Civil War History - Secession and PoliticsWas it Slavery, or was it States Rights? Perhaps it was the election of Lincoln? What were the real reasons for Southern Secession and what were the political issues in this time of war? Find your answers here in the Secession and Politics Disussion.
In another thread, you mentioned the Mexican initiative towards the Confederacy and recognition. I thought I'd start this new thread to give it a little more visibility.
As the various states were seceding in the "Winter of Secession" and getting together to form the Confederacy in Montgomery, AL in February of 1861, Mexico was already in the middle of a war of their own. This was the bloody fratricidal Reform War of 1859-61.
Juarez (a full-blooded Indian) led the Liberals against the Conservatives. Early on, he was captured and hauled before a firing squad, but escaped. In early 1861, Juarez was hanging onto Mexico City by the skin of his teeth. By late in the year, the British, French and Spanish were landing an expedition at Veracruz to protect their nationals and try to collect debts; while the British and Spanish later withdrew, Napoleon III converted this into the attempt to create the Empire of Mexico with Maximillian on the throne.
As a result, in early 1861 Mexico didn't need any new enemies. I think the attempt to connect with this new Confederacy on their northern border was largely from self-preservation. Simply delaying trouble with the Confederates would have been a major advantage to Mexico.
In A Government of Their Own by Davis (about the formation of the Confederate government in early 1861), published a few years ago, I recall seeing a discussion of the attempt. Jefferson Davis avoided meeting with the emissary because he felt it might be embarassing if he was to lead an invasion of Mexico within the next year or two -- which gives you an indication of how he viewed the future.
Shortly after that, the Confederates did send a diplomat to Mexico. This was John T. Pickett, sent officially to negotiate a treaty of alliance in May 1861. Apparently that "treaty of alliance" was supposed to include Confederate annexation of large parts of northern Mexico and intrigues for the independence of Vera Cruz -- because that's what Pickett worked for. He was soon arrested by the Juarez government, thrown in jail for 30 days, and expelled from the country.
In addition, there were various schemes and plots that involved the separation from Mexico of the northern tier of mexico, attempts to subborn/bribe Mexican governors, and the actions of Confederate secret agents in Mexico throughout the Civil War -- all of which clearly envision Confederate acquisition of parts of Mexico, one way or another, stright across to the Pacific Ocean.
Regards,
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
I think the attempt to connect with this new Confederacy on their northern border was largely from self-preservation. Simply delaying trouble with the Confederates would have been a major advantage to Mexico.
Thanks, trice. That's mostly what I was getting at: why on earth would the hand of friencship be extended to an entity whose intentions must have been known? You've explained it in your usual, lucid fashion.
ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
In 1861-1865, the U.S. had steamer(steamboats, rams, and ironclads) superiority.
As early as 1861 the U.S. was using the Mexican port of Guaymas, Sonora, in the Gulf of California, to offload supplies that were shipped further up the Gulf of California and the Colorado River to Fort Yuma.
This situation meant that the U.S. would control the New Mexico Territory, after a brief occupation by Confederate forces.
The U.S. logistics meant more supplies to maintain an army in New Mexico, and stop any plan of the Confederacy to acquire any U.S. territory.
The U.S. logistics meant more supplies to maintain an army in New Mexico, and stop any plan of the Confederacy to acquire any U.S. territory.
All the more reason to buddy up with the Confederacy. Can't imagine the Mexicans trusting the US Government. A case of better the devil you don't know than the devil you do?
ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
All the more reason to buddy up with the Confederacy. Can't imagine the Mexicans trusting the US Government. A case of better the devil you don't know than the devil you do?
Well, maybe they knew the Confederates better than you think:
Jeff Davis and Braxton Bragg were, of course, the heroes of Buena Vista where they shot the Mexican Army into the ground.
Beauregard had been a hero of Scott's staff in the taking of Mexico City.
Confederate diplomat John Slidell of Louisiana (the one in the 1861 Trent Affair) had been the man sent to negotiate the Rio Grande as the border of Texas after annexation into the US in 1845-46 -- as well as purchasing New Mexico and California. Since the Mexicans were already furious over the Texas annexation, it is not surprising that this turned into a fiasco and that Slidell was not received by the Mexican government. Slidell was a name well-known in Mexico, but not in a favorable way.
Confederate diplomat John T. Pickett was very well-known in Mexico, having been a US consul in Veracruz, Mexico for 9 years (1853-61) and was very well-known there. Despite being from Kentucky, he had also fought in the Hungarian uprising with Kossuth, and was in the Lopez fillibustering operation against Cuba. He is often compared to William Walker, the Nicarauguan filibuster leader in the 1850s. In Owsley's King Cotton Diplomacy, the chapter on this is called: "The Confederacy and Mexico: John T. Pickett, Swashbuckler". After the Civil War, this Pickett is best known for two things: selling Secretary of State Seward a part of the Confederate Archive that had somehow ended up in Canada along with Pickett, and being involved in the selling of the Louisiana electoral vote during the Hayes-Tilden election of 1876. In general, not the sort of guy to make the Mexicans feel all warm and fuzzy about their new neighbor's intent -- which probably explains how he ended up in jail and being expelled from the country.
It may be the Mexicans had a bit too much experience with the people who'd be leading this new Confederate government next door -- and didn't trust them worth a darn.
Regards,
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
In 1861-1865, the U.S. had steamer(steamboats, rams, and ironclads) superiority.
As early as 1861 the U.S. was using the Mexican port of Guaymas, Sonora, in the Gulf of California, to offload supplies that were shipped further up the Gulf of California and the Colorado River to Fort Yuma.
This situation meant that the U.S. would control the New Mexico Territory, after a brief occupation by Confederate forces.
The U.S. logistics meant more supplies to maintain an army in New Mexico, and stop any plan of the Confederacy to acquire any U.S. territory.
Yes, but that is more apparent now than it was then. In early 1861, the US Navy consisted of 90 ships. Over 20 of them were laid up in port unable to take to the sea. Others were stationed off Africa (the slave patrol) or over near China and Japan, or elsewhere. Many were obsolete due to frugal budgets in the 1850s.
Regards,
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
All the more reason to buddy up with the Confederacy. Can't imagine the Mexicans trusting the US Government. A case of better the devil you don't know than the devil you do?
=====
From CONFEDERATE WESTERN AMBITIONS by W. H. WATFORD in Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 44, No. 2:
Mexico was then in the midst of one of its periodic revolutions, and a state of near anarchy encouraged a long-threatened intervention by European nations. Under these conditions, Union and Confederate diplomatic agents in Mexico were seeking to advance the interests of their respective governments.
The most important Confederate official was John T. Pickett, accredited to the Juárez government. Before leaving Richmond, he had written his predecessor in Mexico, John Forsyth, that the destiny of the new Confederacy lay "southward," pointing out to him the "immense advantages" which would accrue to the Confederate States from the "boundless agricultural and mineral resources" of Mexico. 48 In Mexico City, he learned that the United States had been given permission to march troops across Mexican territory. He began to threaten military reprisals, declaring on one occasion that a large Confederate force was moving towards El Paso with the intention of occupying Arizona and New Mexico, and that if the United States took advantage of the offer, war would probably ensue between Mexico and the Confederate States. 49 Meanwhile in his dispatches to Richmond, he was urging the Confederacy to take possession of Mexican territory. 50
48John T. Pickett to John Forsyth, March 13, 1861, quoted in J. Fred Rippy, TheUnitedStatesandMexico (New York, 1926), 201. 49Corwin to Seward, September 7, 1861, HouseExecutiveDocuments, No. 100, 37 Cong., 2 Sess., VIII, 23. 50Frank Lawrence Owsley, KingCottonDiplomacy (Chicago, 1931) 103-105.
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Mexico and the Confederacy, 1861 
Linear Mode
