No. 347.
Mr. Foster to Mr. Evarts .

No. 733.]

Sir: The fact that the Mexican Senate has, in secret session, taken some action in regard to permission for the crossing of American troops into Mexican territory has been made public in the opposition press, and is the occasion of very severe attacks upon the administration. The Diario Oficial, the government organ, has denied the charge that a treaty has been entered into, and while it has sought to mislead the opposition press as to the action of the Senate, it has been careful to conceal what was the real action of that body.

I inclose one of the most temperate articles which has appeared on this and other supposed pending questions with the United States, taken from the Monitor Republicano, an independent paper, and which is a pretty fair expression of the prevailing public sentiment.

I am, &c.,

JOHN W. FOSTER.
[Inclosure in No. 733.—Translation.]

The questions with the United States.

* * * * * * *

We should, then, consider the entrance of Mr. Mata into the department of foreign affairs as an event without political signification, hut as having certain importance on account of the serious questions which are to be treated. After sounding public opinion, [Page 554] we can say to Mr. Mata that any arrangement with the Government of the United States which may offend the dignity of the nation, wound the susceptibilities and the rights of the Mexicans, injure their interests in the present or compromise them in the future, will be unanimously rejected throughout the whole country and may precipitate a civil war. Discontented parties will make use of a concession which may be simply a measure to preserve order as a party pretext.

As the secrets of diplomacy are impenetrable, we can state nothing with certainty, but our duty compels us to give attention to the rumors in public circulation and analyze them.

The subjects of controversy are various which are contained in the demand of the American Government, and which are in accordance with the desires of the Texans, the eternal enemies of Mexico: the passage of American troops to our territory in order to follow up marauders with the co-operation of the Mexican forces; the abolition of the Free Zone; the exemption of American citizens from extraordinary taxes; pecuniary indemnifications for injuries suffered in consequence of the revolutions and of marauders.

The most serious, the most important, of these points is, without any doubt, that which treats of the passage of our frontier by American troops, since the integrity of Mexican territory is being constantly threatened by the expeditions of American Federal troops, by the recruiting of Texan forces, by the frequent fillibustering plans, by the projects for the conquest and annexation of five of our principal frontier States, projects conceived and supported by the American press. No; it is not possible for the Mexican Government to permit the troops of the United States to pursue marauders within our territory, even when it may be in combination with our troops.

We have said it on other occasions when the instructions to General Ord were being discussed, and we repeat it now, that we do not consider it degrading for the United States nor for Mexico to make an arrangement by which both governments bind themselves to punish robbery, murder, and all the depredations of the barbarous Indians and of the civilized inhabitants of both frontiers, even when for this purpose the invasion of the two territories is stipulated. When there is reciprocity there can be no offense imputed to any of the contracting parties. Such an agreement would not be degrading, but it would be highly dangerous. How can we believe in the good faith of the American Government when hardly yesterday Mr. Hayes, disregarding the faith of treaties, and inaugurating a hostile policy, was provoking us to war? How can we forget that if the conflict did not break out we owe it to Congress, to the opposition party, and to the good sense of the American people? We would be unjust if we did not acknowledge that among that people and in both legislative chambers there are honorable men who do us justice and who sympathize with our misfortunes.

Senator Morgan is there recommending to his government the cultivation of friendly and commercial relations with Mexico, proposing that the present limits between our republic and that of the United States be guaranteed as permanent and inviolable. And when a Senator, who represents nothing less than the State of Alabama, considers our fears just and natural, and asks a solemn declaration which will insure respect for the inviolability of our frontier, because he considers it necessary and indispensable for the establishment of confidence and frank relations between the two countries, are we going to permit the passage of American troops to our territory without any guarantees whatever?

The faith of treaties is suggested to us. What are treaties worth to the colossus of the north? Did they not exist in 1836, when it favored the independence of Texas? Did they not exist in 1848, when it despoiled us of the half our territory?

We are glad that we are not the only ones in believing that a declaration guaranteeing us from all temptation of conquest or annexation on the part of the American Government should precede any agreement for giving security to the frontier. On the contrary, if such a declaration should not precede an arrangement, an accidental encounter between American and Mexican forces in our territory would give rise to a conflict which would be a pretext for war. Our troops exercising the same right which we would concede to the Americans upon crossing to the neighboring territory would be received with shots by the hostile Texans.

We are as fully convinced as anybody of the necessity of extirpating murder and robbery upon both frontiers; of giving security to their inhabitants, and that, in order to secure this, it is necessary to resort to a combination between the two governments; but in regard to so thorny a question we think that the will of the nation should be consulted through all practicable mediums.

The abolition of the free zone demanded by the American Government, if consented to, would place the country upon a level with the Turkish Empire, in making our autonomy doubtful. This question is at present pending resolution in Congress, and from it we hope that it may be resolved, not in favor of the interests of the neighboring country, but in favor of our frontier population.

To exempt foreigners from extraordinary taxes would be equivalent to placing natives in a worse condition than that of the former, when both have in our country an equal right to the protection of the laws. It is not for the neighboring nation which [Page 555] does not permit foreigners to acquire real estate, but does grind them down with heavy taxes in order to pay the war debt, to demand of us that exemption.

We would renounce our autonomy if we should accede to that demand.

A government combated by revolutionists, and obliged to maintain order, would have no right to create the resources necessary for an object so important even when it had received the necessary authorization from the legislative power.

That right would only be recognized with respect to citizens, but not with respect to foreigners, whose lives and property the government guarantees in preserving order. It is well, that the military chiefs and employés of the government should not make extensive use of that authorization, which they have abused and will abuse, imposing forced loans and arbitrary requisitions. We are all agreed that a limit should be placed upon these abuses which we acknowledge have been frequent, although in a certain proportion falling heavier upon our citizens than upon the foreigners; but it is known that the government is responsible for them.

The pecuniary indemnification for which the Texans have clamored so loudly, in order to make their own fortunes and secure by their claims the necessary capital for acquiring the northern Mexican States, should not, in our judgment, be taken into consideration.

Writers on international law recognize that a government is not under obligations to indemnify the injuries caused to foreigners by factions in a civil war. With regard to the injuries suffered by the inhabitants of the frontier, either from cattle-thieves or from barbarous Indians, it is impossible to estimate them, and as one government is as impotent as the other to give them protection and security, we do not see what claims the Americans would present which we could not present in turn. In a few words we have examined the points of controversy in the treaty which it is desired to celebrate between the American and Mexican Governments; but in doing so, we have been guided by public rumors and not by any official data or information. We do not guarantee anything.