[Inclosure.]
Mr. Elkins to
Mr. Foster.
War
Department,
Washington, January 19, 1893. [Received January
21.]
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the
receipt of your letter of the 13th instant inclosing for my
confidential information a copy of a dispatch from the minister of
foreign affairs of the Republic of Mexico, delivered to you by the
chargé d’affaires of that Government in this city, in relation to
the pursuit of outlaws on the frontier, to which you invite my
attention, and especially to the two recommendations made by the
minister respecting the movement of troops, concerning which you
request the views of the Department at as early a date as
practicable.
The communication of the minister was referred to the Major-General
Commanding the Army, and I invite attention to the inclosed letter
from him, dated the 17th instant, expressing his views on the
subject, in which I concur.
The suggestion relative to the disposition of the United States
troops and the Mexican troops on the lookout for these outlaws, the
Major-General Commanding the Army remarks in his letter, is a timely
one, and the suggestion will be conveyed from the headquarters of
the Army to the commanding general, Department of Texas, for his
guidance.
Very respectfully,
S. B. Elkins,
Secretary of War.
Gen. Schofield
to Mr. Elkins.
Headquarters of the Army, Washington, D. C., January 17, 1893.
Sir: Referring to the copy, furnished you
by the State Department, of a dispatch from the minister of foreign
affairs of the Republic of Mexico to the chargé d’affaires of that
Government in this city, and dated December 31, 1892, I have the
honor to offer the following suggestions:
Preventive measures have not in any country been found sufficient to
always prevent attempts at crime, nor always to prevent some success
in such attempts. It can not be hoped to accomplish even so
desirable an object as this always without the employment of means
largely in excess of those which any government has regarded itself
as justifiable in employing.
Considering the physical features of the border country between the
United States and Mexico, and the character of a large portion of
the population inhabiting that country on either side of the
boundary line, it is not strange that the general experience of
these and other nations should have found no exception there, and
yet the number of successful incursions from the one side to the
other of the Rio Grande has in fact been very small, and the damage
done not very great. The vigilance of the military forces of the two
nations on either side of the river has sufficed to
[Page 440]
make such lawless attempts very
dangerous and unprofitable to the criminal whose robber designs have
been only thinly veiled under a pretense of political purpose.
The military force employed by the United States on that frontier has
been, and now is, quite as large in proportion to the service
required as the aggregate strength of the Army will permit, and it
is believed as large as the international obligations of the United
States require. It is believed that future attempts at such lawless
incursions from Texas into Mexico should be deterred by the pursuit,
arrest, and punishment of criminals who have heretofore been engaged
in such lawless acts, rather than by a large military force
constantly on guard along the Rio Grande, and this for various
reasons, among others, the manifest fact that such guarding of the
border would do nothing to change the character or purpose of the
lawless population in that part of the country on either side of the
river, and would make it certain that whenever any other military
exigency should cause the troops to be withdrawn these criminal
raids into Mexico would immediately be renewed without risk to the
criminals. This pursuit and arrest and punishment of those who have
thus violated the neutrality laws of the United States devolves
primarily upon the civil authorities of the Government, or of the
State of Texas. In this work the troops can only aid the United
States marshals as a part of their posse.
This leads to the manifest conclusion respecting the suggestion of
the Mexican Government, that the troops of either country may, in
pursuit of lawless raiders, follow them across the river into the
territory of the other country. Since not even the troops of the
United States can, independently of the civil authority, make such
pursuit in the State of Texas, but must do so in aid of the
marshal’s posse, far less would it be possible for the troops of a
foreign nation to do the same thing. Indeed, in the arrangement
heretofore made between the United States and Mexico for the pursuit
of savage Indians across the line, the stipulation was made, it is
believed, at the instance of the Mexican Government, that this
should only take place in a portion of the country which is wild,
mountainous, and uninhabited by civilized people. It would be
manifestly impossible for either country to allow the troops of the
other to pursue even savage Indians into a territory of the other
country inhabited by citizens.
The Mexican minister makes one suggestion which I am happy to
appreciate as very timely, namely, that in the disposition of the
United States troops on the one side and of the Mexican troops on
the other such concert of action may be had between the commanding
officers of the two forces as to double the effect, by stationing
the Mexican troops at one crossing and those of the United States at
another alternately. I will immediately convey to the commanding
general, Department of Texas, this suggestion for his guidance.
Very respectfully,
J. M. Schofield,
Major-General
Commanding.
