he never abandoned the project, showing in his correspondence with the officials of the government in Washington an unblushing readiness to resort to bribery and trickery when he found that legitimate diplomatic effort would not accomplish his purpose." 98 To show the ultimate failure of all negotiations respecting the boundary up to this date, the subsequent fate of the treaty of limits pending at this time should be briefly traced. It will be recalled that it was concluded January 12, 1828, and that, owing to delay on the part of Mexico the exchange of ratifications was not effected within the stipulated time limit of four months. On April 5, 1831, an additional article was concluded renewing the treaty and extending the time for exchanging the ratifications one year from that date.99 On April 5, 1832, the last day allowed, the ratifications were exchanged. This time the Mexican government acted nearly three months before the expiration of the time; but the United States delayed until the last day, the Mexican representative having declared two days earlier that his government had instructed him not to exchange the ratifications of the commercial treaty unless those of the treaty of limits could be exchanged at the same time, and the United States Senate having advised and consented to its ratification on the day preceding the exchange.100 The

98 See Barker, "Jackson and the Texas Revolution," American Historical Review, XII, 791-797.

99 United States, Treaties and Conventions, 1776-1909, I, 1084.

100 United States, Treaties and Conventions, 1776-1909, I,

one year provided in article three within which commissioners should meet to begin marking the line expired without Mexico's acting, though the United States had been prompt enough this time;101 and on April 3, 1835, a second additional article was agreed to which provided that the commissioners should be appointed within one year from the exchange of the ratifications of this second additional article. But the ratifications of this article were not exchanged till April 20, 1836,102 when Texas had wrested her independence from Mexico by force of arms. The commissioners never met.

With the attempts of the Mexican government in September, 1829, and April, 1830, to stop immigration into Texas from the United States, the relations between Texas and Mexico and the relations between Mexico and the United States respecting Texas enter a new phase. This has been, and is being, treated with sufficient fullness by students of the Texas Revolution, the Texas national period, and the annexation of Texas to the United States.

1084; and Montoya to Livingston, March 26, 1832, House Executive Documents, 25 congress, I session, number 42, page 51; and same to same, March 31, 1832, in the same document, page 53; also same to same, April 3, 1832, in the same document, page 57.

101 Castillo to McLane, December 2, 1833, House Executive Documents, 25 congress, I session, number 42, page 60; same to same, same document, page 62; McLane to Butler, January 13, 1834, same document, page 16; and Butler to Lombardo, December 21, 1834, same document, page 38.

102 Mexico, Tratados y Convenciones, I, 180.

CHAPTER X

PUBLIC ATTACKS ON POINSETT AND HIS RECALL

Poinsett's part in the organization of the York Masons, the beginning of the political activity of those lodges, and the early attacks on him because of his relations with them have been considered in a previous chapter. The Yorkino party, which had come into existence in the early part of 1826 and before the end of the year had grown so strong as to carry most of the state elections, continued to grow and retained its influence. The Escoceses, the Scottish Masons, unable to retain or regain influence and still attributing the growth and power of their opponents to the magic influence of Poinsett over the government and the Yorkinos, resorted first to innuendo and then to violence, in order to drive him from the country.

Zavala, who was a Yorkino, says that the newspapers which the opposing factions established declared with as much ignorance as impudence that so long as the Escoceses had control the government was tranquil and prosperous; but that as soon as the Yorkinos attempted to take part in the government disorder and anarchy prevailed. He says that this is the argument of the tyrant who has monopolized power and wishes to keep it from the people. Just so, he continues, the 1 That on Poinsett's Relations with the York Masons.

king of Spain argued that, so long as the Spaniards were allowed to rule America and the natives did nothing but obey, all was quiet; but as soon as the natives began to assert their rights the struggle began and peace vanished. The Yorkinos also published papers to advocate their cause. These became the objects of suspicion and attack from their opponents who declared that they were subsidized by Poinsett. and were working for the interests of the United States as opposed to those of Mexico.

2 Zavala, Ensayo Historico, I, 354. In the preceding seven pages Zavala reviews the party strife. The tone of these newspaper criticisms of Poinsett and of the government supposed to be dominated by him is shown in the following extracts from Voz de la Patria, II, número 8, 15 de febrero de 1830: "No afligan menos la Pátria los males políticos que ya comenzaban á manifestarse, y cujo origen fontal se debe casi esclusivamente á la instalacion de los lógias de los Yorkinos en Mexico. . . . Poinsett, el regulador y árbitro de este establecimiento, de que se ha llamado Sumo Pontifice, mui luego procuró sacar todo el partido posible para llenar sus objetos principales; á saber destruir nuestra República, y engrandecer la del Norte América, por ser on [en] su concepto incompatible la existencia de ambas. . . . La mano artera de Poinsett movia a su placer los hilos de esta trama: este hombre insidioso de la humanidad, y cujo nombre hace temblar á las repúblicos de Chiloe y Buenos-Aires, de donde fué lanzado como una mala y dañina bestia."

3 Aviraneta, a European Spaniard traveling in Mexico, was told in Vera Cruz " que el Mercurio es un periódico subencionado por Poinssete [sic] enviado de los Estados Unidos: es un periódico yorkino, para promover la espulsion de los comerciantes y propietarios Españoles del teritorio del república, y substituir la influencia del pueblo Yanki." See Aviraneta é Ibargoyen, Memorias Intimas, 1825-1829, in D. Luis Garcia Pimentel, Documentos Historicos de Mejico, III, 45.

On November 10, 1827, Poinsett reported to Clay an act which it is difficult to see how he could have defended from the charge of interfering in Mexican politics. As has been shown in preceding chapters Guerrero had been closely associated with what Poinsett frequently alluded to as the American or democratic party. He was also a member of the Yorkino lodges, an active spirit in their organization, and practically the head of the order. In October, 1826, Poinsett had predicted that Guerrero would be the Yorkino candidate for the next presidential election. He now proceeded to assist in making his prophecy

come true.

Against the wish of his friends in the government Guerrero had declared that he was going to join the movement, at the time becoming popular, for expelling from Mexico all remaining European Spaniards. These friends appealed to Poinsett to persuade Guerrero to abandon his designs, and to await patiently the effect of his friends' efforts to have him elected next year as successor to Victoria. He had written the desired letter, Poinsett told Clay, and President Victoria had thanked him for writing it. Guerrero had replied in a tone of great intimacy, modestly declaring his unfitness for the high office which Poinsett had thus informed him his friends wished him to On page 58 he says: "Los escritores del Mercurio son hombres vendidos al oro que desparama Poinsset [sic] á manos llenas, entre los incautios mejicanos.” A brief outline account of the party strife is printed in Martinez, Sinopsis Historica de las Revoluciones, I, 58.