The Misunderstood War
The Mexican-American War is often misunderstood by North Americans...but seldom forgot by our neighbors across the border
|
Mention the U.S.-Mexican War and most Americans react with a glazed, questioning look. Mexicans, on the other hand, remember it well.
"It is a scar for them," says Sylvia Komatsu, executive producer of the four-hour PBS television series, The U.S.-Mexican War (1846-1848).
Mexican Nationals often refer to the war as the "one where the gringos stole our land." And not completely without foundation. Often confused with the Texas War for Independence from Mexico, the Mexican-American War happened nearly ten years afterward. While the Texan's fight for sovereignty may have well been the start of hostilities between North and Central American political centers in Washington and Mexico, the actual conflict involved the United States desire to gain a great deal of territory from Mexico, an area today known as California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico and Colorado.
Mexico had declined to sell the territories, and tension along the U.S./Mexican border intensified over the course of several years. Historians often disagree as to how the war actually started. But it is known that a large force of U.S. military stationed in deep South Texas along the Rio Grande River often were involved in border skirmishes with Mexican troops stationed in Matamoras.
The Historic "Military Highway" that runs from Brownsville North along the border toward McAllen was the scene for many of these skirmishes, and an area thought to be strategically important from the standpoint of launching a ground invasion into Mexico if that became necessary.
Most Mexican historians believe the actual U.S. invasion of Mexico started as a result of a particularly bloody border skirmish, an event they say happened at the provocation of U.S. troops.
The actual war was initiated when the U.S., already having border disputes with Mexico, reinforced its border brigade with 4,000 fresh troops to the Rio Grande (or Rio Bravo as it is known in Mexico). On the heels of that move, U.S. President James Polk insisted that Mexico sell its northern half to the U.S.
Hostilities commenced and the U.S. crossed the border to occupy Matamoras. Soon after, U.S. warships attacked Veracruz and landed troops, who fought their way overland to Mexico City. Santa Anna led a defending army, but the Mexicans were overwhelmed. In the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, virtually dictated by the U.S., Mexico agreed to sell its northern territories to the victor for $15 million. For Mexico, the war was a traumatic event that resulted in the loss of many lives, half its territory and a great deal of pride and hope for the future.
Contrary to what many think, the Mexican army was poorly equipped; many were barefoot and hungry, but they fought very valiantly. Many American and Mexican soldiers lost their lives during the two-year war. And the fight was a bloody one that cost both sides a great deal. For the U.S., it was the first war ever fought outside its border. For Mexico, a conflict that divided its country in half.
What started with the valiant stand of 180-plus Texian heroes at the Alamo in 1836 eventually led to the acquisition of the entire region of what is now known as the Southwestern United States.
Though not popular among Mexican historians, following is the request for war to Congress from President James Polk:
Washington, May 11, 1846
To the Senate and House of Representatives: The existing state of the relations between the United States and Mexico renders it proper that I should bring the subject to the consideration of Congress. In my message at the commencement of your present session the estate of these relations, the causes which led to the suspension of diplomatic intercourse between the two countries in march, 1845, and the long-continued and unredressed wrongs and injuries committed by the Mexican Government on the citizens of the United States in their persons and property were briefly set forth.
The strong desire to establish peace with Mexico on liberal and honorable terms, and the readiness of this Government to regulate and adjust our boundary and other causes of difference with that power on such fair and equitable principles as would lead to permanent relations of the most friendly nature, induced me in September last to seek the reopening of diplomatic relations between the two countries. Every measure adopted on our part had for its object the furtherance of the desired results. In communicating to Congress a succinct statement of the injuries which we had suffered from Mexico, and which have been accumulating during a period of more than twenty years, every expression that could tend to inflame the people of Mexico or defeat or delay a pacific result was carefully avoided. An envoy of the United States repaired to Mexico with full powers to adjust every existing difference. But though present on the Mexican soil by agreement between the two governments, invested with full powers, and bearing evidence of the most friendly dispositions, his mission has been unavailing. The Mexican government not only refused to receive him or listen to his propositions, but after a long-continued series of menaces have at last invaded our territory and shed the blood of our fellow-citizens on our own soil.
It now becomes my duty to state more in detail the origin, progress, and failure of that mission . . . .Mr. Slidell arrived at Vera Cruz on the 30th of November, and was courteously received by the authorities of that city. But the Government of General Herrera was then tottering to its fall. The revolutionary party had seized upon the Texas question to effect or hasten its overthrow. Its determination to restore friendly relations with the United States, and to receive our minister to negotiate for the settlement of this question, was violently assailed, and was made the great theme of denunciation against it.
The Government of General Herrera, there is good reason to believe, was sincerely desirous to receive our minister; but it yielded to the storm raised by its enemies, and on the 21st of December refused to accredit Mr. Slidell upon the most frivolous pretexts . . .
General Herrera yielded the Government to General Paredes without a struggle, and on the 30h of December resigned the Presidency. This revolution was accomplished solely by the army, the people having taken little part in the contest; and thus the supreme power in Mexico passed into the hands of a military leader.
Determined to leave no effort untried to effect an amicable adjustment with Mexico, I directed Mr. Slidell to present his credentials to the Government of General Paredes and ask to be officially received by him. There would have been less ground for taking this step had General Paredes come into power by a regular constitutional succession. In that event his administration would have been considered but a mere constitutional continuance of the Government of General Herrera, and the refusal of the latter to receive our minister would have been deemed conclusive unless an intimation had been given by General Paredes of his desire to reverse the decision of his predecessor.
But the Government of the General Paredes owes its existence to a military revolution, by which the subsisting constitutional authorities had been subverted. The form of government was entirely changed, as well as all the high functionaries by whom it was administered.
Under this circumstance, Mr. Slidell, in obedience to my direction, addressed a note to the Mexican Minister of foreign relations, under date of the 1st of March last, asking to be received by that Government in the diplomatic character to which he had been appointed. This minister, in his reply, under date of the 12th of March, reiterated the arguments of his predecessor, and in terms that may be considered as giving just grounds of offense to the Government and people of the United States denied the application of Mr. Slidell. Nothing therefore remained for our envoy but to demand his passports and return to his own country.
Thus the Government of Mexico, though solemnly pledged by official acts in October last to receive and accredit an American envoy, violated their plighted faith and refused the offer of a peaceful adjustment of our difficulties. Not only was the offer rejected, but the indignity of its rejection was enhanced by the manifest breach of faith in refusing to admit the envoy who came because they had bound themselves to receive him . . . .
IN my message at the commencement of the present session I informed you that upon the earnest appeal both of the Congress and convention of Texas I had ordered and efficient military force to take a position "between the Nueces and the Del Norte."
This had become necessary to meet a threatened invasion of Texas by the Mexican forces for which extensive military preparations had been made. T he invasion was then threatened solely because Texas had determined, in accordance with a solemn resolution of the Congress of the United States, to annex herself to our Union, and under these circumstances it was plainly our duty to extend our protection over her citizens and soil.
The Congress of Texas, by its act of December 19, 1836, had declared the Rio del Norte to be the boundary of that Republic. Its jurisdiction had been extended and exercised beyond the Nueces. The country between that river and the Del Norte had been represented in the Congress and in the convention of Texas, had thus taken part in the act of annexation itself, and is not included within one of our Congressional districts. Our own Congress had moreover, with great unanimity, by the act approved December 31, 1845, recognized the country beyond the Nueces as a part of our territory by including it within our own revenue system, and a revenue officer to reside within that district has been appointed by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. It became, therefore, of urgent necessity to provide for the defense of that portion of our country . . . .
The movement of the troops to the Del Norte was made by the commanding general under positive instructions to abstain from all aggressive acts toward Mexico or Mexican citizens and to regard the relations between that Republic and the United States as peaceful unless she should declare war or commit acts of hostility indicative of a state of war. He was specially directed to protect private property and respect personal rights. . . . .
The Army moved from Corpus Christi on the 11th of March, and on the 28th of that month arrived on the left bank of the Del Norte opposite to Matamoras, where it encamped on a commanding position, which has since been strengthened by the erection of fieldworks.
The Mexican forces at Matamoras assumed a belligerent attitude, and on the 12th of April General Ampudia, then in command, notified General Taylor to break up his camp within twenty-four hours and to retire beyond the Nueces River, and in the even to f his failure to comply with these demands announced that arms, and arms alone, must decide the question. But no open act of hostility, was committed until the 24th of April . . . .
The grievous wrongs perpetrated by Mexico upon our citizens throughout a long period of years remain unredressed, and solemn treaties pledging her public faith for this redress have been disregarded. A government either unable or unwilling to enforce the execution of such treaties fails to perform one of its plainest duties.
Upon the pretext that Texas, a nation as independent as herself, thought proper to unite its destinies with our own, she has affected to believe that we have severed her rightful territory, and in official proclamations and manifestoes has repeatedly threatened to make war upon us for the purpose of reconquering Texas. In the meantime we have tired every effort at reconciliation. T he cup of forbearance has been exhausted even before the recent information from the frontier of the Del Norte. But now, after reiterated menaces, Mexico has passed the boundary of the United States, has invaded our territory and shed American blood upon the American soil. She has proclaimed that hostilities have commenced and that the two nations are now at war.
As war exists, and notwithstanding all our efforts to avoid it, exists by the act of Mexico herself, we are called upon by every consideration of duty and patriotism to vindicate with decision the honor, the rights, and the interests of our country.
JAMES K. POLK
