The United States and Mexico, 1861-1865 Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Orum, Thomas Tondee, 1940- Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 25/09/2021 03:58:33 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/551948 THE UNITED STATES AND MEXICO 1861-1865 by Thomas T . Drum A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 1 9 6 7 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfill­ ment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowl­ edgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his judgment the proposed use of the material is in the inter­ ests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author. SIGNED: APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR This thesis has been approved on the date shown below: /f, ///y Date Professor of History ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my appreciation to Professor Russell C. Ewing for his invaluable guidance in the preparation of this work and also for having intro­ duced me to the mysteries of graduate work. For encourage­ ment to complete the work, my gratitude to Professor Donald N . Lammers. Without the moral and financial assistance of my parents and my wife I could not have even begun, much less complete, this program. Of course, none of these are responsible for the quality of this work; for that only I can be blamed. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT....................................... .. v CHAPTER I. THE SETTING FOR CONFLICT...................... 1 II. THE UNION CHOOSES A C O U R S E .................. 17 III. THOMAS CORWIN AND UNION P O L I C Y .............. 31 IV. THE CONFEDERACY FAILS AT MEXICO CITY ..... 55 V. THE UNION BLOCKADE ........................... 64 VI. UNION VICTORY: NEW HOPE FOR THE REPUBLIC . 80 EPILOGUE .......................... 99 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................... 100 iv ABSTRACT The United States was the shield behind which the Mexican Republic avoided the fatal blows of French imperial aspirations. The potential of the United States, with the end of its civil conflict close at hand, to act on behalf of the Mexican Republic was a vital factor in the ouster of the alien throne. The success of French aspirations in Mexico, even with the United States handily involved in civil war, was dependent on too many variables. Could the South defeat or stalemate the rest of the United States? Would the United States, involved as it was in the fight for the survival of the Union, make a fatal misstep when challenged in an area where its influence and intentions had often been suspect in the past? The neutral policy of the United States in Mexico enabled the federal government to survive the apprehensive period of the intervention with relative poise and afforded it the opportunity, once the Civil War ended, to emphasize the principles of the Monroe Doctrine. v CHAPTER I THE SETTING FOR CONFLICT From 1861 to 1865 relations between the United States and neighboring Mexico were complicated by war and chaos on both sides. The Convention of London forces invasion of the Mexican Republic in 1861, obstensibly seeking the redress of pecuniary grievances, became in time a French scheme not entirely directed to the mere collec­ tion of debts. French aspirations, as manifested by their aggressive actions, encouraged other European nations to attempt to assume protective roles in other distressed Latin American republics. While the United States was enmeshed in internal conflict, Mexico fought to maintain some semblance of sovereignty in spite of the French invaders. During these troubled times, while the Juarista government was embattled and often in flight, the United States maintained its diplomatic representative in Mexico City, refusing to yield to the tides of change. It was not until the conclusion of the American Civil War that public and government attention could be directed to the problems of Mexico. 1 2 The years following the French intervention brought new problems and a resurgence of old ones to plague the already tenuous relations between the United States and Mexico. In order to put in proper perspective the circum­ stances which made relations between Mexico and the United States so strained during the crucial years from 1861 to 1865, the factors which played vital roles in the formation of policy on both sides of the Rio Grande should be examined. The United States, under the Buchanan administra­ tion, had cast its lot with the Juarista Liberals during the War of the Reform.^ It was felt that recognition of the Liberals by United States Minister Robert McLane "committed this country to the recognition of Liberal principles in Mexico." By this move the United States "gave the world to understand that our sympathies were on that [Liberal] side, and that our influence so far as its exercise at all would be compatible with our own interests, 2 would be thrown into that scale." Although the Liberals were acknowledged as the government of Mexico, the politi­ cal tensions in the United States prevented the 1. Buchanan sought Mexican territory and hoped to annex Chihuahua and Sonora. For his Mexican policy see Philip S. Klein, President James Buchanan, A Biography (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1962), pp. 321-323. 2. New York Times, January 9, 1860. 3 ratification of the McLane-Ocampo Treaty by which the Liberals would have added to their treasury some $4,000,000 in return for the right of transit across the 3 Isthmus of Tehuantepec and at two other points in Mexico. United States attention was directed toward the fall of 1860 when its own political destiny was to be shaped. The United States presidential election of 1860 was held under the stress of immense national partisanship. The long years of strife between North and South were fast reaching the danger point. The campaign split the previ­ ously all-powerful Democratic Party into three factions. When the election returns were counted, Lincoln, the candidate of the new Republican Party, carried New England, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and the Northwest. Lincoln polled some 1,800,000 votes against the 2,800,000 votes of the combined opposition. He received 182 electoral votes while the opposition split the others: 72 for Breckenridge, 39 for Bell and 12 for Douglas.^ John C. Breckenridge, carrying the banner for the Southern Democrats, and the Union Party's John Bell split the South, with the latter taking Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee, 3. The political opposition to the treaty felt that "no treaty negotiated under Mr. Buchanan's Adminis­ tration could possibly be advantageous to the interests of the country or the world . ." Ibid., January 20, 1860. 4. Ibid., November 10, 1860. 4 and the former, the Carolines, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Maryland, Delaware, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas and Arkansas William Seward, campaigning for Lincoln at a New York convention, emphasized the gravity of the times. "There is an agreement that this republic of ours is now in a crisis and I confess as I believe it to be true. If this republic passes safely through this crisis then it is assured of a long life, if not it will die. In the South, tension had reached such a peak that the governor of North Carolina put the issue before his state in strong terms. "When North Carolina might deem it necessary to the preservation of her rights and the maintenance of her honor to assume a separate and independent position, she will call upon her sons to rally to her banner.In Alabama, the Montgomery Mail reiterated the threat. "Our people are preparing to take care of themselves in the event of the O success of Black Republicanism." "The Federal Union in effect no longer exists: it was virtually dissolved last 5. Klein, President James Buchanan, A Biography, p. 351; Ollinger Crenshaw, The Slave States' in the Presi­ dential Election of 1860 (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1945;, pp."^97, 298. 6. New York Times, November 1, 1860. 7. Ibid., quoted in the Wilmington, North Carolina Journal, November 1, 1860. 8. Ibid. 5 Tuesday by the election of a Black Republican to the Presidency," spoke a Virginia newspaper. "We are on the brink of a revolution of which none can say what the issue 9 may be." This was the feeling throughout most of the South. The stage was set for conflict. The northern land­ slide for Lincoln delineated the camps even more clearly. Southerners, after the election, felt that they had been thrust into a hostile camp. Their belief was that the future policy of the new government would be based on hostility toward the South and her institutions, denying them equal footing with the North.^ While Southern newspapers were trumpeting disunion, a Northern newspaper acclaimed the victory of Lincoln as- the "unbroken voice of all the Northern states," dismissing the South as being of "no account anyway." The choice of William Henry Seward, a staunch foe of slavery, as the Secretary of State further threatened not only the internal situation, already beyond reconcilia­ tion, but the external position of the United States as well.