The full program of the annexationists was not limited to the acquisition of Texas. It was far more ambitious, and was divulged to only a few. A war with Mexico was to be provoked, and in the end the whole of the Mexican republic was to come under American rule. There was much talk of "Manifest Destiny" and the "onward march of civilization." With Mexico in the Union, and carved up into numerous slave states, the balance of power would be in Southern hands for a long time to come.

In spite of all these shrewd manipulations it looked as if Texas was about to be turned away like an uninvited guest. But there were other things to be done. The annexationists had a trump card hidden away. When the uproar against annexation was at its loudest pitch this little trump gave them comfort, and they would take a peep at it now and then. Finally, they slid it unobtrusively on the table.

Suppose Great Britain should take over Texas as a part of the flourishing British empire? What then? England needed cotton, and Texas seemed likely to become the greatest cotton-producing region in the world. There was the Monroe Doctrine, of course, but would it apply if an American nation should voluntarily put itself under the protection of a European power? Texas was a free and independent republic, despite Mexico's claims, and might dispose of herself as she pleased.

Hints were passed to representatives of the Texan republic, and they began some vague conversations with British agents. The London government was afraid of the proposition. Very likely the Queen's ministers realized the true inwardness of the situation, and saw that they were being used as a cat's-paw by the annexationists. The proposal was kept warm, however, and the news of it was allowed to filter out. A small but influential party in the North began to declare that it would be better to admit Texas, after all, rather than let such a rich domain come under British influence.

Manifest Destiny

73

In the autumn of 1844 the question of annexation was one of the chief issues of the presidential campaign. The Democrats made "Manifest Destiny" the corner stone of their political philosophy for the moment. What possible objection could there be to admitting Texas? And as a slave state. Was not slavery recognized by the United States Constitution? And was it not a part of American civilization, like Plymouth Rock and the Baptist religion? As for the Mexicans, what had they to say about it that a white man ought to listen to? A lot of yellow-skinned half-breeds and god-knows-what mixture of Spaniards and Indians, presuming to lay down boundary lines and claim this and that as their territory. They had no right to any territory. If the American nation possessed the right spirit it would go down to Mexico, conquer the whole lazy tribe, and take civilization and slavery to that part of the continent.

So ran the minds of the annexationists as the presidential election approached.

James K. Polk, an insignificant Tennessee politician, who was almost unknown to the American people, was nominated by the Democrats because he had written a strong letter in favor of immediate annexation. His career had been so colorless that nobody knew anything against him, and the Democrats managed to elect him.

The results of the election cheered the annexationists wonderfully, and started a rise in the value of the cheap Texas bonds. But there was Congress still to reckon with, for although the annexationists had a majority of both the Senate and the House they were not strong enough in the Senate to get a treaty of annexation ratified, as a treaty requires a twothirds vote. After thinking it over awhile the leaders of the annexation party tore up the proposed treaty with Texas, and decided to do the job with a joint resolution, which needs only a majority of both Houses.

The joint resolution went through, but only by a bare

majority. The efforts of the administration were aided by a vast crowd of lobbyists.

With Texas in the Union, protected by the powerful United States, the whole contention with Mexico should have soon come to an end. But the larger scheme of Mexican conquest was still in the background, and something had to be done in that direction. It was necessary to find a cause for a quarrel with Mexico . . . and this necessary cause was quickly discovered.

Turn to the map of Texas in your atlas, and you will see the small river Nueces running into the Gulf of Mexico, about one hundred and twenty miles north of the Rio Grande. The Mexicans claimed that the southern border of Texas was the Nueces, while the Texans declared that their territory extended to the Rio Grande. This insignificant strip of land was made the pretext for war. The conflict was begun by American troops moving into the Nueces region and occupying it.

CHAPTER VI

GRANT THE PACIFIST

§ 1

RANT'S regiment went into camp on the western edge

G

of Louisiana, near the town of Natchitoches, and remained there for more than a year. Life was almost without incident, though Ulysses wrote that he retained very agreeable recollections of his stay. The poker games among the officers were agreeable, to be sure. They played for very small stakes; in the course of three or four hours Grant would win or lose a trifling sum, measured not in dollars but in cents. The troops stationed on the Texan border were pompously called the "Army of Observation." A better name, although it would not have been so soothing to national hypocrisy, would have been the "Army of Provocation," for its purpose was to goad Mexico into a conflict. Every one from commander down to drummer boy knew that war with Mexico was just around the corner, and the spirit of elation in the camp overcame the long weariness of waiting.

The officers of the Army of Observation, with the exception of Lieutenant Grant, and perhaps a few others, were all for war, and the order which came in July, 1845, for the Fourth Infantry to proceed to New Orleans, and later, to Corpus Christi, Texas, was received with joy.

At the bottom of his heart Grant was a pacifist . . . not only then, but throughout his life. In the 1840's pacifism as a principle was unknown. The best minds in the world were still magnetized by the Napoleonic conception of military power as a substitute for ideas. As a substitute for justice,

too. The spiritual and economic diseases that fester under the skin of the conqueror had not yet been traced to their true cause. The conqueror still vainly imagined that he was made stronger, and not weaker, by his victories.

In such a world atmosphere there was no place for any considerable body of pacifist opinion to form; but there were individual pacifists, and Grant was one of them, although he never called himself anything of the kind.

A striking evidence of his instinctive pacifism was his often expressed dislike of armies and fighting. When he was on his tour around the world the Crown Prince of Germany invited him to attend a military review. Grant accepted the invitation, but in commenting on the review he said to Bismarck:

The truth is I am more of a farmer than a soldier. I take little or no interest in military affairs, and, although I entered the army thirty-five years ago and have been in two wars, in Mexico as a young lieutenant, and later, I never went into the army without regret and never retired without pleasure.

At Versailles the French government conducted him, with an escort, as a distinguished guest to the famous gallery of war paintings in the palace. "I tried to enjoy the pictures,' he said, "but found them only disgusting. . . . I never saw a war picture that was pleasant,” he added.

One does not have to go very deep into his personality to observe his aversion to war, yet his mind was so foggy in all its abstract conceptions that he was never able to form for himself any sharply defined theory of pacifism. He had no formula for doing away with warfare in civilized countries. The Civil War, he thought, "was necessary”—to use his own expression, but he took part in it only because he was a graduate of West Point, and he considered it his duty, though a disagreeable one.

In reflecting upon the various aspects of his character we encounter this strain of pacifism as it appears in many forms,