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
Economic considerations all but dominate recent historical writing in this country about the railroads of Mexico. Technical matters of construction and operation, as well as the role of the state in both, are touched upon, but economic interpretation, whether of the development of a railway system or of its impact on the nation, is the watchword if not catchword of most writing. Probably the leading example of the dominant approach is Growth against Development: The Economic Impact of Railroads in Porfirian Mexico (Northern Illinois University Press, 1981), by John H. Coatsworth, in which the author concludes that, while “the short run contribution of railroads to economic growth was large,” their longrun impact helped “to create the underdeveloped country Mexico has become.” Applying economic theory and measuring, Coatsworth in essence proves with numbers a case argued more elegantly in straight prose early in this century: that the application of a modern transportation network to a staple producing economy will do little more than extend and intensify the production system so as to increase the staple output.
1 Coatsworth, , Growth against Development, p. 190.Google Scholar Other works which stress economic interpretation include: Chapman, John G., La construcción del Ferrocarril Mexicano, 1837–1880 (Mexico City, 1975; translation of Ph.D. diss., University of Texas, 1972)Google Scholar; Goldfrank, Walter L., “The Ambiguity of Intrastructure: Railroads in Pre-Revolutionary Mexico,” Studies in Comparative International Development, 2 (1976): 3–24 Google Scholar; Parlee, Lorena M., “Porfirio Díaz, Railroads and Development in Northern Mexico” (Ph.D. diss., University of California at San Diego, 1981)Google Scholar; and Schmidt, Arthur P. Jr., “The Railroad and the Economy of Puebla and Veracruz, 1877–1911. A Look at Agriculture” (Paper delivered meeting of Southwest Social Science Association, Dallas, 1973, mimeo.).Google Scholar
2 Phillips, Ulrich B., A History of Transportation in the Eastern Cotton Belt (New York, 1908), pp. 1–20.Google Scholar
3 Chapman, , Construcción del Mexicano, p. 13.Google Scholar
4 Alamári, Lucas, Proyecto para la empresa del camino de Veracruz á México (Mexico City, 1824), p. 1.Google Scholar
5 Randall, Robert W., Real del Monte: A British Mining Venture in Mexico (Austin, Texas, 1972), pp. 54–55.Google Scholar
6 Convocatoria de accionistas para la Empresa de Camino de Veracruz (Mexico City, 1826), p. 7. Those three figures were Servando Teresa de Mier, José Francisco Fagoaga, and Francisco Arrillaga, respectively.
7 Chapman, , Construcción del Mexicano, p. 13.Google Scholar
8 Observaciones generales sobre el establecimiento de caminos de hierro en los Estados Unidos Mexicanos (New York, 1833), pp. 6–8, 10.
9 Chapman, , Construcción del Mexicano, pp. 13, 24.Google Scholar
10 Ibid, p. 25.
11 Francisco Fagoaga et al. to Antonio López de Santa Anna, Mexico, March 17, 1842, Archivo General de la Nación, Ferrocarriles [hereinafter cited as AGN, FCC], Vol. 1, expediente 5, folios 1–8.
12 “Yndicaciones sobre el establecimiento de Ferro-carriles en la República,” June 26, 1845, AGN, FCC, Vol. 2, expediente 20, folios 1–13.
13 Ibid.
14 Chapman, , Construcción del Mexicano, pp. 14, 15–16.Google Scholar
15 “Propuestas de varios Sres. … pa.contratar el camino de fierro de Veracruz a la capital de la Rep. y de ella a algún puerto del Pacífico,” February 27, 1851, AGN, FCC, Vol. 3, expediente 66 Bis.Google Scholar
16 Proyecto de comunicación oceánica por el centro de la República (Veracruz, 1851), pp. 1, 4.
17 Memoria presentada a S. M. el Emperador por el Ministro de Fomento Lis Robles Pezuela de los trabajos ejecutados en su ramo el año de 1865 (Mexico City, 1866), pp. 145, 146, 149. Hereafter the annual reports of this ministry, which usually cover the year prior to the publication date, will be referred to as Memoria de Fomento 1865, etc.
18 Chapman, , Construcción del Mexicano, p. 129.Google Scholar
19 Calderón, Francisco R., La República restaurada: la vida económica. Vol. II of Historia moderna de México, Villegas, Daneil Cosío, gen. ed. (Mexico City, 1955), p. 622.Google Scholar
20 Calderon, , Vida económica, pp. 625–55Google Scholar; Chapman, , Construcción del Mexicano, pp. 130–33.Google Scholar
21 Payno, M., Memoria sobre el ferrocarril de México a Veracruz (Mexico City, 1868), p. 142 Google Scholar; Chapman, , Construcción del Mexicano, p. 130 Google Scholar; Calderón, , Vida económica, p. 125.Google Scholar
22 Mexicanos, Varios, Breve exposición del proyecto de la Compañía Mexicana para la construcción del ferrocarril entre México y Veracruz (Mexico City, 1868), p. 17.Google Scholar
23 Calderón, , Vida económica, p. 609 Google Scholar
24 Ibid., p. 612.
25 Some of those entrepreneurs and their proposals are discussed in Pletcher, David M., Rails, Mines, and Progress: Seven American Promoters in Mexico, 1867–1911 (Ithaca, New York, 1958).Google Scholar
26 Exposición que hace la Asociación Mexicana de Ingeneiros Civiles y Arquitectos con motivo de las modificaciones propuestas por el Sr. Rosecranz a la Ley del Ferrocarril de Tuxpám (Mexico City, 1872), pp. 4, 15; the Rosecrans proposal and its fate are treated in Pletcher, , American Promoters, pp. 34–71.Google Scholar
27 Observaciones sobre la cuestión de ferrocarriles por Sebastián Camacho (Mexico City, 1872), pp. 3–4, 5, 10.
28 Disertación sobre ferrocarriles escrita por El Señor D. J. de J. Cuevas [Mexico City, 1872], pp. 6–8.
29 Julius A. Skilton, U.S. Consul General, to Hamilton Fish, Secretary of State, November 26, 1870. National Archives Microfilm Publications, Microcopy No. 296: Despatches from United States Consuls in Mexico City, 1822–1906, Roll 7.
30 “Yndicaciones sobre Ferro-carriles,” June 26, 1845, AGN, FCC, Vol. 2, expediente 20, folios 1–13.
31 Chapman, , Construcción del Mexicano, pp. 34–35.Google Scholar
32 Gregorio Cevallos, Governor of Michoacán, to Minister of Development, Morelia, August 5, 1851, and Minister of Relations to Governor of Michoacán, México, August 18, 1851, AGN, FCC, Vol. 3, expediente 48.
33 Minister of Relations to Governor of Veracruz, México, October 2, 1851, and Miguel Palacio, Governor of Veracruz, to Minister, Jalapa, October 6, 1851, AGN, FCC, Vol. 3, expediente 51.
34 “Propuestas de various Sres.,” February 27, 1851, AGN, FCC, Vol. 3, expediente 66 Bis.
35 Proyecto de communicatión oceánica, p. 5.
36 “Opiniones y condiciones bajos las cuales el Srio. de Fomento deben conceder privilegios para los ferrocarriles de Veracruz a México y de México a un puerto del Sur,” AGN, FCC, Vol. 15, expediente 196.
37 Colección de Leyes de Fomento, 1853–1869, Archivo Histórico de la Secretaría de Comunicaciones y Transportes, Mexico City (hereinafter cited as ACT), pp. 3–5; Decreto prorogando la instalación en Londres de la Compañía que ha de construir un ferrocarril de Veracruz al Pacífico, ACT, Clasificación 1/686–1, Año 1854 (Hereafter I shall cite documents in the manuscript collection of ACT only by their classification number and date); ACT, 1/687–1, 1855.
38 ACT, 9/561–1, 1856 [p. 2].
39 Ibid. [pp. 2–3].
40 Printed Railroad Concession to Antonio Escandón, August 31, 1857, AGN, FCC, Vol. 8 Bis., expediente 128.
41 Escandón, Manuel, Breve exposición al público sobre el negocio del camino de fierro entre Veracruz y México (Mexico City, 1858), passim.Google Scholar
42 Ibid., p. 3.
43 Collectión de Leyes de Fomento, 1853–1869, ACT [pp. 11–14, 15–22].
44 Rippy, J. Fred, The United States and Mexico (New York, rev. ed., 1931), p. 49;Google Scholar Glick, Edward B., Straddling the Isthmus of Tehuantepec (Gainesville, Florida, 1959), pp. 7–10.Google Scholar
45 Besides the works cited herein, see Rippy, J. Fred, “Diplomacy of the United States and Mexico Regarding the Isthmus of Tehuantepec,” Mississippi Valley Historical Review, 6 (1919–1920).Google Scholar
46 Malloy, William F., comp., Treaties, Conventions, International Acts, Protocols, and Agreements between the United States of America and Other Powers, 1776–1909 (Washington, 1910), 1: 1124.Google Scholar
47 Manning, William R., comp., Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States. Inter-American Affairs, 1831–1860 (Washington, 1937), 9: 1137–40.Google Scholar
48 Memoria de Fomento, 1865, pp. 598–599.
49 The United States, European, and West Virginia Land and Mining Company, Prospectus, Contract for Mexican inter-Oceanic Railway, Canal, and Telegraphs (New York, 1867), p. 14, 16.
50 Calderón, , Vida económica, p. 706.Google Scholar
51 Cuevas, , Disertación sobre ferrocarriles, p. 23.Google Scholar
52 Exposición de Ingenieros y Arquitectos, pp. 7, 8–9.
53 Representative of works supporting interoceanic from the viewpoint of the capital are Observa-ciones por Camocho, p. 7; A. y H. Ferrocarriles, La Concesión hecha al General Rosecranz bajo su aspecto legal y de conveniencia (Mexico City, 1872), pp. 15, 21; Mancera, Gabriel, Ferrocarril Interoceànico: Discurso pronunciado por el Señor Don Gabriel Mancera. … (Mexico City, 1872), p. 20 Google Scholar; and Discurso pronunciado por el C. Diputado Ramón G. Guzunán … el ferrocarril Internacional y Interoceánico (Mexico City, 1874), pp. 30–36. … In Ferrocarriles, Carta del General W. S. Rosecranz al General Ramón Corona y contestación de este señor (Mexico City, 1872), passim, the interoceanic concept’s impact on Western Mexico is discussed: and the voice of the State of Sonora is heard in Ferrocarril de Sonora proyectado por el Sr. James Eldredge con aprobación del gobierno de aquel estado (Mexico City, 1872), passim.
54 Enclosure in Thomas H. Nelson to Hamilton Fish, Mexico City, Aprii 5, 1873, U.S. Department of State, Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States (Washington, 1862—), 1873, p. 663 (cited hereinafter as Foreign Relations).
55 Edward L. Plumb to Mexican Department of Public Works, Mexico City, September 26, 1873, Ibid., pp. 675–79. For a detailed and lively account of Plumb's promotional activities in Mexico, see Pletcher, , American Promoters, pp. 72–105.Google Scholar
56 Foster, John W. to Fish, Mexico City, November 22, 1873, Foreign Relations 1874, p. 718 Google Scholar; Pletcher, , Rails, p. 91.Google Scholar
57 Enclosure in Foster to Fish, Mexico City, January 23, 1874, Foreign Relations 1874, p. 723.
58 Observaciones por Camocho, pp. 3, 4–5, 7, 9, 12.
59 Richards, Antonio D., Historia del ferrocarril de Tuxpám al Pacífico (Mexico City, 1872), pp. 405.Google Scholar
60 Mancera, , Ferrocarril Interoceñico, pp. 22–24.Google Scholar
61 Calderón, , La vida económica, pp. 711–12, 741.Google Scholar
62 Calderón, Francisco, “Los ferrocarriles,” El Porfiriato, La vida económica,Google Scholar Vol. 7 of Historia moderna de México, ed. Daniel Cosío Villegas (Mexico City, 1965), pp. 539–40, 564–68, 624–28; McNeely, John H., The Railways of Mexico (El Paso, Texas, 1964), pp. 12–13 Google Scholar; Powell, Fred W., The Railroads of Mexico (Boston, 1921), p. 1.Google Scholar
63 Calderón, , “Los ferrocarriles,” pp. 488–500.Google Scholar
64 Soto, Manuel Fernando, Report of the Hidalgo Railroad Company to the Department of Communications and Public Works (Mexico City, 1893), pp. 5–21.Google Scholar
65 Calderón, , “Los ferrocarriles,” pp. 556–58Google Scholar; Glick, , Straddling the Isthmus, pp. 29–31.Google Scholar
66 ACT, 2/20-1, pp. 1–16; ACT, 2/685-1, folios 202–231.
67 Fernández, Ramón, Discurso pronunciado por el C. Senador Ramón Fernández … relativo á … reformas … el contrato … celebrado con la compañía Limitada del Ferrocarril Mexicano (Mexico City, 1879), pp. 18, 23, and passim.Google Scholar
68 La verdad sobre la cuestión de ferrocarriles (Mexico City, 1880), passim.
69 Foster to Evarts, William M., Mexico City, October 9, 1878, Foreign Relations 1878, p. 639.Google Scholar
70 Foster to Evarts, Mexico City, January 28, 1879, Foreign Relations 1879, p. 774, 775, 780, enclosures No. 1,2.
71 Ibid., pp. 775–779.
72 Enclosure No. 5 in Ibid, p. 787.
73 Foster to Evarts, Mexico City, December 16, 1878, April 3, 1879, Foreign Relations 1879, pp. 764–65, 767–70, 799–800.
74 Memoria de Fomento, 1883, p. 256. (Emphasis mine.)
75 Diario Oficial, Mexico City, January 1, 1885, p. 2.
76 Diario de debates de la Cámara de Diputados, 1886, Vol. I, 204–205.
77 Diario Oficial, April 29, 1886, p. 3.
78 Ibid., April 1, 1895, pp. 1–2.
79 Ibid., June 25, 1895, p. 1.
80 Memoria de Hacienda y Crédito Público corriespondiente al año económico de I de julio de 1898 a 30 de junio de 1899, presentado por el secretario José I. Limantour al Congreso de la Unión (Mexico City, 1902), pp. 401–15; Calderón, , “Los ferrocarriles,” pp. 570–72.Google Scholar
81 “Ley sobre Ferrocarriles,” Diario Oficial, May 13, 1899, pp. 2–3; The New Railroad Law of Mexico (Mexico City, 1899), pp. 3–4.
82 “Ley sobre Ferrocarriles”, pp. 3–24; New Railroad Law, pp. 4–45. The specific lines were Chi-huahua City to Pacific, Mexico City to a port in Guerrero, Mexicano to Tehuano, Guadalajara to Tepic and Mazatlán, Mexican Central to Colima and Manzanillo, Tehuano to Guatemalan border, and Tehuano to states of Tabasco and Campeche. “Ley sobre Ferrocarriles,” p. 3; New Railroad Law, p. 4.
83 Calderón, , “Los ferrocarriles,” p. 630.Google Scholar
84 Calderón, , “Los ferrocarriles,” pp. 595–628 Google Scholar; McNeely, , Railways of Mexico, pp. 16–18 Google Scholar; Powell, , Railroads of Mexico, pp. 175–77.Google Scholar
85 “Limantour’s Report to Díaz,” July 10, 1903, in McNeely, Railways of Mexico, pp. 16–17 Google Scholar; “Discurso del Secretario de Hacienda y Crédito Público … Cámara de Diputados,” December 14, 1906. ACT, 10/89–1, p. 1
86 “Discurso del Secretario,” ACT 10/89–1, pp. 2–4.
87 Ibid., p. 7.
88 Coatsworth, , Growth against Development, pp. 43–46.Google Scholar
89 Alzati, Servando A.. Historia de la mexicanización de los ferrocarriles de Mexico (Mexico City, 1946), pp. 165–66.Google Scholar
90 Gurza, Jaime, La política ferrocarrilera del gobierno (Mexico City, 1911), p. 130.Google Scholar
