USA > California > History of California, Volume XXII > Part 62
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90
resulting treaty. Also Tratado de Paz, Mex. 1848, 8vo, 55 p., in Engl. and Spanish. The territory corresponding to Texas, N. Mex., Arizona, and Cal. was ceded to the U. S. for $15,000,000, and the amount of all decided and pending claims against Mexico. The boundary was the middle of the Gila and a straight line from the Colorado junction to the Pacific, at a point one league below the southernmost point of the port of S. Diego. Free navigation of the Gila and of the Colorado and gulf below the junction was assured. Mexican residents of the ceded territory were free to remain or depart as citi- zens of Mexico or the U. S., but must choose within a year, a failure to do so being equivalent to a decision to become citizens of the U. S. All property rights were to be inviolably respected, including those of the church and of all ecclesiastical or religious corporations or communities. Mexican grants of land were to be recognized; and legitimate titles in Cal. were to be such as were legitimate under Mex. law before May 13, 1846.
392
THE RULE OF GOVERNOR MASON.
band of brothers, emulating each other in their exer- tions to develop the wealth and resources, and to secure the peace, happiness, and permanent prosperity, of their common country."13
Reporting his action to the government on August 19th, Mason was later occupied with the disbandment of the volunteers, with consequent fears of Indian hostilities, with details of an anomalous system of government, and with various routine matters, bc- sides affairs connected with the gold excitement. He says: "I do not anticipate any rebellion or revolution on the part of the Californians, although the southern district must be entirely abandoned by the military force now there; and in fact, the minds of all men are so intently engaged upon getting gold, that for the present they have not time to think of mischief;" yet he did not cease to urge upon the government the necessity of providing additional means of security.19
Congressional action on the territory acquired from Mexico is a subject that can neither be disregarded nor satisfactorily treated in connection with Califor- nian annals of 1846-8. Not only does its treatment involve much repetition in the history of New Mex- ico, Texas, and of the Mexican war as presented in
18 Aug. 7th, Mason's proclamation of peace. Cal. and N. Mex., Mess. and Doc., 1850, p. 500-1. Original print in English and Spanish. Pico (Pio), Doc., MS., ii. 215.
19 Aug. 19th, Mason to govt. The letter announcing the treaty was dated Querétaro May 30th, and was sent up from La Paz overland by Col Burton. Cal. and N. Mex., etc., 597. June 23d, Buchanan to Larkin, with the news. Larkin's Doc., MS., vi. 134. Aug. 23d, Mason to govt. Ammunition sent to Oregon for Ind. war; also furnished to Cal. rancheros for protection, Pico's return, fortifications urgently needed at S. F., no laborers can be hired for less than $10 or $20 per day. C'al. and N. Mcx., etc., 601. Aug. 25th, Id. to Id. Paying off of troops, continued desertions, crews of merchant vessels mutinous, but no power to arrest them, no equipments. Id., 603. Aug. 28th, desertions, troops must be better paid or it is of no use to send them; those faithful now deserve reward. 'Should any rebellion take place, no future promise of pay, however great, would call 100 men from the mines.' Not an ounce of ammunition can be bought. Id., 643. Nov. 24th, Mason wishes to be relieved, 'the war being over, and the soldiers nearly all deserted.' Many people of L. Cal. have been brought here, orders given to feed and quarter them for two months. Id., 648-9. Dec. 27th, compliments to officers for past services. Reports of several horrible murders and robberies, including that of Reed and family at S. Miguel. Id., 649-53.
593
CALIFORNIA IN CONGRESS.
other volumes of this series, but it belongs inseparably to the grandest and most complicated topics of United States history, national development, territorial ex- tension, the struggle between slavery and freedom, nullification, abolition, secession, and all the successive steps that led to the greatest war of modern times. How futile the attempt to present en résumé even an outline view of these matters; yet a résumé, and that of the briefest, is obviously all that can be offered here.
Texas in 1844-5 was regarded in the United States as including a strip of territory extending from the gulf to latitude 42°, along the Louisiana boundary of 1819, and westward rather indefinitely into Mexican posses- sions. The people at this time strongly favored its an- nexation, because of a general desire for enlarging the republic in accordance with manifest destiny, of a theory that the country had been needlessly yielded to Spain in 1819, and of popular sympathy for the supposed wrongs of Texan settlers. With additional strength as a pop- ular measure in support of certain presidential aspira- tions, and as a field for profitable land speculations, a treaty of annexation was signed in 1844; yet it was rejected in the senate by a vote of two to one. This result was due to the fact that by the treaty the United States would have assumed the existing war with Mexico, that by its terms Texan boundaries were arbitrarily extended to the Rio Grande, and that annexation by treaty was not deemed the best method of procedure. To the majority the idea of an aggres- sive war on Mexico was not a pleasing one; a minority favored the measure at any cost, either desiring war or believing it might be avoided.
Early in 1845 the project was presented in a modi- fied and more acceptable form, that of a joint resolu- tion to admit territory "rightfully belonging" to Texas, under a constitution to be submitted to con- gress, and with the condition that four new states might be formed under the provisions of the Missouri HIST. CAL., VOL. V. 38
594
THE RULE OF GOVERNOR MASON.
compromise, prohibiting slavery north of latitude 36° 30'. This passed the house by a vote of 120 to 97. In the senate it could be passed only by the addi- tion of a peculiar amendment or alternative substitute providing for preliminary negotiations at the presi- dent's discretion, and then by a vote of 27 to 25, with the understanding that negotiations with Mexico should be opened by Polk, the president-elect, before submitting the resolution of congress to Texas. But President Tyler in the last days of his term, having approved the bill, at once despatched it to Texas by a special envoy. Thus the measure was carried in March by a trick. If President Polk was to any ex- tent a victim, he proved a very willing one, since he made no effort to recall the envoy, and the adminis- tration became fully committed to the measure, which was accepted by Texas in July. Accordingly, in December the state was admitted by the new congress by a vote of 141 to 56 in the house, and 31 to 14 in the senate. There was a strong opposition from the north to the extension of slavery, but many who op- posed annexation on account of Mexican complications deemed themselves bound by the action of the last congress.
Mexico had repeatedly announced that the annexa- tion of Texas would be taken as a declaration of war, and as such it was intended by the administration; but for fear that Mexican threats might not be car- ried out, the declaration was renewed by the advance of United States forces to the Rio Grande. Hostili- ties began in April 1846, and in May the president called upon congress for means to prosecute the war and repel invasion. The war bill was passed by both houses almost unanimously, and signed by President Polk on May 13th. There were protests against the preamble, which falsely declared the war to exist by act of Mexico, but the actual beginning of hostilities created a military spirit which few cared to resist, especially as there were some real grounds of com-
595
THE 'THREE MILLION BILL.'
plaint against Mexico. And as yet the war had no other avowed purpose than that of repelling inva- sion, obtaining indemnity for past grievances, and effecting a settlement of Texan boundaries.
Not only were immediate steps taken to enlist vol- unteers for active service and to occupy frontier prov- inces of Mexico, but the purpose of the war party to permanently hold California and New Mexico began to be revealed, notably by proceedings in connection with organizing the New York volunteers and Mor- mnon battalion. In August, at the end of the session, the president called upon congress for funds to be used in making peace, that is, as an advance payment to Mexico for concessions in fixing boundaries. A bill to grant $2,000,000 for 'extraordinary expenses' not specified, caused a warm discussion and strong opposition. Whigs denounced the war and the pro- posed acquisition of territory, which were defended by democrats. At last a substitute bill, giving $30,000 for negotiations, and $2,000,000 for expenditure if needed on ratification of a treaty, with the 'Wil- mot proviso,' prohibiting slavery in any territory that might be acquired, was passed in the house by a vote of 87 to 64. In the senate the rejection of the Wil- mot proviso probably, and certainly any action on the bill, was prevented by a Massachusetts senator who spoke 'against time' until final adjournment.
Before the matter came up again at the second session of the twenty-ninth congress several victories had been won on the field of battle, California and New Mexico had been occupied, and the intention to wage a war of conquest, and force Mexico to pay its cost, had become more clearly apparent. In his December message the president alluded to the es- tablishment of a civil government in the provinces named. In the senate a resolution to refer this part of the message to the committee on territories was defeated on the ground that it would be absurd to take any action respecting territory not yet belonging
596
THE RULE OF GOVERNOR MASON.
to the United States. In the house, however, such a resolution was adopted, as was another calling on the president for information on the civil government, with copies of all instructions on the subject to Kearny, Stockton, and others. Discussion took a wide range, and gave congressmen an opportunity to repeat their opinions on the war and its probable re- sults, as well as on the rights of the government under international law in conquered provinces.
But the chief topic of debate at this session was the 'three million bill,' of like purport, save in amount, to that defeated before. The whole subject of the Mexican war was now much more fully considered than ever before, and on the main issues at least there was no longer any concealment. Whigs, with few exceptions, denounced the war as unjust and aggres- sive from the first, and still more earnestly in its newer aspects as a war of conquest. They favored a treaty adjusting Texan boundaries and providing for a payment of the old claims. They opposed the dis- memberment of Mexico, the enforced collection of indemnity for expenses of the war, and the use of money to purchase a peace. Some of them declared their belief that the three millions were to be used as a bribe for Mexican officials, and pointed to the re- turn of Santa Anna under a United States passport. They opposed the acquisition of California and New Mexico, because the republic was large enough, be- cause the population of those provinces was undesir- able, because of the irregular methods proposed, and especially because of difficulties in connection with the slavery question. Southern whigs were particu- larly anxious and earnest in urging this phase of the matter, declaring that the acquisition of new territory would result in endless controversy and perhaps in breaking up the union. Webster and other conser- vatives in the north held the same view. Democrats, on the other hand, justified the war as provoked by Mexico, freely admitting the intention to force the
597
THE WILMOT PROVISO.
enemy to pay its cost, advocating the acquisition of California and New Mexico as both justifiable and desirable, and defending the purchase of a peace. Most urged a vigorous prosecution of the war for the purposes indicated, though Calhoun with a small fol- lowing favored a defensive policy, a mere holding of the occupied provinces till Mexico should yield. The danger to be feared from the slavery agitation was represented as purely imaginary, though some speak- ers admitted that disunion would result from north- ern attempts to interfere with southern rights in newly acquired territory-attempts which as they trusted would never be made. Opponents of the bill were plausibly denounced as willing to prolong the war by insisting on irrelevant issues.
Slavery in new territory was, of course, the real point of contention. Abolitionists in the north were now openly, and disunionists in the south secretly, in favor of forcing the issue. Conservatives in both sections wished to avoid it. The Wilmot proviso or its equivalent introduced in both houses at this session was made the text of the controversy. Southerners opposed it, claiming that congress had no right to pro- hibit slavery in the territories, and generally express- ing acquiescence in the Missouri compromise. North- erners, including many anti-slavery men, opposed it as premature, since it was absurd for congress to legis- late on territories not yet belonging to the United States; as needless, since slavery was already prohib- ited by Mexican law in California and New Mexico, where it could, morcover, never exist for natural rea- sons; and as tending both to prolong the war and to excite sectional controversy. Its advocates in- cluded abolitionists, men opposed to the extension of slavery, those doubting the possibility of extending free soil, and a few conservatives who regarded the proviso as the best means of defeating the bill. Doubtless there was a southern radical element se- cretly approving the proviso as a means of agitation.
598
THE RULE OF GOVERNOR MASON.
In the house the three-million bill was passed in Feb- ruary 1847, with the Wilmot proviso, by a vote of 115 to 105, but this house bill went no farther. In the senate the proviso was defeated by a vote of 31 to 21, and the bill was passed on March 1st by 29 to 24. It passed the house two days later by 115 to 81, the proviso as an amendment being defeated by 102 to 97.
Though funds were thus placed at the president's disposal, there was much hard fighting to be done before Mexico could be forced to yield. Santa Anna, whether or not he had made and broken any agree- ment respecting a treaty, served a useful purpose to the United States, exhausting Mexican resources by a compact resistance. At last, in March 1848, the treaty of peace, eeding California and New Mexico for $15,000,000, was referred to the senate and rati- fied by the requisite two-thirds vote. In July it was communicated to the senate as having been finally ratified by Mexico in May. Meanwhile, at the first session of the 30th congress discussions on the presi- dent's message, on the Oregon question, and on vari- ous resolutions for and against the right of congress to legislate on slavery in the territories had afforded opportunity for keeping the old questions alive, with- out leading to any practical result, or even to the evo- lution of any new theories. In his message of July 6th the president announced that California and New Mexico now belonged to the United States, that the temporary military government in those provinces had ceased to exist, and that a territorial civil gov- ernment was an urgent necessity, at the same time recommending a spirit of mutual concession in estab- lishing the new order of things. On July 22d, in compliance with resolutions of congress, adopted not without debate, he communicated additional informa- tion on boundaries and on the past military rule.
So fully had earlier debate made known the views of congress on the questions at issue, that it was
599
COMPROMISE DEFEATED.
deemed useless to attempt the passage of any terri- torial bill either prohibiting or permitting slavery. Neither the north nor south would yield, and each party of course held the other responsible for the fail- ure to provide a government for California. In the senate a select committee reported on July 19th a bill to make territories of Oregon, California, and New Mexico, with the compromise feature of leaving the matter of slavery to be settled by the courts, facilities being provided for easy and prompt appeal to the United States supreme court. In the discussion it was advocated by southern whigs and by democrats generally; but its opponents declared it to be an eva- sion rather than a compromise, that it was a southern measure, that the supreme court as constituted would support slavery, that congress should not relinquish control over the matter, and that the bill in its details was faulty. It was passed on July 26th, after a con- tinuous session of twenty-one hours, by a vote of 33 to 22; but in the house, after brief discussion, it was laid on the table by a vote of 112 to 97. Congress ad- journed in August, and California had no government. But the Oregon bill, excluding slavery, was finally passed by both houses, though the senate favored making the Missouri compromise the basis of its ac- tion, and the president announced that he would not have approved the bill but for the fact that Oregon was north of latitude 36° 30'.
Before congress met again in December 1848, the gold excitement had added a new element of interest and importance to the pending controversy. Again the president urged the necessity of a government. In the discussions of this session more attention was given than before to the people, conditions, and needs of California, though these were still but secondary topics. Slavery in the territories was the real ques- tion and the subject of voluminous speeches. I can- not present even en résumé the complicated network of bills, substitutes, amendments, and points of order
600
THE RULE OF GOVERNOR MASON.
by which each party strove to gain an advantage. The north was resolved to restrict slavery, and would entertain no proposition for compromise. Once the house in committee of the whole passed a resolution to cede back to Mexico the new territory, retaining San Francisco for the $3,000,000 already paid. An offer of private speculators to take California and pay the cost of the war was mentioned. The house also passed a bill for Upper California similar to the Oregon bill, prohibiting slavery, by adopting the ordinance of 1787 ; but the senate did not act on this proposition. Con- siderable importance was attached in debate to the danger of losing California if a government was not speedily provided for her rapidly growing and adven- turous population.
The impossibility of obtaining territorial govern- ments being apparent from the first, Senator Douglas introduced and most zealously advocated a bill to admit California and all the new territory at once as a state of the union, the people having, of course, the right to decide the slavery question for themselves. This was cutting the gordian knot indeed; but besides being a solution that would be practically a defeat for the south, though certain prominent southerners favored a similar measure in the house, it had several objec- tionable features. The judiciary committee reported adversely, on the grounds that congress had no power to create but only to admit a state, that the popula- tion was scanty and unfit, that the right to divide the state later as was proposed could not be reserved, and that boundary troubles with Texas were inevitable. Failing in this, Douglas offered a substitute bill ad- mitting California, and providing for the admission of New Mexico as soon as her population should be suf- ficient; but the measure was not favorably considered.
The final effort was to attach the matter to appro- priation bills. An amendment of the army bill, giv- ing to the inhabitants the rights of habeas corpus, trial by jury, and freedom from martial law, was
601
NO GOVERNMENT.
rejected, perhaps because the 'inhabitants' included negroes. But an amendment to the civil and diplo- matic bill, extending the revenue, Indian, and land laws over California and New Mexico, was adopted in the senate by 25 votes to 18, the south expecting some advantage from the implied extension of the con- stitution to the provinces. The house substituted an amendment authorizing the president to hold the new provinces by using the army and navy to maintain existing laws, and also extending the United States revenue laws; but this was not accepted by the senate, chiefly because the Mexican laws prohibited slavery. Finally, on March 4th, after an all-night session and complicated debate, the senate receded from its origi- nal amendment, and thus passed the appropriation bill, leaving California as before withont a govern- ment. Then at the last moment before adjourning, and not without protests from southern senators against the protection of any property rights where their own were ignored, a bill was passed extending the revenue laws over California, and establishing a collection district there.20
The matters thus presented extend chronologically somewhat beyond the limits of this chapter and vol- ume, but belong to what precedes rather than to what follows. Later developments connected with the ad- mission of California as a state, after the people had formed a constitution, will be treated in a later vol- ume. We have seen that the subject of California in congress, down to the middle of 1849, includes really but very little of California and a good deal of congress, or congressional action on matters that were national rather than provincial in their scope.
As we have seen, not only did congress after the treaty of 1848 consider the government that should
20 For the voluminous debates of which I have attempted to present an outline, see Cong. Globe, 1845-9, 29th and 30th congresses. Also Benton's Debates and Houston's Debates for the same period.
602
THE RULE OF GOVERNOR MASON.
be provided for California, but earlier, in December 1846, the system that had actually been put in opera- tion there. A resolution calling upon the president for information and explanation on the subject was passed after long debate, which was, however, merely a part of the general controversy, with but slight bearing on the state of affairs in the far west. Cer- tain peculiarities in the proclamations of Sloat, Kearny, and Stockton afforded a favorable opportunity to attack the administration, to denounce the war, and particularly the apparent purpose to make it a war of permanent conquest. After the discussion had served its partisan purpose the matter was dropped, as the president's explanation was unassailable on the point nominally at issue, and his plans of conquest were otherwise clearly enough announced. The debate, however, brought out the views of congressmen re- specting the civil government of conquered provinces as regulated by international law. Mr Douglas took the ground, more or less fully supported by others, that by the act of occupation California and New Mexico became United States territory, and as such immediately subject to the control of congress. On the other hand, Mr Rhett and a few followers ex- pressed very radical opinions in favor of the arbitrary and unlimited powers possessed by the president as commander-in-chief. Neither of these extreme views, however, was generally supported.21
The position assumed by the president from the beginning to the end of the war, both in messages to congress and instructions to subordinates, supported in the debates by conservative members with citations from writers on international law, and carried out
21 Debates in 2d sess. 29th congress, in Cong. Globe, 1846-7, p. 13, 20, 33, 37-9, 43-4, 46, 67, 75-6, 83, 87, 345. The president's explanatory message is also found with accompanying documents as U. S. Govt Doc., 29th cong. 2d sess., H. Ex. Doc. 19. See also, on civil government, Cong. Globe, 1847- 8, p. 910-16, 989-92, including the message of July 22, 1848. Also Globe, 1848-9, p. 191. The most complete treatment of the subject, in all its phases, is found in the speech of Mr Seddon of Va .. Dec. 10, 1846, in Globe, p. 23-6.
603
RIGHTS OF CONQUERORS.
more or less uniformly by the successive commanders in California, was in substance as follows: War hav- ing been regularly declared, the executive, as com- mander-in-chief, could use his forces to conquer and hold any part of the Mexican territory as an act of war. The first object was to obtain possession, to overcome all armed resistance, and to secure submis- sion on the part of the people. This accomplished, it became a right and duty to protect citizens in their individual rights, and thus prevent anarchy. To this end the conquerors acquired the powers of sovereignty temporarily lost by Mexico. Methods would depend largely on the judgment of commanders, and might vary with circumstances; but a conciliatory rather than an oppressive policy was required. Strict mar- tial law might be enforced if deemed necessary; other- wise, the people being submissive and friendly, a tem- porary civil government might be established as a legitimate feature of military rule. The nature of the system to be introduced was not to be determined by the people; Mexico was entitled to no voice in the matter; the power of the conqueror was absolute, except as limited by the requirements of humanity and justice, constituting what is called international law and usage. Other things being equal, it was natu- ral and right to continue the old Mexican methods; but the conqueror might legitimately conciliate pop- ular favor for his government and nation, as well as promote the cause of justice, by annulling oppressive acts of Mexico; and in introducing modifications deemed convenient or essential to safety, he might properly take the institutions of his own nation as a model. By the conquest California did not become United States territory ; the president had no power to make or declare her such; she did not come under the protection of the constitution or of legislation by congress. What powers of permanent annexation or government congress and the executive might legiti- mately have assumed over California before the treaty
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.