History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 6/Chapter 19

by Hubert Howe Bancroft

 

CHAPTER XIX.

DIAZ, GONZALEZ, AND DIAZ.

1877-1887.

Political Programme of Diaz — Installation of Congress — Diaz Elected President — Opposition to his Government — Mutiny of the Crew of 'La Trinidad' — Foreign Relations — Difficulties with the Untted States — Joint Commission on Claims — Adjustment of Claims — The Northern Border Troubles — Their Settlement — Attempts at Reëlection Defeated — Administration of Diaz Reviewed — President Gonzalez' Biography — Guatemala's Claim to Chiapas — Adjustment of Dispute — Foreign Relations — Internal Affairs — Progress of Mexico — Gonzalez as an Administrator — The Modified Stamp Act — Recognition of Debt to British Bond-holders — Diaz Again Elected President.

While Diaz was absent much anxiety had been caused in the capital by the action of the press and certain ill-balanced individuals, who sought to divert the revolution from its true progressive course by inculcating reactionary principles. In order to counteract the effect of such doctrines, Diaz on February 16th issued a circular,^[1] in which he set forth that it was his intention to restore constitutional order as soon as possible, and firmly carry out the promises of the plan of Palo Blanco with regard to constitutional reorganization, the security of personal guaranties, and the reforms prescribed therein. The revolution, he stated, was not reactionary or retrogressive, but liberal and progressive in its principles. In conclusion, he wished to impress upon the nation that the present executive was not exclusive in his views of governing. It was his wish to govern with the liberal national party, without distinction of cliques, and he invited the intelligent of all factions to coöperate with him in the work of constitutional reconstruction. Thus the policy of Diaz, from the first, was the reverse of that of Lerdo; and by his impartial regard for the liberal-minded partisans of all cliques he made his administration successful.

The day appointed for the primary elections was January 28, 1877, while the secondary or electoral votes of the districts for the members of congress and the president were to be cast on the 11th and 12th respectively of February following. Congress was to be installed on the 12th of March.^[2] It was found necessary, however, in the case of the more distant states, to extend this time, and it was not until April 1st that a number of deputies sufficient to constitute a quorum could be assembled. On that day congress formally opened its sessions, and Diaz, still in the character of provisional president, delivered the customary address to the house. He stated that although the relations of the government with foreign powers were for the present abnormal, the diplomatic agents resident in the capital had manifested so friendly a spirit that he did not doubt that the nations they represented would shortly recognize the new government. Alluding to the elections, he said that the popular suffrage had been entirely free; that though in some cases abuses had occurred, they were attributable to the practices inaugurated by the late administration, and he called the attention of congress to this evil, in order that by reforms of the electoral laws and the punishment of violators of them, it might be put a stop to. He then touched upon the measures that had been taken for the internal improvement of the country. The rural police had been increased for the suppression of brigandage; initiatory steps had been taken to effect reforms in the courts of justice; improvements had been begun for the advancement of public instruction; and attention had been given to the development of telegraphic and railroad systems. He then spoke of the lamentable condition of the treasury, and informed congress that the minister of that department would lay before it the budget for the ensuing financial year, in which efforts had been made to reduce expenditures to the ordinary income of the federal government without burdening the nation with fresh imposts. The president of the congress in his reply congratulated Diaz on the success of the revolution, and the nation on the prospects of peace and progress held out by his programme. Congress, he said, would accept the circular of February 16th as a part of the programme of the government, setting forth, as it did, the spirit and principles of the revolution.

It was not till May 2d that congress was able to declare the result of the presidential elections, and on that day it pronounced Diaz elected constitutional president. His election had been almost unanimous, 10,500 votes out of 10,878, cast in 181 districts, being in his favor. On the 5th he made the necessary protestation. His term of office was to expire November 30, 1880.

Porfirio Diaz, whose previous public career is already before the reader, was born September 15, 1830, in the city of Oajaca, and was educated in the clerical and scientific institutes established there. He began a course of studies for the bar, which, after long interruption, he completed later in the city of Mexico. From early youth his career was a military one, having, while still quite young, joined the movement against Santa Anna. In 1857 he gave in his adherence to the reform party, and fought bravely during the ensuing war. Throughout the French invasion he was conspicuous for his opposition to the establishment of a monarchy, and his brilliant achievements raised him to the foremost rank of military leaders. His administrative ability was signally shown in the successive positions which he occupied as chief of a district, governor of a state, and virtually civil, military, and financial ruler of the territory to the south of the linea del Oriente. Accomplished, and in personal intercourse agreeable, Diaz displays in his conversation decision and military abruptness. With dignity of deportment, he unites a manner marked by simplicity. His will is indomitable. When the rebellion against Lerdo broke out, Diaz was generally disliked by foreigners, who feared the revolutionary projects of a military leader. They would have preferred the unprogressive but quiet administration of Lerdo to the disturbance of a revolution which entailed risk to their private interests. But these feelings in time died out under his firm and progressive policy.

Although, owing to the exigencies of his position, Diaz surrounded himself at first by his particular partisans, he soon began to display a more inclusive policy, and in time the prominent men of all parties were drawn within the circle of his supporters. Neither civil nor military positions were closed to Inglesistas, Juaristas, or Lerdistas; and though the latter long held aloof and refused to accept his government, before the completion of his term he had won them over and opened a way for their entrance into political life during the time of his successor.

Some opposition was, nevertheless, offered to his government. General Alvarez, governor of Guerrero, rose against Jimenez, the military governor sent by Diaz, and the state was more or less disturbed during the first half of 1877, Jimenez being finally driven out of it. In July, however, an arrangement was made between Álvarez and General Cuellar, by which the former recognized the authority of Diaz^[3] More troublesome were demonstrations made on the northern border from the territory of the United States in favor of Lerdo, as they complicated matters pending with the neighboring republic.^[4] Escobedo, in the latter part of 1877, organized a force in Texas for the invasion of Mexico, and entered Coahuila. José María Amador made a similar movement into Tamaulipas. In 1878 several engagements took place, but with no success to the Lerdistas. On June 3d Escobedo was defeated by Nuncio, and captured shortly after at Cuatro Ciénagas, whence he was taken to Mexico city, where he was released on parol September 13th.^[5] Amador was not so fortunate. After a series of ill successes he was routed August 24th at the Rancho de Guadalupe, five leagues from the Villa de Mendez, and slain with his brother Albino and brother-in-law José María Cisneros.

Apart from these hostile movements directed against the federal government, there were others of a local character, for the most part stirred up by revolutionary malecontents. During the years 1878 to 1880 inclusive, Vera Cruz, Jalisco, Puebla, San Luis Potosí, Oajaca, Yucatan, and Campeche were more or less afflicted by such disturbances, while the most troublesome one occurred in Sinaloa. They were all, however, suppressed; and where the intervention of the federal troops was necessary no very serious exertion on the part of the government was required. The government of Diaz, in fact, may be regarded as governing enjoyed unusual freedom from trouble, considering the discordant elements from which it sprung.

Special mention must be made of a mutiny in 1879 at Tlacotalpan, on the Alvarado River, which gave occasion to a most uniortunate event, causing great excitement at Vera Cruz. A portion of the crew of the war-steamer Trinidad, taking advantage of the absence of the commander, and led by the commanding officer of the artillery, Francisco A. Navarro, who was in concert with some of the inhabitants of Alvarado, seized the vessel and put out to sea in the direction of El Cármen, Campeche. When this was known at Vera Cruz, Luis Mier y Teran, the governor,^[6] caused some suspected persons residing in the city to be seized, shot, and buried the same night without form of trial. This gave rise to a storm of indignation. The report sent to the government was to the effect that a mutiny in concert with that on board the Trinidad had taken place at the barracks in Vera Cruz, and that the victims, nine in number, had fallen in the attack. But the relatives of the deceased denied this, and clamored for justice; the press was loud in its denunciations; and the government was compelled to issue orders for the exhumation of the bodies, that they might be submitted to medical examination. Teran interposed every obstacle to delay this action; nor did the government show much more alacrity. On July 13th, however, the corpses were disinterred, and Lore undeniable evidence that the victims had been put to death by military execution.^[7] Proceedings were instituted against Teran, who was tried before the grand jury, which on May 18, 1880, declared itself incompetent to pass judgment in the case; It was then referred to the chamber of deputies, which on November 14, 1881, pronounced itself likewise incapable of rendering a decision.^[8]

With regard to the Trinidad, the mutineers having proceeded to the Isla del Cármen seized $4,000 of the public funds, and Navarro with a part of the crew having remained on shore, a counter-mutiny was promoted by the boatswain, who retook the ship and brought her back to Vera Cruz, June 30th. Navarro and those with him were apprehended later, in the plaza of Campeche, having with them over $2,500 of the stolen money.^[9]

 

During the administration of Diaz the relations of Mexico with foreign countries were greatly extended. The aim of both his foreign and domestic policy was to insure the progress and increase the prosperity of the republic. By the middle of 1877 Diaz had been recognized by Spain, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, and most of the Central and South American republics. In 1879 relations were again entered into with Portugal and Belgium, and finally with France, in October 1880, after several years of negotiation.^[10]

While new treaties of amity and commerce were thus being formed, the diplomatic and consular services were enlarged in the interest, and consequent expansion of trade. Nor was Diaz blind to the disadvantages under which Mexico lay with regard to certain existing treaties, and the proper notifications were given for their annulment in order to procure others more favorable.^[11] The relations between Mexico and the United States require more than a passing notice, and I shall consequently enter somewhat more into details regarding them.

 

Soon after the ratification of the Guadalupe treaty in 1848, mutual complaints began to arise on the part of Mexican and United States citizens against the respective authorities, on account of injuries to their persons or property. When the Gadsden treaty, in 1854, released the United States government from the obligations contained in the eleventh article by which that government solemnly agreed to restrain by force Indian incursions into Mexico from United States territory, the complaints of Mexican citizens increased, owing to the incessant depredations committed on the frontier by Indians and lawless desperadoes, who crossed the border from the neighboring republic. Still more numerous and more urgently pressed were the claims made against Mexico by United States citizens, many of whom had suffered severe grievances during the troublous times of that nation. Such a multitude of claims against the Mexican government, demanding compensation for forced loans, for losses incurred by military operations, for appropriation of private property, and for compulsory military service, was laid before Secretary Seward, that he proposed, in March 1867, to Romero, the Mexican minister at Washington, that in order to avoid difficulties which might lead to a rupture, a treaty should be made, by which United States citizens should be exempted from forced loans or contributions of any kind, and from military service. Romero reported the matter to his government The result was a convention entered into by the two governments in 1868, by which it was agreed that a mixed commission, composed of two members respectively representing the two nations, should be appointed to adjust the claims.^[12] The commission was to appoint an arbiter and hold its sessions in Washington. Gomez Palacio was appointed by the Mexican government, and William H. Wadsworth by that of the United States. These commissioners began their labors in August 1869.

To enter into particulars connected with this joint commission, whose labors extended over a period of seven years, would be tedious. Its abrupt termination several times seemed imminent, threatening a rupture between the two nations, and it was frequently prorogued. In 1870, Doctor Lieber, after much wrangling, was appointed arbiter, and on his death, which took place October 1, 1872, Sir Edward Thornton, the British minister at Washington, was made umpire in October 1873. There were further frequent interruptions. Twice the Mexican commissioner was changed. In 1871 Palacio was appointed Mexico minister to the United States, and Leon Guzman succeeded him as member of the joint commission in April 1872. Guzman and Wadsworth, however, could not work amicably together, and the former resigned in December, the labors of the commission being again interrupted till the arrival, in July 1873, of his successor, Manuel María Zamacona. Henceforth more cordiality existed between the commissioners; and on the 31st of January, 1876, their labors terminated. The time allowed the commission for the adjustment of their claims had been on several occasions extended by special conventions, and when the cases which still remained undecided were submitted to the umpire, who was required to send in his decisions within six months after the closing of the commission, it was also found necessary to extend that time to November 20th, on which day the adjustment was finally concluded.

The result of this lengthy investigation, which cost over $300,000, was that awards were made against Mexico in favor of United States citizens to the amount of $4,125,622, while $150,498 was awarded to Mexican claimants, the latter sum to be deducted from Mexico's liability, which was to be paid by yearly instalments of $300,000, to begin January 31, 1877.^[13]

With regard to the 2,000 claims that were laid before the commission, representing the sum of $556,788,600,^[14] the greater portion of them were fictitious, and the legitimate ones exorbitant. The joint commission opened a field for speculation to every class of rascals. Every device was practised to rob one government or the other, the claimants hesitating not at all at perjury and forgery. Before the convention of 1868 the claims filed by American citizens against Mexico amounted to 330; but this number, after the commission was installed, was swelled to over 1,000. Out of 1,017 American claims examined by the commissioner's, 831 were rejected, and out of 998 Mexican claims only 167 received awards.^[15]

Notwithstanding this settlement of claims, there were still other matters threatening a rupture between the two countries. There was the refusal of Mexico to exempt United States citizens from the payment of forced loans — by doing which she claimed that she would be surrendering her sovereign right to exact contributions in times of emergency from residents in the country; and the refusal to permit American troops to enter Mexican territory in pursuit of marauders.

As early as January 1871, Nelson, United States minister in Mexico, asked that the latter concession might be granted, and repeated the request in April following. On both occasions he was refused; and in April 1875 Secretary Fish, in order to satisfy the Mexican government on the point of international honor, proposed to Minister Mariscal that an agreement should be made by which the troops of both nations might cross the boundary line in pursuit of savages, bandits, and desperadoes. Such a mutual concession would have been derogatory to the dignity of neither republic, and there is little doubt that Lerdo, during the peaceful years of his administration, could have taken measures that would have satisfied the expectations of the United States. But this he neglected to do, and when the revolution broke out it was beyond his power. Consequently the depredations on the frontier became more frequent and irritating. Somewhat later during the last-named year the United States minister, John W. Foster, again called the government's attention to this matter, and receiving no satisfactory reply, finally informed the minister of foreign affairs that if Mexico would not afford the necessary protection the United States would assume the responsibility of doing so. Affairs thus remained till 1877, during which the representations to the Mexican government were frequent and more urgent. It is not surprising, however, that in the distracted condition of Mexico during this period they met with no immediate attention. But the excitement in Texas had become threatening. The demands of that state for redress and the application of self-protection were so clamorous that on June 1, 1877, orders were issued from Washington instructing General Ord to cross the Mexican frontier in pursuit of marauders on United States soil. He was, however, charged to request the coöperation of the authorities. This elicited a protest on the part of the Mexican agent at Washington, on the ground that such a step was contrary to treaty and international law, and Diaz instructed General Treviño to oppose by force any such invasion.^[16]

Matters at this time were still further complicated by the fact that the United States, opposed to revolutionary principles, did not recognize Diaz as the head of the government, while the question of annexation of the northern states was animatedly discussed. War in fact seemed imminent. There is little doubt that Foster would have fomented hostilities if he could, and President Hayes did not seem adverse to such a course. Nevertheless, the action of Diaz while maintaining the national dignity was energetic, and at the same time not marked by unfriendliness. An adequate force was sent to the frontier, with great effect in suppressing depredations; and the first and second instalments of the joint commission's awards were punctually paid. In view of this conciliatory line of action, and of the firm establishment of Diaz as executive, the government at Washington recognized him as president in April 1878; and though occasional encroachments were made on Mexican territory, leading to official correspondence, peaceful relations continued. On May 9th following Manuel María de Zamacona was appointed minister plenipotentiary to the United States.^[17]

In September 1880 the government at Washington asked for a formal permission on the part of Mexico to allow United States troops to cross the boundary line. The executive laid the matter before congress, which finally expressed its willingness to grant the concession under certain conditions. The result was, that on the 29th of July, 1882, a convention was signed, by which it was agreed that the federal troops of both republics might reciprocally cross the frontier in pursuit of savage Indians.^[18] On July 29th of the following year a treaty was entered into, by which it was agreed that each nation should appoint a surveying party, to form when combined an International Boundary Commission. The duty of this commission was to mark out afresh the dividing line, which, owing to the destruction of monuments, was giving rise to difficulties.^[19]

 

On the 1st of November, 1877, congress approved the non-reëlection law, and on May 5th of the following year a congressional decree amending the federal constitution to that effect was published.^[20] Nevertheless, as the elections drew near, several of the states, especially Morelos, proposed that Diaz should again be eligible to the presidency, provided that he obtained two thirds of the electoral votes.^[21] In most of the states, however, the plan was disapproved; nor was Diaz so imprudent as to favor a movement directly opposed to the plan of Tuxtepec, to which he was pledged. He recognized that such an action might destroy confidence in his good faith, both at home and abroad, and he consequently instructed his friends to desist from their efforts to procure his reëlection.^[22]

The candidates for the presidential chair were Manuel Gonzalez, Justo Benitez, García de la Cadena, Ignacio Mejía, and Manuel M. de Zamacona. By decree of September 25th congress declared Gonzalez elected,^[23] and on December 1, 1880, he assumed the executive office.

 

The administration of Diaz was essentially progressive, and a consequent general amelioration in the condition of the people was observable in both a social and material point of view. Owing to the excellent condition into which the urban rural police was brought, never had the security of the public been so well provided for. Relations between the federal government and the states were cordial; and although the president retained extraordinary powers, he never resorted to declarations of martial law in districts that required federal interposition.^[24] Great impetus was given to education. The establishment of numerous agricultural schools and of scientific observatories was contemplated, together with the repair of roads, causeways, and bridges, as well as several improvements in the ports of the republic. But the difficulties the government had to contend with, having as yet to quell the turbulent spirit which still prevailed even after the crushing out of a general revolution, were in the way, and hindered it from carrying out most of its progressive plans. It may be said that under Diaz' rule the chief material improvements introduced were the establishment of two observatories, astronomical and meteorological. The government took in hand the railway problem, making liberal grants to several companies that were disposed to engage in the construction of railroad lines, both international and local. It should be born, in mind that in adopting this progressive policy the president had to contend with the opposition existing in his own cabinet, brought about by the establishment of railway communication between Mexico and the United States. The only minister who openly upheld the railway scheme without exhibiting any fear of undue American influence was General Gonzalez, minister of war, who later became the successor of General Diaz in the executive office, and efficaciously aided him in removing the prejudices of his colleagues.

The financial condition of Diaz' government was truly a painful one. The consequences of the revolution which had just triumphed had caused a great disturbance in treasury affairs. Moreover, the army had been considerably increased with the triumphant revolutionary troops, and the treasury was unable to meet the enormous expenses of so large an armed force. The government was under the absolute necessity of introducing economy on a large scale, involving a considerable reduction of the army and the suppression of many civil offices. Notwithstanding this saving, the treasury continued in great strait; there were years when one fourth of the salaries were left unpaid, and during the whole of that time public officers and the army had to submit to the loss of a percentage of their pay. When Diaz surrendered the executive chair the treasury was exhausted, and burdened with obligations to the amount of about three million dollars, which had to be met at once.^[25]

In strong contrast with Lerdo's stagnation policy, during the administration of Diaz frequent changes in his cabinet occurred. I have already called attention to his non-exclusive principle in regard to political appointments, and this was well illustrated in January 1880 by his nomination of General Berriozábal as minister of government.^[26] On November 15th the members of Diaz' cabinet sent in their resignations, in order to leave the new president at liberty to form his own ministry. Gonzalez had already consulted Diaz with regard to his selection of ministers, and requested him to accept the portfolio of public works. The new cabinet, therefore, was thus composed: minister of foreign affairs, Ignacio Mariscal; of government, Cárlos Diez Gutierrez; of justice, Ezequiel Montes; of fomento, Porfirio Diaz; of war, Gerónimo Treviño; and of the treasury, Francisco Landero y Cos.^[27]

Gonzalez' history, like that of the greater number of political men now figuring in Mexico, is highly romantic. Born in obscurity, he rose through every difficulty and danger to the highest office of the nation. Neither the death-potential bullet nor the assassin's hand could stop his onward career.^[28] At Puebla he lost his right arm, and at Tecoac he was again severely wounded on the stump by a bullet, besides being struck on the thigh. His body bears the scars of a dozen wounds received in combats with the French or in civil war. On his left cheek a long gash has left its cicatrice. When he became a candidate for the presidency, bis opponents said that he was a Spaniard, and therefore ineligible. The opposition press raised the cry, and the credulous masses believed it. It was necessary to bring his origin to light, and his baptismal certificate was published. It appears that he was christened in Matamoros on the 18th of June, 1833, as a legitimate son of Fernando Gonzalez and Eusebia Flores, both native-born Mexicans. The names given him at the baptismal font were José Manuel del Refugio. He was born in that city, and spent his early years in the Moquete rancho, situated five leagues from the town. Upon attaining manhood, he became the chief clerk of a mixed store and bakery in Matamoros, kept by an uncle-in-law of his, named Campuzano. At the age of nineteen he enlisted as a soldier, and from that day his military career was never interrupted. In a few years, and solely by his courage and meritorious services, he attained the highest rank in the army. His record shows that every promotion awarded him was due to a brave deed or to a wound received on the battle-field.

Gonzalez is of low stature and stalwart build. His complexion is somewhat ruddy, and shows the effects of exposure during his long military life. He wears a heavy black mustache; his beard is partially gray; his hair abundant and inclined to curl.

Gonzalez assumed the presidential office at the very time that the government was experiencing the financial difficulties above alluded to; and although the country was at peace, and his efforts were mainly directed to an administrative organization, the task was an arduous one. In regard to international policy, there were only two questions pending, but they were of the highest import, and difficult ones to solve. One of them was that arising from troubles on the frontier of the United States; the other was the boundary dispute with Guatemala.

After the separation of Central America from the Mexican federation in 1824, and the decision of Chiapas to cast her lot with Mexico, the Central American federation still laid claim to Soconusco,^[29] which was a department of Chiapas. Instigated by agents and partisans of the Central American government, the discontented portion of the inhabitants of Soconusco pronounced at Tapachula July 24, 1824, against annexation of the department to Mexico, and the Central American congress thereupon passed a decree incorporating it into that republic. In March 1825 the Mexican government firmly proclaimed against this encroachment, on the ground that Soconusco, being an integral part of Chiapas, was a portion of the Mexican federation. The pronunciamiento of Tapachula was, in fact, nothing less than a revolutionary demonstration against the local government of Chiapas and the federal government, and Mexico had a right to interfere by force of arms to suppress the revolt. The federal executive, however, refrained from doing so, and the Central American government Occupied Tapachula with troops. As the protest of Mexico was disregarded, a few months later a brigade under General Anaya was sent to Chiapas, but it did not advance beyond that city. When Mexico assumed this threatening attitude, negotiations were opened by Juan de Dios Mayorga, minister plenipotentiary of the united provinces of Central America, who proposed that the question should be decided by the congress of Panamá. This the minister of relations, Lúcas Alaman, refused to agree to, on the ground that such assent would be an admission of a doubt as to Mexico's right to the department. Mayorga then suggested that the question of the boundary should be settled by a joint commission, which proposal Alaman accepted, without in any way renouncing Mexico's right to Soconusco. An agreement was entered into by which both governments were pledged to withdraw their troops, and the inhabitants of Soconusco were not to be called upon by either for contributions of men or money, and left to be governed by their own municipal authorities until the question was settled. That this agreement was weak on the part of Mexico is obvious. Consenting not to exercise authority in a portion of a state which had annexed itself to Mexico by popular vote strengthened the claim of Central America. And this was really all that was done by these early negotiations; half a century passed before any joint commission was appointed. The position of Soconusco for the next seventeen years was anomalous. It was virtually independent, without the capability of self-government. Its political condition bordered on anarchy, and its moral condition on savagism. The department became the headquarters of marauders and the asylum of criminals and malefactors, while from time to time it was invaded by Central American troops, whose conduct did not mend matters.

Affairs remained thus till 1842, when Santa Anna, in consequence of representations of the authorities and citizens, decreed September 11, 1842, that Soconusco was an inalienable part of Chiapas, and consequently of the Mexican nation. The district was formed into a prefectura of Chiapas, and Tapachula, which was raised to the rank of a city, was designated as the capital. Guatemala, the dissolution of the Central American federation being already forecast, protested, and some correspondence followed; but the internal troubles of both countries caused the matter to be dropped until 1853, when Santa Anna appointed Juan Nepomuceno de Pereda minister plenipotentiary to Guatemala, now an independent republic, and laying claim to Chiapas and Soconusco. Guatemala's claim was still more far-fetched than that of the Central American federation. It was based on the ground that Chiapas had belonged to the captaincy-general of Guatemala, the Guatemalan government ignoring the fact that Chiapas had acquired its independence of Spain and Spain's government. As well might Guetemala have laid claim to Nicaragua or Costa Rica, since both those countries formed provinces of the extinguished captaincy-general. Pareda's mission was to effect a treaty for the determination of the boundary, and the settlement of pending disputes, and he submitted a project to Pavon, the Guatemalan minister. But his efforts were of no avail. A new aspect was given to Guatemala's demands. Pavon put in a claim against Mexico for nearly half a million of dollars, known as the deuda de Chiapas.^[30] In 1858 Pereda was recalled, and for fifteen years the matter remained in abeyance.

In August 1874 Ramon Uriarte, Guatemalan envoy extraordinary to Mexico, presented a memorandum to Lafragua, the minister of relations, in which he again brought forward the boundary question, and proposed to make the project of the treaty discussed by Perada and Pavon in 1854 the starting-point. Negotiations were carried on for some time without interruption; a convention was signed December 7, 1877, and a joint commission appointed. Nevertheless, matters did not go on smoothly; the labors of the commission were several times stopped, and at one time the danger of hostilities breaking out was imminent. During the years 1879 and 1880 several irruptions into Soconusco were made by bands of armed men, proceeding from Guatemalan territory; and in December of the latter year Tuxtla Chico was attacked by a force 200 strong, commanded by the jefe político of San Márcos, a department of Guatemala. Mexico grew angry, began to contemplate war, and sent a strong force into Chiapas. But milder measures prevailed; and on September 27, 1882, a treaty was signed by which Guatemala renounced forever her pretended rights to Chiapas and Soconusco, as well as all claims for indemnity, and the boundary line between the two republics was defined in perpetuity.^[31]

The new commercial treaties with Germany, Italy, and Belgium, initiated under the former administration, as well as an extradition treaty with Spain, were concluded by Gonzalez and ratified in 1883. The long-interrupted relations with Great Britain were renewed by Gonzalez, and it should be remembered that Mexico had not made the first advance toward reconciliation Sir Spencer St John arrived in Mexico in July 1883, as the representative of the British government, and as a result of the negotiations held, friendly relations were formally restored between the two countries, and Ignacio Mariscal was in that year accredited as the minister of Mexico near the British government.

In the arrangements of a new treaty with the United States, some little delay occurred. The first project was disapproved by the senate at Washington in November 1882, and another on the reciprocity principle was drawn up. A treaty of this nature was finally agreed to, and ratified by the Mexican senate May 14, 1884.

Comparing Gonzalez' administration with the preceding ones, so greatly disturbed, we may well say that peace reigned during its whole period, and that there was no local trouble to lament. This period of Mexican history was marked by internal progress and prosperity. The advance of the republic was rapid, and of that stable nature which indicates the forward march of civilization. The railway undertakings subsidized by Diaz were carried into effect during the rule of Gonzalez, who, notwithstanding the poverty of the treasury, provided the money required to pay the heavy instalments; and it is a remarkable fact that under his government no company was ever left unpaid.

Trade and industry were considerably encouraged; the army was reorganized and provided with the best arms and artillery known in the world; there were constructed bridges, causeways, wharves, and other necessary works at the ports; public buildings, well deserving of special mention, were erected, such as the custom-house at Mexico; the telegraph service was extended, and public education zealously developed by the government. The moral tone of the people was gradually becoming more elevated.^[32] Owing to the excellent organization of the rural police, malefactors, formerly rendering the highways unsafe, were done away with, and crime notably decreased.

In order to meet the great expenditure called for by so many material improvements, Gonzalez devoted his attention particularly to the reorganization of the public treasury. During the first three years of his administration, the financial condition of the country was very much improved, with an increase of several millions of revenue. As to the point of order in the management of funds, the most perfect system was established; indeed, it was during Gonzalez' term that the treasury for the first time had a perfect system of accounting.

Notwithstanding all these improvements which the country received the benefit of under the government of Gonzalez, giving him a right to be enrolled among its most liberal rulers, his administration experienced a period of adversity, which was in its last year. The immense expenditures incurred, both in the construction of railways and in the improvement of every branch of the public administration, naturally kept the treasury in an exhausted condition. The public revenue, far from being diminished in 1884 had become increased; but the task of introducing progress in a country, and of causing it to live according to modern ideas and ways, is bound to be a difficult and costly one, and the treasury of Mexico did not possess the means to meet at the same time the necessary expenses of the administration as well as those of material development.

Gonzalez found himself placed on the horns of a dilemma; he must either pay the public employés their salaries, neglecting to meet the obligations agreed upon by his predecessor with the companies engaged in building the railways, or solely look after the interests of the latter to the prejudice of the civil list. He hesitated not. Being convinced that the credit of the nation and her future progress were intimately connected with the payment of her debts, contracted to secure the material improvements already realized, he applied the public revenue to the payment of those debts, leaving the government officials without their pay. This policy caused an outcry against the president from that class of the community living on the public revenue, and from his enemies; and that class of politicians who entertained the belief that the best means to gain the good-will of the coming ruler lay in running down the credit of the present one, worked their points, spreading innumerable calumnies against the president, whom they represented as a monster of iniquity. Not one of those calumnies has been substantiated to such a degree as to even give it the semblance of truth. It was said that the source of his fortune, which has been grossly exaggerated, was due to peculation; when the fact is, that at a time of such material development as Mexico derived from the administration of Gonzalez, it was an easy matter for any intelligent and shrewd man to acquire wealth in enterprises of recognized utility to the country, as was done by many others, some of whom were not at all friendly to the president. It was also reported that he was steeped in vice, when it is a well-known fact that Gonzalez is one of the few political men of Mexico who have never failed to maintain the respectability of their position.

The seed of slander against the president having been sown, it was not long in growing, and every financial measure adopted by the government, both to do away with the existing difficulties, and to pave the way for the next administration, which was to assume power in a few months, was construed by the public — ill advised by the enemies of Gonzalez — as a scheme to acquire large pecuniary means, to be divided between the president and his favorites. The main causes of disturbance were two; namely, the modifications introduced in the stamp law, and the convention entered into for the payment of the sums due the British bondholders. The nickel question, which had been a source of speculation on the part of a few money-grabbers, and with which the government had had no concern whatever, gave rise to a petty popular commotion in the city of Mexico.

In March 1884, with the view of augmenting the public revenue, and providing resources for the next administration, orders were given to carry into effect a law decreed by the national congress, under which a number of articles were added to the list of those subject to the payment of stamp dues. The merchants became highly indignant; and in order to deceive and excite the populace, they spread the report that the stamp-tax was intended to enrich the president; the fact being that Gonzalez would have no hand in its collection, but left it to his successor, A few commercial houses of the city of Mexico were closed two or three days; but the firm attitude of the government prevailed, and after making a few light concessions to the merchants, the law went into effect. The government of Diaz has made it imperative to the present time, and its observance is undisputed.

Much deeper was the excitement caused by the recognition of the British debt, and the plan of converting the Mexican bond in London into others, entitled the Consolidated debt of Mexico in London. Some intriguing persons, who had entertained the idea of themselves entering into arrangements with the bondholders, under the belief that they would be well compensated by the latter, endeavored to hinder Gonzalez from so doing, imagining that when the next administration came into power they would be appointed the agents to complete the negotiation. The terms of the convention were that the debt should nominally represent £17,200,000. Of this sum there would be recognized to the bondholders orly £14,448,000; the by no means insignificant difference, £2,752,000, was to be set aside by the Mexican government to meet the expenses of conversion. What Gonzalez had in view was that this large sum, which his successor, and not himself, was to receive — as his administration would terminate in fifteen days — should be applied, one part to meet the expenses of conversion, and the other to place the next administration in funds to pay the bondholders the first coupons, thus protecting the credit of the government, and paving the way for it to raise a loan in London, and facilitate the development of internal works. But that sum, under the name of gastos, became the touchstone of scandal, which the enemies of Gonzalez made the most of to charge him with the intent of using it to his own advantage, while it was impossible for him to do, in view of the fact that he Lad but a few more hours to wield the executive authority. Through the agency of paid agitators and of a few deluded students, they incited the rabble of the city of Mexico to revolt at the moment the chamber of deputies was discussing the clauses of the convention, and approving them in the main. Gonzalez in this matter had acted with his usual prudence, inasmuch as, being authorized by congress to make the arrangement himself, as was done by Diaz later, on the 22d of June, 1885, he declined to act without the sanction of the legislative authority, preferring that the discussion should be postponed until the new president should go into power, and not to spill blood by employing the armed force of the government to put down the mob. These scenes occurred in the last days of November 1884, and the new president was inaugurated on the 1st of December of the same year.

The presidential election, which took place in September, favored Porfirio Diaz, who obtained a large majority, the count showing that he had received 15,999 out of the 16,462 electoral votes. The enemies of Gonzalez spread the slanderous report that he had attempted to murder and poison Diaz in order that the latter should not assume the executive office; and to that effect took advantage of an accident which occurred to the train of the Irolo railway, on which the president-elect was journeying. But plain common sense suffices to destroy this calumny; for in a country like Mexico, where elections are effected under the absolute control of the government, with but little regard to the popular will, President Gonzalez had no need of Diaz' death to keep him out of office. All he need do would be to cause the election of some one else. Diaz was chosen because Gonzalez favored his election.

On the 30th of November, 1884, Gonzalez surrendered the executive office. In spite of the financial difficulties of his last year, of the efforts made by his enemies to destroy his prestige, he did not forfeit, as would have been the case with many another ruler, the respect and esteem of the people. During the stormy days of the British Debt Convention, when the armed mob of Mexico was engaged in rioting, President Gonzalez, unaccompanied, walked the streets, day or night, among the crowds, by whom he was constantly cheered as a homage to his reckless courage. He retired to his own house only upon the day that he retired from the national palace.

His administration will ever be a memorable one in the history of Mexico. Though it is true that he left the treasury heavily burdened, the fact stands that he caused the execution of a number of public works which completely changed the face of the country. The debt he incurred represents the progress oi Mexico, and continued the reorganization of every branch of the administration before begun.

Among the persons most efficiently coöperating in the labors of the administration of Gonzalez, especial credit should be given to Carlos Rivas, who, for his intelligent and successful discharge of commissions intrusted to him, obtained the respect and consideration of the president, and of all his fellow-citizens.

Diaz, succeeding Gonzalez, found himself at first in a most difficult position financially, because the treasury was exhausted, owing to the large obligations contracted by the former ruler. He issued the decree of June 22, 1885, suspending the payment, not only of the floating debt, but also of the subsidies which he had himself granted during his former term to railway companies and others, he consolidated the internal and external debts into bonds of the treasury, and paid with regularity the salaries of public officials, less a discount of twenty-five and later ten per cent.

Peace for the most part followed, though there were communistic uprisings in Mexico and Córdoba in 1885, and a revolutionary movement in Nuevo Leon and Coahuila, and later similar revolts elsewhere. Then there was the Yaqui war in Sonora, the arrogant chief Cajeme being the cause. Lareta Molina, with twenty-two Yaquis, endeavored to suppress him, but the federal government was at length obliged to send a large force against Cajeme, who raised fortifications at various points. In March 1886, three columns, each about 1,200 strong, were set in motion against his positions,^[33] while every town or point of importance around the Yaqui Valley was sufficiently fortified and garrisoned to resist any hostile demonstration on the part of the Indians. The Yaquis were thus hemmed in on all sides. It was a well-planned campaign, and completely successful. The Indians were driven successively from stronghold to stronghold, till all were taken possession of by the Mexican troops. Cajeme, however, baffled all efforts to capture him, though several of his principal men were caught and executed.

In connection with the Yaqui war, mention must be made of outrages committed by the Apaches in Chihuahua and Sonora during 1885-6. To enumerate in the briefest manner all the murders and atrocities committed by these savages in that short space of time would require a chapter; suffice it to say that, by the combined efforts of the Mexican and United States troops,^[34] the scourge has been to a great extent wiped out.

A hope seems to have been entertained by certain schemers in the United States that the acquisition of the northern portion of Mexico by purchase would not be impracticable under the present administration, considering the financial straits in which Mexico found herself when Diaz entered office. The project, however, is a vain one. No people are more opposed to the dismemberment of their national domain than the Mexicans, and any administration that should propose the sale of a portion of their territory would be liable to overthrow. It is true that in the northern states the holders of great tracts of land, and no few of the wealthier class, are favorably disposed to annexation to the United States, but they form but a small proportion of the mass of the population. The imaginary necessity, too, for the sale of territory, has disappeared under the able financial reforms effected by Diaz, and it is to be hoped that the day may never arrive when the counsels of unprincipled men shall prevail. Under such administrations as the present one, the yearly increasing intercourse between the two nations, and the mutual commercial advantages to be derived by peace and reciprocal comity, jealousy and apprehension will cease on the one side, and arrogant pretensions on the other.^[35]

 

 

1. See Diario Debates, 8° Cong., i. 142; and La Voz de Méj. . Feb. 20, 1877, in which a copy of the circular will be found.
2. This was in conformity with the plan of Palo Blanco, which provided that the elections of the supreme powers should take place two months after the occupation of the capital by the revolutionists, and that congress should assemble one month after the elections. See the convocatoria in Diario Debates, 8° Cong., i. 5-10.
3. U. S. Ex. Doc., For, Rel., 1877–1878, i. 406, 425-6; La Voz de Méj., May 10 and Aug. 2, 1877.
4. Lerdo issued a manifesto from New York Feb. 24, 1877, claiming to be the constitutional president. Iglesias did the same from New Orleans on March 16th. Copies will be found in Id., March 26, 27, 1877. The latter returned to Mexico about the middle of Oct. He took no further part in public affairs, but retired to private life without molestation on the part of the government. Iglesias, Recuerdos, MS., 87-8.
5. Particulars of Escobedo's operations will be gathered from La Voz de Méj., July 24, 26, 28, Aug. 8, 15, Nov. 20, Dec. 1, 14, 15, 1977; II., June 17, 19, 21, Sept. 14, Nov. 7, 1878; Diario Ofic., Nov. 3), Dec. 15, 1977, and June 14, 17, 18, 20, 28, July 2, 25, 27, 31, and Aug. 2, 14, 16, 1878.
6. Teran had been elected governor June 1, 1877. Mier y Teran, Apunt. Biog., 72.
7. All the bodies had six gun-shot wounds, representing the regulation number, five of a firing platoon and a coup de grace. Itis, moreover, stated that on four of the bodies the cords with which they had been bound while alive were still remaining. La Voz de Méj., July 18, 20, 1973.
8. Diario Debates, 10° Cong., iii. 591-5; La Voz de Méj., May 20, 1880.
9. Méx., Mem. Guerra y Marina, 1981, 5; Diario Ofic., July 4, 10, 11, 1879. Consult, further, Id., July 24, 1879, et seq.; La Voz de Méj., June 27, July 30, 1879, passim.
10. See Méx. Correspond. Dipl., i. 155-75; ii. 175-88; Diario Ofic., Dec. 1979. Emilio Velasco was appointed minister to France and Baron Boissy d'Anglas as French minister to Mexico. The oficial reception of the latter took place Nov. 29th, the day before the expiration of Diaz' term of office. Id., Oct. 5, 14, 20, 30, and Nov. 29, 1880.
11. The United States, Germany, and Italy were notified that the commercial treatises with Mexico would cease to be in force in accordance with the agreements therein. Those with the former nations would thus become null one year after the respective dates of notification, and that of Italy July 14, 1882. Diaz, Informe, 1580, 8.
12. Copy of convention in Spanish and English is supplied in Mex. Sinop. Hist. Reclam., 14–19.
13. Consult U.S. House Misc. Doc. 39, 44th cong. 2d sess. For full particulars about the commission, see report of the Mexican agent in Méx., Mem. Relac. Exter., 1876-1877, pp. xii.-xvi., with doc. 7, letter A to G inclu.; Méx. Sinop. Hist. Reclam., 186; Guzman, Dictámen del Comis.; U. S. Foreign Rel., 431 cong. 2 sess., i. p. lxvii.-ix.; Id., ii. p. lix.-lxi., 836-984; U.S. Sen. Jour., 44th cong. 2d sess., 525.
14. The claims against Mexico amounted to $470,126,613, and those against the U. S. to $86,661,891. Méx. Mem. Relac Exter., 1866-1859, p. xii.
15. Grant's message of Dec. 5, 1876, in U.S. Foreign Rel., 44th cong. 21 sess., p. vii. The Mexican government regarded several of the awards as unfair, especially those given to Benjamin Weil and the La Abra Mining Co., respectively in the sums of $487,810 and $681,041. It was held that these claims were supported by false statements. The Mexican government made representations showing their fraudulent character. The first instalment was paid, though the government was compelled to have recourse to a forced loan. Méx. Mem. Relac. Exter., 1876-1877, pp. xiv., xv.
16. Méx., Mem. Guerra y Mar., 1876-1877, vi., with doc. A, B, C. It is believed, however, that secret instructions were issued to avoid collision. Frisbie's Reminis., MS., 11.
17. For details regarding these questions of dispute, consult Méx., Mem. Guerra y Marin., 1876-1877; Méx., Mem. Notas Relac., 1877, pp. 45; Id., Relac. Exter., 1878; Mex., Comments U. S. Leg.; Frisbie's Reminiscences, MS., 10-23; Méx., Territorio Invasiones, 1873-1877, pp. 94; U. S. H. E.c. Doc., i. 876-429, 45th cong. 2d sess.; Clarke's Mex., MS., 4-11; Romero's reply to Foster's Report, in Diario Ofic., Jan. 15, 1979, et seq.; La Voz de Méj., Aug. 1, 1877; Id., Oct. 18, 1877. Foster, who had been appointed by Grant in 1872, was transferred to St Petersburg in March 1880, and was succeeded by Morgan as minister to Mexico. Diario Ofic., March 24, 25, and April 21, 1880; Skilton's Statements, MS.
18. The districts into which the pursuit could be conducted were defined as unpopulated or desert, having no points within two leagues of an encampment or town. The pursuing party was to give the earliest possible notice of the invasion to the authorities of the territory invaded, and immediately to retire as soon as it had effected its purpose, or had lost the enemy's trail. Provisions were also made to meet cases of outrage committed by the troops of either nation. Copy of the convention will be found in Diario Ofic., Aug. 25, 1882, and La Voz de Méj., Aug. 27, 1882.
19. Reconnoissance parties were to be first sent out and report the condition of the existing boundary monuments; the number of those destroyed or displaced; the places settled or capable of settlement, where it might be advisable to set monuments closer together on the line; and the character of the new monuments required, whether of stone or iron, and their approximate number in each case. The two governments agreed that the convention should be regarded as continuing in force until the conclusion of the work, provided that the time did not exceed four years and four months from the date of the exchange of ratifications. The ratifications were exchanged in Washington, March 3, 1883. Mex., Boundary Line Treaty with U.S.
20. The amendment also provided that the governors of states could not be reëlected. No president or governor could be eligible till after a lapse of four years from the cessation of his functions. La Voz de Méj., Nov. 3, 1877, May 8, 1878; Diario Debates, 8° Cong., iii. 112-232; Diario Ofic., May 7, 1878.
21. The legislature of Morelos adopted such a plan in 1879, and proposed it to those of the other states, and to the diputacion permanente.
22. Diaz, Datos Biog., MS., 407-9.
23. Diario Ofic., Sept. 27, 1880. He obtained 11,528 electoral votes — La Voz de Méj., Oct. 3, 1880 — a very large majority, due to the fact that he was supported by Diaz.
24. Sinaloa was, in the early part of Diaz' administration, declared in a state of siege without his authorization. It was immediately released from it as soon as he became aware of the fact. Diaz, Informe, 1880, 12.
25. Memoria de Gonzalez.
26. Berriozábal had been Iglesias' minister of war.
27. Diario Ofic., Dec. 1, 1980; Diaz, Datos Biog., MS., 409. Diaz accepted the resignation of his ministers with the understanding that they should continue to exercise their functions until Dec. 1st, when the new ministry would enter office. Diario Ofic., Nov. 29, 1880. He resigned his portfolio May 20, 1881, and on the 27th of June following Gonzalez nominated Carlos Pacheco ministro de fomento. Id., July 1, 1981. At this time Diaz was elected governor of Oajaca. Id., June 28, 1881.
28. Two attempts were made to assassinate him during his presidential canvass or immediately afterward. Diaz, Misc., no. 56.
29. See Hist. Mex., vol. v. 23-4, and Hist. Cent. Am., vol. iii., this series.
30. The grounds for this claim were as follows: When independence was proclaimed the united provinces of Central America assumed the public debt! of the extinguished captaincy-general, and when the union was dissolved in 1947, to each of the Central American republics its corresponding quota was assigned. Guatemala claimed that Mexico, having appropriated Chiapas, ought to pay that state's quota, amounting to $458,060. Martinez, Cuestion Mex. y Guat., 103-7.
31. The treaty was duly ratified by both governments, and exchanged in the city of Mexico May 1, 1883. Mex. Tratado entre Estad. Un. Mex. y Guat. In addition to official organs of the press and other periodicals, the following authorities on this subject have been consulted: Larrainzar, Notic. Hist. Soconusco, Mexico, 1843; Id., Chiapas y Soconusco, con motivo de la cuestion de limites entre Merico y Guatemala, Mexico, 1875; Martinez, Cuestion entre Mexico y Guatemala, Mexico, 1882; Mex., Cuestion de limites entre Mex. y Guat.; Mex. y Guat., Cuestion de limites, Mexico, 1875; Uriarte, Convencion de 7 Dec., 1877; Chiapas, Manig. de los Poderes, Mexico, 1892; Mex., Correspond. Diplom., ii. 429-48, 469-634; Méx., Dem. Relac. Exter., 1878, 43-5, with App. 1-3; Id., 1881, 13-19.
32. Memorias of Fomento y Guerra and Hacienda.
33. One under generals Leiva and Carillo, with 2 mitrailleuse from the west: another under Gen. Camano, with 2 howitzers from the south-east; a heavy body of cavalry was also moved from the town of Buena Vista on the northeast; while Gen. Martinez, the commandant, with his headquarters at Barojica, directed his attention to the occupation of Torin, which was the key to the situation.
34. A momentary cloud cast its shallow over the friendly relations between the two nations, occasioned by an unfortunate collision which occurred in 1886 between a Mexican detachment and a body of U. S. troops under Capt. Crawford, who lost his lite in the scrimmage.
35. The principal authorities used in writing the five preceding chapters are government documents and official papers, and the works of Mexican writers of the period. Of the latter, notice must be made of —

    Derecho Internacional Mexicano, Mex., 1878-9, 4°, 3 pts, i. p. vii. and 707; ii. 408 pp.; iii. 1174 pp. A compilation made by José Fernandez, chief clerk of the department of relations of Mexico, and approved by the executive, of all treaties and conventions entered into by Mexico with other powers from 1821 to 1878. In the first part are those concluded and ratified by the contracting parties; annexed to the respective ones are important documents, such as conferences and treaties of Spain with other nations affecting Mexico. In the 2.1 part are treaties made but not ratified by the Mexican republic, with an appendix containing several important documents. The appendix includes, among other papers, several treaties entered into by Maximilian, the ratifications of which were never exchanged; and like all acts emanating from the empire, they were declared null by the legitimate government of Mexico. The 31 part contains laws and regulations on matters of a general nature; viz., commercial agents, admiralty, antiquities, archives, national arms, public lands, bulls, naturalization and citizenship, foreign relations, ceremonials, penal code, colonization, foreign debt, and many other subjects of more or less interest to foreigners. The typographical work is very fair.

    Correspondencia Diplomática cambiada entre el gobierno de los Estudos Unidos Mexicanos y los de varias potencias extranjeras. Mexico, 1882, 1. 4°, 2 vol., i. 993 PP., 51; ii. 726 pp., 31. Contains all the diplomatic correspondence that occurred between the government of Mexico and the governments of foreign powers from July 1, 1878, to June 30, 1881, with annexes, some of which are of earlier dates. A part of the correspondence appearing in many of the affairs contained in the work is not, properly speaking, of a diplomatic nature, but internal, having taken place between authorities of Mexico; but the compiler, José Fernandez, chief clerk of the department of relations, thought proper to insert it for the reason that much of the matter in it refers to a critical period of Mexican international relations.

    Datos Biográficos del General de Division C. Porfirio Diaz con Acopio de Documentos Históricos. Mexico, 1884. Fol., p. 247, with portrait. This work contains data for the biography of General Diaz from his birth to the end of his presidency in 1880. The data are not very extensive; indeed, for his early life, they are very scanty; but after he entered public life the in formation is abundant, and accompanied with official documents of high importance. In giving to the public this life of Diaz, it became also necessary to relate the historical events of his country for the period embraced. The whole will be found important in writing the history of Mexico.

    Agustin R. Gonzalez, Historia del Estado de Aguascalientes. Mexico, 1881. Sın. 4°,518 pp., 11., 2 maps. A comprehensive history of the state of Aguascalientes from the earliest days of the foundation to 1873, followed by general information on her literature, the customs of the inhabitants, agriculture and mines, manufactures, and other industries, and terminating with remarks on various matters connected with the state to date of publication.

    Plácido Vega, Documentos de la Comision Confidencial. 1803-3. Fol., 15 vol. MSS. This collection consists of the correspondence, documents, accounts, vouchers, etc., connected with Gen. Vega's commission to procure funds, arms, and munitions of war at San Francisco, California, for the republican government of Mexico during the French intervention and imperial régime in that country. The correspondence shows the difficulties met with by the commissioner, and how he overcame them. It also furnishes many important facts on the war between the republicans and imperialists, on President Juarez' policy, etc. The whole is a valuable contribution to the history of that eventful period.

    The following list contains an enumeration of a large number of the authorities that have been consulted. Those of an official character are: Mex., Diario de los Debates, 1869, and succeeding volumes; reports of the government officials, notably those of the secretaries of state for the treasury, government, war, foreign relations, and fomento departments, and decrees and treaties during the period; Mex., Col. Ley., Dec. y Cir., ii. 273-6; ii. 122-339, passim; Id., Bol. Ley., 1863, passim; Id., Recop Leyes, etc., i. 1867, and succeeding volumes; Id., Sinop. Hist. Reclam., 1838-76, passim; II., Correspond. Diplom., i.-ii., 1877-1582, passim; Id., Informe de la Com. Pesquis., 1874; Id., Derecho Intern. Mex., 1978, passim; Id., Codigo Reforma, 1860, 1861; Id, Iniciativas. . . .Hac., 1869; Id., Ley de Timbre, 1876, 81; 1880, 43; Id., Estat. Cuerpo Estado doyor, 1879; Discurso pronun. por el Presidente, 1881, 1882, 1883; Diaz, Informe, 1985, 51 pp.; Mex., Diario Ofic., 1937, and following years; Dublan and Lozano, Leg. Mex., v. 414-51, 596–7, 727-8; viii. 156-67, 218, 255-60, 305-6, 547-8, 571-8; ix. 8, 259-65; x.-xi., passim; Discursos pronunciados ante el Congreso de ls Union en los Sesiones del 16, 18, 19 de Mayo de 1874, Mexico, 1974, 113 p.; U. S. government documents covering this period; notably, Sen. Doc.; Sen. Misc.; Sen. Journal; For. Rel.; House Journal; H. Com. Reports; H. Ex. Doc.;H. Misc.; and Commer. Rel.; to the respective indices of which the reader is referred for Mexican affairs, as well as to those of the Cong. Globe and Hansard's Parl. Debates. The Mexican and other writers and collectors that have been consulted are: Riva Palacio, Hist. Admin. Lerdo; Tovar, Hist. Parl., i.-iv., passim; Arrangoiz, Mej., iv., passim; Rivera, Hist. Jalapa, iv.; Romero, Circulares y otras Publicaciones hechos por la Legacion Mexicana en Washington durante la Guerra de Intervencion, Mexico, 1868, 507 pp.; Id., Refut., 49-51, 85-6; Rivera, Gob, de Mex., ii. 674 et seq.; Niox, Expéd. du Mex., 705-16; Navarro, Informe sobre fr. Revol.: Rivera, Mex. Pint., i., passim; Domenech, Hist. du Mex., 438-40; Romero, Diaz, passim; Diaz, Misc., nos. 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 12, 15, 16, 18-20, 27, 41-3, 43, 55-7, 59-62; Id., Biog, MS., 1-471; Id., Datos Bio., 92–202, passim; Quevedo, El General Gonzalez, Mexico, 1981; Iglesias, Recuerd. Polit., 1874, 89, MS.; Id., Manifiesto, 1876, 20; Id., Estud. Constit. Justic., Mex., 1874, 84; Hamilton's Mex. Laws; Frisbie's Reminis., MS., 40; Vega, Docs, Ms., iii. 301, 427-8, 672-3; Id., Rep. Méj., in Pap. Var., 104, no. 9; D'Héric, Maxim., 185-410; Hall's Mec. Law, 317; Hayes' Scraps, Ariz., v. 126-7, 133; Id., Baja Cal., ix. 62; Querétaro, Col. de Ley y Dec., 1899, 31; Salm-Salm's Diary, ii., passim; Soc. Mex. Geog., 2:1 Ep., iv. 570-85, 745; Id., 31 Ep., i. 396; Sheldon's Letters, 1-26; Busto, Estad. Rep. Mex., i., p. xc.xci.; ii., 5th pt, 423; Id., Impuest. Fed., 1877–8, v.-viii. 3-18, 459-607; Bancroft's Votes on Mex., MS.,1-116; Ober's Travels in Mex., S. F., 1884, 672; Estrada y Zenéa, Man. Gob. Jef. Pol., Mex., 1878, pp. 314, 31.; Evans, Sister Rep., passim; Brocklehurst's Merico To-day, London, 1883, pp. 250, 56 plates; Bishop's Old Mex., 18-21, 139-48, 259-89; Bonilla, Informe, Mex., 1880, 133; Bustamante, contra Arzobispo de Mex., 1877, 31; Peza, Maxim., 109-74; Perez, Dic. Geog., i. 327, 333-3, 315-54 ii. 313-23; iii. 589-600;; Perez, J. S., Alm. Estadist., 77, 104–31, 172, 151-8, 212; Price, Brief, 22-58, passim; Mex., Rept Border Commis., 1864-73; Id., Conven. entre Mex. y Belgica, 1882, 23; Mex., Scraps, i.-ii., passim; Maillefert, Direct., 66-70, 209-70; Mexia, Coment. á la Constit., Mex., 1878, 19 series of pamphlets; Martinez, Cuest. de Mex. y Guat., Mex., 1882, 279; Manero's Guide, 25-40; Montiel y Duarte, Estad. Gurant. Indio, 310-12, 510-69; Hernandez, Geog. Son., 110. ii. 83–93; Vallarta, Votos, Mex., 1883, 603; Cadena, Contestacion, Mex., 1880, 48; Carrington, Affairs in Mex., MS., 1-12; Mier y Teran, Apunt. Biog., 30-73; Caballero, Hist. Alm., passim; Marquez de Leon, Mem. Post., MS., 312 et seq.; Id., Fé Perdida, 55 et seq.; Clarke's U. S. and Mex. Rel., MS., 1-33; Mata, Anuario Univ., 1881, passim; Pap. Var., 104, no. 7; Id., 120, no. 2; Id., 227, no. 9; Romero, Apunt. Éstad., Mex., 1883, 52; Morgan's U. S. and Mex., MS., 1-9; Robertson's Handbook, 1-14; Toma de Tampico, Mex., 1871, 29; Tagle, Circ. Exped. Iglesias, 1876, 27; Nayarit, Los Pueb. da Estad., 1-24; Manero, Doc. Interes., 1874-8, 83; Aspiroz, Cod. Extran., 193-214; Anderson, Mex. St. P., 126–41; Juarez, Col. Artic., Mex., 1871, 69; Abbot's Mex. and U. S., 363-8; Groso, MS., no. viii.; Gonzalez, Hist. Estado Aquasc., Mex., 1981, 518; Guzman, Systema de Dos Camaras, Mex., 1870, 88; Id., Dictamen del Comis., 1872, 71; Jal. Mem. Ejec., 1875-9, 1-65; Gomez, Reclam. Depred. Ind., Mex., 1872, 172; Id., Informe, 1874, 7; Garcia, Esp. y los Españ. en Mex., Mex., 1877, 33; Gallardo, Cuad. Compar. Elec. Presid., Mex., 1872, 7; Id., Sob. de los Estados, Mex., 1874, 40; Id., Cuad. Estad. Elec. Presid., Mex., 1877, 8; Wadsworth, Dict. Reclam. Mex., Mex., 1873, 94; Rodriguez, Com. Mex. Reclam., Mex., 1873, pp. 67, 11. 2; Conkling's Guide, N. Y., 1854, 378; Doc. Hist. Mex., 1532-75, nos. 3, 9.; A great quantity of other publications, from a pamphlet of a single sheet to works of several hundred pages, for too numerous to specify, have also been examined, as well as a great number of files of newspapers covering the period, some partially and others entirely. The principal ones are El Monitor; El Siglo XIX.; El Federalista; El Boletin Oficial del Estado de Sinaloa; El Boletin Republicano; La Estrella de Occidente; El Constitucional; El Diario de Avisos; El Publicista; El Occidental; La Nacion; El Nacional; Amigo del Pueblo; El Arco Iris; La Voz de Mejico; El Fenix: El Derecho; El Defensor de la Reforma; El Correo del Pacífico; El Estado de Sinaloa; El Eco de Occidente; La Era Nueva; La Regencracion de Sinaloa; El Porvenir de Nicaragua; Gaceta de Nicaragua; El Mensagero; Gaceta Oficial de Salvador; El Puello de Sonora; El Susurro; El Fronterizo, published in Tucson; La Crónica, published in Los Angeles, Cal.; Panamá Star and Herald; Panamá Mercant le Chronicle; The Mexican Financier, published in the city of Mexico in English and Spanish, alternate columns. Without enumerating a number of Californian and other local newspapers, mention must be made of The Morning Call; The Chronicle; The Evening Bulletin; The Evening Post: The Alta California; The Daily Examiner; and The Evening Report, all published in San Francisco, and the Sacramento Union, issued at the capital of the state. The Mexican correspondents of these papers furnish news of events, and express the views of political parties and the feelings of the people as regarded from an outside standpoint. Such communications are valuable to the historian, since they afford him an opportunity of drawing a balance between extremes.