Mr. Bigelow to Mr. Seward
No. 268.]
Legation of the United
States, Paris,
February 9,
1866.
Sir: You will find at page 206 of the
Documens Diplomatiques, transmitted with my despatch No. 257, a note
addressed by Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys to the Marquis de Montholon, which
is calculated to leave an incorrect impression of what passed at the
interview to which it refers. For the purpose of rectifying that
impression I addressed to Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys, on the 7th instant, a
letter, which, with his reply, dated the 8th instant, I have the
honor to enclose. It is at present my intention to request him to
publish both letters in the Constitutionnel and La France, where the
despatch in question has been reproduced.
I am, sir, with great respect, your obedient servant,
Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State.
Mr. Bigelow to Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys
Legation of the United
States, Paris,
February 7,
1866.
Sir: I find at page 206 of the Documens
Diplomatiques, for copies of which I have to thank your
excellency, A letter to the Marquis de Montholon, hearing date
October 18, 1865, in which your
excellency says: “En vous derivant,” &c.
[Translation of extract.]
“In writing you this despatch I have entered into a path opened
by Mr. Bigelow himself several days ago. In a conversation in
relation to other matters, this minister asked me,
[Page 812]
in his own name, and
without prejudging the opinion of his government, if I did not
think that the recognition of the Mexican empire by the United
States might facilitate and hasten the recall of our troops. The
instructions which I send you are in answer to this
question.”
As neither the language which I remember to have used, nor the
impression which I intended to convey in that conversation,
correspond entirely with the version which your excellency has
given of it in the foregoing citation, I desire to recall to
your excellency the circumstances under which it occurred, for
the purpose of showing that the confidence which I have in my
own recollection, and in my memoranda made at the time, is not
misplaced.
Your excellency, in reply to my inquiries, had been expressing
your measure of faith in the ultimate consolidation of the power
founded under the auspices of France in Mexico. And upon that
faith rested your hopes of soon recalling your troops. You
recapitulated some of the difficulties against which it would
require a little time to provide; but all of which, you seemed
to think, would diminish in magnitude, if the adversaries of the
new order received no encouragement from the United States. It
was in view of such representations that I asked whether, in
your excellency’s opinion, Maximilian would be able to sustain
himself without the aid of France if his authority were
recognized by the United States. That inquiry led to a
conversation, in which I had occasion, at least twice, to state
to your excellency that our recognition of any government in
Mexico so long as it was sustained by foreign aims was
impossible; that the logic of the situation required the
independence of Mexico to be established by the withdrawal of
all foreign soldiers before our government could formally
recognize a government accused of owing its existence to their
presence.
I am sorry to trouble your excellency with a rectification of a
misapprehension which may seem trifling, but which also may
acquire importance from the circumstances under which it has
been submitted to the public.
I avail myself of this occasion to renew, &c., &c.
His Excellency Monsieur Drouyn de
Lhuys, Minister of Foreign
Affairs.
Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys to
Mr. Bigelow;
Sir: I have received the letter which
you have done me the honor to write me, dated the 7th February,
on the occasion of a despatch recently published, in which I
made allusion to a conversation which we had together upon the
subject of Mexican affairs. Recalling that conversation, you
have thought proper to define its terms. The report of it which
you give is in consonance with my own recollection, and, as I
construe it, does not contain any fact in contradiction to the
despatch to which you refer. It is exact that, in the opinion
which you then expressed, the recognition of the emperor
Maximilian by the federal government should be preceded by the
evacuation of Mexico by the French troops; while, according to
my view, this evacuation should not take place until after the
recognition of the Washington cabinet, which, by contributing to
the consolidation of the new state of things established in
Mexico, would have precisely the effect of facilitating and
hastening the recall of our troops. You objected that your
government could not decide to recognize an authority sustained
by the presence of a foreign army, but, you added, it might be
possible, on the one hand, that the government of the Emperor,
seeing the United States ready to enter into regular relations
with Mexico if that country were evacuated by the French troops,
might determine to press the return of his soldiers; on the
other hand, that the United States, being informed of the
intention of the government of the Emperor, might show more
disposition to entertain the idea of recognition. In thus
associating the conditions from which an agreement might result,
it was to be hoped that our cabinets might find in them the
elements of a solution equally satisfactory to both.
I cannot but render homage, sir., to the spirit of loyalty and
conciliation which dictated this language to you. But the
hypothesis which we examined together remained subject to the
appreciation of your government, whose judgment you reserved.
The cabinet of Washington occupying a different point of view,
the suggestions upon which our conversation turned have been
without result.
Accept, sir, the assurances of my high consideration.
