Go to Page | Index | Contents 287     | Biblio. | Page- | Page+

Republic of the Río Grande and Texas

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

and House of Representatives, Executive Department, Austin, Nov. 1, 1840, in Lamar Papers, III, 464-470.

64. "Preliminary Memorandum, for the Arrangement of an Armistice between Mexico and Texas, Mexico, Septr 25th, 1840"; James Treat to A. S. Lipscomb, Mexico, Sept. 29, 1840; both in Garrison (ed.), Diplomatic Correspondence of Texas, 1908, II, 708 and II, 704-706.

65. R. Pakenham to James Treat, Mexico, Oct. 15, 1840, in ibid., 1908, II, 726-727.

66. "Memorandum, Mexico, September 21st, 1840"; James Treat to A. S. Lipscomb, Mexico, Oct. 17, 1840; both in ibid., 1908, II, 706-707, 711; Adams, British Interests and Activities in Texas, pp. 47-48.

67. J. Treat to Richard Pakenham, City of Mexico, Oct. 14, 1840, in Garrison

Go to Page | Index | Contents 287     | Biblio. | Page- | Page+

AFTER SAN JACINTO: The Texas-Mexican Frontier, 1836-1841
Joseph Milton Nance, 1963