Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Mexican Statement Regarding Texas
Topic Started: Feb 7 2010, 03:01 AM (182 Views)
Mexico
Member Avatar


The Mexican government does not recognize the ability of Antonio López de Santa Anna legally to agree to any terms for us under the Mexican Constitution, and if we did, he was under coercion as a prisoner, not as a surrendering general in accordance with the laws of warfare. Neither did we "recognize peace" between ourselves and "Texas", this is impossible as there is no war, but only a revolt and our government. When Santa Anna signed these in any case, if all of this were accepted, this document would certainly not be a peace treaty, merely the first step to achieving one. Finally, IF all of that were true Texas failed to follow it's end of the deal.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Republic of Texas
Member Avatar


Texas finds the Mexican position absurd, insulting, and dubious to say the least. Santa Anna acted in his official position as leader of the Mexican state while negotiating the aforementioned peace; furthermore his supposed "coercion" and the distinction made with surrender is laughable, given that the rout the Mexican army sustained at San Jacinto put Santa Anna and his troops in an obviously untenable position. His was the role of defeated leader, whether it seemed convenient for El Presidente to acknowledge or not. Mexico is essentially saying that the free men of Texas whipped their army so badly, they had no choice but to acknowledge our independence under duress. No doubt the British felt the same way after Yorktown. Finally, to claim that there is no war but only a revolt simply begs the question, and itself is quite strange given the de facto recognition that Mexico has afforded us in the two years between San Jacinto and the Mexican ambassador's late remarks.
"Y'all can go to Hell, and I'll go to Texas."
- Davy Crockett
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mexico
Member Avatar


While Mexico does not speak nor negotiate with radicals, it would say that the past two years have been filled with Mexican victories over the revolt's "navy". Including the capture of the ship Independence, now patrolling the coast.

Further more, we would also say that under the Mexican Constitution Santa Anna had no power to come to any such agreement for the nation. We also don't know why he is referred to as El Presidente. The President of Mexico at the time was José Justo Corro, and the President before him was Miguel Barragán. Santa Anna was last president in January of 1835.
Edited by Mexico, Feb 7 2010, 03:40 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Republic of Texas
Member Avatar


Mexico's constitutional arguments are most amusing considering that the 1824 constitution was suspended by Santa Anna himself in 1835, when he centralized power in the country and made it a dictatorship in all but name. Whether he held the title of El Presidente at the time or not, there can be no doubt that he represented the supreme leadership of the country, political and martial. Indeed, were this not the case there would have been no impetus for the Texas Revolution in the first place.

If the Mexicans are still confused about their domestic politics (as often happens when one's free government is suspended), we suggest they review the facts of San Jacinto, and they will find that when Santa Anna ignominiously attempted to hide he was betrayed by his soldiers' salutes and their calling him El Presidente. Apparently they knew who was the real authority.
"Y'all can go to Hell, and I'll go to Texas."
- Davy Crockett
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mexico
Member Avatar


We would ask the following message to be delivered via the Belgian delegation:

As per Mexican law at the time Santa Anna lost all presidential powers when he left to serve as a military general.(article II of the Siete Leyes) It's quite expected that soldiers serving under him would come to respect him and refer to him with his past position in mind.

The position of the government was visible from the start when charges were brought against General Filisola for abandoning the province. Since that time Mexico has continued to search and capture ships manned by revolting Texans.

Had the treaty been signed by the President or an official, or in any way accepted by the government it still would not constitute peace.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
United States of America
Member Avatar
An Empire for Liberty

The United States urge both Mexico and Texas to cease this pointless bandying of words. It is quite clear to the international community that Texas is an independent nation, having been duly recognized by governments on both sides of the Atlantic, the number of which is steadily increasing as the months pass.

Until such time as a permanent, amicable resolution to the present disputes can be reached, we advise both sides to remain calm and not antagonize each other.
Posted Image Embassy of the United States of America Posted Image
"For more than half a century, during which kingdoms and empires have fallen, this Union has stood unshaken. The patriots who formed it have long since descended to the grave; yet still it remains, the proudest monument to their memory."
- Zachary Taylor
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Republic of Texas
Member Avatar


Again, to reiterate our previous position, constitutional objections regarding powers and prerogatives are moot in light of the 1835 suspension of the Mexican constitution. No one would seriously argue that Santa Anna was not representing Mexico in an official capacity at the time of the Texas invasion, and except for the competing despots in Mexico City who eventually deposed him, few would dispute Santa Anna as the source of national political power.

Although we do agree with the United States in one respect; further bandying of words with you seems pointless.
"Y'all can go to Hell, and I'll go to Texas."
- Davy Crockett
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mexico
Member Avatar


We fully acknowledge the suspension of the Constitution, the law we were referring to was part of the system of government that replaced it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Texas Embassy · Next Topic »
Add Reply