Page:Vol 5 History of Mexico by H H Bancroft.djvu/347

This page has been validated.
TEXAN DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS.
327

the Americans of punic faith, reiterating his government's resolve to uphold its rights at all hazards, and ended with the words, "the Mexicans will conquer or cease to exist."

Soon after the recognition of Texas the United States accredited a diplomatic agent, named Alcée Labranche, to that government, and received an envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary called Hunt, an American citizen until very recently, who in August 1837 proposed the annexation of Texas to the American Union. He found many obstacles in the way, the chief ones being that a treaty for its accomplishment would involve a war with Mexico, and that the requisite two-thirds vote in the senate for its ratification could not then be obtained. President Van Buren[1] was too shrewd a politician to risk its rejection and to jeopardize the popularity of his administration in the northern states. To decline the proposal for the time being would not affect him in the southern states. He trusted that by a dexterous management of the American claims against Mexico, the main obstacle to the annexation would soon be removed. In this he was disappointed, as we have seen that Mexico's offer to submit the matters in controversy to arbitration postponed for several years the maturity of that plan.

The independence of Texas was recognized by Great Britain and France, which powers immediately afterward sent their diplomatic representatives, the former Captain Elliot of Canton war fame, and the latter the comte Dubois de Saligny, who in after years became so notorious for his diplomatic trickery in Mexico.[2] These two nations well knew that Texan

  1. Ycleped the 'old fox,' and more specially the 'northern man with southern principles.'
  2. The Mexican minister of foreign affairs refers on the 31st of Jan. 1840, to the provisional declarations of the French government relative to its recognition of Mexico's independence from Spain, adding that no such dilatoriness was observed in acknowledging Texan independence from Mexico. Existing ties of friendship were as naught; and in the same manner was the fact ignored that Texan population and resources as compared with those of Mexico