Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 December 2015
American intervention in Mexico during 1916 produced a series of crises which carried the two countries to the brink of total war. Though full-scale confrontation was narrowly averted, United States-Mexican relations suffered in following decades because of the friction produced during that period. American historians have frequently treated the events of that year with blatant defense of President Woodrow Wilson or, at worst, a judgement that hostilities arose because of unfortunate misunderstandings between national leaders. In this age when some scholars have reoriented their thinking about Wilson’s World War I policy, it seems both fair and necessary to reexamine his Mexican program.
1 A good statement of the extent of American and other foreign investment in Mexico during the revolutionary decade can be found in Gibbon, Thomas Edward, Mexico Under Carranza (Garden City: Doubleday, Page and Co., 1919)Google Scholar, especially Chapters III and IV. Unfortunately the book must be used with caution because it is written as a bitter denunciation of Carranza and rests many of its invectives upon questionable evidence.
2 For an excellent discussion of Wilson’s liberal-capitalistic world order based upon the example of the United States, see Levin, N. Gordon Jr., Woodrow Wilson and World Politics: America’s Response to War and Revolution (New York: Oxford University Press, 1968).Google Scholar
3 Clendenen, Clarence, The United States and Pancho Villa: A Study in Unconventional Diplomacy (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1961), 224–226.Google Scholar Villa’s growing antagonism toward the United States in late 1915 was a direct result of President Wilson’s recognition of Carranza’s de facto government. American cooperation with Carranza had been instrumental in Villa’s disastrous defeats at Agua Prieta and Hermosillo in November and December respectively. Enraged by the feeling that he had been stabbed in the back by the United States government, Villa terminated his previous friendship with Wilson and designated him an enemy equal to Carranza. His sanctioning of the Santa Ysabel Massacre rose directly from this new hostility toward Americans. For a short discussion of an opposite viewpoint, however, see Clendenen, 227.
4 “Verdict of the Press on Intervention in Mexico,” Literary Digest, LII (January 29, 1916), 213.
5 Ibid. “The Mexican Murders,” Literary Digest, LII (January 22, 1916), 158.
6 “Mexico’s Turmoil,” Review of Reviews, LIII (February, 1916), 146.
7 Link, Arthur S., Wilson: Confusions and Crises 1915–1916 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964), 201–202.Google Scholar “Mexican Murders,” 158.
8 “Verdict of the Press,” 213.
9 Ibid., 213–215.
10 Quoted in Gruening, Ernest, Mexico and Its Heritage (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1928), 586.Google Scholar
11 Cobb to Secretary of State January 11, 1916 in Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, 1916 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1925), 651. (Here-after cited as Foreign Relations).
12 Lansing to Silliman January 12, 1916, Ibid., 653.
13 Cobb to Secretary of State January 12, 1916, Ibid., 652.
14 Edwards to Secretary of State January 27, 1916, Ibid., 663.
15 Letcher to Secretary of State February 9, 1916, State Department File #812/17268, microfilm roll 51, National Archives and Records Service.
16 Clendenen, Clarence, Blood on the Border: The United States Army and the Mexican Irregulars (London: Macmillan Co., 1969), 199.Google Scholar Link, Wilson: Confusions and Crises, 203.
17 Lansing to Silliman February 16, 1916 in Foreign Relations, 469. Link, Wilson: Confusions and Crises, 203.
18 Consul Hostetter to Secretary of State February 21, 1916 in Foreign Relations, 665.
19 Hanna to Secretary of State March 2, 1916, State Department File #812.00/17339, roll 51.
20 J. A. Vincent to Secretary of State January 7, 1916 in Foreign Relations, 741–743.
21 Lansing to Silliman January 19, 1916, Ibid., 752–753.
22 Lansing to Silliman January 21, 1916, Ibid., 711. Lansing to Silliman February 26, 1916, Ibid., 713.
23 A discussion of whether or not Villa ordered the attack on Columbus lies beyond the scope of this article. But it appears most likely that he did sanction the foray for the sake of bringing about American intervention which would rally Mexican citizens under his banner. This most commonly held viewpoint is articulated by Link, Wilson: Confusions and Crises, 207. For a fresh new approach concerning German encouragement to Villa see James A. Sandos, “German Involvement in Northern Mexico, 1915–1916: A New Look at the Columbus Raid,” Hispanic American Historical Review, L (February, 1970), 70–88. A good summary of the numerous historical arguments about Villa’s role may be found in Clendenen, US. and Villa, 242–246.
24 Tompkins, Frank, Chasing Villa (Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Military Service Publishing Co., 1934), 54–57.Google Scholar
25 Edwards to Secretary of State March 9, 1916, State Department File #812.00/17389, roll 51.
26 Funston to Adjutant General March 10, 1916, State Department File #812.00/17396, roll 51.
27 Braddy, Haldeen, Cock of the Walk (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1955), 136.Google Scholar Baker, Ray Stannard, Woodrow Wilson Life and Letters: Facing War 1915–1911 (New York: Greenwood Press, 1968), VI, 70.Google Scholar
28 Franklin K. Lane to Woodrow Wilson March 13, 1916 in Lane, Franklin K., The Letters of Franklin K. Lane, Personal and Political, edited by Wintermute Lane, Anne and Herrick Wall, Louise (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1922), 204.Google Scholar
29 Memorandum by Lansing March 9, 1916 in The Lansing Papers, 1914–1920 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1940), II, 554–555.
30 Jesús Acuna to Silliman March 15, 1916 in Fabela, Isidro (editor), Documentos Historicos de la Revolución Mexicana—Expedición Punitiva (Mexico City: Editorial Jus, 1968), XII, part I, 42–43.Google Scholar Silliman to Secretary of State March 10, 1916, State Department File #812.00/17415, roll 51.
31 Carranza’s interview with James Carson of the Associated Press March 11, 1916 in Fabela, Documentos, part I, 64–65.
32 Lansing to Agents Silliman and Belt March 9, 1916, State Department File #812.00/17382, roll 51.
33 Clendenen, U.S. and Villa, 249–250.
34 Mason, Herbert M. Jr., The Great Pursuit (New York: Random House, 1970), 84.Google Scholar Thomas, Robert S. and Allen, Inez V.. The Mexican Punitive Expedition Under Brigadier General John J. Pershing, United States Army, 1916–1911 (Washington: War Histories Division, Office of the Chief of Military History, Department of the Army, 1954), II–2 and II–11.Google Scholar
35 Zach Cobb to Secretary of State March 10, 1916 in Foreign Relations, 484. Polk to Belt March 15, 1916, Ibid., 490. Arthur Link discovered an interesting bit of evidence in the unpublished Wilson Papers which indicates the President’s attitude toward the Punitive Expedition. In a private letter to his friend Joseph Tumulty at the time of the incident, Wilson remarked that he had ordered formation of the expedition, but would not allow it to cross the border unless he received total cooperation from the de facto government. See Link, Woodrow Wilson and the Progressive Era 1910–1911 (New York: Harper and Row, 1954), 137.
36 McCain to Funston March 10, 1916, State Department File #812.00/17398, roll 51.
37 Scott, Hugh L., Some Memories of a Soldier (New York: Century Co., 1928), 520–521.Google Scholar
38 Link, Wilson: Confusions and Crises, 209. McCain to Funston March 13, 1916, State Department File #812.00/17457, roll 51.
39 Arredondo to Carranza March 12, 1916 in Fabela, Documentos, part I, 79. American assurances of cooperation clashed with the secret contingency plans prepared by the War College for the possible call-up of 400,000 volunteers should Carranza show hostility toward the expedition. See Link, Wilson: Confusions and Crises, 211.
40 Lansing to Silliman March 13, 1916, State Department File #812.00/17415, roll 51. Silliman to Lansing March 15, 1916, State Department File #812.00/17491, roll 51. Congressional Resolution of March 17, 1916 in Foreign Relations, 491. For a discussion of the nineteenth century reciprocal crossing arrangements which played a major role in the 1916 agreement, see J. Fred Rippy, “Some Precedents of the Pershing Expedition into Mexico,” Southwestern Historical Quarterly, XXIV (April, 1921), 292–316.
41 Andrés G. García to Rafael Múzquiz March 16, 1916 in Fabela, Documentos, part I, 96–97.
42 Arredondo to Secretary of State March 18, 1916 in Fabela, Documentos, part I, 109–110. Arredondo to Acting Secretary of State March 19, 1916 in Foreign Relations, 495–496.
43 Carranza to Gen. Murguía March 20, 1916 in Fabela, Documentos, part I, 144. Frank L. Polk to Wilson March 20,1916 in Lansing Papers, II, 555–556.
44 Arredondo to Secretary of State March 27, 1916 in Foreign Relations, 501–502.
45 Link, Wilson: Confusions and Crises, 217.
46 Steffens, Lincoln, The Autobiography of Lincoln Steffens (New York: Literary Guild, 1931), 735–737.Google Scholar Fain, Samuel S., “The Pershing Punitive Expedition and Its Diplomatic Background” (unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Arizona, 1951), 37.Google Scholar
47 “Villa’s American Allies,” Literary Digest, LII (April 8,1916), 951.
48 E. L. N. Glass, The History of the Tenth Cavalry 1866–1921 (n.p., 1921), 146. “Letters Home—From Mexico,” Literary Digest, LII (June 10,1916), 1732–1733.
49 “Our Unpreparedness Revealed by Villa,” Literary Digest, LII (April 1, 1916), 884–886. “General Funston’s Prudent Estimates,” Review of Reviews, LIII(April, 1916), 389.
50 “Villa’s American Allies,” 953. “Our Game of Chess with Mexico,” Outlook, CXIII (May 10, 1916), 49. “Increasing the Army,” Current History, IV (April, 1916), 3.
51 Braddy, Cock of the Walk, 136. Baker, Wilson: Life and Letters, 71.
52 Rodgers to Secretary of State March 28, 1916 in Foreign Relations, 714.
53 Rodgers to Secretary of State April 20, 1916, Ibid., 716–718. Lansing to Rodgers April 24, 1916, Ibid., 718–719. Rodgers to Secretary of State April 25, 1916, Ibid., 719.
54 Tompkins, Chasing Villa, 137–143. For a listing of military dispatches from the Punitive Expedition after the Parral battle see Foreign Relations, 518–523. A good description of the battle is found in Thomas and Allen, The Mexican Punitive Expedition, IV–1 through IV–7.
55 Carranza to Arredondo April 12, 1916, State Department File #812.00/17866, roll 52.
56 Consul Letcher to Secretary of State April 17, 1916, State Department File #812.00/17894, roll 52. Funston to Adjutant General April 25, 1916, State Department File #812.00/17984, roll 52. Gregory Mason, “The Dough-Boy and the Truck,” Outlook, CXIII (May 31, 1916),280.
57 Franklin K. Lane to Frank I. Cobb May 8,1916 in Lane, Letters, 207.
58 Pershing to Funston April 17, 1916 in Foreign Relations, 521–522.
59 Link, Wilson and the Progressive Era, 137. Immediately after the fight at Parral, Wilson began to augment the Punitive Expedition with infantry, artillerymen, and other permanent type forces which indicated a switch in policy away from the original orders of merely pursuing Villa by cavalry squadrons. Paralleling these developments was the President’s increased interest in Mexican treatment of foreign lives and property, as evidenced in the context of his orders through the State Department. For a like-minded conclusion that April served as the beginning of a major change from Wilson’s original plan of “hot pursuit” to his new policy of exerting military pressure, see Freeman Smith, Robert, The United States and Revolutionary Nationalism in Mexico, 1916–1932 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1972), 49 and 53.Google Scholar
60 For representative petitions of Mormons, farmers, ranchers and others seeking protection of foreign business in northern Mexico see: Mason, Gregory, “Mexico—From the Inside Looking Out,” Outlook, CXIII (May 10, 1916), 94–96.Google Scholar “An American in Mexico,” Outlook, CXIII (May 17, 1916), 149. “Two Mexican Policies,” Outlook, CXIII (May 3,1916), 13–14.
61 Price, Theodore H., “American Business as Affected by Peace and Preparedness,” Outlook, CXIII (May 24, 1916), 226–229.Google Scholar Phelps Dodge, one of the largest American mining concerns in northern Mexico, experienced many temporary shutdowns, but total operations actually suffered very little from 1914 to 1917. See Cleland, Robert Glass, A History of Phelps Dodge 1834–1950 (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1952), 197–198.Google Scholar
62 Conservative historian Samuel Flagg Bemis portrays a similar thought pattern in Wilson’s attitude toward land ownership. The President believed land reform was necessary to Mexico’s future, but it would have to await the establishment of stability and a slower moving legal process. This is also how he probably viewed petroleum and other mineral resources. See Bemis, , The Latin American Policy of the United States (New York: W. W. Norton and Co., 1943), 179.Google Scholar
63 Adj. Gen. McCain to Gen. Scott April 30, 1916, State Department File #812.00/18031, roll 52.
64 Funston to Secretary of War May 1,1916, State Department File #812.00/18045, roll 52.
65 Graham Raht, Carlysle, The Romance of Davis Mountains and Big Bend Country (El Paso: Rahtbooks Co., 1919), 350–358.Google Scholar Military and consular reports relating to the Big Bend raid may be found in Foreign Relations, 540–546.
66 Carranza to Arredondo May 8, 1916 in Lansing Papers, II, 556–557.
67 Silliman to Secretary of State May 20, 1916 in Foreign Relations, 551. Blocker to Secretary of State May 19, 1916, Ibid., 551.
68 C. Aguilar to Secretary of State May 22, 1916, Ibid., 552–563.
69 Smith, The United States and Revolutionary Nationalism in Mexico, 53.
70 Rodgers to Secretary of State July 15, 1916, Ibid., 725. Silliman to Secretary of State June 26, 1916, Ibid., 781. “Mexico’s Threat of War,” Current History, IV (July, 1916), 616–617.
71 Polk to Secretary of Navy June 3, 1916 in Foreign Relations, 669. Link, Wilson and the Progressive Era, 140.
72 Vice Consul Brown to Secretary of State June 19, 1916, State Department File #812.00/18703, roll 53. Link, Wilson: Confusions and Crises, 300. Vice Consul Blocker to Secretary of State June 25, 1916 in Foreign Relations, 670–671.
73 J. B. Treviño to Pershing June 16, 1916 in Fabela, Documentos, Part I, 369–371. Clendenen, U.S. and Villa, 277–278.
74 Clendenen, Blood on the Border, 299–311. Mason, The Great Pursuit, 206–212. Thomas and Allen, The Mexican Punitive Expedition, IV–21 through IV–29. Captain Boyd was among the first fatalities of the battle as he was cut down by a Mexican machine gun.
75 Circular issued June 21, 1916 in Fabela, Documentos, part II, 124–125. General Circular of Obregón transcribed through General Pablo González to General Máximo Rojas June 22,1916, Ibid., 140.
76 “Passing of the Mexican Crisis: The Fight at Carrizal,” Current History, IV (August, 1916), 834–835. Joseph P. Tumulty, Woodrow Wilson as I Know Him (Garden City: Doubleday and Co., 1921), 157. “Mexico-A Programme,” Outlook, CXIII (June 28, 1916), 451–452.
77 Baker, Wilson: Life and Letters, 77. “Mobilizing the Militia,” Outlook, CXIII (June 28, 1916), 443–444.
78 Link, Wilson: Confusions and Crises, 315.
79 Young, Karl, “A Fight that Could Have Meant War,” American West, III (spring, 1966), 19.Google Scholar
80 Lansing to Wilson July 3, 1916 in Lansing Papers, II, 561. Newton D. Baker, “Our Military Situation,” Outlook, CXIII (July 5,1916), 552.
81 Link, Arthur S., Wilson: Campaigns for Progressivism and Peace 1916–1917 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1965), 51–52.Google Scholar Rodgers to Lansing July 15, 1916 in Foreign Relations, 725. “Carranza’s Change of Tone,” Outlook, CXIII (July 12, 1916), 570.
82 Baker, Wilson: Life and Letters, 76.
83 Tumulty, Wilson, 159.
84 Link, Wilson: Campaigns for Progressivism, 51. Fain, “Pershing’s Expedition,” 83–84. Shortly after the voting, Franklin K. Lane wrote to Frank I. Cobb of the New York World stressing that Wilson’s reelection rested upon the work of his party members and cabinet who “kept the Mexican situation from blowing up in a most critical part of the campaign. …” See Lane, Letters, 228.
85 Baker, Wilson: Life and Letters, 80.
86 Lansing to Rodgers August 15, 1916 in Foreign Relations, 606.
87 Franklin Lane to James Harlan August 16, 1916 in Lane, Letters, 222–223. Franklin K. Lane to Alexander Vogelsang September 29, 1916, Ibid., 226. Franklin K. Lane to Frederick J. Lane September 29, 1916, Ibid., 227. Smith, The United States and Revolutionary Nationalism in Mexico, 55–56. Of this group, only the secretary to the American commissioners, L. S. Rowe, was familiar with the domestic state of Latin American affairs.
88 Link, Wilson: Campaigns for Progressivism, 120–121. Smith, The United States and Revolutionary Nationalism in Mexico, 59.
89 Link, Wilson: Campaigns for Progressivism, 328–335.
90 Pershing to Funston November 2, 1916 in Foreign Relations, 612–613. Funston to Secretary of War December 9, 1916, Ibid., 623. Link, Wilson: Campaigns for Progressivism, 332–333.
91 Smith, The United States and Revolutionary Nationalism in Mexico, 60–61.
92 Wolff, Leon, “Black Jack’s Mexican Goose Chase,” American Heritage, XIII (June, 1962), 106.Google Scholar
93 Callahan, James M., American Foreign Policy in Mexican Relations (New York: MacMillan Co., 1932), 571–572.Google Scholar Form of reservation, inclosure #1, Lansing to Wilson April 25, 1917 in Lansing, Papers, II, 566. The United States did send mounted troops into northern Mexico even as late as the early 1920’s, but none of the forces remained for any long period of time below the border. They served only to pursue bandits who endangered the borderlands and they never became the tool of diplomacy that Pershing’s Expedition had served. Descriptions of some of these operations can be found in Raht, Romance of Davis Mountains and Big Bend Country, 362–371 and Stacy Hinkle, Wings Over the Border: The Army Air Service Armed Patrol of the United States-Mexico Border 1919–1921 (El Paso: Texas Western Press, 1970), 5–6 and 24–26.
