existing circumstances, by hostile or unfriendly action on the part of the United States. The President would therefore use all proper influence to favor the restoration of order and authority in Mexico, and, so far as might be in his power, prevent incursions or any other form of aggression by citizens of the United States against Mexico. The Mexican government had lately complained of an apprehended attempt to invade the State of Sonora by citizens of the United States. Mr. Corwin was to assure the Mexican government that effective means would be adopted to put the neutrality laws of the United States into activity, and that due attention would be given to the preservation and safety of the peaceable inhabitants residing along the border. It was hoped that equal attention would be given to this subject by the authorities in Mexico. Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Corwin, min. to Mexico, No. 2, April 6, 1861, Dip. Cor. 1861, 49. October 31, 1861, France, Great Britain, and Spain entered into a convention with reference to combined operations against Mexico for the enforcement of claims. They agreed that they would not, in the employment of measures of coercion, make any acquisition of territory, or take any particular advantage, or exercise in the domestic affairs of Mexico any influence incompatible with its political independence; and, in order that their proceedings might not seem to have an exclusive character, they also agreed to communicate a copy of the convention of the United States and invite that government to accede to it. Hostile operations were begun in May, 1862, but before that time things took an unfavorable turn in consequence of the French having extended protection to General Almonte and other leading men of the Reactionary party who had been banished from the country. On this question of the intervention of the French in the domestic affairs of Mexico the concert of the powers was destroyed. The United States had declined to join them in coercive measures; and as Great Britain and Spain refused to accede to the policy of intervention, France was left to pursue alone the way that led to the attempt and disastrous failure to establish an alien monarchy in Mexico. Moore, Int. Arbitrations, II. 1289-1291, where the details of the intervention are given; Maximilian in Mexico, by Sara Yorke Stevenson; British & For. State Papers, vols. 51, 52, 53, and 54, and pages indicated in the indexes to the various volumes. Certain Mexican bonds, issued on Sept. 1, 1865, known as the Woodhouse issue, were declared by the Mexican government at the time of their issue to be fraudulent and unauthorized. A full report on the subject is in For. Rel. 1878, 624 et seq. (Mr. Hill, Assist. Sec. of State, to Mr. Moss, Jan. 11, 1900, 242 MS. Dom. Let. 217.) 5. LATER RELATIONS. $861. For some years after the withdrawal of the French from Mexico the peace of the latter country continued to be interrupted by domestic contentions. These were attended with serious border troubles, which at times impaired the good relations between Mexico and the United States and gave rise to troublesome questions. The acute stage of the difficulties was passed in 1877. Supra, §§ 222, 223. See the following documents: Relations with Mexico: Texas border troubles and extradition, report of Protection of the Rio Grande frontier: reports of Committees on Military "The record of the last fifteen years must have removed from the minds of the enlightened statesmen of Mexico any possible lingering doubt touching the policy of the United States toward her sister republic. That policy is one of faithful and impartial recognition of the independence and the integrity of the Mexican nation. At this late day it needs no disclaimer on our part of the existence of even the faintest desire in the United States for territorial extension south of the Rio Grande. The boundaries of the two republics have been long settled in conformity with the best jurisdictional interests of both. The line of demarkation is not conventional merely. It is more than that. It separates a Spanish-American people from a SaxonAmerican people. It divides one great nation from another with distinct and natural finality. The increasing prosperity of both Commonwealths can only draw into closer union the friendly feeling, the political sympathy, and the correlated interests which their his tory and neighborhood have created and encouraged. In all your intercourse with the Mexican government and people it must be your chiefest endeavor correctly to reflect this firm conviction of your government." Mr. Blaine, Sec. of State, to Mr. Morgan, min. to Mexico, June 1, 1881, "It is a source of profound gratification to the government of the United that with a full comprehension of the great political and social advantages of such a mode of developing the material resources of the country, the government of Mexico cordially lends its influence to the spirit of welcome and encouragement with which the Mexican people seem disposed to greet the importation of wealth and enterprise in their midst. The progress now making in this direction by the national government of Mexico is but an earnest of the great good which may be accomplished when the intimate and necessary relations of the two countries and peoples are better understood than To conduce to this better understanding must be your constant (Ibid.) now. As to commercial relations with Mexico, see message of July 19, 1876, As to reciprocity, see S. Mis. Doc. 45, 47 Cong. 1 sess.; S. Ex. Doc. 75, 47 As to railroads, see S. Ex. Doc. 73, 45 Cong. 3 sess.; S. Ex. Doc. 38, 46 "It is with sincere satisfaction that I am enabled to advert to the spirit of good neighborhood and friendly cooperation and conciliation that has marked the correspondence and action of the Mexican authorities in their share of the task of maintaining law and order about the line of our common boundary." President Cleveland, annual message, Dec. 3, 1888, For. Rel. 1888, I. xv. "The recent disturbances of the public peace by lawless foreign marauders on the Mexican frontier have afforded this government an opportunity to testify its good will for Mexico and its earnest purpose to fulfill the obligations of international friendship by pursuing and dispersing the evil-doers. The work of relocating the boundary of the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, westward from El Paso, is progressing favorably.” 66 President Harrison, annual message, Dec. 6, 1892, For. Rel. 1892, xv. Good will fostered by inany interests in common has marked our relations with our nearest southern neighbor. Peace being restored along her northern frontier, Mexico has asked the punishment of the late disturbers of her tranquillity. There ought to be a new treaty of commerce and navigation with that country to take the place of the one which terminated thirteen years ago. The friendliness of the intercourse between the two countries is attested by the fact that during this long period the commerce of each has steadily increased under the rule of mutual consideration, being neither stimulated by conventional arrangements nor retarded by jealous rivalries or selfish distrust." President Cleveland, annual message, Dec. 3, 1894, For. Rel. 1894, xi. In August, 1899, a committee representing the people of Chicago presented to President Diaz an invitation inviting him, his cabinet. and his friends to attend, as the guests of the citizens of Chicago, the ceremonies at the laying of the corner stone of the United States building in that city, October 9, 1899, at which the President of the United States was also to be present. The reception of the committee by President Diaz was arranged for through the regular diplomatic channel, and the American ambassador was directed to say that, in the event of President Diaz accepting the invitation, a representative of the United States would meet him at the frontier and escort him to Chicago. President Diaz informed the committee that his acceptance of the invitation would require the consent of the Mexican Congress. It appears that on September 20, 1899, the two houses in joint session granted him a leave of absence of twenty days with permission to visit Chicago, and appropriated $100,000 for his expenses, should he accept the invitation. In consequence, however, of the pressure of public business and illness of his wife President Diaz was unable to make the journey, but he sent as his personal representative Mr. Mariscal, minister for foreign affairs. For. Rel. 1899, 504–510. For an account of the honors paid by the Mexican government to Mr. Gray, minister of the United States, who died at the City of Mexico. February 14, 1895, see For. Rel. 1895, II. 994-996. A concurrent resolution expressing appreciation of the action of the Mexican government was adopted by the Senate of the United States, February 21, 1895, and by the House of Representatives the next day. By the terms of the resolution the Secretary of State was requested to transmit an engrossed copy of it to the Mexican government, which was done. (For. Rel. 1895, II. 996.) The Mexican Congress appropriated $30,000 for the relief of the sufferers by the Galveston disaster. (For. Rel. 1900, 784.) For many years a dispute existed between Mexico and Guatemala as to their common boundary. The United States used its good offices on various occasions. A convention for the settlement of the dispute was concluded in 1895. Message of Feb. 17, 1882, S. Ex. Doc. 156, 47 Cong. 1 sess.; message of May See Mr. Lazo Arriaga, Guatemalan min.. to Mr. Gresham, Sec. of State. by the Mexican minister January 24, 1895. (For. Rel. 1895, II. 979 987.) The United States expressed a strong desire that the question might be arbitrated. (Mr. Gresham, Sec. of State, to Mr. Gray, min. to Mexico, tel., Jan. 21, 1895, For. Rel. 1895, II. 987.) April 1, 1895, a convention between Mexico and Guatemala was signed at the City of Mexico for the settlement of the dispute. (For. Rel. 1895, II. 989.) By Article II. the government of Guatemala agreed to make indemnity for property occupied or destroyed by its agents, and it was agreed that an arbitrator should be mutually selected to fix the amount. Mr. Ransom, minister of the United States to Mexico, was chosen as arbitrator, and his government gave him the permission so to act. (For. Rel. 1895, II. 993.) May 17, 1898, a new convention was signed by Mexico and Guatemala, extending the time for the completion of the labors of the boundary commission. (For. Rel. 1899, 501.) 6. ZONA LIBRE, OR FREE ZONE. § 862. "The problem of the Mexican Free Zone has been often discussed with regard to its inconvenience as a provocative of smuggling into the United States along an extensive and thinly guarded land border. The effort made by the joint resolution of March 1, 1895, to remedy the abuse charged by suspending the privilege of free transportation in bond across the territory of the United States to Mexico failed of good result, as is stated in Report No. 702 of the House of Representatives, submitted in the last session, March 11, 1898. As the question is one to be conveniently met by wise concurrent legislation of the two countries looking to the protection of the revenues by harmonious measures operating equally on either side of the boundary, rather than by conventional arrangements, I suggest that Congress consider the advisability of authorizing and inviting a conference of representatives of the Treasury Departments of the United States and Mexico to consider the subject in all its complex bearings, and make report with pertinent recommendations to the respective governments for the information and consideration of their Congresses." President McKinley, annual message, Dec. 5, 1898, For. Rel. 1898, LXXIX. As to the Mexican Zona Libre, or Free Zone, and its effects on trade between the United States and Mexico, see Dip. Cor. 1867, II. 412; Dip. Cor. 1868, II. 594, 626; For. Rel. 1870, 486, 497; For. Rel. 1871, 608; For. Rel. 1872, 381, 388, 401; For. Rel. 1878, 654, 660; For. Rel. 1880, 724; For. Rel. 1881, 778, 782, 797, 803, 805; For. Rel. 1888, II. 1266, 1282-1284. See, also, message of June 12, 1884, S. Ex. Doc. 185, 48 Cong. 1 sess., relating to the law creating or modifying the Zona Libre. |