Page:Vol 6 History of Mexico by H H Bancroft.djvu/57

Rh dependence and sovereignty. The pecuniary pretensions of the French, though not assailing Mexico's sovereignty, were no less unjust and exorbitant. The first claim was set down at twelve million dollars. They wanted the immediate payment without allowing Mexico the right of examining into their justice through a mixed commission, as practised among civilized nations. The second pecuniary demand preferred by Saligny was that of Jecker and Company for fifteen million dollars, which the Spanish plenipotentiary, and with him Wyke and Dunlop, after a warm discussion, declared inadmissible.Here we have the true inwardness of the fraudulent claims. Jecker was a Swiss by birth, always known as such. It is not claimed that he became a Frenchman till March 26, 1862. Suddenly, without having resided in France or done service to that nation, he appeared as a full-fledged Frenchman, under color of which transformation his claims were advanced by Saligny. Wyke, in the despatch before mentioned, gives the history of Miramon's last financial operation. When his government was at the point of co!lapsing, Jecker & Co. lent it $750,000 in specie, at 5 per centum intercst, as originally agreed upon, receiving therefor fifteen million dollars in treasury bonds, an infamous contract causing discontent throughout the country, and which neither the government of Juarez nor any other would ever recognize. Arrangoiz, Aléj., ii. 361; iii. 20-1; Lempriere's Notes in Mex., 242. Wyke added that he had understood Juarez' government was disposed to pay the $750,000 with the interest due. ''Méx., Legis. Méj''. (1856, July-Dec.); Dublan and ''Lozano, Leg. Mex''., viii. 628-9; Archivo Mex., Col. Leyes, iii. 929–-32; ''Méx., Mem. Hac''., 1870, 475-6. Hidalgo, Apuntes, 104, claims that however onerous or even extortionate, 'nada tenia que ver en él el representante de Inglaterra,' who had opposed the pretension. 'El de España le secundó en esa resistencia.' He would have England and Spain complacently aid Saligny to rob Mexico. The Mexican government was not responsible. ''Lefêvre, Mex. et L'Interv''., 260. On the other hand, it was claimed that the affair might be looked at from a double point of view, namely, the private interests of Jecker and Company, which had become those of numerous Frenchmen and benevolent establishments, compromised by their bankruptcy; and those of the general interests of commerce which by the clauses of the Jecker contract were benefited by