Act of April 20, 1818.

were not committed against any foreign prince or state.1 The act was limited in duration to the term of two years.

On April 20, 1818, the existing neutrality acts were, with some amendments, codified into a single act which repealed all former acts. The new act was entitled, "An Act in addition to the 'Act for the punishment of certain crimes against the United States,' and to repeal the acts therein mentioned." The provisions of the act are as follows:2

Sec. 1 embodies Sec. 1 of the Act of 1794, with the addition that the "commission to serve a foreign prince or state" is enlarged to include "a foreign prince, state, colony, district, or people" and must be exercised against a "prince, state, colony, district, or people" with whom the United States are at peace.

Secs. 2, 3, 5 and 6 embody Secs. 2,3 3,4 4,5 and 5 of the Act of 1794 with a similar extension of the words "foreign prince or state." Secs. 1 and 46 of the Act of 1817 are thus reenacted.

Secs. 4 reenacts that part of the Act of June 14, 1797, which makes criminal the arming of vessels without the limits of the United States with intent to commit hostilities upon the citizens of the United States. The omission of that part of the Act of 1797 which related to hostilities committed upon the "subjects, citizens or property of any prince or state with whom the United States are at peace" marks the abandonment of an attempt on the part of the United States to control the

1For an instance in which such a plea was sustained, see the case of Gelston v. Hoyt, 3 Wheat., 246. See below, p. 74.

2For the full text of the act, see App., p. 176.

With the omission, however, of the proviso of Sec. 2 of the Act of 1794 to the effect that persons would be exempt from punishment under the statute if within thirty days after enlistment they should discover upon oath the persons by whom they were enlisted.

"The clause "within any of the ports, harbors, bays, rivers, or other waters" of the Act of 1794 was changed to "within the limits of the United States" in the Act of 1818. The penalty was made ten thousand dollars instead of five thousand dollars.

"With the addition of the clause "or by changing those on board of her for guns of a larger calibre" to replace the word "size" in the clause "by adding to the number or size of the guns of such vessel."

By what was clearly an oversight, Sec. 4 of the Act of 1817 failed to prohibit a foreign prince or state from augmenting the force of their ships of war to commit hostilities against a colony, district, or people. An attempt

was made to remedy the defect in December, 1817, when it was asserted in the House of Representatives that "the vessels of Old Spain might now enter our harbors and increase their force, while those of the colonies were prohibited from so doing." Annals of Congress, 15th Cong., 1st sess., 519. The defect was finally remedied in the Act of 1818.

acts of its citizens committed outside of its jurisdiction against others than its own citizens.1

Secs. 7, 8 and 9 embody Secs. 6, 7 and 8 of the Act of 1794.

Secs. 10 and 11 reenact Secs. 22 and 32 of the Act of 1817 requiring vessels to give bond and empowering collectors to detain suspicious vessels.

Sec. 12 repeals the previous Acts of 1794, 1797 and 1817.

Sec. 13 reenacts Sec. 9 of the Act of 1794.

The Act of 1818 represents the present law of the United States Revised Statutes, Secs. 5281-5291 upon the subject of neutrality. The provisions of the act are now contained in the Revised Statutes of the United States under Secs. 5281-5291. Apart from certain verbal alterations required by the form of the Revised Statutes, the only change in arrangement consists in including the original Secs. 7 and 8 under Sec. 5287, and in making a new section (5291) of the proviso contained in the original Sec. 2.

On March 3, 1819, Congress passed "An Act to protect the commerce of the United States and to punish the crime of piracy" which has been referred to as supplementing the Act of 1818, but which is connected with that act only by the circumstances of its origin, not by the subject matter with which it deals.

In the autumn of 1837, when the relations between the United States and Great Britain were already greatly strained by disputes over the northeast and northwest boundaries between the United States and Canada, the people of Lower and Upper Canada rose in rebellion against Great Britain and appealed to the citizens of the United States

1In explaining the provisions of the bill which, in an amended form, became later the act of 1818, the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations said that the bill "removed certain provisions of the Act of 1797, which bore exclusively on that cause [of the South American patriots], denouncing the severest penalties against those who aid them." Ibid. 1404. A motion then made, in favor of the omission from the bill of a provision making it penal for any citizen to fit out or arm, without the jurisdiction of the United States, any vessel with intent to commit hostilities upon the subjects of a friendly state, is thus described: "This motion produced a good deal of debate, principally on the expediency of striking out the whole section, and on the impropriety of still retaining a feature in the bill which would admit the possibility of a crime so monstrous and improbable as that of citizens going abroad to commence war upon the citizens and commerce of their own country, and which, even if committed, would be punishable either as treason or piracy." Ibid. 1404.

2With the omission, however, of the clause "or in aiding, or coöperating in any warlike measure" which followed the clause "that the said ship or vessel shall not be employed by such owners in cruising or committing hostilities," in the Act of 1817.

Canadian rebellion of 1837.

Van Buren's proclamation and request for legislation.

across the border for aid in their revolt. Public feeling in the United States along the border was aroused; mass meetings were held and votes of sympathy passed; volunteer companies were organized and drilled; arms and ammunition were collected and subscriptions of money were raised. Navy Island on the Canadian side of the Niagara River was occupied by the patriots, and volunteers from the United States crossed over in large numbers to join their ranks. Prompt action was taken by the government. On December 7th, the Secretary of State wrote to the governors of Vermont, New York, and Michigan requesting them to secure the arrest of all persons engaged in preparations of a hostile character against the territory of Great Britain.1 On the night of December 28th, an English officer at the head of a party of loyalist volunteers crossed the Niagara River and captured a small steamer called the Caroline moored at Schlosser on the American side of the river. Several Americans were either killed or wounded in the affray. After the crew and passengers had been dispersed, the vessel was set on fire and turned adrift in the current just above the falls. The excitement created along the American border was intense, and the local authorities found it difficult to restrain the citizens from resorting to arms to revenge the invasion of American territory. General Winfield Scott was ordered to repair without delay to the Canadian frontier and assume military command there. On January 5th, President Van Buren issued a proclamation in which, after adverting to the fact that, notwithstanding the proclamations of the state governors, arms and ammunition were being procured in the United States and a military force organized, he gave warning that "any persons who shall compromit the neutrality of this Government by interfering in an unlawful manner with the affairs of the neighboring British Provinces will render themselves liable to arrest and punishment under the laws of the United States, which will be rigidly enforced." On the same day, the President sent a special message to Congress in which he called the attention of Congress to the fact that "recent experience on the southern boundary of the United States and the events now daily occurring on our northern frontier have abundantly shown that the existing laws are insufficient to guard against hostile invasion from the United States of the territory of friendly and neighboring nations." His comment on the laws was as follows: "The laws in force provide sufficient penalties for the punishment of such offenses after they have been committed, and provided the parties can be found, but 1See McMaster, A History of the American People. VI, 434-436. 2Richardson's Messages, III, 481.

the Executive is powerless in many cases to prevent the commission of them, even when in possession of ample evidence of an intention. on the part of evil-disposed persons to violate our laws." He then declared "that the Executive ought to be clothed with adequate power effectually to restrain all persons within our jurisdiction from the commission of acts of this character" and recommended "a careful revision of all the laws now in force."

1838.

Two months later, on March 10, 1838, Congress passed an act Act of March 10, intended to supplement the Act of 1818.2 Sec. 1 of the act empowers and requires the officers of the United States therein enumerated "to seize and detain any vessel or any arms or munitions of war which may be provided or prepared for any military expedition or enterprise against the territory or dominions of any foreign prince or state, or of any colony, district, or people conterminous with the United States and with whom they are at peace" and to "retain possession of the same until the decision of the President be had thereon, or until the same shall be released as hereinafter directed." Sec. 2 authorizes and requires the several officers "to seize any vessel or vehicle, and all arms or munitions of war, about to pass the frontier of the United States for any place within any foreign state, or colony, conterminous with the United States, where the character of the vessel or vehicle, and the quantity of arms and munitions, or other circumstances shall furnish probable cause to believe that the said vessel or vehicle, arms or munitions of war are intended to be employed by the owner or owners thereof, or any other person or persons, with his or their privity, in carrying on any military expedition or operations within the territory or dominions of any foreign prince or state, or any colony, district or people conterminous with the United States, and with whom the United States are at peace, and detain the same until the decision of the President be had for the restoration of the same, or until such property shall be discharged by the judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction." A provision, however, is added:-"That nothing in this act contained shall be construed to extend to, or interfere with any trade in arms or munitions of war, conducted in vessels by sea, with any foreign port or place whatsoever, or with any other trade which might have been lawfully carried on before the passage of this act, under the law of nations and the provisions of the act hereby amended." Succeeding sections provide the procedure neces1Richardson's Messages, III, 399.

2For the text of the act, see App., p. 179.

Van Buren's

tion.

sary to the carrying out effectively of the foregoing sections. The act is limited by its terms to a period of two years.

It will be observed that the act, although not framed in clear and precise terms, makes a considerable advance in some respects over the Act of 1818. It not only enlarges the preventive powers of the government, but makes the scope of their exercise more comprehensive. The Act of 1818 permitted the detention of a vessel only when manifestly built for warlike purposes and when carrying a cargo consisting principally of arms and munitions of war. The Act of 1838 empowers the officers of the government to detain "any vessel" prepared for a military expedition against the territory of a foreign state conterminous with the United States; arms or munitions of war may be detained in a similar case (Sec. 1). Moreover, not only vessels but vehicles may be detained, as well as arms and munitions of war, when about to pass the frontier under circumstances furnishing probable cause that the articles are to be used in carrying on a military expedition against the territory of a state conterminous with the United States (Sec. 2). Sec. 2 appears to add nothing to Sec. 1, for it would seem that if the officer detaining the vessel, vehicle, etc., that is about to pass the border, is able to find evidence of a probable intent to employ them wrongfully he might equally well assert that they were prepared for a military expedition.

On November 21st of the same year, the President issued a second second proclama- proclamation reiterating the "solemn warning" given in the previous proclamation.1 The occasion which called forth the proclamation was an attempted invasion of Canada on the part of members of a society called the "Hunters." A force crossed the border from Ogdensburg, but their expedition utterly failed owing to the action of the United States officials in cutting off their supplies and seizing their steamboats.

Proclamation of 1841.

During the summer of 1841, public feeling against England was greatly aroused along the Canadian border as a result of the trial of Alexander McLeod, a Canadian, for the murder, in 1837, of a member of the crew of the Caroline. The Hunters' lodges were again active in endeavoring to further the revolt against Great Britain. On September 25th, President Tyler issued a proclamation in which, after adverting to the fact that "it has come to the knowledge of the United States that sundry secret lodges, clubs, or associations exist on the northern frontier; that the members of these lodges are bound

1Richardson's Messages, III., 482.