The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 16, July 1912 - April, 1913 Page: 57
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Kentucky a nd the Independence of Texas
But convictions were not forthcoming for several reasons. First
of all, it was no easy matter to determine just what constituted a
violation of the act in question, for it must be remembered that
not a crime or offence against the United States under the neu-
trality laws of this country for individuals to leave the country
with intent to enlist in foreign military service, nor an offence to
transport such persons out of this country and to land them in
foreign countries when such persons had an intent to list; nor an
offence to transport arms, ammunition, and munitions of war
from this country; nor an offence to transport persons with intent
to enlist and munitions on the same trip.'
To constitute an offence within the meaning of the act in ques-
tion, there must be combination and organization on the soil of
the United States, with the intention of going abroad to enlist."
To avoid violating the neutrality laws therefore, Austin counselled
that volunteers should not be recognized until they had presented
themselves to the governor of Texas or commander-in-chief of the
The United States district attorney at New York assured the Mexican
consul of his earnest wish to render every aid in his power to preserve
an entire neutrality as regards the Texas revolution. See Senate Does.,
24 Cong., 2 Sess., VI, Nos. 25, 37, 42. Cf., also, House Emec. Does., 24
Cong., 1 Sess., VI, No. 256; 25 Cong., 2 Sess., III, No. 74.
1Moore, Inter. Law Digest, VII, 912. It was held that acceptance of
a commission might be regarded as contrary at least to the spirit of
the Act of Congress of April 20, 1818. Ibid., VII, 872. By some papers
it was charged that 'high officers of the United States government were
taking part with the Texans; this was denied, however. The author of
the War of Texas, p. 43, gives credence to the rumor that some two hun-
dred of Gaines's force had joined the Texan army. On the other hand
an officer writing from Fort Jesup under date of October 24 refers to the
"'high and dignified course in the cause of neutrality and national faith
which is responded to by almost every 'officer in this army-much is due
to Mexico; and the United States owe it to themselves to be strictly
neutral." Virginia Herald, December 7, 1836. It may be observed that
a contract between citizens of the United States and an inhabitant of
Texas to enable him to raise men and procure arms to carry on the war
with Mexico could not be specifically enforced by a court of the United
States. Moore, Inter. Law Digest, VII, 909.
2Cf. Wheaton's Inter. Law (Boyd), Third Edition, p. 584.
'Austin, Archer and Wharton to Smith, January 10, 1836. Garrison,
Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 56. "To undertake to receive them [i. e. troops]
here, and pay their way to Texas, is now impossible. We have not the
means, and it is an 'open violation of the laws of this country, than
which nothing could more effectually injure our cause."
Here’s what’s next.
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
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 Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 16, July 1912 - April, 1913, periodical, 1913; Austin, Texas. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth101058/m1/63/: accessed April 27, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas State Historical Association.