Last updated 09/07/24: 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
The civil conflict within Mexico, 1910 to 1911, brought an active intervention from the United States. It was an interference that both elicited a sharp diplomatic exchange, and tested the neutrality statutes of the United States for clarity and sincerity. Among the members of the Taft Cabinet, there was disagreement on the interpretation of these statutes. The state governments, at best, gave official approval to the confused federal policy. American citizens along the Mexican border boldly assisted the revolutionary government of Francisco Madero, while ignoring the neutrality statutes of the United States. The purpose of this paper is to present the various interpretations of neutrality that arose in the State Department’s “Instructions” to its officers, the official correspondence between Cabinet officers, and the formal replies to the protesting Mexican government.
1 Miller, Consul C. A. to Secretary Knox, Tampico, Sept. 5, 1910. 812.00/341-343, Archives MS., National Archives, Washington, D. C. Google Scholar Also, Consul Ellsworth to Seer. Knox, C. P. Diaz, July 9, 1910. 812.00/334-335. Ellsworth encloses the July 30, 1910 issue of Appeal to Reason which contains an installment of “Barbarous Mexico” by John Kenneth Turner.
2 Ambassador Wilson to Secretary Knox, Oct. 31, 1910. 812.00/355.
3 Wilson to Knox, Nov. 14, 1910. 812.00/379.
4 Wilson to Knox, Nov. 18, 1910. 812.00/388.
5 Knox to Wickersham, Nov. 19, 1910. 812.00/388.
6 Consul Ellsworth to Knox, C. P. Diaz, Dec. 3, 1910. 812.00/549.
7 Consul Edwards to Knox, Ciudad Juárez, Jan. 23, 1911. 812.00/661.
8 Consul Dye to Knox, Nogales [Sonora], Jan. 7, 1911. 812.00/637.
9 Ellsworth to Knox, Jan. 12, 1911. 812.00/644. These munitions were cached in a private dwelling in San Antonio.
10 Brigadier General R. W. Hoyt to Adjutant General of Army, San Antonio, Jan. 13, 1911. 812.00/652. Hagadon’s report to Hoyt is enclosed in the dispatch.
11 Ibid.
12 Ellsworth to Knox, Sept. 30, 1910. 812.00/407.
13 Ellsworth to Knox, Dec. 24, 1910. 812.00/594.
14 Ibid.
15 Wickersham to Knox, Apr. 29, 1911. 812.00/1548.
16 Memorandum handed to Mr. A. A. Adee [State Dept.] by Mexican Ambassador, Nov. 16, 1910. 812.00/421. Also, confer 812.00/512-3; 586, 589; 604–607; 613; 632–633; 647; 654; 655; 665–668; 731; 740; 744; 751; 760.
17 Knox to Ambassador de la Barra, Dec. 29, 1910. 812.00/586.
18 J. A. Fowler (Acting Attorney General) to Knox, Jan. 6, 1911. 812.00/624.
19 Acting Secretary Huntington Wilson to de la Barra, Jan. 24 and Feb. 11, 1911. 812.00/655, 665. Italics mine.
20 Anson Mills to W. W. Keblinger (Secretary of Boundary Commission), El Paso, Feb. 4, 1911. 812.00/730.
21 Memo of General Mills originally sent to President Taft, then forwarded to Knox, Apr. 13, 1911. 812.00/1324.
22 These Memos are attached to the statement of the Mexican Ambassador Dec. 10, 1910. 812.00/559.
23 Ambassador Zamacona to Knox, May 19, 1911. 812.00/1880.
24 Zamacona to Knox, May 19, 1911. 812.00/1934.
25 Knox to Zamacona, May 20, 1911. 812.00/1934. Secretary Knox suggested that “if the robberies of which you speak are extraditable offenses, it would be possible for your Government to institute appropriate extradition proceedings.”
26 Barra, Don Francisco León de la, El interinato presidencial de 1911 (Mexico, Imprenta y Fototipia de la Secretaría de Fomento, 1912), p. 10 Google Scholar. Mr. de la Barra says: “El Gobierno americano, aunque ostensiblemente daba su apoyo al General Díaz, fue impotente para evitar las violaciones a la neutralidad, pues sin embargo de haber puesto por toda la frontera un cordón de tropas, los cargamentos de armas y municiones pasaban todos los días, y a México penetraban multitud de simpatizadores de la rebelión. La opinión pública, por otra parte, era ya notoriamente adversa al Gobierno.”
27 Knox to de la Barra, Dec. .1, 1910. 812.00/499.
28 Solicitor’s [State Dept.] Note dated Dec. 1, 1910. 812.00/447. Italics mine.
29 Knox to Mexican Ambassador, 812.00/632, 633, 647, 654, 655, 665–668. Italics mine.
30 Memo for Latin-American Division and Solicitor’s Office [State Dept.], Mar. 17, 1911. 812.00/1058. Italics mine.
31 Ellsworth to Knox, Dec. 24, 1910. 812.00/594.
32 Ibid., Dec. 25, 1910. 812.00/587.
33 Wilson to Wickersham, Dec. 27, 1910. 812.00/587.
34 J. A. Fowler to Knox, Dec. 28, 1910. 812.00/597.
35 Secretary of War to Knox, Dec. 28, 1910. 812.00/599.
36 Knox to U. S. Consul at Ensenada, Feb. 8, 1911. 812.00/706. The Instruction stated: “Report promptly if American property is attacked or actually threatened. We have cruisers at San Diego, Calif.”
37 Ellsworth to Knox, Feb. 4, 1911. 812.00/728.
38 The Attorney General’s letter to Secretary Knox has been described as “an extremely outrageous letter.” Unfortunately, this letter cannot be found in either the State Dept. or Justice Dept. files; it might shed further light on what the Attorney General’s concept of neutrality was.
The Instructions of Secretary Knox to Consul Ellsworth, Jan. 25, 1911, is quite a sharp dressing down. While instructing the Consul to “secure a proper observance of the rules and regulations governing our neutrality,” he is advised not to interfere with the allowed acts of its citizens. To trade in arms and ammunition during a revolution is neither against “the international laws of neutrality nor the rules of our neutrality statutes.” Such trade is merely “trade in contraband of war,” and the only penalty is “confiscation of the material in which they are trading.” The United States, moreover, is not a policeman “charged with the maintenance of order along its [Mexican] northern border.” He, finally, charges Mexico with “taking no action whatever in the matter beyond reporting to this Government.” 812.00/672a.
39 The Secretary of State’s reply, under date of March 2, 1911, was given to the President, along with the Attorney General’s letter. 812.00/780. An appended note asks if the Secretary of State was present at the President’s Conference with the other members of the Cabinet, held “before February 1st.” The reply, signed “H. W.” [Huntington Wilson], is pencilled: “Dear Mr. Clark,—The Secretary was present, he thinks, but the idea was of course to do only what was legal.”
40 President Taft to Secretary of Treasury, May 12, 1911. 812.00/1808. To this onion skin carbon copy is appended the post-script: “I think it would be wiser not to publish this letter, but to send it to your Collector at El Paso for his guidance.”
41 Memo of J. Renben Clark, May 11, 1911. 812.00/2233.
42 Secretary Bayard to Mr. Becerra [Colombian Min. to U. S.], Apr. 24, 1885. Cf. United States Foreign Relations, 1885, pp. 256–257; quoted from Briggs, Herbert W., The Law of Nations (New York: Crofts & Co., 1947), p. 747.Google Scholar
43 Cf. footnote No. 29.
44 Memo of Ass’t Secretary Huntington Wilson to J. R. Clark, Mar. 22, 1911. 812.00/1011. Italics mine.
45 Knox to Zamacona, June 7, 1911. 812.00/1984.
46 Memo of Huntington Wilson’s interview with de la Barra, Mar. 22, 1911. 812.00/1050. Italics mine.
47 J. R. Clark to Mr. Dodge [Lat.-Amer. Division], Mar. 28, 1911. 812.00/1092. Italics mine.
48 Knox to Secretary of Treasury, Apr. 25, 1911. 812.00/1400.
49 Knox to Zamacona, June 6, 1911. 812.00/1963. This note was drafted by J. Renben Clark.
50 Wickersham to Knox, Apr. 17, 1911. 812.00/1387. The enclosure is a report of the Chief of the Bureau of Investigation to the Attorney General.
51 Acting Secretary Wilson tp Attorney General, Sept. 19, 1911. 812.00/2343.
52 Cumberland, Charles Curtis, Mexican Revolution: Genesis Under Madero (Austin: Univ. of Texas Press, 1952), p. 128.Google Scholar
53 Carreño, Alberto Mario, La diplomacia extraordinaria entre México y Estados Unidos, 1189–1941 (México: Editorial Jus, 1951), II, 259–262.Google Scholar
