noticing in detail the addi- tional ones which the administration now found it con- venient to disinter from the oblivion of past years, and which had been in fact buried by the treaty ratified 5th April, 1832, which proclaimed the friendship existing between the two Republics. It may be well, however, to give a few samples of these claims to show the determined efforts of the American Government to quarrel with Mexico.
"Mexican Company, Baltimore, 1816; amount of claim not stated. This was an association of individuals that furnished General Mina with the means of undertaking his invasion of Mexico, which amount they aver has never been repaid to the;ji."
" Mrs. Young, 1817 ; amount of claim not stated. The claimant is the widow of Col. Guilford Young, who was a partner of Mina, and was killed while fighting in 1817. The claim is understood to be for arrears of pay.'' These claims it will be observed, are for insmTectionary services against the Spanish Government, seven or eight years before that Government was succeeded by the Mexican RepubHc.
"John B. Marie, 1824; amourft of claim not stated. Goods seized upon pretext of having been introduced con- trary to a Mexican law. The claimant says he was igno- rant of the law."
*'T. E. Dudley, and J. C. Wilson, 1824; amount * Ex. Doc, 24th Cong., 2d Sess., vol. 3.
claimed not stated. The claimants robbed of a part of their property by the Camanche Indians, on their return from a trading e^tpedition to Mexico."
The proposition to employ the naval force of the Union in making reprisals to enforce such claims was deemed too hazardous to be wise. It would necessarily bring on a war ; and a war waged on pretexts so scandalous, might destroy the popularity of the party, and augment the