which shew now easy it is for the wolf to find pretexts for eating we lamb, it only the original reason of a good appetite be not wanting.

Such was the state of things until 1835; the emigration into Texat from the United States having been constantly increasing, and the autho rity of the Mexican government being put completely at defiance. At ihis time Santa Anna, having completed the revolution, and secured the supreme power in his own hands, turned his attention seriously toward his refractory Anglo-American province, and sent General Cos into Texas with a small army, (o enforce certain requisitions of the government, among which were the enforcing of an obsolete law of 1S30 against the emigration of Americans into Texas; and the surrender of Lorenzo de Zalva, a Mexican refugee, fled to Texas to escape punishment for havins moved in the Mexican congress for a law directed against the property of the church. In the course of the summer, General Cos took possession of the town of Antonio de Bexar; and on the 28th of September, 1835, the Texans, who had armed for resistance against Mexico, attacked and defeated a party of Mexicans, at the town of Gonzales, on the Rio Guadalupe.

The contest thus commenced between a successful rebel chief, who had violated the constitution of his country, on the one hand, and a rebellious province, inhabited by a superior race, on the other, could have bet one result: the separation and independence of the revolted province. Nor, if we keep in view the history of our own Union, and the achievements which constitute our greatest glory, can we find any thing to condemn in the conduct of the Texans. The right of revolution is inherent in nations; and any people vindicates its privilege to that right the mo ment it shows itself able to exercise and maintain it. Thus the inde pendence of Texas was as much a real bond fide independence—provided she succeeded in maintaining it—as that of the British colonies of Nortk America, subsequent to July 4, 1776. On the 3d of November, 1835. toe delegates of Texas assembled at San Felipe de Austin, and put forth a declaration against Santa Anna and other military chieftains, who, it stated, "had by force of arms overthrown the federal institutions of Mexico, and dissolved the social compact which existed between Texas and the other members of the Mexican confederacy." The war. from this lime, was prosecuted with various fortunes to either side, until Apr» 21, 1836, when the contest was virtually decided by the battle of Sar Jacinto, at which the Mexicans were totally defeated, and Santa Ann himself made prisoner. On the 2d of March previously, the Texan dele gales had assembled at Washington, on the Brazos, and made a fjrnu'. Declaration of Independence, signed a constitution, and organized a go vernment. The Texans now, therefore, required of their prisoner. Sant Anna, an obligation, which he at length took, to " solemnly acknowledge, sanction, and ratify" this act of independence, and to use his persoual and official powers to procure, without delay, the ratification and confirmation of that treaty by the legitimate government of Mexico. At this time the boundaries of Texas were defined as follows:

"Beginning at the mouth of the Rio Grande; thence up the principal stream of said river to its source; thence due north to the 43° of north latitude; thence along the boundary line, as defined in the treaty betweea the United States and Spain (February, 1819), to the place of beginning.' The claim of boundary and independence, however, founded upon this concession of Santa Anna, cannot be maintained, as it was virtually extorted by force, and could not be of any binding virtue until it had been ratified by the legitimate government of Mexico. So far from receiving this sanction, however, President Bustamente, who shortly afterward superseded Santa Anna, repudiated this treaty, and recommenced tb» war with Texas—a war which, gradually subsiding into an interrupted

series of bauditti-like excursions on either side, at length entirely ceased, and Texas was virtually its own master.

It was at this period that the real ultimate designs of the Texas emigrants from the United States became apparent, that all disguise was thrown off, *nd the question of annexation to the United States boldly proclaimed. On tli 4lh of August, 1837, a little more than two years after her declaration of .^dependence, the new government had made a proposition of annexation, which Mr. President Van Buren declined; declaring that, so long as we were bound by a treaty of amity and commerce with Mexico, to annex Texas would necessarily involve the question of war; and that a disposition to espouse the quarrel of Texas was at variance with the spirit of the treaty, and with the policy and welfare of the United States.

A distinction ought here to be made, which seems entirely to have oeen overlooked. Although the inhabitants of Texas had an unqestionable right to obtain their freedom from Mexico, and erect themselves into an independent republic—and although the United States had also the right of recognizing that independence—yet the moment it was made apparent that the ultimate object of Texas was annexation to the American Union, the sincerity of the former, and the disinterestedness of the other, became rairly questionable. The world will therefore decide that, whatever might have been the right of Texas to procure her freedom, or of the United States to recognize it, the moment that it was proposed to make both acts inure to the aggrandizement of the United States, that moment Mexico had a right to complain of it, as affording a sufficient ground of war.

Meanwhile, a series of partial negotiations between Texas and various other powers, for the purpose of procuring the acknowledgment of her independence, went forward—disturbed now and then by a sprinkling of war with the enfeebled yet exasperated mother-country—until the acci dental administration of our government by Mr. Tyler, revived the old scheme of annexation in all its force, and introduced a new element into the political canvass of 1844, which resulted in the final annexation of Texas, though not the election of Mr. Tyler, by whom it had really been accomplished.

On her side, Mexico had not been idle. On the 23d of August, 1843, Mr. Bocanegra, the Mexican minister of foreign relations, addressed a uote to Mr. Waddy Thompson, which contained the following passage:

"And if a party in Texas is now endeavouring to effect its incorporation with the United States, it is from a consciousness of their notorious incapability to form and constitute an independent nation, without their having changed their situation, or acquired any right to separate themselves from their mother country. His excellency the provisional president, resting on this deep conviction, is obliged to prevent an aggression, inprecedented in the annals of the world, from being consummated; and <f \t be indispensable for the Mexican nation to seek security for its rights at lie expense of the disasters of war, it will call upon God, and rely on its own efforts for the defence of its just cause."

This declaration was a notice to the American government of the effects to be anticipated from the annexation, and was leplied to, by Mr. Waddy "hompson, in a haughty note, affirming that the notice of the Mexican minister was a threat, or a warning; but silent as to the attitude really assumed by the United States.

A short time subsequent to this correspondence, and as if to prevent any misunderstanding of the meaning of Mexico, General Almonte, Mexican minister at Washington, addressed a note to Mr. Upshur, secretary of state, of which the following passage is a part :—

"But if, contrary to the hopes and wishes entertained by the government of the undersigned for the preservation of the good understanding aud

armony which should reign between the two neighbouring and frieafiv republics, the United States should, in defiance of good faith, aid the prin ciples of justice which they have constantly proclaimed, commit the unheard of act of violence of appropriating to themselves an urtegrart part of the Mexican territory, the undersigned, in the name of bis naao.-. and now for them, protests in the most solemn manner against such in aggression; and he moreover declares, by express order of his government, that on sanction being given by the executive of the Union to ite incorporation of Texas into the United States, he will consider bis mission ended, seeing that, as the secretary of state will have learned, tie Mexicar goternment is rcsolced to declare war as soon at it receives lafiiWii ■ tf such an act."

Long previous to actual annexation, it will be observed, the Mexican government had officially informed the executive of the United States, that war must inevitably result from that act. The government of :he United States, however, persisted in its plan of annexation: and to Mr. J. C. Calhoun, appointed secretary of state by Mr. Tyler after the death of Mr. Upshur by the explosion on the steamer Princeton, is due ib« merit of the ingenious discovery that "this step (the annexation) bad been forced on the government in self-defence, in consequence of the polic* adopted by Great Britain in reference to the abolition of slavery ia Texas" —notwithstanding the explicit declaration of Mr. Pakenham, the British minister, that, although his government earnestly desired the abolition of slavery in Texas, yet that "it would not interfere unduly, or with an improper assumption of authority with either party, in order to insure the adoption of such a course." On the 22d of April 1844. Mr. Tyler submitted to the Senate a treaty of annexation, which, after some warm debate, was rejected, and the question left open to tbe public and tbe press.

In the following November the presidential canvass was broo^ht to 1 close by the election of Mr. Polk to the presidency, as the avowed champion of annexation, and in obedience to this apparent expression oi the popular will congress passed, on the 1st of March, 1845. a joint resolution giving its consent that the territory "rightfully belongicf to the republic of Texas" might be erected into a new state called the Sizxe of Texas; subject, however, to the adjustment by this government of “all questions of boundary that may arise with other governments." Tt* terms of this resolution were promptly accepted by Texas, by her ordi nance of July 4, 1845; and two days after she requested the president oi the United States to occupy the ports of Texas and send an army to their defence a request which was granted with an alacrity which showed hov agreeable it was to that functionary.

It is at this point in the history of these transactions that we first encounter the name of Major General Zachary Taylor, then in command at Fort Jessup who received orders to advance his forces into Texas, several weeks before the War Department had received intelligence o( tbe Texan ordinance of July 4. On the 28th of June Mr. Donelson, ikes minister to Texas, and to whom General Taylor had been referred for advice, wrote him that he had best move his forces, "without delay, to the western frontier of Texas," and also informing him that Corpus Chrid'-. on Aranzas Bay, was the best point for the assembling of his troops. Mr. Donelson, iu this letter, also stated that the country between tbe Nueces and the Rio Grande was in dispute, the Texans bclding Corpus Christi, and the Mexicans Santiago, at the mouth of the Hio Grande.

General Taylor proceeded at once to Aranzas B?y, where he arrive; and took position in the beginning of August, where all the trooos in t£« west, the northwest, and on the Atlantic coast, that could be pp^red. vert o»dercd to join him. In November, 1845, the forces sembid caler hia