The Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, Volume 9, July 1905 - April, 1906 Page: 13
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Diplomatic Relations of England and Republic of Texas. 13
the abolition of the African slave-trade, was unwilling to grant to
another power the right to search American vessels. England
hoped that by getting the assent of as many other powers as pos-
sible to similar arrangements she might be able to force the United
States government to surrender its prejudices and give its assent
also. In this way the treaty with Texas, even though unimportant
in itself, was considered important in its bearing on the relations
of England and the United States.1
(2) Reasons for offering recognition at this time.-Palmerston's
reasons for recognizing Texas when he did are not altogether clear.
Such uncertainty as he had entertained concerning the ability of
Texas to maintain her independence was by this time no doubt
resolved. The action of the United States, France, and the Nether-
lands in granting recognition gave Texas a secure place as a na-
tion, and so destroyed one of Palmerston's main reasons for de-
clining to recognize her. England wished, for political and com-
mercial reasons, to hold a position of influence in the Texas situa-
tion, and to continue to hold this position it was necessary that
England should now follow suit in recognizing Texas and hence-
forth deal with her as an independent power.2 England's policy
was, as has been said, to prevent the annexation of Texas to the
United States. Texas, when she first was recognized by the United
States, had applied for annexation also; but the Van Buren ad-
ministration, for political reasons and from a fear of taking ac-
tion that might put Texas in a false position, had declined to
consider the proposition at that time. Thus at the period of Ham-
ilton's mission annexation was not a live issue, and Palmerston
felt that if recognition must come, which now appeared to be the
case, it had best come at such a time as this, when it would seem
to give least encouragement to the annexation impulse.
(3) Exchange of ratifications postponed and delayed. - The
three treaties were at once sent to Texas for ratification. The
commercial treaty and the treaty for mediation were sent out by
Arthur Ikin, and they were immediately ratified by the Texas
IHamilton to Lipscomb, July 28, 1840, and Jan. 4, 1841; Burnet to
Hamilton, Dec. 23, 1839; Hamilton to Jones, Feb. 18, 1842; Hamilton to
Lamar, Nov. 6, 1840; Gammel, Laws of Texas, II 886-904.
2Smith to Jones, June 3, 1842.
Here’s what’s next.
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Texas State Historical Association. The Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, Volume 9, July 1905 - April, 1906, periodical, 1906; Austin, Texas. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth101036/m1/17/: accessed November 22, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas State Historical Association.