimately, perhaps, enlarge the basis of the domestic empire?
But I crave pardon for placing these disjointed thoughts before Your Lordship—the emanation of Moments which sickness rendered solitary.
William Kennedy. Viscount Palmerston. G, C. B.
168. F. O., Texas, Vol. 16.
169. F. O., Texas, Vol. 16.
170. F. O., Texas, Vol. 16.
171. F. O., Texas, Vol. 16.
172. F. O., Texas, Vol. 16.
173. F. O., Texas, Vol. 16.
174. “Extra” edition.
175. F. O., Texas, Vol. 16.
176. The Galveston News, March 3, 1846.
177. F. O., Texas, Vol. 16.
178. F. O., Texas, Vol. 17. This is the last letter from Kennedy in Texas, containing anything of interest. On September 18, 1846, Kennedy left Texas on sick leave and a Mr. Lynn was appointed acting consul at Galveston. His correspondence is confined to the details of his office. Mr. Kennedy never returned to Texas, and formally gave up his consulate in 1850. Lynn's appointment to the place was confirmed May 18, 1850.
179. All enclosures are unidentified newspaper cuttings.
180. Robert John Walker, United States Senator from Mississippi, appointed secretary of the treasury by Polk, 1845. He was the author of the tariff of 1846, which was considered to have a free trade basis, Walker's principle being that no revenue should be raised by import duties, not directly needed to meet the expenses of the government.
181. F. O., Texas, Vol. 16.
182. This letter has already been inserted in its proper chronological order. See The Quarterly, XX, 167.
183. F. O., Texas, 21.
184. F. O., Texas, Vol. 21.
185. F. O., Texas, 16.
186. F. O., Texas, 16.
187. The New Orleans Daily Picayune, April 21, 1846.
188. F. O., Texas, 16.
189. The controversy over the Oregon boundary was thought at this time to threaten war between the United States and Great Britain.
190. F. O., Texas, Vol. 16.
191. The New Orleans Commercial Bulletin, April 24, 1846.
192. F. O., Texas, Vol. 16. This was the last letter to Aberdeen written by Elliot while in America, as chargé d'affaires to Texas.
193. F. O., Texas, Vol. 16.
194. F. O., Texas, Vol. 16.
195. F. O., America, Vol. 476. After the Texan Republic ceased to exist, British consular correspondence from the state was classified under F. O. America. This correspondence has been examined for further material on the Texan Republic, but the letter here printed is the only one found. It is to be noted that Kennedy is here writing to Palmerston. who has replaced Aberdeen at the foreign office, so that Kennedy's implied reflection on Aberdeen's policy is not in itself proof that Kennedy had desired Great Britain to pursue a more vigorous policy in the years 1841-1846. Nevertheless, it is probably true that Kennedy always regarded Aberdeen's policy in Texas as over cautions.
How to cite:
"BRITISH CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING TEXAS XXIV ", Volume 021, Number 2, Southwestern Historical Quarterly Online, Page 185 - 213. http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/publications/journals/shq/online/v021/n2/article_5.html
[Accessed Sun Mar 21 13:03:28 CDT 2010]
