CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY Cornell University Library JX 238.A4 Correspondence concerning claims against 3 1924 007 442 167 The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924007442167 CORRESPONDENCE COKCBICNIN'S CLAIMS AGAIIST GEEAT BEITAH. TBlIinaTTBD TO TBB SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES fv*^-^^- IS jlNSWEll TO THIS RESOLUTIONS OF DECEMBER 4 AND 10, 1867, AND OF MAI 27, 1868,, I VOLUME I. WASHINGTON: aOVEUNMENa" FEINTING OFFICE. 18(59, UNiVERSrrY; ESSAGE OF THE PEESIDBNT To the Senate of the United, States : In answer to tlie resolution of the Senate of the 27th of May last, in relation to the subject of claims against Great Britain, I transmit a report from the Secretary of State, and the papers wliiroclamation extend- ing blockade to ports of Virginia and North Carolina. States that, as civil war between the north- ern and southern States of the American Union is imminent, and that as the presi- dent of the southern confederacy pro- poses to issvie letters of marque against northern commerce, her Majesty's North American and West Indian squadron must be re-enforced, and that no preference must be shown for either party in the approach- ing contest by British naval forces. States that motion of Mr. Gregory in House of Commons for recognition of insurgents which was postponed from 16th to 30th ult. has again been postponed a fortnight. Lord Russell invites an interview, and in- forms Mr. Dallas that three insurgent emissaries are in London ; that he is not unwilling to see them unofficially ; that there is an understanding as to similar course as to recognition between England and France. Refers to rumors of block- ade but thinks well of waiting until the arrival of Mr. Adams before acting. The postponement of Mr. Gregory's motion de- pends upon Lord Russell's suggestion. Receipt of Mr. Faulkner's 117, 119, and 120 acknowledged. Instructions of President as communicated will be his guide. In reference to Mr. Faulkner's official con- versation with M. Thouvenel, reported in 119, the latter gentleman must be assured of the complete harmony of the cabinet in regard to the rebellion and informed that the unofficial opinion expressed by Mr. Faulkner that a peaceable acquiescence in the claim of the insurgents to separate sovereignty does not represent the inten- tion of the United.States, which does not contemplate a dissolution of the Union. Instruction to say to Mr. Thouvenel that British government admit that the south- ern confederacy is entitled to be considered a belligerent and to be invested with cor RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. NOTIFICATION OF BLOCICADE— Continued. No. From whom and to whom. Lord Russell to Lord Lyons. Do. Mr. Adaras to Mr. Seward. Date. 1861. May 6 May 11 May 17 May 13 Subject. responding rights and prerogatives, and to call the attention of the French govern- ment to the bearing the contest may have on the rights and interests of neutral na- tions. Refers to the proclamation of block- ado by President Lincoln, and to that grant- ing letters of marque by Jefferson Davis. Opening of the civil war in the United States has caused her Majesty's gov- ernment to determine that the parties are in a position to claim the rights and to perform the obligations attaching to bel- ligerents. Without concealment of this view of the British government, their regret at the disastrous state of affairs in the United States cannot be too strongly expressed. Reception at the residence of Lord Russell of Mr. Yancey, Mr. Mann, and Judge Rost, emissaries of the insurgents. They state that secession from the Union was ba^d on the high prices of manufactured gooSs. They quote the wealth of the South, and propose to open their country to for- eign commerce. Lord Russell states that he cannot officially communicate with them, but two propositions would arise with question of recognition; whether they could maintain their position as an inde- pendjent state, and in what manner do they intend to maintain relations with foreign states. Reception at Liverpool by American cham- ber of cominerce. Supposed community of interest in favor of cotton culture in- fluences public sentiment of Liverpool in favor of insurgents. Developments be- tween the 1st and 14th of May in the House of Commons of the intention of the British government to elevate the insur- gents to the level of belligerents. Cordial reception by Mr. Dallas. The death of the Duke of Bedford postpones presenta- tion by Lord Russell and prevents conver- sation upon Queen's proclamation prior to to its issue.. Subsequent presentation by Lord Palmerston on Thursday. Public opinion in England and the unsatisfactory debate in the Lords on the Queen's procla- mation demand an early interview with Lord Russell. Postponement of Mr. Greg- ory's motion in Commons to 7th of June. Queen's proclamation VI KECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGEEENCY. DECLARATION OF PARIS. Mr. Seward Mr. Adams. to Lord RusaeU to Earl Cowley. Earl Cowley to Lord Russell. 1861. April 24 May 6 May 9 Lord Russell to Earl Cowley. Do Earl Cowley to Lord Russell. Lord Russell to Lord Lyons. May 13 May 16 May 17 May 18 Refers to proposition of President in 1854, to maritime powers, that free ships make free goods, and that neutral property on ene- my's vessel not to he confiscated, and to the declaration of Paris. States reasons for rejection hy United States, with abstractof subsequent proposition to England and France. Instruction to ascertain whether British government will now agree to pro- ject of convention inclosed, based upon - declaration of Paris. Refers to civil war in United States and states determination of British govern- ment to consider the self-styled confeder- acy a belligerent. Instruction to call atten- tion of French government to probable bearing of the contest on rights and inter- ests of neutrals, and asks whether, in view of the situation and the proclamations issued in United States, the French and English governments should not invite the contestants to act upon principles in second and third articles of declaration of Paris. Refers to practice of the United States as at variance with declarations; alludes to negotiations in 1856 ; their sub- sequent interruption by President Bu- chanan; and commends co-operation of England and France to obtain adoption of principles above mentioned. Asks the views of French government States, in reference to interview with Mr. Thouvenel for submission of contents of instruction of May 6, that French govern- ment agree to the proposition. Mr. Thou- venel makes a suggestion concerning man- ner of obtaining assent of belligerents in United States. In view of agreement be- tween United States and France on decla- ration of Paris, no difficulty may be antici- pated. Precedents for recognition of belli- gerent rights of insurgents to be found in British treatment of letters of marque during revolution in America. Expression of satisfaction with the views of French government. Inclosing copy of dispatch to Lord Lyons, relative to adoption of declaration of Pa- ris by United States. States that dispatch to Lord Lyons has been laid before Mr. Thouvenel, who approves draught, and informs Earl Cowley that Mr. Mercier has already been similarly in- structed. States that the French government concur in instructions which announce the deter- mination of British government to admit belligerent rights of insurgents in United States, and also in others relating to adoption of declaration of Paris by bel- ligerents, and have similarly instructed KECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLiaEEENCY. DECLAEATION OF PAKIS— Continued. VII No. From whom and to whom. Date. Subject. I 1861. 10 Mr. Sewaxd to Mr. Adams. May 21 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Lord Eussell to Lord Lyons. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. May 21 May 21 May 22 ....do .do. May 27 May 30 Mr. Mercier. States that British goyern- ment cannot accept renunciation of pri- vateering by United States, if coupled with condition that they should enforce its re- nunciation on insurgents. Requests Lord Lyons to transmit copy of previous dis- patch of same date to the president of insurgents, by way of British consul at Charleston or New Orleans. States that United States consider privateers in insurgent service pirates, and that United States will avail herself of law of nations if Great Britain gives them shelter from pursuit and punishment. British government can avoid this by accepting proposition in regard to declaration of Paris. A refusal to accede to it now will seem a desire by Great Britain to patronize privateering so long as it may be aimed at the destruction of the United States. States to Lord Russell that he has instruc- tions to negotiate in regard to rights of neutrals in time of war, who replies, after a review of previous negotiations, that he had already transmitted authority to Lord Lyons to assent to the only point at issue. States that Mr. Adams has informed him that United States were disposed to adhere to declaration of Paris, and that he had been empowered to negotiate upon the subject. That in view of the power of the French and English ministers at Washington to settle the question, Mr. Adams consented to leave it in the hands of Mr. Seward. Acknowledges receipt of President's procla- mation of blockade of coast of Virginia and North Carolina, and instructions to negotiate for abolition of privateering. Suggests the propriety of procuring ex- emption of private property from capture, in addition to the terms of proposed con- vention, and expresses doubts as to the expedition of the negotiation. Inclosing copy of his note informing Mr. Thoavenel that he was empowered to ne- gotiate in regard to privateering, rights of neutrals, and to the subject of the block- ade. States that he has informed Mr. Thouvenel of his authority to negotiate to accept the four propositions adopted at congress of Paris in 1856, with the addition of the pro- vision exempting private property afloat, if not contraband, from capture. States reasons for pressing the adoption of the addition upon the French government. Mr. Thouvenel states that if the proposi- tion is submitted in writing, the other maritime powers would be addressed, and answers would probably be received in ten days. States substance of French laws in VIII RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. DECLARATION OP PARIS— Continued. No. Prom \rliom and to whom. Date. Subject. Lord Lyons to Lord Russell. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. 10 do. Lord Russell' to Mr. Gray. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Grey to Lord Russell. 1861. June 4 June 7 June 12 June 12 June 14 June 14 reference to the entrance of a French sub- ject into the service of a foreign privateer. Acknowledges receipt of instructions to pro- pose to "United States adherence to prin- ciples respecting maritime law laid down in declaration of Paris. Confers with Mr. Mercier, who had received similiar instruc- tiong, and was directed to instruct consul . at New Orleans to make similar proposals to insurgent government. They agree that an identical course by Great Britian and Prfince would best accomplish the object. The United States adhere to the declaration of Paris, in the expectation that the British and French governments will be bound by its acceptance to consider the southern privateers pirates. States that it would be difficult to prevent southern privateering now, and there is little hope that cabinet will approve or Congress ratify convention that does not bind contracting parties to consider southern privateers p irates. Mr. Thouvenel's remark as to consultation with foreign powers applied only to con- ference with ministers of French govern- ment. The statement in American news- papers that the United States would adhere to declaration of Paris will prevent ac- ceptance of amendment proposed. Reasons why the acceptance of the declaration by England and France will not be so bene- ficial to United States as anticipated. Incloses copy of his written proposition in regard to declaration of Paris. States that European press take it for granted that accession of United States to declaration of Paris would not alter relations of mari- time powers to the self-styled confederacy. Suggests that the recognition of belligerent rights of insurgents prevents its applica- tion, if adopted by United States, to insur- gent privateers. Probable difficulty of procuring, now, adherence of other powers to the declaration. States that Mr Thouvenelhas invited opinion of British government to propositioris of Mr. Dayton that private i)roperty on the sea in time of war should be free from capture and that as privateering being abolished the privateers of the insurgents should be deemed pirates, and gives reasons for disapproval of propositions by her Majesty's government. On the I2th instant Lord Russell informs Mr. Adams of Mr. Dayton's propositions to French government, and that he had formerly stated his readiness to consent to the total omission of the 4th article of the declaration of Paris if agreeable to the U. S. States that Mr. Thouvenel's views concur with those of Lord Russell in regard to RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. DECLARATION OF PARIS— Continued. IX 19 Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Lord Lyons to Lord Russell. Do. 21 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Lord Russsellto Lord Lyons. 1861. June 17 June 17 June 17 June 19 June 21 adoption of Mr. Dayton's proposed modifi- cation of declaration of Paris, and that ■while the French government had declined ■ Mr. Dayton's propositions, it would accept the declaration of Paris if not amended. After long delay and no reply to previous proposition on same subject, Lord Lyons and Mr. Mercier have made known the desire of their governments to receive ac- ceptance of the United States to declara- tion of Paris. Mr. Seward declines to officially receive communications which assume that the insurgents are entitled to belligerent rights. States reasons|there- for, and refers to duty and capacity of United States to fulfill all treaty obliga- tions and to prevent the violation by insurgents of the rights of friendly nations. Informs Lord Russell that, with Mr. Mercier, he had received on the 15th, from Mr. Seward, the view entertained by the United States o the declaration of Paris. Mr. Seward declines to receive communi- cation founded on assumption that insur- gents are belligerents and that the question conld be adjusted at Paris and London. Copies of the French and English instruc- tions are left with Mr. Seward as data for dispatch. Mr. Seward informally objects to concert of action between Great Britain and France towards United States, and says that he could agree to all that was requested concerning declaration of Paris, bnt it was not his intention to take official cognizance of the belligerency ascribed to insurgents unless forced to do so. Referringto conference between Mr. Mercier, Mr. Seward, and himself, in which Mr. Sew- ard conceived the proposition under discus- sion to be entirely distinct from his proposal to adhere to declaration of Paris. Lord Lyons subsequently explained the differ- ence and received from Mr. Seward com- plaints as to the absence of any attentibn on offer to of England and France to his the part adhere without reserve to same declara tion. That he would prefer Mr. Marcy's amendinent, but would accept declaration as it stood, and should instruct Mr. Adams to procceed with negotiation. States that Lord Russell's instruction to Lord Lyons asks, on the 15th of June, the United'States to concede to England prin- ciples of declaration of Paris, which, on the 24th of April, formed the substance of a proposition to England. As Lord Lyons does not seem authorized to negotiate at Washington, Mr. Adams is requested to open negotiations, if acceptable at London. Recapitulates Mr. Dayton's proposition to French government about declaration of RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. DECLARATION OF PARIS— Continued. 23 12 32 87 Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. 1861. June 22 Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. June 22 July 1 July 6 Paris, and the concurrence of Great Britain in the rejection of it by France. States that Mr. Adams has not been instructed to make similar proposition to Great Britain. States that United States insist that France shall do nothing to concede belligerent rights to the insurgents, and that they de- cline to hear her opinion of insurgent title to belligerency. When France acts in vio- lation of her friendly obligations to United States then we will inquire whether, after accession to declaration of Paris, she could shelter pirates in her ports, and then we can decide the character of our remedy. States that United States will not consent to severance of friendly rela- tions, and that the responsibility of the next step is with France. Incloses copy of Mr. Thouvenel's reply to proposition to open negotiations for acces- . sion of France to declaration of Paris. Mr. Thouvenel states that the United States must address all the powers associated in the declaration before his proposal can be considered. Mr. Dayton is in doubt whether condition of the United States modified by action of Great Britain, Prance, and Spain, in regard to privateering and belligerent rights, will permit accession to declaration of Paris. Delay cannot jeopardize affairs. Awaits instructions to accept for United States declaration of Paris, pure and simple. States that while the United States would prefer to add Mr. Marcy's amendment to the declaration of Paris, yet they are ready to accept declaration as it stands. States that the acceptance of the declara- tion of Paris has become complicated by reason of French acknowledgment of in- surgent belligerency, and Mr. Dayton's departure from instruction No. 4. Reasons which demanded immediate presentation of proposition to French government. Im- practicability of the Marcy amendment to exempt private property afloat from cap- ture in time of war, and the not un- reasonable motive which caused delay to negotiation by adding amendment to the declaration, pure and simple, as first ten- dered by Mr. Seward. States that it is not a time for propagandism, but for ener- getic action, to arrest the worst of all national calamities, and directs Mr. Day- ton to renew proposition for an adoption of declaration of Paris in form originally prescribed, and to avoid compromising the exclusive sovereignty of United States. If any question concerning it shall arise, let it be introduced by France, and in that case Mr. Dayton must await instructions, EECOGNITION OP REBEL BELLIGERENCY. DECLARATION OF PARIS-Continued. XI No. From whom and to whom. Date. Lord Lyons to Lord Russell. 1861. July 8 14 17 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. .do. Subject. July 12 July 19 but must assure the French goTemment of the desire of the United States to lead in the negotiations when there shall be hope for the adoption of the Marcy amend- ment. States that he has given Mr. Seward a list of the powers which have acceded to decla- ration of Paris on maritime law. In refer- ence to the complication at Paris, produced by Mr. Dayton, Mr. Seward says if the United States declared that their accession to Paris declaration would impose an obli- gation on France with regard to disloyal as well as loyal States of the Union, or if the French government announced that by the acceptance of the accession of the United States they did not intend to con- tract any engagement affecting the insur- gent States, Mr. Dayton's apprehension that an acceptance of the declaration would be injurious to United States, might be well founded. If the point described could be omitted from discussion, the ac- cession of the United States might be accepted now, and its effect on insurgents determined afterward. Delay would arise from consultation with other powers. Mr. Seward presumed that practically England and France were sure that United States held that the flag covered the cargo, and that the goods of friends were free under enemy's 'flag; that it would endeavor to protect commerce of friends, and would hang privateers' crews as pirates. Lord Lyons informs Mr. Seward that last measure could not be acceptable to England or France, and informs Lord Russell that it is important that the ac- cession of United States to declaration should not 'be accepted without inform- ing them of the effect of acceptance by England and France with regard to insurgents. Acknowledges receipt of dispatches from 2 to 25. Recapitulates series of misun- derstandings in regard to accession to dec- laration of Paris. States purpose to obtain from Lord Russell distinct answer in writ- ing of disposition to open negotiations in London. Refers to Mr. Seward's No. 32, and incloses copy of correspondence with Lord Russell relative to opening negotiation at London. Describes misunderstanding concerning conversation at the first interview between Lord Russell and himself relative to dec- laration of Paris. Has left copy of con- vention with Lord Russell for submis- sion to British cabinet, and states that Constitution of United States requires agreement to be submitted for action of XII RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. DECLARATION OF PARIS— Continued. 20 Mr. Adams to Lord Russell. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. 49 22 22 Mr. Se-ward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Adams to Mr Seward. 24 55 58 Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Earl Cowley to Earl Russell. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. 1861. July 19 July 26 July 29 July 30 Aug. 2 Aug. 2 Aug. 6 Aug. 8 Aug. 12 Senate. Incloses note from Lord Russell, stating that as soon as Britisli government is informed that similar convention has been concluded at Paris, it will accede. Informs Lord Russell that he will ascertain extent of Mr. Dayton's powers to negotiate with France. If he is not authorized to proceed, further instructions from "Wash- ington will be required. Refers to his dispatch No. 17, and states that he has received from Mr. Dayton an ac- count of his proposition to French govern- ment to accept Marcy amendment. Ap- proves the propriety of Mr. Dayton's course, and speculates on the position of Great Britain. States that Mr. Dayton agrees to proceed on basis proposed by Lord EusseU so soon as it shall be conveyed to him in writing. Approves proposed appeal to British govern- ment on the subject of the declaration of Paris. Incloses copy of note wherein Mr. Adams requests him to ascertain from French government whether it will agree simul- taneously with that of Great Britain to accept accession of United States to decla- ration of Paris, pure and simple,.al80 copy of his reply signifying readiness to ascertain. Incloses copy of a note to Lord Russell of July 29, relating to situation of Mr. Day- ton's proposal to French government, and his intention to propose the accession of France to declaration of Paris, pure and simple, simultaneously with the assent of Great ]3ritain, and a copy of Lord Russell's reply, wherein he agrees 'to negotiate as soon as conventions can be simultaneously signed in Paris and London, but adds that Great Britain considers the engagement prospective and not retroactive. States that instruction No. 27 has been an- ticipated by action based on information from Mr. Adams, and incloses copy of note to Mr. Thouvenel proposing to enter into a convention with France for accession to declaration of Paris, pure and simple, and referring to similar proposition made to British government by Mr. Adams. Awaits with solicitude issue of proposition referred to in Mr. Adams's No. 17. Similar propositions go forward to every maritime power in Europe. States that Mr. Dayton has proposed to ne- gotiate convention with France embodying four points of declaration of Paris. Hopes that oonference between Mr. Adams and Mr. Dayton will bring about under- standing with England and France in re- gard to declaration of Paris. KECOGNITION OF EEBEL BELLIGERENCY. DECLAEATION OF PAKIS— Continued. XIII 61 From whom and to wliom. Mr. Seward to Ml. Adams. Earl Russell to ■Earl Cowley. Earl Cowley to Earl Russell. 1861. Aus. 17 Aug. 19 Aug. 20 35 Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. 32 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Aug. 22 Aug. 23 Approves proceedings referred to in Mr. Adams's No. 22, and after reviewing Lord Russell's remark that the acceptance by Great Britain of the accession of United States to declaration of Paris will be pro- spective, not retroactive, instructs Mr. Adams to ask Lord Russell for an explana- tion of this modification before any further proceedings in the proposed negotiation. liicloses copy of his note to Mr. Adams re- specting signature to proposed convention, and a copy of declaration he proposes to issue on signing the convention. States that Mr. Thouvenel, upon receiving Lord Russell's note and declaration, in- formed him that France had detprmined to issue similar declaration, but that Mr. Dayton thought he could not receive such declaration without referring to his gov- ernment ; that Mr. Dayton hardly concealed from Mr. Thouvenel that the object of United States in signing convention was to force western powers to treat southern privateers as pirates. States that both England and France refuse to negotiate except on understanding that convention is not to bear directly or indi- rectly on domestic difficulty in United States. Incloses a copy of Mr. Thouvenel's note, a copy of proposed convention, and of the French declaration. States that Mr. Thouvenel distinctly informed him that neither England nor France could deal with southern privateers as pirates, and that they could dispense with adhe- sion of United States to declaration of Paris before participating in their domes- tic controversy, and that the declaration to accompany proposed convention an- nounces this determination . Mr. Dayton replied that his instructions contained no authority to vary obligalions which France might incur by interpretation of terms of convention, and that United States could not recognize any distinction between its loyal and rebel citizens in treating with foreign governments. Mr. Thouvenel states that the outside declar- ation proposes to prevent future contro- versy concerning strict neutrality France had adopted. Mr. Dayton suggests to Mr. Adams either to issue counter declaration declining to admit doctrine of Anglo- French declaration, and proposes to await Mr. Adams reply before farther conference with Mr. Thouvenel. Incloses copy of note from Lord Russell with copy of declaration to be issued on signing the proposed convention, and has become acquainted with the intention of the French government to issue similar XIV RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. DECLARATION OF PARIS— Continued. 37 Earl Cowley to Earl Russell. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. 34 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. 83 Earl Russell to Earl Cowley. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. 39 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. 1861. Aug. 27 Aug. 29 Aug. 30 Aug. 31 Sept. 7 Sept. 7 document. States tliat Mr. Dayton and himself await further instructions. States that he has informed Mr. Thouvenel that Mr. Adams refuses to sign convention without further instructions. Incloses copy of his note of August 26 to Mr. Thouvenel reviewing the intention of French government to declare that con- vention does not implicate it directly or indirectly in the internal conflict in United States. Has adopted Mr. Adams's suggestion to stop negotiations, and ex- plaining position and anticipations of United States to await further instruc- tions. Announces failure of negotiation, and in- closes note of August 23d informing Lord Russell of determination to decline, in view of the proposed outside declara- tion, to sign the contemplated convention on the day appointed. After reviewing progress of negotiations, he iufers influ- ence in the cabinet adverse to success of proposition of United States. Incloses Mr. Adams's note in regard to British declaration upon conclusion of convention, and his reply thereto. Reviews proceeding of Lord Russell as evin- ced in his proposed declaration to accom- pany convention, approves Mr. Adams's interruption of negotiations, and instructs him to inform Lord Russell that the pro- posed declaration is inadmissible, because it is impossible to permit a foreign power to adjust its relations upon assumed inter- nal differences in United States, because it is not mutual, and because it is a de- parture from the declaration of Paris. If British government shall adhere to propo- sition, negotiation must be suspended. Anticipation of future relinquishment of present objections -by Great Britain to position of United States. Regarding ne- gotiation terminated, Mr. Seward states the -^dews of the United States in regard to rights of neutrals in present case, and incloses copy of act of Congress which prohibited, in 1838, intervention with Brit- ish authority in Canada. Acknowledges receipt of dispatches from 61 to 67, and transmits copies of Lord Rus- sell's note to him of the 28th of August, and of his instruction to Lord Lyons in reference to declaration of Paris, proposed modification by outside declaration and declination of Mr. Adams to conclude ne- gotiation. View of certain involutions of British policy, and the probable suggestion of the outside modification of declaration of Paris by some member of the cabinet in the interest of the insurgents. Notes date of indorsement upon Lord Russell's note. EECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLI6BEENCY. DECLAEATION OF PARIS— Contiuued. XV 44 56 Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. 45 52 59 104 1861. Sept. 7 Sept. 10 Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Lord Lyons to Earl Russell. Earl Cowley to Earl Russell. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Earl Cowley to Earl Eii-sseU. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Lord Lyons to Earl Russell. Earl Russell to Lord Lyons. Do. 132 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Sept. 10 Sept. 10 Sept. iO Sept. 14 Sept. 24 Sept. 28 Oct. 14 , Oct. 19 Dec. 6 Dec. 20 Dec. 24 1862. Mar. 20 Incloses copy of a letter of August 5 to Mr. Adams in regard to unaccex>tability to England of Slarcy amendment, and to in- terpretation of Lord Russell's statement that the engagements of Great Britain will be prospective. Refers to proposed out- side declaration, and to explanation re- qxiested. Reviews progress of negotiation with France, and expresses the opinion entertained by the United States of the proposed modifi- cation of the declaration of Paris. In- structs Mr. Dayton to inform Mr. Thouve- nel that the proposed outside declaration is deemed inadmissible by the President, and if it shall be insisted upon, negotia- tions must be suspended. luojoses translation of a note of the 9th in- stant from Mr. ThoUvenel, relating to spe- cific grounds of exception to an uncoudi- tioual acceptance of declaration of Paris. Has heard Mr. Seward read instruction to Mr. Adams to break oif negotiation. States that Mr. Dayton has informed Mr. Thouvonel of suspension of negotiations. Acknowledges No. 34, -and refers to 83 as an- ticipating the course pursued. States that Lord Lyons has read to him letter to Mr. Edwards upon Dominican affairs. Has informed Mr. Thouvenel that if the pro- posed declaration is insisted on, the United States intend to break off negotiations. Acknowledges receipt of Mr. Seward's 83, and states that he will await further ap- proval of his proceedings before communi- cating with Lord Russell. Has submitted copy of Mr. Seward's 56, in reference to accession of United States to Paris declaration, to Mr. Thouvenel. Communicates President's approval of Mr. Adams's proceedings ; states that the pres- ent development of insurrection is due to toleration of its appeals in Europe. Transmitting copies diplomatic correspond- ence for- 1861. States that a review of the correspondence supports the determina- tion oi England and France not to accept accession of United States to declaration of Paris without the obligations assumed towards the seceded States. Instructs Lord Lyons to inform Mr. Seward that in case of war between England and United States, the former will relinquish her right to privateering, provided the United States would reciprocate. Referring to approval by United States of Mr. Adams's refusal to sign convention as modified by declaration. Sentiment in Parliament concerning rights on ocean, and of blockade during the war. Difficulties attending the adoption of in- 110 111 114 116 117 117 117 118 118 119 119 120 121 121 XVI EECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. REVOCATION OF MR. BUNCH'S EXEQUATUR, ETC. No. From whom and to whom. Date. Subject. P-I 1862. terest as a rule of action. Indiiforent dispo- sition of England to respect neutral rights and blockade in present war, and reasons therefor. REVOCATION OF MR. BUNCH'S EXEQUATUR, OR ME. BUNCH'S MISSION. 63 64 Lord Lyons to Lord Russell. Lord Russell to Lord Lyons. Lord Lyons to Lord Russell. Consul Bunch to Mr. Hammond. Lord Lyons to Earl Russell. Do. Mr. Seward to Mr, Adams. .do. Lord Lyons to Earl Russell. 1861. July July 24 Aug. a Aug. 5 Aug. 16 Aug. 16 Aug. 17 Aug. 17 Aug. 19 Transmits copy of instruction to Mr. Bunch relative to obtaining a satisfactory declar- ation from southern government as to mar- itime rights of neutrals. Mr. Mercier has sent similar instructions to the French act- ing consul at Charleston. Approves Lord Lyons's instructions to Mr. Bvmch. ^ Reports Mr. Bunch's receipt of instructions. Incloses number of letters in accompanying bag, which are intended for post. Incloses correspondence with Vice-Consul Edwards relative to arrest at New York of Mr. Robert Mure, naturalized citizen of United States, on charge of carrying dis- patches trom rebel government to its com- missioners in Europe. Refers to Mr. Mure's character as dispatch bearer. Mr. Seward states that Mure's" passport is iuvalid, and that private letters from insurgents were found in his possession. Lord Lyons states that British vice-consul at New York has been instructed to ascertain truth of charg- es against Mure. Refers to paragraph in Baltimore Sun, which states that confederate congress has ac- cepted the second, third, and fourth claus- es of declaration of Paris. Incloses Mure's passport. Consul Bunch's let- ter, and details particulars of arrest, and describes papers and bag found in Mure's possession. Sends Mr. Sclmltz with bag and instructs Mr. Adams to request the return of the contents, if treasonable, and in such case to inform Lord Russell of the expec- tation of the United States that Mr. Bunch will be visited with the displeasure of the British government. Lord Lyons is aware of transaction and general character of dispatch. States that Mr. Bunch is implicated as con- spirator against United States by letter found in Mure's possession, and requests Mr. Bunch's recall. Refers to disposition of bag taken from Mure by Mr. Seward, and reviews suspicions of Mr, Seward concerning its treasonable con- tents. States that instruction of Mr, Bunch to Mr. Mure do not seem extraordinary, and that Mr, Seward is sincere and courteous. EECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. SVII REVOCATION OP ME. BUNCH'S EXEQUATUR, ETC.— Continued. Lord Lyons to Earl Russell. Do. Do. 1861. Aug. 23 Aug. 30 Earl Russell to Earl Cowley. Earl Cowley to Lord Russell. 41 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Earl Cowley to Earl Russell. Earl Russell to Lord Lyons. Sept. Sept. May 9 Sept. 9 Sept. 10 Incloses extracts from newspapers relating to conversation described in letter taken from Mure between its writer and Mr. Bunob relative to tbe mission of Messrs. Belligny and Trescott to Richmond, and suggests that there has been an abuse of Bunch's confidence by Mure. Inclosing a dispatch from Consul Bunch rela- tive to proceedings to procure adherence of so-called Confederate States to declara- tion of Paris; a copy of resolutions of congress at Richmond on the subject; a copy of instructions issued by the presi- dent of insurgents to private armed ves- sels, and a copy of form of bond required. Expresses satisfaction with proceedings of Consul Bunch. Transmits copies of Mr. Adams's letter re- questing recall of Mr. Bunch. States that the first proposal for instruction, the exe- cution of which proved offensive to United States, came from France. States that British government decline to accede to request, without, however, admitting that the negotiation with the southern govern- ment is a step to the recognition of the confederacy. States that Mr. Thouvenel agrees that the ' assent of the belligerents in United States should be procured if possible to the sec- ond and third articles of the declaration of Paris; that consuls should be made organs of communication with southern States ; that as France and United States had always agreed on articles proposed, it would be difficult for either party in Amer- • ica to refuse assent ; that at beginning of American Revolution Great Britain treated letters of marque as piracy, though she subsequently acknowledged the belliger- ent rights of the States. States that he has delivered bag captured from Mure into hands of Mr. Layard, of British Foreign Office, and has com- municated to Lord Russell circumstances attending capture. States that he has re- quested that Mr. Bunch may be recalled, and incloses two notes to Lord Russell upon the subject. Announces return of Captain Schultz with dispatches from Mr. Dayton. States that, in reply to his note communi- cating the request of the United States for the recall of Mr. Bunch in consequence of his execution of orders, Mr. Thouvenel informed him that no similar request had been made of the French government, but that it would not give up an agent who had merely executed its orders. Incloses copies of correspondence with Mr. Adams in relation to the proceedings of Mr. Bunch, and requests that an explana^ X.VIII EECOUNITION OF REBEL BELLIGEEENCT, REVOCATION OF MR. BUNCH'S EXEQUATUR, ETC.— Continiied. 44 108 109 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Earl Cowley to Earl Russell, Lord Lyons to Earl Russell. Do. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. ....do.. Earl Russell to Lord Lyons. Lord Lyons to Eaxl Russell. 1861. Sept. 14 Sept. 17 Sept. 27 Oct. 8 Oct. 22 Oct. 23 Oct. 26 Oct. 28 tiou may be made by Mr. Bunch of that part of his conduct which has received criticism by United States. Incloses two notes from Lord Russell in re- gard to the capture of British dispatch bag and the conduct of Consul Bunch. States that it appears that Bunch has been executing recent instructions. Lord Rus- sell states that in view of interruption of mails in contravention of postal treaty with great Britain, private letters were confided to consular bag, and that on open- ing bag nothing was found of treasona^ ble character ; that Mr. Bunch cannot be recalled, and that the British government in endeavoring to obtain accession of southern States to last three articles of declaration of Paris,, do not consider itself as taking the first step to a recognition of the sonthem confederacy. States that Mr. Dayton has made no repre- sentation to French government in regard to participation of French consul at Charleston in Mr. Bunch's mission. States that Mr. Bunch denies statement con- tained in letter taken from Mure. Reports proceedings for facilitating correspondence with Bunch. Incloses dispatch from Consul Bunch ex- planatory 6f his conduct in regard to trans- mission of dispatches by Robert Mure. Acknowledges receipt of No. 44, containing Lord Russell's statement concerning con- tents of intercepted dispatch bag. Ob- jects to substitution of British dispatch bag for United States maU bag, and hopes that magnanimity of British government may be relied on not to complain of breach of international postal treaty, and of resort of United States to suppression of corre- spondence between insurgents and foreign nations. Reviews Lord Russell's statement of Mr. Bunch's negotiation with insurgent gov- vemment, and announces the reasons which induce United States to revoke Mr. Bunch's exequatur. States influence of Queen's proclamation on British relations with insurgent authorities, and expresses satisfaction with conduct of Lord Lyons, with whom an arrangement has been made for conveyance of correspondence of British , government to and from its consuls resid- ing in blockaded ports. States that explanation communicated by Consul Bunch in his communication of the 30th September is not satisfactory, and requests further explanation from Mr. Bunch. States that during an interview Mr. Seward read to him an instruction to Mr. Adams to inform the British government that the United States had determined to revoke RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. XIX REVOCATION OF MR. BUNCH'S EXEQUATUR, ETC.— Continued. No. From whom and to wliom. Date. Subject. 1861. 71 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Nov. 14 Lord Lyons to Earl Russell. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Not. 14 Nov. 15 74 75 81 136 do -do do. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. • Nov. 22 Nov. 22 Nov. 29 Nov. 30 the exequatur of Mr. Bunch. States that in the dispatch no allusion is made to the co-operation in the negotiation of the French consul at Charleston. In reference to Mr. Bunch, Lord Lyons avers that never were serious charges brought upon a slighter foundation. Refers to dispatch No. 108, and states that during an interview on the 13th of Novem- ber, he communicated its contents to Lord Russell, and incloses copy of his note to the British minister embodying substance of 108. Mr. Adams inquires concerning found- ation of information of the revocation' of Mr. Bunch's exequatur, which has reached England. Communicates dispatch from Consul Bunch containing further explanation of the con- tents of the intercepted letters, and the reason for confiding his dispatches to Mr. Mure's care. States that Lord Palmerston in an interview refers to the revocation of Mr. Bunch's exequatur as a proceeding calculated to produce irritation. Mr. Adams has re- ceived no intimation of the fact from his government, and states that United States was desirous to raise no needless ques- tions; but they were annoyed by proceed- ings of parties in sympathy with the rebel- lion in England and France. The sense of faith in foreign aid had kept up the rebellion, and was the only source of bad feeling in America for England. States that in accordance with instruction 109 he has communicated to Earl Bussell the determination of the United States to revoke the exequatur of Mr. Bunch. Incloses Earl Russell's note of the 15th in- stant, in regard to the intercepted dis- patch bag at Mr. Bunch and to transfer of discusions to Washington. Incloses copy of Earl Russell's note in re- gard to revocation by United States of Mr. Bunch's exequatur and copy of Mr. ' Adams's reply thereto, in which the princi- ples and reasons involved are discussed, es- pecially the determination of the British government to communicate directly with insurgent government when necessity shall require. States that at the time of the communication of the French and British governments to the insurgents, through Mr. Bnnch, he had learned that' England was prepared to assume a tone that should repel prevailing presumption of its inclination to a recog- nition. Offensive correspondence of Great Britain left no alternative but to revoke exequatur of offending consul, which was done because he had rendered himself per- sonally obnoxious. XX RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCT. REVOCATION OF MR. BUNCH'S EXEQUATUR, ETC.— Continued. No. 84 87 From wtom and to whom. Mr. Adams to Mr. j^Seward. Lord Lyons to Earl RusseU. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Lord Lyons to Earl RusseU. Do. Earl Russell to Lord Lyons. Mr. Mason to Earl Russell. Do. Date. 1861. Dec. 6 Deo. 6 Dec. 12 Deo. 23 Dec. 1862. Jan. 18 July 7 1863. Jan. - Subject. Incloses copies of further correspondence with Earl Russell in regard to revocation of Mr. Bunch's exequatur, wherein Earl Russell disclaims any interference in the domestic affairs of the United States ; but explicitly claims the right of protecting the lives and property of British subjects wherever they may be threatened, attacked, or injured. I^r. Adams in reply states that he does not perceive that Earl Russell's in- terpretation of law of United States relieves Mr. Bunch, a consular officer under recog- nition of United States, undertaking diplo- matic negotiation with persons in open resistance to. its authority. Calls attention to dispatch in published dip- lomatic correspondence for 1861, addressed to Mr. Adams, in regard to revocation of Mr. Bunch's exequatur; but has not re- ceived or seen any official notification of such revocation. Incloses copy of a note from Earl Russell acknowledging that Mr. Bunch, under instructions from British government, placed himself in communication with persons in arms against United States. States that with the exception of the infor- mation in Mr. Adams's note of the 21st of November, he has no official knowledge of revocation of Mr. Bunch's exequatur. States that Mr. Seward has informed him that Mr. Bunch's exequatur bad been re- voked some time, and that by a note of the 6th instant he finds that Mr. Adams had announced it to the British government. Refers to a communication of the fact to Mr. Bunch, and its effect upon his sources of information. States that the British government do not dispute right of United States to revoke Consul Bunch's exequatur, and that the vice-consul can sign such papers as are required for use in the United States. States that the adhesion of the Confederate States is given to the law of blockade as declared by the convention of Paris, with the addition engrafted by the British gov- ernment relative to its maintenance by a force sufficient to prevent access to the coast of the enemy. Refers to previous note of July 7, 1862, communicating assent of Confederate States to principle of Paris declaration in regard to blockade, and states that the British government having derogated from the proposition agreed to, rerase either to reply to the official complaint of the confederacy or to make explanations re- quested. RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. XXI DEMAND FOR REVOCATION OP REBEL BELLIGERENCY. 10 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Lord Russell to Lord Lyons. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. 1861. May 21 May 21 May 21 May 22 States that course of events in Europe lias made it necessary for the United States to take decided stand and signify its views. Reviews Mr. Dallas's proceedings, and in- forms Mr. Adams that whenever unofficial or official intercourse with insurgent emis- saries is established he must arrest com- munication with British government. Mr. Adams is instructed to take no notice of any alliance between England and France in regard to United States. The blockade will be maintained, and it is ex- pected that it wUl be respected. Every foreign consular or diplomatic agent in United States who shall disobey federal laws or disown federal authority, wUl be dismissed. The United States will ques- tion proceedings which have in view recog- nitioa of insurgents, and will treat insur- gent privateers as pirates. Interview with Lord Russell at Pembroke Lodge. Refers to effect of opinioif in Engush private and public circles upon the difficulties in the United States and upon international relations. Lord Rus- sell says that he informed Mr. Dallas that the British government were not disposed to interfere in struggle in United States, and he now adds that the course of the government in regard to participation of British subjects had necessarily to be de- fined. In regard to Hungary, cited by Lord Russell as a precedent for action of Great Britain in acknowledging belliger- ency of self-styled confederacy, Mr. Adams replies that the mission to Hungary was one only of inquiry, and was not followed by recognition. Mr. Adams refers to rights and duties of neutrals and his power to negotiate. Lord Russell informs him that Lord Lyons has authority to negotiate at Washington. Inquires concerning the kind of blockade established, and to the high tariff adopted by the United States. Lord Russell promises to communicate to United States through Lord Lyons a state- ment of the attitude of England in regard to rebellion. Relating' the substance of conversation with Mr. Adams at Pembroke Lodge, May 18. Mr. Thouvenel expresses concern of Emperor at disturbances in United States ; desires to be informed concerning policy of United States in regard to neutrals, to southern privateers, and to blockade. Tender by the Emperor of his good offices to United States as mediator. Mr. Thouvenel's re- marks to Mr. Dayton and Mr. Sanford in regard to neutral duties and rights of France. XXII RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCT. DEMAND FOR REVOCATION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY— Continued. No. From whom and to whom. Date. Suhject. 10 Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. 1861. May 30 14 Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. May 30 June 3 15 .do. June 8 16 -do. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. June 8 June 14 19 Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. June 17 Refers to Mr. Sanford's conversation with Mr. Thouvenel, and says that Mr. Thou- Tenel may he informed that any com- munication held hy the French govern- ment with agents of insurgents will he considered hy United States as excep- tionahle and injurious, and that the United States are not reconciled with recognition of the southern States as a helligerent power. No disposition manifested in France to favor recognition of insurgent independence. The recognition according helligerent rights to insurgents is for commercial purposes. Apprehension in United States of foreign aid or intervention in rebellion is justified hy reserve of British ministry when protest of United States against recognition of insurgents was presented ; by contracting an engagement with France without con- sulting United States as to policy in re- gard to rebellion: by Lord Russell's an- nouncement that he was not unwilling to receive insurgent commissioners unoffi- cially; by .precipitate issue of Queen's proclamation. Has delayed communicat- ing views of President until receipt of promised statement of England and France of their attitude towards United States. Expresses satisfaction of Presi- dent with Mr. Adams's reception by Brit- ish government. Reviews conversation between Lord Russell and Mr. Adams of 18th May in regard to foreign intervention. Approves Mr. Adams's interrogatories and statements. Refers to reasons given in dispatch 14 for anticipating foreign intervention. Refers to Queen's proclamation, and says that any of the positions of Lord Russell in regard to that instrument are not conceded by United States., Negotiations in regard to declaration of Paris can be conducted at Washington. Approves Mr. Adams's re- marks on tariff. Incloses note to Lord Lyons in regard to application of rule exempting Mends' goods in enemy's vessel to case of bark Winifred. Converses with Lord Russell in regard to precipitate issue of Queen's proclamation, and to unofficial reception of insurgent emissaries. Receives assurance tliat Brit- ish government intends to be entirely neutral, and that reception of commission- ers did not imply recognition. Mr. Adiims says that Queen's proclamation has re- lieved United States from liability for damages to British shipping by insurgents. Proceedings of United States in view of anxiety lest insurgents should obtain aid RECOGNITION OF EEBEL BELLIGEEENCY. XXIII DEMAJSTD FOR REVOCATION OF REBEL BELLIGEEENCY— Contmned. 1861. 21 11 Mr. Sewaid to Mr. Adams. 22 10 Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. June 19 Lord Russell to Lord Lyons. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. June June 21 June 21 June 22 June 28 from foreign nations. Views of United States government in regard to declaration of Paris communicated in proposition to England and France. That he could not receive the dispatches which Lord Lyons and Mr. Mercier were directed to commu- nicate. Refers to the understanding be- tween England and France as to one course in reference to rebellion in United States. Commuuication in Mr. Meroier's dispatch of the recognition of the insur- gents as belligerents by France ; also of the inclination of France to negotiate in rela- tion to neutral rights. Bearing of the present state of affairs upon the future relations between the two countries. Refers to interview with Lord Lyons and Mr. Mercier, whereia Lord Lyons presents a dispatch from his government, which United States cannot receive, stating that the country is considered by England to be divided into two belligerent parties; implying, without specification, the pos- session of belligerent rights by the insur- gents. President declines, with apprecia- tion, the mediation tendered by Great Britain. Mr. Thouvenel has informed him that the French government has no idea of recog- nizing the independence of the insurgent government, and that he has received Mr. Rost as a private citizen. All efforts of the confederate agents have been unsuc- cessful in obtaining either recognition or money from France. Is not able to recall occasion when his lan- guage seemed offensive to Lord Lyons. He has refrained from expressing to Lord Lyons dissatisfaction which has been pro- duced by his communications. Obstruc- tion to diplomatic intercourse greater than the manner of conducting it is to be found in the opinion of the American people, based upon indifference of British govern- ment and community to integrity of United States. Satisfaction with Mr. Adams's , conduct. Only complaint Mr. Adams has made has been against premature publication of Queen's proclamation of neutrality. Re- views the reasons which induced British government to recognize belligerency of insurgents. Cites Mr. Canning. The gov- ernments of France and England agree that proposition of Mr. Dayton to attach Marcy amendment to declaration of Paris ought to be rejected. Shall regard France as respecting United States until she practically violates her friendly obligation. Communication to Lord Russell of President's views, expressed in Mr. Seward's.l4 and 15. 205 208 209 210 211 212 XXIV RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. DEMAND FOE REVOCATION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY— Continued. No. From whom and to whom. Date. Subject. 32 27 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. 1861. July 1 July 6 42 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. July 21 21 35 Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. .do July 22 Aug. 22 34 Earl Russell to Messrs. Yancy, Rost, and Maun. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward, Earl Russell to Mr. Adams. Aug. 24 Aug. 30 Sept. 9 Can never acquiesce in assumption of Great Britain that United States is divided in two parts ; though, if Great Britain for- bears from interference, United States will not inquire concerning the names it gives that forbearance. Causes of misapprehension of instructions concerning proposition to France to accept declaration of Paris. United States will not acquiesce in declaration of France, which assumes that United States is not exclusive sovereign in States and Territo- ries of the Union; and they adhere to declaration of Paris, pure and simple, as an undivided nation. Profound solicitude of President to avert foreign war. Reasons for protesting against foreign recognition and interfer- ence in insurrection. Reasons for refcain- ing from proving to Great Britain the assumed error of her recognition of in- surgents as belligerents, and for desiring mutual forbearance until reconciliation of conflicting systems shall have become im- possible. Mutual forbearance authorized President to inform Congress on 4th of July that sovereignty of United States was respected by all nations. Substantial character of the policy of the United States, and disastrous consequences if the war involves foreign states. Will communicate reasons of United States for not ofScially receiving a communication from Mr. Mercier, announcing concession of belligerent rights to insurgents. Comments upon the intention of France to address the government at Montgomery. Infoi-ms Mr. Thouveuel that any declaration which recognized distinction . between North and South was a matter upon which the United States were peculiarly sensitive ; that they treated with foreign governments for the whole country. Mr. Thouvenel answered that France did not contest the right of United States to treat for the whole country ; that the declaration was intended to prevent misconception in the future. Acknowledges receipt of their letter of the 14th, and informs them that the British government cannot acknowledge the in- dependence of the so-styled confederacy. Incloses Lord Russell's letter to Mr. Ed- wards, of 14th May, in regard to annexa- tion of Dominican territory to Spain, and invites attention to designation of contending parties in America. The British government have recognized belligerent character of southern States but are not prepared to recognize inde- pendence of so-called confederacy. EECOGNITIOK OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. XXV DEMAND FOR REVOCATION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY— Contiimed. 61 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Lord Lyons to Eail Russell. 1861. Oct. 18 Nov. 4 168 179 182 114 196 197 199 Earl Russell to Messrs. Yancey, Rest, and Mann. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. do do.. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. ..do do.... Dec. 1862. Jan. 23 Feb. 5 Feb. 13 Feb. 19 Feb. 27 Feb. 28 Mar. 6 Movements inspired by insurgent emissaries to influence Britisb government; character of public speeches of British ministers; public review of American affairs by Earl Russell. Intentions of British government expressed in leading article iu London Post, Lord Palmerston's paper. Lord Rus- sell's probable friendship for United States. Mr. Seward says reception of confederate vessels in British ports is the only difficul- ty between United States and Great Britain. Lord Lyons informs Mr. Seward that ob- jection to communication between Eng- land, France, and the (Ze/acfo government of the South, can only teep open a source of irritation ; there was necessity for such communication. Cites instances, and Mr. Seward's reply. Declines to enter into official communica- tion. Embarrassment of United States by the posi- tion of the British government in regard to entertainment of insurgent cruisers in British ports. Effective military capacity of United States. Approves proceeding of Mr. Adams in regard to " Nashville." Has commimicated to Mr. Perry uselessness to European maritime powers of a policy which invites insur- gent privateer^ and repels American com- merce from their ports. United States have heard with incredulity that France proposed three months ago, to Great Britain, recognition and intervention to break blockade. Has rglieived evidence that secession sympathizers will inaugu- rate debate and motion in Parliament for recognition. If British government still perseveres in its policy, is it asking too much of them to lend protection of their courts to the en- forcement of the neutrality commanded by the Queen's proclamation? Reviews Mr. Dayton's report of conversa- tion with Mr. Thouvenel in reference to neutral rights and duties as affected by war in United States, and to progress and end of military operations. Concession of belligerent rights to insur- gents is cause of all embarrassments be- tween England and United States. Presses propriety of revoking that concessien upon attention of British government. Successes in the West permit partial resto- ration of inland trade and adoption of measures in relation to fea coast, which will be some alleviation to blockade. Duration of the war in the United States is dependent upon revocation of the Brit- XXVI RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. DEMAND FOR REVOCATION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY— Continued. No. From whom and to whom. Date. Subject. 123 203 209 Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. ....do 1862. Mar. 8 Mar. 10 Mar. 15 210 129 133 .do. Mr. Dayton' to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Mar. 17 Mar. 25 Mar. 26 135 131 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mar. 27 Mar. 31 ish concession of belligerent rights to in- surgents. Requests that Earl Russell may he asked whether it would not be wiser and . better to remove necessity of block- ade than to keep the world in debate about expediency of trying to break it. Proof of the efficiency of the blockade. The insurrection is kept alive by the treatment of the insurgents as lawful belligerents by the maritime powers. Statements to prove efSciency of blockade. Losses and sufferings in Europe by reason of war in United States may be removed by rescinding the decrees of England and France which concede belligerent rights to a faction. ' Is gratified with improved condition of pub- lic opinion in Great Britain. As insurrec- tion is approaching exhaustion, the Presi- dent hopes that Mr. Adams is sparing no efforts to convince Earl Russell that the time has come when the cojicession of bel- ligerent rights may be revoked with safety to Great Britain. Occupation of southern ports by Union forces will probably terminate illicit trade with Great Britain. Does not understand why maritime powers do not rescind bel- ligerent rights accorded to insurgents. Conversation with Emperor about cotton supply, opening the ports, and the con- cession of belligerent rights to insurgents. Refers to conversation of Mr. Dayton with the Emperor, to the distress among French cotton operatives produced by civil war in the United States, and to the policy of France based on aspect of affairs in Eu- rope at the beginning of the war. Instructs Mr. Dayton to communicate to Mr. Thouve- nel the purpose of the President to re- move the extraordinary restraints which have been imposed upon commerce as soon as practicable, and that the pacification of tide Union would be assisted by the re- vocation of belligerent rights accorded to insurgents and reasons therefor. Doubts the expediency of pressing upon the British government arguments for retrac- tion of their error in granting to rebels belligerent rights. Conversation with Mr. Thouvenel in regard to the propriety of France retracting the concession of belligerent rights to insur- gents. Mr. Thouvenel says that France cannot act without conference with Eng- land. He thinks that the concession is of little importance if the United States is in possession of all the ports. The sympa- thies of France have been from the begin- ning with the North. . EECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. XXVII DEMAND FOR REVOCATION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY— Continued. No. 217 218 From whom and to whom. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. .do, 140 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. 228 138 144 137 335 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Date. Subject. 1862. Mar. 31 April 1 April 3 April 14 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. April 15 April 16 April 17 April 19 Incloses dispatch of Mr. Dayton reporting conversation with the Emperor of the French. Reasons for continuing to urge upon the Brit- ish government the revocation of the con- cession of belligerent rights to the insur- gents. Geographical and social reasons that render such a peaceful separation as intimated by Lord Russell impossible. Still adheres to the opinion that no good would come from pressing upon British government, now, the propriety of revok- ing the concession of belligerency to the insurgents. If the expectations of the insurgents of recognition of their sovereignty by princi- pal maritime powers were removed, the President feels assured that the opening of the ports might be conceded at once. Leaves to the discretion of Mr. Adams the selection of the occasion for communicat- ing this view to the British government. Surveys military position which authorizes Mr.Thouvenel to assume that insurrection is failure. That commercial interests of France are involved in revocation of belli- gerency accorded to insurgents, and the supply of cotton depends upon duration of t|e insurrection. That blockade can be raised as soon as concession of bellige- rency to insurgents is revoked. Presses upon Lord Russell the revocation by England of the concession of bellige- rent rights, as it is now the only remain- ing moral support of the insurgents. Re- fers to absence of aversion on the part of the French Emperor to entertain the ques- tion. Lord Russell justiiies English neu- trality, and denies disposition of British government to protect blockade runners. Mr. Adams cites cases where, if Uilited States should adopt similar neutrality. Great Britain could not fail to be injured. The treatment of the Oreto is a source of unfriendly feeling between the two nations. Lord Russell does not know how England can alter her policy. Will keep in view the suggestion in regard to withdrawal by France of concession of belligerent rights. Will confer with Mr. Adams before communicating with French government in writing. The grievances which disturb the United States, and alienate it from Great Britain, seem deduoible from concessions to insur- gents. Instructs Mr. Adams to famish British government with accumulating evidence of purpose of United States to preserve the Union. Responsibility for future alienation between the two coun- tries cannot rest with the President. XXVIII EECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. DEMAOT3 FOR REVOCATION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY— Continued. No. 146 240 148 245 149 151 159 147 164 149 From whom and to whom. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. .do- Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Date. 1862. April 28 April 28 May 1 May 5 May 5 May 7 May 15 May 16 May 22 May 22 Subject. Bullock's projected expedition from England is regarded as a piratical invasion of the United States. Would it not he well for France to signify her aversion to designs of European conspirators. Capture of New Orleans. Bullock's pro- posed expedition leads to reflection that European powers are willing that the sup- pression of the in'surrection should be associated with conviction that sympa- thies of Europe were lent to abortive revolution. President's mitigation of blockade. Incloses copy of correspondence with Mr. Adams in regard to subscription among merchants in Liverpool to aid insurgents. If true neutrality was observed by foreign powers domestic strife would soon terminate. Successes of Union arms, simultaneous prep- aration to mitigate blockade, and ratifica- tion of treaty for suppression of African slave trade. President requests attention of Earl Russell may be called to position of Great Britain in regard to recognition of insurgents as belligerents Opening of New Orleans to mails and com- merce. A speedy termination of the war depends upon withdrawal of belligerent rights conceded to insurgents by foreign powers. The issue of proclamation for the restoration of commerce at New Orleans may be re- garded as announcement that United States has passed danger of disunion. French neutrality and friendship. iCommunication to Lord Russell of success of Union arms, and of the growing feel- ing of irritation towards Great Britain. Lord Russell replies that large portion of country remains unconquered, and that hostile sentiment had always existed in America. Mr. Adams cites instances in experience of his family that show causes of unfriendly feeling between the two countries. He awaits still farther change for the bet- ter condition of affairs in United States before urging again the revocation of con- cession to insurgents of belligerent rights. In reply to request, in view of recent Union successes, to revoke belligerent rights ac- corded to insurgents, Lord Russell replies that he does not see his way to a change of policy. In reply to reproach that in- surgents obtained arms and money in England, Lord Russell says that United States have availed themselves of same opportunity. Mr. Adams said that the practice had been discontinued. Has communicated to Mr. Thouvenel desire of the United States for the revocation of belligerent rights accorded to the inaur- RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. XXIX DEMAND FOR REVOCATION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY— Continued. 154 163 272 167 178 303 195 359 373 418 355 336 669 1862. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. ....do. Mr. Seward . to Mr. Adams. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. do. do. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. June 3 June 9 June 20 July 10 July 18 Sept. 13 Sept. 26 Oct. 20 Dec. 8 1863. Mar. 26 April 24 July 30 gents. Mr. Tliouvenel refers to military situation and future of the South, disposi- tion of the cotton crop, and the impossi- hility of acting upon the proposition for withdrawal of belligerency without pre- Tious conference with England. Mr. Day- ton suggests that France may signify her aversion to plots of insurgent conspirators in England. Mr. Thouvenel adiuits that they cannot he justified. Suggests co- operation with Lord Lyons and Mr. Mercier to obtain revocation of neutrality decree. Revocation by France of concession of bel- ligerent rights depends entirely upon ex- istence of present understanding with England. Reasons for withdrawal by France of her recognition of insurgent belligerency. Regrets refusal of Enn;land to reconsider its attitude towards United States. Relations with maritime powers may be debated in Congress. Regrets determination of France not to re- scind belligerency accorded to insurgents. Change of position of maritime powers is necessary to full restoration of commerce with Europe. United States have redressed every complaint made by foreign governments, and only complain because neutrality encouraging to rebellion has not been repealed. Recognition by maritime powers of internal enemy as belligerent, ilUoit British trade and sympathies of Europe counteract efforts of United States to terminate war. Discussion of reception of insurgent emissa- ries by French government with Mr. Thou- venel. Political interests of European states are modifying agreement- between England and France to act in accord upon questions issuing from American insurrection. Remonstrance against the British govern- ment permitting hostile expeditions to be fitted out in her ports. In regard to the intimation in the communi- cation from Earl Russell of the belief that the United States are more tolerant of real or apparent injury from France than ftom Great Britain. Inclosing speeches made in the House of Lords on the 23d instant on American affairs. Tone of Lord Russell's reply. Though France unnecessarily recognized in- surgent belligerency, the United States appreciate their observance of neutrality. Review of insurgent situation; the encourage- fiient it has received from maritime powers of Europe. Action of England m regard to cruisers ; of France in proposing a recog- 262 263 XXX EECOGKITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. DEMAND FOE REVOCATION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY— Continued. No. From whoia and to ■whom. Date. Subject. 676 Cir. Mr. Seward to Lord Lyons. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. -do. 1863. Aug. 4 Aug. 10 Aug. 12 729 762 771 802 580 838 596 843 602 861 869 950 do... .do. ....do. do . Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. ,.....do .do Oct. 5 Nov. 17 Nov. 30 1864. Jan. 6 Jan. 21 Feb. 8. Feb. 12 Feb. 13 Feb. 19 Mar. 3 Mar. 11 May 18 nition of insurgent Independence, quences of general war. Case of the General Rusk Conse- Speculations concerning reasons for English animosity against United States. In view of military success of Union arms, the quickest way for foreign maritime - powers, who seek commercial prosperity through restoration of peace in America, to gain that end is to withdraw support from insurgents, and leave adjustment of insurrection to the people of the United States. The preparation of hostile expeditions in England is regarded as fruit of neutral- ity proclamation. The United States re- fuse to be derogated to equality with insurgents by any act of British govern- ment. Insurgent plots in Canada a consequence of neutrality proclamation. Proceedings of the insurgents as disturbers of the public peace at home and abroad. Reasons for revoking belligerent rights ac- corded to the insurgents. Case of Rappahannock. Enlistment of pi- rates, and equipment of ships of war by British subjects in British waters press United States to ask if Great Britain will put an end to such intolerable practices inconsistent with her neutrality. Incloses ■ copy of communication to Lord Russell in regard to issue by insurgents of naturalization papers to aliens on board vessels that never have been within'insur- gent jurisdiction. Commending the communication to Lord Russell of insurgent naturalization of aliens at sea. Incloses Lord Russell's note in regard to Mallory's report, and to charge that Brit- ish dominion is base for insurgent opera tions. The interest of Great Britain is to be found in change of policy towards United States. Inclosing Mr. Adams's note to Lord Russell in regard to extraordinary facilities insur- gents derive from British neutrality. Regrets that Lord Russell still thinks that necessity exists for regarding insurgents as belligerents. Thinks that France and England would re- cede rather than go further in the line of favor to the insurgents. Satisfaction with the vindication in Parlia- ment of the proceedings in the case of the Tuscaloosa, instituted to preserve British neutrality. RECOGNITION OF EEBEL BELLIGEEENCY. XXXI BEMAND FOE EEVOCATION OF EEBEL BELLIGEEENCY— Continued. From whom and to ■whom. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Earl Russell to Lord Lyons. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. do Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. -do. Mr. Seward to Mr. Potter. Notice. Date. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. -do. Mr. Hunterto Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Hunter. 1864. Aug. 15 Not. 26 Deo. 1 Deo. 26 1865. Mar. 2 Mar. 10 Mar. 13 Mar. ' 30 Apr. 4 April 4 Mar. 21 April 4 April 7 April 13 May. 5 May 11 Suhject. Increase of emigration is dependent upon recognition of insurgent belligerency by European states. Eeviews the demand of the United States upon the British government for a relin- quishment of their belligerent recognition of the insurgents, and the reasons for not acceding to it. Incloses the London Times containing Lord Russell's letter to the three rebel commis- sioners, announcing determination of Brit- ish government to maintain its neutrality. Has received Lord Eussell's letter to rebel emissaries, and says if British govern- ment were less just. United States would raise question upon the extraordinary com- munication. Appointment of Sir Frederick Bruce as min- ister to United States, and indications of British |)olity to be drawn therefrom. Apprehension prevailing in Great Britain that the close of insurrection will be fol- lowed by inauguration of wax upon Eng- land through Canada. Case of the Stonewall Will urge upon Lord Eussell the necessity of withdrawing British recognition of in- surgent belligerency. Resume of public opinion in Englaind on Canadian affairs. Conciliatory tone is preserved by United States, but alienation is encouraged by continued recognition of insurge;its as belligerents. Incloses Mr. Burnley's note informing United States of discharge qf St. Albans raiders, and of their subsequent arrest on charge of violating Queen's neutrality. Can go no further in way of conciliating Canada until there is some show of reci- procity. Reward offered for arrest of invaders of ter- ritory of United States. Will communicate to British government remonstrance against course of British government in continuing to recognize rebels as belligerents. Incloses copy of a note addressed to Lord Eussell in regard to the Sea King, and re- monstrating against continued recognition of insurgents as belligerents. In view of military news the withdrawal of belligerent rights by Great Britain is ex- pected. Incloses Lord Russell's note of May 4 in re- gard to reply of Mr. Adams to applicajtion of Portugal in 1818, for redress, quoted as precedent in case of the Sea King. Upon the relinquishment by United States of right to search British vessels, depends action of British government in regard to insurgent belligerency. XXXII EECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. DEMAND FOE REVOCATIOIf OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY— Continued. No. From whom and to whom. Date. Subject. 1401 960 963 964 975 Mr. Hunter to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Hunter. 1865. May 15 .do .do Sir F. Bruce to Earl Russell. Earl Russell to Earl Cowley. Earl Cowley to Earl Russell. Earl Russell to Sir F. Bruce. Earl Russell to Earl Cowley. Mr. Adams to Mr. Hunter. Sir J. Crampton to Earl Russell. 983 Mr. Adan^sto Mr. Hunter. May 18 May 25 May 25 May 26 May 30 May 31 June 2 June 2 June 2 June 6 June 8 » The arrival of the Stonewall at Nassau in- duces President to press upon British gov- ernment necessity of withdrawing their recognition of rehel belligerency. Incloses note to Sir Frederick Bruce upon that sub- ject. Incloses Loudon Times containing ministe- rial replies to inquiries concerning with- drawal from insurgents of befflgerent rights. Restrictions concerning sojourn of national vessels in British and French ports have been withdrawn ; withdrawal of belliger- ent rights depends on renunciation by United States of right to search neutral vessels at sea. Suggests possession by force of Galveston and Rio Grande to pre- vent illicit trade. Incloses his reply of 20th to Lord Russell's note of 4th instant. The precipitate re- cognition of insurgents as belligerents, and the flagrant abuse of neutrality by the in- surgents in British waters without Satis- factory prevention by British govern- ment, justify United States in claimmg reparatiqn. Incloses proclamation of President opening all seaports except those of Texas. Rea- sons for expecting early removal of all re- strictions upon trade. Suggestions as to an arrangementfor siraulta^ neous withdrawal by England and France of belligerent rights accorded to insurgents. Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys suggests the addition to the arrangement proposed that confed- erate vessels may be disarmed and sold in British and French waters. Recognizes the termination of war in United States and withdraws recognition of insur- gent belligerency modified by regulations concerning disposition of insurgent prop- erty in British waters. Any insurgent vessels found in British ports after termination of war properly revert to United States, but all counter claims to Buoh property must be decided in courts of law. Alarm in England at alleged imperious de- maud of United States for reparation of damages by vessels fitted out in England. An alliance between France and England against United States is suggested by in- surgent emissaries and French and British sympathizers with rebellion. Incloses royal decree of Spain abrogating decree of 17th of June, 1861, by which in- surgents were recognized as belligerents. Incloses copy of Lord Russell's note to. lords commissioners of admiralty of 2d in- stant, announcing withdrawal of belliger- ent rights from Insurgents, and comments thereon. EECOGNITIOX OF REBEL BELLIGEEENCY. PORT REGULATIONS. XXXIII No. From whom and to whom. Bate. Subject. 1464 Earl Cowley to Eaii Russell. Earl Russell to Sir F. Bruce. Sir F. Bruce to Earl Russell. Mr. Hunter to Mr. Adams. Earl Russell to Sir F. Bruce. Earl Eussril to Sir F. Bruce. 1865. June 13 June 16 June 19 June 26 July 1 July 6 Incloses extract from the Moniteur stating that imperial government will no longer recognize belligerents in North America. Reduction of Galveston having been accom- plished by United States, it will not be ne- cessary to point out the clause in Presi- dent's proclamation which threatens cer- tain offenders as pirates. Incloses Mr. Seward's reply to Lord Russell's dispatch of the 2d instant. Mr. Seward regrets the consultation of British with French government before recognizing restoration of peace in United States ; that the twenty-four-hour rule is still in force ; and that there is a reservation in favor of insurgent vessels of war; and protests against allowing insurgent vessels to leave British ports. The United States regard the right of search as having come to an end. Incloses President's proclamation rescinding blockade. Approves the decision in the case of the Ret- ribution, and assents to the position that a commissioned ship of an enemy cannot, during the continuance of the war, be re- lieved from condemnation in a prize court of the other belligerent, by sale to aneutral. In regard to the objections of Mr. Seward to the apparent concessions to the insur- gents in the instrument rescinding bellig- erent rights. PORT REGULATIONS. Ord. 84 53 Lord Lyons to Lord Russell. Secretary of colo- nies to gover- nor of Canada. Lord Russell to Lord Lyons. Messrs. Yancey, Rostand Mann to Earl Russell. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. 1861 May 11 June 1 June 1 Aug. 14 Sept. 10 Oct. 4 Is informed that southern congress declared war and authorized issue of letters of marque. Incloses his dispatch to Rear- Adniiral Milne. Announcing British neutrality and interdic- tion of prizes in British ports. Incloses note to lords commissioners of ad- miralty in regard to interdiction of prizes in British ports. Requesting British recognition of confeder- ate independence and objecting to inter- diction of their prizes in British ports. Incloses dispatch from Mr. Bernard, of Trini- dad, slio,wiug connivance of island author- ities with insurgent privateer Sumter. Directs that the British government be requested to prevent similar occurrence in future. Incloses copies of two notes addressed to Lord Russell in regard to violation of neu- trality ip British West Indian Islands. A c — ni- -VOL. I XXXIV RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. PORT REGULATIONS— Continued. 58 112 122 93 196 137 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Lord Lyons to Earl Russell. Do 232 275 188 198 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Earl Russell to Lord Lyons. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Earl Russell to Lord Lyons. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. ...do Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. .do 1861. Oct. 11 Oct. 29 Nov. 4 Nov. 9 Nov. 11 Nov. 22 Dec. 20 1862. Feb. 27 Mar. 27 Feb. 1 April 16 June 23 July 17 July 31 Incloses Lord Russell's reply in regard to allegations that British neutrality had been violated in AVest Indian Islands. President does not regard Lord Russell's ex- planation of affair at Trinidad as satis- factory, and hopes that Great Britain will reconsider question involved. In regard to reception of insurgent priva- teers in English and Dutch ports. Mr. Seward requests Lord Lyons to suggest to British government the adoption of the twenty-four-hour rule which had been adopted by all other powers of Europe. Great Britain is only government which ex- tends unlimited hospitality to insurgent privateers, and requests the reconsidera- tion of their position. Asserts that Mr. Seward never chooses to understand position of British govern- ment. As a. neutral it will treat insur- gent vessels in same manner as vessels of United States. Lord Russell says that supplies in all in- stances furnished insurgent vessels in Brit- ish ports came from individuals and not the government. The time of stay pre- scribed in British regulation was substan- tially the same as that in foreign ports. Requests serious consideration by Lord Rus- sell of the preparation in British waters of a fleet of piratical privateers to depre- . date upon American commerce. Incloses copies of three notes received by him from Lord Russell in regard to the refusal of the authorities at Nassau to per- mit United States vessel of war Flambeau to coal at that j)ort, and an extension of the privilege to a merchant vessel of the insurgents. Incloses copy of letter addressed to lords commissioners of the admiralty with re- gard to the rules to preserve strict neu- trality of England as commanded to be observed in all ports in British j urisdiction. Approval of proceedings of the governor at Nassau in case of Flambeau by British government is considered unfriendly by President. Inconvenience to legitimate commerce is sufficient reason for revision of British proclamation of neutrality. Removal of American ship of war Saginaw from Hong Kong may be communicated to Earl Russell as illustration of injurious operation of British neutrality. Incloses note to Lord Russell in regard to the exclusion from Hong Kong of the United States vessel Saginaw, and accom- panies it with copies of all papers in case. Incloses copies of additional correspondence between himself and Lord RusseU in re- gai!d to Saginaw. 339 340 341 342 343 343 34 344 346 348 351 351 352 354 RECOGNITION OP REBEL BELLIGERENCY, PORT REGULATIONS— Continued. XXXV From whom and to whom. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Earl Russell to Lord Lyons. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Date. 1862. Aug. 14 1863. Not. 13 Nov. 28 1864. Mar. 10 Subject. .do. .do. Mr. Burnley to Mr. Seward. Do. Mir. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. F.W.Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Hunter to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Hunter. Mar. 4 April ii 22 June 16 June 17 Sept. 9 Sept. 23 1865. Mar. 20 April 12 May L6 May 19 As he never expects to hear of insurgent vessels in Chinese waters, he deems exclu- sion of American vessels unnecessary. As the British and French government have recognized insurgents as belligerents, the refusal to receive their vessels would in- volve necessity of refusing to receive tho.se of United States. Lord Palmerston says that England would not permit interference with any vessels within British waters, but in regard to vessels met at sea the British government would not dispute the belligerent right of search. Incloses debate in Parliament in regard to rebel operations on the ocean. Requests reconsideration by British govern- ment of policy which permits abuse of neutrality by insurgent emissaries in Brit- ish ports and j)rovinces. Cases of Tusca- loosa and Chesapeake. Mr. Burlingame telegraphs that Chinese gov- ernment has forbfiden insurgent cruisers to enter its waters. Incloses note from Lord Russell objecting to the entrance of "United States vessel of war Tioga in colonial ports, and commu- nicating a copy of English port regula- tions and of his reply cm the subject. Incloses instructions of British government to governors of colonies respecting treat- ment of prizes in British waters, and state- ment of number and tonnage of American vessels sold to British subjects in 1863. Orders in council regulating anchorage of vessels of war of United States, and of insurgents in harbor of Halifax. Incloses order of British government prohib- iting sale or dismantling of United States or insurgent vessels in English ports. Departure of Lord Lyons and appointment of Sir Frederick Bwce. Though spirit which animates intercourse with Great Britain is filendly, the United States can- not defer claiming removal of European regulations which deny safety to mercan- tile marine upon the ocean and reciprocity for our navy in European waters. incloses proclamations : 1. Closing certain southern ports as ports of entry. 2. Open- ing Key West to commerce. 3. Refusing privileges in United Statee ports to those vessels of foreign governments which 4eny similar privileges to vessels of United States in their ports. Incloses President's proclamation in regard to insurgent cruisers. Incloses correspondence between Earl Russell and lord's commissioners of the admiralty XXXVI RECOGNITION OP REBEL BELLIGERENCY. PORT REGULATIONS— CoDtinned. No. From -whom and to whom. Date. Subject. be OS 973 977 Mr. Adams to Mr. Hunter. .do. Cir. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. 990 Mr. Adams to Mr. Hunter. 1454 1473 1485 1491 1495 1025 1032 1507 1509 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. -do. .do. .do. Mr. Hunter to Mr. Adams. Mr. Moran to Mr. Seward. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. .do. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. .do. 1865. in regard to desirted reTocation of order of January, 1862, regulating visits of United States ships of war to British ports. June 2 Has communicated to Lord Russell procla^ 371 mation of President of May 10, 1H65, in re- gard to the reception by insurgent vessels of hospitalities in foreign ports, and has received Lord Russell's reply. June 2 Lord Russell says that Great Britain does not 373 mean to be impatient about restoration of commerce in ports that United States had right to close, and that insurgent vessels now upon the sea would not be admitted in British ports. June 7 Admiral Goldsborough is instructed not to 374 enter a,ny foreign port unless necessary, where belligerent rights are extended to rebels and naval honors withheld from United States flag. June 15 Incloses debate in House of Lords on Presi- 375 dent's proclamation closing ports in Texas. Though United States ceases to carry on war, it does not debar itself from the right to pursue on tho*bceau vessels without na- tional character. June 19 Incloses copy of correspondence with Sir 375 Frederick Bruce, and of letter to Secretary of Navy, on subject of withdrawal of con- cession of belligerent rights to insurgents. July 3 Incloses letter of Secretary of Navy to Rear- 380 Admiral Goldsborough in regard to effect upon naval intercourse of the withdrawal by Great Britain of concession to insur- gents of belligerent rights. July 25 Expresses hope that Mr. Adams has been 381 guided by instruction which refers to dis- position to be made of a certain class of vessels found in British ports. July 25 Incloses correspondence with Sir Frederick 381 Bruce in regard to Earl Russell's exten- sion of twenty-four-hour rule to insurgent vessels to be found in British ports upon termination of insurgent belligerency. July 28 Disposition of the Rappahannock suggests 383 that England adopt the course of Spain. Incloses information concerning case of 383 United States vs. Prioleau in British courts. Incloses full report of proceedings in court 384 of chancery in case of cotton claimed by United States. Has instituted proceedings for recovery of 384 insurgent vessels in British waters. Views of United States as to their rights in 385 the case of United States vs. Prioleau, the subject of interlocutory decree of Tice- Chancellor Wood. Secretary of Navy instructs Rear-Admiral 386 Goldsborough, as Great Britain still ad- heres to twenty-four-hour rule, to avoid English ports, and decline to exchange naval courtesies with British vessels of war. July 28 Aug. 3 Aug. 10 Aug. 10 Aug. 12 EECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. XXXVII PROPOSITIONS FOR MEDIATION AND INTERVENTION. No. Fr ] ] and ■ 1. . Date. Subject. p-i 1865. 1066 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Oct. 14 Incloses information that all restrictions on vessels of war of United States are re- moved in British ports, and that Admiral Denmau has been recLuested to capture ' Shenandoah. 386 Sir Fi. Bruce to Oct. 30 All restrictive measures have been removed 387 Mr. Seward. from United States vessels in British waters. 1572 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Oct. 31 As Great Britain has removed all restrictions upon vessels of United States in British waters, the Secretary of the Navy has been requested to rescind instructions to naval officers to discriminate in regard to their visits in British ports. 388 Mr. Seward to Oct. 31 "Will express through Mr. Adams satisfaction 389 Sir F. Bruce. .of United States with removal of restric- tions by Great Britain. PROPOSITIONS FOR MEDIATION AND INTERVENTION. Mr. Dallas to Mr. Seward. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. do Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. do Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. ... do- Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. do 1861 May L. 2 May 17 May 22 June 8 June 8 June 8 June 8 July 6 Sept. 14 Sept. 19 Nov. 14 Nov. 30 Postponement of Mr. Gregory's motion in Houde of Commons for recognition of southern confederation. Postponement of Mr. Gregory's motion until 7th June. M. Thouvenel says that Emperor felt dis- posed to tender his good offices to United States. Incloses debate terminating Mr. Gregory's motion in the House of Commons. Foreign intervention, aid, and sympathy for insurgents can only protract war. United States court will order restitution of part of cargo of Winifred, owned by Brit- ish subjects. In regard to tender of good offices by Empe- ror. Gratification with the disposition of insur- gent application for recognition by French government. Impression of insurgent emissaries that a maintenance of their struggle for three months longer will be rewarded by recog- nition. Active preparations for sustaining defense. British government will wait development of pending military preparations before, considering Teoognition. Toleration of revolutionary emissaries in England and France. Incidents permitted by British policy which have tendency to bring United States and England into collision. England has be- come source of insurgent supplies. It has improperly communicated with rebel leaders at Richmond, and insurgent ves- sels receive privileges in its ports. XXXVIII EECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGEEENGT. PEOPOSITIONS FOE MEDIATION AND INTERVENTION— Continued. 157 168 106 178 112 186 191 148 260 IGO 176 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. do. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. do Mr. A dams to Mr. Seward. Lord Lyons to Earl Euasell. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Dayton to ilr. Seward. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. 1862. Jan. 2 Jan. 23 Jan. 24 Feb. 4 Feb. 7 Feb. 17 Feb. 19 April 25 May 16 May 28 Jime 12 June 20 Incloses dispatch No. 97 to Mr. Dayton in regard to expectation, in yiew of the rigor- ous blockade, of demonstration in favOr of recognition of insurgents in England and France. Mr. Dayton is requested to assure Mr. Thouvenel that the need of a blockade will not continue very long. Will await the threatened development of purpose of portion of British people to in- duce their government to aid insurgents. The manner of manufacturing sympathy in Europe for insurgents, and encouraging develojjment of plans for interference in American affairs. Has information that Parliament and Cham- bers are -to be pressed into discussions de- signed to induce Great Britain and France to recognize insurgents. Favorable sentiment shown in Queen's speech to Parliament, and in debate, to- ward United States. Communicating details showing efficiency of blockade, and tabular statement from Mr. Shufeldt, consul general at Havana, showing nationality of vessels that have run through. Aspect of aflairs which caused apprehension of foreign intei'vention has changed. Friendly sentiment toward United States fluctuates with character of news received. Suppressed Sympathy. Applications for recognition. Mr. Seward's views in regard to the continu- ance of the blockade, and the wishes of the United States in regard to the cotton sup- ply; he places no confidence in report that France and England are in communi- cation for purposes of intervening in Ameri- can affairs. The statement that thirty blockade runners have gathered at Nassau to await the opening of ports and the withdrawal from the ocean of pirates depredating on Ameri- can commerce and seeking shelter in British ports, induces him, under direction of President, to confer, if representatives abroad shall think" discreet, with friendly nations upon prospects of war and their future course in regard to it. Eeasons for such a course showing condition of insur- gent and prospect of Union cause. There are important rumors prevailing that if proffered intervention of France and England should be rejected, a recognition will follow, to be succeeded by active inter- vention to stop the war. Inquiries in re- gard to definition of contraband as applied to open ports. Has given to Lord Russell substance of Mr. Seward's No. 260. Lord Eussell attaches but little importance to tender of Mr. RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. XXXIX PROPOSITIONS FOE MEDIATION AND INTERVENTION— Continued. From whom and to whom. Date. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr, Dayton. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. .do. Mr. Mason to Earl Russell. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Earl Russell to Mr. Mason. Mr. Mason to Earl Russell. Do Earl RusseU to Mr. Mason. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. 1862. July 5 July 9 July 10 Mr. Mason to Earl Russell. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Dayton to . Mr. Seward. Earl Russell to Mr. Mason. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Subject. July 11 July 17 July 17 July 19 July 24 July 24 July July 24 31 July 31 Aug. 1 Aug. 2 Aug. 2 Aug. 2 Aug. 13 Lindsay's motion in the House of Com- mons for recognition. Approves submission of his dispatch No. 260 to Lo)d Russell. Advocates of African slavery and its opponents are acting in concert to precipitate servile war. Constant advance in price of cotton incites agitation of intervention by Emperor in American affairs. Unfair tone of jouinals under control of French government. Increased activity of European politicians with a view to provolse intervention in American affairs, is an inducement to ask foreign governments to consider position, interests, and purposes and character of . United States. Reviews the subject. Will report new ground proposed to be taken by ministers on American question in de- bate on Mr. Lindsay's motion. Fate of Mr. Lindsay's motion for recognition of insurgent independence. Favorable sentiment of the confederate gov- ernment in regard to the proposed medi- aition by England in American affairs. Quotes Lord Palmerston's statement of views of British government. Sympathy in England with proposals for recognition, and expectation of final divis- ion of United States. Success of propo- sals for recognition of insurgent independ- ence depends upon military movements in United States. Is of the opinion that any proposal to United States to recognize southern confederacy would irritate United States, and proposal to Confederate States to return to the Union would irritate the confederates. Reasons for recognizing independence of confederacy. Requests an interview Will submit draught of reply to Mr. Mason's note of 24th to cabinet. Declines interview. Insurgent reports of willingness of France to recognize independence of confederacy, and British sentiment in relation to same subject. Reasons for recognition of oonicderate inde- •pendence. Though British nation desire dismember- ment of United States, it is not believed that any practical measure of recognition will be executed by British government, and reasons therefor. States that the report that England, France, and Russia are to offer, separately, media- tion to the United States' conflicts with information from other quarters. , Reasons for conclusion that the time has not yet arrived to recognize indepeudence of confederacy. Disbelief of au y intention on thepart of France to intervene in affairs of United States. XL RECOaNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. PROPOSITIONS FOR MEDIATION AND INTERVENTION— Continued. No. From whom and to wliom. Cii-. 208 211 189 336 338 Mr. Stuart to Earl Russell. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. .do. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. .do. 229 234 ;368 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Date. 1862. Aug. 16 Aug. 18 Aug. 22 Aug. 29 Sept. 3 Sept. 8 Sept. 9 Oct. 3 Oct. 8 Oct. 10 Subject. The United States, for forbearance upon part of foreign nations, rely upon following reasons : 1st, that the United States will not entertain any foreign mediation in domestic affairs; 2d, that no one would predict that more supplies of grain, gold, and cotton would be furnished in case oi war with foreign nations than now ; 3d, vigorous and successful preparations for continuing the war would not permit such an anticipation. Has read Lord Russell's note to Mr. Seward in regard to British opinion of progress of war. Reasons for Inadmissibility of foreign inter- vention in affairs of United States. In regard to the method adopted by Lord Russell to notice reasons assigned by Mr. Seward in No. 260 for revocation of belli- gerent rights andchangeofpWicy towards United States. It is reported that change was under consideration, but failure of attack on Richmond caused its rejection in British cabinet. Incloses Lord Russell's note to Mr. Stuart. The idea of interveution loses strength in England. Imijrobability of interference by Emperor in affairs of United States. Comments upon extraordinary manner Lord Russell adopted to notice appeal contained in instruction No. 260, in regard to future course of foreign nations towards United States. Incloses No. 207 to Mr. Dayton in regard to conversation in which Mr. Seward denies Mr. Mercier's affirmation that events seem to indicate that Union must be divided into two confederacies. Mutual assurances conceruiug acceptability of Mr. Dayton as medium of diplomatic intercourse with France. Mr. Seward instructs Mr. Dayton to converse with Mr. Thouvenel in regard to Mr. Mercier's statements. Effect of victory aft Antietam upon public sentiment in England. Is of the opinion that sympathies of majority of poorer classes in England are with the Union. Appreciates' Mr. Thouveuel's candor. Mode- ration does not affect sentiments of insur- gents who are bent upon reducing the country to complete chaos. Undoubted capacity of United States to conquer, and evident weakness of the society of the Gulf States. Mr. Dayton's conversation with Mr. Thou- venel indicates harmony in despondency between Mr. Mercier and himself, but no unfriendliness. Proposed consideration by French government of American question. Encouraging prospect for United States. Neither foreign war nor failure to maintain the Union is apprehended by United States. RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. XLI PROPOSITIONS FOR MEDIATION AND INTERVENTION— Continued. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adama. do Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. ....do.. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. do Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. ....do. Earl Russell to Earl Cowley. 1862. Oct. 14 Oct. 18 Oct. 21 Oct. 20 Oct. 24 Oct. 28 Nov. 4 Nov. 4 Nov. 6 Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Nov. 10 Nov. 13 Nov. 15 Nov. 13 Nov. 18 Reception of President's proclamation abol- ishing slavery, and its probable effect upon public in Europe. Desponding situation in insurgent States. Though the President never would recog- nize relations of friendship with any power which shall lend its aid to foreign inter- vention, he is confident that they now could not endanger the Union. Incloses copy of following dispatch No. 237. Has information that Great Britain and France are to consider question of recog- nition of insurgents as sovereign state. Reasons for considering such recognition unnecessary and unfriendly. Lord Russell says that Mr. Gladstone's speech was not meant to indicate any change iu the neutral policy England had adopted in regard to American war. Mr. Adams received same assurances from Russian ambassador, but is of opinion that a victory in Virginia can alone 'check current of public sentiment. Incloses extract from Globe in regard to departure of Lord Lyons for America, and the probability that no interference in American affairs will be attempted. Trusts in capacity of United States to unde- ceive those who desire a collision in regard to domestic insurrection. Review of European sentiment concerning foreign intervention iu American war. Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys says that intention of French government was comprised in wish to be useful if acceptable to both parties. Expresses satisfaction that the expectation of the insurgents, incited by Gladstone's speech, that Great Britain would give them aid has proved unfounded. Reviews situ- ation. Publication of correspondence of France with England and Russia, proposing interven- tion in American affairs, and speculations thereon. Decisive answer of Lord Russell in reply to French note tendering good offices to United States. Russian reply. In reply to the statement that circumstan- ces attending prosecution of the war war- rant the Emperor of tbe French in believ- ing that time has arrived for maritime powers to offer their good offices to bel- ligerents in America for suspension of hos- tilities, Lord Russell says that there is no ground, at present, to hope that the fed- eral government would accept the pro- posal suggested. Incloses his note to Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys calling attention to errors in regard to American military situation in published communication to French ambassadors in XLII RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. PROPOSITIONS FOR MEDIATION AND INTERVENTION— Contirmed. 264 231 261 414 263 265 418 271 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Lord Lyons to Earl RusseU. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Lord Lyons to Earl Rassell. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. 1862. Nov. 21 Nov. 25 Nov. 28 Nov. 28 Nov. 30 Nov. 30 Deo. 2 Dec. 5 Deo. 8 Deo. 11 England and Russia, inviting intervention in America. Informs Lord Russell of his conviction of the uncertainty of the Emperor's disposition towards United States, and his confidence in the policy of the British ministry to the extent it had been declared. Lord Russell refers to rumors concerning opinion in the United States in regard to the pro- posed intervention and to the Emperor's reception of Mr. Slidell. Incloses Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys's note of Nov. 23 in regard to the Emperor's offer of mediation, and determination in view of its failure to cease from a further pressure, but France will be always willing, either singly or in concert with other powers, to aid in bringing about a reconciliation between belligerents in United States. States that Mr. Mercier has not had the least warrant from authority of United States for representing that President would entertain any proposition in regard to ac- tion of United States in its domestic affairs. Receipt of correspondence in regard to French ixivitation to intervene in Ameri- can affairs. Uaanimity of public press in reiiiidiating foreign intervention. In regard to receipt of invitation of France to European maritime powers to intervene in American affairs. Incloses No. 263 to Mr. Dayton or subject. Opinion entertained by United States of the Emperor's invitation to England and France to offer their mediation in Ameri- can affairs. Its failure removes necessity for discussing propriety or necessity of the proceeding. Mr. Seward has informed him, though United States is not called upon to give any opin- ion on subject of French proposition for mediation, that if any European powers desire to offer any explanations the United States will respectfully receive them. As course of President in regard to the late French proposition has been indicated, necessity for a review of Mr. Dayton's note to Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys is removed. Popular judgment in United States ascribes invitation of Emperor to England and Rus- sia, to mediate in American affairs, to hos- tile and aggressive designs. President, not accepting this opinion, deems the pro- ceeding based upon erroneous assumption in regard to military and naval condition of United States. Determination of peo- ple and Congress to hold country in defense against foreign intervention has been in- tensiiied. Exertions of insurgents in England are re- warded by cotton loan, and strong polit- ical interest in their favor. EECOGNITION OP REBEL BELLIGERENCY. XLIII PROPOSITIONS FOR MEDIATION AJSTI? INTERVENTION— Continued. No. 268 From whom and to whom. 246 278 283 255 465 316 297 481 302 337 277 Date. Subject. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Earl Russell to Lord Lyons. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Lord Lyons to Earl Russell. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. M. Drouyn de Lhuys to M. Mercier. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mt. Dayton. 1862. Deo. 11 Deo. 19 Dec. 23 Deo. 29 1863. Jan. 7 Jan. 9 Jan. 15 Jan. 9 Feb. 2 Feb. 6 Feb. 6 Mr. Seward to Feb. 16 Mr. Adams. Mr. Seward to Feb. 16 Mr. Dayton. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Feb. 26 Feb. 26 Directs Mr. Dayton to communicate satisfac- tion of President with frank explanation of Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys, in reply to Mr. • Dayton's note upon subject of tender of good oiSces to procure cessation of hostili- ties in America. Instructs him to communicate to Mr. Sew- ard that distress in LaUcasliire for cotton will furnish him with reasons enough for discussion of American question iu Europe. Reasons for communicating to Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys statement of military condition of United States, without instructions. Relations between United States and France. Their delicate nature, and liability to in- terruption by attempt of France to dictate to United States, grounded on supposed sympathy of certain local party with France. Has informed Mr. Seward, in reply to his re- mark that European powers were discuss- ing American affairs without consulting United States; that distress in Lancashire was reason enough for the discussion. Approving Mr. Dayton's note to Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys of November 16, 1862. Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys will direct Mr. Mercier to suggest to United States appointment of commissioners to treat with South for Union and peace. Statement of terms of proposition. Reasons for suggesting informal conference with authorities that represent the South for the purpose of restoring peace, and directing that such proposition be made to United States. Public concern in regard to supposed benev- olent i(lea of French mediation in Ameri- can affairs. / Inclosing Queen's speech on opening of Par- liament. Mr. Mercier has communicated Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys's suggestion that United States shall hold informal conferences with au- thoiities that represent the South. Presi- dent's reasons for disapproving the plan. Incloses copy of instruction No. 302 to Mr. Dayton. Has no doubt that French tender of good offices was the fruit of disloyal communi- cations from United States. Indications of increased health in public sentiment promises strength to the government. Effect upon public opinion in England of a reported niisunderstauding between Mr. Mercier and Mr. Seward. Military success of United States would remove all insur- gent sympathy, except that found in inte- rested commercial circles. Has communicated to Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys negative answer of United States to pro- posal of French government for informal 479 479 XLIV EECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. PROPOSITIONS FOR MEDIATION AND INTERVENTION— Continued. No. From whom and to whom. Date. Subject. 60 292 356 547 Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. do.' Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. do. .do. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. 1863. Mar. 27 Mar. 27 Ajril 10 June 15 June 26 June 26 July 1 July 2 July 3 July 9 July 8 July 9 July 10 July 10 conferences between United States and southern authorities. Has oommuuioated to Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys concurrent resolutions of Congress con- cerning foreign intervention in the exist- ing rebellion. Has communicated to Lord Russell resolu- tions of Congress in regard to foreign intervention. In regard to satisfactory termination of re- sults of improper advice given by citizens of United States to foreign powers in re- gard to propriety of foreign mediation. Consequences of foreign intervention Motion of Mr. Roebuck assigned for 30th in- stant in House of Commons. Conference of Messrs. Lindsay and Roebuck with Emperor at Paris. Baron Gros has said that Emperor will re- new proposition for recognition to British government, and if declined, will proceed alone. Incloses debate in House of Commons on motion made by Mr. Roebuck ai;id the im- plication of the Emperor of the French. Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys says that Emperor did not authorize Mr. Roebuck's statement in House of Commons concerning willingness of France to recognize insurgents, and that no official communication upon the sub- ject had passed between the English and French governments. Effect of Mr. Roebuck's statement npon his political standing. The growing disposi- tion in Great Britain to take action in favor of rebels is stimulated by insurgent emissa- ries. It can only be counteracted by sue cess of Union arms. Incloses copy of 368 to Mr. Dayton Renewal of proposition for moral action of European governments in domestic affairs of United States may be traced to insur- fent emissaries. If such prove true, United tates will ref«ard action of Franco as un- friendly. Recent military successes of Union arms may induce Emperor to return to policy of neutrality and non-interven- tion. Directions for proceeding in case Emperor shall violate sovereignty of United States. Assignment of Monday for continuance of discussion upon Mr. Roebuck's motion. Unfriendly opinion and sympathy in offi- cial circles concerning American affairs. Inclosing instruction to Mr. Dayton in regard to French intervention in American civil war. In regard to the remarks of Baron Gros, French embassador in London, as to the Emperor's intention to interfere in domes- tic affairs of United States. Mr. Dayton is requested to ask for a staiement of Emperor's policy. 480 480 481 481 482 482 483 483 484 485 485 486 487 RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. XLV PROPOSITIONS FOR MEDIATION AND INTERVENTION— Continued. No. From -whom and to whom. Date. Subject. ^ fU 650 321 370 452 374 656 329 333 676 334 483 380 487 733 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. 1863. July 11 June 26 Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Sewaid to Mr. Dayton. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. V Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. do. July 11 July 16 July 17 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys to Mr. Mercier. July 18 July 30 Aug. 5 Aug. 10 Aug. 20 Aug. 27 July 29 Mr. Seward Mr. Adams. to Sept. 3 Sept. 15 Oct. 9 Incloses Mr. Dayton's dispatch relative to 489 recognition of insurgents. Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys's assiiranoes concern- 439 ing intentions of Emperor. Importance of Mexican question and impossibility of accepting Mr. Drouyn.de Lhuys's state- ments as final concerning policy of Empe- ror towards United States. Incloses Mr. Renauld's coiumuujcation in La France concerning visit of Mr. Slidell to Emperor and the Roebuck motion for recognition. Receives information removing anxieties 490 concerning foreign intervention. Incloses debate on Mr. Roebuck's motion in 491 Parliament. In regard to Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys's observa- 491 tious concemingjeported conversation be- tween the Emperor and Messrs. Roebuck and Lindsay. Incloses published correction of the report that British government had violated confidence iu regard to French proposition for mediation. Defers consideration of Roebuck motion 493 until the answer of Great Britain is made to Mr. Roebuck's proposition. Communicates result of conversation with 493 Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys in regard to Baron Gros's statement, and to policy of Emperor upon subject of intervention iu American affairs. Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys is not aware that Brit- 494 ish government have betrayed confidence in the manner indicated by Mr. Roebuck. Has received Mr. Seward's correction. Animosity against United States in England, 495 and its probable consequences. Conversation with Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys in 495 regard to the Roebuck-Lindsay conference with the Emperor. Incloses note to Lord Russell covering dis- 497 patch to Mr. Dayton in regard to the im- propriety at the present juncture of affairs of extending aid to the rebels. Comments upon the Emperor's views of civil 497 war in United States as expressed in the explanatory statement, published in the Mouiteur, of the conversation with Messrs. Roebuck and Lindsay. Incloses Lord Russell's reply to Mr. Adams in 493 regard to impropriety at present time of permitting encouragement of civil war in America. \ Relates substance of conversation with Mr. 499 Dayton, in which he states that France had not recognized the South, nor signed with it any treaty for the cession of Louisiana and Texas ; and that France neither sought for herself, nor for any other power, acces- sions in America. Influence of insurgent intrigues upon sta- 500 bility of European policies in regard to United States; XLVI KECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. . PROPOSITIONS FOR MEDIATION AND INTERVENTION— Continued. No. From whom and to whom. Date. Subject. P^ . 1864. 816 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Jan. 15 Declaration that war in America and peace in Europe are guarantees of British security, and that close of war will be followed by preposterous demands by United States upon Great Britain. British policy has fostered insurgent intrigue, and that change of policy is necessary to prevent alienation and insure success of President's 501 823 do Feb. 1 views. United States cannot now accept interven- 503 tion on part of Great Britain to obtain con- cessions for insurgents. 853 do Feb. 24 In regard to the Queen's speech and the de- bate thereon. 503 705 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. June 2 Management of Mr. Lindsay's motion for recognition. 504 725 do June 23 Disposition of Mr. Lindsay's motion for rec- ognition. 504 1012 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. June 27 Transmitting correspondence with Mr. Day- ton relative to renewed effort bet ween Eng- land and France to restore peace in United States. 504 486 Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. June 10 Relative to suggestions for another effort between England and France to restore peace in United States. 505 592 Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. June 27 Does not credit reports of a renewed effort by England and France to restore peace in United States. 505 744 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward; July 14 Intention of Mr. Lindsay to resuscitate in the Commons his motion for recognition. 506 751 do July 21 Condition of public sentiment in England concerning American affairs, and elaborate 506 movement to concentrate opinion in favor of interveiition in civil war. Fate of in- surgent intrigues in England. 1049 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. July 28 Comments upon parliamentary debate on resolution for ministerial censure so far as it bears upon the situation in the United States. Contrasts the conduct of the Brit- ish Parliament with that of the United States during the war. 507 753 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. July 28 Fate of Mr. Lindsay's resuscitated motion. Incloses debate on the subject. 509 1058 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Aug. 1 Incloses copy of instrnction to Mr. Dayton relative to report of new design of Em- peror.to propose mediation in civil war. 510 621 Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Jul; Foreign mediation in affairs of United States cannot be admitted. 510 1063 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Aug. 8 1865. Acknowledges history of efforts of insurgents to procure from England recognition of their confederacy. 510 1245 do Jan. 23 Insurgents' hope of recognition based upon idea that rebels in late presidential election i 511 were prevented exercise of suffrage, there- fore the next administration- will not bo ' de jure governjnent over the States which ! by treaty of peace 1783 were acknowledged free, indepeiiident States. Incloses article » from Richmond Sentinel. ENFOECEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. XL VII GENEEAL SUBJECT OF ENFOECEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. From whom and to whom. Date. Object. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. , do. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward, Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. do. . do .do Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. do- Mr. Seward to Lord Lyons. 1861. June 28 Aug. 1 Aug. 30 Sept. 10 Sept. 11 Sept. 14 Sept. 25 Oct. 4 Not. 30 1862. Jan. 24 Jan. 27 Feb. 13 Feb. 14 Feb. 21 Inclosing advertisements which indicate de- liberate purpose to disregard blockade, and requesting that complaint may be made if there is any infringement of Brit- ish neutrality act. » J. D. Bullock's contract in Europe for ten iron steameDs. British government has disclaimed power to prevent departure of Bermuda. If British government has power to prevent exportation of coutrabaud, request that colonial authorities may prevent Mr. Ad- derly, of Nassau, New Providence, from carrying out contract for shipment of arms to insurgents. Inefficiency of British law to prevent expor- • tation of contraband to insurgents will oblige United States to exercise vigilance in detecting unlawful character of British vessels approaching blockaded coast. Information of designs of insurgent emissa- ries in Great Britain enables authorities here to practice vigilance. Rapid increase of naval force will permit vigorous demonstrations ou coast, which are expected to defeat the enterprises of the insurgents. Incloses copies of two notes to Lord Russell in regard to violation of British -neutrality in West India Islands. Consignment to Mr. Adderly, by insurgent order, arms and powder for confederacy. Hospitalities extended to insurgent vessels in British ports which do not interfere with Queen's proclamation of neutrality, but which are denied by every other civilized State. Revocation of orders prohibiting exportation of arms and ammunition of war. Refuge of insnrgent privateers in British ports. Conversation with Mr. Thouvenel in regard to the settlement of the rights of neutrals on a liberal basis, and the continuance of the blockade on the southern coast. British reasons for British of neutrality and attitude of British (*)urt8 in permitting •ttie Bermuda to be fitted out with arms and munitions to be emjjloyed by insurg- ents in their attempts to overthrow United States. Incloses communication from United States consul general at Havana in regard to the conduct of the master of the English steamer General Miramon. Opinion of the President in regard to the difference of Lord Russell from some of the conclusions presented in the note of the 26th of December upon the Trent afFair. XLVIII EKFOECEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY— Continued. No. From -whom and to whom. Cate. Subject. be ci Ph 131 135 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. .do. 140 do. 225 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. 238 164 266 187 323 336 340 1862. Mar. 13 Mar. 27 do. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adaras to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Stuart to Earl Russell. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. do. April 3 April 4 April 26 May 22 June 2 July 17 Aug. 13 • Aug. 16 Sept. 8 Sept. 13 Incloses his note to Lord Russell in regard to the conduct of the master of the General Miramon, and showing that outside rebel lines nearly all the active sympathy and assistance came from subjects of Great Britain. Lord Russell's reply is also in- closed. In regard to the activity of British subjects to set aside the blockade, and arming ves- sels to engage in insurgentservice. Does not consider it a proper time for a pressure for retraction of proclamation according bel- ligerent rights to insurgents. Incloses copy of note to Lord Russell in regard to the preparation of the Oreto for the insur- gent service, and to British encourage- ment of their cause. Still adheres to oi>inion that proper time for application for revocation of proclamation according belligerent rights to insurgents has not arrived. Incloses Lord Russell's note on the gunboat Oreto, and the agency of British subjects in supplying aid to the rebels. In regard to the fitting out of vessels of war in England for service of insurgents. Re- port that Captain Bullock will bring two iron-clads from England for insurgent ser- vice. Regrets that British government will not arrest proceedings of parties engaged in supplying insurgents with material of war. Incloses Lord Russell's note in reply to his application ior revocation of proclamation according belligerent rights to insurgents, and relates substance of subsequent inter- view on same subject. The revelation of insurgent military condi- tion, and of their abuse of European neu- trality, afforded«by the appended rejiort of Caleb Huse. Inclosing con'espondence with Lord Russell in regard to United States vessel Tusca- rora, lying in Southampton for repairs. Approves action in case of Oreto, and in re- gard to perversion of neutral privileges of Island of Nassau. Without English sym- pathy insurrection would die. British hostility towards United States can only be accounted for on ground of unnecessary jealousy. Has received from Mr. Seward assurance that the issue of letters of marque is for the present suspended. Rumors in regard to the preparation of a navy for insurgents in British waters. Con- struction of navy in ^he United States to counteract its influence. Incloses intercepted letter addressed by S. E. Mallory, confederate secretary of navy, to James H. North, in regard to Oreto, Ala- ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. XLIX GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY— Contimiecl. No. 237 242 244 378 427 435 454 462 322 505 From whom and to whom. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. do ... .do Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. do .do .do .. do.. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Earl Russell to Mr. Adams. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Bate. 1862. Oct. 10 Oct. 16 Oct. 23 Oct. 25 Dec. 15 Dec. 29 1863. Jan. 19 Jan. 30 Feb. 13 Feb. 12 Mar. 9 Subject. bama, and the Florida, fitted out in Eng- land for the insurgents. Requests its com- munication to Lord Russell. Mr. Gladstone's betrayal of his consciousness of the existence of plan for preparation of insurgent navy in England. Importance of the acknowledgment in connection with- the position of Great Britain. There is no disposition in England to apply powers of government to investigation of circumstances complained of in relation to the vessel 290. Incloses Lord Russell's note of October 16th admitting that though foreign enlistment act or any other act can be evaded by sub- tle contrivances, the English government cannot go beyond letter of existing law. Approves Mr. Adams's protest addressed to Lord Russell on subject of fitting out in- surgent vsssels in British ports. Incloses copy of official correspondence rela- tive to bark Maury, vessel supposed by Mr. Giampton to be intended to cruise against British commerce during Crimean war. Reasons for continued ill feeling in America against Great Britain. Incloses copies of intercepted treasonable correspondence of insurgents at Richmond with theii agents abroad in regard to in- surgent naval preparations in Great Brit- ain, and exhiBiting condition of their affairs and intrigues in Europe. Incloses communication from Secretary of Navy in regard to transmission by British and Spanish vessels of war of insurgent gold through blockaded ports of South to insurgent emissaries in England. Incloses note to Lord Russell transmitting intercepted correspondence between in- surgent officials in the United States and insurgent emissaries in Europe in regard to utilization of English neutrality; to arrangements for establishing the credit of the confederacy by the negotiation in English market of a loan to be paid by cotton consigned to ccftnmercial house in England and run through the blockade, and to incipient intrigue fostered by France for the establishment of Texan in- dependence. Acknowledges receipt of intercepted corres- pondence of confederate State, Treasury, and Navy departments, communicated by Mr. Adams. The destruction of the Jacob Bell by the Florida is regarded as indicating ruin of national navigation, unless it can be pre- vented either by enforcement of British neutrality or by the employment of force under commission of marque and reprisal. A — ^rv-^ ^VOL. I li ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. GENERAL SUBJECT OP ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY— Continued. No. From whom and to whom. Date. Subject. 349 352 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. -do. 1863. Mar. 13 Mar. 19 356 .do. Mar. 27 359 538 540 297 369 Earl Russsell to Lord Lyons. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. .do. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mar. 27 Mar. 28 April 2 April' 7 AprU 9 April 9 Incloses note from Lord Russell, stating that the British government do not find any sufficient evidence in intercepted insurgent correspondence suhmitted, of system of action in direct hostility to United States on part of English subjects. Incloses note to Lord Russell in regard to the allegation that the evidence contained in intercepted correspondence is incom- plete as to active hostility of British sub- jects towards United States. Refers to the unfriendly interpretation to be placed upon the presence of an established agent in Great Britain for the construction of six iron-clad steamers, to be used in warring upon United States, and presence of finan- cial agent to negotiate loans to sustain credit of insurgents. Conversation with Earl Russell in regard to disposition and ability of the British gov- ernment to prevent insurgents from using English territory as base for development of. their plots. Lord Russell regrets the departure of the two privateers from British waters as a misfortune rather than a fault. Mr. Adams has communicated resolutions of Congress in regard to inter- vention, and suggests the prosecution of the parties in Liverpool known to have been connected with outfit of gunboats. In regard to conversation with Mr. Adams upon the departure of the Oreto and Ala- bama from British ports, and the general subject of alleged insurgent violation of British neutrality. Debate in House of Commons in regard to American affairs. President regrets that British government declines to interfere to arrest proceedings of British subjects who are violating Queen's neutrality within the exclusive jurisdiction of Great Britain. Instructs Mr. Adams to enforce enlistment laws through courts. Uneasiness in United States arising through toleration of hostile naval preparations in Great Britain, and pressure for letters of marque and reprisal to insure success of naval operations against insurgents. Conversation with Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys, in which he inquires concerning American action in reference to letters of marque, and to the consideration of the subject in English Parlifiment. Incloses correspondence with Lord Russell in regard to the intercepted insurgent dis- patches, who states that the British gov- ernment will endeavor to discover and obtain legal evidence of violation of the enlistment act, with a view to its strict enforcement. ENFOECEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. LI GENEEAL SUBJECT OF ENFOECEMENT OF NEUTEALITY— Continued. No. 370 545 546 .548 From whom and to whom. Date. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. .do. do.... 552 386 566 336 400 409 588 590 1863. AprU 9 AprU 10 Subject. April 10 April 13 .do. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. Mr. Adams to Mr. Mr. Seward. .do. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. .do. Lamport & Holt and others to Earl Eussell. April 15 AprU 23 April 24 AprU 24 May 1 May 8 May 9 May 9 June 9 Incloses correspondence with Lord Eussell in regard to the preparation at Liverpool of vessels for carrying on hostilities at sea against the United States. Authorizes him to arrest, by judicial proceed- ings, the departure of hostile vessels from ports of Great Britain. The negotiation of insurgent loan in Loudon is regarded by people of United States as tending to complicate relations between the two countries, so as to render it difficult to preserve friendship between them? In regard to the proper time for remonstrat- ing against seeming toleration by British government of hostilities of its subjects against United States. Acknowledges receipt of dispatches, and says United States, under difficulties, unable in a friendly country to put into activity laws and proclamations 'designed to prevent aggressions by British subjects upon American commerce, appeal to England to enforce those laws. England avows her willingness to enforce laws, x>rovided she is furnished with evidence that vyould lead to conviction of offenders. Incloses telegram from San Francisco col- lector of customs, relative to insurgent conspiracies in Vancouver. Incloses note from Lord Eussell, denying application of quotations from United States judicial decisions to occurrences in British dominion. Approving his correspondence with Lord Eussell concerning intercepted insurgent dispatches. Intentions of President in regard to the issue of letters of marque, and his opinion of French neutrality. Incloses note to Lord Eussell, stating that negotiation of insurgent cotton loan in London will terminate concessions of every form that have been made to alleviate rigors of blockade in regard to shipment of cotton. Incloses Lord Eussell's reply to note in regard to effect of cotton loan in conduct of United States as to amelioration of the blockade. United States will not fail to do justice to good disposition which British govern- ment is manifesting to repress equipment of hostile vessels in British ports. Approving correspondence in regard to inter- cepted insurgent dispatches. Memorial from ship-owners of Liverpool to the British secretary of state for foreign affairs, requesting, ia view of the situation which permits a foreign belligerent to send to sea from British ports vessels of war in contravention of the provisions of existing law, an amendment to the foreign enlistment act. 599 600 600 601 LII ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY— Continned, No. 663 480 689 691 499 740 756 From whom and to whom. E. Hammond to Lamport and Holt, and oth- ers. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mt. Adams. -do. 761 586 608 802 917 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. -do. .do. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. -do. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. .do. Date. 1863. July 6 July 24 Aug. 21 Sept. 2 Sept. 2 Sept. 17 Oct. 24 Not. 9 Not. 16 1864. Jan. 28 Mar. 3 Jan. 6 April 22 Subject. States that, in opinion of Lord Russel, for- eign enlistment act is effectual for all rea- sonable purposes. It is hoped, in view of some changes in mili- tary situation of United States, that British government will not be indifferent to trans- actions tending so strongly towards alien- ation and war. Incloses correspondence with Lord Russell in in regard to the prohibition against repack- ing gunpowder at Belize, British Hondu- ras, enforced by GoTemor Seymour. Requests that thanks be communicated to Rear Admiral Sir Lewis T. Jones for his efforts to preTent embarkation of rebel crew and officers on Tessel supposed to have been " Southerner," at Queenstown. Reviews menacing character of European situation towards United States, and re- questing Mr. Adams to ascertain whether there is any evidences of disposition in British governing circles to maintain anu.- cable and cordial relations with the Uni- ted States. Incloses reply of Lord Russell in regard to the communication of thanks to Gov- ernor Seymour of Honduras. Probable effect of Lord Russell's speech at Blairgowrie on opinion in the United States. Review of instances which cause irritation between United States and Eng- land. If Great Britain shaJl cease to permit the issue of insurgent privateers from her ports, and shall revoke her recognition of insurgent belligerency. United States will endeavor to countervail among its citizens the effect of British hostile declamation ; but United States are not disposed to sub- mit to what they have declared would be intolerable injuries from any foreign power. Incloses correspondence of Mr. Marcy in re- gard to the expectations of England and France concerning the equipment of pri- vateers in the United States. Reply to Lord Russell in regard to the natu- ralization on insurgent vessels at sea of British subjects as confederate citizens. In regard to the alleged improper voyage of the WiU-o'-the-wisp. Case of the Rappahannock, and the general subject of insurgent violation of British neutrality and the modes of prevention adopted by British government. Announces proceedings inspired by dismissal by law lords of appeal in case of Alex- andra. Reviews situation at home and abroad. ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. LIII GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY— Contmued. From whom and to whom. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. J. P. Benjamin's instructions to insurgent cruis- ers. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Earl Russell to Mr. Burnley. Date. Subject. 1864. April 23 May 12 July 2 • 1865. Jan. 12 Jan. 30 1864. Publish- ed in In- dex of Dec. 29, 1864. 1865. Feb. 15 Feb. 15 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Feb. 16 President expects Mr. Adams to remonstrate with Lord Russell upon organization of a joint stock company to carry supplies from British ports to the insurgents, under con- tract with insurgent cabal at Richmond. Trial of Iron-clads is postponed, on. applica- tion of Mr. Bravay, until 6th of June. Part of crew of ship Avon have been landed at Plymouth. Florida at St. Nazaire. Con- centration of insurgent naval force in Eng- land. Requests Mr. Adams to communicate to Lord Russell that the whole of the British West India Islands are practically used by insurgents as base for hostile operations. Com^aint of Great Britain that United States vessels have violated neutrality regulations of British government in Ba- hama Islands. Incloses letter in London Times, by Histori- cus, in regard to the operations of insur- gents in English territory, and the appli- ■ cation of international law to their cap- tures at sea. The letter of Historicus and the claim of the insurgents to unusual interpretation of in- ternational law in favor of their captures at sea. Incloses dispatches of Mr. Slidell to Mr. Benjamin in regard to negotiation with English and French governments to assent to their wishes concerning captures at sea of neutral property. Rebel minute of instruction relative to their cruisers. Important friendly communication from Lord Russell will come in next mail. Informs Mr. Burnley that he trusts that orders sent to governor general in Can- ada will convince United States that everything that can will be done to prevent carrying on hostilities against United States from Canadian territory or waters, and that he has addressed a letter to the confederate government on the subject of their use of British soil as base for hostile expeditions against Uilited States. Incloses correspondence with Lord Russell in regard to responsibility for outfits by individuals of vessels for account of reb- els. Has received from him assurances of friendly action of Canadian government, and a letter which is to be delivered to insurgent government, reviewing the con- duct of their agents, and requesting them to desist from using British soil as base for hostile operations. Mr. Adams is con- vinced that nothing but grossest misman- 626 Lrv ENPOECEMENT OF NEUTEALITT. GENERAL SUBJECT OP ENPOECEMENT OF NEUTEALITY— Continued. No. From whom and to whom. Date. Subject. 884 1282 Earl Eussell to Mr. Adams. Earl Eussell to Mason, Slidell, and Maun. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. 1865. Feb. 15 Feb. 13 Feb. 23 Mar. 1294 -do Mar. 9 1311 903 1325 916 922 .do Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. do Mar. 20 Mar. 23 Mar. 27 April 6 April 12 agement on part of United States would effect any change in established policy of Great Britain towards United States. Popular apprehensions of what is to fol- low conquest of insurgents by United States. Inclosing his letter to Messrs. Mason, Slidell, and Maun, referred to in previous dis- patch No. 879, as one to be delivered to insurgent government. Complaints of the violation of British neu- trality by insurgent government. (In- closed with Mr. Adams's 879.) Conversation with Lord Eussell in regard to proposition of rebels to make, upon quarter-deck of their privateers, a prize court ,to adjudicate prizes and neutral property. If England and France assent to this proposition, United States will claim similar rights in regard to neutral property. Policy of President is not one of conquest or retaliation. Relations between Eng- land and United States are not improved by conduct of Great Britain in permitting insurgent schemes to find development on British soil. Incloses telegram from Uni- ted States consul at Halifax, in regard to iron-clad fleet under Captain Moffat, from French and English ports, to attack New York; proceedings indicated, which, if adopted by Great Britain, would be gen- erous and just. In regard to Mr. Adams's conversation with Lord Eussell relative to aggressions com- ing from British provinces and ports, and to the transmission of British official copy of note addressed to Messrs. Slidell, Ma- son, and Mann, to General Lee, command- ing insurgent forces. Incloses copy of letter to Secretary of War upon the sub- ject. Incloses correspondence with War Depart- ment in regard to transmission of British letter to Messrs. Slidell, Mason, and Mann through military lines. Incloses correspondence with Lord Eussell in regard to the termination of the Cana- dian reciprocity treaty. Incloses correspondence with War Depart- ment in regard to refusal of General Lee to receive copy of communication ad- dressed by British government to Messrs. Mason, Slidell, and Mann. Lord Eussell is too unwell to grant inter- view ; has left dispatches 1294, 1309, 1311, and 1315 with him. Conversation with Lord Eussell in regard to outfits and other operations of the rebels ; has sent notice to Mr. Perry, at Madrid, concerning J. P. HaU and the steamer Kearsarge. ENFORCEMENT OP NEUTRALITY. LV GENERAI, SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY— Continued. No. From whom and to whom. Date. Subject. 931 938 1520 1137 1687 60 61 164 185 131 135 224 298 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. .do. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Dudley to Mr. Seward. .do. .do. .^do . do... .do. .do .do. 1865. April 20 April 28 Aug. 22. 1866. Jan. 25 Feb. 17 .1862. May 3 Nov. 21 Dec. 30 1863. Aug. 15 Aug. 24 1864. Feb. 5 June 15 Incloses correspondence with Lord Russell in regard to refusal of insurgent General Lee to receive copy of communication addressed to Messrs. Mason, SUdell, and Mann. Incloses Lord Russell's note in regard to the investigation of the character of two ves- sels, the Virginia and Louisa Ann Fanny, at the Bermudas. Incloses correspondence between Sir Fred- erick Bruce and State Department, in regard to the withdrawal of the notice abrogating the agreement contained in the convention of 1817, limiting the naval armament on the lakes. Incloses circular from Lord Clarendon re- questing information concerning the con- struction of vessels for foreign govern- ments in the private ship-yards of Eng- land, and his acknowledgment thereof. Incloses letter from Secretary of Navy stat- ing that United States has had no vessel building within British dominions since 1861. In regard to the purchase of thirty steamers in England, for the purpose of making combined attack upon United States. The Semaphore and Memphis are among the number. Has communicated information concerning purchase of thirty steamers, to Mr. Adams and to Mr. Morse. Gives list of those that have sailed, and those that are building in England. England is main dependence of rebels for arms, ammunition, and all kinds of cloth- ing for their army. Gives list and loca- tions of blockade runners. Detailed information concerning Laird's rams, other steamers, the Glasgow ram, the steamer at Stockton, Miller's gun- boat, and two at London. Is persuaded that if it had not been for the aid and assistance the insurgents received from England, rebellion would not have assumed its present proportions. Description of vessels building for insur- gents in Thomson's yard, at Glasgow. In- surgent credit in England based upon their cotton ; policy of destroying it recom- mended. Vessels building and afloat for use of insurgents. Petition of Liverpool merchants, asking British government to recognize southern confederacy. Incloses slip relating do- ings of Alabama. Incloses instructions to governors of colo- nies in regard to belligerent cruisers and their prizes. LVI ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRAIilTT. AMENDMENT OF LAWS. No. From whom and to -whom. Date. Subject. 1^ 377 .Mr. Dudley to Mr. Seward. 1864. Nov. 4 In regard to indisposition of Englisli goT- ernment to prevent sailing of insurgent vessels from Liverpool. Insurgents in future wiU probably purchase vessels that are already built, and send them out with armament stored as merchandise. Prob- able course of Leon Smith. 658 AMENDMENT OF LAWS. 83 85 79 160 381 383 281 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. do Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. do.. Earl Eussell to Mr. Adams. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. .do Mr; Adams to Earl Eussell. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. 1861. Sept. ,7 Sept. 10 Nov. 29 1862. May 15 June 12 Oct. 25 Oct. 27 Nov. 20 Dec. 25 Refers to the passage of a law in 1838, by United States, which prevented inter- vention against government of Great Britain by American citizens, and sub- mits propriety of adoption of similar meas- ure in Great Britain at present juncture. Incloses intercepted letter from John P. Baldwin to Henry Adderly, relative to shipment of arms and powder for the use of the insurgents, from Nassau. The Uni- ted States expect special legislation by British government to cover such cases, of the character of the act of Congress of 1838. Incloses Lord Russell's note stating that if necessary to preserve neutrality, her Maj- esty will be advised to adopt further measures. Incloses correspondence with Lord Russell in regard to escape of the Emily St. Pierre, through absence of legal authority of British government to punish her of- fense. Interpretation of Queen's neutral- ity proclamation induces United States to believe that such authority exists in British statute. Earl Russell replies that blockade runners, laden with contraband, do not come within the province of foreign enlistment act, and that it devolves upon the United States to capture them. Mr. Ad- ams's rejoinder on same subject. Offenses which are within provisions of foreign enlistment act. Incloses papers from minister at Lisbon, in regard to depredations of insurgent ves- sels dispatched from British ports, upon American commerce, near island of Flores. Incloses resolutions of chamber of com- merce in regard to destruction at sea of American vessels, near Azores, by insur- gents. Solicits redress for national and private iiyury sustained by United States and more effective prevention of repetition of such lawless proceedings in English ports. Incloses Lord Russell's note of 19th, sug- gesting amendment to foreign enlistment ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. AMENDMENT OF LAWS— Continued. LVII No. 454 321 483 493 651 453 From whom and to whom. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Earl Russell to Lord Lyons. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. .do.. Earl Russell to Lord Lyons. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Bate. 1863. Jan. 19 Feb. 13 Feb. 14 Feb. 19 Mar. 2 Max. 27 July 11 493 .do. Memorial of ship owners of Liv- erpool to Earl Russell. Mr. Hammond to Messrs. Lam- port and Holt and others. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Subject. July 16 June 9 July 6 Sept. 10 act of both countries with a view to an increased efficiency. Directs conference with Lord Russell in re- gard to suggested amendments to enlist- ment acts of both countries. Incloses intercepted treasonable correspondence, and directs him to employ them so as to induce British government to enforce ex- isting larws. Lord Russell states that lord chancellor having considered that their foreign enlist- ment act was sufficiently effective, no change it seemed could be made. Mr. Adams has said that he was ready to hear any amendments to United States foreign enlistment act, but they con- sidered it already satisfactory. As Brit- ish cabinet has come to similar conclu- sion in regard to English law no further proceedings at present need be taken. President hopes that British government will act upon Lord Russell's suggestion as to amendment of the foreign enlistment acts of the two countries. As British government conclude that their foreign enlistment law is sufficient with- out amendments, the President expects that England will take measures to en- force execution of the law. Lord Russell states that cabinet are of opin- ion that enlistment act is sufficient, but legal evidence could not always be pro- cured ; that British government had done everything in its power to execute the law. President suggests for consideration of British government whether, on appeal made by them. Parliament might not think it expedient to amend existing stat- ute so as to effect what is believed it ought to accomplish. If British law is not amended, the alternative of the United States. Calling attention to reply of Mr. Hammond to memorial of ship-owners of Liverpool suggesting alteration in foreign enlistment act. Suggesting an alteration in foreign enlist- ment act. Stating that in Lord Russell's opinion the enlistment act is effectual for all reasona- ble purposes. If provisions of act were extended, presence of proof would be ne- cessary, because no law could or should be passed to punish upon suspicion. Announcement of Lord Russell, in public speech, that new powers may be solicited from. Parliament if present powers should prove insufficient. LVIII ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTKALITY. AMENDMENT OF LAWS— Continued. No. From -wliom and to Tvhom. Date. Subject. 760 Mr. Adams to Earl Eussell. Earl Russell to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Earl Euseell. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. 1863. Sept. 16 Sept. 25 Sept. 29 Nov. 14 552 1136 1042 1052 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. .do. 1127 Earl of Claren- don to Sir F. Bruce. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Dec. 10 . 1864. Oct. 24 1865. Sept. 7 Sept. 21 Dec. 26 1866. Jan. 4 British government cannot justly plead in- effioacy of enlistment law to enforce duties of neutrality in present emergency. The intimation of hostile proceedings towards Great Britain by United States wiU not induce British cabinet either to overstep limits of the law, or propose to Parliament the adoption of any new law they may not think proper to be adopted. Did not intimate hostile proceedings, but urged a reliance upon the law as sufficient, from the-confidence expressed in it by the most eminent authority in the kingdom. Communicates information concerning pro- jected insurgent expeditions from Canada. Requests that Lord Russell may be asked to consider the plot in connection with threatened aggression directly from the ports of Liverpool and Glasgow. Princi- ples which shall regulate maritime con- duct of neutral states hereafter are likely to be settled by precedents which arise during present civil war. Alludes to use made of Canadian territory by insurgents, and suggests to Lord Rus- sell possibility of reciprocating legislation of IJnited States in 1838. Has left printed copy of law with Lord Russell. Requesting serious attention of British gov- ernment to the multiplying instances of insurgent use of Canadian territory as base for hostile expeditious. Motives of insurgents. Declination of reasonable re- quest of United States in regard to im- provement of British law. Incloses Lord Russell's note of the 30th Au- gust in regard to the adoption of a new law when the inadequacy of an old law is ap- parent. The existing law has not proved inadequate in cases of rams in the Mersey or Pampero in the Clyde. Incloses note to Lord Russell of the 18th of September, replying to Lord Russell's defence of existing British legislation as having proved adequate to preserve neu- trality. Reviews Lord Russell's account of adoption of neutrality laws in United States and England. Conversation with Mr. Adams in regard to propriety of amendment of international law where it had been demonstrated to be ne- cessary, and requesting that Mr. Seward may be invited to co-operate to that end. Incloses note to the earl of Clarendon, com- municating declination by United States of British proposition for revision of Eng- lish and American neutrality, laws so that security might be given against those who evade them. ENFORCEMENT OP NEUTEALITY. SUPPLIES, ETC., OFVESSELS-Continued. LIX No. 1161 1164 1168 1712 42 From wliom and to whom. Earl of Claren- deu to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. -do. ....do Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Moran to Mr. Seward. .do , ..do Date. 1866. Jan. 4 Mar. 1 Mar. 8 Mar. 15 Mar. 20 Mar. 29 Oct. 13 1868. June 3 Subject. Acknowledging Mr. Adams's note informing British goTernment that United States is not inclined to assent to concurrent revis- ion of neutrality statutes. Incloses his note to Earl of Clarendon in re- gard to statement of Sir Eoundell Palm- er, in House of Commons, that failure of British cabinet to improve their preven- tive laws was undoubtedly owing to the action of the United States. Incloses debate in Parliament on c[uestions of maritime law, and correction by Sir Eoundell Palmer of his statement that failure of British cabinet to improve British law was owing to action of United States. Incloses correspondence between himself and Earl of Clarendon in regard to Sir Eoundell Palmer's statement, on the 23d of February, in the House of Commons. Approval of his correction of the statement of Sir Eoundell Palmer. Incloses Lord Clarendon's note of the 24th in- stant, and its accompaniment from Sir Eoundell Palmer relative to statements made lately in House of Commons in re- gard to amendment of foreign enlistment acts of Great Britain and United States. Announcement in the Standard that Lord Derby would appoint royal cominission to inquire into workings of existing neu- trality law. A Communicates reports and comments of Lon- don papers thereon, of the royal commission appointed to inquire into character and working of foreign enlistment act. SUPPLIES, ETC., OF VESSELS. 42 43 44 46 Mr. "Whiting to Mr. Seward. do. do ...do. 1861. Dec. 10 Dec. 10 Deo. 12 Deo. 19 Arrival of Isabel and Gladiator laden with arms for rebels. That coal of United States cannot be reshipped without viola- ting neutrality laws of Great Britain. Incloses letter from colonial secretary com- municating governor's order that if Uni- ted States coal is landed it shall be with understanding that it must not be re- shipped. Incloses letter of colonial secretary refusing to allow transhipment of coal from the Caleb Stetson to the United States steam- er Flambeau, in Bahama waters. Coaling of insurgent packet Theodora al- lowed after refusal of similar privilege to the Flambeau, United States steamer. Co- lonial secretary replies that Theodora is LX ENFOKCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. SUPPLIES, ETC., OF VESSELS— Continued. 172 125 1387 Mr. Whiting to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward to Lord Lyons. Lord Lyons to Mr. Seward. Do- Mr. Seward to Lord Lyons. Do Lord Lyons to Mr. Seward. Do. Mr. Seward to- Lord Lyons. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. 1862. Jan. 2 Jan. 31 Mar. 6 1863. April 4 April 7 Jnne 13 June 17 June 24 June 30 Nov. 2 Nov. 10 1865. Feb. 25 commercial vessel, and therefore entitled to hospitalites of port. Has ordered coal fleet to Key West. British brig Cecil, Master Boggs, refuses to go. Movements of rebel steamer Isabel, and British steamer Gladiator. Requesting Earl Russell to explain proceed- ings in case of Flambeau. United States steamer refused permission to coal at Nas- sau. Incloses note to Earl Russell, soliciting such action as will rectify error of interdioting to United States steamer Flambeau the use of coal stored at Nassau. The sal© of the cargo of the prize ship Han- over, captured by the insurgent vessel Retribution at Long Cay, Bahamas, and the subsequent dispatch of the Hanover, laden with salt, to an insurgent port. Acknowledges receipt of note in regard to the sale of the cargo of the insurgent prize Hanover, atLong Cay, Bahamas, and prom- ises inquiry. Incloses communication from governor of Bahamas, in regard to sale of cargo of in- surgent prize Hanover, at Long Cay. Aotnowledges receipt of note of 13th instant relative to insurgent prize ship Hanover. In relation to report of Mr. T. B. Burnside to governor of Bahamas. There is doubt in mind of government of United States whether the authorities at Long Cay were ignorant that the Hanover was a prize to the Retribution. WiU communicate his request for farther prosecution concerning knowledge by Brit- ish authorities of character of Hanover when at Long Cay, Bahamas. Incloses dispatch from governor of Bahamas reporting measures taken by attorney gen- eral of colony for prosecution of Vernon Locke, a man charged with having been concerned in the fraud practiced on the authorities at Long Cay in case of Hano- ver. Locke has given bail in £400. The bail in the case of Vernon Locke seems insignificant ; but United States trusts that justice of British government will be vin- dicated. In regard to the refusal of British authori- ties at Nassau to permit United States ves- sel Honduras to enter the port. Contrasts this exclusion with the permission accord- ed to blockade runners and suspicious craft of insurgent origin to remain at anchor in harbor, and that these proceedings, asso- ciated with insurgent operations in Cana- da, will mate incurable breach between England and United States. ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTEAX,ITY, BLOCKADE-EUNlSflNG. LXI No. From whom and to whom. Date. Suhjeot. 926 1366 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Hunter Mr. Adama. to 1865. AprU 13 April 24 Incloses correspondence with Lord Eussell in regard to the refusal of the authorities at Nassau to permit the entry of United States steamer Honduras, and to the pres- ence of the Rattlesnake, Tallahassee, sus- picious craft, in the same harhor and at the same time. Incloses lettet of Secretary of Navy in re- gard to proceedings of the governor of the Bahamas in refusing to allow United States vessel of war to enter port of Abaco for purpose of removing property saved from wreck of United States steamer San Ja- cinto, and calling attention to want of comity exhibited by governor on that oc- casion. BLOCKADE-RUNNINa 128 207 132 156 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. .do. .. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. ...do. 1861. Nov. 1 1862. Mar. 7 Mar. 11 Max. 20 May 8 Success of Bermuda has tempted insurgent agents to prosecution of enterprises to run blockade. Movement of arms from Ham- burg, and the occupation of Birmingham and London in turning out rifles for ship- ment through the blockade. Presence of Semmes in England, and his purposes. Projects of insurgents, and schemes to run the blockade. . Departures of the Bermu- da and the Oreto. Wants official intelli- gence of the captures of blockade runners. The insurance by English companies in Liv- erpool of blockade runners is by implica- tion levying war on United States. It is inconsistent with relations of friendship, and will excite in this country feelings of deep alienation. Review of British sentiment on American question. Conflict of Great Britain with United States would transfer whole carry- ing trade of Great Britain into hands of neutral continental nations. It is plain that without additional provision, sug- gested by Mr. Marcy, English interests on the sea are in great jeopardy in time of war, and yet with admission of it control of the ocean is forever lost. Self interest being point of their policy, the adoption of declaration of Paris is a sacrifice of which they are beginning to repent. Th? way to make any real advance in doc- trines of international law is to inforce observation of a consistent system of pol- icy upon any single power, whenever it may venture to set up its immediate inter- est as only rule of action it wiU abide by. Incloses Lord Russell's note of May 6, in the case of the steamer Labuan, stating that if United States inflicts the great injury LXII ENFOECEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. BLOCKADE-EtnsnsnNG. No. From wliom and to whom. Date. Subject. 1863. 281 205 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. June 26 Aug. 7 265 286 -do. ...do Nov. 27 1863. Jan. 1 136 736 Mr. Dudley to Mr. Seward. ....do. Mr. Seward to • Mr. Adams. Jan. 2 Aug. 25 Oct. 17 of a blockade upon other nations, the ut- most they can expect is, that European powers shall respect those acts of United States within limits of law. Mr. Adams replies that United States is embarrassed by complaints of severity of blockade by a friendly nation, which at same time con- fesses its inability to restrain its subjects from stimulating the resistance that neces- sitates continuance of the blockade. He is pained to learn that United States can- not expect that England should frame new statutes to remedy deficiency of its laws to prevent what it acknowledges on face of old statute to be evils created by its refrac- tory subjects. Has a list of eleven steam- ers and ten sailing vessels to run the block- ade via Nassau, and that business is reduced to a system, aided by British capital. The use of Nassau by insurgents as place of deposit of their munitions of war shipped thither from England. Release of insur- fent vessel Oreto on arrival of Captain emmes, of Sumter. Request that pro- test against- proceeding maybe made to British government. Incloses note from Lord Russell, covering a letter from Mr. Layard to Mi. Hersfall, suggesting, in reply to a memorial from British merchants and ship-owners in Liv- erpool in regard to proceedings of United States cruisers off Bahamas, that Liverpool merchants should refrain from blockade running. Outfits of vessels to run the blockade multi- ply. Arrival of Captain Maury and eight or nine rebel officers iudicates that some- thing warlike is to be expected. Incloses note of 30th December to Lord Rus- sell, in regard to British equipment of blockade runners, enlistment of British subjects in insurgent service, the occu- pation of Nassau as storehouse for goods awaiting transhipment to insurgent terri- tory, the insurance of blockade runners, and the arming of insurgent vessels-of- war. Accompanies his note by list of ves- sels engaged in illegal commerce, from Messrs.' Dudley and Morse. List and descriptidn of blockade runners ; their, rendezvous ; and the foreign ports en route to insurgent ports where stores are kept, awaiting opportunity to be run through blockade. Incloses slip from Journal of Commerce, stating that confederates receive immense supplies by way of Wilmington, and that officers and crew are leaving to man in- surgent vessels building in England. Incloses letter from Secretary of Navy in re- gard to contract between insurgent agents for delivery of naval stores at St. George's, ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. BLOCI^DE-RUNNING— Continued. LXIII No. From whom and to whom. Date. Subject. 529 550 782 566 570 806 810 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. -do. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. ..do.... Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. 1863. Nov. 4 Dec. 4 Deo. 7 1864. Jan. 1 Jan. 8 Jan. 11 ..do Jan. 12 812 814 584 .do Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Adams to Earl KusseU. Jan. 13 Jan. 14 Jan. 28 Jan. 25 Bermuda, to he thence introduced into United States. Requests that Bermuda authorities may prevent the islands he- coming place of deposit in violation of Queen's neutrality. Incloses note to Lord Russell in regard to in- tercepted contract between insurgents concerning delivery of naval stores at St. George's, Bermuda. Incloses reply of Lord Russell in regard to intercepted insurgent contract concerning delivery of liaval stores at St. George's, Bermuda. Requests inquiry whether Ralph Cator, alias Peterson, a blockade runner, is either an active or retired British naval officer. Incloses note to Earl Russell in relation to the conduct of Ralph Cator, alias Peter- son, and Lord Russell's acknowledgment. Incloses note from Lord Russell, in regard to » employment of Ralph Cator, commander in British navy, in running blockade. Incloses letters which show that British ves- sels engaged in violations of blockade are not neutral vessels, but rebel transports dispatched and sailing under British flag. He will inquire of Earl Russell, in view of this development, if that English policy needs modification. While he admits that evidence in case of the use of Bermuda as insurgent depot is at- tended by uncertainty and want of direct- ness, it is thought that England could in- stitute precautionary measures against ex- ecution of insurgent purpose in thd island so injurious to United States. Of the same class of cases does the news contained in the Morning Telegraph of St. Johns, New Brunswick, relate, and the conveyance of contraband mail to Bermuda by Lieuten- ' ant Rooke, of the British army. Incloses extract from London Index in re- gard to the employment of the British flag- to cover property of iasurgent authorities who, in m any instances, own the vessels fly- ing that flag. Incloses extract from dispatch of United States consul at Malta, relative to reports that British naval officers, under assumed names, are engaged in violating blockade. Enlarges in interview with Lord Russell upon aggravated nature of violations au- daciou3y committed by rebels against neu- trality of Great Britain, and urges expedi- ency of more positive action in advance of settlement of difficulties in America. Lord Russell states that cabinet has disapprove* his suggestion to send armed vessel to con- federate authorities with an officer in- structed to remonstrate. In regard to the employment of the British, flag to cover insurgent ownership of block- LXIV ENFOECEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. BLOCKADE-EUNNING^-Contiuued. No. From whom and to whom. Date. Subject. 1864. 590 621 Mi. Adams to Mr. Seward. ...,,. do 901 647 663 Mr. Seward Mr. Adams. to Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. ...do. 728 1026 do ,. Mr. Seward Mr. Adams. to Feb. 4 Max. 18 April 5 April 8 April 21 June 23 July 9 ade runners and the engagement of Lieu- tenant Eooke, of British army, in carry- ing contraband mail to Bermuda. The difficulties which grow out of the tolera- tion of the outrageous abuses of belliger- ent privileges granted to the insurgents. Incloses papers found on steamers taken in violating blockade. Incloses Lord Russell's acknowledgment of Mr. Adams's note covering papers taken in steamers engaged in running the blockr ade of the southern ports. Incloses correspondence with Lord Russell in regard to habitual abuse by insurgents of the belligerent privileges conceded to them by United States, and the consequent suspicion attaching to British subjects en- gaged in violating blockade. To the treat- ment as prisoners of war of British sub- jects found .on board vessels ostensibly British, but really property of insurgents. To the charge against Lieutenant Rooke, of British army, of carrying contraband mail, and to the intentions of James Ash, and Stringer, Pembroke ■& Co., to buUd steamers for confederate belligerents. States that Secretary of Navy has concluded to direct discharge of aliens captured on neutral vessels violating blockade. Incloses acknowledgment of Earl Russell of note in relation to fraudulent use by rebels of British flag to cover their vessels and crew in running blockade. Correspondence with Lord Russell in regard to what appears to admit of no doubt, that every vessel engaged in blockade-running must consent to be at the service of the enemy to aid him in carr3dng on the war. Statement of attorney general of liability of certain persons to prosecution under the enlistment act. Renewal of correspondence with Lord Rus- sell in regard to liability of British sub- jects captured in blockade runners to be treated by United States as enemies. Acknowledging correspondence with Lord Russell in regard to British claim to im- munity for British subjects who engage in furnishing supplies of arms to insurgents in vessels owned or chartered by insur- gent authorities who run the blockade under contract with them. BLOCKADE RUNNING— THE BERMUDA. 31 27 Mr. Wilding to Mr. F.W.Seward. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. 1861. Aug. 16 Aug. 16 Description of Bermuda, a screw steamer built by Fraser, Trenholm & Co. Incloses note to Lord RusseU in regard to equipment in English waters of steaonei ENl^ORCEMENT OF NEUTEALIXy. BLOCKADE-ETJNNING— Continued. r.xT No. From whom a.nrl to whom. Date. Subject. 1 1861. Bermuda to be employed in insurgent ser- vice, and Lord EussoU's acknowledgment. 30 Mr. Adams to Mr. Saward. Aug. S3 Bermuda has sailed, laden with gunpowder and stores. Incloses Lord Eussell's note stating that there is not sufficient evidence to warrant interference with clearance or sailing of Bermuda. 761 •So do Aug. 30 All he can do is to apprise "department in season so as to prevent supplies shipped, as on Bermuda, from reaching United States. Purchase of steamers Leopold, Princess Charlotte, and Southampton. 762 HH do Sept. 6 In regard to comphcity of Fraser, Trenholm & Co. with departure of steamer Bermuda. 763 m Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Sept. 11 ■ Eegrets inefficiency of British laws to pre- vent violations of United States rights. The vigilance that will of necessity be ex- ercised in detecting unlawfiil character of British vessels will bo unpleasant to British government. 763 Mr. Adams to Nov. 22 Informs Lord EusseU of the arrival of the 763 Earl EusseU. ' 1862. steamer Bermuda at the insurgent port of Savannah, and reflections thereon. 16 Mr. Dudley to Mr. Seward. Feb. 14 In regard to contrabantl cargo of steamer Besjmuda. 764 17 : do Feb. 15 la regard to insurgent ownership of Ber- muda. 765 276 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. June 23 Incloses printed copy of record in case of United States vs. Prize steamer Bermuda and cargo. 765 27H do June 25 lucloses Mr. Ashton's communication calling attention to unsigned letter to be found 766 in record of UniteS States vs. Bormvida. BLOCICADE-EUNNING— THE FmGAL. 59 634 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Seward Mr. Adams. to 1861. Oct. 17 1863. June 22 Sailing of Fingal with bark Amelia, laden with cartridges and gutipowder. Informa- tion concerning her movements. In regard to captiire of Fingal near Savannah by United States cruisers. BLOCKADE-EUNNING— THE GLADIATOE. 69 44 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Mr. Whitiug to Mr. Seward. Do. 1861. Nov. 8 Dec. 12 1862. Jan. 19. Equipment of the Gladiator at London In regard to arrival of Gladijitor at Nassau. Colonial secretary's letter upon subject is inclosed. Movement of rebel vessels Caroline alias Kate Lockwood, Isabel alias EUa Warley, aud* Gladiator, in harbor and near Nassau. AC— T- -TOL. 1 LXVI ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTKAUTT. BLOCKADE-RUNNING— ContiiiTied. No. From -whom and to whom. Date. Subject. i 10 101 Mr. Whiting to Mr. Seward. Mr. Dudley to Mr. Seward. do 1862. Feb. 12 Aug. 1 Aug. 8 Movement of rebel vessels and arrival of Catawba at Nassau direct from Charleston. 771 7711 105 77?> - BLOCKADE-RUNNING— THE GEOEGIANA. 301 311 531 368 374 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. ." -do. Mr. Seward Mr. Adams. to Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. do 186a Jan. . ■ 22 Jan. 29 Mar. 28 April 9 April 16 Incloses correspondence with Lord Russell remonstrating against departure of Georgi- ana from Liverpool, and letter from Mr. Morse, consul at London, describing vessel, and correspondence between British au- thorities on same subject. Incloses further correspondence with Lord Russell in regard to stfeamer Georgiana. Incloses communication froili Mr. Whiting in regard to arrival of (Gceorgiana at Nassau, with request that it may be laid before Earl Russell. Is glad to learn that Georgiana has been driven ashore. Incloses note to Lord Russell in regard to arrival of Georgiana at Nassau, covering communication from Mr. Whiting, United States consul at Nassau, and Lord Busaell'a acknowledgment thereof. 772 777 782 782 783 Sitforcenient or neutrality contirauetl in Tolrame II. RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY. CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. RECOGNITION OF REBEL BELLIGERENCY BY GREAT BRIT- AIN AND FRANCE. Mr. Black to Mr. Ballas. [Circular.] No. 304.] Department of State, Washington, February 28, 1861. Sm : You are, of course, aware tliat the election of last November resulted in the choice of Mr. Abraham Lincoln ; that he was the candi- date of the republican or anti-slavery party ; that the preceding discus- sion had been confined almost entirely to topics connected, directly. or indirectly, with the subject of negro slavery ; that every northern State cast its whole electoral vote (except three in New Jersey) for Mr. Lin- coln, while in the whole South the popular sentiment against him was almost absolutely universal. Some of the southern States, immediately after the election, took measures for separating themselves from the Union, and others soon followed their example. Conventions have been called in South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louis- iana, and Texas, and those conventions, in all except the last-named State, have passed ordinances declaring their secession from the federal government. A congress, composed of representatives from the six first-named States, has been assembled for some time at Montgomery, Alabama. By this body a provisional constitution has been framed for what it styles the " Confederated States of America." It is not improbable that persons claiming to represent the States which have thus attempted to throw off their federal obligations will seek a recognition of their independence by the government of Great Britain. In the event of such an effort being made, you are expected by the President to use such means as may in your judgment be proper and necessary to prevent its success. The reasons set forth in the President's message at the opening of the present session of Congress, in support of his opinion that the States have no constitutional power to secede from the Union, are* still unan- swered, and are believed to be unanswerable. The grounds upon which they have attertipted to justify the revolutionary act of severing the bonds which connect them with their sister States are regarded as wholly insufficient. This government has not relinquishecj its constitu- tional jurisdiction within the territory of those States, and does not design to do so. \t must be very evident that it is the right of this government to ask of all foreign powers that the latter shall take no steps which may tend to encourage the revolutionary movement of the seceding States, or in- crease the danger of disaffection in those which still remain loyal. The President feels assured that the government of her BritauDic Majesty will not do anything in these affairs inconsistent with the friendship which this government has always heretofore experienced from her and her 8 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BEITAIN. ancestors. If the independence of the " Confederated States " should be acknowledged by the great powers of Europe, it would tend to disturb the fiiendly relations, diplomatic and commercial, now existing between those powers and the United States. All these are consequences which the court of her Britannic Majesty will not fail to see are adverse to the interests of Great Britain as well as to those of this country. Your familiar knowledge of our political institutions will enable you to explain satisfactorily the causes of our present domestic troubles, and the grounds of the hope still entertained that entire harmony will soon be restored. I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, J. S. BLACK. Geoegb M. Dallas, Esq., London, &c., &c., &c. The same, mutatis mutandis, to W. Preston, Esq., Madrid ; E. G. Fair, Esq., Brussels ; Theo. S. Fay, Esq., Berne ; Jos. A. Wright, Esq., Berlin; J. G. Jones, Esq., Vienna; J. Williams, Esq., Constantino- ple ; Charles J. Faulkner, Esq., Paris ; Henry C. Murphy, Esq., Hague; John Appleton, Esq., St. Petersburg. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dallas. CIKCDLAK. [Communicated to Lord Eussell by Mr. Dallas, April 8 — British Blue Book, No. 1 of 1862, p. 17. — Eelating to tlie civil war in the United States.] [Extracts.] Department op State, Washington, March 9, 1861. SiE : My predecessor, in his dispatch ISo. 304 addressed to you on the 28th of February last, instructed you to use all proper and necessary measures to prevent the success of efforts which may be made by persons claiming to represent those States of this Union in whose name a pro- visional government has been announced to procure a recognition of their independence by the government of Great Britain. I am now instructed by the President of the United States to inform you that, having assumed the administration of the government in pur- suance of an unquestioned election and of the directions of the Consti- tution, he renews the injunction which I have mentioned, and relies upon the exercise of the greatest possible diligence and fidelity on your part to cownteract and prevent the designs of those who would invoke foreign intervention to embarrass or overthrow the republic. When you reflect on the novelty of such designs, their unpatriotic and revolutionary character, and the long train of evils which must follow directly or consequentially from even their partial or temporary success, the President feels assured that you will justly appreciate and cordially approve the caution which prompts this communication. I transmit herewith a copy of the address pronounced by the Presi- dent on taking the constitutional oath of ofiice. It sets forth clearly the errors of the misguided partisans wlio are seeking to dismember the Union, the grounds on Avbich the conduct of those partisans is disal- lowed, and also the general policy which the government will pursue with a view to the preservation of domestic peace and order, and the maintenance and preservation of the federal Union. CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 9 Tou will lose no time in submitting this address to the British minis- ter for foreign affairs, and in assuring him that the President of the United States eufertains a full conflderice in the speedy restoration of the harmony and unity of the goveriuiient by a firm, yet just and liberal bearing, co-operating with the deliberate and loyal action of the Ameri- can people. ****** ##* The United States have had too many assurances and manifestations of the friendship and goodwill of Great Britain to entertain any doubt that these considerations, and such others as your own large experience of the working of our federal system will suggest, will have their just influence with the British government, and will prevent that govern- ment from yielding to solicitations to intervene in any unfriendly way in the domestic concerns of our country. ***** * *## I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. George M. Dallas, Esq., London. The same, mutatis mutandis, to E. G. Fair, Esq., Brussels ; Theo. S. Fay, Esq,, Berne ; Jos. A. Wright, Esq., Berlin ; J. G. Jones, Esq.,, Vienna ; J. Williams, Esq., Constantinople ; Charles J. Faulkner, Esq., Paris; John Appleton, Esq., St. Petersburg ; Henry C. MuriAy, Esq.,. Hague; William Preston, Esq., Madrid. [Inclosure.] Extracts from the inaugural address of President Lincoln delivered on the' fourth of March, 1861. I hold that, in contemplation of universal law, and of the Constitu- tion, the Union of these States is perpetual. Perpetuity is implied, if not expressed, in the fundamental law of all national governments. It is safe to assert that no government proper ever had a provision in its. organic law for its own termination. Continue to execute all the express, provisions of our national Constitution, and the Union will endure for- ever — it being impossible to destroy it except by some action not pro- vided for in the instrument itself. * * # * * «•# * * It follows, from these views, that no State, upon its own mere motion,, can lawfully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void; and that acts of violence, within any State or States, against the authority of the Ujiited States, are insurrectionary, or revolutionary, according to circumstances. I, therefore, consider that, in view of the Constitution and the laws, the Union is un'oroken, and, to the extent of my ability, I shall take, care, as the Constitution itself expressly enjoins upon me, that the laws of the Union be faithfully executed in all tlie States. Doing this I deem to be only a simple duty on my part; and I shall perform it, so far as practicable, unless my rightful masters, the American people, shall withhold the requisite means, or, in some authoritative manner, direct the contrary. I trust this will not be regarded as a menace, but only as the declared purpose of the Union, that it will constitutionally defend, and maintain itself. 10 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. Mr. Dallas to Mr. Seward. [Extracts.] No. 325.] Legation of the United States, London, March 22, 1861. Sir : I liave recently had the honor to receive your dispatches, num- bered 304 and 305. * # * * * # # Having noticed that the dispatch No. 304, bearing date the 28th of February, respecting the newly-formed confederacy of seceded States, was in harmony as well with the views enunciated in the inaugural address on the 4th instant as with those of the presidential message of December last, I lost no time in seeking an interview with her Majesty's principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, and in stating the oppo- sition which I am in that dispatch instructed to make to any recogni- tion by the Queen of England of the independence of those who have thus attempted to throw off their federal obligatioiis. The necessary opportunity was accorded to me on the day after my receipt of the dispatch, yesterday. Lord John Eussell then listened to the communication as one he expected; though on its purport the British cabinet, if they had interchanged opinions at all, had reached no definite conclusion as to their proper course of action., I took the liberty to inquire whether any one professing to represent the southern republic had approached this government on the subject, and his lordship, with prompt frankness, assured me that he felt no hesi- tation in answering in the negative, adding that he had been shown a private letter from which he inferred that accredited ministers or com- missioners, authorized to negotiate for the recognition, would shortly be ^sent by the provisional authorities of Montgomery. I have ,the honor to be, sir, your most obedient servant, G. M. DALLAS. The Hon. the Secretary of State, Washington. [From British Blue Book, "Nortli America," X862, No. 1, p. 14.] No. 19. Lord J. Eussell to Mr. Dallas. Foreign Office, March 21, 1861. Lord John Eussell presents his compliments to Mr. Dallas, and has the honor to transmit to him herewith a draft of a dispatch which he ■proposes to address to Lord Lyons, her Majesty's minister at Washing- ton, with reference to their conversation of yesterday, and to request that Mr. Dallas will be good enough to inform him whether he has cor- .rectly represented the purport of the dispatch from Judge Black. [From British Blue Book, "North America," 1862, No. 1, p. 14.] No. 20. Mr. Dallas to Lord J. Russell. Legation of- the United States, London, March 21, 1861. Mr. Dallas presents his compliments to Lord John Eussell, and returiiing the draft of a proposed dispatch to Lord Lyons, begs, in CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 11 answer to tlie question put to him, to express his opinion that the pilr- port of the note from Judge Black, read to his lordship yesterday, is correctly represented in that dispatch. [From British Blue Book, "North America," 1862, No. 1, p. 14.] No. 21. Lord J. Bussell to Lord Lyons. Foreign Office, March 22, 1861. My Lord: The American minister called upon me yesterday after- noon, and read to me a dispatch of Judge Black, dated the 28th of February. In this dispatch Judge Black expresses his conviction that States which have separated from the United States without any legal or con- stitutional right to do so will not be acknowledged as independent states by Great Britain. Her Majesty's government have shown, he said, so friendly an interest in the welfare of the United States, that it. is due to them to state that the United States have not acknowledged the right of the seceding States tcf claim independence, and do not design to do so. I replied to Mr. Dallas shortly and verbally, stating that, even if the government of the United States had been willing to acknowledge the separation of the seceding States as founded in right, her Majesty's gov- ernment would have seen with great concern the dissolution of the Union which bound together the members of the American republic. That the opposition of the government of the United States to any such separation, and the denial by them of its legality, would make her Majesty's government very reluctant to take any step which might encourage or sanction the separation. That, however, it was impossi- ble to state, at the present moment, in what shape the question might present itself; nor was it in my power to bind the British government to any particular course of conduct in cases of which the circumstances and the significance were at present unknown to us. I am, &c., J. EUSSELL, Mr. Dallas to Mr. Sewav'd. [Extract.] No. 329.] Legation of the United States, London, April 5, 1861. Sir : I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your dispatches, numbered 306 and 307, and a circular, dated the 9th of March, 1861, respecting the probable efforts of persons claimingto represent a southern provisional government to obtain the recognition of their independence by Great Britain. Eespecting this last-mentioned subject, I addressed yesterday, as soon as your instruction was received, a note to her ^Majesty's principal sec- retary of state for foreign affairs, requesting an early interview, deeming it not Impossible that I might be enabled to send you something by this 12 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. steamer. My note, however, is yet unanswered, owing, I presume, to tlie absence of Lord John Eussell from town. The commissioners from the new confederacy have not yet arrived, and may not arrive until late in this month. You were apprised by my dispatch of the 22d ultimo, (K'o. 325,) that, on the receipt from the department of your predecessors No. 304, 1 had lost no time in placing the matter properly before this government. Your own views will be communicated in greater fullness when the opportunity is allowed me. # * * * * * * #^* I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, G. M. DALLAS. The Hon. William H. Setvaed, Secretary of State. Mr. Dallas to Mr. Seward. No. 330.] Legation op the IJnited States, London, April 9, 1861. Sir : Referring to my dispatch of the 5th instant, (No. 329,) I have now the honor to state that Lord John Eussell accorded me an interview at the Foreign Office yesterday, and enabled me to submit fully to his con- sideration the representations of your circular [of March 9] with the inaugural address of the President. We conversed' for some time on the question of recognizing the alleged southern confederacy, of which no representative has yet ap- peared, and may not appear until the end of the month. His lordship assured me with great earnestness that there was not the slightest disposition in the British government to grasp at any advan- tage which might be supposed to arise from the unpleasant domestic differences in the United States, but, on the contrary, that they would be highly gratified if those differences were adjusted and the Union restored to its former unbroken position. I pressed upon him, in concluding, if that were the case — and I was quite convinced that it was — how important it must be that this coun- try and France should abstain, at least for a considerable time, from doing what, by encouraging groundless hopes, would widen a breach still thought capable of being closed. He seemed to think the matter not ripe for decision one way or the other, and remarked that what he had said was all that at present it was in his power to say. The coming of ray successor, Mr. Adams, looked for from week to week, would doubtless be regarded as the appropriate and natural occasion for iinally discussing and determining the question. In the intermediate time, whatever of vigilance and activity may be necessary shall, of course, and as a high duty, be exerted. English opinion tends rather, I apprehend, to the theory that a peace- ful separation may work beneficially for both groups of States and not injuriously affect the rest of the world. They cannot be expected to appreciate the weakness, discredit, complications, and dangers which we instinctively and justly ascribe to disunion. I beg to add that a phase of this subject will be introduced in the House of Commons to-night by Lord Alfred Churchill, and that on the CLAIMS AGAINST GKEAT BRITAIN. 13 15tli instant a motion favoring the recognition will be pressed by Mr. W. H. Gregory, member for Gal way, I have the honor to be, sir, your most obedient servant, G. M. DALLAS. Hon. William H. Sewakd, Secretary of State. [For parliamentary notices relating to belligerent recognition, see Parliamentary and Judicial Appendix No. 1.1 [From Britist Blue Book, "North America," No. 1, p. 19.] No. 26. Lord J. Russell to Lord Lyons. FoEEiGN Opfice, April 12, 1861. Mt Lokd : Mr. Dallas called upon me on the 8th instant, in pursuance of an appointment, and communicated to me a dispatch which he had received from Mr. Seward, United States Secretary of State, and of which I inclose a copy.* There are several passages in this dispatch at which I might have taten exception, but I thought it best not to raise unnecessary ques^ tions; I therefore confined myself to the following observations : I said that it was not the wish or intention of her Majesty's govern- ment to pronounce any judgment on the causes whicibi had induced seven of the United States to secede from the rest. Whether, as to the past, those States had reason to complain that the terms of the compact of union had not been observed, or whether they had reason to apprehend that, for the future, justice would not be done to them, were questions which her Majesty's government did not pretend to decide. They had seen in the United States a free and prosperous com- munity, with which they had been happy to maintain the most amicable relations. Now that a secession had taken place, they were in no hurry to recog- nize the separation as complete and final. But, on the other hand, I could not bind her Majesty's government, nor tell how and when cir^ cumstances might arise which would make a decision necessary. That I must, therefore, decline to enter into any further discussion at the present monient, and could only assure him of our regret at the events which had recently occurred. 1 am, &c., J. EUSSELL. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. [Extracts.] No. 2.] Depaetment of State, Washington, April 10, 1861. , SiK : Although Grea.t Britain and the United States possess adjacent dominions of large extent, and although they divide not very unequally * See circular of March 9, ante. 14 CLAIMS AGAINST GKEAT BRITAIN. a considerable portion of the commerce of the world, yet there are at present only two questions ia debate between them. One of these con- cerns the line of boundary running through Puget's Sound, and involves the title to the island of San Juan. The other relates to a proposition for extinguishing the interest of the Hudson's Bay and Puget's Sound Agricultural Companies in the Territory of Washington . The di scussi on of these questions has hitherto been carried on here, and there is no necessity for removing it to London. It is expected to proceed amicably and result in satisfactory conclusions. It would seem, therefore, on first thought, that you would find nothing more to do in England than to observe and report current events, and to cultivate friendly sentiments there towards the United States. IsTevertheless, the peculiar condition of our country in the present juncture renders these duties a task of con- siderable delicacy. You will readilj' understand me as alluding to the attempts which are being made by a misguided portion of our fellow-citizens to detach some of the States and to combine them in a new organization under the name of the Confederate States of America. The agitators in this bad enter- prise, justly estimating the influence of the European ijowers upon even American affairs, do not mistake in supposing that it would derive sig- nal advantage from a recognition by any of those powers, and especially Great Britain. Your task, therefore, apparently so simple and easy, involves the responsibility of preventing the commission of an act by the government of that country which would be fraught with disaster, per- haps ruin, to our own. ********* It is much to be deplored that our representatives are to meet abroad agents of disunion, seeking foreign aid to effect what, unaided, is already seen to be desperate. You need not be informed that their success in Great Britain would probably render their success easy elsewhere. ^ "fr "fr 'T? 'tF ^ ^ ^ ^ If, as the President does not at all apprehend, you shall unhappily find her Majesty's government tolerating the application of the so-called seceding States, or wavering about it, you will not leave them to suppose for a moment that they can grant that application and remain the friends of the United States. You may even assure them promptly in that case that if they determine to recognize, they may at the same time prepare to enter into alliance with the enemies of this republic. You alone will represent your country at London, and you will represent the whole of it there. When you are asked to divide that duty with others, diplo- matic relations between the government of Great Britain and this gov- ernment wiU be suspended, and will remain so until it shall be seen which of the two is most strongly entrenched in the confidence of their respect- ive nations and of mankind. ********* We freely admit that a nation may, and even ought, to recognize a new state which has absolutely and beyond question effected its independ- ence, and' permanently established its sovereignty ; and that a recogni- tion in such a case affords no just cause of offense to the government of the country from which the new state has so detached itself. On the other hand, we insist that a nation that recognizes a revolutionary state, with a view to aid in effecting its sovereignty and independence, com- mits a great wrong against the nation whose integrity is thus invaded, and makes itself responsible for a just and ample redress. ********* In the circumstances of the present case, it is clear that a recognition CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 15 of the so-called confederate nation must be deemed equivalent to a deliberate resolution by her Majesty's government that this American Union, which has so long constituted a sovereign nation, shall be now permanently dissolved, and cease to exist forever. It remains to bring out distinctly a consideration to which I have already adverted. Great Britain has within the last forty-five years changed character and purpose. She has become a power for pro- duction rather than a power for destruction. She is committed, as it seems to us, to a policy of industry, not of ambition ; a policy of peace, not of w^ar. One has only to compare her present domestic condition with that of any former period to see that this new career on which she has entered is as wise as it is humane and beneficent. Her success in this career requires peace throughout the civilized world, and nowhere so much as on this continent. Eecogni-tion by her of the so-called Confederate States would be intervention and war in this country. Permanent dismemberment of the American Union in consequence of that intervention would be perpetual war— civil war. The new con- federacy, which in that case Great Britain would have aided into existence," must, like any other new state,, seek to expand itself north- ward, westward, and southward. What part of this continent or of the adjacent islands would be expected to remain in peace? The President would regard it as inconsistent with his habitually high consideration for the government and people of Great Britain to allow me to dwell longer on the merely commercial aspects of the question under discussion. Indeed, he will not for a moment believe that, upon consideration of merely financial gain, that government could be induced to lend its aid to a revolution designed to overthrow the institutions of this country, and involving ultimately the destruction of the liberties of the American ijeople. To recognize the indeiiendence of a new state, and so favor, possibly determine, its admission into the family of nations, is the highest possible exercise of sovereign power, because it affects in any case the welfare of two nations, and often the peace of the world. In the European s> stem this x)ower is now seldom attempted to be exercised without invoking a consultation or congress of nations. That system has not been extended to this continent. But there is even a greater necessity for prudence in such cases in regard to American States than in regard to the nations of Europe. A revolutionary change of dynasty, or even a disorganization and recombination of one or many states, therefore, do not long or deeply affect the general interests of society, because the ways of trade and habits of society remain the same. But a radical change effected in the political combinations existing on this continent, followed, as it probably would be, by moral convulsions of incalculable magnitude, would threaten the stability of society through- out the world. Humanity has, indeed, little to hope for, if it shall, in this age of high improvement, be decided without a trial that the principle of interna- tional law, which regards nations as moral persons, bound so to act as to do to each other the least injury and the most good, is merely an abstraction too refined to be reduced into practice by the enlightened nations of western Europe. Seen in the light of this principle, the several nations of the earth constitute one great federal republic. When one- of them casts its suffrages for the admission of a new member into that republic, it ought to act under a profound sense of moral obligation, and be governed by considerations as pure, disinter- 16 CLAIMS AGAINST GEEAT BEITAIN. ested, and elevated as the general interest of society and the advance- ment of human nature. The British empire itself is an aggregation of divers communities which cover a large portion of the earth and embrace one-flfth of its entire population. Some, at least, of these communities are held to their places in that system by bonds as fragile as the obligations of our own federal Union. The Strain will some time come which is to try the strength of these bonds, though it will be of a different kind from that which is trying the cords of our confederation. Would it be wise for her Majesty's government on this occasion to set a dangerous precedent, or provoke retaliation? If Scotland and Ireland are at last reduced to quiet contentment, has Great Britain no dependency, island, or province left exposed along the whole circle of her empire, from Gibral- tar through the West Indies and Canada till ft begins again on the southern extremity of Africa 1 The President will not dwell on the pleasing recollection that Great Britain, not yet a year ago, manifested by' marked attention to the United States her desire for a cordial reunion, which, all ancient preju- dices and passions being buried, should be a pledge of mutual interest and sympathy forever thereafter. The United States are not indifferent to the circumstances of common descent, language, customs, sentiments, and religion, which recommend a closer sympathy between themselves and Great Britain than either might expect in its intercourse with any other nation. The United States are one of many nations which have sprung from Great Britain herself. Other such nations are rising up in various parts of the globe. It has been thought by many who have studied the philosophy of modern history profoundly that the success of the nations thus deriving their descent from Great Britain might, through many ages, reflect back upon that kingdom the proper glories of its own great career. The government and people of Great Britain may mistake their commercial interests, but they cannot become either unnatural or indifferent to the impulses of an undying ambition to be distinguished as the leaders of the nations in the ways of civilization and humanity. I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. President Lincoln's proclamation of April 15, 1861, calling for 75,000 IState militia, to suppress the insurrection. BY THE PEESIDENT OP THE "UNITED STATES. A proclamation. Whereas the laws of the United States have been for some time past, and now are, opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals by law : Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the militia of the several States of the Union, to the aggregate number of seventy- CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 17 five thousand, in order to suppress said combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed. The details for this object will be immediately communicated to the State authorities through the War Department. I appeal to all lojal citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our national Union, and the perpetuity of popular government, and to redress wrongs already long enough endured. I deem it proper to say that the first service assigned to the forces hereby called forth will probably be to repossess the forts, places, and property which have been seized from the Union ; and in every event the utmost care will be observed, consistency with the objects afore- said, to avoid any devastation, any destruction of or interference with property, or any disturbance of peaceful citizens in any part of the country. And I hereby command the persons composing the combinations aforesaid to disperse and retire peaceably to their respective abodes within twenty days from this date. Deeming that the present condition of public affairs presents an extraordinary occasion, I do hereby, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution, convene both houses of Congress. Senators and representatives are therefore summoned to assemble at their respective chambers, at twelve o'clock, noon, on Thursday, the fourth day of July next, then and there to consider and determine such measures as, in their wisdom, the public safety and interest may seem to demand. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed. Done at the city of Washington, this fifteenth day of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-one, and of the iadependence of the United States the eighty-fifth. [L, s.] ABRAHAM LINCOLK By the President : William H. Seward, Secretary of State. Mr. Faulkner to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] No. 119.] Legation op the United States, Paris, April 16, 1861. Sir: I called to-day upon Mr. Thouvenel at the ministry of foreign affairs, and was promptly admitted to an interview. Agreeably to your request, I handed to him a copy of the inaugural address of President Lincolu, and added that 1 was instructed by you to say to him that it embraced the views of the President of the United States upon the difl- culties which now disturbed the harmony of the American Union, and also an exposition of the general policy which it was the purpose of the government to pursue with a view to the preservation of domestic peace and the maintenance of the federal Union. I said to him that the President thought it not improbable that an appeal would be made before long by the "Confederated States" to 2 A 0— VOL. I 18 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. foreign powers, and, among others, to the government of France, for the recognition of their independence; that no such appeal having yet been made, it was premature and out of place to discuss any of the points involved in that delicate and important inquiry; but the government of the United States desired the fact to be known that, whenever any such application shaU be made, it will meet with opposition from the minister who shall then represent that government at this court. Mr. Thouvenel, in reply, said that no application had yet been made to him by the Confederated States, in any form, for the recognition of their independence; that the French government was not in the habit of acting hastily upon such questions, as might be seen by its tardiness in recognizing the new kingdom of Italy ; that he believed the mainte- nance of the federal Union, in its integrity, was to be desired for the benefit of the people Korth and South, as well as for the interests of France, and the government of the United States might rest well assured that no hasty or precipitate action would be taken on that subject by the Emperor. But while he gave utterance of these views, he was equally bound to say that the practice and usage of the present century had fully established the right of de facto governments to recognition when a proper case was made out for the decision of foreign powers. Here the official interview ended. I am, very respectfijlly, your obedient servant, CEfAS. J. FAULKNEE. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. [From Britisli Blue Book, No. 1, 1862, "North America," p. 23.] No. 31. Lord Lyons to Lord J. Bussell. [Extract.] Washington, Aj^ril 22, 1861. I have the honor to inclose copies of a proclamation of the President of the southern confederacy inviting application for letters of marque and also a proclamation of the President of the United States declaring that southern privateers will be treated as pirates, and announcing a blockade of the southern ports. i lost no time in taking measures to communicate the contents of these proclamations as fast as possible, both by telegraph and post, to Eear- Admiral Sir Alexander MUne. The subsequent interruption of commu- nication with the North has prevented my learning how far my measures were successful. I am informed that an official notification of the blockade will be sent to the foreign legations here in the course of the day. Under ordinary circumstances the season during which British vessels frequent soutbern ports closes in May and does not re-open until October. I understand that some alarm is felt in the North respecting the south- ern privateers, but it must be supposed that the navy of the United States wUl suffice to arrest their operations. If these privateers, how- ever, make any head in the GuK of Mexico, it may perhaps be advisable CLAIMS AGAINST GEEAT BEITAIN. 19 that a British squadron should be sent there to insure the safety of the British merchant vessels; [For communication of official copy of proclamation of the President of April 19, see Lord Lyons to Lord Russell, of the 27th of April. Mr, Seward to Mr. Dayton. [Extracts.] No. 3.] Department op State, Washington, April 22, 1861. The agitators ia this case have, perhaps, not unniaturally carried their bad cause before foreign states by an appeal for recognition of the inde- pendence they have proclaimed, and which they are committed to estab- lish by arms. Prudence requires liiat we oppose that appeal. The Presi- dent believes that you will be able to do this in such a manner as will at once comport with the high consideration for his Imperial Majesty which this government habitually entertains, and a due sense of the dignity and honor of the American people. The President neither expects nor desires any intervention, or even any favor, &om the government of France, or any other, in this emer- gency. Whatever else he may consent to do, he wUl never invoke nor even admit foreign interference or influence in this or any other contro- versy in which the government of the United States may be engaged with any portion of the American people. It has been simply his aim to show that the present controversy furnishes no one ground on which a great and friendly power, like France, can justly lend aid or sympathy to the party engaged in insurrection, and therefore he instructs you to insist on the practice of neutrality by the government of the Emperor, as all our representatives are instructed to insist on the neutrality of the several powers to which they are accredited. Not entertaining the least apprehension of the departure from that course by his Majesty's government, it is not without some reluctance that the President consents to the suggestion of some considerations affecting France herself, which you may urge in support of it. ******** Foreign intervention would oblige us to treat those who should yield it as allies of the insurrectionary party, and to carry on the war against them as enemies. The case would not be relieved, but, on tha contrary, would only be aggravated, if several European states should combine in that intervention. The President and the people of the United States deem the Union, which would then be at stake, worth aU the cost and all the sacrifices of a contest with the world in arms, if such a contest should prove iaevitable. ******** I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient seivant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Hon. William L. Dayton, t&c, d&c, <&c. 20 ■ CLAIMS AGAINST GEEAT BRITAIN. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 4.] ' Dbpaetment op State, Washington, April 27, 1861. SiE : A dispatch has just been received from Mr. Dallas, dated the 9th of April instant, the record of which (No. 330) you doubtless will find in the archives of the legation when you shall have arrived at Loudon. In that paper Mr. Dallas states that he had had a conversation with Lord John Eussell, the minister of foreign affairs of her Britannic Majes- ty's government, on the subject of a protest against any recognition of the so-called Confederate States of America, the protest having been pre- sented to him by Mr. Dallas, in obedience to a circular letter of instruc- tions sent to him from this department, under the date of the 9th ultimo. Mr. Dallas represents that his lordship assured him, with great earn- estness, that there was not the slightest disposition in the British gov- ernment to grasp at any advantage which might be supposed to arise from the unpleasant domestic differences in the United States; but, on the contrary, that they would be highly gratified if those differences were adjusted and the Union restored to its former unbroken position. This, by itself, would be very gratifying to the President. Mr. Dallas, however, adds that he endeavored to impress upon his lordship how important it must be that Great Britain and France should abstain, at least for a considerable time, from doing what, by encouraging groundless hopes, would widen a breach still thought capable of being closed; but that his lordship seemed to think the matter not ripe for decision one way or the other, and remarked that what he had already said was all that at present it was in his power to say. When you shall have read the instructions at large which have been sent to you, you will hardly need to be told that these last remarks of his lordship are by no means satisfactory to this government. Her Britannic Majesty's government is at liberty to choose whether it will retain the friendship of this government by refusing aU aid and comfort to its ene- mies, now in flagrant rebellion against it, as we think the treaties exist- ing between the two countries require, or whether the government of her Majesty will take the precarious benefits of a difterent course. You will lose no time in making known to her Britannic Majesty's government that the President regards the answer of his lordship as possibly indicating a policy that this government would be obliged to deem injurious to its rights and derogating from its dignity. I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Chaeles Feancis Adams, Esq., n the right of the southern States to claim to be recognized as a belligerent, and, as such, invested with all the rights and prerogatives of a bellig- erent. I think it right to give your lordship this timely notice of the view taken by her Majesty's government of the present state of affairs in North America, and her Majesty's government do not wish you to make any mystery of that view. I shall send your lordship, by an early opportunity, such further infor- mation on these matters as may be required for your gTiidance ; at pres- ent, I have only to add that no expression of regret that you may employ at the present disastrous state of affairs will too strongly declare the feelings with which her Majesty's government contemplate all the evils which cannot fail to result from it. I am, &c., • . J. EUSSELL. [From British Blue Book, " North America," No. 1, 1862, p. 33.] No. 33. Lord J. Bussell to Lord Lyons. * FoEEiGN Oppice, May 11, 1861. My Loed : On Saturday last I received at my house Mr. Yancey, Mr. Mann, and Judge Eost, the three gentlemen deputed by the southern confederacy to obtain their recognition as an independent state. One of these gentlemen, speaking for the others, dilated on the causes which 38 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. had induced tlie southern States to secede from the northern. The prin- cipal of these causes, he said, was not slavery, but the very high price which, for the sake of protecting the northern manufacturers, the south were obliged to pay for the manufactured goods which they required. One of the first acts of the southern congress was to reduce these duties, and, to prove their sincerity, he gave as an instance that Louisiana had given up altogether that protection on her sugar which she enjoyed by the legislation of the United States. As a proof of the jriches of the south, he stated that of $350,000,000 of exports of produce to foreign countries, $270,000,000 were furnished by the southern States. I said that I could hold no ofScial commupication with the delegates of the southern States. That, however, when the question of recogni- tion came to be formally discussed, there were two points upon which inquiry must be made : first, whether the body seeking recognition could maintain its position as an independent state ; secondly, in what man- ner it was proposed to maintain relations with foreign states. After speaking at some length on the first of these points, and alluding to the news of the secession of Virginia and other intelligence favorable to their cause, these gentlemen called my attention to the article in their constitution prohibiting the slave trade. I said that it was alleged very currently that if the slave States found that they could not compete successfully with the cotton of other coun- tries they would revive the slave trade for the purpose of diminishing the cost of production. They said this was a suspicion unsupported by any proof. The fact was, that they had prohibited the slave trade, and did not mean to revive it. They pointed to the new tariff of the United States, as a proof that British manufactures would be nearly excluded from the north, and freely admitted in the south. Other observations were made, but not of very great importance. The delegates concluded by stating that they should remain in London for the present, in the hope that the recognition of the southern confederacy would not be long delayed. < I am, &c., J. EUSSELL. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extracts.] No. 1.] Legation op the United States, London, May 17, 1861. Sir : I have the satisfaction to announce my safe arrival at this place on Monday evening, the 13th of this month. The steamer reached Liver- pool at eleven in the morning, where I was received with the utmost kindness, and strongly solicited to remain at least one day. A large deputation of the American Chamber of Commerce waited upon me and delivered an address, to which I made a brief reply. Both have been printed in the newspapers, and I transmit a copy of the Times containing them. I could not fail to observe, in the course of these proceedings, the great anxiety and the fluctuating, sentiment that prevail in regard to the probable issue of affairs in America. I could also perceive that my arrival had been expected with far more solicitude than I had anticipated. It was not disguised from me that a supposed community of interest in the cotton culture was weighing heavily in that city in favor of the dis- affected, and that much misapprehension prevailed as to the relative CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 39 position of parties in the United States, wlaich it was of some consequence to dispel. To this end it had beeu the wish that I could have found it convenient to make a longer stay in the place. Under other circumstances, I might have so far deferred to these rep- resentations as to delay my departure for twenty-four hours. But, on the other hand, some incidental allusions to the state of things in London convinced me of the importance of losing no time on my way. Accord- ingly, I took the next train in the afternoon, and was in a condition to proceed at once to business on the morning of Tuesday, the 14th. In the interval between my departure from Boston on the 1st and my arrival on the 14th, I discovered that some events had taken place deserving of attention. The agents of the so-called Confederate States had arrived, and, as it is supposed, through their instigation, certain inquiries and motions had been initiated in Parliament for the purpose of developing the views of the ministry in regard to American affairs. I allude more particularly to the questions proposed by Mr. Gregory, of Galway, and to the motion of Mr. Horsfall, the member for Liverpool, touching the effect of the blockade proclaimed by the President against the southern ports. The answer given by Lord John Eussell, in the proceedings of the 6th of May, will, of course, have attracted your attention long before these lines meet your eye. I need not say that it excited general sur- prise, especially among those most friendly to the government of the United States. There seemed to be not a little precipitation in at once raising the disaffected States up to the level of a belligerent power, before it had developed a single one of the real elements which consti- tute military efficiency outside of its geographical limits. The case of the Greeks was by no means a parallel case, for the declaration had not been made until such time had intervened as was necessary to prove, by the very words quoted by Lord John Eussell from the instructions of ■ the British government, that the power was sufficient " to, cover the sea with its cruisers." Whereas, in the presentinstance, there was no evidence to show, as yet, the existence of a single privateer afloat. The inference seemed almost inevitable, that there existed a disposition, at least, not to chill the hopes of those who are now drawing the very breath of life only from the expectation of sympathy in Great Britain. Yet, I am not quite prepared to say that there is just ground for the idea. On the contrary, I am led to believe, from the incidental discussion afterwards held in both houses, as weU as from other information, that the language of Lord John Eussell was viewed as not altogether sufficiently guarded, and that the ministry as a whole are not prepared to countenance any such conclusion. There are still other reasons which occasion in me great surprise at the action of his lordship. I need not say that I was received by my predecessor, Mr. Dallas, with the greatest kindness and cordiality. I immediately learned from him that he had declined himself to enter into any discussions on the subject, because he knew that I was already on my way out, and that 1 should probably come fully possessed of the views of my government, and ready to communicate them freely to the authorities here. To this end, he had already concerted with Lord John Eussell the earliest possible measures for my presentation and for a con- ference with him. * * On Tuesday morning Mr. Dallas called on me to accompany him on his visit to Lord John Eussell, at his house, at eleven o'clock. Great was our disappointment, however, to find that he had been suddenly caUed away, at an early hour, to visit his brother, the Duke of Bedford, at Woburn Abbey, who was very ill, and who actually died at two o'clock in the afternoon of that day. This, of course, has put an end to all further communication with him for the present. I 40 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BEITAIN. very much regretted this circumstance, as I Should have been glad to converse with him prior to the final action upon the proclamation ^hicli Avas adopted by the privy council, and which was issued in the Gazette on the very same day. A copy of that proclamation is to be found in the Times of the 15th of May, the same paper which I have already desired to transmit for another purpose. I submit it to your consideration with- out comment. Feeling doubtful how the informal arrangement of Lord John Eussell might have been affected by his sudden departure, I at once addressed to him the customary announcement of my arrival, and a request for an audience of her Majesty at an early day. This brought me immediate replies from the minister and from his secretary, Mr. Hammond, con- firming the appointment of Thursday (yesterday) as the time for my presentation, whilst the latter gentleman notified me that in the absence of Lord John Eussell, Lord Palmerston would be in waiting at the palace at three o'clock to present me. At the same time Mr. Dallas received a similar notification, appointing the same hour and place for his audi- ence of leave. This arrangement was fully carried out yesterday accord- ing to the programme. Mr. Dallas was introduced first, and took his leave, after which I presented my credentials, with a few words express- ive of the desire of my government to maintain the friendly relations existing between the two countries; and thus I became the recognized minister. Thus an end is put to all the speculations which have been set afloat in some quarters, for interested j)urposes, touching the probable position of the minister of the United States at this court. I might add, that so far I haA^e every reason to be fully satisfied with the reception which I have met with from everybody. Fortunately, the news which came from the United States by the same steamer which brought me was calcu- lated to dispel many of the illusions that had been, industriously elab- orated during the period of isolation of the city of Washington, and to confirm the faith of those who had permitted themselves to doubt whether all government in the United States was of any more cohesive- uess than a rope of sand. Yet, I cannot say that the public opinion is yet exactly what we would wish it. Much depends upon the course of things in the United States, and the firmness and energy made visible in the direction of affairs. The morning papers contain a report of the debate in the House of Lords on the Queen's proclamation, to which I beg to call your particular attention. I cannot say that the tone of it is generally such as I could wish. There is undoubtedly a considerable influence at vork here, both in and out of the ministry, which must be met and counteracted at as early a moment as practicable. Mr. Gregory yesterday gave notice of a post- ponement of the consideration of his motion until the 7th of June. The reason assigned is the situation of Lord John Eussell. * * The same cause, however, which postpones this debate also delays my opportuni- ties of conference with the minister. My wish has been to confer with him rather than with any of the subordinates, for reasons which will readily occur to you. S"ext week come the Whitsuntide holidays, and the adjournment of Parliament for ten days, during which little can be done with effect. I propose, nevertheless, at once to apply for a con- ference at as early a period as possible. ****** # I have the honor to be your obedient servant, GHAELES FEANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. CLAIMS AGAINST GRE.IT BRITAIN. 41 P. S. — I have this moment received your dispatches JSTo. 3 and No. 4. They are of such importance that I immediately addressed a note to the foreign office requesting an early interview. [For debate referred to see Parliamentary and Judicial Appendix, Qiteen's Proclamation of May 13, 18G1. [From tlie London Times of ^ay 15, 1861.] IFrom Tuesday's Gazette.^ By the Queen. — A Pkoclasiation. ViCTOEIA E. Whereas we are happily at peace with all sovereigns, powers, and states : And whereas hostilities have unhappily commenced between the gov- ernment, of the United States of America and certain States styling themselves the Confederate States of America: And whereas we, being at peace with the government of the United States, have declared our royal determination to maintain a strict and impartial neutrality in the contest between the said contending parties : 1\'e therefore have thought lit, by [and with J the advice of our privy council, to issue this our royal proclamation : And we do hereby strictly charge and command all our loving subjects to observe a strict neutrality in and during the aforesaid hostilities, and to abstain from violating or contravening either the laws and statutes of the realm in this behalf, or the law of nations in relation thereto, as they will answer to the contrary at their peril : And whereas in and by a certain statute made and passed in the fifty- ninth year of his Majesty King George the Third, intituled "An act to prevent the enlisting, or engagement of his Majesty's subjects to serve in a foreign service, and the fitting out or equipping, in his Majesty's dominions, vessels for warlike purposes, without his Majesty's license," it is, among other things, declared and enacted as follows: "That if any natural-born subject of his Majesty, his heirs and suc- cessors, without the leave or license of his Majesty, his heirs or succes- sors, for that iDurpose first had and obtained, under the sign-manual of his Majesty, his heirs Or successors, or signified by order in council, or by proclamation of his Majesty, his heirs or successors, shall take or accept, or shall agree to take or accept, any military commission, or shall otherwise enter into the military service, as a commissioned or non- commissioned officer, or shall enlist or enter himself to enlist, or shall agree to enlist or to enter himself to serve as a soldier, or to be employed or shall serve in any warlike or military operation in the service of or for or under or in aid of any foreign prince, state, potentate, colony, province, or part of any province or people, or of any person or persons exercising, or assuming to exercise, the pow«rs of government in or over any foreign country, colony, province, or part of any province or people, either as an officer or soldier, or in any other military capacity; or if any natural-born subject of his Majesty shall, without such leave or license as aforesaid, accept, or agree to take or accept, any commission, warrant, or appointment as an officer, or shall enlist or enter himself, or shall agree to enlist or enter himself, to serve as a sailor or marine, or to 42 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. be employed, or engaged, or shall serve ia and on board any ship or ves- sel of war, or in and on board any ship or vessel used or fitted out, or equipped or intended to be used for any warlike purpose, in the service of or for or under or in aid of any foreign power, prince, state, potentate, colony, province, or part of any province or people, or of any person or persons exercising, or assuming to exercise, the powers of government in or over any foreign country, colony, province, or part of any province or people; or if any natural-born subject of his Majesty shall, without such leave and license as aforesaid, engage, contract, or agree to go, or shall go to any foreign state, country, colony, province, or part of any province, or to any place beyond the seas, with an intent or in order to enlist or enter himself to serve, or with intent to serve, in any warlike or military operation whatever, whether by land or by sea, in the service of or for or under or in aid of any foreign prince, state, potentate, colony, prov- ince, or part of any province or people, or in the service of or under or in aid of any person or persons exercising, or assuming to exercise, the powers of government in or over any foreign country, colony, province, or part of any province or people, either as an officer or a soldier, or in any other military capacity, or as an officer or sailor, or marine, in any such ship or vessel as aforesaid, although no enlisting money or pay or reward shall have been or shall be in any or either of the cases aforesaid actually paid to or received by him, or by any person to or for his use or benefit ; or if any person whatever, within the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, or in any part of his Majesty's dominions elsewhere, or in any country, colony, settlement, island, or place belong- ing to or subject to his Majesty, shall hire, retain, engage, or procure, or shall attempt or endeavor to hire, retain, engage, or procure, any person or persons whatever to enlist, or to enter or engage to enlist, or to serve or to be employed in any such service or employment as aforesaid, as an officer, soldier, sailor, or marine, either in land or sea service, for or under or in aid of any foreign prince, state, potentate, colony, i^rovince, or part of any province or people, or for or under or in aid of any person or per- sons exercising, or assuming to exercise, any powers of government as aforesaid, or to go or to agree to go or embark from any part of his Majesty's dominions, for the purpose or with intent to be so enlisted, entered, engaged, or employed as aforesaid, whether any enlisting money, pay, or reward shall have been or shall be actually given or received, or not; in any or either of such cases, every person so offending shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon being convicted thereof, upon any information or indictment, shall be punishablie by fine and imprisonment, or either of them, at the discretion of the court before which such offender shall be convicted." And it is in and by the said act further enacted — " That if any person, within any part of the United Kingdom, or in any part of his Majesty's dominions beyond the seas, shall, without the leave and license of his Majesty for that purpose first had and obtained as aforesaid, equip, furnish, fit out, or arm, or attempt or endeavor to equip, furnish, fit out, or arm, or procure to be equipped, furnished, fitted out, or armed, or shall knowingly aid, assist, or be concerned in the equipping, furnishing, fitting out, or arming of any ship or vessel, with intent or in order that such ship or vessel shall be employed in the ser- vice of any foreign prince, state, or potentate, or of any foreig-n colony, province, or part of any province or people, or of 'any person or persons exercising, or assuming to exercise, any powers of government in or over any foreign state, colony, province, or part of any province or people, as a transport or store-ship, or with intent to cruise or commit hostiLLties CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 43 against any prince, state, or potentate, or against the subjects or citizens of any prince, state, or potentate, or against the persons exercising, or assuming to exercise, the powers of government in any colony, province, or part of any province or country, er a,gainst the inhabitants of any foreign colony, province, or part of any province or country, with whom his Majesty shall not then be at war; or shall, within the United King- dom, or any of his Majesty's dominions, or in any settlement, colony, territory, island, or place belonging or subject to his Majesty, issue or deliver any commission for any ship or vessel, to the intent that such ship or vessel shall be employed as aforesaid, every such person so offend- ing shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall, upon conviction thereof, upon any information or indictment, be punished by fine and imprisonment, or either of them, at the discretion of the court in which such oifender shall be convicted; and every such ship or vessel, with the tackle, apparel and furniture, together with all the materials, arms, am- munition, and stores, which may belong to or be on board of any such ship or vessel, shall be forfeited ; and it shall be lawful for any officer of his Majesty's customs or excise, or any oflflcer of his Majesty's navy, who is by law empowered to make seizures for any forfeiture incurred under any of the laws of customs or excise, or the laws of trade and naviga- tion, to seize such ships and vessels aforesaid, and in such places, and in such manner in which the officers of his Majesty's customs or excise and the officers of his Majesty's navy are empowered respectively to make seizures under the laws of customs and excise, or under the laws of trade and navigation; and that every such ship and vessel, with the tackle, apparel, and furniture, together with all the materials, arms, ammuni- tion, and stores which may belong to or be on board of such ship or ves- sel, may be prosecuted and condemned in the like manner and in such courts as ships or vessels may be prosecuted and condemned for any breach of the laws made for the protection of the revenues of customs and excise, or of the laws of trade and navigation." And it is in and by the said act further enacted — " That if any person in any part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, or in any part of his Majesty's dominions beyond the seas, without the leave and license of his Majesty for that purpose first had and obtained as aforesaid, shall, by adding to the number of the guns of such vessel, or by changing those on board for other guns, or by the addition of any equipment for war, increase or augment, or procure to be increased or augmented, or shall be knowingly concerned in increasing or augmenting, the warlike force of any ship or vessel of war, or cruiser, or other armed vessel, which at the time of her arrival in any part of the United Kingdom, or any of his Majesty's dominions, was a ship of war, cruiser, or armed vessel in the service of any foreign prince, state, or potentate, or of any person or persons exercising or assuming to exercise any powers of government in or over any colony, province, or part of any province or people belonging to the subjects of any such prince, state, or potentate, or to the inhabitants of any colony, province, or part of any province or country raider the control of any person or persons so exercising, or assuming to exercise, the powers of government, every such person so oflfending shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall, upon being convicted thereof, upon any infor- mation or indictment, be punished by flue and imprisonment, or either of them, at the discretion of the court before which such offender shall be convicted." iiTow, in order that none of our subjects may rmwarily render them- selves liable to the penalties imposed by the said statute, we do hereby 44 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. strictly command that no person or persons whosoever do commit any act, matter, or thing -whatsoever, contrary to the provisions of the said statute, upon pain of the several penalties by the said statute imposed, and of our high displeasure. And we do hereby farther warn all our loving subjects, and all per- sons whatsoever entitled to our p'i'otection, that if any of them shall presume, in contempt of this our royal proclamation, and of our high displeasure, to do any acts in derogation of their duty, as subjects of a neutral sovereign in the said contest, or in violation or contravention of the' law of nations in that behalf; as, for example, and more especially, by entering into the military service of either of the said contending parties, as commissioned or non-commissioned officers or soldiers; or by serving as officers, sailors, or marines on board any ship or vessel of war or transport of or in the service of either of the said contending parties; or by serving as officers, sailors, or marines on board any pri- vateer bearing letters of marque of or from either of the said contend- ing parties ; or by engaging to go or going to any place beyond the seas with intent to enlist or engage in any such service, or by procuring or attempting to procure, within her Majesty's dominions at home or abroad, others to do so ; or by fitting out, arming, or equipping any ship or vessel to be employed as a ship of war or privateer or transport by either of the said contending parties ; or by breaking or endeavoring to break any blockade lawfully and actually established by or on behalf of either of the said contending parties ; or by carrying officers, soldiers, dispatches, arms, military stores, or materials, or any article or articles considered and deemed to be contraband of war, according to the law or modern usage of nations, for the use or service of either of the said con- tending parties; all persons so offending will incur and be liable to the several penalties and penal consequences by the said statute or by the law jaf nations in that behalf imposed or denounced. And we do hereby declare, that all our subjects and persons entitled to our protection, who may misconduct themselves in the premises, will do so at their peril and of their own wrong, and that they will in nowise obtain any protection from us against any liabilities or penal conse- quences, but will, on the contrary, incur our high displeasure by such misconduct. Given at our court at the White Lodge, Eichmond Park, this thir- teenth day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-one, and in the twenty-fourth year of our reign. God save the Queen. [The above has been compared with the proclamation as published in the British Blue Book, and the difference indicated by inclosing the words which j(,ppear in the Times, but not in the Blue Book, in brackets. [For subsequent proclamations and declarations of other j)owers, see General Appendix, No. 1.] DECLAEATION OF PAEIS. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. [Circiilar.] Fo. 3.] Dbpaetment op State, Washington, April 24, 1861. Sir : The advocates of benevolence, and the believers in human pro- gress, encouraged by the slow though marked meliorations of the bar- CLAIMS AGAINST GEEAT BRITAIN, 45 barities of war wliicli have obtained in raoderri timea, have been, as you are well aware, recently engaged with much assiduity in endeavoring to effect some modificatio]; of the law of nations in regard to the rights of neutrals in maritime war. In the spirit of the movement, the President of the United States, in the year 1854, submitted to the sev- eral maritime nations two propositions, to which he solicited their assent as permanent priaciples of international law, which were as follows : 1. Free ships make free goods ; that is to say, .that the effects or goods belonging to subjects or citizens of a power or state, at war, are free from capture or confiscation when found on board of neutral vessels, with the exception of articles contraband of war. 2. That the propertj^ of neutrals on board an enemy's vessel is not sub- ject to confiscation unless the same be contraband of war. Several of the governments to which these propositions were submit- ted expressed their williugness to accept them, while some others, which were then in a state of war, intimated a desire to defer acting thereon until the return of peace should present what they thought would be a more auspicious season for such interesting negotiations. On the 16th of April, 1856, a congress was in session at Paris. It con- sisted of several maritime powers, represented by their plenipotentiaries, namely, Great Britain, Austria. France, Eussia, Prussia, Sardinia and Tu.rkey. That congress, having taken up the general subject to which allusion has already been made in this letter, on the day before mentioned, came to an agreement, which they adopted in the form of a declaration, to the effect following, namely : 1. Privateering is and remains abolished. 2. The neutral flag covers enemy's goods, with the exception of con- traband of war. 3. ]Sreutral goods, with the exception of contraband of war, are not liable to capture under enemy's flag. 4. Blockades, in order to be binding, must be effective ; that is to say, maintained by forces sufficient really to prevent access to the coast of the enemy. The agxeement pledged the parties constituting the congress to bring the declaration thus made to the knowledge of the states which had not been represented in that body, and to invite them to accede to it. The congress, however, at the same time insisted, in the first place, that the declaration should be binding only on the powers who were or should become parties to it, as one whole and indivisible compact; and, secondly, that the parties who had agreed, and those who should afterwards accede to it, should, after the adoption of the same, enter into no arrangement on the application of maritime law in time 6f war without stipulating for a strict observance of the four points resolved, by the declaration. , The declaration which I have thus substantially recited, of course, pre- vented aU the powers which became parties to it from accepting the two propositions which have been before submitted to the maritime nations by the President of the United States. The declaration was, in due time, submitted by the governments rep- resented in the congress at Paris to the government of the United ' States. The President, about the 14th of July, 1856, made known to the states concerned his unwillingness to accede to the declaration/ In making that announcement on behalf of this government, my prede- cessor, Mr. Maroy, called the attention of those states to the following points, namely : First. That the second and third propositions contained in the Paris 46 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BEITAIN. declaration are substantially the same with the two propositions which had before been submitted to the maritime states by the President. Second. That the Paris declaration, with the .conditions annexed, was inadmissible by the United States in three respects, namely : 1st. That the government of the United States could not give its assent to the first proposition contained in the declaration, namely, that " Privateer- ing is and remains abolished," although it was willing to accept it with an amendment which should exempt the private property of individ- uals, though belonging to belligerent states, from seizure and confiscation by national vessels in maritime war. 2d. That for this reason the stip- ulation annexed to the declaration, viz. : that the four propositions must be taken altogether or rejected altogether, withqut modification, could not be allowed. 3d. That the farther condition annexed to the declaration, which provided that the parties acceding to it should enter into no negotiation for any modification of the law of maritime war with the nations, which should not contain the four points contained in the Paris declaration, seemed inconsistent with a proper regard to the national sovereignty of the United States. On the 29th of July, 1856, Mr. Mason, then minister of the United States at Paris, was instructed by the President i^ propose to the gov- ernment of France to enter into an arrangement for its adherence, with the United States, to the four principles of the declaration of the Con- gress of Paris, provided the first of them should be amended as specified in Mr. Marcy's note to the Count de Sartiges on the 28th of July, 1856. Mr. Mason accordingly brought the subject to the notice of the imperial government of Prance, which was disposed to entertaia the matter favorably, but which failed to communicate its decision on the subject to him. Similar instructions regarding the matter were addressed by this department to Mr. Dallas, our minister at London, on the 31st day of January, 1857 ; but the proposition above referred to had not been directly presented to the British government by him when the adminis- tration of this government by Franklin Pierce, during whose term these proceedings occurred, came to an end on the 3d of March, 1857, and was succeeded by that of James Buchanan, who directed the negotiations to be arrested for the purpose of enabling him to examine the questions involved, and they have ever since remained in that state of suspension. The President of the United States has now taken the subject into consideration, and he is prepared to communicate his views upon it, with a disposition to bring the negotiation to a speedy and satisfactory con- clusion. • For that purpose, you are hereby instructed to seek an early opportu- nity to call the attention of her Majesty's government to the subject, and to ascertain whether it remains disposed to renew negotiations for the accession of the government of the United States to the declaration of the Paris congress, with the conditions annexed by that body to the same; and if you shall find that government so disposed, you will then enter into a convention to that effect, substantially in the form of a pro- ject for that purpose herewith transmitted to you; the convention to take effect from the time when the due ratifications of the same shall have been exchanged. It is presumed that you will need no special explanation of the sentiments of the President on this subject for the purpose of conducting the necessary conferences with the government to which you are accredited. Its assent is expected on the ground that the proposition is accepted at its suggestion, and in the form it has pro- posed. For your own information, it will be sufficient to say that the President adheres to the opinion expressed by my predecessor, Mr. CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 47 Maroy, that it would be eminently desirable for the good of all nations that the property and effects of private individuals, not contraband^ should be exempt from seizure and confiscation by national vessels in maritime war. If the time and circumstances were propitious to a pros- ecution of the negotiation with that object in view, he would direct that it shoidd be assiduously pursued. But the right season seems to have passed, at least for the present. Europe seems once more on the verge of quite general wars. On the other hand, a portion of the American people have raised the standard of insurrection, and proclaimed a pro- visional government, and, through its organs, have taken the bad res- olution to invite privateers to prey upon the peaceful commerce of the United States. Prudence and humanity combine in persuading the President, under the circumstances, that it is wise to secvire the lesser good offered by the Paris congress, without waiting indefinitely in hope to obtain the greater one offered to the maritime nations by the President of the United States. • I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &e., &c., &c. P. S. — A full power to treat is also herewith sent. The same, mutatis mutandis, to the ministers of the United States in France, Eussia, Prus- sia, Austria, Belgium, Italy, and Denmark. Convention upon the subject of the rights of belligerents and neutrals in time of war, between the United States of America and her Majesty the Queen of Great Britain and Ireland. The United States of America and her Majesty the Queen of G-reat Britain and Ireland, being equally animated by a desire to define with more precision the rights of belligerents and neutrals in time of war, have, for that purpose, confen-ed full powers, the President of the United States upon Charles Francis Adams, accredited as their envoy extraordi- iiary and minister plenipotentiary to her said Majesty, andher Majesty the Queen of Great Britain and Ireland, upon And the said plenipotentiaries, after having exchanged their full powers, have concluded the following articles : Article I. 1. Privateering is and remains abolished. 2. The neutral flag covers enemy's goods, with the exception of contraband of war. 3. Neutral goods, with the exception of contraband of war, are not liable to cap- ture under enemy's flag. 4. Blockades, in order to be binding, must be effective ; that is to say, maintained by a force sufdcient really to pre- vent access to the coast of the enemy. Article II. The present convention shall be ratified by the President of the United States of America, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and by her Majesty the Queen of Great Britain and Ireland, and the ratifications shaU be exchanged at Washington, within the space of six 48 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BEITAIIT.. months from the signature, or sooner if possible. In faith whereof, the respective plenipotentiaries have signed the present convention in dupli- cate, and have thereto af&xed their seals. Done at Ijondon, the day of , in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-one, (1861.) [Communicated to Lord J. Eussell by Mr. Adams, July 13.] [From British Blue Book, "North America," No. 3, 1862, p. 1.] No. 1. Lord J. Bussell to Earl Cowley. FoEBiGN Office, May 6, 1861. Mt Lord : Although her Majesty's government have received no dis- patches from Lord Lyons by the mail "n-hich has just arrived, the com- munication between Washington and New York being interrupted, yet the accounts which have reached them from some of her Majesty's con- suls, coupled with what has appeared iu the public prints, are sufficient to show that a civil war has broken out among the States which lately composed the American Union. Other nations have, therefore, to consider the light in which, with reference to that war, they are to regard the confederacy into which the southern States have united themselves ; and it appears to her Majesty's government that, looking at aU the circumstances of the case, they can- not hesitate to admit that such confederacj^ is entitled to be considered as a belligerent, and, as such, invested with all the rights and preroga- tives of a belligerent. I have stated this to Lord Lyons ia the dispatch of which I iiiclose a copy for your excellency's information.* In making known to M. Thouvenel the opinion of her Majesty's government on this point, your excellency will add that you are instructed to call the attention of the French government to the bearing which this unfortunate contest threatens to have on the rights and interests of neutral nations. ' On the one hand. President Lincoln, in behalf of the northern portion of the late United States, has issued a proclamation declaratory of an intention to subject the ports of the southern portion of the late Union to a rigorous blockade ; on the other hand, President Davis, on behalf of the southern portion of the late Union, has issued a proclamation declaratory of an intention to grant letters of marque for cruisers to be employed against the commerce of the north. In this state of things, it appears to her Majesty's government to be well deserving of the immediate consideration of all maritime powers, but more especially of France and England, whether they should not take some steps to invite the contending parties to act upon the princi- ples laid do-ma in the second and third articles of the declaration of Paris of 1856, which relates to the security of neutral property on the high seas. The United States, as .an entire government, have not acceded to that declaration ; but in practice they, have, in their conventions with other powers, adopted the second article, although admitting that, without some such convention, the rule was not one of universal application. * This dispatch is printed with the above under the head of " Belligerent Recognition." CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 49 As regards the third article, in recent treaties concluded by the United States with South American republics, the principle adopted has been at variance with that laid down in the declaration of Paris. Your excellency will remember that when it was proposed to the gov-' ernment of the United States, in 1856, to adopt the whole of the decla- ration of Paris, they, in the first instance, agreed to the second, third, and fourth proposals, but made a condition as to the first that the other powers should assent to extending the declaration so as to exempt all private property whatever from capture on the high seas ; but before any final decision was taken on this proposal, the government of Presi- dent Buchanan, which in the interval had come into power, withdrew the proposition altogether. It seems to her Majesty's government to be deserving of consideration whether a joint endeavor should not now be made to obtain from each of the belligerents a formal recognition of both principles as laid down in the declaration of Paris, so that such principles shall be admitted by both, as they have been admitted by the powers v/ho made or acceded to the declaration of Paris, henceforth to form part of the general law of nations. Her Majesty's government would be glad to be made acquainted with the views of the imperial government on this matter with as little delay as possible. I am, &cj, J. EUSSELL. [From British Blue Book, " North America," No. 3, p. 3.] No. 3. Earl Cowley to Lord J. Russell. Paeis, May 9, 1861. ■" My Lord : I called this afternoon on M. Thouvenel for the purpose of obtaining his answer to the proposals contEtined in your lordship's dispatch of the 6th instant, relative to the measures which should be pursued by the maritime powers of Europe for the protection of neutral property in presence of the events which are passing in the American States. M. Thouvenel said the imperial government concurred entirely in the views of her Majesty's government, and would be prepared to join her Majesty's government in endeavoring to obtain of the belligerents a formal recognition of the second and third articles of the declaration of Paris. M. de Flahault would receive instructions to make this known officially to your lordship. With regard to the manner in which this endeavor should be made, M. Thouvenel said that he thought a communication should be addressed to both parties in as nearly as possible the same language, the consuls being made the organs of communication with the southern States ; that the language employed should be that of goodwill and friendship ; that the present state of things should be deplored, and a declaration made , that the governments of Great Britain and France intended to abstain from aU interference; but that the commercial interests of the two coun- tries demanded that they should be assured that the principles with respect to neutral property laid down by the congress of Paris would be , adhered to, an assurance which the two governments did not doubt they should obtain, as the principles in question were in strict accord- ance with those that had been always advocated by the United States. 4. A n ^VOT.. T 50 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. M. ThoTivenel observed that as France and the United States had been always agreed on these maritime questions, it would be difficult for either party in America to refuse their assent to the principles now invoked. His excellency said further that, in looking for precedents, it had been discovered that Great Britain, although treating at the commencement of the American war letters of marque as piracy, had, after a time, recognized the belligerent rights of the States in rebellion against her. I have, &c., COWLEY. LFrom British Blue Book, " North America," No. 3, 1862, p. 3.] No. 4. Lord John Bussell to Earl Cowley. Foreign Office, May 13, 1861. My Lord : I have received your excellency's dispatch of the 9th instant, and I have to instruct you to express to M. Thouvenel the satis- faction of her Majesty's government at the concurrence of the imperial government in their views, as set forth in my dispatch of the (ith instant, in regard to the expediency of endeavoring to- obtain from the bellige- rent States of North America a formal recognition of the second and third articles of the declaration of Paris on the subject of maritime law. I am, &c., J. EUSSELL. [From British Blue Book, "North America," No. 3, 1862, p. 3.] No. 5. Lord J. Bussell to Earl Cowley, [Extract.] Foreign Office, May 16, 1861. I transmit to your excellency herewith a copy of a draft to Lord Lyons.* Your excellency will communicate the draft to M. Thouvenel, and report to me, as soon as possible, whether the French government con- cur in it ; in which case the instruction would be forwarded to Lord Lyons by the mail of Saturday next. [From British Blue Book, "North America," No. 3, 1862, p. 4.] No. 6. Earl Cowley to Lord J. Bussell. [Extract.] Paris, May 17, 1861. I saw M. Thouvenel as soon as was possible after the receipt of your lordship's dispatch of yesterday's date, inclosing a copy of a draft to Lord Lyons. 'Printed with dispatch No. 39 of Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward, dated September 7, 1861. CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 51 M. Thouvenel had. already written to M. Mercier in the same terms as your lordship proposes to address your instructions to Lord Lyons. I need hardly add that his excellency concurs entirely in the draft. [From Britisli Blue Book, "Nortli America," No. 3, 1862, p. 6.] No. 8. Lord J. Russell to Lord Lyons.' [Extract.] FoKEiGN Office, May 18, 1861. I think it right to acquaint your lordship that my instruction to you of the sixth instant, in which I stated to you the grounds on which her Majesty's government had thought it incumbent on them to admit the helligerent rights of the Confederate States of America, as well as my instruction to you of this day, have severally been communicated to the French government, and that, as I learn from Lord Cowley and the French ambassador, the imperial government concur in those instruc- tions, and have sent corresponding intructions to M. Mercier. Your lordship may therefore be prepared to find your French colleague ready to take the same line with yourself in his communications with the government of the United States. I need not tell your lordship that her Majesty's government would very gladly see a practice which is calculated to lead to great irregu- larities, and to increase the calamities of war, renounced by both the contending parties in America as it has been renounced by almost every other nation of the world; and therefore you will not err in encouraging the government to which you are accredited to carry into effect any dis- position which they may evince to recognize the declaration of Paris in regard fo privateering, as her Majesty's government do not doubt that they will, without hesitation, recognize the remaining articles of the declaration, to which you are now instructed to call their attention. You will clearly understand that her Majesty's government cannot accept the renunciation of psivateering on the part of the government of the United States if coupled with the condition that they should enforce its renunciation on the Confederate States, either by denying their right to issue letters of marque, or by interfering with the bellig- erent operations of vessels holding from them such letters of marque, so long as they carry on hostilities according to the recognized princi- ples and under the admitted liabilities of the law of nations. You will take such means as you shall judge most expedient to trans- mit to her Majesty's consul at Charleston or New Orleans a copy of my previous dispatch to you of this day's date, to be communicated at Montgomery to the president of the so-styled Confederate States. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. [Extract.] Ifo 10 I Department of State, Washington^ May 21, 1861. Sir: ** *# **## As to the treatment of privateers in the insurgent service, you will 52 CLAIMS AGAINST GEEAT BRITAIN. say that tMs is a question exclusively our own. We treat them as pirates. They are our own citiz^ens, or persons employed by our citizens, preying on the commerce of our country. If Great Britain shall choose to recog- nize them as lawful belligerents, and give them shelter from our pursuit and punishment, the law of nations afford an adequate and proper remedy and we shall avail ourselves of it. Happily, however, her Britannic Majesty's government can avoid all these difliculties. It invited us in 1856 to accede to the declaration of the congress of Paris, of which body Great Britain was herself a mem- ber, abolishing privateering everywhere in all cases and forever. You already have our authority to propose to her our accession to that decla- ration. If she refuse to receive it, it can only be because she is .willing to become the patron of privateering when aimed at our devastation. I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Chakles Fkancis Adams, Esq., &e., rorth Carolina, dated 27th April, 1861. I received likewise dispatch No. 4 last night, containing views of the government at Washington as to the abolition of privateering; and inclosing to me a commission to effect with the French government a treaty for that purpose, with the form of such treaty. This is of great importance, and will affect in a material degree the means of defense on the part of our country in time of war. I shall proceed in conformity, however, with these instructions, to communicate with the minister of foreign affairs on the silbject. But I cannot help feeling that, in view of what the French law is, as heretofore stated, and the little danger to our commerce which can soon arise from any action of this government or of its subjects from privateers, that I had better attempt again to obtain a provision exempting from seizure private property afloat (unless contraband) the same as private property is now exempt on land. I should very much regret an opportunity lost to obtain such a treaty provision, if possible, before we give up that spe- cies of volunteer marine by which we are enabled in some degree to affect the commerce of other nations, ha^ang a heavier naval marine, ' while they are destroying our o^^n. The Emperor is about to leave Paris for the country, and it^is doubtful if great expedition can be had in this matter ; but, acting under the direct instructions of the government at home, I shall incur no unnecessary delay in caiTying those instructions (if I can procure no better terms) into effect. Your very obedient servant, WILLIAM L. DAYTON. Hon. William H. Sewakd, Secretary of State. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] No. 6.1 Legation of the United States, Paris, May 27, 1861. Sir : Immediately after closing my last dispatch I wrote to Mr. Thou- venel a note apprising him that I was fully authorized to enter into a 54 CLAIMS AGAINST GEEAT BRITAIN. convention with the government of France in respect to privateering, the rights of neutrals, and the matter of blockade, and requesting him, if disposed to renew negotiations upon these subjects, to name a day for conference. My note was not sent until the 25th instant. A copy is attached, marked letter A. ,* * * # # * * With much consideration, your obedient servant, WILLIAM L. DAYTON. Hon. William H. Sewaed, Secretary of State. Mr, Dayton to Mr. Thouvenel. Legation op the United States, Paris, May 24, 1861. Sir : I have the honor to inform your excellency that I am fully authorized by my government to enter into a conventioir with the gov- ernment of France ta reference to the subject of privateerin'g, the rights of neutrals, and the matter of blockade. If, therefore, the government of his Imperial Majesty remains disposed to renew negotiations upon these subjects, I shall be happy to have a conference with your excellency at such time as your excellency may indicate. With great respect, I have the honor to be your obedient servant, WILLIAM L. DAYTOK M. Thouvenel, Minister of Foreign Affairs. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. [Extracts.] No. 8.] Legation op the United States, Paris, May 30, 1861. Sir : Since the date of my dispatch No. 6 I have had an interview with Mr. Thouvenel. I told him I was authorized to accept the four propositions adopted at the congTess of Paris in 1856, but with the desire expressed by the Presi- dent that the provisions should be added exempting private property afloat, unless contraband, from seizure and confiscation. I did not saj^, nor did he ask, whether the four propositions would be accepted without amendment. He said nothing could be done except by conference with the other power^, but if I would submit the proposition in writing, which I shall at once do, he would- immediately address the other powers, and we would probably receive an answer in ten or twelve days. I have been induced to suggest again the adoption of this amendment exempting private property afloat from seizure and confiscation: (1.) From the preference or wish of the President expressed in your letter of instruction. (2.) From the great importance, as it seemed to me, of CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 55 securing the adoption of the principle, if possible, before the Fnited States should give up the right of privateering. (3.) Prom the facts patent on the correspondence of this legation in 1856, whereby it appears that France and Eussia were both favorably disposed at that time to the adoption of the principle of the amendment, (see Mr. Marcy's dispatch to Mr. Mason, No. 94, dated October 4, 1856, and Mr. Mason's confidential letter to Mr. Dallas, of December 6, 1856,) and the obvious fact that it M'ould be the interest of all the other i)owers (having little naval force) to concur in the amendment. (4.) From the fact that since the date of your dispatch to me authorizing the acceptance of the four propositions adopted by the congress at Paris; Mr. Sanford, our minister to Belgium, on a visit to England, learned from Mr. Adams that the British govern- ment had given, as he understood, general instructions on the subject td Lord Lyons ; and the impression made on the mind of Mr. Adams, aS reported to, me by Mr. Sanford, was that it was not improbable that Eng- land would now, to secure our concurrence in the other propositions, con- cur in the amendment. That in view of this information, Mr. Adams, who had like instructions with my own, had referred the matter back to be treated of and discussed at Washington. I could not, therefore, at once accept the four propositions, pure and simple, without running the hazard of conflicting with what might be done elsewhere. I will probably receive an answer from Mr. Thouvenel (after he shall have communicated my proposition to the other powers) before even I shall receive my next dispatch on this subject from Washington, which I shall await with some anxiety. # * * * ( # * * The laws, however, in connection with the practice of the tribunals of France are, I think, as follows : 1. That the captain who accepts' a commission from a foreign govern- ment and takes command of a cruiser is guilty of a piratical act. 2. That all French subjects enlisting on board of such cruiser, without authority of the Emperor, lose their citizenship, and consequently forfeit their right to the protection of their government. 3. That the principle applied in the French tribunals is unlike that which has been applied in England (and I fear it will be found in the United States) as to harboring privateers ; and while their prizes are in a neutral port having them condemned in courts of admiralty of the country licensing such privateer. The laws and practice. of the French courts do not admit of this. But these matters, as Mr. Thouvenel now says, must be all left for determination t^ the tribunals of France. * # * # * # - * With high consideration, your obedient servant, WILLIAM L. DAYTON. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. [From the British Blue Book, "North America," No. 3, p. 8.] No. 12. Lord Lyons to Lord J. Russell. [Extract.] Washington, June 4, 1861. I had, the day before yesterday, the honor to receive your lordship's dispatches, dated the 18th ultimo, directing me to make proposals to the 56 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. government of the United States to adliere to the principles respecting maritime law laid down by the congTess of Paris. M. Mercier, the French minister here, received on the same day instruc- tions from M. Thouvenel to concert measures with me, with a view to making the same proppsals on the part of the French government. M. Mercier had also received instructions to direct the French consul at New Orleans to go to Montgomery, to make similar proposals to President Davis. M. Mercier and I had a conversation respecting these instructions a few hours after the dispatches containing th^n reached us. On one point we both entirely agTeed. We were both convinced that the best hope of attaining the object of our instructions, and of pre- yentiag an inconvenient outbreak from this government, lay in making the course of Great Britain and France as nearly as possible identical. It is probable that Mr. Adams may, before this dispatch reaches your lordship, have offered, on the part of this government, to adhere to article 1 of the declaration of Paris, as well as to the others, and thus to declare privateering to be abolished. There is no doubt that this adherence will be offered in the expectation that it will bind the govern- ments accepting it to treat the privateers of the southern confederacy as pirates. Had this government offered its adherence immediately upon the appearance of the notice by the southern confederacy of its intention to issue letters of marque, it would probably have not been very difQcult for Great Britain and France to have exercised an influence at Mont- gomery which would have prevented the letters from being actually issued. At the i^resent moment, however, the privateers are in full activity, and have met with considerable success. It is not, therefore, to be expected that the southern confederacy will relinquish the employ- ment of them, otherwise than on compulsion or in return for some great concession from France and England. It seems to be far from certain that the United States Congress would ratify the abolition of privateering ; nor do I suppose that the cabinet will abide by its proposal when it finds that it will gain nothing towards the suppression of the southern privateering by doing so. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. [Extracts.] No. 9.] Legation of the United States, Paris, June 7, 1861. gjjj .#***** I understood him (M. Thouvenel) to say an answer could be got within ten or twelve days from the other powers. I was surprised at the brief- ness of the time stated, but supposed he meant to conWt the represen- tatives of those powers at this court; but his remark, as I am now informed, applied to a consultation with certain of the ministers of the French government only.' The statement in the American newspapers, that the Department of State had authorized an acceptance of the Paris treaty of 1856 (if that is understood by Lord Lyons to be a distinct acceptance of the treaty, pure and simple) will, I fear, prevent all chance of other terms. The late annunciation of the course of the British gov- ernment, shutting their ports against privateers, (which so much limits the belligerent rights of the so-called Confederate States,) you wiU con- CLAIMS AGAINST GEEAT BRITAIN. 67 sider, perhaps, renders the accession of our government to the treaty of Paris at this time of less importance than it othervyise would he. I think, from remarks in the New York press, (Herald and Times, and perhaps other prints which I have not seen,) that the force and efficacy of an accession by our government to the treaty of Paris is misunder- stood. If I understand the view of these foreign governments, such accession' by us woiild merely bind our hands as respects privateering ; it would not at all enlarge our rights as against a belligerent power not a party to the treaty ; nor would it bind these European governments to enforce the laws of piracy as against such belligerent power not a party to the treaty. If they admit the Confederate States as a belligerent power, and recognize them for even commercial purposes, (which, I take it, is what they mean to do,) our accession to the treaty of Paris will not change their action on this question. The status of these rebellious States as respects privateering will remain where it was ; at least that is the view which I think is and will be taken of this question by England and, Prance. But however this may be, I am happy to know that, in suggesting to the French government the amendment to that ireaty, (securing private property afloat, unless contraband,) I have occasioned no_ unnecessary delay, inasmuch as Mr. Adams has referred the whole matter back to Washington, and as soon as you shall act there, or before, upon a notification to me, I can act here. With high consideration, I have the honor to be your obedient servant, WILLIAM L. DAYTON. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. [Extracts.] No. 10.] Legation op the United States, Paris, June 12, 1861. I have not yet received from Mr. Thouvenel an answer to my written proposition to open negotiations for the accession of the United States to the treaty of Paris of 1856. A copy of that written proposition, marked A, is hereunto attached. The European press, so far as I have observed, take it for granted that the accession of the United States to that treaty would not at all alter the relations of the several powers to the so-called southern confederacy. A treaty cannot of itself alter the law of nations, although it may restrict the rights of those States which become parties to it. The treaty of Paris certainly did not prevent the United States, while no party to it, from issuing letters of marque, nor would the accession of the United States to such treaty prevent the confederates of the Squth from doing the same thing if they are recognized by other nations as a belligerent power. The whole difQculty, every subsequent right which has been conceded to the confederates, grows out of that recognition. It is doubtful, perhaps, whether the other powers will, under the cir- cumstances, negotiate for the accession of the United States at this time to the treaty in question ; but should they do so, it will be with the und-erstanding, I take it, that it imposes no new duties upon them grow- 58 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. ing out of our domestic controversy. I beg pardon, however, for these suggestions. They may, perhaps, be considered a little beyond the line of my ofScial duties. ' * # * * * * * With high consideration, I have the honor to be your obedient servant, WILLIAM L. DAYTOK Hon. William H. Seward, /Secretary of State. A. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Thouvenel. Legation of the United States, Paris, May 31, 1861. SieT In conformity with the verbal promise I gave at our last confer- ence, I now have the honor to propose to your excellency an accession, . on the part of the United States of America, to " the declaration con- cerning maritime law," adopted by the plenipotentiaries of France, Great Britain, Austria, Prussia, Eussia, Sardinia, and Turkey, at Paris, on the iBth of April, 1856, with the addition to the first clause, which declares '• privateering is and remains abolished," of the following words : " And the private property of the subjects or citizens of a belligerent on the ' high seas shall be exempted from seizure by public armed vessels of the other belligerent, unless it be contraband." Thus amended I'will immediately sign a convention on the part of the United States, acceding to the declaration, which will, I doubt not, be promptly ratified and confirmed by my government. With much respect, I have the honor to be your very obedient servant, WM. L. DAYTOK His Excellency Monsieur Thouvenel, Minister of Foreign Affairs. [From British Blue Book, "North America," No. 3; p. 7.] No. 10. Lord J. Russell to Mr. Grey. Foreign Office, June 12, 1861. Sir : The ambassador of France came to me yesterday, and informed me that the minister of the United States at Paris had made to M. Thou- venel two propositions : The first was that France should agree to add to the 1st article of the declaration of Paris the plan of protecting private property on the sea from capture in time of war. The second proposition was, that privateering being abolished by the adoption of the 1st article of the declaration of Paris, amended as pro- posed, the privateers sent out by the so-styled southern confederacy should be considered as pirates. M. Thouvenel wishes to learn the opinions of her Majesty's government CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 59 upon these propositions. Her Majesty's government decidedly object to the first proposition. It seems to them that it would reduce the power in time of war of all States having a military as well as a commercial marine. It is hardly necessary to point out that in practice it would be almost impossible to distinguish between bona fide ships carrying merchandise, and ships fraudulently fitted out with means of war under the guise of merchant vessels. With regard to the second point, her Majesty's government are not disposed to depart from the neutral character which her Majesty, as well as the Emperor of the French, has assumed. You will read this dispatch to M. Thouvenel. I am, &c., J. EtrSSBLL. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] J^To. 8.] Legation of the United States, London, June 14, 1861, Sir: * * * * * * However this may be, my duty was plain. I applied for an interview with Lord John Eussell, and he appointed one for ten o'clock on Wednes- day, the 12th, at his own house. After some slight preliminary talk, I observed to him that I had been instructed to press upon her Majesty's government the expediency of early action ou the subject of privateer- ing ; that in the present state of excitement in the United States conse- quent upon the measures which it had felt it necessary to adopt, I did not know of anything which would be so likely to allay it as an agree- ment on this point. His lordship then said that he did not know whether I knew it, but the fact was that Mr. Dayton had niade a proposition to France for negotiation on the basis of the articles as agreed upon in Paris. France had communicated the fact through her minister, the Compte de Flahault ; and he intimated that there had been a cabinet conversation on the subject, without arriving at a decision. I then referred to what had passed at our former interview. I mentioned my proposal to negotiate, and the inclination shown by his lordship to leave the subject with Lord Lyons, with authority to arrange the only point in dispute as the government at Washington might desire. There I had left the matter. His lordship replied that he did not mean to be quite so understood. His intention was to g&y, that having agreed upon the three articles, he should be ready to consent to the total omission of the fourth article, if that would be agreeable at Washington. I said that I had not so understood him, and from my present recollection I am con- fident that my report of his language was not incorrect. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES FEANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. 60 CLAIMS AGAINST GEEAT BEITAIN. [From British Blue Book, "North America," No. 3, 1862, p. 7.] Ko. 11. Mr.' Grey to Lord J. Bussell. Paris, June 14, 1861. My Lord : In obedience to your lordsliip's instructions, I yesterday read to M. Thouvenel your dispatch of the 12th instant, relating to the propositions made by the minister of the United States to his excellency. M. Thouvenel expressed great satisfaction on finding how completely your lordship's views coincided with his own. His excellency said he was already aware that your lordship entertained the same opinion as he himself did on this subject, but he had not yet heard it so decidedly expressed, and he desired me to convey his thanks to your lordship for the communication. . His excellency proceeded to say that the first proposition had not been made by Mr. Dayton until he had asked that minister to address him an offlcial note on the subject. His answer to it w^s that the imperial gov- ernment would be glad if that of the United States acceded, "purely and simply," to the declaration of Paris, but that it was out of the question to accept the condition which it was proposed to add to that declaration, for the effect would be, as your lordship observes, greatly to reduce the power in time of war of all states having a military as well as a commercial marine. With regard to the second proposition, his excellency said it was made by the United States, with the evident object of leading the French government to take a decided part against the southern confederacy, but this attempt had failed, and there was no intention on the part of the French government to depart from their neutral character. • , M. Thouvenel also informed me that he has not yet received any further communication from Mr. Dayton. I have, &c., ' W. G. GEEY. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. [Extracts.] Ko. 19.] Department op State, Washington, June 17, 1861. The United States have never disclaimed the employment of letters of marque as a means of maritime war. The insurgents early a-nnounced their intention to commission privateers. We knew that friendly nations would be anxious for guarantees of safety from injury by that form of depredation upon the national commerce. We knew also that such nations would desire to be informed whether their flags should be regarded as protecting goods, not contraband of war, of disloyal citizens, found" under them, and whether the goods, not contraband, of subjects of such nations would be safe from confiscation when found in vessels of disloyal citizens of the United States. This administration, free from some" of the complications of those which had preceded it, promptly took up the negotiations relating to the declaration of the congress of CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 61 Paris, just at the point where they had been suspended hy President Buchanan. We found it just and humane in itself, so far as it goes, and that it had only failed to be accepted by the United States because foreign nations had refused to accept an additional principle proposed by this government, yet more just and humane than any which it does contain, namely, that the property of private citizens, not contraband, should be exempted from confiscation in maritime war. While still willing and desirous to haA-e that further principle incorporated in the law of nations, we nevertheless instructed you, and all our other representatives in foreign countries, to waive it, if necessary, and to stipulate, subject to the concurrence of the Senate of the United States, oar adhesion to the declaration of the congress of Paris as' a whole and unmodified. This was done so early as the 25th day of April last, long before the date of the instructions which Mr. Mercier proposed to submit to us. We have ever since that time been waiting for the responses of foreign powers to this high and liberal demonstration on our part. We have, however, received no decisive answers on the subject from those powers. It was under these circumstances that, on the 15th day of June instant, the minister from Prance and the minister from Great Britain, having previously requesrted an interview, were received by me. Each of them announced that he was charged by his government to read a dispatch to me and to give me a copy if I should desire it. I answered that, owing to the peculiar circumstances of the time, I could not con- sent to an official reading or delivery of these papers without first know- ing their characters and objects. They confidentially and with entire frankness put -the dispatches into my hands for an informal preliminary examination. Having thus become possessed of their characters, I replied to those ministers that I could not allow them to be officially communicated to this government. They will doubtless mention this answer to their respective states. The paper, as understood, while implying a disposition on the part of France to accord belligerent rights to the insurgents, does not name, specify, or even indicate, one such belligerent right. On the other hand, the rights which it asserts that France expects, as a neutral, from the United States, as a belligerent, are even less than this government, on the 25th of April, instructed you to.concede and guarantee to her by treaty, as a frienii. On that day we offered to her our adhesion to the declaration of Paris, which contains four propositions, naniely : 1st. That privateering shall be abolished. 2d. That a neutral flag covers enemy's goods not contraband of war. 3d. That goods of a neutral, not contra- band, shall not be confiscated, though found in an enemy's vessel. 4th. That blockades, in order to be lawful, must be maintained by com- petent force. We have always, when at war, conceded the three last of these rights to neutrals, a fortiori^ we could not when at peace deny them tp friendly nations. The first-named concession was proposed on the grounds already mentioned. We are still ready to guarantee these rights, by convention with France, whenever she shall authorize either you or her minister here to enter into convention. There is no reser- vation or difficulty about their application in the present case. We hold all the citizens of the United States, loyal or disloyal, alike included by the law of nations and treaties; and we hold ourselves bound by the same obligations to see^ so far as may be in oux power, that all our citi- zens, whether maintaining this government or engaged in overthrowing it respect those rights in favor of France and of every other friendly nation. In any case, not only shall we allow no privateer or national 62 CLAIMS AGAINST 6EEAT BEITAIN. vessel to violate the rights of friendly nations, as I have thus described them, but we shaU also employ all our naval force to prevent the insur- gents from violating them, just as much as we do to prevent them fxom violating the laws of our own country. # * # * * * *,# # I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SBWAED. William L. Datton, Esq., &c., tfec, , in obedience to the instructions of his government, who accepts the responsibility of his proceedings so far as they are known to the foreign department^ and who cannot remove him from his office for having obeyed his. instructions. But when it is stated in a letter from some person not named, that the first step to the recognition of the southern States by Great Britain has been taken, the undersigned begs to decHne all responsibility for such statement. Her Majesty's government have already recognized the belligerent character of the southern States, and they wiU continue to consider them as belligerents. But her Majesty's government have not recog- nized, and are not prepared to recognize, the so-called Confederate States as a separate and independent state. The undersigned requests Mr. Adams to accept the assurance of his highest consideration. EUSSELLj Charles Francis Adams, Esq., tfcc, le of the law in a mitigated form to Mr. Bunch and Lis alleged intermixture with the dis- putes and controversies going on within the United States, surely cannot have made so great a mistake as to have assumed that he was dealing with "the government of a foreign state." He has considered Mr. Bunch as an officer of her Majesty's government, formally recognized by the government of the United States for certain purposes of commerce, who has been engaged in political correspondence, as well with his own government as with rebellious insurgents in the United States, for pur- poses foreign from those which were assigned at the time he received his authority, and for that reason that he has knowingly violated the law. At the same time the undersigned took great care in exxiressing his firm belief that her Majesty's government, in directing their agent in the manner indicated, could not have been aware of the nature and charac- ter of that law ; a belief which he is happy to find by his lordship's present mode of considering it to have been well founded. But much as the undersigned found of difficulty in regard to the mis- conception he has been so unfortunate as to originate in his lordship's mind of his view of a law of his own country, he has been still more embarrassed to learn the fact that in his statement of what appeared to his mind trae in its application to all governments, and undeniable in respect to the government of the United States, he has not enjoyed the satisfaction of his lordship's concurrence in opinion. This statement was, that " the only authority in the United States to which any diijlo- matic communication whatever can be made is the government of the United States." If the undersigned had been led in any way to vary this proposition, he would have deemed himself to have gone much far- ther in the road to recognition of " the government of a foreign state" within the United States than he did in that mistakenly attributed to him by his lordship. Surely it could not have been his lordship's inten- tion to present the proposition that the same diplomatic agent of a for- eign power can be accredited to the government of a country, and to the self-constituted authorities of a portion of the people who are waging war to overthrow it. Applying this argument to the question of Mr. JBunch, his case resolves itself into this: that holding his authority to act in an official relation as an officer of a foreign government from the 170 CLAIMS AGAINST GEEAT BRITAIN. recognition of the authorities of the United States, they are expected to acknowledge his right while acting in this capacity, at the same time to treat with any of their -own citizens who defy their authority whenever it may be deemed advisable by that government. Surely such a propo- sition, if accepted, would seem to undermine the foundations of sound international relationship all over the world. Surely no government, entertaining a proper degree of self-respect, would consent for a moment to receive any representative of a foreign nation if his first act might be to attempt to underjnine the authority to which he had been accredited, by recognizing for any purpose the validity of a domestic antagonism within its limits. The undersigned is not insensible to the force of his lordship's pgu- ment in regard to the necessity imposed upon it of protecting the inter- ests of British subjects in those regions where the authority of the United States is suspended, as well as to the difficulty of calling upon the government of the United States to make good the damage that might ensue from the acts of persons now in armed resistance. Doubt- less it must have been under considerations like these that her Majesty's government was induced to release that of the United States from responsibility for such reclamations, by adopting the policy of granting to the insurgents the rights of a belligerent. Without entering into the wide field of discussion presented by the arguments of his lordship, the undersigned contents himself with the remark that, whatever may be the course of action her Majesty's government deem proper to lay down for itself in regulatiug its relations with the insurgent forces in the United States, it will scarcely be disposed to require of the govern- ment of the United States that it should recognize the agents through whom they may be carried on. The objection to Mr. Bunch's action is, that while he has been enjoyiag, as consul of her Majesty in the United States, the advantages of a solemn recognition of the United States, he has been engaged in official proceedings in violation of the law, as well as outside of any authority with which they ever consented that he should be vested. That the latter part of this statement is the fact would scarcely seem to admit of the possibility of a doubt. But inasmuch as the under- signed is not altogether sure that he has placed the matter so/uUy before his lordship as his duty to his country seems to him to require, he trusts he may be permitted to enlarge upon it a little farther. The position of Mr. Bunch in regard to the United States had been exclu- sively that of a consul of a foreign nation at a commercial port. That such a position does not of itself involve the right of diplomatic nego- tiation with the recognizing government, much less with any subordi- nate authority, is too well established law to need further elucidation. The only question that remains for consideration is, then, whether the authority actually vested in Mr. Bunch by her Majesty's government to enter into communication with the insurgents in the United States touching certain articles of the declaration of Paris, to which their acquiescence was to be obtained, was of a diplomatic or purely of a con- sular nature. The proper answer to this is to be found in an appeal to the mode in which, from its very commencement, the declaration of Paris has been permitted to take its shape. In -its origin it was the result of a conference of the accredited envoys of the great powers ; and in all the later steps taken to secure the acquiescence of different nations,' including the United States, the agency used has been that of the cus- tomary diplomatic representatives. It, therefore, admits of no doubt in the mind of the undersigned that the declaration of Paris is a pure CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 171 diplomatic act, and that all negotiations since carried on to extend its authority, including that which the undersigned himself had the honor to carry on with his lordship for a time, bear the same exclusive char- acter. It is, therefore, plain to the mind of the undersigned that the government of the United States in objecting to the assumption, by an officer of a foreign government recognized by it only as vested with the authority of a consul, of diplomatic authority to treat within the limits of the United States, and without its knowledge or consent, with per- sons acting in armed resistance to it, has justification fully sufiftcient to sustaiu its decision to withdraw the formal act of recognition of such officer. To suppose it capable of a different course would seem to be to condemn it as unworthy of the character for honor and independence to which it has ever endeavored to aspire. In conclusion, the undersigned desires to express his personal obliga- tions to Earl EusseU for the friendly notice he has been pleased to take of his labors in the arduous and difficult mission with which he has been charged. It gives him great pleasure to be able on his part to testify to the uniform, courtesy and good wiU with which he has been treated in all his relations with her Majesty's government. The undersigned prays Earl EusseU to receive the assurances of his most distinguished consideration. CHARLES FEAKCIS ADAMS. Eight Hon. Earl Eussell, de., do., <&o. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. [Extract.] IJTo. 136.] Department op State, Washington, November 30, 1861. gjE :*#**##*# Secondly. The communication of the British and French governments to the insurgent cabal at Eichmond, through Mr. Bunch, was a proceed- ing that could not fail to alarm the American government and people. When the fact happened to become known to us, I had just become satisfied, though in confidential communications, that the British govern- ment was prepared to assume a tone that should repel the prevailing presumption of its inclinations to a recognition. But the offensive cor- respondence of the British government left us no alternative but to exercise our right to revoke the exequatur of the offending consul. It was done, however, upon the grounds of his having rendered himself personally obnoxious. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., <&o., <&c., &c. Mr, Adams to Mr. Bernard. [Extract.] 'Eo. 84.] Legation op the United States, London, December 6, 1861. Sir: ******** Yesterday I received from Lord Eussell a note in answer to mine of the 172 CLAIMS AGAINST GEEAT BEITAIN. 29tli ultimo, on the case of Mr. Buncli. Although the matter is really closed, 1 thought it advisable to record a reply. Copies of both papers are transmitted herewith. ********* I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES FEANOIS ADAMS. Hon. WiLLiAiffi H. Sewaed, /Secretary of State. t Uarl Bussell to Mr. Adams. Foreign Office, December 4, 1861. The undersigned, her Majesty's principal secretary of state for foreign afl'airs, has had the honor to receive a note from Mr. Adams, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States at this court, of the 29th ultimo, upon the contents of which some explanation is due to Mr. Adams. Very pressing business has alone delayed this explanation. Mr. Adams states that his meaning has been quite misunderstood. " But," Mr. Adams goes on to say, " on a careful re-examination of his note of the 21st, the undersigned must be i)ermitted to say that he has found some difllculty in perceiving anything that appears to him to be ambiguity in his meaning. He discovers only one government of a for- eign state alluded to, and that is obviously her Majesty's government. The other party in his own mind were the rebellious insurgents in arms against the authority of the United States, which he was very far from characterizing in the manner indicated by his lordship. The purpose of the law seems to the undersigned to have been severely to punish all persons, whether native or foreign, citizen or privileged, who knowingly made themselves instruments of foreign states to foment factious disturbances within the United States. It appears to have been enacted during the. troubled period of the French revolution, when interference with the domestic affairs of neighboring nations was an avowed princi- ple of action, and was, therefore, boldly acted upon even by the recog- nized agents of the French authorities." The undersigned must be permitted to say that, with this explanation, the law in question appears to him still less applicable to the case of Mr. Bunch than it did before. The description of that law is given by Mr. Adams in his former letter in the following words: ''The statute to which allusion is made forbids, under a heavy penalty, any person, not especially appointed or duly authorized or recognized by the President, whether citizen or denizen, privileged or unpri^rileged, from counseling, advising, aiding or assisting, in any political corre- spondence with the government of any foreign state whatever, with an intent to influence the measures of any foreign government, or of any ofllcer 'or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of their government." It now appears that the foreign government alluded to is the British government, and the offense with which Mr. Bunch is charged is that he advised, aided, or assisted the British government, with an intent to influence the measures of the British government " in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the meas- ures of their government." CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 173 Kow, upon sncli a cliarge, Mr. Bunch must be at once acquitted. He has not advised or assisted the British government " in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the meas- ures of their government." Mr. Bunch has assisted the foreign government by which he is employed to obtain from a de facto authority proper and requisite iiro- tection for British ships and for British merchandise embarked in ships of the United States. It is only necessary to make this statement in order to show that the spirit of the statute quoted is still more inapplicable to the conduct of Mr. Bunch than its own words and its letter. The purport and spirit of that statute enacted during the troubled period of the French revolution was to afford the means of checking interference with the domestic affairs of the United States. Her Majesty's government, who are, it appears, the foreign govern- ment referred to, have never interfered with the domestic afiairs of the United States, and they have never instructed or authorized any diplo- matic or consular agent of l^r Majesty to interfere with these domestic affairs. But, while her Majesty's government explicitly disclaim all such inter- ference, they as explicitly claim the right of protecting the lives and property of British subjects, wherever and by whomsoever their lives and properties may be threatened or attacked or injured. In order to do so with effect, it is sometimes necessary to communicate ^dth the de facto authorities of a port or province or a state. To give a recent instance, in the course of last year Sicily was occupied by the troops of the King of the Two Sicilies, by the yolunteer forces of Gari- baldi, and by the army of the King of Italy. During these transactions the property of the Queen's subjects at Marsala was thought to be in danger. Her Majesty's government did not stop to inquire whether Gari- baldi was the lawful dictator of Sicily, or whether the insurgent Sicilians were rebels against the legitimate sovereignty of Francis the Second. They iaterposed at once, by remonstrance and by the presence of her Majesty's ships, against the threatened or presumed violence. This is a right which belongs to every state, and her Majesty's government will exercise it on behalf of her Majesty's subjects whenever they see occasion to do so ; but they will at the same time abstain from any inter- ference in the domestic troubles of friendly states. The undersigned requests Mr. Adanis to accept the assurance of his highest consideration. EUSSELL. Ghakles Feaktcis Adams, Esq., cfcc, tfcc, i&c. Mr. Adams to Earl Russell. Legation oe the United States, London, December 6, 1861. The undersigned, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States, has the honor to acknowledge the reception of the note of the right honorable Earl Kussel, her Majesty's principal secre- tary of state for foreign affairs, of the 4th instant, in answer to las own of the 29th ultimo touching the case of Mr. Bunch, her Majesty's consul at Charleston. The undersigned has read the additional exposition made by his lordship of the bearing of the law of the United States, 174 CLAIMS AGAINST GEE AT BEITAIN. wHicli has been under consideration, on the question at issue, with the deepest attention, and he has applied himself to a careful re-examination of all the provisions of the law itself, with an anxious desire to see it in a light which may acquit Mr. Bunch. But it is with great regret that he is agaiQ forced to the conclusion that, in consenting to assist her Majesty's government in carrying on a negotiation which, however little intended by that government, he could not in his situation fail to know would have an unfavorable effect upon the measures of the government of the United States in the disj^utes and controversies in which it was involved, he clearly brought himself within the scope of the statute. And in further consenting, while holding a purely consular trust under the recognition of the government of the United States, to accept a labor of diplomatic negotiation with persons in open resistance to the regularly constituted authorities of the nation, without first apprising the government of her Majesty of the existence of a ijrohibition like that now in question, which certainly throws a shade of doubt uj)on the pro- priety of such a course, he has wiUfally assumed a responsibility for which the government must hold him excljisively accountable, at least so far as to withdraw the authority under which he has heretofore acted as a public oificer with their approbation. The undersigned takes great pleasure in noting the assurances given in his note by Earl EusseU that her Majesty's government have no dis- position to interfere with the domestic affairs of the United States. He has himself at no time entertained a suspicion that it was otherwise. Neither was it ever in his contemplation to venture to present any propo- sition for the regulation of her Majesty's government in the difficult circumstances in which he is ready to admit they have been placed, Neither does he i^ropose to question the right of that government to take measures for the protection " of the lives and the properties of her Majesty's subjects wherever they may be threatened or attacked or injured." He certainly would not deny to any other responsible nation the same extent of power in that contingency which he should ever be ready to claim for his own. So far as the undersigned is able to under- stand the present question, however, it does not appear in any way to involve a consideration of that subject. One of the gxounds of dissatis- faction with the conduct of Mr. Bunch is, that while holding her Maj- esty's commission as consul under the recognition of the government of the United States, he has at the same time been employed in a diplo- matic negotiation with persons in armed resistance to their authority. In this it would appear that he has been acting under instructions from her Majesty's government. It is certainly competent to that govern- ment to assume such a responsibility if it thinks proper. But the under- signed must be permitted to remark that a corresponding responsibility appears to him thereby to devolve upon the government which he has the honor to represent, and that is not by continuing its own recognition to the ofllcer selected as the agent to conduct these extraordinary nego- tiations with persons in arms against itself, after the facts have been brought to its knowledge, to give rise to an implication of a doubt of its own rightful authority. For these reasons, as well as for the others heretofore given in the course of this, to the undersigned, very painful correspondence, it becomes his duty to announce that the exequatur, formerly granted by his government to Mr. Eobert Bunch, has been withdrawn. The undersigned desires to renew to Earl EusseU the assurances of his highest consideration. OHAELES EEANCIS ADAMS. Eight Hon. Earl Etjssell, &c., <&c., (&c. CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BEITAIN. 175 [From the British Blue Book, "North America, " 1862, No. 1, p. 115.] Ko. 130. Lord Lyons to Earl Bussell. [Extract.] Washington, December 6, 1861. I have the honor to transmit to your lordship a copy of the papers relating to foreign affairs which were laid before Congress with the President's message. ******** At page 126 appears a dispatch* to Mr. Adams identical Avith, or very closely resembling, that announcing the revocation of Mr. Consul Bunch's exequatur, which was read to me by Mr. Seward on the 26th of October last. I communicated as much of it as I could recollect to your lordship in my dispatch of the 28th of that month. I observe that in one part of his dispatch Mr. Seward states that the government "must revoke" the exequatur ; and in another he desires Mr. Adams to inform your lordship that the exequatur has been withdrawn. I have no reason to suppose that the formal act revoking the exequatur has yet been signed. When the exequaturs of three British consuls were Revoked in 1856, the form adopted was that of letters patent published in the newspapers, in the same way in which exequaturs are published. This is, I believe, the usual practice. I have not observed in the newspapers any such letters patent with regard to Mr. Bunch's exequatur. I have not received any notice of such letters having been signed. Indeed, I have no official faiowledge of there having been any intention to revoke Mr. Bunch's exequatur. ******** I have not^time to make sure of the fact before the departure of my messenger, but I am nearly certain that eventually the exequatur of the Russian consul, mentioned in the second paragraph of page 53, was not revoked. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] No. 87.] Legation of the United States, London, December 12, 1861. SiK : I have to acknowledge the reception of dispatches from the department, numbered from 128 to 133, both inclusive. «#****** I transmit a copy of a note from his lordship in reply to mine of the 6th instant, on the case of Mr. Eobert Bunch, which closes the corre- spondence on that subject. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Sewaed, Secretary of State. * See dispatch &om Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams, No. 109, October 23, 1861, anti. 176 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. Earl Russell to Mr. Adams. Foreign Office, December 9, 1861. The undersigned, her Majesty's principal secretary of state for foreign afiairs, has had the honor to receive the note of Mr. Adams, envoy ex- traordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States at this court, of the 6th instant, in answer to his note of the 4th. Mr. Bunch has certainly, in pursuance of the orders of her Majesty's government, placed himself in communication with persons in. arms against the United States government. The undersigned has already explained the reasons for which such orders were given, and he regrets to find that the conduct of Mr. Bunch, which the undersigned considers not only legitimate but praiseworthy, has appeared blamable to Mr. Adams and the government of the United States. But the undersigned does not perceive that any adA^antage would be obtained by the con- tinuance of this correspondence. The undersigned requests Mr. Adams to accept the assurances of his highest consideration. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., it. His lordship here interposed by saying that there was not, in his opinion, any occasion at present for going into this class of arguments, as the government did not contemplate taking any step that way. Should any such tim« arrivein the future, he should be very ready to listen to every argument that might be presented against it on the part of the United States. At this moment he thought we had better confine our- selves to the matter immediately in hand. I then remarked that there was another subject upon which I had received a dispatch, though I should not, after so long a conference, venture to do more than open the matter to-day. This was a proposal to negotiate ia regard to the rights of neutrals in time of war. The necessary powers had been transmitted to me,' together with a form of a convention, which I would do myself the honor to submit to his con- sideration if there was any disposition to pursue the matter further. His lordship then briefly reviewed the past action of the two countries since the meeting of the congress at Paris, and expressed the willing- ness of Great Britain to negotiate ; but he seemed to desire to leave the subject in the hands of Lord Lyons, to whom he intimated that he had already transmitted authority to assent to any modification of the" only point in issue which the government of the United States might prefer. On that matter he believed there would be no difficulty whatever. Under these circumstajiGes, I shall not press the subject further at this place until I receive new directions to that effect from the department. His lordship then observed that there were two points upon which he should be glad himself to be enlightened, although he did not know whether I was prepared to furnish the information. They both related to the President's proclamation of a blockade. The first question was upon the nature of the blockade. The coast was very extensive, stretch- ing along the Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico a grisat way. Was it the design of the United States to institute an effective blockade in its whole extent, or to make only a declaration to that effect as to the whole, and to confine the actual blockade to particular points? Considering the uniform doctrine of the government refusing to recogniize the validity of mere paper blockades, he could hardly suppose they designed the latter. To this I replied that I knew nothing directly of the President's inten- tions on this subject; -but that inasmuch as the government had always protested against mere paper blockades, I could not suppose that it was now disposed to change its doctrine. On the contrary, I had every reason for affirming that it was the intention to make an effective block- ade; and this was more practicable than at first sight might appear from the fact that there were few harbors along the coast, however great its extent, and these were not very easy of access. I thought, therefore, that even though the blockade might not be perfect, it would be suffi- ciently so to come within the legitimate construction of the term. His lordship then alluded to the other point, which was, that the proclamation assigned no precise date for the commencement of the blockade, which he believed was necessary; but he presumed that that defect might be remedied at any time. To which I added that I did not CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 187 doubt any such omission of form would be supplied as soon as it was pointed out. His lordship then made some remarks upon the adoption of the tariff; to which I replied that, in my belief, that law was mainly passed as a revenue measure, with incidental protection; that it was not in any way aimed in a hostile spirit to foreign nations; and that the people of the United States would always buy from Great Britain as much as they could pay for, and generally a good deal more. This last remark raised a snule; and thus ended his lordship's series of inquiries. Having thus disposed of these secondary questions, I returned once more to the charge, and asked him what answer I should j'eturn to the inquiry which I had been directed to make. In order to avoid any ambiguity, I took out of my pocket your dispatch No. 4, and read to him tiie paragraph recapitulating the substance of Mr. HaUas's report of his interview, and the very last paragraph. I said that it was import- ant to me that I should not make any mistake in reporting this part of the conversation; therefore I should beg him to furnish me with the precise language. He said that he did not himself know what he was to say. If it was expected of him to give any pledge of an absolute nature that his government would not at any future time, no matter what the circumstances might be, recognize an existing state in America, it was more than he cotdd promise. If I wished an exact reply, my better way would heto address him theinquiry in writing. I said that I was well aware of that, but I had hoped that I might be saved the necessity of doing so. On reflection, he proposed to avoid that by offering to transmit to Lord Lyons directions to give such a reply to the President as, in his own opinion, might be satisfactory. To this arrangement I gave my assent, though not without some doubt whether I was doing right. In truth, if I were persuaded that her Majesty's government were reaUy animated ,by a desire to favor the rebellion, I should demand a categorical answer; but thus far I see rather division of opinion, consequent upon the press- ure of the commercial classes. Hence I preferred to give the short time demanded, as well as to place in the hands of the President himself the power to decide upon the suflELciency of the reply. It may be as well to state that, both in matter and manner, the con- ference, which has been reported as fully and as accurately as my mem- ory would permit, was conducted in the most friendly spirit. * #,# * # # # * * I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, OHAELES FEAiirCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. SEWAI^D, Seoreta/ry of State. [From Britisli Blue Book, " Nortli America," No. 1, 1862, p. 34.] ISo. il. Lord J. Russell to Lord Lyons. Foreign Office, May 21, 1861. My Lord: Mr. Adams came to me at Pembroke Lodge on the 18th instant. After some general conversation he said he was instructed to ask me for an explanation of the language I had used to Mr. Dallas. 188 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BEITAIN. The expressions I had employed had been interpreted in the United States as being of an unfriendly tenor, and as intimating a change of policy on the part of Great Britain. He led me to understand that any such change would put an end to his mission, and unfavorably affect the relations of the two countries. I repeated to Mr. Adams what I had said to Mr. Dallas, that, had a separation taken place between different parts of the American Union in an amicable manner, her Majesty's government would still have regretted that a Union of States so famous and so conspicuous for its love of liberty and enlightened progress should have been dissolved ; that the opposition made by the government of the United States to the secession would make us stiU more averse to take any step to record and recognize that secession. I explained to Mr. Adams, however, that the dispatches of Judge Black and Mr. Seward seemed to ask on our part for a perpetual pledge that we would under no circumstances recognize the seceding Sta;tes. I had, therefore, thought it uecessary to add that Great Britain must hold herself free to act accordiag to the progress .of events and as circumstances might require. I reminded Mr. Adams that the United States had recognized Don Miguel, the usurper of the throne of Portugal, and had even intended to acknowledge the Hungarian republic in 1848, when it was obvious that such a republic could not endure. I said that, on the other hand, we had taken no step except that of declaring ourselves neutral, and allowing to the southern States a belligerent character; that the size and population of the seceding States were so considerable that we could not deny them that character, but that this step implied no recognition nor allowed any other than an inter- mediate position on the part of the southern States. Mr. Adams admitted this, but thought the step we had taken precipi- tate. He contrasted it with the long period which elapsed between the beginning of the Greek insurrection and our admission of the belligerent character of Greece. I said that the population of the seceding States, amo anting to many millions, made them of greater importance than Greece in the early days of her independence, and the critical position of our commerce made it necessary to take some step ; that we could not call the seceding States rebels, nor take part in the war against them. Mr. Adams declared he had no wish to see us take part in the war, but he did wish us not to give assistance to the South. I told him we had no thoughts of doing so; that the sympathies of this country were rather with the North than with the South, but we wished to live on amicable terms with both parties. I pointed out that the blockade recently instituted, and the designation applied to the privateers of the southern States as pirates, might give rise to difficulties; that, however, the blockade might no doubt be made effective, considering the small number of harbors on the southern coast, even though the extent of three thousand mUes of coast were compre- hended in terms of that blockade. Mr. Adams said it was by no means the intention of the United States to institute a paper blockade, a measure against which they had always protested. With regard to privateers and piracy, I said that although general principles might be proclaimed, the putting them into execution might be accompanied with that forbearance and humanity which might be expected from a nation so cognizant of international relations and so advanced in civilization as the United States. CLAIMS AGAINST GEE AT BRITAIN. 189 I touched upon the high protective tariff recently enacted, and was assured that it was intended rather for revenue than for protection, and that if it failed in bringing revenue it would not be maintained for the sake of monopoly and restriction. I told Mr. Adams that I did not wish at present to discuss the causes of the secession or the present state of the conflict; but I assured him that if recognition should ever be in contemplation, I would send to him and allow a full hearing to his exposition of facts and arguments. I must not omit to state that Mr. Adams, while complaining strongly of our hasty allowance of belligerent rights to the South, expressed throughout a desire on the part of the government of the ITnited States to live on the most friendly terms with Great Britain. I had no hesitation in giving reciprocal assurances of good will. , I am, &c., J. EUSSELL. ' Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. [Extracts.] No. 5.] Legation of the United States, Paris, May 22, 1861. Sir : I have the pleasure to announce to you my arrival in this city on Saturday, May 11. On Monday, application was made through our lega- tion for an audience with Mr. Thouvenel, minister of foreign affairs, which was granted for the 16th instant, on which day I was duly presented to hiTTi by Mr. Walsh, of the American legation. Mr. Thouvenel, m the course of the conversation, took occasion to say that he deeply regretted the condition of things in the United States, and that in this expression of feeling he represented the views and feel- ings of the Emperor; that so deeply concerned was the Emperor that he had felt disposed to offer his good offices, but had been deterred from the fear that his offer might not be well received f but should occasion for this arise^ he would always be ready and happy to be of use. He made special inquiry as to the policy of our government in regard to neutral rights, particularly in reference to neutral property found in southern ships. He went into considerable detail to show that historical precedents were in favor of treating southern vessels as those of a regular belligerent, and applying the same doctrine to them as had always been upheld by the United States. He dwelt particularly upon the fact that Great Britain, during our revolutionary war, had not considerered our privateers as pirates. I understood him to say that, as respects an effective blockade, it would be fally recognized and respected ; but he seemed much impressed with the importance of understanding clearly the intentions of our govern- ment in reference to these matters as respects the foreign world. As respects a tender of the kind offices of the Emperor I could only thank him for the interest in our country which the suggestion mani- fested, but gave him no reason to suppose such offer at this time would be accepted. As to the doctrines which our government would apply in reference to the blockade of southern ports and neutral rights, 1 told him I had no specific instructions at present, and could only refer him to the proclamation of the President and the general principles of international law which might bear on the case. I further informed him that imme- diately after my reception by the Emperor I would apprise my govern- ment of the anxiety of the French government to learn the views of our 190 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. government more definitively upon these questions. You will not fail to have observed that the action of France and England upon this question of belligerent rights has been upon a mutual understanding and agree- ment. Throughout the conversation he seemed anxious to impress upon me the great interest which Prance took in our condition, and their desire for the perpetuation of the Union of the States. He referred to the fact that France had aided in its formation, and did not desire to witness its dissolution. The recognition of the southern confederates as possessing belligerent rights he did not consider at aU as recognizing them as inde- pendent States. After the conversation had closed, to save time, I at once presented a copy of my letters of credence, and requested an audience of the Emperor, &c. On the next day I was informed by a note from the minister that I would be received at the palace on the 19th instant, at which time I was presented in due form to the Emperor, in the presence of certain ofilcers of the court. ********* The Emperor, after a courteous welcome, and one or two remarks of a character personally complimentary, said, in substance, that he felt great ■ interest in the condition of things in our country; that he was very anx- ious our difficulties should be settled amicably; that he had been and yet was ready to offer his kind offices, if such offer would be mutually agree- able to the contending parties ; that whatever tended to affect injuriously our . interests was detrimental to the interests of France, and that he desired a perpetuation of the Union of the States, with some additional remarks of like tenor and character. His observations were in the same vein as those of the minister of foreign affairs, and I doubt not were the frank expressions of his views on this subject. ********* On Monday, the 20th instant, I called again on Mr. Thouvenel, in com- pany with Mr. Sanford, (our minister to Belgium,) for the purpose of obtaining, if possible, a little more distinct information as to what France meant by the terms "neutral rights "and "belligerent" rights; how far he considered such rights as extending to the capture and condemnation of prizes in the ports of France, &c. He said in reply, in substance, that they held that the flag covers the cargo; and that if a southern ship carrying neutral property was captured, the property would not be con- demned, &c. He hoped our government would recognize principles for which it had always contended. 1 told him it would certainly do so; but the question here was, whether there was a flag; that our government insisted that the confeaerates, being merely in rebellion, had no flag, and I could not exactly understand how a foreign government which had not reognized them as an independent power could recognize them as having a flag. He said, furthermore, that the French government had given no warning to their citizens, &o., (as the English government had,) by proclamation, because it was unnecessary; that the statute law of France (of 1825, April 10, I think) declared that any French citizen taking service under a foreign power lost aU claim to protection as a citizen; that if a subject of Prance should take service on board of a letter of marque Mcensed by the Confederate States, it would be, as I understood him, piratical on the part of such subject. He said, furthermore, that no letters of marque could be fitted out in their ports, or even sheltered there, unless they came in from necessity, (as stress of weather, &c.,) and then could remain, I think, but twenty-four CLAIMS AGAINST GEEAT BEITAIN. 191 hours; that consequently there could he no bringing of prizes into French ports, and while there a condemnation of them in the courts of the southern States. His conversation on this part of the case was very satisfactory, and he promised me a reference in writing to the Prenct statutes bearing on the question. He a,dded that the French government had addressed certain interrogations to our government, and would awadt their answer. The disposition of this government to keep onfriendljr relations with us is, I think, manifest, and it will not, I judge, be dimin- ished by the obvious fact that certain portions of the public men and the press of England are felicitating themselves on the condition of things in America. The policy of having a heavy commercial power in the wesv, as some counterpoise to the marine power of England, is too manifest to escape amind so sagacious as that of the present Emperor of the Frencl. I had taken the liberty before the reception of your last dispatch, dated 4th instant, of assuring all persons, official and otherwise, with whom I came in contact, that the most eftective measures were being taken by our government to crush out this causeless and wicked rebeUion, and that I believed such efforts would be continued to the end ; that the feais (which existed in some quarters) that the government would again tem- porize, and lose the advantage which the present determined euthusiasm of the people gave to it, were groundless. I find very strong feelings existing here in behalf of the IJnion among the American citizens from the northern States, and a determination to support the government with men and money. ********* N^o formal notice of the blockade of southern ports has been given to the government here, unless through the agency of the French minister at Washington. Indeed, I think I understood Mr. Thouvenel to say that they had received no such formal notice at all. I shall caU the attention of Mr. Thouvenel to the original proclamation when I communicate to him (as I shall at once do) the additional proclamation (just received) of the blockade of the ports of Virginia and ]S"orth Carolina. Tour very obedient servant, Hon. William H. Sewaed, Seeretary of State. WILLIAM L. DAYTOK Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. [Extract.] No. 10.] Depaetment op State, Washington, May 30, 1861. SiE : Mr. Sanford, who was requested by me to look to our interests in Paris in the interval which might elapse between the withdrawal of Mr. Faulkner and your own arrival, has transmitted to me (in his dispatch No 2) an account of a very interesting conversation which he has recently held with Mr. Thouvenel on our internal affairs. In that conversation Mr. Thouvenel intimated that, in view of the great commercial interests which are involved in the domestic contro- versy which is now agitating the United States, the French government had felt itself constrained to take measures, in conjunction with the government of Great Britain, to meet a condition of things which 192 CLAIMS AOAINST GREAT BRITAIN. infperiled those interests. That it had been decided that communica- tions of a similar tenor should be addressed by both of those govem- mbnts to the government of the United States, and that those commu- nijcations would be forwarded in the current week. Mr. Thouvenel kindly- foreshadowed the points of those communications. As those papers maybe expected to arrive by, perhaps the next steamer, I shall reserve comments upon the propositions indicated until they sHaU thus be fully and directly brought to the attention of the President. There are, however, some points in the conversation, or suggested by itj which I cannot properly suffer to pass unnoticed. First. 1 desire that Mr. Thouvenel may be informed that this govem- mjnt cannot but regard any communications held by the French govern- ment, even though unofBicial, with the agents of the insurrectionary mbvement iu this country as exceptionable and injurious to the dignity aid honor of the United States. They protest against this intercourse, however, not so much on that ground as on another. They desire to maintain the most cordial relations with the government of France, ai d would therefore, if possible, refrain from complaint. But it is mani- fest that even an unofficial reception of the emmissaries of disunion has a cejrtaiQ though measured tendency to give them a prestige which would encourage their efforts to proseciite a civil war destructive to the pros- perity of this country and aimed at the overthrow of the government itself. It is earnestly hoped that this protest may be suf&cient to relieve this government from the necessity of any action on the unpleasant subject to which it relates. Secondly. The United States cannot for a moment allow the French governmeut to rest under the delusive belief that they will be content to have the Confederate States recognized as a belligerent power by states with which this nation is in amity. Ko concert of action among foreign states so recognizing the insurgents can reconcile the United States to such a proceeding, whatever may be the consequences of resist- ance. Thirdly. The President turns away from these points of apprehended difference of opinion between the two governments to notice other and more agreeable subjects. I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. William L. Dayton, Esq., &c., &c., &c. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] Ko. 8.] Legation of the United States, Paris, May 30, 1861. Snt: * ***#*## I am happy to say that there is no disposition manifested here, so far as I have observed, to favor the rebellion in our southern States, or to recognize them as an independent power. AH recognition of rights on their part is for commercial purposes only. But the government of France cannot, it says, look at this rebellion as a smaU matter. That, embracing as it does a large section and many States, they cannot apply to it the same reasoning as if it were an unimportant matter or confined to a small locality. CLAIMS AGAINST GffiEAT BRITAIlSr. 193 Mr. ThouYenel says he lias had no application from southern com- missioners for any purpose of recognition, and he does not know even that such persons are or have been in Paris. With high consideration, jowc obedient servant, WILLIAM. L. DAYTOK Hon. William H. Sewaed, Secretary of State. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams, ISo. 14.] Department op State, Washington, June 3, 1861. SiK : YoMT dispatch of May 17, (No. 1) has been received. Yoiu? speech at Liverpool was equally prudent and happy. Your promptness in passing through the town to the seat of government, although to be regretted in some respects, is, in view of the circumstances, approved. Every instruction you have received from this department is full of e'S'idence of the fact that the principal danger in the present insurrection which the President has apprehended is that of foreign intervention, aid, or sympathy; and especially of such intervention, aidj or sympathy on the part of the government of Great Britain. The justice of this apprehension has been vindicated- by the following facts, namely: 1. A guarded reserve on the part of the British secretary of state, when Mr. Dallas presented to him our protest against the recognition of the insurgents, which seemed to imply that, in some conditions, not explained to us, such a recognition might be made. 2. The contracting of an engagement by the government of Great Britain with that of France, without consulting us, to the effect that both governments should adopt one and the same course of procedure in regard to the insurrection. 3. Lord John Eussell's announcement to Mr. Dallas that he was not unwUling to receive the so-called commissioners of the insurgents unofft- ciaUy. 4. The issue of the Queen's proclamation, remarkable, first, for the circumstances under which it was made, na^pely, on the very day of your arrival in London, which had been anticipated so far as to provide for your reception by the British secretary, but without affording you the iaterview promised before any decisive action should be adopted ; sec- ondly, the tenor of the proclamation itself, which seems to recognize, in a vague manner, indeed, but still does seem to recognize, the insurgents as a belligerent national power. That proclamation, nnmodifted and unexplained, would leave us no alternative but to regard the government of Great Britain as questioning our free "exercise of all the rights of self-defense guaranteed to us by our Constitution and the laws of nature and of nations to suppress the insurrection I should have proceeded at once to direct you to communicate to the British government the definitive views of the President on this grave subject, if there were not especial reasons for some little delay.. These reasons are, first, Mr. Thouvenel has informed our representa- tive at Paris that the two governments of Great Britain and Prance 13 A C— VOL. I 194 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. were preparing, and would, without delay, address commimications to this government concerning the attitude to be assumed by them in regard to the insurrection. These communications are hourly expected. Second. You have already asked, and, it is presumed, will have obtained, an interview with the British secretary, and will have been able to present the, general views of this government, and to learn defi- nitely the purposes of Great Britain in the matter, after it shall have learned how unsatisfactory the action of the British government hitherto has been to the government of the United States. The President is solicitous to show his high appreciation of every demonstration of consideration for the United States which the British gOA^ernment feels itself at liberty to make. He instructs me, therefore, to say that the prompt and cordial manner in which you were received, under peculiar circumstances, arising out of domestic afEictions which had befallen her Majesty and the secretary of state for foreign affairs, is very gratifying to this governinent. A year ago the differences which had partially estranged the British and the American people from each other seemed to have been removed forever. It is painful to reflect that that ancient alienation has risen up again under circumstances which portend great social evils, if not disaster, to both countries. Eeferring to your precedent instructions, and reserving further direc- tions untn we shall have your own report of the attitude of the British government as defined by itself for our consideration, I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., cfcc, &o., &c. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 15.] Department op State. Washington, June 8, 1861. Sir : I have the jjleasure of acknowledging the receipi; of your dispatch of May 21, (No. 2,) which contains ,a report of the conversation which you had held with Lord John Eussell on the 18th day of that month. This government insists, as all the world might have known that it must and would, under all circumstances, insist, on the integrity of the Union, as the chief element of national life. Since, after trials of every form of forbearance and conciliation, it has been rendered certain and apparent that this paramount and vital object can be saved only by our acceptance of civil war as an indispensable condition, that condition, with aU its hazards and deplorable evils, has not been declined. The acceptance, however, is attended with a strong desire and fixed purpose that the war shaU be as short and accompanied by as little suffering as possible. For- eign intervention, aid, or sympathy in favor of the iasurgeuts, especially on the part of Great Britain, manifestly could only protract and aggra- vate the war. Accordingly, Mr. Dallas, under instructions from the President, in an interview conceded to him by the British secretary of state for foreign affairs, presented our protest* against any such inter- vention. Lord John Eussell answered with earnestness that there was not in the British government the least desire to grasp at any advantages which might be supposed to arise from the unpleasant domestic differences in the United States, but, on the contrary, that they would be highly grati- CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 195 fied if those differences were adjusted, and the Union restored to its former unbroken position. Mr. Dallas then, as he reported to us, endeavored to impress upon his lordship how important it must be that Great Britain and France should abstain, at least for a considerable time, from doing what, by encouraging groundless hopes, (of the insurgents,) would widen a breach still thought capable of being closed ; but his lordship seemed to think that the mat- ter was not ripe for decision, one way or another, and remarked that what he had already said was all that at present it was in his power to say. Upon this report you were instructed to inform her Britannic Majesty's government that the President regarded the reply made by his lordship to Mr. Dallas's suggestion as possibly indicating a policy which this government would be obliged to deem injurious to its rights, and dero- gating from its dignity. This government thought the reply of the secretary unjustifiably abrupt and reserved. That abruptness and reserve unexplained, left us under a seeming necessity of inferring that the British government might be contemplating a policy of encourage- ment to the insurgents which would widen the breach here which we believed it possible to heal if such encouragement should not be extended. A ATital interest obliged the United States to seek explanation, or to act on the inference it thus felt itself obliged to adopt. Tour dispatch of the 21st of May, (No. 2,) which has just been received, shows how you have acquitted yourself of the duty imposed upon you. After stating our complaint to his lordship, you very properly asked an elucidation of his meaning in the reply to which exception had been taken by us, and very rightly, as we think, asked whether it was the intention of her Majesty's ministers to adopt a policy which would have the effect to widen, if not to make irreparable, a breach which we believe yet to be entirely manageable by ourselves. His lordship disclaimed any such intention, A friendly argument, however, then arose between the secre- tary and yourself concerning what should be the form of the answer to us which his lordship could properly give, and which would, at the same time, be satisfactory to this government. The question was finally solved in the most generous manner by the proposition of his lordship that fcfr would instruct Lord Lyons to give such a reply to the President as rai^^ in his own opinion, be satisfactory, which proposition you accepted- I hasten to say, by direction of the President, that your course in Was proceeding is fally approved. This government has no disposition to lift questions of even national pride or sensibility up to the level of diplo- matic controversy, because it earnestly and ardently desires to maintain pea«e, harmony, and cordial friendship with G-reat Britain. Lord John Eussel's j)roposition, by authorizing the President to put the most favor- able construction possible upon the response which was deemed excep- tionable, removes the whole difiSculty without waiting for the intervention of Lord Lyons. You wiU announce this conclusion to Lord John EusseU, and inform him that the settlement of the affair in so friendly a spirit affords this government sincere satisfaction. Your conversation with the British secretary incidentaUy brought into debate the Queen's late proclamation, (which seems to us designed to raise the insurgents to the level of a beUigerent state;) the language employed by her Majjesty's ministers in both houses of Parliament, the tone of the public press, and of private opinion, and especially a speech of the lord chancellor, in which he had characterized the insurgents as a belligerent state, and the civil war which they are waging against the United States asjvstum bellum. The opinions which you expressed on these matters, and their obA-ious 196 CLAIMS AGAINST GKEAT BRITAIN. tendency to encourage the insurrection and to protract and aggravate the civil war, are just, and meet our approbation. At the same time, it is the purpose of this government, if possible, consistently with the national welfare and honor, to have no serious controversy with Great Britaia at all 5 and if this shall ultimately prove impossible, then to have both the defensive position and the clear right on our side. With this view, this government, as you are made aware by my dispatch ISTo. 10, has determined to pass over without official complaiut the publications of t];ie British press, manifestations of adverse individual opinion in social life, and the speeches of British statesmen, and even those of her Majesty's ministers in Parliament, so long as they are not authoritatively adopted by her Majesty's government. We honor and respect the freedom of debate, and the freedom of the press. We indulge no apprehensions of danger to our rights and interests from any discussion to which they may be sulgected, in either form, in any place. Sure as we are that the transaction now going on in our country involves the progTess of civili- zation and humanity, and equally sure that our attitude in it is right, and no less sure that our press and our statesmen are equal in ability and influence to any in Europe, we shall have no cause to gxieve if Great Britain shall leave to us the defense of the independence of nations and the rights of human nature. My dispatch IsTo. 14 presented four distinct grounds on which this gov- ernment apprehended a j)olicy on the part of her Majesty's government to intervene in favor of the insurgents, or to lend them aid and sympathy. The first ground was the reserve practiced by the British secretary for foreign affairs in his conversation with Mr. Dallas, referred to in the earlier part of this dispatch. I have already stated that the explanations made and oiiered by Lord John Kussell have altogether removed this ground from debate. The second was the contracting of, an engagement by the government of Great Britain with that of France, without consulting us, to the effect that both governments would adopt one and the same course of proceed- ing in regard to the stibject of intervention in our domestic affairs. Yon were informed in my dispatch No. 10 that, as this proceeding did not necessarily im]Dly hostile feelings towards the United States, we should not formally complain of it, but should rest content with a resolution to hold intercourse only with each of those states severally, giving due notice to boti that.the circumstance that a concert between the two powers in a% proposition each might offer to us would not modify in the least degree the action of the United States upon it. The third ground was Lord John Eussell's announcement to Mr. Dallas that he was not unwilling to receive the so-caUed commissioners of the insurgents unofficially. On this point you already have instructions, to which nothing need now be added. The fourth ground is the Queen's proclamation, exceptionable first for the circumstances under which it was issued, and secondly, for the matter of that important state paper. My dispatch No. 14 apprised you of our reason for expecting a direct communication on this subject from her Majesty's government. I reserve instructions on this fourth ground, as I did in that dispatch, expecting to discuss it fully when the promised direct communication shaU bring it authoritatively before this government in the form chosen by the British government itself. My silence on the subject of the defense of that proclamation made by Lord John EusseU in his conversation with you being grounded on that motive for delay, it is hardly necessary to say that we are not to be regarded CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 197 as conceding any positions whicli his lordship assumed, and which yon so ably contested on the occasion referred to in your dispatch. Your argu- ment on that point is approved by the President. Tlie British government having committed the subject of the proposed modifications of international law on the subject of the right of neutrals in maritime war to Lord Lyons before you were prepared by our instructions to present the subject to that government, no objection is now seen to the discussion of that matter here. ISo communication on any subject herein discussed has yet been received from Lord Lyons. Dispatches which you must have received before this time will have enabled you to give entire satisfaction to his lordship concerniiig the blockade. We claim to have a right to close the ports which have been seized by insur- rectionists, for the purpose of suppressing the attempted revolution, and no one could justly complain if we had done so decisively and peremp- torily. In resorting to the milder and very lenient form of the blockade, we have been governed by a desire to avoid imposing hardships unneces- sarily onerous upon foreign as well as domestic commerce. The Presi-' dent's proclamation was a notice of the intention to blockade, and it was provided that ample warning should be given to vessels approaching and vessels seeking to leave the blockaded ports before capture should be allowed. The blockade from the time it takes effect is everywhere ren- dered actual and effective. Your remarks on the subject of the late tariff law were judicious. The subject of revenue policy in the altered condition of affairs is not unlikely to receive the attention of OongTess. We are gratified by the information you have given us of the friendly spirit which has thus far marked the deportment and conversation of the British government in your official intercourse with it. I am, sir, respctfuUy, your obedient servant, WILLDLM H. SEWAED. Chaeles I'EAJNrcis Adams, Esq., at Montgomery for certain explanations." I could not have anticipated, from what had been said to me here, that such a course was in contemplation. Shoidd they adopt it, the act would seem to me to approximate a recognition in this instance of the southern government more nearly than anything that has yet occurred. In that event, your future course wUl, no doubt, be guided by that wisdom which is so essen- tial to carry us through the troubles of our present position. * * * With much respect, I have the honor to be your obedient servant, WILLIAM L. DAYTON. Hon. William H. Sewaed, Secretary of State, Mr. Dayton to Mr, Seward, [Extract.] No. 35.] Legation op the United States, Paris, August 22, 1861. Sir: * * * * * * In the course of our conversation I told him [M. Thouvenel] that any declaration or action which looked to or recognized a difierence or dis- tinction between the North and South was a matter upon which our gov- ernment was, under the circumstances, peculiarly sensitive. That we treated with foreign governments for our whole country, North and South, and for aU its citizens, whether true men or rebels, and when we could not so treat, we would cease to treat at all. He answered that they did not mean to contest our right to treat for the wjiole country, and that was not the purpose of the outside declaration they proposed to make; but having heretofore adopted a course of strict neutrality, the declaration in question was right and proper to prevent misconception and contro- versy in the future.' With much respect, your obedient servant, WILLIAM. L. DAYTON. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State, 218 CLAIMS AGAINST GEEAT BRITAIN. [From Biitisli Blue Book, " North America," No. 1, 1862, p. 70.] No. 78, Uarl Bussell to Messrs. Ycmcy, Bost, and Mann. Foreign Office, August 24, 1861. The undersigned has had the honor to receiTe the letter of the 14th instant, addressed to him by Messrs. Yancy, Eost, and Mann, on behalf of the so-styled Confederate States of l^orth America. The British government do not pretend in any way to pronounce a Judgment upon the questions in debate between the United States and their adversaries in North America; the British government can only i'egret that these differences have unfortunately been submitted to the (arbitrament of arms. Her Majesty has considered this contest as consti- tuting a civil war, and her Majesty has, by her royal proclamation, declared her intention to preserve a strict neutrality between the con- tending parties in that war. Her Majesty will strictly perform the duties which belong to a neutral. Her Majesty cannot undertake to determine by anticipation what may be the issue of the contest, nor can she acknowledge the independence of the nine States which are now combined against the President and Congress of the IJnited States, until the fortune of arms or the more peaceful mode of negotiation shall have more clearly determined the respective positions of the two belligerents. Her Majesty can, in the mean time, only express a hope that some adjustment satisfactory to both parties may be come to, without the calamities which must ensue in the event of an embittered and protracted conflict. The undersigned, &c., EUSSBLL. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] No. 34.] Legation of the United States, London, August 30, 1861. gj-[j. * * * * # * Although the matter is not altogether germane to the preceding, I will not close this dispatch without calling your attention to the copy of a letter of Lord John Eussell to Mr. Edwardes, which I transmit as cut from a London newspaper, The Globe. It purports to have been taken from parliamentary papers just published, although I have not seen them, nor have I found it printed in any other newspaper. Tou will notice the date, the 14th of May, being the very day of my flrst"visit to his lordship in company with Mr. Dallas, when he did not see us, as well as of the pub- lication of the Queen's proclamation. I have reason to beUeve that the original form of that proclamation described the parties in America in much the same terms used by his lordship, and that they were only qualified at a very late moment, and after earnest remonstrance. The tone of the letter corresponds very much with that used to me, a report of which was transmitted in my dispatch No. 8. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES PEANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 219 Lord Russell to Mr. Udwardes. Foreign Office, 3{ay 14, 1861. It is for tlie Spanish government to weigh in the balance of their judg- ment the advantages and inconveniences which may arise from the annexation of the territory of the Dominican State to the domiaions of Spain ; and any opiaion which her Majesty's government may form on the subject can be fotmded on no other consideration than a regard for what they may look upon as the real and permanent interests of Spain. Her Majesty's government would, no doubt, have felt a strong and decided dissatisfaction at the proposed annexation if it had been Ukely to lead to the introduction of slavery into a commimity which is free from the taint of that pernicious institution ; but the formal and repeated declarations of Marshal O'DonneU, that under no circumstances wiU slavery be introduced into the Dominican territory, have removed the main cause which would have led her Majesty's government to view the proposed annexation with dislike and repugnance. Her Majiesty's government certainly apprehended, when first this pro- jected annexation was talked of, tliat it might, if carried into execution, involve Spain in unfriendly discussions, if not in conflict, either with France or with the United States, or with both. With regard to France, her Majesty's government have not learned that the French government has expressed any positive objection to the proposed arrangement, although she may not think it advantageous to Spain. It appears, also, from what has been stated to you, that there is no probability at present of any positive resistance to the measure, either by the northern or the southern confederation of Korth America. But the Spanish govern- ment should not too confidently rely on the permanent continuance of this indifference or acquiescence on the part of the HJTorth Americans ; and it is not impossible that when the civil war which is now breaking out shall have been brought to an end, an event which may happen sooner than at present appears likely, both the North and the South might combine to make the occupation of the Dominican territory by Spain the cause of serious difference between the North American governments and that of SpaiQ. Her Majesty's government do not deny that Great Britain, as a power naturally incMned to peace, and systematically addicted to commerce, must always view a war between any two powers as an event not only at variance with her principles, but to a certain degree injurious to her interests. But with respect to Spain, the motives of the British gov- ernment spring from far higher sources. Great Britaiu and Spain have for long periods of time, and ui circumstances of high moment to each, been faithful and active allies ; their alliance has been greatly useful and eminently honorable to both. It is a fundamental maxim of British policy to wish well to Spain, and earnestly to desire her welfare and prosperity ; and therefore any combination of events which might at any time iuvolve the possibility of Spain being engaged in a conflict which, from local circumstances and disadvantages, might be in the end seri- ously injurious to her rule over her ancient possessions, would be viewed by her Majesty's government with lively apprehension and sincere regret. [The above letter was published in the Globe of or before August 30, 1861, as taken from British Blue Book, entitled "Papers relating to the annexation of Eastern St. Domingo to Spain;" p. 14.] 220 . CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. [Commuuicated -witli Mr. Adams's dispatoli No. 44, to Mr. Seward, dated Septem- ■ber 14, 1861.J Lord Bussell to Mr, Adams. [Extract.] Foreign Office, September 9, 1861. Her Majesty's government have already recognized the belligerent character of the southern States, and they will continue to consider them as belligerents. But her Majesty's government have not recognized, and are not preipared to recognize, the so-caUed Confederate States as a sep- arate and independent state. The undersigned requests Mr. Adams to accept the assurance of his highest consideration. RUSSELL. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., <&c., &c., &c. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] No. 61.] Legation op the United States, London, October 18, 1861. Sir: * * * * * * I have good reason to believe that, under the stimulus applied by the insurgent emissaries, some movements are maktag in Liverpool, Man- chester, and London, asweU as in other manufacturing places, to concen- trate an influence upon the government to effect the purpose named. The result of it has as yet been made visible to the public eye only in the form which some of the casual public speeches take that are made by her Majesty's ministers. Several of these, as for example, the Duke of Newcastle, Lord de Grey, and Sir Robert Peel, have touched lightly upon the necessity of maintaining a rigid neutrality in our difBculties, whilst they have been more or less earnest in their friendly expressions foulards the United States, according to their respective proclivities. But Lord Russell, in the address which he has lately made at Newcastle, at the banquet prepared ia his honor, has gone a little further, and while professing neutrality as his doctrine, has undertaken to examine the nature of our struggle and to predict its results. According to him, it is a question between empire and independence, in other words, an exact repetition of the war of 1776. Of course, if the logical sequence of all the other portion of this address is to be rigidly adhered to, if the doctrine of leaving men to work out their own way without let or hindrance is the true foundation of the social economy, then does he regard the United States as wrong, and the insurgents as right. The former are to blame if they seek a reunion, because they would tolerate slavery thereby, but they are equally to blame if they endeavor to con- trol the disposition to extend and perpetuate slavery. The alternative which his lordship'S' reasoning would seem to favor is the concession of a social system based upon the principle of the subjection of one race of mankind to the will of another, a very remarkable deduction for a states- CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 221 man claiming as the reward for Ms long public services tlie meed of praise for his consistent advocacy of popular rights. But his lordship seems to my poor judgment to have made another mistake in this speech, in leaving some groimd for an inference that there is, after aU, something or other to be done by Great Britain towards put- ting an end to this lamentable state of things. It may be a mere fault of expression, not altogether unusual with his lordship, but it certainly does seem as if he not only felt that the United States were wrong, but that we ought to be somehow made sensible that we were so. It is there- fore no cause for surprise to find the London Times of yesterday morning eagerly catch at this opening, and to demand what it is his lordship means by his inuendo. There can be no doubt that in this case, as in that of his speech in Parliament, in May last, he has done the very thing which he professes so great a desire to avoid, scattered such ambiguous voices as to increase the confusion he declares himself anxious to dispel. It is this consideration that gives importance to the leading article in the London Post of yesterday morning, a newspaper which is understood here occasionally to express the sentiments of the prime minister. Lord Palmerston. I transmit a copy of that paper for your consideration, because I believe it to be intended to set at rest any doubts which might have arisen as to the intentions of the government at this moment. The reasoning, unlike Lord Eussell's, is plain and clear, and straight to the point. There is no intention to interfere with the blockade, or to pro- nounce judgment in any way upon the merits of the American question. I have no reason to suppose that Lord Eussell does not himself entirely concur in the justice of this policy. I believe him to be at heart more friendly to the United States than many who may profess a great deal more, but I am compelled to admit that during my short official relations with him, my experience cannot give testimony in favor of his mode of . administration. ****** I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant. CHAELES FEANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Sewaed, Secretary of State. rFrom British Blue Book, "North America," 1862, No. 1, p. 102.] No. 110. Lord Lyons to Earl Russell. [Extract.] Washington, November 4, 1861. In my immediately preceding dispatch of this date, I have reported to your lordship the substance of observations which Mr. Seward made to me the day before yesterday, with regard to the reception of confederate vessels in British ports. Mr. Seward concluded by saying that he earn- estly wished this matter could be satisfactorily settled, because it now constituted the only " difficulty " between the United States and Great Britain. Perceiving that I did not immediately assent to this, Mr. Sew- ard added, " It is, at all events, the only question we have against you; you may, perhaps, have something against us." 222 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. I thougM it well to take advantage of the opening tlins given to me, and to make some remarks to Mr. Seward on certain matters in which it appears to me that the course taken by the United States government is likely to have an unfortunate effect on the relations between the two countries. I said to Mr. Seward that I could not but think that the extreme punctiliousness Avhich he displayed with regard to communications between the British and French governments and the de facto govern- ment in the south was neither politic nor reasonable : the effect of it must be to keep open a constant source of irritation. It was impossible that such communications should not take place. Under present cir- cumstances there was no authority in the southern States which could afford protection to the persons and property of the large number of British and French subjects estaTjlished in those States, except the so- called confederate government. It was impossible, therefore, that we should " ignore " the existence of that government. The necessary inter- course with it had been titherto carried on in the most unofflcial man- ner, and with the most delicate regard to the susceptibility of the gov- ernment and i)eople of the United States.' Was it a reasonable ground of complaint, or of strong — or, at least, discourteous — ^proceedings on the part of the cabinet of "Washington? To put an extreme case — which, however, might not impossibly have happened in old times in Italy — suppose a band of brigands qbtained possession of a town in which there were foreign consuls, foreign residents, and foreign prop- erty : could the government of the country be justly offended if the con- suls made the best terms they could for their countrymen with the chief of the brigands, so long as their lives and fortunes were in his hands ? I proceeded to give some instances of matters in which communication with the southern de facto authorities was necessary. I mentioned, among other cases, that of British property on board a vessel captured by a southern privateer. Was it an offense to the United States if the British consul should take steps to obtain the restitution of this prop- erty ? Was it wise to ijush England and France to the wall ? What could be the advantage of rendering it difficult to conduct this neces- sary intercourse ia the quiet and unobtrusive manner which had been adopted ! Mr. Seward said that probably he should not think it necessary to take notice of an application from the restitution of captured property. [Prom Britisli Blue Book, "North America," 1862, No. 1, p. 111.] Ko. 124. Harl Russell to Messrs. Yancey, Bost, and Mann. Foreign Office, December 7, 1861. Lord Eussell presents his compliments to Mr. Yancey, Mr. Eost, and Mr. Mann. He has had the honor to receive their letters and inclos- ures of the 27th and 30th of November ; but, in the present state of affairs, he must decline to enter into any official commruiication with them. CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 223 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 168.] Department op State, Washington, January 23, 1862. We are embarrassed by the attitude of the British government in regard to the entertainment it gives m its ports to pirates engaged, without advantage to any loyal or humane interest in the world, in destroying our national commerce — a commerce only less important to Great Britain than it is to the American people. The President cannot but regard this misfortune as a consequence of precipitancy on the part of the Brit- ish government which might weU have been avoided. 1 wait, however, before giving you instructions upon the subject, for the advices which are expected to indicate, if not determine, the future course of the British government in regard to our domestic affairs. Judging from present appearances, just what was required of us by for- eign nations with unreasonable impatience is now in good time being accomplished. Federal forces, strong, well appointed, and superior in numbers, with all the needful material and means for effective action, confront the insurrection on every side. Its resources and strength are inadequate to resist the pressure, and it is expected soon to give way. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., (fee, (fee, &g. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 179.] Department of State, Washington, Febrtiary 5, 1862. Sir: Tour dispatch of January 17 QSo. 103) feU upon the department as merely a small part of the largest foreign mail ever received here, and only after such delays as left insuflcient time to dispose of the same before the departure of the outgoing steamer. I approve entirely of your proceediag iu regard to the Nashville, while I haU the solicitude of the British government for the preservation of peace iu the British waters as a favorable indication. I have given to the Navy Department the information received from you concerning the probable attempt to transfer the NashviUe to British owners. I have given to Mr. Perry substantially the same ideas which I have expressed to yourself in regard to the uselessness to European maritime powers of a policy on their part which invites only insurgent privateers and repels loyal American commerce from their ports. It is easy to see that this is the effect of a premature recognition of the insurrection as entitled to belligerent rights. ■ We hear from various correspondents, as you do, that France proposed three months ago to Great Britain a recognition and intervention to break the blockade. The communication of this kind which appeared to wear the highest character for authority was said to have come from the innermost circle of the British government. We have not credited it for this, among other reasons, namely: Lord Lyons, who, although a man of prudent reserve, is, at the same time, entirely truthful, has frankly told me that he knows nothing of the matter, while the French minister, who is a 224 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. very frank and friendly person, denies all knowledge of any such pur- pose. Further, Mr. Thouveners communications with, us, made before and after the settlement of the Trent affair, are of such a character as to exclude a belief that Prance was, indeed, projjosing to Great Britain a plot for the dismemberment of the Union. Moreover, I am slow to believe that either the government of France or the government of Great Britain misunderstand the true interests of their own country so much as to desire the dissolution of the Union, especially a dissolution to be effected by European intervention, and with the purpose of establishing a slaveholding power on the borders of the Caribbean sea. We have unmistakable evidence that sympathizers with the secession- ists will inaugurate a debate and motion for recognition in Parliament. Nor will I deny that I indulge some apprehension of the result. But, at the same time, I am not conscious of having left anything undone that could be done to enlighten the British government and the British pub- lic upon the merits of the question. The solution of it must be left to those who are expected to assume the responsibility. One thing is cer- tain, so far as any future poUtical event can be, and that is, that neither ynth nor without foreign aid will this Union be permitted by the Amer- ican people to fall. I cannot close this dispatch without expressing especial acknowledge- ments for the care and candor with which you have sifted the thick rumors of mischief, and given me what was worthy of consideration. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Ohables Feakcis Adams, Esq., (fee, <&c., &c. Mr: Seward to Mr. Adams. [Extract.] 'So. 182.] Dbpaetment of State, Washington, February 13, 1862. Sir: *#*### Has not the policy of Great Britain in regard to our internal troubles been adhered to long enough ? This is a question for the British gov- ernment. If the British government shall still think it necessary to persevere, is it asking too much of them that they shaU lend the protec- tion of their courts to the inforcement of the neutrality which the Queen's proclamation commands. * * * # # # * I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Francis -Adams, Esq., &c., # * * # # I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SBWAED. William L. Dayton, Esq., &c., &v., &c. Mr. Setcard to Mr. Adams. [Extracts.] No. 203.] Department of State, Washington, March 10, 1862. Sir : I have your dispatch of February 21, Ko. 119, which informs me, first, of the progress of the debate in Parliament concerning the alleged inefftciency of our blockade. I have already treated, sufaciently^ I think, upon that subject. I wiU add, however, first, that I am credibly informed that the commander of the French fleet in our waters inspected the block- ade, and thereupon stated to Mr. Mercier that it is as effective as it could be made by any navy in the world. Second, Memphis newspapers pub- lish telegrams from New Orleans which they state tha;t gold is at a pre- mium there of sixty to sixty-five per cent. * » ■ # * # * I fall back upon the ground assumed in my recent dispatches. There is no need for further losses and sufferings in Europe by reason of our domestic troubles, and consequently no need for a continuance of the disturbance of relations between the maritime states of Europe and our- selves. Let the governments of Great Britain and France rescind the decrees which concede belligerent rights to a dwindling faction in this country, and all their troubles will come to a speedy end. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Frajstcis Adams, Esq., &c., cfcc, EPABTMEIe seen that, although, like every other country, the United States are not exempt from faction, yet, the people need only to see and to realize aiy newnational danger, and time to measure the aimount of sacrifices required, to avert it. When they have done this, the last sacrifices are as cheel-- fully made as the fbrst. Arrogance, menace, and military severity on tie part of the insurgents have given place to spasmodic demands for -a&y and final levies of men and money, now discovered to be essential fcr mere self-defense. j What is the instruction of this crisis'? I do not forget that war, espi- cially civil war, is capricious. I know very well that the rainbow, whici appears when the clouds have parted, is not always a sure sign that evei worse tempests are not gathering in the political skies. Nevertheless w^ must act upon such indications as Providence is pleased to favor us with) alWays applying to them the test of experience. One of the instructions of experience is, that, usually, a short and convulsive life is appointed] to factions, while nations, like individuals, though obliged to encounter many successive and fearful dangers, are yet created to endure and fiil-1 'fill great ends. So we regard the present stage of this contest as reas-l suring us of the ultimate deliverance of the country, and the salvation, \ in their full extent, of its territory and its free institutions. '• At the moment, however, when we are accepting this satisfactory view, \ we find that we are drifting, notwithstanding our most earnest and vig- orous resistance, towards a war with Great Britain. Our commerce on the high seas is perishing under the devastation of ships of war that are sent out for that purpose from British coasts, by British subjects, and we hear of new corsairs and more formidable armaments of that kind, designed even to dislodge us from the military occupation of insurgent ports and to burn and destroy our principal cities, and these armaments, it is represented to us by imposing British authorities, the government of Great Britain is not authorized by the laws of the realm to restrain. It cannot be deemed offensive to say that at any period of our history when we were not suffering from intestine war, these injuries would not have been borne. At least it is true that they were not attempted until we were seen to have fallen upon the calamities of civil war. Great Britain might ask herself whether, if a similar opportunity for such hos- tilities should offer, she would consent to bear like assaults upon her commerce and her sovereignty. I know no one point of political calcu- lation more certain than this, that just what the people of Great Britain would do, under defined circumstances, in self-defense, that is what, under the same circumstances, the people in whose name I am writing must and will do in their o^ma defense. I would, if properly I could, shut out from consideration another ele- ment which enters into the case. Great Britain has at uo time intimated that, even with the co-operation of Prance, she woidd adopt or sanction a war or a hostile policy against the United States. Her government has on apt occasions indicated a very different and much more just disposi- tion. We respect the government and people of Great Britain for her persistence in these indications. Nevertheless we have the personal iiuthdrity of the Emperor of the Prench for the fact that he has annoimced to Great Britain that he is willing to follow, if Great Britain will decide CLAIMS AGAINST. 'great BRITAIN. 265 to lead tlie way, in recognizing the insurgents. To give sucli a recogni- tion, tinder the circumstances, would be to them a demonstration more potential than a fleet or an army, while it would authoritatively sanction the piratical enterprises of British subjects, which, even when disavowed by Great Britaia, are pro^^ng intolerable to the United States. At the same time it is to be observed that Great Britain as well as France has been explicitly informed by the United States that a recognition of the insurgents would necessarily be deemed by them an imfriendly proceed- ing. Virtually, therefore, France invites Great Britain to an alliance oftensive and injurious to the United States. Judging with the Ught which faUs upon our position, such an alliance would be morally wrong; for of what crime against both or either of these two nations, or against any nation, are the United States accused ? What unatoned wrong have they dojje which France and Great Britain are entitled by the law of nations to redress ! The United States have fallen, not without forty years of protracted resistance, into a state of civil war, which is an incon- venience to other maritime and commercial powers. Has either Great Britain or France, or any other nation, sinned less against the peace of the world than the United States ? If ever a nation could plead success- fully the irrepressibility of the elements of a civil strife, it is the United States on this occasion. World-planted and cherished, African slavery here has audaciously risen up to overthrow a government, the most equal and just that has ever been established among men, and to erect a new one exclusively upon the basis of human bondage. The United States refuse to be destroyed or divided by such an agency for such a ptu'pose. It is not easy, on this side of the Atlantic, to conceive how such a civil war can be looked upon with favor, or even with indifference, in Europe. We have, nevertheless, accepted the fact that Great Britain and France do regard this insurrection with :fe,vor, on the demand of the statesmen and presses which seem most to engage the confidence of the people in those countries. France now requires us to go one step further and to accept the fact that Great Britain and herseK ought to vote for the admission of the insurgents into the family of nations. The ground upon which the Emperor favors that extraordinary proceeding is, that it is expected that it would tend to bring our unhappy civil war to a close. His Imperial Majesty seems, to me, to have widely misconstrued the character of the American people. They are a brave and a jealous peo- ple ; they have made it their chief duty, throughout a whole century, to achieve a national independence and acquire a continental influence, just like that which France and Great Britain have respectively won through the conflicts of eight centuries. The people of the United States iindoubt- edly desire peace, but they would neither accept a peace that the pro- posed combination woidd offer them, nor acquiesce in it if it were possible to force it upon them. European powers can dictate peace, even to Asiatic communities, only by subjugating them, and yet they have been undergoing the process of moral decline since the era of Alexander. American society, on the contrary, is in the full vigor of youth ; it is too enlightened not to resist extirpation or aggression by foreign powers. I forbear from pressing the consideration that such a proceeding to enforce peace, in the United States, would be immoral, or the consideration that acceptance of a peace thus compelled woidd be suicidal. Those who should be prepared for an attempt either to subjugate the United States by force or to divide and separate them by foreign influence, could not be expected to appreliend the sensibilities and the sentiments which prevail among the people whom it is proposed in that extraordinary way to pacify. 266 CLAIMS AGAINST 'GREAT BRITAIN. Certainly, however, it behooves all the parties concerned to consider what probably will be the consequences to themselves if the intemperate action of British subjects and the inducement of French alliance shaU bring on a war between Great Britain and France and the United States. Suppose it to result in the success of the allies ? I have already said that no peace accepted at their hands could endure. Are the allies strong enough to garrison the American continent ? "Will they ever be prepared to guarantee the new slave State, and to hold its ambition for territory and its cupidity for slaves within bounds 1 And what are the bounds to be prescribed 1 Shall that new slave State be allowed to extend slavery and dominion only throughout the present territory of the United States, or are the anomalous and hateful institutions to be restored in Mexico . and throughout Spanish America, including the West India Islands ? It has required a term of iiffcy years and the co-operating power of the United States to arrest the African slave trade. How do the supposed allies now expect to jjrevent its renewal when the United States shall have relapsed into accompliceship with that dreadful traffic ? Or is the arrested work of Christianizing Africa, through the missionary enginery of the Middle Passage, to be renewed and carried on to its consummation under the auspices of the supposed allies ? Prudent states, even though strong in mutual alliance, must, never- theless, always take into consideration all the chances of success and failure. Let us sixppose, then, that the allies shall not succeed in their enterprise, and that the United States shall come unharmed out of the contest. Would there be nothing to apprehend from the temper of a people who had been, as it would then seem, wantonly brought into national conflict on no other pretext than their unwillingness to surren- der up their sovereignty and independence ? Is there any possession or any interest of France or of Great Britain, domestic or colonial, that would be the better assured to its lawful sovereign after such a war than it has been heretofore assured, through the justice and forbearance of the United States, so long as they had constituted a nation ? There is, moreover, a moral opinion that pervades the world, and when it is excited it works marvelous things in the policy of peoples and states. The universal revolution towards popular forms of government received, from the war in which that system was inaugurated here, an impulse which long continued to force it forward, through unheard of convulsions in Europe, and which impelled it into triumphant success throughout this continent. Those who contemplate an alliance by European monarchical states against the United States may be reasonably expected to consider how long and how far the aggressive governments are likely to be will- ingly suppMed with men and the materials for a war that will be deemed to be waged for the suppression of popular institutions. Alliances may, indeed, be made by monarchs and statesmen ; but, after all, they must depend for support and continuance upon the allied peoples and nations themselves. France and Great Britain are now equals. Alliance between a weak state and a strong one has sometimes been pre- served thrpugh several generations, when the states were separate and remote ; but I think there has been no case in which a voluntary alliance has permanently held two equal independent states through a long Avar without producing in one or in both of them changes that, had they been foreseen, would have been suflicient, by way of warning, to prevent the formation of the alliance. The statesmen of Prance and of Great Britain, if the project of an alliance were indeed seriously entertained, could not, I think, begin too soon to study how the expenses and the losses, and CLAIMS AGAINST GEEAT BEITAIN. 267 the profits and benefits, whicii must attend or follow it, shall be equitably allotted between the two countries. I have thus surveyed not only our domestic situation, but also the entire position of our relations with the chief maritime powers, not because it is seriously apprehended here that either alone, or in alliance with France, Great Britain is now about to adopt the injurious and unfriendly measure which the Emperor of Prance has indicated, but because the survey furnishes a basis for the renewal, under the President's instruc- tions, of a suggestion which has for some time been held in abeyance — namely, that all the misunderstandings which have arisen between the United States and Great Britain, including those which now seem to be causing the two countries to be drifting towards a conflict which must be calamitous, are due to the premature recognition of the insurgents as a belligerent power, and that two years of experience have confirmed the wisdom and the justice of the protest that this government made against that extraordinary proceeding. The insurrection, notwithstand- ing the incalculable benefits it has received from that most unfortunate measure, has, nevertheless, languished from the very beginning, and has now descended so low that manifestly it would perish at once, if it were left like the late insurrection in India, like the insurrection which a few years ago occurred in Canada, like the chronip instirrections in Spanish America, or even like the insurrection now raging in Poland, to stand by means of its own strength, not as a recognized belligerent, but as a domestic party, aiming to revolutionize the government that it refuses to . obey. I know how difiicult it w.ould be for the government of Great Brit- ain aU at once to reverse the policy of which we have never ceased to complain, even though it might be conceded that that policy had been unnecessarily adopted. But every new demand that is made ujjon that government for toleration of designs hostile to the United States relates back to the premature recognition of the insurgents as a belligerent,^ and strains to convert it into not merely a recognition of their sovereignty, but into actual war against the United States. Recurring to the senti- ments which the President expressed in the beginning of these unhappy troubles, I am authorized to tender to Great Britain assurances of the desire of the United States for the removal of every cause of alienation, and for the re-establishment of the relations between them on the found- ations of common interest and of affections and sympathies which, if left unopposed, would hold them together in the bonds of enduring friend- ship. We invite her to weigh these advantages agatast the promised benefits of any hostile alliance that she can form against us. We are yet friends, though that friendship has been severely tried. If we must becon^ enemies, the responsibility of that unhappy and fearful event will rest on her Majesty's goverirment and the people of Great Britain. It is not intended that you shall formally communicate the contents of this paper to Earl Eussell, but that you will jise its suggestions and argu- ments in your own discretion if circumstances shall seem to you to require or to favor the introduction of the serious f opics which I have thus dis- cussed. I am, sir, your obedient servant, ' ' WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Charles Pkancis Adams, Esq., cfec, <&c., &c. 268 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN.. Mr. Seward to Lord Lyons. [Extracts.] Department oe State, Washington, August 4, 1863. The undersigned, Secretary of State of tlie United States, lias the honor to acknowledge the reception of the note which was addressed to him by- Lord Lyons, on the 1st of August instant, concerning the case of the steamer General Eust, alias the Blanche. • # # *'# # * * * # The General Eusk was notoriously an American vessel, and it is not satisfactorily shown in the case that the title in her has ever been, in good faith, lawfnlly vested in any subject of Great Britain. At the same tirae, it is hardly necessary for the undersigned to remark that the United States have never assented to the fact her Majesty's gov- ernment assumes, namely, that the insurgents are a lawful belligerent, and consequently the United States insist that, as between those insur- gents and the United States, all such proceedings of their pretended authorities are simply illegal and void. The undersigned avails himself of this opportunity to renew to Lord Lyons the assurance of his high consideration. WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Eight Hon. Lord Lyons. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 676.] Department op State, Washington, August 10, 1863. Sir : Your dispatch of the 23d of July, No. 456, was duly received. Tour comments upon the condition of public sentiment in Great Britain would, if published, find a universal response in this country. But whither is the animosity agaiast the United States, which inspires a class of Englishmen, leading England ?, They have, indeed, been gratified with seeing the prestige of this countrj', at least for a time, abridged. But has England yet gained a square mile of territory, or has she extended or augmented her great influence a hair's breadth, through the humiliation we have brought on ourselves by the divisions which Englishmen seek to perpetuate and widen ? Spain occupies a province which perhajps she might not have claimed if our country had remained at peace, and Prance has sent a column to Mexico since the United States became embarrassed by civil war. But England has no part in these European acquisitions on this continent. Has the voice of England become more commanding in Western Europe, or in China, or Japan, since she has been made to appear an enemy of the United States % I think that it is not on her word that the peace of the world is supposed to be depending. What, indeed, is the American quarrel which already divides the voices though not yet the votes of England, but a civil war in the universal commonwealth of the British races ? Great Britain has not yet been actively concerned by American dissensions, but if we might discuss her policy as freely as her statesmen discuss our own, I think I might safely say that she does not feel a surer confidence in preserving the integrity of her great empire than we do in maintaining unbroken the large but more compact and pro- CLAIMS AGAKSrST GREAT BRITAIN. 269 auctive one whicli has been committed to onr care. The people of Great Britain thought more dispassionately and acted more wisely in cultivat- ing the friendship of the United States three years ago than they do now m crowding upon the line where prejudice rises into alienation. We must, nevertheless, accept the actual situation. Perhaps it is appointed for needful discipline to both branches of the British family. When that discipline shall have been fully realized, the records of your legation will show that it was not the United States which in this instance misunder- stood the interests of the great race, or were unfaithful to the instincts which should have preserved them in full force for the benefits of civil- ization. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Chables Fbajstcis Adams, Esq., &o., &c., &c. Circular No. 39, Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. Department op State, Washington, August 12, 1863. Sib : Whenever the United States have complained of the pi'emature decrees of Great Britain and France, which accorded the character of a belligerent to the insurgents, the statesmen of those countries have an- swered, that from the first they agreed in opinion that the efforts of the government to maintain the Union, and preserve the integrity of the republic, could not be successful. With a view to correct tMs prejudg- ment of so vital a question, I addressed a circular letter to the represent- atives of the United States in foreign countries on the 14th day of April, 1862, in which I reviewed the operations of the war on sea and land, and presented the results which had attended it down to that ■ period. The prejudice which I then attempted to remove still remains, and it constitutes the basis of all that is designedly or undesignedly in- jurious to this country in the policy of foreign nations. The insurgents have been enabled to protract their resistance by means of sympathy and aid they have received from abroad, and the expectation of further and more effective foreign assistance is now their chief resource. A new effort, therefore, to correct that prejudice is demanded equally by a pru- dent concern for our foreign relations, and by the paramoimt interests of peace and humanity at home. [Mr. Seward then gives a lengthy revieV of military operations, and of the progress made in suppressing the rebellion, and concludes :] Tou will use the facts presented in this paper in such a way as may be most effective to convince those who seek a renewal of commercial prosperity through the restoration of peace in America, that the quick- est and shortest way to gain that' desirable end is to withdraw support and favor from the insurgents, and to leave the adjustment of our do- mestic controversies exclusively with the people of the United States. I am, sir, your obedient servant, ' ' WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Chables Francis Adams, Esq., &c., tfec, &o. 270 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BEITAIN. 3Ir. Seward to Mr. Adams. [Extract.] No. 729.J Department op State, Washington, October 5, 1863. Sir: ' * * * * * The proclamation of neutrality was a concession of belligerent rights to the insurgents, and Avas deemed by this government as unnecessary and in effect as unfriendly, as it has since proved injurious to this country. .The successive preparations of hostile naval exxjeditions in Great Britain are regarded here as fruits of that injudicious ijroclamation. Earl Eussell adds that the United States have derived some military supplies from Great Britain, and enlisted many British subjects in their cause. But it can hardly be denied that neither such supplies nor such meA would have been necessary if Great Britain had not, so far as she was concerned, first raised the insurgents to the position of belligerents. It is hardly necessary to say that the United States stand upon what they think impregnable ground when they refuse to be derogated, by any act of the British government, from their position as a sovereign nation in amity with Great Britain, and placed upon a footing of equal- ity with domestic insurgents, who have risen up in resistance against their authority. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &c., <&g., &c. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 762.] Department of State, Washington, November 17, 1863. Sir : Tour dispatch of October 29 (No. 526) has been received. I thank you for the newspaper debates wMch you have furnished me on the sub- ject of the armed naval expeditions prepared in British ports. I think you have rightly derived the existing embarrassments of the British government in regard to our affairs from the one cause — ^the error of investing the insurgents with a belligerent character. The latest incidents disclose that the insurgents, so long tolerated and practically cherished within the realm, have at last, by natural conse- quence, had the hardihood to organize in the British provinces, adja- cent to our ports, with design for a border campaign. It seems surpris- ing that they have not earher made this attempt. The Canadian author- ities, desirous of peace and beneficial commerce with us, have not been slow to discover the duties devolved upon them by comity and interna- tional law, and they have acted promptly and effectively in fulfilling those obligations. Her Majesty's government cannot fail, I think, to approve of this course, because it is conservative of their transatlantic empire. It seems to me, also, that they cannot easily undervalue the good faith and candor of this government in its proceedings in regard to this new class of embarrassments. It is certain that in such attempts CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BEITAIN. 271 as tlie insurgents are so audaciously making in Canada we miglit look for occasions of offense, if AA^e were disposed to be aggressive or un- friendly to Great Britain. We sliall probably pass through the present difficulties easily, but other plots will follow. Certainly the insurgents are inventive, bold, and enterprising. Their schemes are suggestive. They have failed because of deficiency of material power and moral strength in the insurrection itself. They are disturbers of the peace at home, and notliing more here. They are disturbers of the peace of Europe, and can be nothiug more there. Slaveholders, seeking to sub- vert justice and establish slavery, they have not even strength enough to destroy the, Union. How idle are all the European policies which assume that such architects can build and maintain states ! When shall we see the governments of Great Britain and France apprehending this truth ? What new and unnecessary complications are we to go through before they discover and act upon it ? I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SBWAED. Chables Francis Adams, Esq., &c., <&c., &e. Mr. Seivard to Mr. Adams. [Extract.] 1^0. 771.] , Department op State, Washington, Noveniber 30, 1863, gjjj . # * * # * * * So in regard to our foreigii relations, the conviction has universally obtained that the true national policy is one of self-reliance and self- conduct in our domestic affairs, with absolute non-interference in those of other countries. These two important ideas are accepted with practi- cal universality in the loyal States, while in the region covered by the insurrection they are resisted only by those who have staked their all , upon the fortunes of a desperate strife. Under these circumstances, Europe, with her attention already diverted from America, will no longer fiud provocation or encouragement here for a policy hostile to the settlement of our controversy upon the basis of our constitutional union. I think, moreover, that she cannot be long in discovering that, in lieu of her present partial illicit trade, vath its con- stant annoyances, she has only td revoke her recognition of the insur- gents as a belligerent to secure a return of peace, with a restoration of the commerce which prevailed before the civil war began. True there will, for a season, be a difference in the materials of exchange. But one has only to consider the immense forces of population and industry exist- ing in the United States to become satisfied that whenever peace returns every source of national wealth now closed win soon be made to flow even more freely under the application of labor universally free than it did before, while slavery was maintained as a part of the industrial economy of the country. Apprehensions that the aggrandizement of the United States as a commercial power can bring any practical inconvenience or danger to European states can disturb none but visionary minds. We can never be dangerous unless we are armed. We were never so great, and yet never so completely unarmed, as we were when this civil war broke out. We were never before so shorn of national prestige as we are now, through 272 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. the operation of domestic faction ; yet ^we have never before been so strongly armed as we are at this moment, upon land and water. If we have ever been aggressive, it was the interest of slavery that made us belligerent abroad, as it was the same interest that has now afflicted ourselves with civil war. We can be only a peaceful nation, if we are left to enjoy our independence in the way that our destiny leads us. We can only become a disturber of the world's peace by being called into the world to defend that independence. I do not know in what way Great Britain and France may tliink it expedient to reverse the injurious policy they have hitherto pursued in regard to us, but I tliink that in order to direct theif attention with more earnestness to European affairs, they must soon come to the con- clusion that it is wise to remit American affairs exclusively to the gov- ernment of the United States. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., tfec, (fee, &c. ■ Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No 802.] Department op State, Wasliington, January 6, 1864. Sir: Tour dispatch of the 11th of December (So. 554) has been received, and your proceedings therein related concerning the pirate Rappahannock are approved. I acknowledge also the receipt of your dispatch of the 11th of Decem- ber,. No. 655, which is accompanied by a copy of the correspondence which has taked place between yourself and Earl Russell on the subject of the enlistment of pirates and equipment of ships of war by British subjects, and their naval operations on the high seas, against the unarmed mer- chantmen of the United States. The papers you have thus submitted to his lordship prove beyond a possible doubt that a systematic naval war has been carried on for more than a year by subjects of her Majesty from the British island as a base, and there is every reason for believing that unremitted efforts are made to give that warfare increased vigor 'and extension. It now appears from these papers that the belligerents have a regularly constituted treasury and counting-houses, with agents in London, for paying the wages of the British subjects who are enlisted there in this nefarious service. Hitherto remonstrances made by the United States to her Majesty's goverimient have been held inconclusive and unsatisfactory, because it was said that they were not attended with such clear, direct, and conclusive proofs of the offenses complained of, as would enable the government to arrest the offenders, and apply judi- cial correction to the practices indicated. It seems to the President that this difficulty has now been fully and completely removed. Having recently brought to the knowledge of her Majesty's government flagrant violations of our national rights of a simUar kind attempted in her Ma- jesty's North American provinces, and having still more recently given to Earl Russell, through your hands, the avowal of all these transactions by domestic conspirators against the United States, it only remains for me to inform you that the President awaits, with deep concern, a determina- tion by her Majesty's government of the grave question which you have been iastructed to submit to them, namely, whether that government will CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 273 adopt any new measm-es to put an end to practices which are not less intolerable to the United States than they are inconsistent with the neu- trality which her Majesty has proclaimed and enjoined upon aU of her subjects. In writing so earnestly upon this subject, I do not by any means forget that recently her Majesty's government have taken meas- ures to detain certain vessels which were being built for the purpose of carrying on war with the United States, nor do I overlook the fact that her Majesty's government have promised due attention to a special com- plaint which is referred to in this communication. The President does not, in the least, doubt that her Majesty's government are earnestly and seriously engaged in considering several of such complaints, distinctly and separately. Nevertheless, I trust that I shall not be thought unrea- sonably importunate in asking you again to press the general subject upon the attention of her Majesty's government, in the light of the facts now first brought to the knowledge of this department. Alarming events are occurriag on our borders, prosecutions are pending in Great Britain. We have been obliged to institute a special naval and military police in the port of New York, which must soon prove as annoying to lawful traders from friendly states as to our own citizens, and thus new irrita- tions are arising, and new controversies are gathering up between the two countries. -On our part we trace aH the evils to an unnecessary, andj as we think, an anomalous recognition by her Majesty's government of insurgents as a naval power who have no pretensions to that title. We desire to know whether, after aU its gross abuses and injurious consequences, that con- - cession must remain unrevoked and unmodified. If it must remain, then we desire to know whether her Majesty's government can apply a cure to these abuses and consequences, or whether we are expected to devise and provide the proper remedies. If the British government is to 'do nothing, and the United States everything, I know not what security commerce can ever have hereafter against universal practices of privateering and piracy, except that even the lawful trade between friendly coujitries must be carried on under the protection of ever-pres- ent and adequate armed force. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED, Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &c., <&c., die. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. No. 580.] Legation op the United States, London, January 21, 1864. Sir: The eccentricities of the rebels are among the most marked pecu- liarities of this war. It seems that they undertake to issue naturaliza- tion papers to aliens on board of vessels which have never yet them- selves been able to get within their jurisdiction. I transmit a copy of my note to Lord EusseU relating to this subject, and covering copies of two such papers, the originals of which are now in the hands of Mr. Dudley, the consul at Liverpool. How long the British government will continue to put up with such things it is difBcult to teU. Made daily more sensible of the difficulties into which their early measures have plunged them, they are still reluc- 18 A 0— TOL. I 274 CLAIMS AGAINST GEEAT BRITAIN. taut to take any step which indicates the slightest admission that they were wrong. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES FEANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. Mr. Adams to Uarl Busaell. Legation op the United States, London, January 20, 1864. Mt Loud : I have the honor to submit to your consideration copies of two papers, the originals of which are in the possession of the consul of the United States at Liverpool. It would seem by these papers as if the' so-caUed naval officers of the insurgents in the United States assume to themselves the power on the ocean, not only as in former cases to constitute a court of admiralty on the quarter-deck for the condemnation of prizes, but also to naturalize the subjects of foreign sovereigns at sea, without the necessity of prior emigration or settlement in any vicinage. I pray your lordship to accept the assurances, &c., CHAELES FEANCIS ADAMS. Eight Hon. Eabl Eussell, cfcc, &e., &c. Certificate of citizenship in favor of Frank OlassbrooTc, a free white ina/n, twenty four years of age. To all whom it may concern : Know all men by these presents that I, WiUiam L. Maury, a first lieu- tenant in the navy of the Confederate States of America, and captain of the armed steamer Georgia, a vessel of war belonging to said States, do hereby, and by virtue of authority in me vested by an act entitled "An act to establish a uniform rule of naturalization for persons enlisted in the armies of the Confederate States of America," do issue this my certificate in favor of Frank Glassbrook, a free white native of England, and now a seaman on board this vessel, and in the naval service of the Confederate States of America aforesaid, whereby the said Frank Glass- brook, having of his own free wUl, at the age of twenty-four years, enlisted in the naval service aforesaid, and taken the oath of allegiance to the said States, is made a natural citizen thereof, and invested with all the responsibilities, duties, obligations, and privileges that are bylaw attached to every naturalized citizen of the Confederate States of America. Done at sea, on board the confederate States steamer Georgia, this 27th day of April, in the year of our Lord 1863. In testimony whereof I hereunto aifis^my hand and seal. WILLIAM L, MAUEY, [l. S.] First Lieut., Gom^dg Confederate States Steamer Georgia. CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 275 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. ISo. 838.] Department op State, Washington, February 8, 1864. Sir : Tour dispatch of January 21 (IJTo. 580) has been received, together with a copy of your note to Earl EusseU. on the subject of pretended rebel naturalization at sea. I have the pleasure of informing you that the spirit of that paper, as well as the teims in which it is expressed, are fuUy approved. The President thinks that the vigilance you have manifested in so promptly bringing the matter to the notice of her Majesty's government is worthy of especial commendation. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &c., &c., i&c. , Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. fExtract.] Ko. 596.] Legation op the United States, London, February 12, 1864. Sir: I have the honor to transmit a copy of a note addressed to me by Lord EusseU in reply to miae of the 19th of last month, on the report of Mr. MaUory. * * * * * * * I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES FEANCIS ADAMS. Hon. WrLLLAM H. Seward, Secretary of State, Earl Bu-ssell to Mr. Adams. [Extract.] Foreign Oppice, February 8, 1864. There is, however, one passage in your letter which it is impossible for her Majesty's government to pass over without especial notice; this passage is as follows: "I am further directed, respectfully, to represent that the toleration of these avowed enemies of the United States, whilst known to be carrying on these hostUe practices, now fully revealed, within the British realm and its dependencies, without restraint of any kind, cannot be regarded as an exercise of the unquestioned right of sheltering political exUes, but rather as equivalent to permitting them to abuse that right for the purpose of more effectually availing them- selves of British aid and co-operation now notoriously given them, in waging war with a country with which Great Britata is at peace.'' In reply to this allegation, her Majesty's government think it right to state that her Majesty's dominions must necessarily continue to be open to the subjects of both belligerents, as long as her Majesty is at peace with both of them 5 but that her Majesty's government will, at the same time, continue to put in force, as they have hitherto don'e, to the full 276 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. extent of the means in their power, the laws of this country against those subjects of either of the belligerents who may be found, by trans- gressing those laws, to have abused the rights of hospitality, and to have offended against the authority of the Crown. With regard to its being made a matter of complaint by the govern- ment of the United States, that her Majesty thought fit, upon the origi- nal commencement of hostilities, to recognize the status of belligerents in both the parties to this unhappy contest, her Majesty's government can only repeat the observation which they have had occasion to make on former occasions, iu reply to similar representations received from you, that any other course would have justly exposed this country to a charge of violating the clearest principles and soundest precedents of international law. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, EUSSBLL. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., a^ Qyjy (jau your attention to the speech of Mr. Gladstone, at Manchester, wMch is reported in the Times of this morning. I am sorry to say that it is not in quite so friendly a tone as his former one on the same subject. Indeed, it seems to me that public opinion shows signs of fluctuation, just in proportion to the character of the news from America. The paragraph in the President's proclamation which relates to the removal of the dangers from foreign . hitervention is not well received, perhaps, because it touches the sore too abruptly. As the period approaches when the end of the existiag stock of cotton grows more and more visible, the distress of the opera- tives appears more aggravated, and the speculations as to the future are more freely indulged in. The movements of the Emperor are watched with more iaterest, and hopes are undoubtedly cherished, in secret, that he will have the courage to do what many here wish, but are ashamed to declare to the world. In the mean time outfits of vessels with supphes to run the blockade go on with increased vigor. Every account received of a successflil voyage stimulates to enlarged contributions. ********* I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES FEAlSrOIS ADAMS. Hon. WiLLiAia H. Sewaed, Secretary of State. [From Britisli Blue Book, " North America," No. 1, 1863, p. 1.] » No. 1. Lord Lyons to Earl Bussell. [Extract.] > Washington, May 16, 1862. I have the honor to inclose copies of an article which has appeared iu the iSTational Intelligencer newspaper this morning, on the subject of rumors which have reached this country from Europe of an intention on the part of England and France to intervene in the present civil war.. It is temperate in tone, and is dfeserving of attention, as it may be taken to express the view of the subject taken by this government. Mr. Seward, indeed, spoke himself to me in very much the same lan- guage three days ago. The French government had, he said, aH along very frankly communicated to the government of the United States its perplexities and the sufferings endured by its people in consequence of the interruption of commerce with the south. He had been unable for some time to do more than exhort that government to have patience and wait with confidence for the alleviation he had promised as the result of the first successes of the United States arms. He had now redeemed the promises he had made. Three ports were already opened; CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 405 it would soon be possible to open otters. The United States were no longer responsible for the interruption of commerce. If trade should not revive, if foreign nations should stUl be unable to provide them- selves with cotton, tQbacco,,and other southern products, the fault would lie, not with the TJnited States but with the rebels. If the rebels destroyed the cotton and tobacco already in existence, if they gave up the culti- vation of those articles, they would do so in opposition to the wishes and in defiance of the authority of the United States. The only course for foreign powers to take in order to relieve themselves from the suffer- ings which they already endured, and to secure themselves from the still greater sufferings which threatened them, would be to exert their influence in favor of the prompt restoration of the federal power in the insurgent States. Peace, the return of confidence, and the consequent resumption of trade and agriculture, would immediately follow the re-establishment of the Union and the Oonstitation. Mr. Seward added that he did not attach any belief to the rumors that England and France were in communication with a view to intervene in the affairs of this country. He had, indeed, received numerous letters from Em^ope stat- ing it to be the fact; but he thought that the reports might be traced to the friendly representations to the United States which had been from time to time made by the French government; that perhaps that government was wiHing that such reports should be spread, in the hope that they might tend to make the French people patient. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. ISo. 260.] Department oe State, WashiTigton, May 28, 1862. Sir : Your dispatch of May 8 (Eo. 156) has been received. There is a statement in the public journals that thirty vessels which had left British ports with a common design to run our blockade have gathered at JSTassau, and that they are now remaining there, awaiting the relaxation of the blockade at some of the southern ports, which the President has permitted to take place on the 1st of June, preferring to avail themselves of that lawful privilege rather than persevere in their prohibited operations. I think, therefore, that we may congratulate ourselves upon having advanced to a new stage in our intercourse with maritime powers affecting the present troubles in the United States — a stage at which motives of sympathy in foreign countries with the insur- gents, derived from the pressure of the blockade, will disappear. This stage is also marked by another improvement of the case, namely, the withdrawal from the ocean of the pirates who have occasionally sought shelter and protection in friendly ports while committing depre- dations on American commerce. Under the President's instructions I desire to inaprove the position thus attained to confer, if oar representatives abroad shall think it dis- creet, with the friendly nations upon the prospects of the war and their fature course in regard to it. By way of introduction, I beg to recall to your recollection the facts that, at the earliest proper moment, I set forth most distinctly the opin- ions of this government that the mutual interest, present and permanent, of all the maritime nations, including this country, require the preserva- tion of harmonious relations between them, and that the same interests 406 CLAIMS AGAESrST GREAT BRITAIN. demand that, so far as possible, peace shall prevail throughout the world, and especially in the United States and upon the American continent. In explanation of these views, I set forth the opinion that the indus- trial systems of Western Europe and the United Spates, including their agriculture, manufactures, and commerce, are, in some respects, to be regarded less as distinct national systems than as one general combina- tion of agricultural, manufacturing, and commercial agencies, in which a jar in one country necessarily produces disturbance in all the others; so that a serious disorganization of the machinery employed in produc- tion here cannot fail to result in derangement, probably in (fisaster, everywhere abroad. There are now some painful evidences that these speculations were not unsoufid. There is distress among the peasantry of Ireland, in the manufacturing towns of Belgium, and the wine presses and silk looms in some parts of France seem to be coming to a dead stand. All the suf- ferers — I will not stop to inquire how justly — trace their misfortunes to the civil war of the United States. It is manifest that what the European nations want is an end of that war as speedy, and leaving the industrial system of this country as little disorganized, as possible. It would seem impossible for any considerate person to doubt that this is the very consummation which the government of the United States must want, even more than it can be desired by the European states. This government has expressed that want earnestly, decidedly, sometimes, perhaps, even impatiently. K"evertheless, the war has continued a whole year, against the wishes of Europe as well as of America. A new cam- paign is even beginning. In order to determine whether it is likely to reach the desired end, it will not be unprofitable to consider the causes of its prolongation to the present period. This government, at the beginning, assumed, and it has constantly insisted, that the Union could, must, and should be preserved. On the other hand, the European nations, when they saw the storm burst upon the country, eitlier doubted, or actually disbelieved, the possibility of that great salvation. Europe had but a subordinate and indirect interest in the great problem, and it supposed that if the United States could only be convinced that the Union could not, in the end, be preserved, they would at once forego the contest and consent to a national dissolution, which it,was erroneously thought would be followed by peace, while we knew that it would only be the beginning of endless war. Thus European opinion has practically favored the insurgents and encouraged them with ephemeral sympathies and unreal expectations of foreign intervention, and has thus protracted the war to the present time. Certainly this government and the American people are even more confident of the preservation of the Union now than they were a year ago, and are, therefore, even less likely now than they were then to accept peace with the inconceivable pains and perils of dissolution. Can it be presumptuous, then, for us to ask European statesmen to review, in the light of the events of the war, the opinion which they formed at so early a stage of it, that the opinion itself might, perhaps, properly be deemed a prejudice ? Of course, in such a review, the observer would not overlook the con- trast between the position which the federal government held a year ago and its present situation. Then it had. been practically expelled, with all its authorities, civil, military, and naval, from every State south of the Potomac, Ohio, and Missouri rivers, while it was held in close siege in this capital, cut off from communication with even the States which had remained loyal. K"ow, it has virtually retaken all the posi- CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 407 tions it so early lost on the seaboard ; it possesses the Mississippi and aU the other great natural highways, and has forced the insurgents to battle in the most inaccessible parts of the insurrectionary district. The forces and the resources of the government are unexhausted and increasing. Those of the insurgents are diminished and becoming nearly exhausted. No one, either here or in Europe, now contests these simple facts. The only argument opposed to them is, that the insurgents have deter- mined not to acknowledge the authority of the Union. The evidence of this is a certain resolute and defiant tone maintained by their organs. Certainly so long as the insurgents have any hope of ultimate suc- cess, they could not be expected to discourse otherwise than in just such a tone, nor will they fail to cherish such a hope so long as they find a willingness to meet it with sympathy in Europe. The very last advices which came from that quarter, pre^aous to the arrival there of the news of the fall of New Orleans and Norfolk, were full of speculations about some newly-conceived form of intervention. But it must be remembered that the insurgents are men, and that they may reasonably be expected to speak and to act like other belligerent fac- tions under similar conditions. So, also, being men, and subject to the laws which determine the economy of Society, they must in all cases conform themselves, however unwillingly, to the circumstances by which they are surrounded. They cannot, more than other masses of men, determine for themselves, under one state of circumstances, what they wiU do under a different one. A writer upon war advises brave men never to nail their colors to the staff", remarking that if they shall be able, and find it desirable, they can maintain it there without nailing, while it will be more convenient to lower it if they shall find themselves unable or no longer desirous to keep it flying. But, speaking practically, what has been the result, thus far, in the present case ? Has disloyalty been found an indomitable sentiment in this war ? It pervaded even this capital and this District at the beginning of the strife. It no longer exists here. It divided Maryland, and provoked conflict there. The Union is now as strong in that State as in any one of the always loyal States. It committed Missouri to the pretended new confederacy. Mis- souri is now active and earnest among the loyal States. It placed Ken- tucky in an attitude of neutrality. But Kentucky is to-day firm, resolute and even self-devoted to the Union. In other regions where disloyalty was more general, such as Eastern Yirgiaia, Tennessee, and Louisiana, and North Carolina, acquiescence under the federal authorities has promptly followed their appearance there, and the preliminary steps are taken for the restoration of the laws of the Union. It is a simple fact that loyalty reappears everywhere just so fast as the successes of the government arfe deemed sufficient to afford a guarantee for reliance upon its protection. The disunionists, even in their strongest holds, are not a people, but only a faction, surpassing the loyal in numbers, and sUencing them by terrors and severities in many places, but neverthe- less too few and feeble to prevent the return of any district or any State to the Union in the presence and under the protection of the federal authorities. The President asks foreign nations to consider that we are only at the end of one year now, and yet the whole effective mass of the insurrec- tionary region has been brought into the field by conscription. The credit of the revolution is dead before the first dollar has been raised by taxation to support it, and the territory which must bear taxation is 408 CLAIMS AGAINST GEEAT BRITAIN. at once reduced to the narrowest limits, and is exhausted of its wealth and supplies. The power of a losing faction, under any circumstances, must contin- ually grow less ; but that of the disunionists is abating under the oper- ation of a cause peculiar to themselves, which it is now my duty to bring forward — I mean the practice of African slavery. I am aware that in regard to this point I am opening a subject which was early interdicted in this correspondence. The reason for this inter- diction, and the reason for a departure from it, are, however, equally obvious. It was properly left out of view, so long as it might be reasonably hoped that by the practice of magnanimity this govern- ment might cover that weakness of the insurgents without encouraging them to persevere in their treasonable conspiracy against the Union. They have protracted the war a year, notwithstanding this forbearance of the government ; and yet they persist in invoking foreign arms to end a domestic strife, while they have forced slavery into such promi- nence that it cannot be overlooked. The region where the insurrection still remaius flagrant embraces all . or parts of several States, with a white population of four and a half million, and a negro population of three and a half million, chiefly slaves. It is thus seen to be a war between two parties of the white race, not only iii the presence but in the very midst of the enslaved negro race. It is notorious, we could not conceal the fact if we would, that the dispute between them arose out of the questions in which the negro race have a deep and lasting interest, and that their sympathies, wishes, and interests naturally, necessarily, inevitably, fall on the side of the Union. Such a civU war between two parties of the white race in such a place, and under such circumstances, could not be expected to con- tinue long before the negro race would begin to manifest some sensibility and some excitement. We have arrived at that stage already. Every- where the American general receives his most useful and reliable infor- mation from the negro, who hails his coming as a harbinger of freedom. Wherever the national army advances into the insurrectionary region, African bondsmen, escaping from their insurrectionary masters, come out to meet it and to offer their service and labor in whatever capacity they may be desired. So many of these bondsmen have, even without the invitation, and often against the opposition of the federal military and naval authorities, made their way from bondage among the insur- gents to jfreedom among the loyalists, that the government finds itself occupied with the consideration of measures to provide them with dom- icils at home or abroad. Not less than a hundred such escape every day, and as the army advances the number increases. K the war sbould continue indefinitely, every slave wiU become not only a free- man, but an absentee. If the insurgents should resist their escape, how could they hope to prevent the civil war they have inaugurated from degenerating into a servile war ? True, a servile population, espe- cially one so long enslaved as the Africans in the insurrectionary States, require time and trial before they can organize a servile war ; but if the war continues indefinitely, a servile war is only a question of time. The problem, then, is whether the strife shaU be left to go on to that point. The government, animated by a just regard for the general welfare, in- cluding that of the insurrectionary States, adopts a policy designed at once to save the Union and rescue society from that fearful catastrophe, while it consults the ultimate peaceful relief of the nation from slavery. It cannot be necessary to prove to any enlightened statesman that the labor of the African in the insurrectionary region is at present indis- CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 409 pen sable, as a resource of the insurgents, for continuing the war, nor is it now necessary to show that this same labor is the basis of the whole industrial system existing in that region. The war is thus seen to be producing already a disorganization of the industrial system of the insur- rectionary States, and tending to a subversion of even their social system. Let it next be considered that the European systems of industry are largely based upon the African slave labor of the insurrectionary States employed in the production of cotton, tobacco, and rice, and on the free labor of the other States employed in producing cereals, out of which combined productions arises the demand for European produc- tions, materials, and fabrics. The disorganization of industry, which is already revealing itself in the insurrectionary States, cannot but im- pair their ability to prosecute the war, and at the same time result indirectly in greater distress in Europe. On the other hand, this disorganization operates far less injuriously at present to the federal government and to the loyal States. Every African laborer who escapes from his service is not only lost to the sup- ■port of the insurrection, but he brings an accession to the productive labor of the loyal States, and to that extent increases their ability to continue the contest in which they are reluctantly engaged. The fail- ure of foreign importations," as heretofore, in retain for the exportation of southern staples, stimulates the manufacturing industry of the loyal States. Immigration is accelerated by an activity in these States, resulting from extended manufacture and prosecution of the war. Thus has the phenomenon appeared, disappointing so many prophecies in Europe, that the war impoverishes and exhausts only the insurrection and not the Union. I shall not contend that these effects would be per- petual. I know there is a reckoning for every nation that has the mis- fortune to be involved in war, and I do not expect for the United States any exemption from that inexorable law. But it is enough for my pres- ent purpose that the penalties are neither more severe nor more immi- nent than the loyal States can endure while bringing this unhappy con- test to its desired conclusion. Let us now suppose that any one or more European States should think it right or expedient to intervene by force to oblige the United States to accept a compromise of their sovereignty. What other effect could it produce than to render inevitable, and even hurry on, that servile war, so completely destructive of aU European inter- ests in this country, which this government so studiously strives to avoid ? I know that the danger of any foreign nation attempting such a policy, if it has ever existed, has passed, as I am happy in knowing that no for- eign government has ever threatened such intervention, while several magnanimous governments have repudiated all unfriendly designs. I have put forward that hypothesis only by way of preface to a ques- tion not less significant, namely, what must be the effect of such a policy abroad as will encourage the insurgents with hopes of an intervention which is never to occur ? Is not that effect visible in the obstinacy of the insurgents in their destruction of the cotton and tobacco already culti- vated and liable to be brought into commerce by the return of peace, and in their studied neglect of the planting the seed of their staples, and turning so much of the African labor as they are able to save into the production of supplies of provisions and forage, to enable them to con- tinue the war? The effect wiU be further developed as time goes on in opening a way for that servile war which, if it shall be permitted to come, will produce infinite suffering throughout the world, and can only at last result in an entirely new system of trade and commerce between the United States and aU foreign nations. 410 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. I need not say tliat these views are not grounded on any proceedings or expressions of the British government, and are to be submitted to them, only as they will be to other states, from a strong desire on the part of the President that the true condition of the present strife may be everywhere fully understood. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., (fee, tfec, &c. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] No. 160.] Legation op the United States, Paris, June 12, 1862. Sir : Your dispatch 'No. 160 is received. The defeat of General Banks, to which it refers, has been commented upon by the great body of the English press as though it were a victory of vast importance to the southern cause. This, together with the check to our gunboats on the James River, is assumed as altering altogether the face of things ; and the future of the war is now looked upon as a sort of dissolving view. The glass is reversed, and the end, they say, seems more remote than at the beginning. In this condition of things the rumors of recent conferences thicken, and it is said that a strenuous effort is now being made to induce England and Prance to intervene, in some form, ia our affairs. Those who are hostile to the interests of the United States care little ia what form this intervention comes. They believe that, should England and Prance tender mediation or otherwise, and the same be rejected by our government, (as they well know it would be,) these governments could not then stop ; that the cot- ton interests, backed by the national pride of both countries, would urge them first into a recognition of southern independence, and then into an active intervention, if need be, to stop the war. It is seen, too, by those who are unMendly to the Union of our States, that should success attend our arms ia one or two more battles, it would be too late to tender aid to the South ; that their condition would not even afford a fair pretext for interference. They do not mean the opportunity shall pass if they can prevent it. What success will attend their efforts I do not know. I should not attach much importance to these rumors, however well accredited they seem to be, were it not for the exceeding pressure which exists for want of cotton, and the growing fear that the opening of ports merely will not supply that want. Any hostile interference on the part of France would be much in con- flict with the tone of feeling ia which she has heretofore and at all times expressed herself. In addition, I do not see how she can suppose that her interference would tend to facilitate the procurement of cotton, which she so much needs. I can scarcely believe that anything effective will be attempted until the consequences of the opening of our ports have been realized. As yet no time has been given. I get communications from our consuls in different quarters to know what is excluded from our opened ports under the head of " contraband of war." Mr. Chase's circular, as printed ia certain New York papers, excludes " aU liquors." This would embrace ordinary French and other CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 411 wines, tlie sole exports of Bordeaux and other toAvns. Can this have been the iatention of the government ? I am, sir, yoitr very obedient servant, WILLIAM L. DAYTON. Hon. William: H. Seward, iSeeretary of State. Mr. Adams to Mr, Seward. [Extracts.] No. 176.] Legation of the United States, London, June 20, 1862. Sir : I had a conference with Lord Eussell yesterday at four o'clock. On the main object for which I had sought an iaterview, the reading to him your dispatch No. 260, 1 found, upon an examination of the vari- ous papers I had brought with me, that I had left it at home after all. But I gave the substance of it, and as his lordship intimated that he would lite a copy of it, and I saw no objection to it, I agreed to send him one instead of putting him to the trouble of another conference. ********* This day the motion of Mr. Lindsay, afiBrming the desirableness of the recognition of the insurgents, is to be brought forward in the House of Commons. His lordship casually alluded to it in the course of our conversation as a matter of little importance. In point of fact, the character of our latest news would seem to render the agitation of the question almost ridiculous. A newspaper report of the result will doubt- less go out in the steamer that carries this dispatch. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, OHAELES FEAJJTGIS ADAMS. Hon. Willi AM H. Seward, Secretary of Stale. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. [Extract.] No. 287.] Department of State, Washington, July 5, 1862; Sir : Your dispatch of June 20 (No. 176) has been received. It is a satisfaction to know that a copy of my dispatch No. 260 has been received and read by Earl EusselL The subject it presents is one of momentous import. It seems as if the extreme advocates of African slavery and its most vehement opponents were acting in concert to pre- cipitate a servile war — ^the former by making the most desperate attempts to ovefthrow the federal Union, the latter by demanding an edict of uni- versal emancipation as a lawful and necessary, if not, as they say, the only legitimate way of saving the Union. ********* I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., ro. 259.] LEGATION' OF THE UNITED STATES, London, N^ovember 13, 1862. Qjjg . * # * * * * It now appears that the Emperor of France has taken a positive step. The letter of M. Drouyn de Lhuys to the two powers of Russia and Eng- land appears in the newspapers. Mr. Dayton will, doubtless, give you by this steamer a full report of the communication that has been made to him by that minister, a brief abstract of which he has sent to me. It remains to be seen what fate it will meet from the parties to which it is addressed. How it will fare with Russia I think there can scarcely be a doubt. Independently of the steady tone of Baron Brunnow, the ambassador at this court, in all his conversation with me, I find an article in a news- paper of authority at St. Petersburg, which very distinctly signifies an indisposition to interfere in any other way than that which has already been taken by Russia. A cabinet council was held here yesterday, when there can be no doubt that some action was had on the subject. Although I have not yet had an opportunity to know from authoriized sources what the decision was, yet I have no doubt of its character, judging only from the tone of the leader in this morning's Times. Lord Russell has appointed a conference with me on the subject of the claims convention for Saturday, so that I shall postpone seeing him until that time, unless in the interval I should have any reason to doubt the cor- rectness of my present impression. Of course, if I am right as to the decision of these two parties, it results from what Mr. Dayton tells mejof the declaration to him by the minister that there will be no action at all. I ought to mention the fact that I have received from a good source the information, that prior to the date of the note of M. Drouyn de Lhuys, the King of the Belgians had addressed a note to the Emperor 454 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. of France, recommending tlie adoption of some sucli measure as tliat wliich lias been taken. * * * # * The propo- sition of an armistice of six months can come only from some party anx- ious to save the rebels from the immediate dangers that encompass them. It is, in other words, moral intervention of the most decisive character. It remains to he seen how long the unwillingness of the other great powers to give countenance to such a proceeding will deter him from undertaking to act alone. The preparatory steps taken in Mexico are not without their significance in this connection. ******* I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELBS FEANOIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extracts.] No. 261.] Legation of the United States, London^ November 15, 1862. Sir : The reply of Earl Eussell to the French note, which is published in all the morning papers, is sent herewith. It is sufBLciently decisive to answer all present purposes. I have just returned from my conference with his lordship on the subject of the convention. The conversation which ensued was too long to be reported to-day. I can only say that it was friendly and satisfactory. I inquired if he had any information of the answer of the Eussian court. He said that he had received only an abstract of it by the telegraph. I understood him that, in substance, it contained an expression of great interest in the communication, a desire not to stand in the way of any joint action that might be deter- mined by the two powers, and a profession of a wish to help on any measures to restore peace in America that might be likely to prove acceptable to the United States. * * * It is a little remarkable that, both in England and France, the ten- dency of public opinion is gradually to fall into the old channel of party divisions. The advocates of strong poWer side with the rebels, while the more liberal and popular party befriend the cause of the government. This is becoming more and more visible as the struggle goes on. Efforts are now making here, with a good prospect of success, for a more effective organization of the anti-slavery sentiment in our behalf. Since writing the above I have received the following telegram, pur- porting to give the substance of the Eussian answer : " St. Petersburg, Hfovemher 15. " The * Journal de St. Petersburg' of to-day contains the reply of Prince Gortschacow to the note of M. Drouyn de Lhuys. " The Prince, after recalling the constant efforts of Eussia in favor of conciliation in America, says : ' It is requisite, above aU, to avoid the appearance of any pressure whatever capable of chilling public opinion in America or of exciting the susceptibility of the nation. We believe that a combined measure of the powers, however conciliatory, if pre- sented in an of&cial or of&cious (officieux) character, would risk arriving CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 456 at a result opposed to pacification. If, howeyer, France should persist in her intention, and England should acquiesce, instructions shall be dispatched to Baron Stoeckl, at Washington, to lend to both his col- leagues, if not official aid, at least moral support.'" I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES FEANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H.- Seward, Secretary of State. [From British Blue Book entitled "Dispatch respecting the Civil W^r in North America."] [presented to both houses op PAELIAMBNT by COMMAITD OP HER MAJESTY — 1863.] Uarl Btissell to Earl Oowley. Foreign Office, November 13, 1862. My Lord: The Count de Flahault came to the Foreign Office by- appointment on Monday the 10th instant, and read to me a dispatch from M. Drouyn de Lhuys relative to the civU war in North America. In this dispatch the minister for foreign affairs states that Europe has followed with painful interest the struggle which has now been going on for more than a year on the American continent. He does justice to the energy and perseverance which have been displayed on both sides, but he observes that these proofs of their courage have been given at the expense of innumerable calamities and immense bloodshed. To these accompaniments of civil conflict is to be added the appre- hension of a servile war, which would be the climax of so many irre- parable misfortunes. If these calamities affected America only, these sufferings of a friendly nation would be enough to excite the anxiety and sympathy of the Emperor. But Europe also has suffered in one of the principal branches of her industry, and her artisans have been subjected to the most cruel trials. Prance and the maritime powers have, during this struggle, main- tained the strictest neutrality, but the sentiments by which they are animated, far from imposing on them anything like" indifference, seem on the contrary to require that they should assist the two belligerent parties in an endeg.vor to escape from a position which appears to have no issue. The forces of the two sides have hitherto fought with balanced suc- cess, and the latest accounts do not show any prospect of a speedy termination of the war. These circumstances taken together would seem to favor the adoption of measures which might bring about a truce. The Emperor of the French, therefore, is of opinion that there is now an opportunity of offering to the belligerents the good offices of the maritime powers. He therefore proposes to her Majesty, as well as to the .Emperor of Russia, that the three courts should endeavor, both at Washington and in communication with the Confederate States, to bring aoout a suspension of arms for six months, during which every act of hostility, direct or indirect, should cease, at sea, as weU as on land. This armistice might, if necessary, be renewed for a further period. This proposal, M. Drouyn de Lhuys proceeds to say, would not imply. 456 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN, on tlie part of the three powers, any judgment on the origin of the war, or any pressure on the negotiations for peace, which it is hoped would take place during the armistice. The three powers would only interfere to smooth obstacles, and only within limits which the two interested parties would prescribe. The French government is of opinion that, even in the event of failure of immediate success, these overtures might be useful in turning the minds of men, now heated by passion, to consider the advantages of conciliation and of peace. Such is, in substance, the proposal of the government of the Emperor of the French, and I need hardly say that it has attracted the serious attention of her Majjesty's government. Her Majesty is desirous of acting in concurrence with France upon the great questions now agitating the world, and upon none more than on the contingencies connected with the great struggle now going on ia 'SoTth America. Neither her Majesty the Queen nor the British nation will ever forget the noble and emphatic manner in which the Emperor of the French vindicated the law of nations, and assisted the cause of peace, in the instance of the seizure of the confederate commissioners on board the Trent. Her Majesty's government recognize with pleasure, in the desigp of arresting the progress of war by friendly measures, the benevolent views and humane intentions of the Emperor. They are also of opinion that if the steps proposed were to be taken the concurrence of Eussia would be extremely desirable. Her Majesty's government have, however, not been informed up to the present time that the Russian government have agreed to co-operate with England and France on this occasion, although that government may support the endeavors of England and France to attain the end pro- posed. But is the end proposed attainable at the present moment by the course suggested by the government of France ? Such is the question which has been anxiously and carefully examined by her Majesty's government. After weighing all the information which has been received from America, her Majesty's government are led to the conclusion that there is no ground at the present moment to hope that the federal govern- ment would accept the proposal suggested, and a refusal from Wash- ington at present would prevent any speedy renewal of the offer. Her Majesty's government think, therefore, that it would be better to watch carefully the progress of opinion in America ; and if, as there appears reason to hope, it may be found to have undergone, or may undergo hereafter, any change, the three courts might then avail them- selves of such change to offer their friendly counsel with a greater pros- pect than now exists of its being accepted by the two contending parties. Her Majesty's government wiU communicate to that of France any intelligence they may receive from Washtugton or Richmond bearing on this important subject. Your excellency may read this dispatch to M. Drouyn de Lhuys, and give him a copy of it. I am, &c.. RUSSELL. CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 457 Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. fExtract.] No. 227.] Le&ation of the United States, Faris, November 18, 1862. SiK : Herewith I inclose to you the copy of a communication just made to Monsieur Drouyn de Lhuys. * # * * * * « * #« I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM L. DAYTON. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. Mr. Dayton to M. Drouyn de VHuys. Paris, November 16, [17,] 1862. Monsieur le Ministre : In a recent conversation had with your excellency you asked some questions ia relation to the population of the southern States of the United States and the position of the several divisions of our army. This, in connection with a statement in your dispatch of the 30th October to his Majesty's ambassadors at London and St. Petersburg, officially published, induces me to make to you this communication. Although that dispatch was not addressed to me or to my government, yet it so intimately concerns the latter that I am sure I shall be excused if I refer to it in connection with the subject-matter of our conversation. I do this not with a view to any criticism or the expression of any opin- ions beyond those already given by me, but to correct, so far as I can, what seems to me a misapprehension of facts. I do this in the hope that, should the question present itself for con- sideration in the future, your excellency may be induced to review your opinion as to the strength of the parties involved in the war now exist- ing in the United States. Tour excellency says : " There has existed between the belligerents from the very outset of the war an equality of strength which has been almost constantly maintained ever since, and after so much bloodshed, they are now in this respect very nearly in the same position as at first. Nothing justifies the expectation of anymore decided military operations , at an early day." In answer to your questions in our conference of the 11th instant I endeavored, with the aid of a map, to point out the districts of country occupied at present by the several divisions of our army. If your excellency can, from memory, recall those positions and com- pare them with the condition of things at " the very outset of the war," (or even as it has been within the past year,) you will find cause, I am sure, for grave doubt as to the accuracy of opinion expressed in the above extract. A little more than a year ago the whole of the slave States south of the Potomac and Ohio, and west of the Mississippi, (thirteen in all,) were in possession of the insurgents, except only a small locality in Virginia opposite to Washington ; a tract of country in the same State, to the west of the Alleghany Mountains, in which there was a mixed possession ; the 458 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. nortliern part of Kentucky, and perhaps one-half of Missouri. With these exceptions, they held undisputed sway of the entire country of the South. They possessed, at the same time, the military arsenal at Harper's Ferry and the vast naval arsenals and dockyards at IJJ'orfolk and Pensacola. They had likewise possession of the eastern shore of Chesapeake Bay, which, in connection with the command of the Potomac, gave them con- trol over the access by water to Washington, the capital of the nation. They have lost during the year the eastern shore of the Chesapeake and the command of the Potomac, the city of Norfolk with its arsenals and dockyard, and neighboring country, and the dockyards at Pensacola. They have lost aU Virginia west of the AUeghanies, Kentucky and Missouri, and part of Tennessee^ comprising, among other points, Nash- ville, its capital, and Memphis, its commercial port on the Mississippi. They have lost every port, harbor, and fortification on the Atlantic coast of any v,alue, (those at Charleston alone excepted,) from the mouth "of the Chesapeake to the southern point of Florida, and thence around the Gulf coast to Pensacola. But more important even than this, they have, within the year, lost New Orleans, the great commercial metropolis of the South, with the numerous fortifications established for its defense. They have likewise lost the Mississippi, with every island and river for- tification (save that at Yicksburg) by which it was defended. This river, which drains the entire valley of the West, and cuts in two the slave States from Cairo to the Gulf, and on which could float the navies of the world — which can neither be forded nor bridged — ^must forever separate the four slave States and their contiguous territories on its West side from those on the East. The loss of this river was more injurious to the cause of the insurrectionists than the loss of many battles. Conscious that this would be so, it was fortified, your excellency will remember, not only at its mouth, and below and at New Orleans, but at every avail- able point upwards ; yet it, with its many fortifications, (Vicksburg alone excepted,) has, within the year, been lost to the South. The Tennessee and the Cumberland — great interior rivers of the West — with their de- fenses and fortifications, have likewise been taken, after a hard struggle, by the armies of the Union. In a word, the insurgents do not now hold a foot of ground which they did not hold early in the war, while the flag of the Union has been con- stantly advanced, and now floats somewhere on the soil or over the forti- fications of every slave State, save one. Their armies have, in the mean- time, been driven from an area of country embracing, in the aggregate, not less than one hundred thousand square miles, and occupied by a population ranging from one million and a half to two millions of people. But in war " equality in strength " consists not in these things only. Permit me, therefore, to remind your excellency that, while all the incip- ient efforts on the part of the South to create a navy have been defeated and her vessels destroyed, the navy of the United States has, within the year, grown from a very small to a very great power — closing the ports of the South, precluding, save with our consent, all entrance to or exit from them unless by stealth or accident. This power, which the South has little to meet, is almost exclusively the growth of the year, and on our own coasts, and in ports, harbors, and rivers of the South, it cannot but be in the future the most ef&cient means of attack or defense. There are two other elements of strength which specially require con- sideration — men and money. The armies of the South have been large beyond example, as compared with the extent of population from which they have been drawn. To raise them to their present standard, the conscription law of the South has embraced all from the age of eighteen CLAIMS AGAINST GKEAT BRITAIN. 459 to forty-five. Their armies, like our own, waste away by the casualties of war, and there can be little force in reserve to supply the constant drain. An examination of the Preliminary Eeport of the Census of 1860 (of which I have had the honor to transmit you a copy) will show, on page 131, that the body of the population upon which the South must draw for the supply of this drain is less even than I suggested in our recent conversation. The aggregate free population of aU the slave States, including Mary- land, Delaware, Virginia, Kentucky, and Missouri, is only eight millions two hundred and eighty-nine thousand seven hundred and sixty-three, (8,289,763 ; ) but from this must be deducted the population of those slave States in the possession of the United States where no conscription law of the South could possibly be enforced, and likewise the free blacks of the South, in whose hands they dare not place arms. The free population of tihiose States, shown by the census of 1860, is as follows-: Delaware 110, 418 Maryland 699, 860 Kentucky 930, 201 Missouri 1, 067, 081 Kanawha, or Western Virginia, with Jefferson, Accomac, and !Northampton counties, estimated at 379, 774 Free blacks of the South to be deducted 250, 787 Making an aggregate of 3, 338, 121 Which number, deducted from the aggregate free population of the South, leaves only four millions nine hundred and fifty-one thousand six hundred and forty-two, including men, women, and children. The gen- eral accuracy of these figures can readily be tested by reference to pages 131, and 286, 287, 288, and 289 of the Census Eeport, before referred to. It is true that to some slight extent troops may voluntarily go into the southern army from portions of the country not in their possession, but these would probably be at least balanced by those withholding them- selves along the coasts, and in the towns and cities of the South subject to our control, and for which no allowance is made in the above calcula- tion. I need not recapitulate the population of the free States and the bor- der States in our possession. The aggregate, by a reference to the same Census Eeport, will be seen to be within a fraction of twenty-two millions, (21,996,845.) During the last summer, in addition to the army then in the field, they raised, within the space of two months, principally by voluntary enlistment, six hun- dred thousand men, and there is yet another, and stiU another army in reserve, as I am instructed, to take their places, in whole or in part, should that unhappily become necessary. In the foregoing estimate I have taken no account of the slaves of the South as a source either of strength or weakness. As they have been used heretofore, they have certainly added strength to their masters. They have, in fact, fed the army. Some have been forced to labor with it in the trenches, while the great mass have toiled in the fields at home, thus leaving almost the entire population of the South free to fight its battles. Emancipation, should it occur, while it liberates the slaves, would cut off this source of strength from their masters. Their supplies in the rear must be kept up or their army cannot be 460 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BEITAIN. held together. The one is essential to the maintenance of the other. A time may soon come, therefore, when, aside from the " apprehensions" incident to emancfpation, the slaves of the South mU be to their masters a source of weakness and not of strength. Permit me, however, here to add that, whoever may have entertained " apprehensions " of a " servile war," such I do not suppose for a moment to have been contemplated by the President in foreshadowing his policy of emancipation. The slaves of the South, scattered over a vast extent of country, have no arms and no means of procuring them. They have little intelligence, no means of distant intercommunication, and can have no general concert of action. They may refuse to labor for their masters, and their masters cannot constrain them. The map left with your excellency, showing the per- centage of slaves ia each county of the South, will prove this beyond a question. In certain large sections of country, along the Mississippi more especially, there is about twenty-eight per cent, only of white population. All the rest are slaves. Of this population the able-bodied are now almost entirely away with the army. Should attempts be made here, or in other sections, to constrain the slaves to a forced obedience, they may resist or they may leave their plantations, as many have already done, and seek the friendly shelter of the Union flag. But neither principle nor policy wiU induce the United States to encourage a " servile war," or prompt the slave to cut the throat of his master or his master's family. The government will not even permit, as I have already said to you, its own soldiers or the soldiers of the enemy, acting as guerillas or marauders, belongiag to no organized force and under no regular flag, to make war or attack even an armed enemy, without punishment ; stUl less would it encourage or permit slaves to offend against humanity by attack upon the feeble and helpless. That an isolated case or cases of wrong may occur in the .course of establishing a great change (if such shall be established) in the social organization of the South, is not im- probable ; but in every such case, I doubt not that the arm of the gov- ernment would promptly interfere to protect and to punish. This, how- ever, is matter incidental only to the subject of my communication. Leaving the question of population, I pass for a moment to the other great element of strength in war, and that is money. I have already said that the resources of the South iu men would seem to be practically exhausted, and their resources in money, I think, must be equally so. I am instructed that, with a floating debt of four hun- dred millions of dollars, represented by paper at a discount of seventy- five per cent., they have neither raised, nor have they the means of raising, a revenue equal to ten millions, ia any form or for any purpose. Want and distress are already disclosing themselves tu painiid forms throughout the entire region occupied by the insurgents. On the other hand, the government of the United States has, as I am instructed, a revenue, available in the precious metals, of more than a hundred mil- lions, while its mtaes are yielding gold more rapidly than foreign trade withdraws it from the country. In this vital matter of finance, there- fore, there does not seem to exist between the parties an equality of strength. So far, indeed, as I can see, such equality has existed nowhere except on certain battle-fields, and especially between the two great armies in Virginia. Here the insurgents have advanced and retreated. They have gained battles and lost them. I do not mean to depreciate their gallantry ; they are yet my countrymen. Here at least they have CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 461 shown equality of strength ; but everywhere else the permanent gain has been with the armies of the Union. I avail myself of this occasion to renew to your excellency assurances of the most distinguished consideration, with which I have the honor to be Tour excellency's very obedient servant, WILLIAM L. DAYTON. Monsieur Deouyn de Lhuts, Minister of Foreign Affairs. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] I^To. 264.J Lbg-ation op the United States, London, November 21, 1862. Sm : I was so hurried at the close of the last week in my effort to report the result of my conference with Lord Eussell in season for the steamer that I was unable to give you any detailed account of it. Although not very long ta time, it embraced a conversation on three different subjects. The first was upon his lordship's note in answer to the French proposition which appeared in the newspapers of that morn- ing. The substance of this was comprised in my letter, though I did not perhaps give in it a fuU idea of the extent of its amicable character. I tried to impress upon him a sense of my conviction of the uncertain nature of the Emperor's disposition towards us, and my greater confi- dence in the policy of this ministry to the extent that it declared itself. His lordship seemed to imply that such had not been the view taken in America ; and he went so far as to say, in allusion to the fact announced in the newspapers that Mr. Slidell had been admitted to an audience of the Emperor, which is stated to have happened on the very same day of the date of M! Drouyn de Lhuys's note, that if any minister here had procured an audience of the Queen for Mr. Mason there would have been no end to the indignation among us. I replied that the knowledge of this event would unquestionably have its effect in diminishing the popular sympathy with France. I thought that this proposition of M. Drouyn de Lhuys would meet with no favor, and would, in conjunction with the reception of Mr. SUdell, be construed as an act of direct hos- tility. Here his lordship interposed a singular doubt. He intimated that from such reports as had been received of the reception of the overtures of M. Mercier at the time when the confederate forces were entering Maryland, he had been led to suppose that the government at Washington was not then entirely indisposed to accept his assistance. Strangely enough, I will add here that a precisely similar story has since come to me from France, through a wholly independent source. I re- plied to his lordship at once that I had received from you a fall report of your conversation with M. Mercier at the time referred to, which was of a wholly opposite character, and that a copy of your subsequent dispatch to Mr. Dayton on the same subject had been placed in my hands, to be used here at my discretion, which was so strong in its terms that I did not think it advisable to show it to him at all. For as things seemed to me to be going on well enough as they were, I feared that in case of any immediate call upon her Majesty's government for action it might lead to embarrassment, as implying a decision under more or less 462 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. of constraint, I was the more glad I had taken such a view of it, as the course • marked out in his reply to France was left clear from any question of its being perfectly spontaneous. His lordship said he thought my course had been judicious. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, OHAHLES FEAIsTOIS ADAMS. Hon. Williajm: H. Sbwaed, Secretary of State. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] S"o. 231.] Legation op the United States, . Paris, November 25, 1862. SiK : I received last night from M. Drouyn de Lhuys a communica- tion, dated 23d instant, in answer to mine of the 17th, (dated by mis- take the 16th.) The communication of M. de Lhuys is of so much interest that I send you herewith a copy of the original and a translation. #^1, Au 4^ ^ Jd. 4k ^U 4k. 'Jr ^ TT TT 'Jr "rP ■ST "TP I am, sir, your obedient servant, Hon. WiLLiAm H. Sewaed, Secretary of State. WILLIAM L. DATTOK Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys to Mr. Dayton. [Translation.] Depautment op Foreign Ap-pairs, Palace of Gompeigne, Novemier 23, 1862. Sir : I have learned with lively interest the information which you have been pleased to communicate to me upon the respective situation of the two belligerent parties in the United States. Ton express to me the hope that these suggestions may modify my opinion as to the equilibrium of strength between the States of the North and those of the South, and they are certainly of a nature to make me appreciate all the resources of your government. But it is none the less true that, notwithstanding the inequality of numbers and of financial means, notwithstanding local advantages and partial con- quests, the conditions of soil and climate seem to oppose insuperable obstacles to the progress of the struggle, and that the equal energy of both sides tends to impress upon it a character of indomitable despera- tion, (^' indomitable acharnement") I am pleased to render homage with you to the courage which the Americans, upon the one side and the other, have shown thus far ; but this courage, even, while it excites the admiration of' the world, is only calculated to render more uncertain the result ("soi*") of the combats, and to retard the termination of the disasters of this bloody war. CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 463 You know, sir, what feelings tMs sad spectacle has given rise to in ns. You know the step which a profound sympathy for America has inspired in the government of the Emperor, ia the hope of opening the way to a reconciliation. This step, you know also, ought and could take place, (" avoir lieu,") in the opinion of the Emperor, only with the consent and concurrence of the two belligerent parties. At present, the reception given to our proposition by the cabinets of London and St. Petersburg prevents us from thinking of pursuing it further, ("em- pSclie que nous ne songions d, y donner suite.") But I can assure you, , sir, that our friendly dispositions have «iot changed. If some day the Americans, tired of turning their valor against themselves, should wish to have recourse to us in order to seek in concert the means of termi- nating this conflict, they would find us always ready (be it in associating ourselves with other powers or be it separately) to aid them with our co-operation, and to testify, by our good offlces, feelings which have not ceased to animate France in regard to them. Eeceive, sir, the assurances of my most distin guish ed consideration. DE0UY]5f DB LHUYS. Mr. Dayton, Envoy UxtrOordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States at Paris. Mr. Seward to Mr, Dayton. [Extract.] S"o. 261.] Depahtment op State, Washington, November 28, lS62. Sir : Your dispatch of November 10 (So. 223) has been received only at this late day. # # # # * I have now only to say that the views presented by me in my dis- patch of October 20 are the deliberate and settled convictions of the government, always to be expressed when, in your judgment, any expression whatever on the subject of the action of foreign powers shall be either necessary or expedient. In reply to a suggestion in your dispatch, it is proper for me to say that neither M. Mercier nor any other person has had the least warrant from any authority of the United States for representing to his govern- ment that the President would be disposed to entertain any proposition in regard to the action of this government in the conduct of our domes- tic affairs from any foreign quarter whatsoever. The exact contrary is the effect of all that has ever passed between all the ministers residing here and this department. You wiU judge whether it is important to clear up this point at Paris. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWARD. William L. Dayton, Esq., (fee, t&c., <6c. 464 CLAIMS AGAINST GEEAT BRITAIN. [From British Blue Book, "North America," No. 1, 1863, p. 46.] No. 50. Lord Lyons to Earl Bussell. [Extract.] Washington, November 28, 1862. The intelligence that Prance had proposed to Great Britain and Eussia to join her in advising the belligerents in this country to agree to an armistice reached New York by telegraph from Cape Eace on the 25th instant. The substance of your lordship's answer was received at the same time. Yesterday the text of the French proposal, of your lordship's answer, and of the principal part of the Eussian answer, was forwarded to New York by telegraph from HaUfax. It is to be observed that in every one of the newspapers I send foreign intervention is distinctly repudiated. It is very true that the leaders of the political parties do not always put forth in the news- papers exactly the same sentiments which they entertain and even express in private. Still, the unanimity of the press on the present occasion shows at least that this is not a time at which pubUc opinion would force the acceptance of foreign mediation upon a reluctant cabinet. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 414.] Department of State, Washington, l^ovember 30, 1862. SiE: I have received your dispatch of the 13th of November, (No. 259,) and also your dispatch of November 15, (No. 261.) They relate to the proposition recently made by the Emperor of Prance to the Empe- ror of Eussia and to the Queen of Great Britain, to join him in recom- mending an armistice in our unhapi)y civil war. Your statements upon that subject are very interesting and satisfactory. At the same time I do not propose to discuss the transaction. You will learn the impression it has made upon the President from the copy which I send you of my dispatch of this date to Mr. Dayton. I senxl a copy of the same paper to Mr. Taylor, in Eussia; and thus, by the President's direction, I leave the Prench proposal to take its place among the incidents already past of the lamentable civil war of which we again think we are beguming to see an approaching end. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Chaklbs Prancis Adams, Esq., &c., &c., &c. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. [Extract.] No. 263.] Department of State, Washington, November 30, 1862. Sir: Your several dispatches of November 12, (No. 224,) November 13, (No. 225,) and November 14, (No. 226,) have been received. I CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 465 have also, by the aid of the telegrapli, the substance of the invitatioTi which was addressed by the Emperor of France to the Emperor of Eussia and the Queen of Great Britain to join in recommending an armistice in OUT civil war, together with the answers of those two sovereigns declin- ing that invitation. ****** # # In regard to the main subject my instructions will be very simple and short. An inconclusive conference concerning the United States has been held between three powers, all of whom avow themselves as friends of the United States, and yet the United States were carefully excluded from the conference. Neither party in the conference proposed any com- bination to coerce the will or control the policy of the United States. Under these circumstances the United States are not called upon to say what they would have done if the proposition of France, which was declined by Eussia and Great Britain, had been adopted and carried into effect. 'Not are we called upon to discuss the propriety of the posi- tions and proceedings respectively of the several parties in the confer- ence. Such a debate upon a subject which has already lost its practical character, or which, to speak more accurately, has not attained such a character, might produce irritations and jealousies, which the President desires to avoid. Acting upon these principles, we shall ask no explanations, nor shall we in any manner comment upon explanations which shall be voluntarily made. A government which is conducting a great nation through a civil war must deal continually with new events as they arise, not with those which have already fallen into history. The United States has continually said to all Europe that they know that the saving of the American Union depends on the American people themselves, and not at all on the policies of foreign states, severally or combined. Such states may, as they have heretofore done, prolong and agitate our unnatural and lamented strife, by exciting or maintaining the hopes of our disloyal citizens, but they cannot change our purpose to maintain the integrity of the Union or defeat its accomplishment. This government will in all cases seasonably warn foreign powers of the injurious effect of any apprehended interference on their part, and having done this, it will measure its means of self-defense by the mag- nitude of the dangers with which the country is threatened. Foreign nations scarcely need to be reminded that family quarrels are always of short duration; that the very scandal which they bring ope- rates" as an inc^tive to reconciliation. Much more does the unavoida- ble apprehension of foreign interference work in that direction. The emissaries of treason who now remain in European capitals will very soon disappear, and the whole American people will forever afterwards be asking who among the foreign nations were the most just and the most forbearing to their country in its hour of trial. It is the President's policy so to conduct our national affairs that all who have heretofore been our friends may abide in that relation. If any of them shall be lost, our regret wiU thus be modified by the reflection that the bereavement resulted from our misfortune and with- out fault. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SBWAED. William L. Dayton, Esq., <&o., &c., : Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extracts.] ' ]Sro. 337.] Legation of the United States, London^ February 26, 18C3. Sm : I omitted last week much notice of the telegram received from you, as well as of the general news that came by the steamer respecting the alleged interruption of the blockade at Charleston, for the reason that the fiction made no impression whatever on public ojjinion in this country. A little more success has attended a similar attemj^t yesterday to create a belief of a serious misunderstanding between Mr. Mercier and yourself. The wish for French intervention is father to the thought. And it is the more cherished by malevolent parties, since the course of opinion here renders the probability less of any such action on this side. ********* In the mean time, however, the favorable interval should be improved by the militaiy action in America. This is all that is needed to protect us from the possibility of European intervention. I regret to be obliged to confess that thus far the results have not corresponded to expectation. Cases of decided success grow less rather than more frequent, and pabUc confidence in the direction of the war has declined. Were it not for this, I can confidently affirm that by tliis time few vestiges of sym- pathy with the rebels would remain outside of interested commercial circles in any part of this kingdom. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELBS FEANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Seward, Seai-etary of State. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. 'So. 277.] Legation op the United States, Paris, February 26, 1863. Sir: Your dispatch No 297 was received by me on the 24th instant. It was immediately copied, and yesterday read to Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys, the copy, at his request, being left with him. He listened attentively to its reading, and at the close said that his suggestion to our govern- ment had been made in a kind spirit, and he believed the reply to be in a like spirit ; that he was not disposed to make the reply or its suggestions the subject of debate or argument; that he did not know, I think he added, if he had any right to do so. He said that he would read again the copy of the dispatch left with him, and consider it more carefully than he could from having heard it once read only. There was nothing 480 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. in the manner of Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys to indicate that he was disap- pointed in the result. I should add, however, that he had already been apprised of it 'by a short communication from Mr. Mercier. He said Mr. Mercier had informed him by a brief note that you would give a negative answer, but in all respects a kind one. This I told him you had done, and called his attention to the prefatory remarks in your dispatch as an evidence of the spirit and kind feeling in which his suggestion had been received by our government. The conversation closed without any intimation from Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys of further or ulterior purposes upon the part of this government. I could not, for obvious reasons, assume to question him as to whether such purposes did or did not exist. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM L. DATTOK Hon. WiLLiAJVi H. Sbwaud, Secretary of State. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] 1:^0. 292.] Legation op the United States, Paris, March 21 j 1863, Sijj .##*#*-**# I yesterday communicated to Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys the "concurrent resolutions of Congress concerning foreign intervention in the existing rebellion." He did not desire me to read them, but preferred that I should leave a copy, which I did. He said he had already seen them, they having been immediately communicated to his department through Mr. Mercier. He made no remarks concerning them, and evidently was not disposed to go into any conversation on the subject. His mind seem ed to be preoccupied with Poland an d its complications. He avoided, intentionally, as I thought, conversation as to our affairs. He merely said that things seemed ripe there for some important movements, and he supposed we would soon have news of interest from our country. I am, sir, your obedient servant. Hon. Wllliam H. Seward, Secretary of State. WILLIAM L. DAYTOK Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] No. 356.] Legation of the United States, London, March 27, 1863. Having disposed of this matter, I next turned to the subject of the joint resolutions of Congress on foreign intervention, and agreeably to your instructions contained in the printed circular of the 9th March I offered to read them to his lordship, or to leave a cogy, as he might CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 481 prefer. He said that Lord Lyons had already sent a copy of them, which he had read. His opinion on that subject was suflciently known. He would therefore take a copy, which I accordingly put into his hands. * * * * * *#-■* I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES PEANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. [Extracts.] No. 547.] Dbpaktment of State, Washington, April 10, 1863. Sik: Your dispatch of March 20 (Ko. 353) has been received. * * It has not been gratifying to this government to see that consultations concerning our internal affairs have been held by representatives of foreign powers with citizens of the United States who dissented from the policy of the President. * # * * jjut, on the other hand, the greater responsibility for the improper communications manifestly rested with the citizens who encouraged and probably sought the illicit intercourse. The discontented state of the public mind at the moment when our suspicions were aroused made it seem inexpedient then to institute proceedings against those citizens. It would not have been magnanimous to complain of the compromised foreigner and leave the conspiring citizens unrebuked. Fortunately, the injurious proceeding culminated in the propositions of Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys. The necessity for answering that communi- cation furnished the occasion equally to show the determination of the government and to elicit the sentiments of the people in regard to every form of foreign intervention and intrigue. The result has been so entirely satisfactory as to enable the President to overlook, as merely harmless incidents in our great struggle, the injurious consultations to which I have alluded, and to leave the parties to them to the all-sufficient censure of public opinion throughout the world. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Chables Fkancis Adams, Esq., d;c., tfcc, die. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. [Extract.] No. 627.] Dbpaktment op State, Washington, June 15, 1863. Sie: *##**•** Intervention or even recognition of the insurgents by foreign nations must in any case be expected to result in a foreign war, more or less wide and universally dangerous. Knowing that owiag to the doubts and diffl- culties which attend the military and naval operations, foreign nations are continually tempted to offensive intervention or interference, we have 31 A C— VOL. I 482 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BEITAIN. come to contemplate the aggravation of external war as always possible, and at no time improbable. When it shall come, if it must come, it ought to find us armed "with the plea that we have neither made it, nor readily of unwisely provoked it. We think that we can better afford to err on the side of prudence than incur the responsibility of a disastrous complication that with reasonable moderation could be avoided. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Ohakles Feajstcis Adams, Esq., dc, <&€., <&o. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] No. 438.] Legation of the United States, London, June 26, 1863. gjjj . # * # * * * The question proposed by Mr. Eoebuck, as a test of the sense of the House of Commons on America, is assigned for the 30th instant. I understand it is yet to be modified, so as to fit the supposed minimum of resistance that can be applied to it. In the meanwhile Messrs. Eoebuck and Lindsay are reported to have been to Paris, acting in the capacity of self-appointed negotiators for the co-operation of the Emperor of the Erench, and to have obtained some sort of favorable expression of senti- ment from him. This is a new species of influence to bring to bear ia England with any hope of success. ******* I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES FEANOIS ADAMS. Hon. WrLLiAM H. Sewaed, Secretary of State. Mr. Adams to Mr^ Seward. No. 439.] Legation op the United States, London, Jime 26, 1863. SiE : I feel it my duty to inform you that I yesterday learned frorii a good source that Baron Gros, the French ambassador at this court, expressed it as his individual opinion that the Emperor would soon renew his proposition to the British government to recognize the rebel author- ities, and in case the ministry should decline to move, he would then pro- ceed alone. At the same time he took care to disclaim speaking from authority or any positive knowledge. I have this from a person entirely trustworthy. I have the honor to be, six, your obedient servant, CHAELES PEANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Sewaed, Secretary of State. CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BEITAIN. . 483 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward ' [Extract.] ifo. 441.] Legation of the United States, London, July 1, 1863. Sm: I transmit, out of tlie ordinary course, a report* of the proceed ings in the House of Commons last night, on the motion made by Mr. Eoebtick. It is difficult to imagine a more awkward situation than that in which he has succeeded in placing as well his own government as the Emperor of the French. A painful sense of this is marked in the leader in this morning's Times on the subject. The struggle between inclination and prudence is sin- gularly betrayed in the admission that the speech was heard by the House with pleasure. The debate wiU probably be resumed on Thursday. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES FEANOIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Sewaed, Secretary of State. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seicard. [Extract.] No. 323.] * Legation op the United States, Paris, July 2, 1863. Sm: I have communicated to Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys to-day the sub- stance of your dispatch I^^o. 357. *« # * * * * * * I then called his attention to the statements of Mr. Eoebuck, in the British Parliament, made yesterday, as to the views and wishes of the Emperor in reference to the recognition of the South. He expressed much regret that Mr. Eoebuck should have made statements of what must have been at best an unofiacial and private conversation ; and, as to those parts of the statement in which he says the Emperor authorized him to communicate his views on this subject to the House of Commons, he said it could not be so; such a proceeding would have been so irreg- ular that it was not possible for him to suppose that the statement of Mr. Eoebuck could have originated otherwise than in a misunderstanding or mistake; that, in point of fact, no official communication of any kind has recently passed, on this subject, between France and England. He said that it was not improbable that the Emperor had stated, in the course of conversation, that his views on the subj ects remained unchanged, and that he wished to act in concert with England in reference to Amer- ican affairs; but he was satisfied that he had suggested nothing and pro- posed nothing to be communicated to the British government. I told Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys that I assumed no right to inquire as to the private con- versations of the Emperor, but here was a case in which it was said the Emperor had authorized two members of the British Parhament to make statements in that chamber for the purpose of influencing its policy against *For inolosnre see Parliamentary and Judicial Appendix, No. 26. 484 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. the United States ; that under such circumstances (if true) the communica- tion on the part of the Emperor assumed a quasi official character, and it was, therefore, the fair subject of inquiry and explanation. To this he assented, and said it was not possible for him to speak of the exact words of a conversation at which he was not himself present, but he was satisiied it could not have been as represented. He said, further, that the statement of Mr. Roebuck seemed to him contradictory in itself, and we know that part of it in which the Emperor is made to complain of ill treatment at the hands of Earl Eussell, in exposing his dispatch of last year to you, must in some way be untrue or absurd. The contents of that dispatch, you will recollect, were communicated to me by the French government, and by me to you before it was in any way made public, and the dispatch itself was immediately afterwards printed in the Moni- teur. It is preposterous to suppose that his Majesty could have com- plained that the British government had committed a breach of confi- dence in communicating to you what it had already formally communi- cated to me. * * * It may not be amiss that I should state that the Emperor himself, since the visit of Messrs. Lindsay and Eoetauck, has said explicitly that he had given no authority to those gentlemen to propose any thing, or in any way to represent his views to the British government. It is difficult to understand how these discrepancies can be accounted for. Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys, before closing the conversation, repeated his often expressed wish for the termination of our war, and said he would be glad if England could suggest some mode by which it might be brought about; but for himself he could see nothing which would be available for that purpose. I took occasion again to assure him that it certainly would not be brought to a close by a recognition of thQ South; that such an act might extend and enlarge the war by drawing other nations into it, but it would have no effect on the United States exc'ept to exasperate the North and excite it to increased exertions. To this he made no reply. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM L. DAYTON. Hon. William: H. Sewakd, Secretary of State. IS. B. — Inclosed is the extract* from Mr. Eoebuck's speech. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward,. Extract.] ISo. 446.] Legation op the United States, London, July 3, 1863. Sir : The effect of Tuesday night's debate was very severe on Mr. Eoebuck, who seems to have lost by it the remnant of political consid- eration which he once enjoyed. His extraordinary attempt to influ- ence the action of the house by the use of the authority of the Emperor of the French, as well as his presuming to make himself the medium of an appeal to Parliament against the conduct of the ministry, have had the consequences which might naturally be expected by any one ac- quainted with the English character. Thus it happened that Mr. Eoe- buck, though addressing an assembly a great portion of whom sympa- * For inclosure see Parliamentary and Judicial Appendix, No. 26. CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. 485 tWzed with him in his object, demolished his cause, whilst on the other hand, Mr. Bright, even whUst running counter to the predisposition of lELOst of his hearers, succeeded in extorting a general tribute of admira- tion of his eloquent and conrincing reply. But though the fate of Mr. Eoebuck's motion was sealed by the course of the debate of that evening, it is not to be inferred that there is not a steady increase of the disposition in high quarters to take some action or other in favor of the rebels. This is much stimulated by the assiduous labors of the rebel emissaries to produce a belief in the existence of a great diversion of opinion among us, as to the propriety of continuing the war. It is argued that some action on this side would now have an effect to diminish all hopes of success in restoration, and to a correspond- ing extent to make the advocates of peace, who would gladly welcome such assistance, to preponderate. The only effective answer to such a course of reasoning, applied to minds predisposed to conviction, is success in the war. And that is, I am sorry to say, as yet denied us. Precisely at this moment comes the intelligence of aggressive movements of the rebel army, which bear the look of power not met by corresponding ability to resist them. It is true tha,t the first aspect of this news was not viewed with favor, because it was thought to be likely to revive the war spirit and reunite opinion. The growing hope is, however, that a stroke may be effected which will be so decisive as to render some operation on this side more natural and effective presently than it can be just now. The debate was last evening adjourned over to a week from Monday, evidently for the purpose of awaiting events. But it seems now to be the general opinion that the government will not give facilities to a renewal of it at so late a period of the session, unless the circumstances should have essentially become changed in the interval. The conflicting testimony in regard to the Emperor's course is made even more inex- plicable by the declaration last night of Mr. Layard. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES FEASTOIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Sbwaed, Secretary of State. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 647.] Department of State, WasMrigton, July 9, 1863. Sib : I transmit herewith for your information a copy of an instruction, which I yesterday addressed to Mr. Dayton, upon the subject of inter- vention in the affairs of the United States. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Chajbles Francis Adams, Esq., &c., d;c., tfcc. Mr. Seward to Mr. Dayton. No. 368.] Department op State, Washington, July 8, 1863. Sir : Your dispatch of June 22, No. 317, has been received. So much of it as relates to international postal arrangements has been communicated to the Postmaster General. 486 CLAIMS AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN. Fresh rumors of imperial sympathy with the insurgents of this country, and of intentions of the cabinet at Pontainebleau to renew its propo- sitions for moral action of European governments in our domestic affairs preceded the arrival of your dispatch, and now borrow a certarn measure of confirmation from it. Whatever truth there may be in these reports, it is morally certain that they are promulgated, not by the French government, but by emissaries of the insurgents in Europe, for the pur- pose of producing the intervention they threaten us with. The rumors may, therefore, be received with much allowance. The government of the United States, with unanimity unprecedented in its councils, has already, inoffensively, and with becoming respect, made known to the Emperor of the French that any new demonstration of activity by him prejudicial to the unity of the American people will be necessarily regarded as unfriendly, and will produce a strain upon the fraternal bonds that have so long united the two countries. We should profoundly regret a proceeding that would be followed by such a consequence. We cannot think so unkindly of the Emperor of the French as to believe that his recent success in Mexico would influence his judgment ujion a question so entirely independent of the merits of his war against that republic, and at the same time so profoundly interesting to the United States. If his impartial judgment could, indeed, be swerved by such accidents as the capture of Puebla and Mexico, we should then be entitled to believe that it would return to its first policy when he shall have received intelligence of the defeat that our insurgents have recently sustained in Pennsylvania, and the even more significant event of the surrender of Vicksburg, which has just taken place. The question recurs, however, what are you to do in view of these new alarms? I am authorized to reply that you will not be expected to seek beforehand to penetrate the Imperial determination, or to manifest any anxiety concerning it. If the Emperor shall, by any official act, violate the sovereignty which you represent, your functions will be suspended. If he shall go further than to propose, either separately or in conjunction with any other power, to again address the United States concerning their affairs, you wDl inform Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys that you have good reason to expect that they will not in any case be induced to depart from the course they have so distinctly indicated in regard to foreign intervention. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. William L. Dayton, Esq., [From Gtere's General Advertiser, Liverpool, June 6, 1861.] New Oeleajn:s. — Steam: communication between Liveepool AND New Oeleans. — The British and American Southern Steamship Company's first-class iron screw-steamers are intended to sail from Liv- erpool to New Orleans, as foUows : Malacca, 7th August ; Eangoon, 4th September ; to be followed every alternate Wednesday by other first- class scr6w-steamers, now building. For further particulars apply to F. Sabel, agent, 19 Water street, Liverpool. Chaeleston. — Steam coMMtmiOATioN between Liveepool and Chaeleston. — A first-class steamship wiU be dispatched from Liver- pool to Charleston on or about the 15th July next. A monthly service will be established. Goods and passengers for New Orleans, Mobile, and Savannah can be forwarded by this line, Charleston having direct rail- way communication with all the southern and western cities. For fur- ther particulars apply to Eraser, Trenbolm & Co., 10 Eumford Place, or to M, G. Klingender & Co., Tower Buildings, 22 Water street. Mr. 8ewa/rd to Mr. Adams. No. 53.] Depaetment of State, Washington, August 1, 1861. SiE : I learn, through what seems a very direct channel,, that Mr. J. D. Bullock, of Savannah, Georgia, is in Europe; that he has contracted, 518 ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. for ten iron steamers, gunboats, all to be armed, at $750,000 for all, and all to come out as war vessels. You wlU be able to collate this information wltli other statements of the same character, of which you are already possessed. I think the agent. Captain Walker, whom I sent to Europe, will be able to get at the bottom of the matter. The President expects that, of course, you will secure the aid of the government in arresting the movement, if you can get at the facts. I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., t&c, &e., <&c. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] JSTo. 35.J Legation of the United States, London, August 30, 1861. You will before this have formed some notion of the extent of my power in this way, from my success iu preventing the departure of the Bermuda, ^o stronger case is likely to be made out against any parties than this. The activity of our consuls, Messrs. Wilding and Davy, fur- nished me with very exact information of all the circumstances attend- ing the equipment of this vessel, and yet her Majesty's government, on being apprised of it, disclaimed aU power to interfere. Under these cir- cumstances, all that seems left to me to do is to gather such information of these movements as I may for transmission to the department in sea- son to be on the lookout to intercept the supplies before they reach the coast. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES FRANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 85.] ,' Department of State, Washington, September 10, 1861. Sir : I transmit a copy of an intercepted letter of the 30th of July last, from John P. Baldwin, of Eichmond, Virginia, to Henry Adderley, at Nassau, New Providence, relative to the shipment of arms and powder from that place for the use of the insurgents in this country. The exist- ing British statute for the prevention of armed expeditions against coun- tries at peace with Great Britain is understood to be similar to our act of Congress of the 5th of April, 1818. Proceedings like that referred to in the letter of Baldwin, however, afford us special reason to expect leg- islation on the part of the British government of the character of our act of 1838, referred to in my instruction to you of the 7th instant, num- bered 83. It may be, however, that the British executive government now has the power to prevent the exportation of contraband of war GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFOECEMENT OP NEUTRALITY. 519 from British colonies near the United States for the use of the insur- • gents in the South. Should this be the fact, you will bring the subject to the attention of Lord Russell, and request that proper instructions in regard to it may be given to the colonial authorities. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Charles Francis Adahs, Esq., (fee., cfec, c&c. [For inclosure see dispatch l*fo. 53, of Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward, dated October 4, 1861,post.] Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 86.] Department op State, Washington, September ,11, 1861. Sir : Your dispatch of August 23d has been received. The inefilciency of the British laws to prevent violations of our rights is deeply to be regretted. We shall necessarily be obliged to exercise vigilance in detecting the unlawful character and objects of British ves- sels approaching our coasts, which will not be pleasant to the govern- ment whose flag they will be perverting to such unfriendly uses. I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., (fee, (6c., c&c. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. 'So. 89.] Depaetmbnt op State, Washington, September 14, 1861. Sir : Tour dispatch of August 30 (No. 35) has been received. While I regret with you that the administration of the laws of Great Britain is such as to render comparatively ineffectual your efforts to defeat there the designs of parties in that country injurious to the United States, I have great pleasure in saying that the information we receive from you concerning them is often very valuable, and enables us to put our own autborities here in a way of vigilant surveillance, which promises good results. I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &e., &c., &g. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 97.] Department op State, Washington, September 25, 1861; Sir : Your dispatch of September 6 QSo. 38) has been received. Our naval force is rapidly increasing, and the command of it has recently been reorganized. We are preparing for some vigorous demon- strations on the coast, to begin in about ten days ; and I trust, there- 520 ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. fore, that we shall be able to defeat on this side the enterprises of the insurgents, which we have been unable to prevent on the other. I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, ' ' ' WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Chaules Francis Adams, Esq., (fee, &o., &c. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] Ko. 53.1 Legation op the United States, London, Octoher 4, 1861. Sir: ****** The dispatch ISTo. 85, dated the 10th of September, like its immediate jpredecessor, No. 84, * * * relates to cases of violation of neutrality in the British islands in the West Indies. I have now the honor to forward copies of two notes addressed by me to Lord EusseU, one of the 30th September and the other of the following day, touching these questions. ********* I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, OHAELES FEANOIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Sewaud, Secretary of State. Mr. Adams to Earl Russell, Legation op the United States, London, October 1, 1861, My Lord : It is with much regret that I find myself receiving, at every fresh arrival from the United States, instructions from my gov- ernment to make representations to your lordship concerning alleged violations of her Majesty's proclamation of neutrality, committed by British subjects through the channel of the colonies situated near the United States. I have the honor now to submit to your lordship's consideration the copy of an interceiited letter from a person named John P. Baldwin, living at Eichmond, in Virginia, in the service of the insurgents, addressed to Henry Adderley, esq., of Nassau, New Providence. It appears by this letter that Nassau has been made, to some extent, an entrepot for the transmission of articles contraband of war from Great Britain to the ports held by the insurgents. It would be a gTcat source of satisfaction to the government of the United States to learn that her Majesty's government felt itself clothed with the necessary power to prevent the exportation of such contraband from the colonies for the use of the insurgents, and that it would furnish the necessary instructions to the local authorities to attain that end. I pray your lordshij) to accept the assurances of the highest consider- ation, with which I have the honor to be yonr lordship's most obedient servant, CHAELBS FEANCIS ADAMS. The Eight Hon. Earl Eussbll, S^c., IfC., 8fc. GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. 521 Mr. Baldwin to Mr. Adderley. EiGHMOND, ViKGiNiA, July 30, 1861. Mt Dear Addeelet : The secretary of the navy of the Confederate States of America has ordered from England, to be shipped to Nassau, a quantity of arms and powder. I have recommended them to be consigned to you, and I have to ask of you, as a favor to me, to take good care of them. I will be with you soon, and wUl expect your aid in transhipping the same. I must request you to regard this as a confidential communication, and will explain the reasons when we meet. You need not write me at aU on the subject. Hoping soon to see you, I remain your friend, JISO. P. BALDWLN". Henry Adderley, Esq., N^assau, JT. P., Bahamas. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. [Extract.] No. 136.] Department of State, Washington, November 30, 1861. gjjj,: ****** 3d. When we asked the British government, in all kindness, to exclude piratical vessels which are preying upon our merchant marine engaged in carrying bread to Europe from British ports, we received for answer that the law officers of the crown, say that to supply such vessels with shelter, coal, and provisions does not conflict with her Majesty's proclamation, and thus these pirates are afforded by Great Britain privileges which are denied by every other civilized and Christian state. ****** I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Prajstcis Adams, Esq., t&c, &c., &o. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. No. 105.] JiEGATION OP THE TJNITEI) STATES, London, January 24, 1862, Sir: The only event of any importance connected with American affairs that has happened during the last week is the revocation of the orders prohibiting the exportation of arms and munitions of war. This win release the large quantity of saltpeter in the hands of parties here, and wQl probably renew the activity of the confederate emissaries in forwarding supplies to the insurgents. Mr. Davy reports to me the arrival of the Bermuda at Hartlepool. Though it is denied that she is to be dispatched again, I am inclined to believe it only a pretense ia order to quiet suspicion. In the meanwhile the relative position of the Nashville and of the Tuscarora in the harbor of Southampton remains 522 ENFOKCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. unchanged. On tte other hand, the Sumter, having been warned to leave Cadiz, has put into Gibraltar, after capturing two vessels. This tendency to take refuge in British ports is becoming so annoying to the government here that I shaU not be surprised if the limit of twenty- four hours' stay be soon adopted. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAKLES FEANOIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Sewaed, Secretary of State. Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward. [Extracts.] No. 109.] Legation of the IJnitbd States, Paris, January 27, 1862. Sir : Since my dispatch of the 18th instant I have received yours, No. 97. * ♦ # « * * Tour dispatch afforded me an excuse for asking of Mr. Thouvenel a special interview. It was granted for Friday last, when I had with him a long conference, and, I think, made an impression on his mind in ref- erence, at all events, to certain points. I suggested to him, according to your directions, the propriety of calling the attention of the British government to the suggestion in your note to Mr. Mercier in reference to the better settlement of certain principles of maritime law. I assured him that the government of the United States would at aU times be ready and willing to assent to any general arrangement which would have for its effect the permanent set- tlement of the rights of neutrals on a liberal basis ; that we did not want the present occasion to pass without fixing upon Great Britain especially, in a definite form, certain principles for which France and the TJnited States had always contended, but to which Great Britain had never yielded her assent. I reminded him that while we were not, at the present moment, in the most favorable position to move in such a matter, France could, under aU the circumstances, with great propriety and power, take the initiative ; that it seemed to me very desirable she should do so, and that something should be done before the question of the Trent should become mere matter of history, to take its place as a single precedent amongst others, and to be dealt with, canvassed, or avoided by the statesmen of that country as interest or inclination might prompt. Mr. Thouvenel thought that Great Britain could not now get back of this precedent, but said that France could do nothing alone ; she must consult with other powers. He. suggested a commission oi jurisconsults, who should prepare and present for discussion certain questions, which should be submitted to a congress of ministers or em- bassadors, soriiething, I suppose, after the manner of the congress of Paris of 1856. This I inferred to be a suggestion only. It indicated, however, a willingness to act in the matter, if any available means could be found for doing so. In calling his attention, among other matters, to those questions affecting the interests of neutrals, I told him that, without having any distinct authority from my government for saying so, I had no doubt it would be happy to adopt the most liberal policy in reference to blockades, either to abolish them by the general assent of aU nations. GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. 523 or modify them in such, way as to make them, in the least possible degree, detrimental to the great interests of commerce. He at once asked if I intended to include in my remark the blockade that we had established of the ports of the South. This afforded me an opportunity, and I replied, in the language of your dispatch, by teUiag him that this blockade was " a thing daily more and more falling within our power to modify, if not remove altogether. " I reminded him that it was mani- festly the interest of the tlnited States, having a great commercial marine, (though not a large naval power,) to remove all obstacles in the way of the most free commercial intercourse, and I ventured to assure him that our government was too wise and far-seeing to permit any transient matter to interfere with the attainment of a great end, or the adoption of a most liberal and enlightened commercial poUcy. * * * ' * # * I have the honor to be, with miich respect, your obedient servant, WILLIAM L. DAYTOK Hon. WiLLTATVT H. Sbwaed, Secretary of State. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 182.] Depaetment op State, Washington, February 13, 1862. Sm : Westerly winds have hindered the steamers so that it is only after a period of twenty days that I now receive your dispatch of the 24th of January, ^o. 105. It affords us pleasure to know that the inhibition against the expor- tation of saltpeter, which was so unnecessary, has been rescinded. It has been only European sympathies and European aid that have enabled our disloyal citizens to prolong the civU war. The commercial advantages which Great Britain derives from her present policy are, a trade with the insurgents in articles contraband of war, and in less illegitimate merchandise introduced into the disloyal States in contra- vention of a vigorous blockade. Besides this commercial advantage, Great Britain gains the security of an acknowledgment of her immu- nity as a neutral by the pirates who are engaged in destroying our commerce. But the pirates are outlaws, having the control of not one port in our own country. On the other hand, what inconveniences do not result to Great Britain herself from her unnecessary and undeserved concessions to the insurgents ? Alarms, apprehensions, and preparations for war with that one of all the nations whose constitution and habits most inchne it to peace, and which, if left in the enjoyment of peace, is always at once the most hberal in its supplies of material and provisions to the British manufacturers, and the most liberal consumer of their fabrics. Has not the policy of Great Britain in regard to our internal troubles been adhered to long enough 1 This is a question for the British gov- ernment. If the British government shall still think it necessary to persevere, is it asking too much of them that they shall lend the protec- tion of their courts to the enforcement of the neutrahty which the Queen's proclamation commands ? Will they stand by and see the Ber- muda again fitted out with munitions and arms by British subjects, to be employed by insurgents in their attempts to overthrow the govern- ment of the United States? 524 ENFOECEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. When Spain refases shelter to the Sumter, is Great Britain wiUing that she shall rest from her work of destruction, and repair in the har- bor of Gibraltar? These indulgences extended to pirates, who are destroying our com- merce, must, sooner or later, give rise to the questions, What wrong have the United States done or even meditated against Great Britain ? What duty of neutrality, or even friendship, which they owed to Great Britain, have they failed to perform ? What fault have they committed in thein: national conduct 1 They, indeed, are involved in a domestic strife, but it is a strife which, while they are fighting for their own exist- ence, is, at the same time, purely a war of self-defense. In' your own way please bring these views to the attention of Earl Russell. Meantime I shall refer the matter you mention relative to the Bermuda and the Sumter to the Secretary of the M'avy. I doubt not that, if we must maintain war in European waters against American pirates, ia addition to the naval operations in which we already are engaged nearer home, we shall be able to meet that responsibility with fuU success.' I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Chables Francis Adams, Esq., (fee, tfcc, dc. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. 'So. 184 ] Department op State, Washington, February 14, 1862. Sir : I herewith transmit to you the copy* of a communication of the 24th ultimo, addressed to this department by the consul general of the United States at Havana. It has reference to the conduct of the mas- ter of the English steamer General Miramon, oflf the port of Mobile, in the month of May last. It will be seen that, in violation of a solemn pledge, the captain of the General Miramon grossly abused a privilege granted to him by Flag Of&cer McKean from motives of humanity. Ton will make the facts known to the British government, and express the expectation of the President that, if that government has the neces- sary power, it will cause the captain of the Miramon to be suitably pun- ished for his perfidy. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., c6c., d;c., &c. Mr. Seward to Lord Lyons. Depabtment of State, Washington, February 21, 1862. Mt Lord : I have submitted to the President the copy of an instruc- tion from Earl Eussell which you left with me, and which bears the date of January 23d, In this paper Earl Eussell sets forth cexi;ain poiats upon which the *Por inclosure see dispatch from Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward, No. 131, March 13, 186%,, GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. 525 British government differs from some of the conclusions which I pre- sented to you in my note upon the Trent affair, of the 26th of December last. It is perceived that these differences do not disturb the conclusion contained in that paper upon which the case of the Trent was disposed of by this government. The differences stated by Earl Eussell iavolve questions of neutral rights in maritime warfare, which, though of confessed importance, are not practically presented in any case of conflict now existing between the United States and Great Britain. It is very desirable, however, that these questions should be settled, if possible, by an early understand- ing between the two governments. Nevertheless, Earl EusseJl, I think, will agree with me that they relate only to a part of the international law of maritime war, while there are other and kindred questions equally important and equally hkely to arise in the disturbed condition of affairs which exists on this continent, and in any conflict which may happen in Europe. All such questions, moreover, affect not only these two nations, but all the other maritime powers. Earl Eussell need not be reminded that the necessity which has existed for meliorations of the law of mari- time war in regard to neutrals has been a subject of debates and even of conventions of such powers. The friendly relations which this gov- ernment holds to such powers require that aU that it does in this con- nection should be done with their full knowledge and with an expressed desire for their co-operation. This government has taken an active part in seeking to promote such meliorations through such conventions. Its views on this subject have undergone no change. It will cheerfully second any negotiations to that end which Great Britain, or any other maritime power, will inaugurate. If it shall seem preferable, it will itself initiate such proceedings. Our ministers accredited to such powers wiU, at an early day, receive full instructions to this effect. In the mean- time, your lordship may assure Earl Eussell that, while the United States will justly claim as their own the belligerent rights which the customary practice allows to nations engaged in war, according to our present con- victions, there is no melioration of the maritime law, or of the actual practice of maritime war, that the leading maritime states, including Great Britain, shall think desirable, which wiU not be cheerfully assented to by the United States, even to the most liberal asylum for persons and the extreme point of exemption of private property from conflscation in maritime war. I avail myself of this opportunity to renew to your lordship the assur- ance of my high consideration. Eight Hon. Lord Lyons, tfcc, c&c, (&c. WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] No. 131.] LsaATION OF THE UNITED STATES, London, March 13, 1862. Sir : In obedience to the instructions contained in your dispatch ~So. 184, of the 14th of February, I have addressed a note to Lord Eussell in regard to the conduct of the master of the British steamer General Mira- mon, a copy of which is herewith transmitted. 526 ENFORCEMENT OP NEUTRALITY. It will be perceived that I have ventured to introduce another and a different cause of complaint, which suggested itself to me in the pierusal of the report of the discussion in both houses of Parliament on the blpckade. I have done so, not in the expectation of effecting any pur- pose of checking the notorious tendency of the commercial classes, but rather to put on record on the part of the government of the United' States the consciousness of its existence ; for the time may come when there wiU be attempts to deny it. There are people in England who still pretend that the complaints which brought on the war of 1812 were ill founded. But for the evidence perpetuated by the official records of the government of the tJnited States, this story might become the estab- lished faith of the nation. And so it may be in the event of a restora- tion of our affairs. It will probably be affirmed here that there was a rigid abstinence throughout our time of trial from all attempts to do us injury. In opposition to this, it may be as well to have it in our power to show that, outside of the lines of the rebel States, nearly all the active sympathy and positive assistance has come from the subjects of Great Britain. At this very moment the means which the insurgents have to carry on the war are derived from them, and- vessels are fitting out as well as actually on the way to supply them continually with more. I trausmit a copy of a note just received from Lord Eussell, in acknowl- edgment of mine. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHARLES PEAWOIS ADAMS. Hon. Wecliam H. Sbwaed, Secretary of State. Mr. Adams to Earl Bussell. Legation op the United States, London, March 10, 1862. Mt Lord : It is with much regret that I am constrained to lay before you the copy of a letter addressed to the Department of State by the consul general of the United States at Havana, contaioing a serious complaint against the conduct of the master of the British steamer Gen- eral Miramon, off the port of MobUe, in the month of May last. It ^ould appear from the statements therein made, if in accordance with the facts, that Captain Golding took advantage of a privilege granted to him to enter the port of Mobile, upon his profession- of a de- sfre to perform an act of humanity, to abuse the confidence thus placed in him, by discharging one cargo of merchandise, and taking off another, in violation of the blockade known to be established at that place. It is almost needless to remind your lordship how much the disposi- tion to relieve to neutral nations the inconveniences inevitably attending a blockade must be affected by the misconduct of such of their citizens as prove to have no respect for moral obligations. It is not without regret that I am compelled to add that this is by no means the only instance wMch has come within my observation of a desire of British citizens to interfere with the blockade in every manner possible. Not only have the newspapers in Great Britain contained advertisements of vessels about to depart, with the declared ihtention of violating it, but I have reason to believe that respectable assurance companies in London have gone so far as to establish a specific rate of premium at which they GENERAL SUBJECT OP ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. 527 are prepared to guarantee the property engaged in sucli unlawful ven- ture. The effect of such conduct, ia weakening the confidence which my countrymen desire to feel in the friendly disposition of the people of Great Britain, is easily to be conceived. It is no part of my intention in making this representation to imply the existence of any desire on the part of her Majesty's ministers, or of the British nation at large to give the smallest countenance to such hostile demonstrations. My purpose is rather to solicit such action, if it be within the power of the government, as may, by putting the seal x)f public reprobation upon a single weU-authenticated act of dishonesty, serve to deter other evU-minded persons from pursuing the same path in future. Praying your lordship to accept the assurances of my highest consid- eration, I have the honor to be, my lord, your most obedient servant, CHAELBS FEAIirOIS ADAMS. Eight Hon. Earl Eussell, (&e., d}0., &o. Mr. ShufelM to Mr. Seward. No. 9.] United States Consulate General, Havana, January 24, 1862. Sib : I inclose a letter of mine to J. T. Crawford, esq., her Britannic Majesty's consul general, in which I deemed it my duty to inform Mr. Crawford of the conduct of the master of the English steamer " Gene- ral Miramon^' off the port of Mobile, in the month of May last, as therein expressed. I also inclose his reply thereto. I am, sir, with respect, E. W. SHUFELDT, Consul General. Hon. WrLLLAM H. Seward, Secretary of State. Mr. Shufeldt to Mr. Crawford. United States Consulate General, Havana, January 18, 1862. Mt Dear Sir : I desire to communicate for your information the fact, received from Flag Officer McKean, of the United States blockading fleet in the Gulf of Mexico, that the English steamer "Miramon," now or recently lying in this port, was permitted to enter the harbor of Mobile under a solemn pledge from the master, named Golding, that he would come out, without breaking cargo, on the following day, his object being to land a lady passenger, and seriously ill. This occurrence happened in May last, and the permission was granted by Flag Officer McKean him- self. In violation of this pledge, the Miramon discharged her cargo in Mobile, and has recently brought another to this port. I need not say to you that so gross an abuse of a privilege granted purely from motives of humanity will render the future movements of this vessel liable to more than ordinary suspicion. I am, my dear sir, truly and respectfully, your obedient servant, E. W. SHUFELDT, Consul General. 3. T. Crawpord, C. B., Her Britan/nio Majesty's Consul General in Cuba. 528 , ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. Mr, Crawford to Mr. Shufeldt. Havajsta, January 20, 1862. My Deah Sir and Colleag-xte : I liave tlie pleasure of acknowledg- ing the receipt of your letter of tlie 18tli instant, communicating to me the fact, which you have receired from Flag Officer McKean, of the United States blockading fleet in the Gulf of Mexico, respecting the British steamer "General Miramon," which vessel Mag Officer Mc- Kean informs you he permitted to enter the port of Mobile under a solemn pledge from the master, named Golding, that he would come out without breaking cargo on the following day; but that the master violated that pledge, as the " Miramon" discharged her cargo at Mobile, and has recenty brought another to this port; and you observe that such conduct on the part of the master will render the future move- ments of this vessel liable to more than ordinary suspicion. I notice by the "Diario de la Marina" that the "General Miramon" is advertised for sale here, but I have no idea of what will be her future movements. Believe me to remain, my dear sir and colleague, yours, very truly and sincerely, JOSEPH T. CEAWFOED, Consul General in Cuba. E. "W. Shufeldt, Esq., United States Consul General, Havana. Uarl Russell to Mr. Adams. Foreign Office, March 13, 1862. Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 10th instant, calling attention to the conduct of the captain of the British steamer General Miramon, as reported to your government by the United States consul at Havana, in discharging a cargo of merchandise and tak- ing off another at Mobile; the captain of the General Miramon having been allowed to enter that port while under blockade, in consequence of his having stated to the commander of the blockading squadron that his object in going to Mobile was to perform an act of humanity. You also call my attention to the number of vessels lading cargoes in this coun- try with the declared intention of running the blockade, and you request that her Majesty's government will take such ' action in the matter as may be within their power. I have the honor, in reply, to state that, if the facts as alleged against the captain of the General Miramon are not susceptible of a satisfactory explanation, her Majesty's government would much regret that a British ship-master should have abused the confidence of the commander of the United States blockading squadron; and, as regards the second poiatto which you call my attention, I have to assure you that the matter shall have the due consideration of her Majesty's government. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, EUSSELL. Chahles Francis Adams, Esq., &e., (fee, &c. GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OP NEUTRALITY. 529 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] No. 135.J LEaATION OF THE UNITED STATES, London, March 27, 1862. Sir : I have the honor to acknowledge the reception from the depart- ment of dispatches numbered from 199 to 208, inclusive. It will have coine to your knowledge, by the reception of my dispatch No. 131, of the 13th of March, that I had already acted in conformity with the suggestions contained in your I^o. 207, dated on the 11th, by addressing a note to Earl Eussell in remonstrance against the notorious activity of the subjects of Great Britain in eiforts to set at nought the blockade. To that communication I hsuye not yet received a reply. The reception of a letter from Mr. Dudley, the consul at Liverpool, con- taining additional information to the same effect, supplied me with a new occasion to write to his lordship in the spirit of your dispatch No. 19(), of the 27th of February. A copy of this latest note, dated the 26th instant, is herewith transmitted. After a full conversation with Mr. Morse, we both arrived at the conclusion that the evidence in our pos- session would not sustain so broad a position as that contemplated in your letter; for, whatever may have been the purposes of the con- federate emissaries and their friends, pending the difficulties connected with the Trent case — aiid I am inclined to believe they went to the full extent indicated — I fancy they have shrunk within much smaller com- pass since that speck of war has disappeared. The activity is now mainly directed to the expediting of every species of supply through the means of steam vessels, which may themselves be turned to some account in the way of illicit trade or of piratical warfare. Of these last, the Oreto seems to be the only one likely to prove formidable. I thought it, therefore, h good opportunity to place upon his lordship the respon- sibility of the consequences of permitting himself to be deluded by what I cannot help thinking the willful blindness and credulous partiality of the British authorities at Liverpool. From the experience of the past, I have little or no confidence in the success of any application that may be made of the kind. It is not the less important, for all that, to per- petuate the testimony for future use. That Great Britain did, in the most terrible moment of our domestic trial, in struggling with a mon- strous social evil she had earnestly professed to abhor, coldly and at once assume our inability to master it, and then become the only for- eign nation steadily contributing in every indirect way possible to verify its prejudgment, will probably be the verdict made up against her by posterity on a. calm comparison of the evidence. I do not mean to say that such has been the course of the whole people. A considerable por- tion of them in all classes have been actuated by nobler views. There is, throughout England, a great deal of warm though passive sympathy with America. But there is likewise an extraordinary amount of fear as well as of jealousy. And it is these last passions which have per- vaded the mass- of the governing classes, until they have inscribed for the whole nation a moral and political record which no subsequent action will ever avail to obliterate. I am bound to notice in several of your late dispatches a strong dis- position to press upon the British government an argument for a retraction of its original error in granting to the rebels the rights of a belligerent. There may come a moment when such a proceeding might 34 A c— VOL. I 530 ENFOECEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. seem to me likely to-be of use. But I must frankly confess that I do not see it yet. Tlie very last speech of Lord Eussell in the House of Lords is, from beginhing to end, inspired by an opposite idea. The final disruption of the United States, and the ultimate recognition of the seceding States, are as visible in every woid of that address as they were in the letter of the same nobleman to Mr. Edwardes on the 14th of May last. Lord Palmerston has entertained the same conviction. * » * The foreign policy of the government, upon which its friends almost exclusively depend for what is left it of poi)u]arity in the nation, rests upon this basis. * * * For these reasons I respectfully submit to your consideration my doubts about the expediency of moving in this direction now. Indeed, should it so happen that the existing indi- cations of an early termination of the struggle continue to multiply, there will be little occasion for further remonstrance of any kind here ; for the disposition to help a party once that it is felt to be (iertaiuly sinking is not very common among either political or commercial men; and there are no others in Great Britain who would stop to shed a tear over the fallen fortunes of the quasi-belligerent of their own creation. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES EEANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Sewarb, Secretary of State. Mr. Adams to Uarl Eussell. Legation op the United States, London, March 25, 1862. My Lord : I have the honor to submit to your consideration the copy of a letter received from the consul of the United States' at Liverpool, touching the case of the steam gunboat Oreto, which I have already made the subject of a communication some time ago. It is with great reluctance that I am driven to the conviction that the representations made to your lordship of the purposes and destination of that vessel were delusive, and that though at first it may have been intended for service in Sicily, yet that such an intention has been long since aban- doned in fact, and the pretense has beep held up only the better to con- ceal the true object of the parties engaged. That object is to make war on the United States. All the persons thus far known to be most con- nected with the undertaking are either directly employed by the insur- gents in the United States of America, or residents of G-reat Britain notoriously in sympathy with and giving aid and comfort to them on this side of the water. It is with the deepest regret that the President directs me to submit to her Majesty's government a representation of the unfortunate effect pro- duced upon the minds of the people of the United States from the convic- tion that nearly all of the assistance that is now obtained from abroad by the persons still in arms against their government, and which enables them to continue the struggle, comes from the kingdom of Great Brit- ain and its dependencies. Neither is this impression relieved by the information that the existing municipal laws are found to be insufficient, and do not furnish means of prevention adequate to the emergency. . The duty of nations in amity with each other would seem to be plain, not to suffer their good faith to be violated by ill-disposed persons within GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFOECEMENT OP NEUTRALITY. 531 tlteir borders merely from the inefflcacy of their prohibitory policy. Such is the view which my governmeat has been disposed to take of its own obligations in similar cases, an,d such, it doubts not, is that of all foreign nations with which it is at peace. It is for that reason I depre- cate the inference that may be drawn from the issue of the investiga- tion which your lordship caused to be made in the case of the Oreto, should that vessel be ultimately found issuing safely from this king- dom and preying on the commerce of the people of the United States. Not doubting myself the sincerity and earnest desire of your lordship to do all that is within your pow«r to fulfill every requirement of interna- tional amity, it is to be feared that all the favorable effect of it may be neutralized by the later evidence of adverse results. It is no part of my intention to imply the want of fidelity or of good will in any quarter. I desire to confine myself closely within the pale of my duty, a repre- sentation of the precise causes of uneasiness between the two countries, and an earnest desire to remove them. Firmly convinced that the actual position of things in connection with the hostile equipment in British waters by no means does justice to the true disposition of her Majesty's government, I am anxious to place the matter before your lordship in such a light as to obtain the evidence more perfectly to establish the truth.* I am further instructed to say that, well aware of the embarrassment and losses sustained by the nations with which the United States are in amity, through the operation of the restrictive measures to which the government has felt itself obliged to have recourse in its efforts to sup- press the insurrection within its borders, it has ever been its desire to hasten the moment when it might be practicable to rescind them, con- sistently with the attainment of its great object. But to that end much must necessarily depend upon the degree in which cooperation with its policy, or the contrary, may be experienced from without. It is obvious that just in proportion to the success of the efforts made by the ill-in- tentioned people of foreign countries to violate the blockade must be the endeavors to enforce it with increased stringency. So also in propor- tion to the success of such persons in supplying, by violation of law, the insurgents with the means of continuing their resistance must be the delay in restoring to all honest people the customary facilities of trade and intercourse to which they are justly entitled. It ha's not been with- out great regret that the government has been compelled to observe the extent to which her Majesty's flag ha's been abused to subserve the pur- poses of the disaffected, and thus to continue the present depressed con- dition of legitimate trade. A very great proportion of the vessels which attempted to violate the blockade appear to be fitted out directly from Great Britain or some of her dependencies. The effect of permitting such violations of good faith to go unnoticed by government is not merely to create an unfortunate degree of irritation in America, implicating many far beyond the sphere of the unworthy parties concerned in pro- ducing it, but to postpone proportionately the prospect of bringing about a better state of things. It is for this reason, as well as from a desire earnestly felt by the President to maintain unbroken all the customary relations of amity with Great Britain, that I have been directed to make the present representation. Any suggestion of the means best adapted to remedy the evils complained of is deemed a matter exclusively with- in the competency of those in whom the decision to act is vested. Dis- *No order was ever sent out to Nassau to seize the Oreto that Mr. Dudley is aware of, (Letter of May 18, 1868.) 532 ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. claiming every wish to solicit more than my government would in its turn be prepared under similar circumstances to concede, and entertain- ing full confidence in the disposition of her Majesty's ministers on their part to act to the utmost of their ability in the same spirit, I pray your lordship to accept the assurances of the highest consideration with which I'have the honor to be, my lord, your most obedient servant, CHARLES FEANOIS ADAMS. Eight Hon. Earl Eussell, (fee, <&c., &c. [For the inclosed note of Mr. Dudley, dated March 22, 1862, see " Eebel Cruisers," subdivision " Florida," post ; dispatch from Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward, No. 135, March 27, 1862.] Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. » [Extracts.] "ho. 140.] Legation of the United States, London, April 3, 1862. Sir : I have to acknowledge the reception of dispatches from the de- partment, numbered 209, 210, and 211. They make particular reference only to one -subject, the revocation by Great Britain of her recognition of the insurgents as a belligerent. I have already, in my dispatch No. 135, of the 27th of March, submitted my views on the expediency of pressing the subject just at this time. After consultation with some of our friends, I still adhere to the opinion. A few weeks more of news like that we have received for some time back may dispose of it without fur- ther difficulty. Ou the other hand, a contrary current would subject us to needless mortification in a refusal. I transmit iierewith a copy of Lord Eussell's note to me of the 27th, in reply to mine of the 25th of March, on the subject of the gunboat Oreto and the agency of British subjects in supplying aid to the rebels. It is pretty much what I expected. The Oreto has sailed from Liver- pool. I have thfe honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES FEANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. Earl Bussell to Mr. Adams. Foreign Office, March 27, 1862. Sir: Upon receiving your letter of the 25th instant, I immediately directed that the treasury and customs department should be requested to take such steps as may be necessary to ascertain whether the Oxeto is equipped for the purpose of making war on the United States; and if that fact can be proved, to detain the vessel. The charge that nearly all the assistance now obtained from abroad by persons still in arms against the government of the United States, and which enables them to continue the struggle, comes from Great Britain and its dependencies, is somewhat vague. I believe the greater part of the arms and ammunition sent from this country to America during the struggle has gone to the United States. GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. 533 I agree wifch you in the statement that the duty of nations in amity with each other is not to suifer their good faith to be violated by ill-dis- posed persons within their borders merely from the ineflciency'of their prohibitory policy. But it is, at the same time, a duty not to punish persons on suspicion, without any proof of their evil int^ent. It is not the custom of this country to deprive any person of liberty or property without evidence of some offense. If such evidence can be obtained, the laws are suflSlcient to prevent the accomplishment of their evil de- signs against friendly nations. YovL have not yourself hitherto furnished me with evidence that any vessel has received a hostile or warlike equipment in British waters, which has been afterwards used against the United States. The care that was taken to prevent the warlike equipment of the Nashville in British waters must be familiar to your recollection. With regard to co-operation with the policy of the United States in respect to the blockade, I must remind you that Great Britain has ab- stained, as far as possible, from complaints of the irregularity of the blockade which has been instituted. Her Majesty's government have been mindful of the suddenness of the danger with which the United States were threatened ; of the inade- quacy of the naval force then at the disposal of the government, and of the great difQculty of blockading a coast of three thousand miles. But beyond forbearance and a liberal interpretation of the law of nations in favor of the United States her Majesty's government cannot go. If by co-operation with the policy of the United States is meant either taking part in the civil war still raging, or imposing restraints on the Queen's subjects unknown to international law, I cannot undertake that her Majesty's government will adopt either of those courses. It would be an unheard-of measure to prohibit merchants from sending ships to sea destined to the southern .ports. Should such ships attempt to violate the blockade, capture and condemnation are the proper penalty of such attempts. No authority can be found for any other. But while these attempts are made on the one side, the United States government have willingly received in the ranks of their army British subjects, who violate the Queen's proclamation, in order to.serve against the confederates. Nay, the law of the United States, by which parents can prevent the enlistment of their sons, being minors, has been set aside, to the prejudice of British subjects, the fathers and mothers of thoughtless lads of sixteen or seventeen years of age. These evils are perhaps inseparable from the unhappy contest now carried on in America. I can only trust it may have a speedy termina- tion, siiitable to the reputation of the United States, and conducive to the future happiness of all the inhabitants of a country so lately pros- perous and united. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant. EUSSELL. Chahles Fkanois Adams Esq., &g., &c., &c. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 225.] Depaktment op State, Washington^ April 4, 1862. Sir : I regret to be obliged to revert to a subject upon which I have already written to you more than once with deep concern, namely, the 534 ENFORCEMENT OP NEUTKALITY. fitting out of vessels of war in England for the service of the insur- gents. The report now comes to us that one or two iron-clad vessels for that service are ready in England, and that Captain Bullock is there with men to bring them to our shores. It is notorious that while the government of Great Britain have form- ally departed from the friendly relations which existed between the two countries before the insurrection began, and have assumed an attitude of neutrality between the belligerents and this government, British sub- jects have become aiders and abettors of the insurrection in every pos- sible way, and that the arms, ammunition, and military stores of the in- surgents are constantly shipped from British ports, and those who bring them are provided in every form with directions and facilities for enter- ing our country in violation of our blockade. This government entertains no more doubt of the stability of this federal Union than her Majesty's government do of the stability of the union of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Under such circumstances, the question arises whether the government of Great Britain are actually indifferent upon the subject of the relations which must exist between the two countries. Are they willing that, so Jong as the insurgents shall be able to protract a hopeless warfare against the peace and happiness of the American people, they shall avail themselves of the aid and sympathy of a sordid class of persons in the British islands, to whom the disturbance of lawful commerce and the subversion of all honest interests of either country are of no value when weighed against their own gains from a hostile and unlawful trade? The President does not believe that the British government . are con- sciously tolerating the injurious practices of which I have complained. But I am instructed to ask you once more to bring these complaints to ' the notice of Earl Eussell, in the hope that the time may have at last come when British subjects, deliberately and wickedly engaged as abet- tors in the existing warfare against the government, may be subjected to some restraint, or at least be made to feel her Maiesty's severe dis- pleasure. The President would not be content without doing aU that lies in his power to arrest a growing discontent on the part of the American people, fast ripening into an alienation which would perplex and embarrass the two nations for an indefinite period. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Chables Pkancis Adams, Esq., <&c., &c., &c. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. [Extract.] No. 238.] Depaetment oe State, Washington, April 26, 1862. Sir: Your dispatch of April 11, 1862, has been received. It is cer- tainly to be regretted that the British government does not see fit to arrest, in some way, the proceedings of the parties engaged in supply- ing the insurrectionists in our country with materiel of war. How sin- gularly this course contrasts with the generous enthusiasm of those GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. 535 states which send us soldiers by hundreds of thousands to uphold the American Union. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., (fee, c&c, &c. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. Fo. 164.] LEaATION OP THE UNITED STATES, London, May 22, 1862. Sir: I have to acknowledge the reception of dispatches from the department numbered from 243 to 246, both inclusive, and also of two printed circulars dated, respectively, on the 3d and 5th of May, conse- quent upon the recovery of New Orleans. I am not aware of any matter contained in theSe which calls for par- ticular notice, unless it,be t'le injunction upon me to renew my appeals to the government of Great Britain for the revocation of the recognition of belligerent rights, its original false step. I had little expectation of success, but I felt it my duty at once to execute the orders. So, after the forms in connection with the slave trade treaty on Tuesday had been completed, I asked the favor of a few minutes' further conversation on this subject. I alluded to the fact of your reception of my report of our last conference, and to your com- ments on it, which had just reached me. I told him that you thought the course ot events, and the decided turn the fortunes of war had taken since the date of that conference, justified you in presuming that some alteration in the views of the government must have ensued. I dwelt somewhat upon the unfavorable impression that act had made on the people of the United States. It was the true root of the bitterness towards Great Britain that was felt there. All the later acts of assist- ance given here by private persons to the rebel8,"the knowledge of which tended to keep up the irritation, were viewed only as natural emana- tions from that fatal source. Every consular report that went, and there were a good many, giving details of ships and supplies and money trans- mitted to keep up the war, served merely to remind us of the original cause of offense. I did hope then that he would consider, before it should be too late to be useful, the expediency of some action that might tend to soften the asperity thus engendered. I believed that in your urgency you were actuated by a sincere desire to maintain kindly rela- tions between the two countries, and to that end you labored to procure the removal of this unlucky obstruction. I certainly acted in that spirit myself. His lordship replied by saying that he did not see his way to any change of policy at present. We seemed to be going on so fast ourselves that the question might settle itself before a great while. i said that I should be sorry to have that result happen before any action had been taken here; for, after it, we should scarcely attach value to what seemed a mere form. His lordship remarked that the insurrection had certainly been a very formidable one. It embraced a great territory and a numerous popula- tion. The very magnitude of the means used to suppress it proved its nature. Under these circumstances the government had sought to remain perfectly neutral. It would lean to neither side. The wishes of 536 ENFOECEMENT OP NEUTRALITY. the federal authorities had been that it should aid them, which would have been a departure from that line of policy. To this I replied, that whatever might be the intent of that policy, the practical effect of it had been materially to uphold the rebels. The declaration of it at so early a moment, before the government had had any time to organize its counteracting forces, was a prejudgment of the whole question in their favor. The people of the United States felt as if the putting the two sides on an equality was in the nature of a standing insult to them. And the manifest eagerness of influential parties in Great Britain to expedite all the means necessary to induce the mis- guided people to persevere in their undertaking was like the continual application of a nettle to flesh already raw. His lordship then fell back upon the same argument to which he has resorted in his note to me of the 17th instant, in answer to my previous remonstrances against these movements, a copy of which goes out with this dispatch. He said that large supplies of similar materials had been obtained here on the part of the United States, which had been freely transported and effectively used against the insurgents. I answered by admitting that at one time a quantity of arms and mili- tary stores had been purchased here as a purely commercial transaction for the use of the federal army ; but that I had early objected to this practice, for the reason that it prevented me from pressing my remon- strances against a very different class of operations carried on by friends and sympathizers with the rebels in this island, and it had been discon- tinued. We had, indeed, purchased largely in Austria, but that govern- ment had never giv^en any countenance to the insurgents. His lordship observed that that government had no commercial interests pressing upon it for protection. Here the conversation ceased. His lordship said that I had fully acquitted myself of my duty, and I took my leave. There was another topic touched prior to the commencement of this one, to which I shall advert in another dispatch. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES FEANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Seavaed, Secretary of State, Earl Russell to Mr. Adams. FoEBiGN Office, May 17, 1862. SiE: I do not wish to prolong this correspondence, and shall only make one remark in answer to your last letter. If the British government, by virtue of the prerogative of the Crown, or by authority of Parliament, had prohibited and could have prevented the conveyance in British merchant ships of arms and ammunition to the Confederate States, and had allowed the transport of such contra- band of war to New York and to other federal ports, her Majesty's gov- ernment would have departed from the neutral position they have assumed and maintained. If, on the other hand, her Majesty's government had prohibited and could have prevented the transport of arms and ammunition to both the ■contending parties, they would have deprived the United States of a great part of the means by which they have carried on the war. The arms GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. 537 and ammunition received from Great Britain, as well as from other neu- tral countries, have enabled the United States to fit out the formidable armies now engaged in carrying on the war against the southern States, "while by means of the blockade established by the federal government the southern States have been deprived of similar advantages. The impartial observance of neutral obligations by her Majesty's gov- ernment has thus been exceedingly advantageous to the cause of the more powerful of the two contending ptirties. I have the honor to be, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, KUSSELL. Oharles Francis Adams, Esq., tfcc, (fee, (fee. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 266.] Department op State, Washington, June 2, 1862. Sir : The arrival of your dispatch I^o. 159 has been already acknowl- edged. The Japanese embassadors Seem to have interrupted a very interesting conversation between yourself and Earl Russell on the sub- ject of the relations existing between this country and Great Britain. I cannot but think that if it had been continued it would have been closed with beneficial results. I hope that Japan may have gained an equivalent for our loss resulting from the interruption. Some materials for enforcing the views you so justly presented with so much energy and so much candor in that interview have already been sent forward to you. There has just now fallen into our hands a very extraordinary document, being a report made by Caleb Huse, who calls himself a cap- tain of artillery, and who is an agent of the insurgents in Europe, to the chief of the artillery of the war department of the insurgents. It recites purchases of arms, munitions of war, and military supplies, which have been shipped by him in England and elsewhere, in the mad attempt to overthrow the federal Union. It reveals enough to show that the com- plaints you have made to Earl Eussell fell infinitely short of the real abuses of neutrality which have been committed in Great Britain in the very face of her Majesty's government. The revolution is now approach- ing its end, and it is just at this moment that the proof becomes irresist- ible that, if it had been successful, its success would have been due to the aid and assistance it derived from the people of Great Britain, not- withstanding the appeals and remonstrances of this government. The President of the United States has persistently expressed his anxiety throughout the whole distempered period which we have passed that it might end in the preservation of friendly and cordial relations with all the states with which we have heretofore lived in amity, and especially with Great Britain. "Whoever shall read the document I now send you will not wonder that the President thinks it desirable that the government of Great Britain should consider, before the war closes, what are likely to be the sentiments of the two nations in regard to each other after that event shall have occurred. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., djc, &o., <&c. 538 ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. Mr. Huse to Mr. Gorgas. Liverpool, April 1, 1862. Major : I have had great difficulties to contend wich in shipping the field artillery, whieh, as I previously informed you, I should soon send from Hamburg. Messrs. Fraser, Trenholm & Co., of this city, placed at my disposal a fine ship, the Bahama, which I supposed would take all the batteries. It is found, however, that the cargo is so difficult to stow that but six or seven batteries can be taken on board the Bahama. I went to Hamburg to superintend in person the shipment, but finding soon after my arrival that every step I took was watched by spies sent from London by the United States minister, as well as by the United States consulate in Ham- burg, and learning that this consul had declared publicly that the ship, being known to have confederate government property on board, would be captured, after taking legal advice, and carefiilly considering the mat- ter, I determined to leave Hamburg and endeavor to dispose of the busi- ness to some purchaser of such merchandise in England. I accordingly came to this country, and sold the whole ten batteries to Captain Blakely, late of the royal artillery, who is now engaged in the manufacture of artillery. He is now in Hamburg, attending to the shipping of the batteries. Just after my arrival in England I received a telegram from Ham- burg informing me that one of the lighters from which the Bahama was receiving her cargo had been run into by a British steamer under charge of a Hamburg pilot, and sunk with eight pieces and carriages, &c., on board. There are reasons for thinking that the pilot was bribed to commit the act, and, the inhabitants of Hamburg being unanimously opposed to the confederacy, it is probable that it will be impossible for me to recover any damages. I have had the satisfaction, however, this morning of receiving a telegram from Captain Blakely informing me that the lighter had been raised, and, the water being fresh, the carriages are not mate- rially injured. Immediately on my arrival in England I set about obtaining a ship to take the remainder of the batteries left by the Bahama, and such other articles as might be ready. I have the satisfaction of being able to inform you that -I have succeeded in engaging the steamship Melita for this \^ork, and that she leaves Liverpool to-day for Hamburg. From Hamburg she will proceed to London, and there take on board the fol- lowing articles: About 10,000 rifles, 2,000 barrels, powder, 5,000 sets accoutrements, 5,000 knapsacks, 300 cavalry swords, 10,000 yards light blue cloth, 3,000 pairs shoes, 6,000 bayonet scabbards, 1,000 cavalry belts, 250 saddles, &c., complete. In addition to the above I haVe had offered to me 50,000 pairs of French shoes and 25,000 shirts, (cotton.) If the holder of these shoes and shirts will take my order on the confederate treasury, payable in the confederacy, in payment for them, I shall purchase them. The shoes are of the French army 'pattern, and although not by any means equal to shoes that I have purchased in England, still I have thought that they would be serviceable, and that possibly they might be much wanted by the array. I have previously informed you that I have had reason to be entirely satisfied with the London Armory Company in all transactions that I have had with them. The rifles manufactured by this company are so GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OP NEUTRALITY. 539 far superior to those obtained from almost every other source, and pos- sessing, moreover, the advantage of being interchangeable, I have requested the chairman to hand me a tender for supplying 40,000 rifles from their manufactory. Inclosed I have the honor to submit a copy of their proposition. In case the department should desire me to make this contract I beg to be informed at the earliest moment, as otherwise I may find it impos- sible to arrange the matter. Thinking it possible that the department might desire a smaller bore, I made inquiries oa this point, and found that they could make a smaller bore, but not without altering several of the machines. The exterior of the rifle would have to be left the same as at present. It is the opinion of some British oflcers that the barrel of the Enfield rifle is too light. Making the bore smaller, therefore, would rather be an improvement, in giving greater strength to the rifle. The Austrian bore is slightly smaller than the English, but almost every other European government rifle is of a larger bore. Tlie Austrian rifle is a very serviceable weapon, though to one accustomed to Enfield and Springfield arms they have a very rough appearance. I am in a position to purchase 20,000 to 30,000 Austrian rifles at about 40 shillings each, say $10. At present I am not in a position, as regards funds, to make the purchase, inasmuch as I owe at least $400,000 more than I have the means of paying. I have thought it necessary, in the discharge of my duty, to press the credit of the confederacy as far as possible with- out endangering its good name, but I must now limit myself to the con- tracts already made. I must pay my debts before doing anything more. As soon, however, as money sufficient. for the purpose is received, I shall at once invest it (unless I receive orders to the contrary) in four batteries of Austrian rifled field artillery, 32 guns suitable for gun cotton as well as for jjow- der, which guns I have already secured, and 20,000 rifles, now in the Vienna arsenal. Unless I should be able to purchase a large number, like 10,000 to 20,000, I should not, without special orders, depart from the Enfield bore, not that the Austrian bore is too small, but because of the great importance of uniformity of bore. It has given me great concern that I have not been able to make bet- ter arrangements for running in the several cargoes that have been for- warded. It is impossible, as I have stated in my previous letters, to obtain ves- sels with capacity for cargo and cqal for so long a voyage, that have, at the same time, the requisite speed for attempting the blockade. I have endeavored to purchase a very fast paddle-wheel steamer to run from Nassau to the coast, but I have no money now for any pur- pose. I should not hesitate to appropriate money to this object, even without orders, seeing how long the Gladiator was detained at Nassau, and considering the great importance of these goods being safely landed. The Economist, Lieutenant Pauntleroy, was at Bermuda on the 0th of March, expecting to sail the next morning. As we have dates from New York to the 20th of March, with no account of the Economist, I have strong hopes th^it she arrived at a confederate port. The steamer Minna sailed while I was in Hamburg. It was intended that she should take 500 barrels of gunpowder. I found on my return to London, however, that the powder had been shut out on account of the vessel being full. Had I been in London, I should have sent powder in preference to anything else. On board the Minna", consigned to I. Adderly & Co., are the following 540 ENFORCEMENT OP NEUTKALITY. articles for the confederate government : 5,900 knapsacks and boards, 5,690 sets of accoutrements, 1,840 gun slings, 992 saber belts, 4,500 yards of cloth, (light blue,) 1,850 sabers, 5,700 rifles, 300 pairs of shoes, 16 sets of saddlery. Correct invoices have been sent by the Minna to Kassau. The Melita will sail from London with a very valuable cargo in about fifteen days. I have requested Lieutenant Worth, of the navy, to take charge of her, but have not yet received his reply. Should it be in the negative, I shall endeavor to obtain an officer from the Sumter, still lying at Gib- raltar. The Melita is, for a screw steamer, fast, and with an enterprising ofQ- cer on board could, 1 am confident, be run in. There will be several large field howitzers so placed that without disturbing the general cargo they can be taken to the deck and then mounted, and with these quite a good defense could be made against wooden gunboats. I have the honor to be your obedient servant, CALEB HUSE, Captain of Artillery. Major J. GoRGAS, Confederate States Artillery, War Department. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] No. 187.] Legation op the United States, London, July 17, 1862. Sir : The Tuscarora is still at Southauipton. She has been detained by the necessity for some slight repairs. Notes have passed between Lord Russell and myself on the subject, copies of which are hereto sub- joined. * # * * I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHARLES FEANOIS ADAMS. Hon. WiLLiAJVt H. Sewakd, Secretary of State. Earl Russell to Mr. Adams. Foreign Office, July 12, 1862. Sir : I have the honor to bring to your notice that the United States screw steamer of war Tuscarora has within the last few days arrived at Southampton, and that, in answer to inquiries addressed to her com- mander, the authorities at that port have been informed that she is in need of repairs which will occupy at least a fortnight. Under these circumstances, I have the honor to suggest that the proper course would be that you should apply formally for that indulgence in favor of the Tuscarora. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, EUSSELL. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., cfec, <&c., &c. ■ GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. . 54 1 Mr. Adams to Earl Eussell. Legation op the United States, London, July 15, 1862. My Lord : I pray your lordship's pardon if, by reason of my want of acquaintance with the proper mode of proceeding, I have failed to take the necessary steps to solicit for Captain Craven, of the United States steamer the Tuscarora, permission to make some repairs required by the continued service of this vessel since her departure from the United States. In the conversation held with Captain Craven touching the matter I did not understand him to have learned that the application should come from me. I presume that the repairs proposed are not of a nature to require much detention. I trust, therefore, that her Majestj'^'s government will be pleased to grant the privilege to the Tuscarora so far as it may be neces- sary to place that vessel in good order for service at sea. Eenewing to your lordship the assurance of my highest consideration, I have the honor to be, my lord, your most obedient servant, CHAKLES FEANCIS ADAMS. Eight Hon. Eael Eussell, <&c., &c., &c. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. [Extracts.] No. 323.] Department of State, Washington, August 13, 1862, Sir: Tour dispatch of August 1 (No. 201) has been received. So also is the action you have taken in regard to the piratical vessels Oreto and 290, and our protest against the perversion of the neutral privileges of the island of ISTassau. You will, on proper occasion, make known to Earl Russell the satisfaction which the President has derived from the just and friendly proceedings and language of the British gov- ernment in regard to these subjects. When we consider how soon this insurrection would wither and die when deprived of the sympathies of the British nation and the hope of aid which those sympathies, now so active, have awakened; how soon commerce would revive; how benefi- cent, as well as how soothing, to the British nation the restoration of our domestic peace must necessarily be; and what hopes for the British race everywhere, and even for civilization itself, are treasured up in a necessary harmony and co-operation of the distinct families of that race, found on every continent and on so many islands, it seems impossible to account for the hostile disposition of a portion of the British- people toward the United States, except on the ground of an unnecessary jealousy, which is feeding an unwise and unnatural ambition. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &c., <&c., &c. 542 ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. [From British Blue Book, "North America," No. 1, 1863, p. 16.] Xo. 21. Mr. Stuarl to Earl Bussfill. [Extract.] Washington, August 16, 1862. , I liad an inter\'iew this morning with Mr. Seward, when, as instructed by your lordship in your dispatch of the 2d instant, I represented to him the danger. of disputes which would probably ensuej should the United States government carry into effect the intention which Mr. Adams has announced to your lordship of issuing letters of marque with a view of checking depredations on United States commerce by cruizers of the so-styled Confederate States. Mr. Seward answered that in consequence of the late friendly act of her Majesty's government, or of the British authorities at S'assau, in seizing the steamship Oreto, and in the expectation that her Majesty's government would pursue the same course with regard to other vessels which were fitting out in British ports for a similar purpose, a recourse to letters of marque would not for the present be resorted to, although he could not assure me that such a measure might not hereafter be found necessary. He also alluded to the case of the other steamer* which had lately escaped from Liverpool, and I explained to him tha,t in that case, as well as in that of the Oreto, her Majesty's government had done all which they legally could do, and that they would do the same in future, whenever proofs could be furnished that vessels were being equipped in British ports in violation of the foreign enlistment act, or of the Queen's proclamation of neutrality. After some conversation, on his side upon the difficulty of producing proofs in such cases, and on mine upon the impossibility of acting on mere suspicions, Mr. Seward gave me the assurance that the, idea of letters of marque was at any rate suspended, for the present; and he added that he hoped that the great additions which are being made to the United States navy would soon be sufficiently completed to render the measure altogether unnecessary. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. [Extract.] 'So. 336.J Department op State, Washington, September 8, 1862. We hear, officially and unofficially, of great naval preparations which are on foot in British and other foreign ports, under cover of neu- trality, to give to the insurgents a naval force. Among these reports is one that a naval armament is fitting out in England to lay New York under contribution. I think that the vigor of our naval department in building a navy upon a sudden emergency can hardly be surpassed; nevertheless, its progress seems slow to us under the circumstances. , * The "Alabama." GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. 543 In addition to the monitor and other iron vessels, already known to you, we have the Ironsides now ready for duty, and a new monitor is expected to be put iuto service within the next ten days. Others will soon follow, and we are doing what we can to be prepared for every possible adverse coutiugency that can affect the situation of the country either at home or abroad. We cannot but regret that the course of administration in Great Britain is such as to render our relations with that country a source of constant and serious apprehension. But it is not perceived here what more can be done than we are doing to preserve an interna- tional peace, which, perhaps, cannot be suiHciently valued until, with- out fault on our part, it shall have been broken. I am sii', your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SBWAED. Ohables Francis Adams, Esq., &g., <&c., &c. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. 'So. 340.] Department oe State, Washington, September 13, 1862. Sir : Mr. Morse, our indefatigable consul at London, has transmitted to this department an intercepted letter written by S. H. Mallory, who is the pretended secretary of the navy to the insurrectionary party of the South, and addressed to James H. North, who is called a commander in that navy. The letter shows that at least two steamers, the Oreto [the Alababa?] and the Florida, have been actually built, fitted up in England for the insiirgents, and dispatched with armaments and mili- tary stores from British ports to make war upon the United States. Mr. Morse has informed me that he intended to submit the letter to you, and it is probable that you will have taken a copy of it. For greater certainty, however, a copy is sent you with this dispatch. It is thought expedient that you give a copy of it to Earl Eussell. Hitherto the British authorities have failed to prevent such transactions, assign- ing as the reason a want of authentic evidence of the illegal character and purposes of the vessels which you have denounced. It will per- haps be useful to give the government this unquestionable evidence of the infraction of the neutrality laws, in, the very two cases of which you have already complained without success. Although these two vessels are now beyond the reach of British authority, the evidence which shows that they ought to have been detained may possibly lend some probability to new complaints in regard to other vessels of a similar character now being built in England. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED, Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &c., &c., my lord, your most obedient servant, CHAELES EEANCIS ADAMS. Eight Hon. Eaul Etjssell, be there converted into a confederate cruiser, with a confederate captain and a confederate crew : how was such a transaction to be prevented? Would not the plans of the confederate agents and of their friends in the country be kept so secret that no law existing, or to be made, could reach them? 1 said that, struck by the difSculties, her Majesty's government had' determined to address the confederate commissioners at Paris ; and I 40 a c — VOL. I 626 ENFORCEMENT OP NliUTEALITY. then proceeded to read to Mr. Adams the letter of which I inclose a copy. But I said there was always great difficulty in communicating with the confederate authorities at Eichmond, and it had occurred to the cabinet that, as the government at Washington must have opportunities of com- municating with the confederates on questions which always arise in the course of protracted hostilities, I might fairly ask Mr. Seward, through the organ of Mr. Adams, to convey my letter safely to the confederate authorities. Mr. Adams raised the difficulties that the confederates might doubt the authenticity of the letter ; but, as I told him that the original had been sent the day before to Lord Cowley, to be delivered to Mr. Mason, Mr. Adams actnowledged that difficulty to be removed. * 1 said that either of the confederates would accept oux conditions, or they would refuse compliance, and in the last case it would be for her Majesty's government to consider what was next to be done. Mr. Adams said that in either case he thought advantage would accrue to the United States ; but he feared that the facility with which the confederates had obtained ships for hostUe purposes in a neutral country would furnish very dangerous precedents to beUigerents ia any future war. I am, with great respect, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, EUSSELL. J. Hume Buknley, (&c., &g., f&c. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extracts.] No. 879.] Legation oe the United States, London, February 16, 1865. SiE : I have the honor to transmit copies of correspondence held with Lord Eussell on the subject of outfits of vessels for account of the rebels, as per list annexed. When I received his lordship's latest note, of the 8th, I thought it sus- ceptible of so triumphant a reply that I had it in my mind to prepare one without delay. Subsequent reflection, however, caused by information of a peculiar character which had then reached me, modified my views, and deter- mined me to desist from any such proceeding. I had not been unaware of the efforts in the press and elsewhere to stir up the popular apprehension of what was to follow in case the rebellion should be subdued. I had heard — : 1st. That enormous claims for damages for the ravages of the vessels let out of English ports would be immediately presented, to which Great Britain could never give any countenance. 2d. That the rescinding of all the various treaty engagements, espe- cially in connection with Canada, was to be only a prelude to an advance into that country of the great armies liberated from the war. Seeing the bearing of aU these movements to be to stimulate the no- tion that a quarrel was about to be picked by ourselves, and that the more decided and irrefutable any note of mine to Lord Eussell at this time might be, the more it might have a tendency to add to these GENEEAL SUBJECT OF ENFOECEMENT OF NEUTEALITY. 627 suspicions, I deliberately came to the conclusion, for the present, to let th6 correspondence droj). It was at this moment I received a note from Lord Russell, asking ine to call upon him on Tuesday, at 3 o'clock. I went accordingly. Then it was that I received the communication of which I gave you intima- tion in my hurried dispatch, No. 877, of the 15th instant, which went out of the customary course in the steamer of that date. I now pro- ceed to report to you my interview. His lordship said he had asked to see me in order to let me know the result of the deliberations of the cabinet on American affairs. With regard to the state of things in Canada, in view of the instructions which had been sent by Mr. Cardwell to Lord Monck, of the action that had been taken by Lord Monck himself, of the measures in progress ia the legislature, and of the decisions of the courts of the province; it was thought that enough had been done to establish confidence there. With respect to the difficulties that had been occasioned on this side by the proceedings of the confederate agents and their friends, in fitting out vessels and enlisting men to carry on the war, from this country as a base, the cabinet had come to a determination. This was to direct him to address a letter to the three persons who had, some time since, written to him as authorized agents of the confederates at Eichmondj on another subject, Messrs. Slidell, Mason, and Mann. These persons were believed to be, all of them, now at Paris. Such a letter had accordingly been prepared. He proposed now to read to me its con- tents. Accordingly, he read it oyer slowly and deliberately. After he finished, he said it was proposed to furnish me with a copy for my gov- ernment. He had already, on Monday, sent the letter to Lord Oowliey, at Paris, to be forwarded to its address. In order to be still more sure of its destinatiou, however, he proposed to send a duplicate to Wash- ington, with a request, that, through the channels of communication which appear to have been established between that place and Rich- mond, it might, if thought proper, be transmitted by us. I then said that I had listened to the reading of th,e letter with mucfh satisfaction. That I could not, at the moment, say what view my gov- ernment would take of it, or of the proposition to transmit it through its agency. I could, myself, perceive no objection. Possibly the other side might be disposed to refuse to receive it, because it came in that way. His lordship remarked that he had first sent it directly to the agents to guard against that difficulty. He alluded to the refusal of the govern- ment to permit a vessel to pass, on a former occasion, as having been based upon other reasons which did not seem to apply to this case. I said it had always seemed to me a matter of surprise that some course of this kind had not been earlier taken. The proceedings complained of were of a most outrageous kind. Indeed, so far as I could remem- ber, a deliberate systematic attempt like this to conduct a naval war from the territory of a neutral power was wholly unprecedented. I had regretted it the more that the toleration of it appeared to be establish- ing a precedent of a most pernicious character in all tuture cases; and, particularly, to us it was setting an example which would hardly fail to be followed by myriads of loose people among us, who might be induced, by the hope of profit or of adventure, to embark in any cause, no mat- ter how unprincipled or desperate, that promised fair returns of spoils on the ocean. His lordship said that such ships might be anywhere taken ; to which I assented, but at the same time reminded him that this was a war of a novel character, that depended mainly upon the 628 ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. gkillful use of modern science, in furnishing vessels of the most speed, at once to overtake tlie helpless and run away from the strong. In short, it was an emulation in racing in which the governing power took the chances against itself. His lordship did not seem disposed to con- liest this. He alluded to the various efforts that had been made to stop these outfits under the law, and to the difficulties which had been met with at every step. I remarked that I had become convinced, from the result of the last trial, that the United States could stand no chance before a jury. His lordship said that it was in consequence of doubts of the Crown lawyers, in the case of the iron-clads, as to the possible presence of one or two advocates of the confederates on the jury ; that it had been decided to buy them up. People here now took sides, almost as vehemently, on our questions as we did ourselves. It was to be re- gretted, but there was no help for it. Under the circumstances, they must do the best they could. From all which it appears, plainly enough, that this measure of a let- ter has been finally adopted, as the only alternative, after consciousness of the utter failure in a resort to the law as a means of preventing this gross abuse, and of the impossibility of procuring from Parliament any amendment to make it more effective. The closing remark of his lordship, as I took my leave, was signifi- cant. Alluding to the possibility of a failm-e of this letter in produc- ing any effect, he remarked that the question would be of going on ; to which I replied, that I hoped it might prove equally convenient to us whether the one party should be made to stop or the other to go on. This conference was one of a most friendly character, and convinced me that, whatever might be the desires of the French Emperor, nothing but the grossest mismanagement on our part would effect any change in the established policy of this ministry towards us. I have since received a note from Lord EusseU, with a copy of the letter. I send a copy of the former with the latter, just as it came to me, preserving a copy of it to place in the archives of this legation. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES FEANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Sewakd, Secretary of State. [Inclosttres.] REBEL EECEUITING- IN AND NAVAL EXPEDITIONS PROM LONDON — OASES OP THE CITY OP RICHMOND, THE HAWK, THE VIRGINIA, AND THE NO. 40, OR LOUISA ANN PANNY. 1. Mr. Adams to Lord EusseU, January 14, 1865. 2. The same to same, January 14, 1865. 3. Lord EusseU to Mr. Adams, January 16, 1865. 4. Same to same, January 27, 1865. [For the above iuclosures see same dispatch under subdivision " Hawk," pout.] 5. Mr. Adams to Lord EusseU, January 30, 1865. 6. Mr. Morse to Mr. Adams, January 27, 1865. 7. Lord EusseU to Mr. Adams, February 1, 1865. [For the above iuclosures see same dispatch under subdivision " Vir- ginia," jjost.] GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. 62& THE SALE OP THE SEA-KING-. Lord Eussell to Mr. Adams, February 1, 1865. [For above inclosure see "Eebel Cruisers," subdivision " Shenandoali,'" post.] THE LETTERS POUND ON THE PLORIDA. 1. Mr. Adams to Lord Eussell, January 18, 1865. [For above letter see Mr. Adams's dispatch to Mr. Seward Ifo. 857, January 19, 1865, printed under the head of " Eebel Cruisers," subdi- vision " Florida," jjost.j 2. Lord Eussell to Mr. Adams, February 8, 1865. THE AJAX AND HEECULES. 1. Mr. Adams to Lord Eussell, February 7, 1865. 2. Mr. Dudley to Mr. Adams, February 2, 1865. 3. Same to same, February 4, 1865. 4. Advertisement; paying crew of the 290. [See "Eebel Cruisers," subdivision " Alabama," j?osf.] 5. Lord Eussell to Mr. Adams, February 8, 1865. 6. Mr. Adams to Lord Eussell, February 9, 1865. 7. Deposition of John Melley, February 6, 1865. 8. Advance note — the Ajax, January 9, 1865. 9. Deposition of George Smith, February 6, 1865. 10. Lord Eussell to Mr. Adams, February 9, 1865. LORD RUSSELL TO THE REBEL EMISSARIES, DEMANDING THE DISCON- TINUANCE OP EXPEDITIONS AND ENLISTMENTS PROM GREAT BRITAIN. 1. Lord Eussell to Mr. Adams, February 15, 1865. 2. Lord EusseU to Messrs. Slidell, Mason, and Mann, February 13, 1865. [For the above inclosures (except No. 4) see same dispatch under sub- division "Ajax and Hercules," i>os*.] Lord Russell to Mr. Adams. Foreign Ofpice, February 8, 1865. Sir: I have had the honor to receive your note of the 18th ultimo, calling the attention of her Majesty's government, with reference to the papers therein inclosed, to the proceedings of confederate agents in this country. I have now the honor to state to you that after careful consideration of these papers there appears to me to be nothing in them upon which any person can be convicted of a breach of the law. Her Majesty's gov- ernment will apply the law with strictness, but they cannot go beyond it. I may observe that a great part of this correspondence relates to arrangements to be carried into effect in France, and not in this country. With regard to your observation ' that it is for you to point out the operations of confederate agents inconsistent with the neutrality of the United Kingdom, and that it is the duty of her Majesty's government to consider how these operations can be checked and prevented for the 630 ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. future, I have to point out to you that her Majesty's government, having used all the means in their power to prevent the fitting and arming of vessels in their ports to cruise against the vessels of the United States, and having faithfully carried into execution the laws enacted to preserve inviolate the neutral and pacific obligations of Great Britain, cannot consider themselves bound to answer for the acts of every individual who may evade the operation of the laws by fitting out and arming ves- sels bought in this country, in some distant neutral port, or on the seas beyond her Majesty's jurisdiction. For such acts no nation does in prin- ciple or in practice hold itself responsible. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, EUSSELL. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., tfcc, (fee, <&g. Lord Russell to Mr. Adams. Foreign Opficb, February 15, 1865. Lord Eussell presents his compliments to Mr. Adams, and has the honor to inclose a copy of the letter of which Lord Eussell spoke to Mr. Adams yesterday as having been addressed to Messrs. Mason, Slidell, and Mann. Lord Bussell to Mason, Slidell, and Mann. Foreign Oppicb, February 13, 1865. Gentlemen : Some time ago I had the honor to inform you, in answer to a statement which you sent me, that her Majesty remained neutral in the deplorable contest now carried on in North America, and^ that her Majesty intended to persist in that course. It is now my duty to request you to bring to the notice of the authori- ties under whom you act, with a view to their serious consideration thereof, the just complaints which her Majesty's government have to make of the conduct of the so-called confederate government. The facts upon which these complaints are founded tend to show that her Majesty's neutrality is not respected by the agents of that government, and that undue and reprehensible attempts have been made by them to involve her Majesty in a war in which her Majesty had declared her intention not to take part. In the first place, I am sorry to observe that the unwarrantable prac- tice of building ships in this country to be used as vessels of war against a State with which her Majesty is at peace still continues. Her Majesty's government had hoped that this attempt to make the territorial waters of Great Britain the place of preparation for warlike armaments against the United States might be put an end to by prosecutions and by seizure of the vessels built in pursuance of contracts made with the confederate agents. But facts which are, unhappily, too notorious, and correspond- ence which has been put into the hands of her Majesty's government by the minister of the government of the United States, show that resort is had to evasion and subtlety in order to escape the penalties of the law ; that a vessel is bought in one place, that her armament is prepaxed in another, and that both are sent to some distant port beyond her Maj- GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. 631 esty's jurisdiction, and that tbus an armed steamship is fitted out to cruise against the commerce of a power in amity with her Majesty. A crew composed partly of British subjects is procured separately; wages are paid to them for an unknown service. They are dispatched, per- haps, to the coast of France, and there or elsewhere are engaged to serve in a confederate man-of-war. Now, it is very possible that by such shifts and stratagems the penal- ties of the existing law of this country, nay, of any law that could be enacted, may be evaded; but the offense thus offered to her Majesty's authority and dignity by the de facto rulers of the Confederate States, whom her Majesty acknowledges as belligerents, and whose agents in the United Kingdom enjoy the benefit of our hospitality in quiet security remains the same. It is a proceeding totally unjustifiable and manifestly offensive to the British Crown. Secondly, the confederate organs have published, and her Majesty's government have been placed in possession of it, a memorandum of in- structions for the cruisers of the so-called Confederate States, which would, if adopted, set aside some of the most settled principles of inter- national law, and break down rules which hei^ Majesty's government have lawfully established for the purpose of maintaining her Majesty's neutrality. It may, indeed, be said that this memorandum of instruc- tions, though published in a confederate newspaper, has never as yet been put in force, and that it may be considered as a dead-letter ; but this cannot be affirmed with regard to the document which forms the next ground of complaint. Thirdly, the president of the so-called Confederate States has put forth a proclamation acknowledging and claiming as a belligerent operation, in behalf of the Confederate States, the act of Bennett G. Burley in attempting, in 1864, to capture the steamer Michigan, with a view to release numerous confederate prisoners detained in captivity in John- son's Island, on Lake Erie. Independently of this proclamation, the facts connected with the attack on two other American steamers, the Philo Parsons and Island Queen, on Lake Erie, and the recent raid at St. Albans, in the State of Vermont, which Lieutenant Young, holding, as he affirms, a commission in the Confederate States army, declares to have been an act of war, and therefore not to involve the guilt of robbery and murder, show a gross disregard of her Majesty's character as a neutral power, and a desire to involve her Majesty in hostilities with a coterminous power with which Great Britain is at peace. You may, gentlemen, have the means of contesting the accuracy of the information on which my foregoing statements have been founded ; and I should be glad to find that her Majesty's government have been misinformed, although I have no reason to think that such has been the case. If, on the contrary, the information which her Majesty's govern- ment have received with regard to these matters cannot be gainsaid, I trust that you will feel yourselves authorized to promise, on behalf of the confederate government, that practices so offensive and unwarrant- able shall cease, and shall be entirely abandoned for the future. I shall, therefore, await anxiously your reply, after referring to the authorities of the Confederate States. I am, &c., EUSSBLL. J. M. Mason, Esq., J. Slidell, Esq., J. Mann, Esq. 632 ENFOECEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extracts.] No. 884. 1 Legation of the United States, London, February 23, 1865. SiE : I have just come from an interview with Lord Eussell. He was unwell, and received me at his own house. I had asked it for two pur- poses. One of these was to communicate to him the substance of j'our dispatch No. 1258, and especially to point out to him that portion of it relating to the ftitimation given by the rebel commissioners of some de- vice to unite the sentiment of both sides on an object not defined, yet not difficult to be conceived. # #•# # * * # * * The other object of my interview related to the contents of your No. 1266. I gave him the substance of it, remarking at the same time that its importance had been much diminished by the later action of her Majesty's government, not yet known in the United States. I then alluded to the reference in Mr. Slidell's letter to some project that had been offered by M. Drouyn de Lhuys through Lord Cowley, in a manner to invite explanations if his lordship felt so disposed. He readily responded. The project, he said, had been little or nothing more than an abstract of that part of the minute of instructions which proposed to save neutral property from destruction, if permission were given to ad- mit it into the neutral ports. It had been considered by himself as inad- missible from the first, but it had been referred, as usual, to the Crown lawyers, who at once pronounced the whole scheme of adjudication on the quarter-deck as involving a departure from the established law of nations, which could not be thought of for a moment. He had in con- sequence written a letter to Lord Cowley, directing him to communicate to M. Drouyn de Lhuys their rejection of it. His lordship did not know what the French government thought of it, but he presumed it could scarcely have held a difierent opinion. I said I had inferred that it must have been so. All that I had been instructed to say was, in case of her Majesty entertaining such a pro- posal, that we should be inclined to enjoy the benefit of this new inter- pretation of law by claiming just the same rights on the ocean over neutral property. The matter was not worth pursuing any fuirther. I should, therefore, content myself with simply leaving in his hands cop- ies of two Intercepted letters of. Mr. Slidellthat came with the dispatcli, particularly as one of them appeared to contain some remarks upon himself which might be interesting to him. I forgot to mention in its proper place that I read to Lord Eussell that passage of your dispatch which proposes as a mode of meeting the ques- tions growing out of the minute of instructions the exclusion from the rights of belligerents of vessels fitted out from British ports. His lord- ship replied that the measure had been fully considered, but that the lord chancellor thought there were insurmountable difficulties attend- ing it. 1 have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHARLES FEANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. GENERAL SUBJECT OF EMFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. 633 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. E'o. 1282. 1 Department op State, Washington, March 1, 1865. Sir : Your dispatch of tLe 10th of February (So. 874) bas been received. The President is by no means surprised at the phase which our affairs have assumed in Europe. It does not even excite wonder here that, in Loudon as well as in Paris, we are expected, immediately upon the end of our civil conflict, to begin a course of retaliatory foreign wars. I do not deny that these apprehensions find some ground of support in the angry tone of our press. It would evince equally a want of national sensibility and of national spirit if the American press should fail to resent the insult and contumely which the press of Great Britain has so incessantly hurled against us during our four years of struggle and affliction. European statesmen have failed to accept — European poli- ticians have studiously refused to hear our explanations of our position in regard to foreign powers. Notwithstanding oiir continual protests, thej' have persisted in derogating us from our place, equal with their own, as a sovereign power in the family of nations, and, so far as they have been able, they have levelled us to the plane of the insurgents. Under cover of neutrality, subjects protected by the government of Great Britain have lavishly contributed material support to the insur- gents, and employed every moral engine to aid them in overthrowing the government of the United States. European politicians do not now mistake in supposing that the people of the United States are indulging a Ijrofound sense of injury. It would not be unnatural if that sense of injury should impel the nation, as soon as its hands shall once more be free, to demand redress. Demands for redress are very apt to culjoiinate in schemes of conquest. This, however, is not the policy of the President. He deems conquests unnecessary, demoralizing and injurious to the republic, as he deems revenge and retaliation unworthy the character of a great nation. The sentiments and policy of this government remain unchanged. Every word of peace and good will to foreign states that we have heretofore spoken, and which has been interpreted as the lan- guage of policy or of fear, is now spoken as freely as before, when we think that all our dangers are virtually passed. The President does not for a moment think of sending armies or navies with such a purpose or upon such motives as have been indicated into Canada, or the West Indies, or Mexico. There is, however, one necessity that is laid upon him, which he would not be allowed to put aside, if he should desire. He was committed at the beginning of his present term of administration to retake and occupy aU the places, posts, and forts which the insurgents had then taken, or afterwards should take a\<^ay from the government, and thus to restore the national authority throughout the Union. He will be committed at the beginning of his next term to every lawful effort that shall tend to restore the national prestige and influence abroad, just as they stood before this unhappy civil war began. Always con- fidently anticipating the triumph of the Union, and, therefore, always foreseeing the difficulties and embarrassments of our relations with the maritime powers, which must exist if the end of the civil war should find their injurious policy j^nchanged, we have, in season, and, our defamers say, out of season, appealed to the maritime States, and especially to Great Britain, to rescind in due time such of their proclama- mations, orders, and decrees as derogate from our national sovereignty over all territory and over all the citizens of the United States. lucre- 634 ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. dulity in regard to our ultimate success has indeed seemed to induce Great Britain to reject these appeals, and now the end of our war is likely to find us face to face with that nation in a very disturbed state of relations. British subjects are still sending forth piratical vessels to destroy our commerce and harass us in our seaports, and these vessels are regarded by her Britannic Majesty's government as lawful ships of war. I annex a copy of a telegram just received from Halifax, which shows the dangers of this sort against which we have to guard. Our ships of war are excluded from British ports, while our own ports are unreservedly open to theirs. In this unfortunate situation of affairs we shall exert ourselves not less diligently than we have done heretofore to pre- serve peace between the two countries. We ought not, however, to be expected to do it without conciliation, or at least some show of good will on the other side. Canada is one of the points where the peace of the two countries is immediately exposed. Judge Smith yesterday adjourned the case of the St. Albans raiders eight days, and thus he has again rendered it impossible for us to modify our restrictive measures in regard to that province. There is reason to hope, however, that, if not the judiciary, the executive authorities of Canada will soon take such proceedings as will reassure the border sentiment. In that case the President will hasten to manifest a renewed sense of security and of liberality towards that important province. Beyond Canada, however, the prospect of reconciliation is clouded. The neutrality law and the Queen's proclamation seem to us to be little better than dead letters in the courts of Great Britain and in the docks of Liverpool and Glasgow. The Rappahannock, at Calais, is a receiving ship for recruiting agents residing and operating at Liverpool. The Shenandoah is afloat, committing new depredations near the cape of Good Hope ; and then almost daily we hear of a new pirate clandestinely built, armed, manned, and equipped, and dispatched from Liverpool. Even Arman's French ram, evading French and Danish laws, employs the services of a British steamer and British merchants to effect its unlawful armament. Can any English statesman exi3ect that the people of the United States will endure an unprincii)led maritime war at the hands of any people without resort to self-defense? What then is to be done"? Shall the governments of the two countries suffer them to drift in conflict? Must the extinguishment of slavery in the United States, an object so dear to both nations, be atoned for by a deadly war between them? Certainly such a consequence is unnecessary. It would be criminal. I will suggest what I think may avert the danger. Great Britain, I think, must now know, what hitherto she has so strangely doubted, namely, that to the Americans the Union is the one chief dominating object of thought and affection. If they are angry with Great Britain, it is because they believe, with how much reason it is unnecessary here to say, that the British nation has desired and sought the overthrow of the Union. If now Great Britain is satisfied that this cherished object of American affection is entirely safe — safe equally against domestic treason and against foreign intervention, then let her manifest in some way her contentment with that established fact. I do not say that this shall be demonstratively or even formally done. It may be done inci- dentally, and even as of chance. Let Britisk ministers, hereafter, instead of speaking of us as a nation that is, or ought, or must be divided into two nations, speak of us as they rightly expect us to speak of Great , Britain, as a sovereign state, whose integrity we recognize, and of whose elements and factions we, as neighbor and friend, neither know nor care GENEEAL SUBJECT OP ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. 635 to know anything. I think the Qneen of England is as popular in the United States to-day as she is among her own subjects. We refuse to understand her allusions to us in her late speech to Parliament as ungen- erous or unfriendly. Why cannot British statesmen be as generous to the United States as their sovereign 1 Then let the vexatious restrictions upon our intercourse with British ports be removed ; and let it be shown that the flag of the United States is as wslcome in British ports as the British flag is in our own. Let justice not stumble on her coasts, but pursue British subjects on the decks of British vessels who violate her laws, and arrest them, if need be, on the high seas, under whatever flag they shall simulate in carrying on their piratical warfare against an unoffending friendly jjower. Great Britain knows, I think, how unex- acting we are, and therefore she knows how easily we can reciprocate peace with peace, and even, if it is desired, friendship with friendship. This done, we shall be able to confer calmly upon such claims and questions as remain to be adjusted in a spirit of friendship and good will. I do not require you to submit this dispatch to Earl Eussell; you may, however, show any part or the whole of it to him if, upon being informed of its character, he shall wish to see it. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Chables Francis Adams, Esq., &c., (fee, cfcc Mr. Jackson to Mr. Seward. [Telegram.] United States Consulate, Halifaoj, February 27, 1865. Information has reached me from sources believed to be reliable, that four iron-clads are on their way from French and English ports to attack S"ew York City, and that five blockade-running steamers, to be con- verted into privateers armed with two guns each, are to co-operate with them. Privateers under command of Captain Moffat. Hon. WrLLiAM H. Sewaed, M. M. JACKSOK, Consul. Secretary of State. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. [Extract.] No. 1294.] Department of State, Washington, March 9, 1865. Sir: I have reserved for consideration in this paper the account which, in your dispatch No. 879, you give of a conversation held by you mth Earl Eussell, at three o'clock on Tuesday, the 14th of February, upon the subject of aggressions coming from British provinces and ports, and certain papers relating tiiereto, namely, a copy of a note addressed to you by Earl Eussell, on the 15th of February last, and of a note which the earl, on the 13th of that month, addressed to the rebel emissaries, Slidell, Mason, and Mann, at Paris. While 1 was reading these papers Mr. Burnley called and left with me, 636 ENFOECEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. for my perusal, a copy of a dispatch he had just received, in which Earl Eussell has given his own version of the same conversation to which I have before referred. There is a practical agreement between the two statements; the only difference, if any, consists in greater explicitness of the earl's explana- tions to you, as they are presented by himself. In accordance with Earl Eussell's suggestion, the Secretary of War has, by direction of the President, transmitted to Lieutenant General Grant the British official copy of Earl Eussell's letter to John Slidell, James M. Mason, and Dudley Mann, with a direction to deliver it by flag of truce to General Lee, the general in command of the insurgent forces. I give you a copy of my note written on that occasion to the Secretary of War, and so soon as' we shall have received a report from the Lieu- tenant General of his proceedings in the matter, I will communicate the result to you for the information of Earl Eussell. It is proper to say that, in thus suffering the communication of the Earl to pass its military lines, this government desires to be understood as proceeding upon the ground of comity to her Majesty's government, and as insisting at the same time upon its well-known position, that the rebels are not justly or properly regarded by Great Britain as even a military power with which foreign states can rightly hold any intercourse even upon military subjects. You will make the contents of this dispatch known to Earl Eussell. It is hoped that what we have now done is a substantial proof of the willingness and desire of the government of the United States to renew and strenghten its heretofore friendly attitude towards the province of Canada and all the British provinces. I think it proper to refrain from expressing any judgment concerning the expediency of the proceeding which her Majesty's ministers have adopted in regard to the violations of neutral rights committed by the rebels in the ports and provinces of the British empire. The United States must continue to insist that the representations they have heretofore made on that subject to her Majesty's government are, in their full extent, reason- able and just. l*fevertheless, the President will cheerfully wait the result of the proceedings which her Majesty's ministers have instituted, and he will be ready to respond in every case to whatever efforts the British government shall see fit to make, with a view to remove existing causes of conflict, in a spirit of liberality, conciliation, and friendship. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Chaeles Fkancis Adams, Esq., tfcc, &c., &c. Mr. Seward to Mr. Stanton. Depaetjibnt of State, Washington^ March 8, 1865. SiK: The inclosed paper has been received at this department from Earl Eussell, her Britannic Majesty's priicipal secretary of state for foreign affairs, with a request that facilities might be afforded for its passage through the military lines of the United States forces. I have to request that the paper may be sent forward to the Lieutenant General, with directions to cause the same to be conveyed to General Lee by flag GENERAL SUBJECT OP ENFORCEMENT OP NEUTRALITY. 637 of truce. I have further to request to be informed of the Lieutenant General's proceedings in the premises. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, , WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Hon. E. M. Stanton, Secretary of War. Mr. Seward to Mr, Adams. ^o. 1311.] Department of State, Washington, March 20, 1865. Sir: Referring to your dispatch of the 16th ultimo, No. 879, so far as it relates to the transmission through the military lines to the insurgent chief of the British official copy of the note addressed by Earl Eussell, under the date of the 13th ultimo, to Messrs. Mason, Slidell, and Mann, I now inclose for communication to Earl Russell, as promised in my dispatch of the 9th instant, No. 1294, a copy of a letter of the 15th instant from the Assistant Secretary of War, which is accompanied by a copy of one of the. 13th instant from Lieutenant General Grant, and of the Lieutenant General's letter to the chief of the insurgent military forces on the subject. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., <§c., cfcc, &c. Mr. Dana to Mr. Seward. War Department, Washington City, March 15, 1865. Sir: Referring to your communication of the 8th instant, inclosing a paper received from Earl Russell, her Britannic Majesty's principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, which you requested might be sent forwardto the Lieutenant General, with directions to cause the same to be conveyed by flag of truce to General Lee, and asking to be informed of the Lieutenant General's proceedings in the premises, the Secretary of War instructs me to transmit the accompanying copy of a communi- cation and of its inclosure from Lieutenant General Grant, to whom the instructions desired by you were given on the 9th instant. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, C. A. DANA, Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. Assistant Secretary of War, General Grant to Mr. Stanton. Headquarters Armies op the United States, City Point, Virginia, March 13, 1865. Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your communi- cation of date 9th instant, transmitting letter of Hon. William H. Seward, 638 ENFOECEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. Secretary of State, forwarding commuDication of Earl Eussell, and to inform you that, in compliance with your instructions, I have this day forwarded the same by flag of truce to General E. E. Lee, commanding confederate armies. I have the honor to be, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant, U. S. GEANT, Lieutenant General. Hon. E. M. Stanton, Secretary of War. General Grant to General Lee. Headquarters Armies op the United States, March 13, 1865. General: Inclosed with this I send you copy of a communication from Earl Eussell, secretary of state for foreign affairs, England, to Messrs. Mason, Slidell, and Mann. The accompanying copy of a note from the Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State, to the Secretary of War exi)lains the reason for sending it to you. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, U. S. GEANT, " General E. E. Lee, Commanding Confederate States Armies. Lieutenant General. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. No. 903.] Legation op the United States, London, March 23, 1805. Sir : In accordance with the instructions contained in your dispatcli, No. 1241, of the 18th of January last, I addressed a note to Lord Eussell on the 17th of this month, giving formal notice of the termination of the reciprocity treaty, and inclosing, at the same time, a certified copy of the resolution expressing the sense of both houses of Congress on that subject. This note was delivered by the messenger of this legation at the Foreign Oifice at 2 p. m., notice of which was entered by him on the envelope, and also reported to me on his return. Not long afterwards I received from his lordship his own acknowledgment of the reception of it. Copies are herewith transmitted. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES PEAJSTCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. Mr. Adams to Earl Eussell. (Delivered at the Foreign Office, at 2 p. m., on March 17, 1865, by James Ensor.) Legation op the United States, London, March 17, 1865. Mt Lord: Under instructions from the government of the United States, I have the honor to transmit to your lordship a certified copy of GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY, 639 a joint resolution of the Congress of the United States, approved by the President on the 18th of January, 1865, in regard to the termination of the treaty concluded between the United States and her Britannic Majesty on the 5th of June, 1854, commonly known as the reciprocity treaty. I have the honor further to inform you that I am directed to notify her Majesty's government that, as it is considered no longer for the interest of the United States to continue this treaty in force, it will terminate and be of no further effect, as provided by the terms of the instrument, at the expiration of twelve months from the date of the reception by your lordship of this notice. I pray your lordship to accept the assurances of the highest consid- eration with which I have the honor to be, my lord, your lordship's most obedient servant, CHAELES FEANCIS ADAMS. Eight Hon. Eakl Etjssell, (&c., &c., cfee. Uarl Russell to Mr. Adams. Foreign Office, March 17, 1865. Sm: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of this day, containing a resolution of the Congress of the United States, approved by the President, in regard to the termination of the treaty of 1854, commonly known as the reciprocity treaty. Her Majesty will instruct Sir Frederick Bruce, on his proceeding to Washington 'as her Majesty's envoy extraordinary, upon the subject. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, EUSSELL. Chaeles Fkancis Adams, Esq., &o., cfcc, &c. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 1325.] Department of Stajte, Washington, March 27, 1865. Sir: I transmit a copy of a letter of this date, addressed to this department by the Secretary of War, and of the papers to which it refers, relative to the communication to the insurgents at Eichmoud of a copy of Earl Eussell's note to Messrs. Mason, Slidell, and Mann, of the 13th of February last. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &c., &c., &c. Mr, Stanton to Mr. Seward. War Department, Washington City, March 27, 1865. Sir : The communication of Earl Eussell, herewith inclosed, was, at your request, transmitted by this department to Lieutenant , General 640 ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. Grant, to be forwarded to General Lee. I have now the honor of returning it to ynu, M'ith the accompanying letters of Lieutenant General Grant and General Lee, received by this department this morning. Your obedient servant, EDWm M. STANTON, Secretary of War. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. Mr. Dana to General Grant. War Department, Washington City, March 9, 18C5. General : This department has received from the honorable William H. Seward, Secretary of State, a communication, a copy of which is hereto annexed, for your information. The paper referred to therein is inclosed herewith. The Secretary of War directs me to request you to please cause it to be delivered to General Lee as requested, and report your action to this department. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, C. A. DANA, Assistant Secretary of War. Lieutenant General U. S. Grant, Commanding Armies oftlie United States. General Grant to Mr. Stanton. Headquarters Armies of the United States, City Point, Va., March 25, 1865. Sir : I have the honor to forward h ere with a communication of General E. E. Lee, " commanding armies Confederate States," of date 23d instant, with iuclosures. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, U. S. GRANT, Lieutenant General. Hon. E. M. Stanton, Secretary of War, Washington City. B. jE. Lee to General Grant. • , Headquarters C. S. Armies, March 23, 1865. General: In pursuance. of instructions from the government of the Confederate States, transmitted to me through the Secretary of War, the documents recently forwarded by you are respectfully returned. I am directed to say " that the government of the Confederate States cannot recognize as authentic a paper which is neither an original nor attested as a copy ; nor could they under any circumstances consent to hold intercourse with a neutral nation through the medium of open dis- GENERAIi SUBJECT OF ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. 641 patches sent through hostile lines after being read and approved by the enemies of the confederacy." I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant,, E. E. LEE, General. Lieutenant General U. S. Grant, Commanding United States Armies. Mr, Adams to Mr. Seward. No.'Qie.] LsaATION OP THE UNITED STATES, London, April 6, 1865. Sir: I have to acknowledge the reception of dispatches from the department numbered from 1303 to 1316, inclusive. With regard to the directions contained in Nos. 1309, 1311, and 1315, as well as 1294, previously received, I had obtained an opportunity for an interview with Lord Eussell to talk over the matters contained in them on Tuesday last; but upon paying my visit, I found his lordship was so miweU as to be unable to see me. I then left with him the dispatches, as he had suggested, for his information only; and I made an arrangement to wait upon him as soon as he should be prepared to assign me a day. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, OHAELES FEAl!fCIS ADAMS. Hon. Willi AM H. Seward, Secretary of State. Mr. Adams to Mr. SewarU. No. 922.] Legation of the United States, London, April 12, 1865. Sir: I have to acknowledge the reception of dispatches from the department, numbered from 1317 to 1327, inclusive. I have also received in a note from the dispatch agent at Boston, Mr. Emory, a telegram requesting me to send notice to Mr. Perry, at Madrid, concerning Mr. J. P. Hall and the steamer Kearsarge, which I caused to be done yesterday, the 11th instant. I had an interview with Lord Eussell yesterday, and brought to his notice such parts of the contents of your Nos. 1317, 1321, 1322, 1323, and 1325, as you wished him to know, as also the contents of a note I had just received from Mr. Dudley, the consul at Liverpool, respecting the arrival of the Tallahassee at that place under the guise of a merchantman. He seemed to be gratified with the language of No. 1321. This led to a vague, general conversation upon the subject of the outfits and other opera- tions of the rebels, and the efforts that had been made to check them, from which I recollect no material point to report. He alluded to the receipt of my note to him of the 7th instant, which embodies the general argu> ment on this subject as being of so important a nature that he should be obliged to take the opinion of the cabinet before making a reply. As the members are dispersed in the country during the Easter holidays, it is not probable that a meeting will take place for a week or two. I think I perceive some beneficial results from the more energetic 41 A 0— VOL. I 642 ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. injunctions issued to tlie authorities ui the ct)loniaI dependencies in checking the abuses of neutrality, which have heretofore been .tolerated in almost all their ports. The accounts of the proceedings at Melbourne are very similar to those reported at Bermuda by Mr. Allen in the letter, a co\)j of which came to me 'with your No. 1317 of the 22d of March. They must be very embarrassing to the rebel cruisers. Had this government started with such measures at the outset, the effect would have been materially to discourage the prosecution of the schemes, and to deter British subjects from those measures of active sympathy which have given them nearly all their force. The reasons why it did not do so are not difi&cult to trace. They sprang partly from the natural inertia of the system, rarely to be overcome excepting under the pressure of strong popular feeling, and partly from the inharmonious temper of the cabinet on the subject of our affairs. It is not quite within the range of a dispatch liable to be published to dwell more fully upon such matters. Enough to say that the course of events has, to a certain extent, modiiied previous difficulties and inspired more union in the prosecution of an energetic policy. This has shown itself in Canada, as weE as in many other places at home and abroad. And although I wiU not venture to affirm that it has got so far as you desire, the open retrac- tion of the original mistake, I am yet fully impressed with the notion that it will contribute so far as it may indirectly to counteract all the tendencies that have made that measure so mischievously injurious. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Sewabd, Secretary of State. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. No. 931.J Lecjation op the United States, London, April 20, 1865. Sir : In connection with your dispatch No. 1325, of the 27th of March, I now have the honor to transmit a copy of a note to Lord EusseU of the 12th instant, and likewise of his reply on the 17th, respecting the copy of his lordship's note to Messrs. Mason, Slidell, and Mann, which was sent forward to the so-called authorities at Richmond and returned by them. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHARLES PRANCES ADAMS. Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State. Mr. Adams to Earl Russell. Legation op the United States, London, April 12, 1865. Mt Lord : I have the honor to transmit copies of certain letters which have passed between the military authorities on the lines before Rich- mond in relation to the document which, in my conversation held with your lordship on the 14th of February, you expressed a wish to have forwarded to that city through the channels of communication established between the contending parties. I likewise have the honor to return the original document itself. GENERAL SUBJECT OF ENFOSCEMENT OF NEUTEALITY. 643 I pray your lordship to accept the assurances of the highest consider- ation with which I have the honor to be, my lord, your lordship's most obedient servant, CHARLES FEANCIS ADAMS. Right Hon, Eabl Eussbll, c6o., (&c., &c. fin closures.] 1. Mr. Stanton to Mr. Seward, March 27, 1865. 2. General Grant to Mr, Stanton, March 25, 1865, 3. General Lee to General Grant, March 23, 1865. 4. Lord EusseU. to Messrs, Mason, Slidell, and Mann, February 13, 1865. [The above inclosures, marked 1, 2, and 3, are published in connection with Mr, Seward's dispatch Iatches, the President thinks that you have given to the British government ample evidence of the seri- ousness of our complaint, as well as sufficient information of specific unlawful designs of the parties concerned therein, and the plans of ope- ration, to secure success to any proper efforts for repressing those designs which her Majesty's government may think proper to put forth. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Chables Fkancis Adams, Esq., &c., &c., die. 670 ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. [From Britisli Blue Book, "North America," No. 1, 1864, p. 2.] No. 3. Earl Bussell to Lord Lyons. [Extract.] Foreign Office, March 27, 1863. MtLord: ***** Mr. Adams said there was one tMng which might be easily done. It was supposed the British government were indiii'erent to these notorious violations of their own laws. Let them declare their condemnation of all such infractions of law. With respect to the [enlistment] law itself, Mr. Adams said either it was sufficient for the purposes of neutrality, and then let the British government enforce it; or it was insuftioierit, and then let the British government apply to Parliament to amend it. , I said that the cabinet were of opinion that the law was sufi&cient; but that legal evidence could not always be procured ; that the British government had done everything in its power to execute the law. * * # * * * I am, &c., EUSSELL. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. [Extract.] No. 651.] Departihent of State, Washington, July 11, 1863. gjjj. ****** I may safely protest, in behalf of the United States, against the assumption of that position by the British nation, because this govern- ment, with a statute exactly similar to that of Great Britain, does con- stantly hold itself able and bound to prevent such injuries to Great Britain. The President thinks it not improper to suggest for the con- sideration of her Majesty's government the question whether, on. appeal to be made by them, Parliament might not think it jiist and expedient to amend the existing statute in such a way as to effect what the two governments actually believe it ought now to accomplish. In case of such an appeal the President would not hesitate to apply to Congress for an equivalent amendment of the laws of the United States, if her Majesty's government should desire such a proceeding, although here such an amendment is not deemed necessary. If the law of Great Britain must be left without amendment, and be construed by the government in conformity with the rulings of the chief baron of the exchequer, then there will be left to the United States no alternative but to protect themselves and their commerce against armed cruisers proceeding from British ports, as against the naval forces of a public enemy, and also to claim and insist upon indemnities for the injuries which all such expeditions have hitherto committed or shall hereafter commit against this government and the citizens of the United States. # * * * * # # I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Prancis Adams, Esq., (fee, (fee, (fee. AMENDMENT OF LAWS. 671 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] ISo. 453.] ■ Legation op the United States, London, July 16, 1863. Sir: * * * * * ♦ In connection with this subject I beg to call your attention to the reply, addressed by Mr. Hammond, on behalf of Lord Eussell, to the signers of the Liverpool memorial, suggesting some alteration in the enlistment act. Both papers are printed in the copy of the Times of the 13th instant, which I transmit. It may be inferred from this that the government will persist in their efforts to enforce the i^rovisions of the enlistment act through the courts, reserving to themselves an avenue of escape by reason of any failure to be supplied with evidence of intent to violate them. Whether they expect the duty of looking this up to be performed by us, or they design to seek it also, from other sources, does not clearly appear. « * * * * * I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES FEANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Sewakd, Secretary of State. j;From British Blue Book, "Nortli America," No. 13, 1863.] Memorial from certain ship-owners of Liverpool.^ suggesting an alteration in the foreign enlistment act. No. 1. MEMOEIAL. To the right honorable the Earl Eussell,, her Majesty's principal secre- tary of state for the foreign department. The memorial of the undersigned ship-owners of Liverpool sheweth, that your memorialists, who are deeply interested in British shipping, view with dismay the probable future consequences of a state of affairs which permits a foreign belligerent to construct in and send to sea from British ports vessels of war, in contravention of the provisions of the existing law. That the immediate effect of placing at the disposal of that foreign belligerent a very small number of steam-cruisers has been to paralyze the mercantile marine of. a powerful maritime and naval nation, inflict- ing within a few months losses, direct and indirect, on its ship-owning and mercantile interests which years of peace niay prove inadequate to retrieve. That your memorialists cannot shut their eyes to the probability that in any future war between England and a foreign power, however insig- nificant in naval strength, the example now set by subjects of her Ma- jesty while England is neutral may be followed by citizens of other coun- tries neutral when England is belligerent; and that the attitude of 672 ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTEAlilTY. helplessness in wMch her Majesty's government hare declared their ina- bility to detect and punish breaches of the law notoriously committed by certain of her Majesty's subjects may hereafter be successfully imi- tated by the governments of those other countries in answer to English remonstrances. That the experience of late events has proved to the conviction of your memorialists that the possession by a belligerent of swift steam- cruisers, under no necessity, actual or conventional, to visit the possibly blockaded home ports of that belligerent, but able to obtain all requisite supplies from neutrals, will become a weapon of offense against which no preponderance of naval strength can effectually guard, and the sever- ity of which wiU be felt in the ratio of the shipping and mercantile wealth of the nation against whose mercantile marine the efforts of those steam- cruisers may be directed. That the effect of future war ^vith any power thus enabled to purchase, prepare, and refit vessels of war ia neutral ports will inevitably be to transfer to neutral flags that portion of the sea-carrying trade of the world which is now enjoyed by your memorialists and by other British ship-owners. ^ That over and above the chances of pecuniary loss to themselves, your memorialists share in the regTct with which a law-regarding community must naturally look on successful attempts to evade the provisions of an act of Parliament passed for a single and simple purpose, but which has been found not to give the executive all the powers needed for its effect- ive execution. That your memorialists would accordingly respectfully urge upon your lordship the expediency of proposing to Parliament to sanction the introduction of such amendments into the foreign enlistment act as may. have the effect of giving greater power to the executive to prevent the construction in British ports of ships destined for the use of bellig- erents. And your memorialists would further suggest to your lordship the importance of endeavoring to secure the assent of the governments of the Fnited States of America, and of other foreign countries, to the adoption of similar regulations in those countries also. AU which your memorialists respectfully submit. Lamport & Holt. James Brown & Co. James Baines & Co. James Poole & Co. Eichard Nicholson & Son. W. Jacob & Co. W. B. Boadle. Henry Moore & Co. J. Prowse & Co. Imrie & Tomlinson. Currie, Newton & Co. Thomas Chilton. Nelson, Alexander & Co. Jones, Palmer & Co. Kendall Brown. Farnworth & Jardine. Gr. S. H. Fletcher & Co. Thomas & James Harrison. J. Aildn. L. H. Macintyre. Finlay, Campbell & Co. Potter Brothers. Cropper, Ferguson & Co. Chas. Geo. Cowie & Co. J. Campbell. W. J. Seally. S. R. Graves. E. Girvin & Co. Eankin, Gilmour & Co. C. T. Bowring & Co. Eathbone Bros. & Co. Liverpool, June 9, 1863. AMENDMENT OF LAWS. 673 No. 2. Mr. Sammond to Messrs. Lamport & Holt and others. Foreign Office, July 6, 1863. Gentlemen: I am directed by Earl Eussell to acknowledge the recjeipt of the memorial dated the 9th of June, signed by you and others of the merchants at Liverpool, in which you urge upon his lordship the expediency of proposing to Parliament such amendments to the foreign enlistment act as shall enable the government to prevent the construc- tion in British ports of ships destined for the use of belligerents. I am to state to you in reply, that in Lord Russell's opinion the for- eign enlistment act is effectual for all reasonable purposes, and to the fall extent to which international law or comity can require, provided proof can be obtained of any act done with the intent to violate it. Even if the provisions of the act were extended, it would still be necessary that such proof should be obtained, because no law could or sholdd be passed to punish upon suspicion instead of upon proof. I am, &c., E. HAMMOND. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] No. 493.] Legation of the United States, London, Septemher 10, 18C3. Qto . * * ' * * * * But a stiU more significant manifestation of the altered tone of the government is to be found in the speech made by Lord Eussell at the opening of the new park at Dundee, yesterday, a report of which is pub- lished in the newspapers of this morning. He seems to have rather gone out of Ms way to take up the subject, in order to announce the policy of the government. You will not fail to observe the greatly in- creased firmness of his language, and more especially his intimation that new powers may be solicited from Parliament, if those now held should prove insufficient. This is, at least, the true tone. I confess that I have more hopes of our prospect of being alile to preserve friendly relations than at any moment since my arrival in England. Unless some new and untoward event should occur to make other complications, I see no barrier of a serious character to our continuance in peace. i/f * * * * * I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Hon. William H. Sewaed, Secretary of State. [Transmitted with Mr. Adams's dispatch to Mr. Seward, No. 497, of September 17, 1863.] Mr. Adams to Lord Bussell. [Extract.]! Legation of the United States,, London, September 16, 1863. MtLobd: * * * # * # And here your lordship will permit me to remind you that her Ma*- 43 A c— vol. I 674 ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. jesty's government cannot justly plead the inefScacy of the provisions of the enlistment law to enforce the duties of neutrality in the present emergency as depriving them of the power to prevent the anticipated danger. It will doubtless be remembered that the proposition made by you, and which I had the honor of being the medium of conveying to my government, to agree upon some forms of amendment of the respective statutes of the two cpuntries, in order to make them more effective, was entertained by the latter, not from any want of confidence in the ability to enforce the existing statute, but from a desire to co-operate with what then appeared to be the wish of her Majesty's ministers. But, upon my communicating this reply to your lordship, and inviting the dis- cussion of propositions, you then informed me that it had been decided not to proceed any fra'ther in this direction, as it was the opinion of the cabinet, sustained by the authority of the lord chancellor, that the law was fully effective in its present shajie. ^ ^ # ^ "TT ^ I pray your lordship to accept the assurances of the highest consider- ation with which I have the honor to be, my lord, your most obedient servant, OHAELES FEAISrCIS ADAMS. Hight Hon. Earl Eussell, (fee, (fee, (fee. iXTransmitted with Mr. Adams's dispatcli to Mr. Seward, No. 504, of October 1, 1863.] Lord Russell to Mr. Adams, [Ex-Sraot.]^ Foreign Office, September 25, 1863. 'gijj- * # * « # » There are, however, passages in your letter of the 16th, as well as in some of your former ones, which so plainly and repeatedly imply an inti- mation of hostile proceeding toward Great Britain on the part of the government of the United States, unless steps are taken by her Majesty's government which the law does not authorize, or unless the law, which you consider as insuffiicient, is altered, that I deem it incumbent upon me, in behalf of her Majesty's government, frankly to state to you that her Majesty's government will not be induced by any such consideration either to overstep the limits of the law, or to propose to Parliament any new law which they may not, for reasons of their own, think proper to be adopted. They wiQ not shrink from any consequences of such a decision. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, RUSSELL. Charles Francis Adams, Esq., (fee, (fee, <&c. LTransmitted witli Mr. Adams's dispatcli to Mr. Seward, No. 504, of October 1, 1863.] Mr, Adams to Earl Russell, [Extract.] Legation op the United States, London, September 29, 1863. My Lord : I have the honor to acknowledge the reception of your note of the 25th instant. I shall take pleasure in transmitting a copy to my government. AMENDMENT OF LAWS. 675 I must pray your lordsMp's pardon, if I confess myself at a loss to per- ceive what portions of my late correspondence could justify tlie implica- tions to wMcli you refer. So far from intimating " hostile proceedings toward Great Britain, unless the law, which I consider as insuflicient, is altered," the burden of my argument was to urge a reliance upon the law as sufficient, as well from the past experience of the United States, as from the confidence expressed in it by the most eminent authority in the kingdom. I pray your lordship to accept the assurances of the highest consid- eration with which I have the honor to be, my lord, your most obedient servant, CHAELES FEANCIS ADAMS. Eight Hon. Eael Eussell, (fee, <&c., &c. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 760.] Department of State, WasMng^n, Noveniber 14, 18G3. Sir : The European mails have not arrived, and they are not expected to arrive before the closing of my dispatches for the next steamer. 'So striking incident has occurred to change the military situation. Judging upon what is officially received, as well as the public informa- tion, the armies of the government are holding their advanced positions firmly, and they are beginning to be felt severely by the insurgents. On the 11th instant Lord Lyons communicated to me information he h^d just received from his excellency the governor general of Canada, to the effect that there was reason to believe in the existence of a plot, gotten up in that province by emigrant insurgents from the United States, to invade the northern frontier ; set at liberty the insurgent pris- oners now in confinement at Johnson's Island, oh Lake Erie, near San- dusky ; burn Buffalo and other cities on the shores of the lakes. It was supposed that these crimes were to be effected by means of the purchase and arming of steamers in the Canadian ports. This information, which was very gratefully acknowledged, borrows a show of authenticity from revealings which have occasionally reached this government. The proper departments promptly adopted measures which, it is believed, are sufift- cient to defeat the criminal enterprise. After making due explanations to Lord Lyons, I have, by the President's direction^ requested Preston King, esq., of Ogdensburg, on the shore of Lake Ontario, to proceed at once to Quebec, to inform the governor general of the preparations which have been made by this government, ^nd to confer freely with him upon the subject, with a Aaew to conform all our proceedings to the treaty regula- tions existing between the two countries, and to the comity which is due to Great, Britain. It seems proper that you should make these proceed- ings known to Earl Eussell, with expressions of the satisfaction with which the President regards what has been so promptly and liberally done by the governor general of Canada and by Lord Lyons. It is thought here that the occasion is a fitting one for asking Earl Eussell to consider the incidents I have related in connection with the occurrences which have taken place within the proper British realm, threateniag invasion or aggression directly from the ports of Liverpool and Glasgow. Do not these incidents show the expediency, not to say the necessity, for some amendments of the laws of the two nations, so as 676 ENFOECEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. to secure the practice of neutrality in the spirit of comity and friendship ? Have we adequate security that hostile expeditions will not yet issue from British ports'? If such expeditions should come from domestic British ports, the same condition of national relations will certainly encourage the fitting out of such expeditions in British colonial ports on our frontier and elsewhere. Could we possibly avoid conflicts between the two countries if British sliores or provinces should, through any misunderstanding, be suffered to become bases for naval and military operations against the United States ? Moreover, the principles which shall regulate the maritime conduct of neutral states hereafter are quite likely to be settled by the precedents which arise during our present civil war. Great Britain, as we think, must ultimately be as deeply concerned as we are in preserving in the greatest ^dgor the cordial principle of non-intervention. I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H, SEWAED. Chables Francis Adams, Esq., &o., &o., &c. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] ISo. 552. 1 Legation op the United States, London, December 10, 1863. glJl; ****** I then aUuded, more particularly, to the great danger attending the abuse that might be made of the vicinage of Oaijada, and suggested the possibility of reciprocating, in some form or other, the legislation adopted by us in 1838, and referred to in your dispatch. His lordship asked to see the printed copy of the law which came with that paper, and at his desire I left it with him. Some further general conversation took place, after which I took my leave. * * * * # • # 4t: I haA'-e the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, CHAELES PEAIifOIS ADAMS. Hon. WiLLiAH H. Seward, Secretary of State. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. [Extract.] No. 1136.] Depajbtment op State, Washington, October 24, 1864. • Sir : It is my duty to iuvite, through you^ the serious attention of her Majesty's government to the instances, which unfortunately seem to be multiplying, in which the British possessions in our neighborhood, both continental and insular, have been made bases for hostile proceedings of the insurgents against this country. The motives for such proceedings have undoubtedly been, not a conviction that material damage would result directly from the hostile acts of the insurgents, but a hope that a AMENDMENT OF LAWS. 677 just sense of national dignity, and self-preservation on our part, might induce us to resent the toleration of the British authorities, and ulti- mately, perhaps, lead that government to take part with the insurgents as an open and declared enemy of the United States. The insufficiency of the British neutrality act and of the warnings of the Queen's procla- mation to arrest the causes of complaint referred to were anticipated early in the existing struggle, and that government was asked to apply a remedy by passing an act more stringent in its character — such as ours of the 10th of March, 1838, which was occasioned by a similar condition of affairs. This request has not been complied Tsith, though its reason- ableness and necessity have been shown by subsequent events. TT ^P ^F ^ # ^p ^ I am, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWAED. Charles Fkancis Adams, Esq., nrchased some small stores, (this is only known to me by their statements,) and imme- diately after left for the ship. I am very positive, if the health officer means the officers, &c., of the Honduras, that there was no intention on their part, or knowledge, that they were violating any law of this colony, and can only add my personal regrets it should have occurred. I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant, THOMAS KIEKPATEICK. Hon. Charles E. Nesbet, Colonial Secretary of Bahamas. [Inclosure No. 7.] Mr. Nesbet to Mr. Kirkpatriclc. Colonial Secretary's Oppicb, Nassau, February 4, 1865. Sir : I am directed by the governor to acknowledge your letter of the Sd instant, stating the circumstances under which boats and officers &om SUPPLIES, ETC., OF VESSELS. 713 the United States steamer Honduras twice landed from that ship, in dis- regard, in both instances, of the quarantine regulations of this harbor, and in opposition, on the second occasion, to her Majesty's oi'dets and directions, laid down for the guidance of ships of war belonging to the United States, and to the intimations conveyed to yourself and Captain Harris that his excellency could not grant his permission to enter the harbor. Captain Harris could not have been ignorant of the regulations exist- ing in this and most other civilized countries, which prohibit persons from leaving a vessel arriving at a port until it shall have been boarded and permission granted by the competent officer. The proper course for obtaining this is known to every naval officer. It is presumed that,' as consrd,- you must be familiar with the local law on the subject, and that you must have informed Captain Harris that he was acting in contra- vention of the law. Captain Harris must have been aware that United States ships are forbidden to enter the ports or waters of any place in her Majesty's do- minions, except under stress of weather, or some other extraordinary circumstances; and, in the latter case, only after having received per- mission to do so. Such permission was given to the United States steamer Honduras to enter the waters of Abaco, for the purpose of lending assist- ance to the wrecked ship of war San Jacinto, but her commander was informed that the governor was restricted from giving it to her to enter those of this island, even in the interest of inhabitants of this colony. It is ^ue that the governor only denied his permission to anchor ; but you must be aware, and Captain Harris must be aware, ihat both the letter and spirit of the Queen's proclamation, and the whole tenor of the communication with his excellency on the afternoon of the day on which he first landed, prohibited his further communication with the shore, as much as his anchoring in British waters. Captain Harris must also have known that the taking in of stores of any kind without the gov- ernor's permission was contrary to her Majesty's orders and directions, which are framed with a view of preventing the ships of war of both belligerent parties in the neighboring continent from entering British waters or communicating with the shore, under any circumstances, ex- cept in such stress of weather, or such other difficulty, as might endan- ger the safety of the ship. His excellency very much regrets this occurrence. As an act of cour- tesy he abstained from requesting Captain Harris at once to leave the shore, and to remove his ship from the mouth of the harbor; but if he could have anticipated that Captain Harris would have come on shore again, and that his ship would have remained off the mouth of the har- bor until a late hour on the following day, it would have been his duty, however distasteful the necessity, to have made this request direct to that officer. His excellency hopes that you will spare him the necessity, on any similar occasion, by cautioning the commanders of all United States ships of war entering these waters, and that you will exert your influ- ence to prevent any infringement of the Queen's territorial rights by ships and subjects of the United States. The governor has already evinced his desire to use every endeavor to prevent such infringements . by the belligerents on the other side, or by parties interested in their cause. I have the honor to be, sir, your most obedient servant, C. E. NESBET, Colonial Secretary. Thomas Kirkpateick, Esq., United States Consul, Nassau. 714 ENFORCEMENT OF NEUTRALITY. [Inclosure No. 8.] Mr. KirlcpatricJc to Mr. Nesbet. United States Consulate, Nassau, February 7, 1865, Sir : I had the honor to receive yesterday afternoon your communi- cation of the 4th instant. I do not intend to enter into any discussion whether it was, or was not, a violation of her Majesty's proclamation for a boat to land from a ship belonging to the government of the United States, cruising in the offlng, or whether it was a violation of the laws of this colony regarding quarantine regulations ; nor will I discuss why vessels belonging to other governments have been permitted to enter the harbor, or land, without let or hindrance, or complaint, as far as I am aware; but I must be permitted to say that I am surprised at the tone loi your letter, insisting that Captain Harris was aware of his com- mitting a violation of these laws, when taken in connection with the conversation had with his excellency the governor the afternoon when Captain Harris and myself had the honor to converse with him in regard to his (Captain Harris's) errand to Nassau, and the reasons for desiring to anchor inside the bar. I shall give the details of that conversation, and all the facts necessary to a full understanding of the subject, to the Department of State of the United States of America, and leave future discussion regarding it where it more properly belongs. I have the honor to be your most obedient servant, ' THOMAS KIEKPATETCK. Hon. 'Charles E. Nesbet, Colonial Secretary of Bahamas. Earl Eussell to Mr. Adams. Foreign Office, April 5, 1865. Sir : In answer to your letter of the 15th of March, I have the honor to state to you that it has been the endeavor of her Majesty's government to carry into effect With fairness and impartiality the diities of neutrality between the government of the United States and those parties who had risen in arms against their authority. Nassau is a position from which, on the one hand, confederate privateers might have greatly annoyed the commerce of the United States, and which, on the other hand, might have been a convenient base of operations for the United States navy. It was thought right, therefore, by her Majesty's government to forbid the resort of men-of-war of either of the two parties to the port of Nassau. I send you a printed copy of the orders issued to this effect on the 31st of January, 1862. Governor Eawson, who has been exceedingly strict in compelling the confederate vessels to comply with the rules which he was ordered to enforce, has no doubt conceived it to be his duty to require equal com- pliance with those rules from the United States vessels of war. Her Majesty's government, if the case had been referred to them, might, in all probability, have dispensed with the observance of these rules in the peculiar case of the Honduras ; but her Majesty's government cannot be SUPPLIES, ETC., OF VESSELS. 715 sm'prised tliat an inferior officer should not have conceived himself at liberty, upon his own responsibility, to dispense with rales laid down by her Majesty for his guidance. I have to observe, moreover, that the landing of the captain of the Honduras and his officers was persisted in not only ia contraversion of the express dissent of the governor and in violation of the rules which the governor had been ordered to cause to be observed, but in contravention also of the quarantine laws of the colony. This is a proceeding which Mr. Seward, I conceive, will surely not consider to have been justifiable. Ton are perfectly aware that there is nothing in the law of nations which 'forbids the attemxit of neutral ship-owners or commanders to evade the- blockade, taking, thereby, upon themselves the risk of cap- ture and condemnation. British merchants have made use of this chance of profit, and have submitted to the capture and condemnation with which such chance is liable to be accompanied. American merchants, when neutrals, have availed themselves of sim- ilar chances of profit, attended with similar risk. With respect to the latter part of your letter of the 15th ultimo, suggesting that certain consequences ought to arise from the present altered position of the sea- ports of the Contederate States, I can only say that her Majesty's gov- ernment will feel bound to continue, as they have heretofore done, to prevent, to the utmost of their power, the violation of her Majesty's rights and of her Majesty's declared neutrality. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, EUSSELL. Chables Francis Adams, Esq., V,iij