Showing posts with label J Pickney Henderson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label J Pickney Henderson. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 6, 2024

Colonel Jefferson Davis to the Editor of the Washington Union, January 6, 1847

(From Washington Union, Feb. 11, 1847.)

Victoria, Tamaulipas, Mexico.
January 6, 1847.

Dear Sir: After much speculation and no little misrepresentation about the capitulation of Monterey, I perceive by our recent newspapers, that a discussion has arisen as to who is responsible for that transaction. As one of the commissioners who were entrusted by General Taylor with the arrangements of the terms upon which the city of Monterey and its fortifications should be delivered to our forces, I have had frequent occasion to recur to the course then adopted, and the considerations which led to it. My judgment after the fact has fully sustained my decisions at the date of the occurrence; and feeling myself responsible for the instrument as we prepared and presented it to our commanding general, I have the satisfaction, after all subsequent events, to believe that the terms we offered were expedient, and honorable, and wise. A distinguished gentleman with whom I acted on that commission, Governor Henderson, says, in a recently published letter, "I did not at the time, nor do I still like the terms, but acted as one of the commissioners, together with Geenral Worth and Colonel Davis, to carry out General Taylor's instructions. We ought and could have made them surrender at discretion," &c., &c.

From each position taken in the above paragraph I dissent. The instructions given by General Taylor only presented his object, and fixed a limit to the powers of his commissioners; hence, when points were raised which exceeded our discretion, they were referred to the commander; but minor points were acted on, and finally submitted as a part of our negotiation. We fixed the time within which the Mexican forces should retire from Monterey. We agreed upon the time we would wait for the decision of the respective governments, which I recollect was less by thirty-four days than the Mexican commissioners asked—the period adopted being that which, according to our estimate, was required to bring up the rear of our army with the ordnance and supplies necessary for further operations.

I did not then, nor do I now, believe we could have made the enemy surrender at discretion. Had I entertained the opinion it would have been given to the commission, and to the commanding general, and would have precluded me from signing an agreement which permitted the garrison to retire with the honors of war. It is demonstrable, from the position and known prowess of the two armies, that we could drive the enemy from the town; but the town was untenable whilst the main fort (called the new citadel) remained in the hands of the enemy. Being without siege artillery or entrenching tools, we could only hope to carry this fort by storm, after a heavy loss from our army; which, isolated in a hostile country, now numbered less than half the forces of the enemy. When all this had been achieved, what more would we have gained than by the capitulation?

General Taylor's force was too small to invest the town. It was, therefore, always in the power of the enemy to retreat, bearing his light arms. Our army-poorly provided, and with very insufficient transportation—could not have overtaken, if they had pursued the flying enemy. Hence the conclusion that, as it was not in our power to capture the main body of the Mexican Army, it is unreasonable to suppose their general would have surrendered at discretion. The moral effect of retiring under the capitulation was certainly greater than if the enemy had retreated without our consent. By this course we secured the large supply of ammunition he had collected in Monterey—which, had the assault been continued, must have been exploded by our shells, as it was principally stored in "the Cathedral," which, being supposed to be filled with troops, was the especial aim of our pieces The destruction which this explosion would have produced must have involved the advance of both divisions of our troops; and I commend this to the contemplation of those whose arguments have been drawn from facts learned since the commissioners closed their negotiations. With these introductory remarks, I send a copy of a manuscript in my possession, which was prepared to meet such necessity as now exists for an explanation of the views which governed the commissioners in arranging the terms of capitulation, to justify the commanding general, should misrepresentation and calumny attempt to tarnish his well-earned reputation, and, for all time to come, to fix the truth of the transaction. Please publish this in your paper, and believe me your friend, etc.,

JEFFERSON DAVIS.

SOURCE: Dunbar Rowland, Editor, Jefferson Davis, Constitutionalist: His Letters, Papers and Speeches, Volume 1, p. 63-5