MEXICO. 



571 



rights over territory which they claim, without the 

 conceded justification of her just title thereto. And 

 especially would the President regard as an unfriendly 

 act toward the cherished plan of upbuilding strong 

 republican governments in Spanish America, if Mex- 

 ico, whose power and generosity should be alike sig- 

 nal in such a case, shall seek or permit any misunder- 

 standing with Guatemala when the path toward a 

 pacific avoidance of trouble is at once so easy and so 

 imperative an international duty. You are directed 

 to seek an interview with Senor Mariscal, in which 

 to possess him with the purport of this instruction. 

 In doing so, your judgment and discretion may have 

 full scope to avoid any misunderstanding on his part 

 of the spirit of friendly counsel which prompts the 

 President's course. Should Senor Mariscal evince a 

 disposition to become more intimately acquainted 

 with the President's views after your verbal exposi- 

 tion thereof, you are at liberty to read this dispatch 

 to him, and, should he so desire, to give him a copy. 

 I am, sir, your obedient servant, 



(Signed) JAMES G. ELAINE. 



EXTRACT OF 8E$OR MARISCAL's EXPOSITION. 



. . . The complaints of the Guatemalans are not 

 sincere, and the government of General Barrios knew 

 very well how different are the facts of the case from 

 the statements made to the Government at "Washing- 

 ton. Even before consulting the President, he could 

 assure Mr. Morgan that the good offices of his gov- 

 ernment were received with high esteem by the Gov- 

 ernment of Mexico. There is as yet, he added, no 

 motive whatever for the fear that the latter will appeal 

 to force to resolve the boundary question with Guate- 

 mala, which for many years has been under pacific 

 and patient discussion, the Mexican Government hav- 

 ing always been the promoter of the discussion, and 

 of its solution by friendly measures. The recent 

 events of which the Guatemalan Government com- 

 plained had been the subject of discussions in which 

 the arguments of Mexico had not been answered, the 

 last notes of the Mexican Government having usually 

 been left without reply. The tactics of the Govern- 

 ment of Guatemala had consisted in appealing, for 

 lack of reasons, to delays and evasions. The present 

 state of the question is, that the survey of the frontier 

 by commissions of engineers appointed by the two 

 governments is still pending. The appointment of 

 these commissions was made by virtue of a conven- 

 tion promoted by Mexico, in which was stipulated the 

 suspension of negotiations upon boundaries until the 

 said frontier could be surveyed, and certain points 

 which formed the basis of discussion could be astro- 

 nomically determined. 



The Mexican Government positively desires to bring 

 the question of boundary to a just and pacific con- 

 clusion, and it is not possible at present even to 

 say whether this question, at least in part, may be- 

 come a proper one for an arbitration. As to the per- 

 fect title of Mexico to the State of Chiapas, including 

 the department or district of Soconusco, of which it 

 has been in possession for so many years, the Mexican 

 Government has several times declared that it does 

 not and can not decorously admit any question. 

 What it has consented to discuss among the claims of 

 Guatemala, and for which it has been surveying and 

 mapping out the frontier, is the matter of the bound- 

 aries or Chiapas and Soconusco, on the Guatemala 

 side. But it may readily be seen that this can not 

 yet give occasion to an arbitration, since the data have 

 not yet been obtained which have been thought in- 

 dispensable for the decision of the points at issue. 

 Mexico is very far from absolutely refusing arbitra- 

 tion, but does not think it possible at present, for the 

 reasons just mentioned, and reserves ner decision as 

 to accepting it in the future, concerning certain points 

 on which it might bo useful. 



Mexico can never forget what was witnessed by the 



S"csent generation of Mexicans as referred to by the 

 on. Mr. Elaine i. e., that the United States lent 



their generous moral support, when, being invaded by 

 a foreign army, her people struggled alone and without 

 resources from abroad against a European monarch 

 and his instrument in this country, who was supported 

 by certain misguided elements at home. JSor will she 

 forget that the sentiment of the American people 

 during that crisis clearly showed that, if the United 

 States had not been engaged in a civil war of vast 

 proportions, the support given to Mexico would have 

 been more than moral, and would have sutiiced to 

 terminate the struggle some years earlier. 



In the same note (Secretary Elaine's) it is stated 

 that the forces of the Emperor Iturbide having occu- 

 pied a large portion of the territory of Central Amer- 

 ica, the fortune of war forced them to abandon all 

 that territory except Soconusco and Chiapas, and that 

 Mexico, alter becoming a republic, did not desist from 

 reclamations founded upon the imperial policy of ab- 

 sorption and conquest. In this there are some his- 

 torical errors, and especially one which is due, as al- 

 ready stated, to one-sided allegations or to the fact 

 that, unfortunately, the history of Mexico is not well 

 known. Even during the empire of Iturbide it was 

 not conquest but the free-will of the inhabitants of 

 Chiapas and Soconusco which determined their an- 

 nexation to Mexico, as well as that of all the prov- 

 inces of Central America except Salvador. In the 

 use of the same liberty, they afterward separated 

 from this country and formed with Guatemala a re- 

 public ; always excepting Chiapas and Soconusco, 

 which, after Mexico became a republic, renewed their 

 determination to remain incorporated therewith. As 

 it is not possible here to recount the history of what 

 occurred, it will suffice to mention that, on account 

 of the ever-renewed claims of Guatemala, there have 

 been published very since: o and carefully studied 

 treatises with the object of proving the ri^ht which 

 Mexico originally acquired to this portion ot her pres- 

 ent territory, basing it, not upon conquest, but upon 

 the will of the inhabitants, the proofs of which may 

 be found in unquestionable documents which have 

 been published. Among these publications are those 

 respectively made by Don Manuel Larrainzar and 

 Don Matias Eomero. persons well acquainted with the 

 facts concerning Chiapas and Soconusco, since the 

 former is a native of that State and the latter has re- 

 sided in Soconusco, where he had to abandon his 

 property, which was devastated by Guatemalan in- 

 vaders. But, without alluding to the contents of the 

 said publications, it will be understood how inaccurate 

 are tiio attacks made upon the right of Mexico to 

 these regions which form a State of the Union, by 

 simply examining the long and weighty note wnicli 

 Senor Lafragua, as Minister of Foreign Aft'airs, ad- 

 dressed to the Minister of Guatemala in this capital, 

 under date of October 9 ? 1875, adjoining to it several 

 documents of a conclusive tenor. This note, which 

 has been circulated in a printed form, and in which 

 the original rights of Mexico to Soconusco and Chi- 

 apas, now placed beyond doubt by a possession of 

 more than thirty and fifty years respectively, are vic- 

 toriously illustrated and proved ; this note, which 

 should have given rise to a serious discussion, has re- 

 mained up to the present time unanswered, as the 

 Government of Guatemala habitually leaves those 

 which it can not answer. The brief summary of that 

 extended note will show by itself that the titles of 

 Mexico have not consisted of absorption and con- 

 quest, as the Hon. Mr. Elaine has been led to believe 

 by moans of calumnies against this republic. The 

 closing words of that document are as follows : " Sum- 

 ming up the argument of the present note, the follow- 

 ing points have been demonstrated: 1. Chiapas was 

 a province similar to the others which formed the 

 captaincy-general of Guatemala. 2. Chiapas, on the 

 3d day of September, 1821. freely separated from 

 Guatemala ana united with Mexico. 3. Chiapas, on 

 the 12th day of September, 1824, again joiued the 

 United States of Mexico by the free choice of a ma- 

 jority of her inhabitants (it having been previously 



