Señor don Matias Romero on the relations between Mexico and the United States., April 30, 1876

Señor don Matias Romero on the relations between Mexico and the United States.

[From The Two Republics, Mexico, Wednesday, May 10, 1876.]

Editor-in-chief of the Revista Universal, Present:

My Dear Sir and Esteemed Friend: In number 97 of volume IX of your paper, of Thursday, the 27th instant, I have read an article entitled, “Mexico and the United States,” in which, referring to certain resolutions presented to the House of Representatives of the United States by the special committee appointed to investigate the affairs on the frontier of Texas and Mexico, certain reflections are made which, although dictated by a very commendable spirit of patriotism, contain inexact impressions, and in consequence may produce results very different from those desired by Mexicans who are animated by patriotic sentiments.

I now propose to make certain rectifications of various ideas expressed in said article; hut before doing so I think it will be proper to state that in writing these lines I am guided by a purely patriotic spirit, which I do not consider inferior to that of the author of the article.

The efforts which the national press are at present making in order to cause the nation to understand the condition of certain questions with the United States, and to prevent certain future dangers, are very commendable; and it is to be desired that it should persevere in that good way. But it is equally essential that in the reflections which it may make it should not incur serious errors, even if for no other reason than to distinguish it from the North American press, which in general, in its articles relating to Mexico, gives credit to the most lamentable mistakes and inaccuracies.

The present or future questions between Mexico and the United States are of such gravity that they should only be treated of or discussed with moderation and without passion, manifesting the reasons and the facts which favor our country, and endeavoring to incur no serious errors, neither to assent to false ideas.

At the present time, and without being acquainted with the state of these questions in the department of foreign affairs, it seems to me that there is no immediate danger of a conflict, and for this belief I have two reasons chiefly: First, that although some few speculators desire war and talk of it, the great majority of the country is opposed to it. Second, that the present President of the United States, Ulysses S. Grant, was one of the most sincere and decided friends of Mexico in the United States under circumstances truly critical for our country. It is difficult to know what designs future administrations of the United States may entertain respecting Mexico, but I think it may be assured that while the present one continues, and while our government gives no just foundation for complaint to the United States, (as I think it has not given up to the present time, nor do I consider it probable that it will,) it does not appear to me probable that the relations between the two countries will reach a critical condition.

There are in the United States as in other nations, and perhaps in greater proportion than many others, a considerable number of restless persons who desire war, although it may be for no other reason than the benefits which war affords them, and who do what they can to provoke it; but I consider it a grave error to believe that these persons form the majority of the nation, and a greater error still that the present administration of that country is controlled by them.

The fact that, besides the article from the Re vista which I have cited, others have appeared in the Federalista, the Monitor Republicano, and the Siglo XIX, in similar terms, all considering that there is imminent danger of a conflict between the two countries on account of the resolutions of the special committee on frontier affairs presented to the House of Representatives, has decided me to write the preceding considerations.

Giving my attention now in an especial manner to these resolutions, I think it proper to state that the member of the House of Representatives of the United States from the district of the State of Texas, which includes the principal sections bordering upon Mexico, presented a proposition asking that a special committee might be appointed to investigate the occurrences on the frontier, and to suggest a remedy. As is the custom in the American House of Representatives, the member who proposes the appointment of a special committee is made the chairman of it. The Representative from Texas was consequently appointed chairman of that committee; and he now appears presenting the resolutions which he considers proper for the attainment of his object.

Thus up to the present time these resolutions have not the character of propositions approved by the House of Representatives, nor still less by the Congress of the United States. From the circumspection of that body, it is to be hoped that it will not proceed in this case to trample upon the rights of Mexico.

It is well and good that the Mexican press should make known to the nation the text of these resolutions, and comment upon them in the terms which its patriotism inspires; but it is not proper, because it is not probable, that it should state as a certainty that these resolutions will be approved by the Congress at Washington.

In the article cited it is stated that the chairman of the special committee of the North American House of Representatives said to that body what a New York paper presents as a conversation of that Representative with a correspondent of the paper in Washington. It is understood at once that these views lose more of their gravity when expressed in a familiar conversation than if they had been uttered in the House of Representatives of the United States.

It is also said that Generals Sherman and Sheridan, of the Army of the United States, are, in favor of these resolutions, and in this also there is inaccuracy. General Sherman, who occupies at the present time the high post of General-in-Chief of the Army of the United States, has expressed on different occasions ideas contrary to an unjust or oppressive policy toward Mexico. General Sheridan, who is also one of the highest officers of that Army, has never had any sympathy with filibustering enterprises against our country. It is consequently unjust to suppose both generals interested in favor of an unjust and aggressive policy.

Something more should be said of the insinuation which is made in reference to General Grant. If the present President of the United States should have desired to avail himself of unworthy means for assuring his re-election, perhaps the Cuban question would have afforded him a better opportunity and a more plausible pretext, and perhaps more popular in the United States, for carrying out his plan. If he has not availed himself of that opportunity, it is not probable that he will do it in respect to Mexico, in which there would be notorious injustice. The nation has no information up to the present time that the President of the United States has made any undue or unjust demand respecting Mexico. Excepting the crossing into Mexican territory of the American forces under Mackenzie, which does not appear to have been ordered by the Government of Washington, and the permission asked of Mexico in order that American troops might pass over to our territory, respecting which, nevertheless, our consent was asked, there is no information of any act that may be qualified as unfriendly on the part of the United States toward Mexico. On the other hand, it is now a fact that General Grant will not accept a second re-election, and that, in consequence, he cannot intrigue in favor of such re-election.

If it is remembered what has been the conduct of the North American Government in regard to questions of acquisition of territory since the close of the civil war in the neighboring nation, it will be seen that it has maintained the policy of not making new acquisitions of territory. The disapproval of the treaty in regard to the annexation of Santo Domingo is a decided fact bearing on this point. Something similar to this is taking place with the reciprocity treaty concluded with the King of the Sandwich Islands. This treaty has found great opposition in the House of Representatives at Washington, notwithstanding its having at the present time a democratic majority, because it contains a clause which gives to the United States the exclusive right of having certain establishments in the territory of those islands, which is objected to because it is considered as the preliminary step toward annexation.

The thinking people of the United States, who form the immense majority of the nation, are not in favor of the forced acquisition of more territory, and still less when the latter is peopled by a race like ours, so unlike that which inhabits the American territory. Without assuring anything, then, for the future in an absolute and definite manner, it does not seem to me that the danger is serious or imminent that the United States intend at the present time to make upon us a war of conquest.

From the patriotism and good sense of the Mexican press, it is to be hoped that in the mean time, while continuing to give its attention to the very important matter for Mexico of our relations with the United States, it will do so with corresponding moderation and circumspection, and without imitating in general the American papers, which, from failing to understand the situation of our country, make reflections destitute of all foundation and circulate gross inaccuracies and errors.

I am, your affectionate and attentive servant,