without either "Texan temptations" or Texan influences, I have studiously kept aloof from all that might be considered Mexican, lest I should unconsciously imbibe a spirit inconsistent with that of an impartial historian.

Those who believe what Mr. Kennedy and others of his category have written of Texas and the Texans, Mexico and the Mexicans, will of course doubt the impartiality to which I lay claim. But let them for one moment reflect upon the identity of causes, principles, and men, who robbed Mexico of Texas, and of those who wanted and still want to rob this country of the Canadas. There is not a public writer in England who does not fully understand and detest the character and designs of the Sympathizers of the north, and yet (if we are to attribute reviews to the editors of the papers where they have appeared, and not to other influences) there is scarcely one who does not profess to believe Mr. Kennedy's description of the modern Texan, who is neither more nor less than a Sympathizer of the south, who has succeeded in his object. Why should the same man be an execrable villain on the frontier of Canada, and a worthy Texan on the borders of Mexico? and why should the same deeds which are decried and punished in the north, not be equally so in the south? Crimes do not change their nature, nor the rights of nations vary, with a mere difference of latitude; the Mexicans, exposed to similar out

rages with ourselves, have had and have the same right to resist them, and while we reject the doctrines and sympathies of Mr. Wm. Lyon Mackenzie, as treasonable and destructive to ourselves, in common justice we must equally repudiate the doctrines and sympathies of Mr. William Kennedy, as promoting treason and sedition against the Mexicans.

I hold that the justice of this parallel is undeniable, and assuming that it is so, I beg the attention of the reader to the following graphic portrait of the Sympathizer of the north, taken from the Canadian British American and West Indian Magazine, for February, 1839, said to have been edited by a gentleman of talent, at present connected with the Morning Herald:

AMERICAN "SYMPATHY."

"American sympathy is clearly all on one side, and the various phases under which it may be found openly displayed or covertly lurking-the Protean shapes it assumes-can neither blind to its cool and callous atrocity, or disguise its cant and hypocrisy in whatever way it may appeal to the sense. The brigands, who, with their title deeds duly enrolled and signed by Mackenzie for lots of fair Canadian land, cross the border, fire the dwelling, and deliberately consummate midnight assassination upon unsuspecting, unpreprared, and helpless men, women, and children-these are Sympathizers.' If the murderous gang ultimately beaten off by a brave and loyal population, succeed in escaping by a disgraceful flight, they are welcomed back by their countrymen with 'sympathy,' not for the innocent victims they had so ruthlessly slaughtered in Canada, but for the booty

not gained, though expected, and the larger share of it laid out by the whole skin sympathizing contrivers of the foray at home. for themselves. If the bandits are captured, brought to trial and sentenced to the gallows, as outcasts, such from the laws of God and man deserve to be, American 'sympathy' then shrouds itself in a world of wordy philanthropy. The charities of kind and of nature are appealed to on their behalf, as if the condemned savages could claim aught of kindred with humanity beyond the outward form. To propitiate a mercy which would often be worse than suicidal in the gallant people outraged and rob the hangman of his due, never more worthily exacted, the banded pirates are held up as folks poor and honest, or as blubbering boys escaped from the maternal apron strings, who have been ' deluded,' unwarily seduced,' or even 'compelled' by threats to join the vagrant crew with which they were associated in their nefarious schemes of bloodshed and rapine-as if the conscious vagabonds knew not the difference between a rifle and a reaping hook, and could not decipher the contract sealed and signed in their own handwriting for the purchase of Canadian freeholds, at the foul price of innocent unoffending Canadian blood!"

I leave the reader of the following pages to point out where I have painted the Texans, alias Sympathizers of the South, in colours blacker than the above. Such, and such only, were the men who, from New Orleans, invaded Texas in 1836! such are the men who, at this moment, hostilize the whole line of the Rio Bravo del Norte ! such are the men who form the Texan nation! from whose vicinity, according to Mr. Kennedy, Mexico is to derive so much benefit, and with whom Lord Palmerston allowed himself to be hurried into a treaty !

The only thing that can be urged in his Lordship's defence is, that in this case he only did what the United States, France, Holland, and Belgium had done before him. But Scripture tells us, " we ought not to follow a multitude to do evil:" "we ought to do unto others as we would that they should do to us;" all which maxims his Lordship, in this case, violated, affording an example which other nations may follow to the prejudice of this great colonial empire, and exposing to imminent hazard the important interests of his countrymen throughout Mexico.

The reader may think the imputation I have cast upon the government of the United States, in having recognized Texas, through a political juggle, as undeserved. Such, however, is not the case. It is a fact in history, well authenticated by other evidence besides that of Mr. Kennedy, (see p. 280, vol. ii.,) that President Jackson recognized Texas merely to give her a semblance of right to dispose of herself, voting her aggregation to the United States. While only recognized as an integral part of Mexico, the cabinet of Washington could not in decency admit into the Union those who were not their own masters. But with states as well as individuals, honesty is the best policy. The crafty Americans perpetrated the disgraceful deed, but they were overreached by the equally cunning, and still more unprincipled Texans, who, under a promise of annexation, had induced President

Jackson to violate the territory of Mexico through the army of General Gaines, and threaten Mexico with war unless she almost instantly paid an indemnity for fourteen specific, and sundry indefinite claims of American citizens, trumped up for the occasion, from the remote date of 1817! All this was done after the battle of San Jacinto, to deter General Bravo, who had concentrated a Mexican army at San Luis Potosi, from invading Texas, and retrieving the disastrous surprise of General Santa Anna. The manoeuvre succeeded. The disputes with France which soon followed rendered it impossible for Mexico, for a time, to spare troops for the reconquest of Texas, and the wily Texans were no sooner relieved from their apprehensions of a fresh visit from the Mexicans, and fortified by the acknowledgment of their independence by the United States, than by a vote of their own congress, they withdrew their petition for admission into the American Union.

It was to this most disgraceful political juggle of General Jackson, that Texas owes its admission amongst independent nations. France followed the example of the United States, to indulge a vindictive feeling against Mexico. Holland and Belgium thought they could do no wrong in doing as the United States and France had done before them; and at last Lord Palmerston followed in the same path, to the manifest prejudice of every British interest, and the sanction of a principle tend