Foster to Evarts, July 13, 1877

No. 231. Mr. Foster to Mr. Evarts.

Sir: The report of the conference had between General Ord, commanding the American forces in Texas, and General Trevino, the Mexican commander on the Rio Grande frontier, reached this city through the newspapers of the United States by last mail, and the results of said conference have been the subject of considerable discussion in the Mexican press.

The report of the conference as received here is that contained in the telegram of General Ord to Lieutenant-General Sheridan, dated Fort Clark, Texas, June 19, in which, referring to General Treviño, he says:

There is a good understanding between us on the basis of my instructions regarding prompt action to suppress marauding and the co-operation of our troops on both sides of the river in necessary pursuit.

Some of the opposition press have interpreted this report of General Ord to mean that Trevino, in the conference, has agreed to the passage of American troops across the boundary into Mexican territory in pursuit of raiders, and have accordingly harshly attacked the administration of General Diaz for permitting the national territory to be violated and for humiliating the Mexican nation by yielding to the demands of the United States. The Diario Oficial, the government official organ, has replied that General Trevino has made no such agreement for the passage of American troops into Mexico, and that the government has not receded from the position assumed in the order of the minister of war, of 18th ultimo, requiring the commander on the northern frontier to resist by force any passage of the frontier by American troops, and demanding the recall or modification of the instructions to General Ord on that point. I inclose a translation of the Diario Oficial’s reply. Since these articles have appeared General Trevino’s official report of the conference with General Ord has been published, a translation of which I herewith transmit.

It will be seen that he expressly states that he declined General Ord’s proposition for the reciprocal passage of the frontier by the troops of either nation in pursuit of outlaws.

General Treviño makes an important statement in his report in regard to the Li pan Indians, whose continued residence in Mexico near the frontier has been the principal cause of the recent raids, murders, and robberies in Texas.

Attention is also called to the character of the force which he proposes to employ to co-operate with the American troops, and to suppress the raids and outlawry on the frontier. He intimates that the regular federal troops cannot be stationed on that border because they “disperse for different causes,” which I understand to mean that they dissolve by desertion, as was stated to me by the former administration, as an excuse for not sending troops to that region. General Treviño states that he has taken steps to organize a volunteer force from the vicinity of the border, to which he proposes to intrust the protection of the Rio Grande, and urges upon the government the importance of providing for their support and prompt payment.

In my opinion there are two objections to intrusting the preservation of the peace and order of the border to such a volunteer force. First, being an independent corps, enlisted at a much higher rate of pay than the regular troops, removed a great distance from the federal treasury and beyond the reach of custom-houses likely to possess federal receipts, there is great danger that their subsistence and pay will be neglected. Second, being composed of residents of the Rio Grande, there is a possibility that they may be subject to the objection which I have repeatedly made to the local authorities, their sympathy or complicity with the robbers., and, being an independent corps, they will not be subject to the same discipline and restraint as the regular troops, and will be as likely to provoke hostility as to repress raids.

I regard it as imperative on the part of Mexico to adopt much more effective measures than those proposed by General Trevino, in order to discharge its international obligations on the Rio Grande.

I am, &c.,

Translations of newspaper articles.

what name does he deserve?

The Tuxtepec Diario called Mr. Lerdo a traitor on the simple suspicion that he was creating difficulties for Mexico. And now that Mr. Porfirio Diaz lays the national dignity at the feet of the United States, and agrees, contrary to the constitution to the humiliation of American troops crossing into Mexican territory, will the Diario please tell us if we can apply the same epithet to the author of such a crime? Let the official organ of Tuxtepec reply.

[From the Diario Official, July 10, 1877.]

what name does he deserve?

Under this title the Federalista has a local item which commences by attributing to us words that we have not written. As upon this subject we have been very explicit, we consider that our colleague is losing its time in endeavoring to misrepresent our views. Then it supposes that the government has entered into some arrangement contrary to the national dignity, a supposition which is entirely false.

The instructions issued by the government in the matter to which the Federalista refers are well known, and there has not been a dispassionate person who has not acknowledged, that the national dignity and the decorum of the country have been well sustained.

The executive will always assiduously endeavor to maintain friendly and cordial relations with the foreign powers. This is its duty, as it is also its pleasure, and in the interest of the country, but it will in every case maintain unstained the national honor.

The statement on which the local item to which we allude is founded is, then, false, and false also is the basis of our colleague’s editorial. Its impassioned comments are consequently without foundation, and can only serve to bring forth others on the other side, inasmuch as the truth is also contrary to the asserted facts.

In the instructions given to General Treviño, under date of the 18th of last June, and which were published in the Diario of the same day, the following is said: “In obedience to that law (the constitution) you will by no means consent that the troops of the United States enter our territory, and, out of respect to the sovereignty of that republic, you will likewise prevent Mexican troops from trespassing on foreign soil.”

These instructions are still in force; they have not been abrogated nor modified; they mark the firm purposes of the government, and by them General Trevino mast be guided.

Everything said to the contrary by newspapers and letters from the United States is deficient of truth, and the deductions drawn from such falsehoods are arbitrary and unjust.

[From the Diario Official, July 11, 1877.]

amusing stories.

The Federalista continues to relate amusing stories, founded on false suppositions.

It is not true that General Treviño has taken the step attributed to him by our colleague. In accordance with the instructions received from the supreme government, and with which the public is acquainted, he has adopted the means of preventing depredations on the frontier, pursuing and punishing the delinquents; but it is false that, exceeding his powers, he has consented to the invasion of our territory by foreign troops.

The telegram of Lieutenant General Sheridan, which the Federalista takes from an American paper, may or may not be authentic.

In the first case it may be that in stating that General Treviño has had an understanding with General Ord on the basis of the instructions given the latter by his government, he referred solely to the part in which he is recommended to solicit the co-operation of the Mexican authorities in the pursuit of the banditti, notwithstanding that the phraseology of the telegram, or its translation, leads to a more extensive application.

At all events, it is false that General Trevino has exceeded his instructions, and neither the Federalista, nor anybody can prove the contrary. The question refers to facts, and the existence of the facts should be fully proven in order to serve as the basis for impartial comments. Until it is proven that any act of General Treviño has been contrary to instructions received from the supreme government and to the dignity of the country, all the statements made to this effect will be arbitrary and defamatory.

The government is well acquainted with the acts of General Treviño, and knows well that he has not discredited his known prudence and well-tried patriotism. Hence the declamations of the Federalista are useless and unjustifiable.