partments. "It is more than evident to me," he wrote, "that the wish of the Mexican Nation, very explicitly and generally expressed, is to re-establish the Federal constitution of 1824, and by means of a convention make such reforms in it as the experience and information of the present age have demonstrated to be necessary for a free people." He refused to say whether he had been well or badly received in Texas, but did state that President Lamar had treated him "with the greatest urbanity" and had manifested to him "the kindest sentiments . . . in favor of the Federal cause in Mexico."[67]  He denied that he had ever thought of appealing over Lamar and his cabinet to the Texas Congress. At the proper time and when he considered it suitable, he declared, he would be glad to explain his views "not only to the Congress, but to the people of Texas, and to all the liberals of the world." This he did in the plan above referred to, which was drawn up and signed on December 14, 1839.

On the question of independence of Texas from Mexico, Anaya had not been too clear, and, of course, the Texans had long given up the idea of desiring statehood in the Mexican federation. The Morning Star[68]  (Houston) suggested that the Texas government give very careful consideration to such factors as the difference in language, race, and concepts of what constitutes a liberal system of government before entering into any sort of formal alliance with the Federalists; although, "We wish our neighbors well," said the editor, "and should rejoice to see their efforts crowned with the most complete success," and be "the first to advocate a recognition of their independence, we are not willing to hazard the existence of our own government, and perhaps the downfall of both." The editor went even further on September 17, asserting that the government's decision not to permit the free use of the Texas ports for the introduction and transportation through the Republic of articles needed by the Federalists and to prohibit the recruitment of volunteers on the soil of Texas was correct. While Texas should assist neither directly nor indirectly the Federal cause, the editor declared that the government's refusal to aid should not be too comprehensive.[69]  Have our leaders, he asked, in the short space of three years forgotten "the hour when we, trembling and weak, stood begging for assistance of another nation? . . . It looks as if our own