Proceedings of the Senate and Documents Relative to Texas, from which the Injunction of Secrecy Has Been Removed Page: 100 of 119
This book is part of the collection entitled: From Republic to State: Debates and Documents Relating to the Annexation of Texas, 1836-1856 and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the UNT Libraries.
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
[ 34.1 100
:t him by, General Almonte, minister plenipotentiary-and envoy extraordiary~
of the; Mexican Republic, in reply to the letter of the undersigned of
the sth day of the same month. T he minister of Mexico, informs the unir.igned
that he has seen with regret that the undersigned has fallen into
;two grave mistakes in regard to the meaning of the MWexican minister's
letter of the 3d of November, wlich mistakes, he presu s, are the con:seq.uence
of some error committed in the translation of that letter, made
eia this department. A suggestion of this sort, coming from the minister of
a nation whose language is different frorm that of the United States, could
-ot fail to put the undlersigned upon carefill inquiry as to the correctness
of t. The undersigned regrets that this has afforded him no reason to
suppose that the language of the Mexican minister's letter admits of any
mnore correct translation into English than that which it has received. If
the true meaninlg of that letter'has not been given, it may be owing to the
diffictlty which already exists in giving in one language all the minute
siades of meaning which may be found in the idiomatic expressions of
another. Be that as it nay, the undersigned does not hesitate to take the
Mexican minister's interpretation of his own language, as given in his letter
to which this is a reply; but he is, at the same tirme, compelled to declare
that he does not see, even in this interpretation, in what respect he
a%s misunderstood the Mexican minister.
The first mistake' into which the Mexican minister asserts that the unilersigned
has fallen is in supposing that the Government of Mexico "impmtes
to one of the supreme-powers of the American Union unworthy
xiews or designs with regard to the territory of Texas ;" and the Mexican
minister now expressly declares that"' the Mexican Government has cast
ai suich imputation-quite the contrary; it has tanifested its reliance on
he circurespectionl and good judgment of the American Congress." If
;tHs be so, the undersigned is' quite at -a loss to know why the Mexican
mui-ister should have considered it necessary to denountce war, as the con.sequence
of the anticipated action of the American Congress. If, as he
mIKw declares, (and as of course he must be understood,) he meant-only to
say that the Bubject of the annexation of Texas to this Union would be
jpraposed and in some mannef agitated or discussed in the American Congtess,
and if, as he also declares, he meant to express the " reliance of his
,cVelrnnment on the circumspection and good judgment of Congress" to
tdfeat any " unworthy views or designs with regard to the territory of
.Texas," it would seem that his interposition could not have been necessary,
even_r in his own view of the case. He either did or did not anticipate
a movemlent on the part of Congress more serious than a simple discussion
sf the measure in question. If he did, then the undersigned has not mishweartood
him; if he did not, then the denunciation of war was wholly
gatuitous and unnecessary, because it was made on a contingency which
le himself did not mean to say was even probable.
Whether the Mexican minister did or did not, in his letter of the 3d of
Noeibmber, mean to impute to this Government, or some part of it, the
idteign to annex Texas to the Union, the undersigned cannot understand
.im as meaning any thing else in his explanatory letter of the 1 lth. He
svtows his suspicion of such a design in his attempt to show that he was
juastified in entertaining that suspicion; arid he does this in the very pas;,ge
of his letter in which he. endeavors to prove that the undersigned
,w,siad in attributing such a suspicion to him. Why else does he refer to
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Congress. Senate. Proceedings of the Senate and Documents Relative to Texas, from which the Injunction of Secrecy Has Been Removed, book, 1844; [Washington]. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth2363/m1/100/: accessed July 23, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .