French interests., October 12, 1886

French interests.

To questions put by La Liberté, the Pays makes this reply on Mexican affairs;

“We answer the questions in La Liberté after this fashion: The mental condition of the empress Charlotte is unfortunately very serious. This blow, adding to Maximilian’s other troubles, will most likely cause him to relinquish his hard task. We do not want the public to be deceived by the despatch we published yesterday. The French government is deeply interested in Maximilian’s return from Mexico, and General Castelnau is the bearer of definite instructions, though we cannot say precisely what they are. But one thing is certain, Napolcon will never consent at any price to give up Mexico without securing French interests, let it cost what it will.

“PAUL DE CASSAGNAC.”

Such is the question, and now we will give the answer. The Pays agree with us that Maximilian must abdicate; so we tell the Patrie the empire is done, according to the Pays’ candid confession. But how are we to protect our countrymen when Maximilian quits? That is what the Pays cannot tell us. It says the government will not give up Mexico without giving the most complete guarantee to French interests. How is the government to do that? we ask our honorable colleague. We see no other issue than that proposed in the treaty of Soledad, three years ago. Are the French interests the Pays alludes to in France or Mexico? If they are in France, why prolong the Mexican expedition? Nothing has been gained by it yet. We went to war for a few millions, and we have spent two hundred and fifty millions. First, the French claims, including Jecker’s, amounted to a few millions; now, they amount to many millions. At first, Frenchmen were treated as well as any other foreigners in Mexico, now we don’t know but they may be murdered to-morrow. That is the balance sheet! After making the mistake of trying to found an empire, now it is down, let us resume our liberty of action.

Must we be responsible for a new government that can be no better than the first? Must we risk a war with the United States by staying in Mexico? That is what the Pays means by saying the Emperor will secure French interests at all risks. It wants a new sacrifice of men and money; it wants a war with the United States.

We do not regard French interests in that light. It was not to the interest of France to begin the Mexican expedition; and when commenced, it was France’s interest to stop at Sole-dad with England and Spain. When France was left alone, it was her interest to treat with the Mexican government after the capture of Puebla and the occupation of the city of Mexico. After founding a government and assuming a guardianship of it, France ought to have lent it money at six per cent., and not have cheated it out of many millions.

We have said this before, and not in passion or with a party spirit. Now we say there are but two roads to pursue in Mexican affairs:

If we try to make Mexico a French province, we shall have war with the United States; if we withdraw with Maximilian and treat with Juarez, we shall have peace. As we have always been victorious in Mexico, we can retire with honor, which is of great importance. There remains then but one political mistake to correct, one debt to liquidate. “A money wound is not mortal,” says the proverb. That is true, if it be properly dressed and not allowed to mortify.

CLEMENT DUVERNOIS.

THE RIGHTS OP JUAREZ.

All the papers favoring French intervention in Mexico make much noise about the differences between Juarez and Ortega, and with strange inconsistency grant rights to the latter which they refuse to the former.

For the benefit of history we will correct these mistakes. According to the constitution of the Mexican republic, in case of the President’s death, the president of the supreme court succeeds to power. Now, in 1862, Ortega was president of that court, while Juarez was President of the republic. During that year Ortega was made chief of the eastern division of the army, and marched to defend Puebla. While besieged in that city, congress, mindful of the risks he ran there, deposed him from chief justice and put a lawyer named Ruiz in his place.

When Juarez’s time expired in 1865 extraordinary circumstances induced a large number of Mexicans to re-elect Juarez. Ruiz protested against that election. Ortega’s protest was null and void, for he was no longer president of the supreme court, and had no right to the presidency of the republic. The government at Washington is right; for as long as it has a minister accredited near Juarez, it will not notice the pretensions and protests of Ortega.