Page:Vol 5 History of Mexico by H H Bancroft.djvu/400

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
380
CAPTURE OF MONTEREY.

On the 31st of that month he issued a decree proclaiming the penalty of death against every native or foreigner who, directly or indirectly, should give aid to the enemy, or engage in contraband traffic with him. He moreover caused numbers of circulars to be dropped on the line of march of the American army, inviting the soldiers to desert under promises of kind treatment and protection.[1] But vacillation marked Ampudia's action, and the antipathy between him and his generals rendered it impossible to arrive at any settled plan. At first he conceived the idea of opposing the enemy at Marin, and concentrated there a large force of cavalry under Torrejon. The plan was soon abandoned, however, and Torrejon retired on the approach of the Americans. Several councils of war were held, but the opposing opinions expressed caused repeated changes to be made in the defensive preparations. Fortifications were commenced, then destroyed, and again resumed. Such indecision had a most disheartening effect upon the army and seriously injured its morale. The defensive works of Monterey were nevertheless made very formidable.

The city, which is the capital of the state of Nuevo Leon, is situated in a fertile valley surrounded by mountain ridges of the Sierra Madre. It extends about a mile and a half along the northern bank of the Rio San Juan, which making a north-easterly turn covers that flank of the town. The suburbs on the north and west were laid out in squares containing scattered huts with gardens enclosed by hedges and irrigating ditches. Directly to the north, about 1,000 yards from the town proper, was the citadel, a bastioned work 270 varas square, erected around the unfinished walls of the new cathedral, protected by dry ditches, and pierced by embrasures for thirty-four guns. It only mounted, however, about twelve, of

  1. Copies of these documents are supplied in Taylor's and Worth's correspondence. Id., pp. 420-3.