Nereida Lopez Historical Document Essay

Our country’s history is rooted in the ideas of racism and ethnocentrism which has led to

the large amount of ignorance that can be found in historical documents. A great way to see how

our leaders of the past truly felt about those who were not in the same “Anglo-circle” as

themselves, is to peer into documents that they wrote to each other. When it came to the

annexation of Texas question in 1845, the diplomats William S. Parrott, John Black, and John

Slidell all wrote to secretary of state James Buchanan, and shared their opinions about the

Mexicans living in Texas, which clearly influenced James Buchanan. The views of these leaders

were both racist and ethnocentric, and clearly influenced James Buchanan to steer his views.

In the third paragraph on page 237, in response, in response to Buchanan’s query on

Mexico’s reception to the notion of annexation, Parrott argues that the Mexican people will not

be content to the idea that the U.S government will not even consider how the Mexican people

feel. He says that the Mexican people do not know what they want, there is no moral courage and

prestige establishment of any form of government in Mexico. He continues, by saying that

Mexico is in a chaos, and that all the chaos has caused groups of parties, which are trying to gain

more power by destroying one another. This makes it appear as though the Mexican people are

apathetic towards others as well as to their own people. This adds to the idea that the diplomats

saw the Mexican people as barbaric people, who did not have reasonable feelings towards their

own.

In the paragraphs to follow, both Black and Parrott say that the Mexican people are not

likely to enter a war with the United States. The tone of both letters is one of superiority, as
Nereida Lopez Historical Document Essay

though there is no way that the Mexican people can be so foolish as to want to enter a war with a

country that is as strong as the U.S. In addition, Parrott says that the arrival of the U.S would

“not only, be well received; but that his arrival would be hailed with joy” (pg. 244 pa.4 ) This

benightedness is difficult to comprehend, considering that many of the Mexican people began to

retaliate against those Americans who were inhabiting their lands.

At this point, Buchanan writes a letter to Slidell, appointing him to serve as his

commissioner to Mexico. He reminds Slidell to stress that the independence of Texas is settled.

In this letter, Buchanan repeatedly writes about the Native Americans, calling them savages, and

implying that if Mexico hands over New Mexico, the burden of these peoples’ will be no longer

for the Mexican government. When Slidell arrives to Texas, the Mexican people do not accept

his credentials, and in his frustrations, he says that the Mexican people are “so feeble and

degrading” (pg. 246 para 2). This adds to the prejudice that the Mexican people are somewhat

ignorant and are unwilling to cooperate.

In a refreshing turn of events, Joaquin M. de Castillo y Lanzas succeeds Manuel de la

Pena as Mexico’s foreign minister. He writes a letter to John Slidell, and in this letter, he states

ever-so-clearly the true intentions of the United States in taking Texas, and how the government

did it. De Castillo calls out the United States by saying that the true desire of the United States

was to extend its territory, not the benefit the lives of the people living in Texas. He also says that

the U.S obviously sent its own citizens to inhabit Texas to plot a plan to eventually take Texas

from Mexico. He reminds Slidell in saying that Mexico has repeatedly protested the idea of

becoming part of the United States. He continues by saying that if a war is to break out, it will

have been the United States that caused it, by its consistent breaking of treaties, hostility, and

fake friendship with Mexico. The United States truly thought that they could get away with being
Nereida Lopez Historical Document Essay

sneaky with Mexico, which suggests that they felt that the Mexican people and Mexican

government was gullible.

However, in December of 1845, General Mariano Paredes led a military coup in Mexico

City and installed himself as the new leader of this new government. Buchanan writes to Slidell,

suggesting that Slidell should go to Mexico City to try to bribe Paredes to accept American funds

to help his new government. It is evident that Buchanan still feels that the Mexican people are a

people that are easily convinced, and easily fueled by money. Slidell fails at doing this, and in his

last letter to Buchanan before returning to the White House to later draft his war message to

Congress, he writes that he will be returning and will reach New Orleans by April. He says it is

difficult to preserve his composure with “these people”, which when one uses these terms, it

separates oneself and distances Slidell from any connection to the Mexicans in Texas.

To conclude, it is evident that the letters written in the Diplomatic Correspondence

Concerning the Annexation of Texas had underlying bias. The authors of the letters had prejudice

against the Mexican people, and made it appear as if they were ignorant, easily fooled, and easily

bribed. In the letters written by Slidell, Parrott, and Black, they made it seem as though the

Mexican people were a passive people. Despite these beliefs, the Mexican government continued

to repel any idea of becoming part of the Union and began to crack down on the tactics used by

the United States government to conquer and expand their territory through Mexico. However,

the influence of Slidell, Parrott, and Black heavily influenced how Buchanan saw the Mexican

people. He continued to use vocabulary that separated himself from the Mexican people, which

furthered any connections he may have made, and any empathetic attitude towards how the

Mexican people might have felt about the American Government overlapping their powers into

lands that were not theirs.

Nereida Lopez Historical Document Essay

References

William R. Manning, editor, Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States:

InterAmerican Affairs, 1831-1860 (Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International

Peace, 1937), 8:163. Pages 237-250