[12.] Santa Anna’s operations till he reached Puebla. Only the principal documents can be cited here. Tributo á la Verdad, 48–9, 54, 136. Picayune, May 6. Diario Sept. 10. [312]Guerra to S. Anna, Apr. 8. Roa Bárcena, Recuerdos, 265–7, 570, 634. S. Anna, Apelación, app., 72–3, 76. [366]Id.., Address to Amer. soldiers, Apr. —. Id.., Detall, 8. Defensa de ... Estrad. S. Anna, Manifiesto, Mar. 24, 1848. [12]Loch to admiralty, Apr. 20, 1847. Apuntes, 183–91. Gamboa, Impug., 36. Negrete, Invasión, iv, app., 274. [13]Bankhead, no. 42, 1847. Courrier Français, May 5. Ramírez, México, 261. México á través, iv, 660–1. [88]Córdoba ayunt., proceedings, Apr. 26–9. [82]Official docs., Apr. 20–30. [82]Prefect of Matamoros, Apr. 26. (Indians) [82]Prefect Tlapa, May 13. Republicano, May 4. [73]Bermúdez de Castro, no. 517, June 29. Nat. Intelligencer, June 2. Monitor Repub., May 4, 23. (Tlacotálpam) Sen. 1; 30, 1, p. 547. Bustamante, Nuevo Bernal, ii, 190. S. Anna, Comunic. Oficial. Carreño, Jefes, cclxx. Lerdo de Tejada, Apuntes, ii, 260. [76]Carrera, Apr. 27. (Chiquihuite.) [76]Acuerdo, Mar. 29; [76]Soto, Apr. 3; [76]to Soto, Apr. 1. [76]Canalizo, Apr. 21, 24, 28. [76]To S. Anna, Apr. 21. [76]To Canalizo, Apr. 21. [76]To Bravo, Apr. 21. [76]Fúrlong, May 9. [76]Gov. to comte. gen. Oaxaca, May 4. [76]S. Anna, Apr. 27. [76]Id.to Rosa, Feb. 5, 1848.
[13.] Santa Anna’s operations after he reached Puebla (except the Amozoc fight). Negrete, Invasión, iv, app., 250–2, 255, Tributo á la Verdad, 49–53, 56–7. S. Anna, Apelación, 41–3. Id.., Detall, 8. [166]Pommarès to Conner, Aug. 29, 1846, confid. Donnavan, Adventures, 99. Dos Palabras. London Times, July 9. Apuntes, 192–3. Gamboa, Impug., 33–5. Ramírez, México, 260, 282. México á través, iv, 661. [95]Protest, Apr. 12. Monitor del Pueblo, Apr. 29. [82]Comte. gen. to gov., May 10. [82]Letter to secy., May 11. [95]Puebla ayunt., proceedings, May 10–15. [82]Isunza, proclam., May 12. [199]S. Anna to Giménez, May 15. Diario, May 10. Monitor Repub., May 13, 23; Dec. 12. Baz, Juárez, 47, note. Bustamante, Nuevo Bernal, ii, 190. [312]Bishop Puebla to S. Anna, Apr. 8. [76]S. Anna, Apr. 27, 29; May 11, 15. [76]To S. Anna, Apr. 20, 30. [76]To Bravo, Apr. 21. [76]To Gaona, Apr. 21. [76]Carrera, Apr. 23. [76]Fúrlong, May 9. [76]S. Anna to Rea, May 12.
[14.] The American advance to Puebla (including the Amozoc fight). Ho. 60; 30, 1, pp. 944–8, 957 (Scott); 967, 994 (Worth). [61]Scott to Wilson, Apr. 23. [218]Henshaw narrative. Tributo á la Verdad, 50. Scott, Mems., ii, 460. Grant, Mems., i, 135. Ballentine, Eng. Soldier, ii, 159, 161, 175–6. S. Anna, Apelación, 41–2. [303]Worth to Quitman, May 10. [159]Collins papers, May 20; July 3–8. Robertson, Visit, i, 312. Orbigny, Voyage, 412. Lawton, Artillery Officer, 145, 156, 162, 170–4, 207–8. Journal Milit. Serv. Instit., xvii (Van Deusen). Löwenstern, Le Méxique, 31. Smith, To Mexico, 153, 163, 165 (nothing in U. S. equal to Puebla), 166. Sen. 65; 30, 1, p. 527. Brackett, Lane’s Brigade, 191, 276. [213]Hatch to father, June 3. [68]Scott to Worth, May 6. Colección de Itinerarios. Revue de Paris, Dec., 1844. Semmes, Service, 225–6, 230–7. Apuntes, 193–6. Sen. 52; 30, 1, p. 125 (Scott). Gamboa, Impug., 36. México á través, iv, 662. [236]Judah, diary. Moore, Scott’s Camp., 84–96. Rosa, Impresiones, passim. [270]Moore, diary. Steele, Amer. Camps., i, 107, 110. Diario, May 16. Ward, Mexico, ii, 201. Stevens, I. I. Stevens, i, 140, 142. [364]Worth to daughter, Apr. 30. [76]Prefect of S. J. de los Llanos, May 11. [76]Comte. milit. Huamantla, Apr. 29. [76]To Bravo, Apr. 26. [76]Fúrlong, May 5. [76]Bravo, Apr. 23. [76]S. Anna, May 13, 15. [76]To S. Anna, May 14. [76]S. Anna to Rea, May 12. And others.
Santa Anna, to justify his course, said he felt compelled to leave Puebla on account of the unfavorable local conditions and the approach of the Americans (Detall, 8). Worth did not have outposts and scouts on the alert, as he should have had, at Amozoc, and knew nothing about the roads (Stevens, Stevens, i, 142). Scott’s delay showed that he did not feel strong enough to advance to the capital. That city was therefore in no danger from his army. If Santa Anna, instead of going there, had now gathered all the Mexican strength between Puebla and Vera Cruz and prevented reinforcements from reaching Scott, the latter would have been in a hard position.
[15.] The Puebla ayuntamiento archives contain the agreement signed at Chachapa by Worth. Later he sought to modify this ([68]orders 31), calling it merely a memorandum ([68]to H. L. Scott, June 16), and on May 20 he signed a new [95]version. Naturally the Pueblans held to the former ([68]Dorán to Scott, June 17). For general orders 20 see p. 455.
[16.] Semmes represents Worth’s régime as entirely satisfactory to the civil authorities (Service, 275). This illustrates the fact that caution is necessary in reading what he says when Worth is concerned, for the records of the ayuntamiento give a different impression. For Worth’s characteristics see chap. xii, [note 8]. The Southern Quarterly Review, April, 1852, 406, note, said Worth “was quite superficial, had no solid or profound attainments, nor was he gifted with grasp of mind requisite to high combinations and extended operations.” Robert Anderson remarked once that he hoped Worth would not, “from a fit of passion, alter his opinions” (Anderson Artill. Officer, 32). Hitchcock in N. Y. Courier and Enquirer (semi-weekly), Mar. 1, 1848: Worth has striking manners and great felicity in conversation, but is utterly destitute of stability and judgment.
[17.] Worth’s operations at Puebla. [68]Worth court of inquiry, proceedings, documents. Weekly Courier and Enquirer, Mar. 2, 1848. Tributo á la Verdad, 12, 48, 51–2. [224]H. L. Scott to Worth, June 20. [61]Scott to Wilson, Apr. 26. Hitchcock, Fifty Years, 257. (Alarms) Grant, Mems., i, 136; Delta, July 8; [218]Henshaw narrative; [307]Roberts, diary; Sen. 65; 30, 1, pp. 527–8. [303]Gen. orders 128. Collins papers. Robertson, Visit, i, 314. Ruxton, Adventures (1847), 30. Bullock, Six Months (1825), i, 83. León, Hist. Gen., 477. Lawton, Artill. Officer, 169, 174–5, 226. Journal des Débats, July 6, 1847. Semmes, Service, 210, 254, 264, 275. Rivera, Jalapa, iii, 912. Apuntes, 193–5. Sen. 52; 30, 1, p. 125 (Scott). Gamboa, Impug., 33–4. Ramírez, México, 261, 267–8, 272. México á través, iv, 662. [236]Judah, diary. Monitor del Pueblo, Apr. 29. [95]Ayunt., orders, May 8. [95]Ayunt., proceedings and corresp. with Worth. [95]W. to first alcalde, May 18. [82]Bravo, proclam., Apr. 28. [82]Isunza, proclam., May 13. [270]Moore, diary. Davis, Autobiog., 274. Negrete, Invasión, iii, app., 61, 86–7. Monitor Repub., May 2, 21; June 5. Ho. 60; 30, 1, p. 994 (Worth). Niles Jan. 15, 1848, p. 311. [364]Worth to Sprague, July 29, 1847. [76]S. Anna, May 13, 16. [76]Fúrlong, May 13. [76]Worth, May 12. [76]Bravo, Apr. 30. [76]Worth to Furlong, May 17. [76]To Fúrlong, May 20.
Ripley (War with Mexico, ii, 115) points out very pertinently that Worth placed his troops injudiciously at Puebla. Worth’s errors bore most unfortunate fruit. Scott, before knowing or suspecting what had been conceded to Mexican laws, made sharp comments on the attitude of the Puebla authorities. Naturally he felt seriously troubled. Worth even allowed them to try citizens who had killed American soldiers, and of course the culprits were acquitted (Sen. 65; 30, 1, p. 527; [95]ayunt. to Worth, May 22). Scott thought seriously of evacuating the city and recapturing it in order to wipe out that concession; but, concluding that such a course would be rather farcical, he simply overrode the concession by republishing general orders 20 (chap. xxxi, [note 22]). This action and the comments angered Worth. Scott angered him further by requesting him to withdraw the [68]circular of June 16, which was impolitic, implied that Worth held an independent command, and if entitled to credence (Lawton, Artill. Officer, 227) should have been given to headquarters, so that all the troops could be warned ([224]H. L. Scott to Worth, June 20). Worth therefore demanded a court of inquiry ([65]gen. orders 196). Quitman, Twiggs and P. F. Smith formed the court and sat on June 30. Their [68]conclusions strongly condemned the circular, the terms granted to Puebla and Worth’s complaints against Scott; and they pronounced him worthy of a severe rebuke, as certainly he was. Scott could not avoid approving the verdict and publishing it in orders ([65]no. 196), but these orders were made known only to chiefs of the general staff and commanders of divisions and brigades. From this time Worth was no doubt in his heart a mortal enemy of Scott. Unhappily, more will be heard of this matter. As for criticising Scott, Worth wrote on July 29 ([364]to S.) that Scott might have entered Mexico city by May 20, in which case (it was Worth’s “firm belief”) “peace would have immediately resulted”—a very superficial judgment. Worth added: “We gain victories and halt until all the moral advantages are lost.” Hitchcock well said that Worth looked only at his ability to march troops to a certain place, while Scott had to see also how the advance could be supported and supplied (Sen. 65; 30, 1, p. 528). (Other references for this note. [68]Scott to Worth, June 16. [68]Worth to Scott, June 20. [68]Id.., order 61, June 20. Lawton, Artill. Officer, 226–8. [68]Worth to H. L. Scott, June 16. [68]Scott to Worth, May 6. Nacional (Atlixco), May 16. Davis, Autobiog., 270–1, 274.)
[18.] At Jalapa he left Brev. Col. Childs with the First Artillery (five companies), the Second Pennsylvania and three companies of the First Pennsylvania; at Perote seven companies of the First Pennsylvania with some artillerists; and at each place a troop of dragoons (Sen. 52; 30, 1, p. 125). The stock of ammunition was still inadequate, and the paymaster had only half of his estimate for January-April (ibid., 124–5).
[19.] Domínguez, leader of the Spy Company, had been an honest weaver, it was said, but on being robbed by a Mexican officer, took to the road and became a brigand chief. When the Americans reached Puebla he was living there quietly with his family; but, knowing the insecurity of his position, he accepted Hitchcock’s offer to become a scout. His band consisted at first of five men but rose to about 100, and probably might have been increased to 2000 (Lawton, Artill. Officer, 266). He and men of his even entered the capital in disguise. While he was at the head of the company, the actual captain was a Virginian named Spooner, who had been a member of his band; and the two lieutenants also were foreigners. The men seem to have served and obeyed orders faithfully, and their leader refused very advantageous terms offered by Santa Anna. (For the Spy Co. see Hitchcock, Fifty Years, 259, 263–4, 330, 335–41, 344–5. Brackett, Lane’s Brigade, 187. Lawton, Artill. Officer, 266. Henshaw narrative, Aug. 8. [69]Domínguez to Polk [Sept., 1848].)