if any Texian Troops shall be found on the right Side of Said River, to return forthwith to the left side; and it is further hereby agreed, that the Troops of neither of the Contracting parties shall repass the Said Río Bravo during the continuance of the present Armistice.[64]

The proposition for a truce was submitted to Cañedo by Pakenham, and Cañedo rejected it on the grounds that it did not have the previous sanction of the Texan government. Pakenham was informed that even if an armistice were possible that the line of separation would have to be not the Río Grande but a line farther to the east. In no case, he was told, could the Mexican government agree "to a provisional line of demarcation to the Southward, or on this side, of the River at San Antonio."[65]  Whereupon, Treat at once discontinued his negotiations with the Mexican officials, "without having been able to present officially, or formally," the propositions he had been instructed to make, and left the country.[66]  Before leaving, however, he informed Pakenham, in accordance with instructions from his government, that should Texas "be constrained to change its position, and Commence offensive operations, it will not be with a view of extending its Territory beyond the Río Grande; and any occupation or Military movement, west of that River, will be temporary, and solely with the view of forcing the enemy to make peace."[67]

While Texans generally approved their government's policy in respect to Mexico and the Federalists, there was some feeling that individuals and private parties could do as they pleased in respect to aiding the Federalists. "Though we heartily approve of . . . [the] line of government policy which restrains our present administration from interfering in the internal affairs of Mexico," declared the Colorado Gazette, "yet we believe that no power on earth can or should prevent