IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) k /. {./ ^ >% /. 1.0 I.I 11.25 JA IIIIII.6 V] /a. ^/^w ^h >> .1.^^ /^ '/ Photographic Sciences Corporation 33 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) A72-4503 #-^ ■^ V ^\ % V <«^\ '^\ a^e Answers of the French government 29 When the President's Proclamation was received by Great Britain 30 Effect of recoj;nition of a state of war 31 The Queen's proclamation 32 Uncertainty of Her Majesty's government 32 Kffect of the Queen's proclamatioa 32 Mr. Bright's views 35 The sovereign right to issue such a proclanaation rot denied 35 It was an unfriendly act 36 And issued with an unfriendly purpose 36 M. Rolin-Jacquemyns on the Queen's proclamation . 36 Unfriendly conduct of Great Britain as to the decla- rations of the congress of Paris 37 The instructions to Lord Lyons might have been regarded as a cause of war 30 Former negotiatit)ns regarding the declarations of the congr !ss of Paris 39 Lord Lyons's interview with Mr. Seward 41 Termination of negotiations with the United States . 42 Great Britain desired to legalize privateering ... 42 Negotiations at Richmond 43 Mr. Auams'3 comments 45 Contrast between conduct of Great Britain to vard the United States in the Trent affair, and toward violators of British neutrality in the insurgent interest . . 47 Mr. Rolin-Jacquemyns on British neutrality .... 50 Proof the unfriendly feeling of members of the British cabinet and Parliament 51 Conclusions 59 III. The duties which Gre.\t Britain, as a neutral, SHOULD HAVE OBSERVED TOWARD THE UnITED StATES . . 61 The Queen's proclamation a recognition of obligations under the law of nations ol Great Britain has recognized its obligations in various ways 61 The obligations recognized by the foreign enlistment act of 1819 61 Municipal laws designed to aid a government in the performance of international duties 62 History of the foreign enlistment act of 1819 , . . 62 Great Britain bound to perform the duties recognized by that act 63 CONTKNT!*. III. TiiK DUTIES WHICH Grkat Britain, as a neithal, HHOrLD HAVB OBSERVED TOWARD THE UnITED StATES — Continued. H^g, The duties rocognized by that act 64 Royal commission to revise the foreign enlistment act of 1815) 67 Report of that commission 68 The Foreign Enlistmfjnt act of 1870 69 Its judicial construjtion 69 International law is a part of the common !aw of England 70 Duties recognized by the Queen's proclamation of neutrality 73 Definition of neutrality 74 Duties recognized by instructions to British officials during the insurrection 75 Correrrondence between the two governments in 1793— '4 76 Trebty of November 19, 1794 79 Construction of that treaty by the commissioners appointed under it 79 The neutrality laws of the United States enacted at the request of Greav Britain 80 Case of the bark Maury 81 Principles thus recognized by the two governments. 81 Obligation to make compensation for injuries ... 82 Correspondence between the United States and Portugal 82 Principles recognized in that correspondence. ... 88 Rul3s in the treaty of Washington 89 Wh.iit is due diligence 91 Fitting out, arming, or equipping, each an oflfense . 97 The second clause of the first rule 97 Reasons for a change of language 98 Continuing force of the rule 100 Duty to detain offending vessels recognized by Great Brita'n 100 Also recognized by France 102 The second rule of the treaty 102 The third rule of the treaty 103 Duty to make compensation for injuries 104 The foregoing views iu harmony with the opinions of Eur^ypean publicists 104 Hautefeuille 104 Bluntschli 105 Rolin-Jacquemyns 108 Ortolan Ill Pierantoni 113 !■ »t' VI NTKNI>i. III. Tin DiTiKa wiiK II (isKAT Bkitain, as a nkutkai,, HIIOl LI) IIAVK OUSKUVKI) TOWAIU) TIIK CnITKI) StATKS — Continued. P^_e L(»rd Wcstbury 114 The case of the Swedish vessels 114 Offending vessels not simply contraband of war . . 119 Opinion of Ortolan 120 Opinion of Heffter 121 Case of the Suntisima Trinidad 122 Controlled by the case of the (Jran Pani 12-t KflVt't of a com mission of the otVendur as a vessel of war 124 Opinion of Sir Houndell I'almer 12G Opinion of Chief Justice Marshall 12(5 Decision of the Supreme Court of the United States 127 The principle recognized by France, (Jreat Hrituiii, Spain, Portugal, and the United States 12'.) Deposit of the ofl'ense 129 Resume of principles 130 IV. WllKRKIN GUEAT BkITAIN FAILKU TO FKKKORM 118 ULIIKS AS A NEUTKAL. Admissions of British cabinet ministers 132 Britisli ports the base of insurgent operations; a par- tial hospitality shown to the insurgents; a branch of their government established in Liverpool; their government vessels ofticially aided in evading the blockade, and in furnishing them with arms, mu- nitions, and means for carrying on the struggle . 134 The firm of Fraser, Trenholm & Co. 135 Character of tlu* blockaded coast 137 Geographical situation of Nassau and Bermuda . . 138 What was done at Nassau 139 The United States denied permission to deposit coal at Nassau 142 Complaints tc Earl Russell and his reply 14H Instructions as tt) hospitalities to the belligerents 144 Lord Palmcrston's threats 145 Contraband of war fraudulently cleared at Nassau for British ports 14G Resume for the year 18G2 147 Base changed to Bermuda 148 What was done at Liverpool by Bullock 149 The Florida 149 The Alabama 150 The Sumter at Gibraltar 152 Tht Florida at Nassau 152 Contracts for constructing six iron-clads 153 COMKNIS. VII IV. WfiKKKiN (iRKAT Britain failkd to pkiu'oum iih dutiks AS A MbllRAL ContilllK'd. j.,^, Tlu' Sumter at rrinidad ir)3 The Floiifia ut Nassau \bA Mr. Adams represents the foregoing facts to Karl Kussell I'A Earl Russell declines to act I;").') Ineftioieiiev of the foreif^n enlistment act lb') l*ropositi(»ns to amend the forei^^n enlistment oet l.'Hj Propositions det'lined hy (in-at Hritain 15() Propositions renewed arul declined • . . 157 These proceedings were an ahandonment, in advance, of "due diliKence" 150 The Georgia 15l> The Alexandra 160 The rulings in the Alexandra case emasculated the foreign enlistment act IG2 lidird's iron-clad rams 16'-' Their detention not an abandonment of the lax con- struction of the duties of a neutral 165 The contracts with Arnian for the construction of vessels in France 100 Conduct of the French (iovernment IGT Contrast between the conduct of France and (tf Great Britain 16S The Tuscaloosa at the Cape of Good Hope . . . leg She is released against tlie advice of Sir Baldwin Walker 169 The course of the governor is disapproved .... 170 The Tuscaloosa comes again into the waters of the Colony 170 The governor reverses his policy and seizes the vessel 170 His course is again disapproved 171 Blockade-running 171 Cotton shipments 17*2 The insurgent government interested in blockade- running 17-4 These facts brought to Earl Russell's notice . . . 176 He sees no oftense in them 176 Earl Russell's attention again called to these facts . 177 He again sees no oft'ense in them 178 Blockade -running in partnership with the insurgent government 179 Continued partiality 180 The Rappahannock 182 The Shenandoah 183 I. ** " fl I * I VIII CONTK.NTK. IV'. WllKHEIN CiKEAT l^RITAlN FAILED TO rEHKoHM ITH DITIEH A8 A NEiTKAL.. — Continued. I>,ge Mr. MonnraKn'' lJernHr1), are sustained by this evidence .... 187 V. WllKKKIN (illKAT HkI'IAIN FAILED To I'EhKORM ITH DLTIEM AH A NH TKAL. TlIE InSIKCJENT CuilSKUS. Earl Russell den<»unces the acts of which the United States complain as unwarranted and totally unjusti- fiable '. . . . 104 British territory the base (tf tlie naval operations of the iiisurj^cnts r.)4 Their arsenal 11)4 The systematic operations of the insurgents a violation of the duties of a neutral 1 '.>.'> Continuing partiality for the insurgents 11)(» Recapitulation of hostile acts tolerated in British Possessions 197 These facts throw suspicion upon the acts of British officials toward the insurgent cruisers 198 They show an abnegation of all diligence to prevent the acts complained of 199 They throw upon Great Britain the burden of proof to show that the acts complained of could not have been prevented 200 List of the insurgent cruisers 200 The Sumter 200 The T'ashville 20G The Florida and her tenders, the Clarence, the Tacony, and the Archer 208 The Alabama and her tender, the Tuscaloosa . . . 229 The Retribution 245 The Georgia 24G The Tallahassee, or the Olustee 258 The Chickamauga 260 The Shenandoah 262 Summary 286 The conduct of other nations contrasted with that of Great Britain 291 VI. Tub Tribunal should award a bum 4n gross to the United States. Oft'er of the American Commissioners in the Joint High Commission 29-4 Rejection of the offer by the British Commissioners 295 Terms of the submission by the Treaty 295 General statement of the cl 'ms 295 rn.NTKNTK. IX VI. TlIK TkIIK'NAL MIlofMi AWAUD A Ml'M IN <.KoHM TO THE L'nitkd SiAThs — Cuntiiiwfd.. |.„g^ Chiitns growing uut of the dostriirti'in of vessels unci cargoes 29r> Ciovornnient vessels *i'.M> Merchant vessel 'i9G Itjjurit'8 to persons *2^{\ Kxpendltures in pursuit of the cruisers 297 Transfer of vessels to the Hritish tlag 297 Knhanced rates of insurance 299 Pr(>longati«)ii of the war lioo Interest claimed to the date of payment 302 Reasons why a gross sum should be awarded . . . IU)2 Im»kx . . , .' 30a •w '■ i\ ►*'^'lfc c Meeting Joint H mission in: the Ul Avhieli, the a( two Ir Am by th iiig til .s^ince vessel as tin Th in nu the tl Thori The ] coufe gotial Vol. CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. PART I. INTRODUCTION. Meeting; of the Joint Higli Com- mission at Wa.sji- inirtoii. In the spring- or" tlio present year (1871) live Commissioners on the part ot" Great Bri- tain and live Commissioner; on th art of the United States of America met at Washington in a body, Avhic'h, Avhen organized, was known as the Joint High Com- mission, in or^ler to discnss, and, if [)ossiljle, t(j arrange for, the adjnstment of several oan>es of dilVfrcnce between tlie two Powers. Among the sn1)jeets which were brouglit before that body bv the Unitetl States wen th le ditVerences w hid 1 arose i hu-- ing the rebellion in the United States, and wliich have existed since then, srowing ont of the acts oonnnittcd bv the several ■' n vessels, which have given rise to the claii as the Alabama Claims."' ^ ns iicnenca llv k nown TI ic sessions of the Joint Iliu.h C omnnssion were many in number, and were largely devoted ti) the consideration of the diiVercnces referred to in ^Ir. Fish's letter to Sir Edward Thornton , from which the above-cited ([notation is made. The High Commissioners, in the protocol of their thirty-sixth conference, caused to be recoriled a statement of their ne- gotiations on this subject, in the following language: 1 Mr. Fish to Sir Edward Thornton, January 30, 1871, Vol. VI, page 16. * >■ tl ^ fl INTRODUCTION. Protocol of the "At the ('f)nf«Tenc(' held on the 8th of March th'e'Tia'bama*' ^^''' American Commissioners .stated that the Claims. people and (Jdvcrnment of tlie United States felt that they had sustaintnl a great wrong, and that great injuries and losses were inflicte SJAIES. rerii- inent lor the depredations committed by the ^e^.sel^ wIioho acts were now under diwcussion. Thry alsci proposed tliat the floint High Commission should agree upon a sum wliich should be paid by (ireat Britain to tlie United States, in satisfaction of all tlie claims and the inten-^t thereon. "The Hritish Commissioners replied that Her Majesty's Government could not admit that Great J>ritain had tailed to discharge toward the United States the tiutirs imposed on her by the rules of International Law. or that she was justly liable to make good to the United States the losses occasioned by the acts of the cruisers to which the American Commissioners had referred. They reminded the American Commissioners that several vessels, suspecti'd of being designed to cruise against the United States, inelmiing two iron-elads, had been arrested or detained by the liritisii Government, and that that Government had. in some instances, not con- lined itself to the discharge of international obligations, how- ever widely construed, as, for instance, when it accjuired, at a great (;ost to the itountry, the control of the Anglo-Chinese Flotilla, whicli, it was a})])rehended , niiglit be used against the United States. "They added tliat, although Great liritain had, from the beginning, disavowed any responsibility for the acts of the Alabama and the other vessels, she had already shown her willingness, for the sake of the maintenance of friendly re- lations with the United States, to adopt the principle of arbitration, provided that a titting Arbitrator could be found, and that an agreement could be come to as to tlie points to which arbitration should apply. They would, therefore, abstain from replying in detail to the statement of the Ameri- can Commissioners, in the hoj)e that the necessity for enter- ing upon a lengthened controversy might be obviated by the adoption of so fair a mode of settlement as that which they were instructed to propose: and they had now to repeat, on behalf of their Government, the olTer of arbitration. "The American Commissioners expressed their regret at this decision of the British Commissioners, and said further that they could not consent to submit the question of the liability of Her Majesty's Government to arbitration unless i . ; INTRODU'TION. nnncipli'.". av liich >]ii)iiM iiovcrn tin* Arbitrator in ih* tl. ('()iiJ^iii. '•TIk' liritish ( oiiunissioniT^ rcplictl tliat they liaioii nf tlii'sc claiins to an Ai iiitrator with in>trii('tions 1 th V 4 )I'MIClplCS AVillCll SilOU hi iiovcrn iiini in the ('onsi(h'ration of thfin. Thcv >ai(l tliat they >iiouhl lit' williiiLi to rttn>i(lt'r what |»rinci[)lr> sh(Mihl be a(h»j»t»'(l lor obs('r\anfH* in ftitui'i' : l»ur tliat thoy \v(U'(! of o|iini()n that th<' bo-«t nioih' nf rondnotincj an arl>itration was to >ubn)it the fads to the Arbiirator. anin)ilar ca>es in future, with the understandiu'j; that any jtrinciples that >hi.;dd \h> a-^i'eed upon >lioulrilish Coinmissii^ners replied that they could not ailmit that there had been any \i()latio!i (»f existinii principles of International Law an d that their instruct ions did not authorize them to accede to a proj)Osal for lavinjj; down rules for the guidance of the Arbitrator, but that thcv would m idee known to their (lovernment the views of t! le .mericau Commissi(Miers on the subject. "At the ri'spective conferences on ^larch H, March 10, IVIarch II), and March 14, the .Joint Hiiih Commission con- sidered the form of the declaration (d' princi[)les or rules W"hi<'li the American Conunissiouers desired to see adopted for the instruction of tlu» Arbitratin* and laid down for ob- servance by the two (unernments in tuture. '"At the close of the conference of the 1 4th of March, the liritish Commissioners reserved several nuestions for the consideration of tl |Ut lelr Government. "At the conference on the 5th of April, the l^ritish Com- missioners stated that thev were instructtnl bv Her Majesty's Government to declare that Her Majesty's Government could not assent to the proposed rules as a statement of principles of International Law which were in force at the time wdien the Alabama Claims arol M I -i. O tb<'. iiu'iit, ill nrdor to v\iiu-v it^ ck'>ii\' nl' >U\'Upitluiiiu^ llir tViriully rc'latiuns l)et\V(.'cn tin- two countries. jukI ol nuikiiii: >ati>t'ac- lorv provision lor tlu' I'liturc. jt;irtH'il that, in deciding tin- (juc'stions between tlie two countries ari>in;^ out ol' th(»se claims, til" Arliitrator sli(»ul(l a»iune tiiat Her Majesty's Govern- ment liad undcrtakm to ad ii)»on tin- princiido ^et I'orth in the rules which tliu American L'omniis>ioners hatl j'rop jurisdiction ol' any vi'>sel intended ti> cruise or carrv' on war as ahove, >uch vi-.-sel havinji l»een specially adapted, in whole (»r in jiart. within >uch jurisdiction, to warlike Use. '•'Secondly, not to permit or sutler either helligerent to make use ot' its ])orts or water> as the lia>e ol" naval ojtera- tions against the other, or l'(»r the ]»urpi»>e dt' the renewal or augmentation of military supplies or arms, or the recruit- ment of men. " 'Thirdly, to exercise ilue diligence in its own i)orts or waters, and, as to all persons within its jurisdiction, to ])re- vent any violation of the foregoing obligations and (.luties.' "It being a condition of this undertaking that these obli- gations should in future be held Xo lie Itinding internationally between the two countries, "It was also settled that, in deciding the matters sub- mitted to him. the Arbitrator should be governed by the foregoing rules, which had been agreed uj»on as rules to be taken as applicable to the case, and by such ]irincij)les of International Law. not inconsistent therewith, as the Arbitrator schould determine to have been ap})lii'able to the case. "The doint High Commission then jiroceeiled to consider the form of submission and the maimer of con>tituting a Tribunal of Arbitration. "At the conferences on tlie Ctli, .^th. l>th, lUth. and 1-tli . t G INTFlOnU* TKIN. of Aj)ril tin' »I()int High Com mission ooiisidorod imd .liscusseiJ tlio form of submission, the manner of" the jiwani, ami tlift mode of ,>eh)ctin<; the vessels whose acts were now under discussion, and the Hritisli ( 'omnnst>ion(u*s rej)li«?d tliat they were autijorized to express, in a friendly s[)irit, the regret felt by Her Majesty's Government for the escape, under whatever circumstances, of the Alabama and other vessels from Hritisii ports, and for the depredations committed by those vessels. '•The American Commissioners acce[)ted this ex|)ression of refrret as very .satisfactory to them and as a token of kind- ness, and said that they felt sure it would be so received by the Government and people of the Uniteti States. ••In the conference on tiie 13th of A])ril the Treaty, Articles F to XT, were agreed to." Th.' rre;itv of 11**' Treaty referred to in this statement w.ishington. ^^..,j, siorncd at Washington on the 8th day of May, 1871 and the ratilications tliereof were exchanged at London on the 1 7th day of the following June. The ar- ticles which ri'late to this subject are the following: '•Article I. '•Whereas difterences have arisen between the (iovernment of the United States and the Government of Her 15ritannic Majesty, and still exist, growing out of the acts connnitted bv the several vessels which have li'iven rise to the claims generically known as the 'Alabama Claims;' ••Arid whereas Her Britannic Majesty has authorized Her High CommissioJiers and Plenipotentiaries to express, in a frit'uilly spirit, the regret felt by Her Majesty's Government for the escape, under whatever circumstances, of the Alabama and other vessels from British ports, and for the depn^lations connnitted by those vessels: "New\ in order to remove and adjust all conij)Iaints and claim the by ing I acts know of Ai CASE OF THE UNITED STATES, lav a or nd ms r.d claims on the part of the United States, and to provide for the speedy settlement of such claims, which arc not admitted bv Her IJritannic Majesty's Government, the Hisjjh Contract- in<; Parties agr^e that all the said claims, growintr out of acts committed by the aforesaid vessels, and «j!;en(M'i(^ally known as the 'Alabama Claims,' shall be referred to a Tribunal of Arbitration, to be composed of live Arbitrators, to be appointed in the followinjjj manner, that is to say: One shall be named by the President of the United States; one shall be named bv Her l^ritannic^ Mait'stv: His Mait'stv the Kiny; of Italy shall be requested to name one: the l*rcsident of the Swiss Confederation shall rv'quested to name one; and His Majesty tlie Emperor of l^razil siiall l)e rcfpiested to name one. "In case of the death, absence, or incapacity to serve of anv or either of tlie said Arbitrators, or in the event of either of the said Arbitrators omittinij; or declining or (.'easing to act as such, the President of the United States, or Her Britannic ^Majesty, or His Majesty the King of Italy, or the President of the Swiss Confederation, or His Majesty the Km])eror of Brazil, as the case may be, may forthwith nam*^ another person to act as Arbitrator in the place and stead of the Arbitrator originally named by such Head of a State. "And in the event of the refusal or omission for two months after receipt of the request from either of the High Contracting Parties of His Majesty the King of Italy, or the President of the Swiss Confederation, or His Majesty the Emperor of ]>razil, to name an Arbitrator, either to fill the original appointment, or in the place of one who may have died, be absent, or incapacitated, or who may omit, decline, or from any cause cease to act as such Arbitrator, His Majesty the King of Sweden and Norway shall be re- quested to name one or more persons, as the case may be, to act a.v such Arbitrator or Arbitrators. "Article II. "The Arbitrators shall meet at Geneva, in Switzerland, at the earliest convenient dav after th'n' shall have been named, and shall proceed impartially and carefully to examine and i I .!l ^ii H iNTIfoDlc T1<»N. (locidc :ill (lUt'stioiis tlutt .•«lijill he Ijiid ln-jniv tliom on the |»:irt oi* tli«' Govi'miiionls dl' \hv I'liitod States jiiul Her IJri- titiiuic INIiijosty. iX'sjxM'tivcly. All (iiicsticns coiisidcrod l)y tlir Trilmi.'Jtl. i ulMdin'^f tlic iinal awitrd, shall Ix- docidod hy a majnrity of all the Arhitrators. ''li!ach (pI till' Hi^h Contracting" I'artifs .shall alM» nainti one ]»f'rs(>n to att<'n(l the 'rril)unal as its ap^cnt to roftrescnt it generally iii all matters comieeted with tiie arbitration. "Ahtki.i: hi. '•The wrl:;in or ]iri!)ted ease- of each of tha twc» P^irtitv*;, aceoinji.'ii.ied hy tiie (htciunents, the oflieial eorr<'S|)ondeni-e, and other evideneo on uhich each relies, shall he delivered in dn]»'!ieate to each of the arliitrators and to the ajient of the other Pai'ty as soon a> niav he afler the organization of the '.rriliunal. hut within a ])eriod not execedinL;" six nionths from the date of the exchange of the ratilications of this Treaty. "Articm: IV. '•Within four months after the delivery on Loth sides of the written oi jirinted case, either Party may. in like manner, deliver in duplicate to each of the said Arbitrators, and to the agent of tin* other Party, a counter-case an'l additional documents, corres])ondenc('. and evidence, in re^^ ly to the case, documents, correspondence, and evidence so ])resented by the other Party. "The Arbitrators mav, howcAer. extend the time for de- livering such counter-case, docuuients, correspondence, and evidence, when, in their judgment, ir becomes necessary, in consequence of the distance t>f the }»lace from which the evidence to be presented is to be procured. 'Tf in the case submitted to the Arbitrators either Partv shall have sjieciiied or alluded to any report or document in its own exclusive possession, without annexing a coj)y, such Party shall be bound, if the other Party thinks jtrojjcr to apjily for it, to furni.sh that Party with a copy thereof; and either may call upon the other, through the Arbitrators, to produce the originals or certilied co})ies of any papers nddu< noti( t \\ ( » delivi (ale the ( ])oini' ment eluci.i jtrinte upon to re diall CASK <»K rill. IMTRD si.\Ti:<. adduct'd as cvidi'iicc. '^iviii^" in t-at'li instance such roasonaMe uotico a- tlic All (it rat or. s may rciinirc. '•Ai;M( 1.1. \. '•It slwiU lio tin' duly ot" the a-jicnt ot' rafli Party. Nvilliin two III .itlis alU'r ihr cxpiralicn ct" tlif iImk' limited lor the drlivcry ot' ihf eoimter-cast' on hutii .skies, to deliver in ilui»li- cate to each <>t' tnc said Arhitrators and Xo the a;li'nt ot' the other Party a wriiten or jjiinted argument, showin^i the ])oints and retcrrinL: ' • the evidence U|ton which his (io\ern- mcnt rclii's: and the Arbitrators may, it' they de.>i re further cluci.iation with rejrard to any ]ioint. recjuirc a written or ])rintetl statement or argument, or oral ar!_amient hy c(»un.sel upon it: hut in such case the (»ther Party shall he entitled to replv I'ither oraliv or in writin>r. as the ea>e mav be. '•Amu i.r; VI. "In decidiiii^ the matters submitted to the Arbitrators they shall be iLdvenied by the I'ollow ing three rules, which are agreed uj on by the High Contracting Parties as rules to be taken as ap})li«'able to the case, and by such ]>rincii)les of Intel-national Law. not inconsistent therewitli, as the Arbitra- tor.s shall determine to ha\e been a[)plieable to the case: lUJ-ES. "A neutral Government is bound — "First, to use due diligence to ])revent the litting out, arming, or equipping, within its jurisdiction, of any vessel which it has reasonable iiround to believe is intended to cruise or to carry on war against a Power with which it is at peace: and also to use like diligence to i)revent the de- parture from its jurisdiction, of any vessel intended to cruise or carry on war as above, such vessel having been specially ada})teci. m w hole or in part, within such jurisdiction, to a])ers warlike use. ••Secondly, rot to permit or sutTer either belligerent to make use of its ports or waters as the base of naval oper- ations against the other, or for the pur]»ose of the renewal c>r augmentation of military supplies or arms, or the recruit- ment of men. 10 INTIJoDrr TION. "Tliinlly, to exorcise due ns within its jurisdiction^ to pre- vent anv ^iol.>tion of tlie I'ori'Uoinii ohliiiations and duties. ''Iler Britannic Majesty lia> c nande(l iier lli^li Commis- sioners and I^lenipotentiaries eclan' tiiat Iler Majestv'j (iovernment cannot assent to tiie toreLioinjj; rules as a state- ment ot" principles ot' International Law which were in force at tlie time when the claims mentioned in Artich' I arose, hut that Her Majesty's (lovernment, in ortler to evince its l MK'^. u States, jit Wasliiiigtoii, witliiu twolvf inoiitlis at'tei" tlie dutt? ot' tl.<' award. *''riu' award sliall he in duplicate, one copy wlun'oot* shall he delivered ti)tije anient ot* the I'liittMl States tor his(iov«'rtuneiit, and the other copy shall he delivered to tin* a;:,ent ol'(»reat Britain tor hi> Government. "AiJiK I.I. viir. '•Kach Govornnn'nt sliall j)ay it> own a;j;ent and provide for tlu» proper remuneration ot' the counsel employed hy it and ot" the Arhitrator aj)pointed hy it, and tor the expense of preparing and sid)inittin<«; its enses comiected with tlie arhitration shall i)e tlet'raved hy the two (iovernments in ecpial moieties. '•AlMK LK IX. '*Thi' Arhitrators sliall keep an accurate record ot' their proceed in;j;s, and may a|)poiiit and employ the necessary ot'licers to assist them. "AuTK LI-: X. "In case the Trihunal linds that Great Britain has tailed to fultill any dutv or tluties as aforesaid, and iloes not award a sum in ^ross, the Hii2:h Contracting; Parties ajiree that a Board of Assessors shall be aii])ointed to ascertain anil determine what claims are valid, and what amount or amounts shall be paid by Great Britain to the United States on account of the liability arisintoii. Tin Hii'inlM't's tlicn'ol' ,s|iii]| sMViTnllv siiii-icriii I xtli'Min ( Ircl; lI'iltlOM tlinr tlifv will iiiiiiartiiilh h\h\ (-ait'luUv rxaiiiiiif and decide. ti» the liest (»!' their iudiiinent and aeeordinii to iu.«>tier and e(|intv. all matters suhniitted to them, and >hall t'ortliNvith j»r(trt'e(l, uiidei" su<*h tidev and re;inlation> a> they may )ire- Hciilte. to the invest i<^^ation> ot the ( laim* whieh shall he pre- sen!fd to them Itv til"' (iovernment ot tiie Iniled States, and shall examine and iirh order and |ti'oper. tin. »i|»on .-neii eMdenee or mannei' a^ they may tliink inlormati<»n onlv as shall he I'urnished hv or on hehall' ot' th« ( lovernments ot' the I'nited Slates and ot' (Ireat Britain re- sjicctively. 'They .siiall he hoimd to hear on eaeh separate claim, it" reritanuic jMajesty at Washington. "All sums of money ^vhich may he awarded under this Article shall he payable at Washinsj:;ton in cohi. within twelve months after the delivery of eacli report. "The ]k)ard of Assessors mav en'olov such clerks as they shall think necessary. » AxK 'ir nil. I Mn;i> • ('^imlly l)v tli<> two tiiii *, iij> inuv lie totiiitl •■x|M>(litiit, on tlii> protltitiidii ot' iitcounts ccrtiJiffl h\- tin' nt»ii!'(|. I'ln' ffmiiiit r;itioii nt' fin" A»t'Hso|N >iiiill ;(l»t) l>»' piiiil \>y tlu' two (ioM'i'imi'Jit'. in <'(|iiii| mnii-fit's III a >in)il:ii' iii:iiitit't' '•AlMl« 1,1. XI. '•Til'' Ili^h ContrjKtiii'pi P:irtii'> eii-^ji'^i' to i'on«itli'r tin' r."«iiif ot" tli«> jd'oroi'tliii'^s ot' tli»' IVilMiiial ot' ArliitiMtiitii ;imlot'iIii' iioani ot" Ai»sos>ors, shoiiM sucli l)Oiii•' a|)[M»iiitt tl, a,-, a l"nll, |)t'ft"<'<'r. ainl lliial '•fttlciiu'nt ot" all tin' flaiius lifn-iulR't'oii' n't'ori'fd to: ami t'lirtlicr t'tiiiaut' that cmtv -iicli claiiii, wiit'tln-r tlu' saint' may or may not lias" li.'cn pfi'scntrtl to tlu' notirt- Ot", maik', prrt'crn'tl, or laitl litt'on' tli<' TiilMinal «ir Hoanl, .shall, I'rom ami alti-r tin' confliiNion ot' the proci't'ilin'js ol" tin' 'rrihnnal or Hoard, he con.Nith'ri'd ami tivalcd as tiiiallv settled. )arro(l md In-nct 1 U)ah Whnt tlio Uiiitcil to t.'st;ilili-»li. 't"ortli In aeeordaure with the provisions ot' Article .Mates will attt'inpt HI ol' the Ti'eaty. the I'liited States have the hom)r to la\ before the 'rrilmnal (»t" Ari>itration this their "Printed Case," accompani^.'d by the docmm'nts, the ot"lirial eorrespondem-e, ami other evidence on which they rely. They |)i'opose to >how , by a historical statt'inent ot' the course puiMU'd by the Hiiti>h (Joverinnent towaril the United States, t'rom the outbreak ot" the insurrection in tin? Southern States ot' the Unit'.'d States, that there was on the part td' the Hritisli Government a studied luit'riemlliin'ss or lixed prtHlispositon adverso to the United States, which t"urnished a con>tant motive t'oi the several acts ot' omi.ssioii and com- mission, hereinafter conii)lained of, as inconsistent with its duty as a neutral. Having" adduced the evidem^? of this t'act. the Uniti'd States will next emleavor to indicate to the Tribuiud of Arbitration what they deem to have been the duties of Great liritain toward the United States, in res[)ect to tln» several cruisers which will be named in this j)aper. They will then endeavor to show that Great Britain failed to perform those duties, both |j;euerally, ami sjiecilically as to 14 INTRODUCTION. each of the cruisers; and that such failure involved the liability to remunerate the United States for losses thus inflicted upon them, upon their citizens, and upon otliers protected by their flag. Lastly, thev will ('ndeav(»r to satisfy the Tribunal of Arbi- tration that it can find, in the testimony which will be offered by the T'nited States, am])le material for estimating the amount of such injuries, and tliey will ask the Tribunal to exercise the powers conferred upon it by Article VII of the Treaty, in awarding "a sum in gross, to bo paid by Great Britain to the United States, for all the claims referred to."' „ ., _, _, In AT)ril, 18Gi), the President communicated Evidence and do- ' cuments, and how to the Senate a mass of oflicial correspondence and other papers relating to those claims, which was printed in live volumes. Tiiese, and two additional volumes, containing further correspondence, evidence, and do- cuments, accompany this case. The whole will form "the documents, the oflicial correspondence, and the other evidence on which [the United States] relies,"' which is called for by Article III of the Treaty. Reference will be made through- out tliis paper to these volumes thus: "Vol. I, page 1," &c., &c., &c. The United States understand, however, that they may, under the terms of the Treaty, present hereafter "additional documents, correspondence, and evidence,"* and they reserve the right to do so. PART II. THE UNFRIENDLY COURSE PURSUED BY GREAT BRITAIN TOWARD THE UNITED STATES FROM THE OUTBREAK TO THE CLOSE OF THE INSURRECTION. I 1 ( H Relations of the In 1860 the United States had been an JireltBdSrpTi;' independent nation for a period of eiglity-four to 1860. years, and acknowledged as such by Great Britain for a period of seventy-seven years. During this period, while sharing to a remarkable extent in the general prosperity of the Christian Powers, they liad so conducted their relations toward those Powers as to merit, and they believed that they had secured, the good-will and esteem of all. Their prosperity was the result of honest thrift: their exceptional increase of population was the fruit of a voluntary immiixration to their shores : and the vast extension of their domain was acquired by purchase and not by conquest. From no people had they better right to expect a just judgment than from the people of Great Britain. In 1783, the War of Separation had been closed by a treaty of peace, which adjusted all the questions then pending between the two Governments. In 1794, new questions having arisen, growing out of the eftbrts of France to make the ports of the United States a base of hostile operations against Great Britain a new treaty was made, at the instance of the United States, by which all the difiiculties were arranged satisfactorily to Great Britain, and at the same time so as to preserve the neutrality and the honor of the United States. In the same 1(3 UNFRIIiNDLINliSS OF GRKAT BRITAIN. YCJtr, nl>o, the lir.-t iiditntlity r.ct ua> pas.^ed l»y Congress/ prescribiu'j; rule.> and establi.-liiii'^" tlse modes of proceeding to enablo tlic United States to porlorni their duties as a neutral toward (h'tvit P)ritain and other ln'ni;^ercnts. In 1812. they ■were forced intn Avar with (Jrt'at Ihitain, by the claim of that Power to impress >eam(n on tlic high seas from vessels of thi^ United States. Alter three year- the war ceased, and tiie claim has never since been practically enforced. In 1818, thev met Briii>h ncLi'otiators more than halfwav in arranging disputed points about the North .VmtMican Fisherio. In 1827, having ad.ded to their own right of discovery the Freneh andSpan- i>h titles to tiie Pacilic coast, thev voluntarily agreed to a joint occupation of a disputed portion of this territory, rather than resort to the la,»t arbitrament of nations. In 1838, when a serious rebellion prevailed in Canada, tlie Congress of the United States, at the request of Great l^ritain, passed an act authorizing the Government to exercise exceptional powers to maintain the national neutrality. In 18-42, the Government of the United States met a lU'iti.-h l^nvoy in a spirit of conciliation, and adjusted by agreement the disputed boundary between Maine and the Hritish Possessions. In 184(3, they accepted the proposal t)f Cireat Britain, made at their own suggestion, to adopt the forty-ninth parallel as a com- promise-line between the two Columbias, and to give to Great Britain the whole of Vancouver's Island. In 185U they waived, by the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty, the right of acquisition on the Isthmus, across which for many years the line of com- munieation from one })art of their dominions to the other must run. In 18r)4, they conferred upon the people of the British Possession- in North America the advantages of a free, full commercial interciiurse with the United States for their products, without securing corres[)onding benelits in return. Thus a series of diflicult questions, some of which might have led to war, hail been peaceably arranged by negotiations, and the increasing intercourse of the two nations was constantly fostered by continuing acts of friendliness on the part of the Government of the United States. ^ For an abstract of this act see Vol. IV, pp. 102 — 103. UNFRIENDLINESS OF GREAT BRITAIN. 17 „ . _,, , . All the political relations of the United Pnendly relatioBS . , ^ of the two Govern- States with England , with the exception of ™ ■ the episode of the war of 1 S 1 2 , had been those of increasing; amity and friendship, conlirmed by a repeated yielding of extreme rights, rather than imperil the cordial relations which the United States so much desired to maintain with their nearest neighbors, their best customers, and their blood -relations. They liad good right, therefore, to believe, and they did believe, that, by virtue of this friendly political understanding, and in consequence of the gradual and steady assimilation of the commercial interests and the financial policies of tiie two Governments, there was in Great Britain, in the summer of 1860, sympathy for the Government and affection for the people of the United States. They had equal reason to think that neither the British Government nor people would look with either ignorance or unconcern upon any disaster to them. Above all, they had at that time a i ia:ht to feel confident, that in any controversy which might grow out of the unhappy existence of African slavery in certain of the Southern States, the British Government would not exercise its sovereign powers, questionably or unquestionably, in favor of the supporters of slaverv. The United States 0» the 6th day of November, in that year, lu I860. ^]^Q jurisdiction of the Government of the United States extended unquestioned over eighteen States from which African slavery was excluded;^ over tifteen States in which it was established by law;- and over a vast terri- tory in which, under the then prevailing laws, persons with African blood in their veins could be held as slaves. This large unsettled or partially settled territory, as it might become peopled, was also liable to be divided into ^ Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, California, Minnesota, Oregon. ^ Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Caro- lina, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri, Arkansas, Florida, Texas. 2 18 UNFRIENDLINESS OF GREAT BRITAIN. new States, which, as they entered the Union, might, ag the law then stood, become "Shive States,'' tlius giving the advocates of slavery an increased strengtli in the Congress of the nation , and more especially in the Senate , and a more absolute control of the National Government. Since the date named three new States, entitled to a representation of six Senators in the National Senate, have been admitted into the Union from this territory ; ^ and the remainder of the great dominions of the United States is now divided into ten inci{)ient political organizations, known as Territories, which, with one exception, may at some future time become States." Election of Mr. '^^^ general election for President of the Lincoiu. United States, which took place on the Gth of November, 1860, was conducted in strict conformity with the provisions of the Constitution and laws of the country, and resulted in the choice of Abraham Lincoln. The party which elected him was pledged in advance to maintain "that the normal condition of all the territory of the United States is that of freedom ," and to " deny the authority of Congress, of a Territorial Legislature, or of any individuals , to give legal existence to slavery in any Territory of the United States."'^ The word "Territory*' is here used in the above-mentioned sense of an incipient political organization, which may at some future time become a State. Secession of South This decision of the people of the United Carolina. States was resisted by some of the inhabitants of the States where slavery prevailed. The people of South Carolina, with an undoubted unanimity, commenced the hostile ^ Nevada, Nebraska, Kansas. West Virginia was formed from a portion of the territory of Virginia, and for this reason does not come within the meaning of the text, though it became a State after the date mentioned. - New Mexico, Utah, Washington, Dakota, Colorado, Arizona, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, District of Columbia. The territory known as the Indian Territory is without political organization, having neither Governor nor Delegate in Congress. It cannot be considered as coming within the meaning of the text. 3 Greeley's American Conflict, Vol. I, page 320. UNFRIENDLINESS OK GREAT BRITAIN. ID movement. In the following month they proclainit'd, throujili a State Convention, their purpose to secede from the Union, because the party about to come into powtT had "announced that the South shall be excluded from tlie common terri- Of Alabama, tory." ^ The State of Alabama, on the 11th of January, with much less unanimity, (the vote hi tlie Con- vention being 61 ayes to od nays,-) followed the example of South CaroHna, giving as their reason tliat the election of Mr. Lincoln, "by a sectional party, avowedly hostile to the domestic institutions [ i. e. , slavery ] of Alabama ," was " a political wrong of an insulting and menacing character." ^ Of (ieor^ia and '^^^ State of Georgia ft)llowed after a other States. much greater struggle, in which the party in favor of remaining in the Union resisted to the last, the final vote being 208 ayes to 89 nays."* Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas each framed an ordinance of secession from the Union before the 4th of February, in each case with more or less unanimity. Opposition to the On the 4th of Februarv, 1861, represen- Sn'oTihlviry th" ^^tives from some of the^ States which had cause of t^ecession. attempted to go through the form of secession, and representatives from the State of North Carolina, which had not at that time attempted it, met at Montgomery,' in the State of Alabama , for the purpose of organizing a provisional government , and having done so , elected Mr. Jefferson Davis as the Provisional President, and Mr. Alexander H. Stephens as the Provisional Vice-President of the pro- posed Confederation. In accepting this office, on the 18th of February, Mr. Jefferson Davis said: ^"We have vainly endeavored to secure tranquillity and obtain respect for the rights to which we were entitled," [/. t'., the right to extend the domains of slavery.] "As a necessity, and not a choice, we have resorted to the remedy of separation." * * ^ McPherson's History of the Rebellion, page 16. 2 McPherson's History of the Rebellion, page 4. 3 Appleton's Annual Cyclopaedia, 1861, page 10. * McPherson's History of the Rebellion, page 3. ^ Appleton's Annual Cyclopaedia, 1861, Vol. 1, page 126. ^ Appleton's Annual Cyclopaedia, l861, page 613. 2* 20 UNFRIRNDTJNESS OF ORRAT BRITAIN. '' Our industrial pursuits have recoived no cliock ; the cultiva- tion of our tields progresses as heretofore; and even should wo be involved in war, there would be no considerable di- minution in the production of the staples which have con- stituted our exports, in which the commercial world has an interest scarcely less than our own. This common interest of producer and consumer can only be intercepted by an exterior force, which should obstruct its transmission to foreign markets — a course of conduct which would be de- trimental to the manufacturhig and commercial interests abroad." Mr. Stephens spoke with still more explicitness. He said ^ the "foundations [of the new government] are laid. Its corner-stone rests upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man ; that slavery — subordination to the superior race — is his natural and moral condition." Having thus formally declared that the contemplated limi- tation of the territory within which negro slavery should be tolerated was the sole cause of the projected separation, and having appealed to the world to support them, the seceding States made efForts, which proved vain, to induce the other slave States to join chem. No other States passed ordinances of secession until after the fall of Fort Sumter. On the; contrary, the people of the States of Tennessee^ and Mis- souri ' before that time voted by large majorities against se- cession; and in the States of North Carolina and Virginia conventions were called and were in session when some of the events hereinafter referred to took place; and these bodies were known to be opposed to the revolutionary movements in South Carolina and the six States bordering on the Gulf of Mexico. A party in the ^ ^^^^^ minority, if not a majority, of the South opposed to people of the slave States known as Border States, and of the mountainous parts of the six States known as the Gulf States, did not desire separation. They were attached to the Union, which had fostered and ^ Appleton's Annual Cyclopaedia, 1861, page 129. ^ McPherson's History of the Rebellion, page 5. 3 Appleton's Annual Cyclopaedia, 1861, page 478. VNFRIENDF.INESS OF (iRKAT HRITAIN. 21 j)r()tectecl their interests, and they expresse'l no dissativstaction, except witli thv^. proposed policy as to the e :tensi()n of slavery, and in many cases not even with that. Their feelings were forcibly exj)ressed by the distinguished Alexander H. Stephens, Provisional Vice-President of the Montgomery Government, in a speech made in the Convention in Georgia before that State passed the ordinance of secession, and about two months before he accepted office at Montgomery. He said, ^ "This step [of secession] once taken can never be recalled: and all the baleful and withering consequences that must follow will rest on the Convention for all coming time. When we and our posterity shall see our lovely South desolated by the demon of war, which this act of yours will inevitably invite and call forth; when our green fields of waving harvest shall be trodden down by the murderous soldiery and liery car of war sweeping over our land: our temples of justice laid in ashes; all the horrors and desolations of war upon us, who but this Convention will be held responsible for it, and who but him who shall have given his vote for this unwise and illtimed measure, as I honestly think and believe, shall be held to strict account for this suicidal act by the present generation, and probably cursed and execrated by posterity for all coming time, for the wide and desolating ruin that will inevitably follow this act you now propose to perpetrate? Pause, 1 entreat you, and consider for a moment what reasons you can give that will even satisfy yourselves in calmer moments; what reasons you can give to your fellow-sufferers in the calamity that it will bring upon us. What reasons can you give to the nations of the earth to justify it? They will be the calm and deliberate judges in the case, and what cause or one overt act can you name or point to, on which to rest the plea of justification? What right has the North assailed? What interest of the South has been invaded? What justice has been denied? And what claim founded in justice and right has been withheld? Can either of you to-day name one governmental act of wrong, deliberately and purposely i ^ McPherson's History of the Rebellion, page 25. 22 UNFRIENDLJNKSS OF GREAT BRITAIN. I dono by the Government of Wa.sliin«^ton, of which the South has H right to complain? I c.hallenjiie the answt^." All the facta above referred to in this paper were patent to the whole world, were ostentatiouslv i)Ut forth bv the insurgents, and were openly commented upon by the public press tiiroughout the United States. It is, therefore, not unreasonable to presume that the liritish Government received from its representatives and agents in the United States full information concerning them as they took place. To suppose the contrary would be to ignore the well-known lid'.'lity of those oflicers. Inauguration of ^^' I^iu^oln entered upon the cuities of his Mr. Limoin. yfji^e on the 4th of March, 18G1. He found the little Army of the United States scattered, and disintegrated; the Navy sent to distant quarters of the globe; the Treasury bankrupt; the credit of the I'nited States seriously injured by forced sales of Government securities; the public service demoralized; the various Departments of the Government tilled with unfaithful clerks and oflicers, whose sympathies were with the South, who had been placed in their positions for the purpose of paralyzing his administration. These facts, which were known to the world, must have attracted the attention of the observant Representative of Great Britain at Washington, and must have enabled him to make clear to his Government the reasons why the Cabinet at Washington must pause be- fore asserting its rights by force. „. „...,, The new Government took an earlv opportu- The British Gov- ^ ^ _ _ ' . . ernment informed nitv to inform the British Government of its 118 puiposes. purposes,^ On the 9th of March, four days after the installmont of Mr. Lincoln, Mr. Dallas, tlie Minister of the United States at Loudon, was instructed to communicate to Lord Russell the Inaugural Address of the President, and to assure him that the President entertained full conlidence in the speedy restoration of the harmony and unity of the Government. He was further told that "the United States have had too many assurances and manifestations of the friend- ship and good-will of Great Britain, to entertain any doubt 1 Seward to Dallas, Vol. I, page 8. UNFRrENDLINESS OF GREAT BRITAIN. 23 that these considerations will have their just ii itluenct' with tlie British Government, and will pre vent that Government from yielding to solicitations to intervene in any unfriendly way in the domestic concerns of our country." ^Mr. Dallas, in complying with his instructions, (April *J, 1S(j1,) pressed upon Lord Russell the imj)ortance of England and France abstaining, "at least for a considerabh' time, from doing what, by encouraging groundless hopes, would widen a breach still thought capable of being closed." Lord Russell Lord John Russell replied that the coming of Mr. Adams (Mr. ?i7.'!l'rm8'8 a'r ri V- I^^Has's successor) ^ 'would doubtless be re- al before actini;. garded as the appropriate and natural occasion for linally discussing and determining the question." The United States therefore had reasonable ground to be- lieve, not only in view of the great moral interests of which they were the ex[)onents, and of the long-standing friendship between them and Great Britain, but also in consequence of the voluntary promise of Lord Russell, that an opportunity would be aft'orded them to explain their views and purposes through their newly selected and specially trusted representative; and least of all had they cause to anticipate that a goveri - ment which they supposed to be in sympathy with their policy as to African slavery, would precipitate a decision as to the insurgents, which was so obviously injurious to the United States, as to almost ap})ear to have been designedly so. Surrender of Fort '^^^ delay upon which the Government of the Sumter. United States relied to lirmly secure the loyalty of the Border States, and their ^d in inducing the peaceable return of the Gulf States, Aas intt lupted by the attack upon Fort Sumter, made by order of the Government at Mont- gomery. This attack ended in the surrender of the garrison on the 13th of April. This was followed on the 15th of April by a -Proclamation of the President, calling out the militia, and convening an extra session of Congress on the 4th dav of the next Julv. ^ Dallas to Seward, Vol, I, page 12. '^ Vol. I, page 16. f t ■ * • ^* ■ • ! •*' J ';■"■'■ 4 24 IINFRIENDMNESS OV (iRKAT HRITAIN. ' ,\ On the 17th of April, Mr. ^ Jofffrson Davis The iMSurpciits to _ ^ ^ issue letters of gave notice that letters of marqiit would be ™ '^'''** granted by the persons who had attempt("d to establish a Government at Montgomery, by usurping the author- ity of the United States. „ , .. On the null of April, President Lincoln 1 ro( lamation giv- _ ^ ' ^ ing notirc oi issued a Proclamation, declaring that a blockade of the pf)rts within the States of South Carolina, oi.j<(t8ofihjitpro- Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, f lamation. j^j^j ^exas would be established for the pur- ])Ose of collecting the revenue in the disturbed part of the country, and for the protection of the public peace, and of the lives and proj)erties of quiet and (trderly citizens, until Congress should assemble. That body was summoned to assemble on the fourth day of the following July. The full text of this Proclamation will be found iit Vol. I, page 2 1 . In the course of the discussion between the two Govern- ments growing out of the war, it has been repeatedly asserted that Her Majesty's Government was induced to confer ujjon the insurgents in the South the status of belligerents, in conse- qi .'nee of the receipt of the news of the President's Pro- clamation of April 19. The United States are tliereforc forced to invite the ])atience of tlie Board of Arbitrators^ while they establish, from conclusive proof, that Her Majesty'* Government is mistaken in that respect. ,^. . . , Before any armed collision had taken place^ The joint action of , •' _ ^ '^ France invited by there existed an understanding between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of the Emperor of the French, with a view to securing a simul- taneous and identical course of action of the two Governments on American questions. Tt is within the power of the British Government to inform the Arbitrators when that understanding was reached. The fact that it had been agreed to by the two governments was communicated to Mr. Dallas, by Lord John Russell, on the 1st dav of May, 18G1." There was nothing in the previous relations between Great ^ Appleton's Annual Cvelopa'dia, 18C1, page 137. 2 Mr. Dallas to Mr. Sew'ard, May _>, ISGl. Vol. I, p. 33—34. 1'NFRIENI>1JNES« OF GREAT BRITAIN. 25 I Britain and tlie United States, which made it necessary for Her Majesty's Government to seek tlie advict*, or to invite the support of the Kmjieror-of the Frencii. in the crisis which, was threatened. Tlie I'nited States arc at a loss to con jectnre what inducement could have prompted such an act, ' unless it may have been the perception on the part of Her Majesty's Government that it was in its nature not only unfriendly, but almost hostile to the United States. When the news of the bloodless attack upon Fort Sumter became known in Europe, Her Majesty's Government apparently assumed that the time had come for tlie joint action which had been j)reviously a<:reed upon: and, without waiting to learn the pur}»oses of the United States, it announced its intenti(m to take the lirst step by recognizing the insurgents as belligerents. When the Prc8- The President's Proclamation, which has jlIucc i?on' wus^ m'^od ^^"^"^ "^"^^^ ^^^' Ostensible reason for this deter- in (Jnat Britain, mination, was issued on the 19th of April, and was made public in the Washington newspapers of the morning of the 20th. An imperfect copy of it was also telegraphed to New York, and from thence to lioston, in each of which cities it appeared in the newspapers of the morning of the "2 0th. The New York papers of the '20th gave the substance of the Proclamation, without the oflicial commencement and close, and with several errors of more or less importance. The Boston papers of the same date, in addition to the errors in the New York copy, omitted the very important statement in regard to the collection of the revenue, which appears in the Proclamation as the main cause of its issue. During the morning of the 10th of April, a riot took place in Baltimore, which ende-i in severing direct communi- cation, by rail or telegraph, between Washington and New York. Telegraphic communication was not restored until the 30th of the month. The regular passage of the mails and trains was resumed about the same time. It ai)pears by a dispatch from Lord Lyons to Lord John Russell that the mails had not been resumed on the 27th.* i ■■ ^ Blue Book, North America, No. 1, 1862, page 26. 2( IINFUIKNDMNKHS OF OUKAT »RIT,\IN. ', 'I- 1 I It is al)solutely oprtaiii that no full ropy of tho text of tlie Proclamation could have left \Vasijin<;ton by tin* inailK of the 19th, and cciually certain that no copy could have reached New York fnun \Vashin«jj;ton after the 1 IHh for several days. On tlie L'Otii tlu' steamer C'amuiian sailed from Portland, taking" the lioston jmpers of that day, with the imj)erf«'ct copy of tlie Proclamation, in which tiie clause in regard to tlie collection of the revenue was suppressed. This steanier arrived at Londonderry on the 1st of May, and the '"Daily Nt'ws" of London, of tlie 2d of May, published the following telcjjiraphic items of news: "President Lincoln lias issued a Proclamation, declaring a hlockaiie of all the ports in the seceded States. The Federal Government will condemn as pirates all privateer-vessels which may be seizeil by Federal shijis."' The Canadian arrived at Liverpool on the 2d of ^lay, and the -'Daily News," of the 3d, and the "Times," of the 4th of May, published the im[)erfoct Boston copy of the Proclamation in the language as shown in the note below. ' • The following is tho President's Proclamation of tlie blockade of the Southern ports: "An insurrection against tlie Governiuent of the United States has broken out in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, and the laws of the United States eannoi '..^ executed effectually therein conformably to that provision of the Constitution which requires duties to be uniform throughout the United States; and further, a combination of persons, engaged in such insurrection, have threatened to grant pretended letters of marque to authorize the bearers thereof to commit assaults on the lives, vessels, and property of good citizens of the country lawfully engaged in commerce on the high seas and in the waters of the United States; and whereas an Executive Proclamation has already been issued, requiring the persons engaged in these disorderly proceedings to desist, and therefore calling out the militia force for the purpose of repressing the same, and convening Congress in extraordinary session to deliberate and determine thereon, the President, with a view to the same purposes before men- tioned, and to the protection of the public peace and the lives and property of its orderly citizens pursuing their lawful occu- pations, until Congress shall have assembled and deliberated on said unlawful proceedings, or until the same shall have No oth to lunc likely by the <)|tinioii Oftirer-* ail iinpiri ment Kussell jesty's ili'ratt'i have h( all the visions the poi have their o Her Majei erntnent ttw l!it to rcronn of ' Comnui recogni destroy On tin have h ceased, of the laws I cases posted. the po blocka ports, said b fact a again captur procec advisu 1 V rM-ltlKM)I.INKss OK (ilJIlVr l»l(irM>. 27 e text of tilt' inailn >ul(l liavo l:>tli tor Portland, itnporf'cct •eganl to *iteann'f >e '"Daily tollowiiijj issued a ts ill tile deiiiii a.s Federal k -M of -Times," coi)y of ! below. ' blockade J United Georgia, and the y therein requires I further, )n, have iuthorize vessels, engaged e United already isorderly tia force congress thereon, re nien- the lives 'ul occu- iberated ill have No other than the Bo>ton copy of the Frodamation appears to have been |>ulilish«Ml in tli)> London newspapers. It is not lik«'ly that a copy was reetMvi'd in Lonilon bet'on' the 10th, by the Fulton tro Opinion i\( Law in It lew York, tl was on this inea;j;er and incorrrect in- o'fhcer^ tiiktMi i»n formation that the advice of the Hritish I^aw an iinpi'ffei't copy. ( )t'liccra was based, upon which that (Jovcr n- iicnt acted. On the eveninu; of the *Jd ot" Mav, Lord dohn Kussell stated in tiie Hou^e of Commons that •Her Mi iestv's (iovernment heard the other dav that the I'onfe- derateil States liavt? issued letters of mar(jue, and to-day we have heard that it i.-: intended tliere shall be a blockade of all the ports of the Southern States. As to the j^eneral j>n)- visions of the law of nations on tlii'se (questions, so th point" me ot s are so new, as well as so iinj)ortant , tiiat they have been referred to the Law OflictM's of the Crown for their opinions."' nerMajesty'«<;..v. ^^ is with deep reoret that the United States ernment decide on jind thems(dves obliiied to lav before the Tri- tli« 1st of May i ,. » i • • i • i i i to recognize a state buual oi Arbitration the evidence that, when of war. ^jjj^ announcement was mad»; in the House of Commons, Her Majesty's Government had already decided to recognize the right of the Southern insurgents to attack and destroy ♦'le commerce of the United States on the high seas. On the 1st day of May, 18G1, (two days before they could have heard of the issue of the President's Proclamation,) Lord ceased, has further deemed it advisable to set on foot a blockade of the ports within the States aforesaid, in pursuance of the laws of the United States and the laws of nations in such cases provided. For this purpose u competent force will be posted, so as to prevent the entrance and exit of vessels from the ports aforesaid. If, therefore, with a view to vi(date such blockade, any vessel shall attempt to leave any of the said ports, she will be duly warned by the commander of one of said blockading vessels, who will indorse on her register the fact and date of such warning; and if the same vessel shall again attempt to enter or leave a blockaded port, she will be captured and sent to the nearest convenient port for such proceedings against Iut and her cargo as may be deemed advisable." 1 Vol. IV, page 482. \: V ■' .' . ^ ; 1 i. il; 28 UNFRIENDLINESS OF GREAT BRITAIN. il John Kussell wrote as follows to the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty : ^ "The intelligence which reached this country bv the last mail from the United States gives reason to suppose that a civil war between ^be Northern and Southern States of that C'onfederacy was imminent, if indeed it might not be con- sidered to have already begun. "Simultaneously wi:h the arrival of this news, a telegram, purporting to have been conveyed to Halifax from the United States, was received, which announced that the President of the Southern Confederacy had taken steps for issuing letters of marque against the vessels of the Northern States." ^ Sjl ^ Sjl 4^ ■ ^ 9^ "I need scarcely observe to Your Lordships that it may be right to apprise the Admiral that, much as Her Majesty regrets the prospect of civil war breaking out in a country ill the happiness and peace of which Her Majesty takes the deepest interest, it is Her Majesty's pleasure that nothing should he done hij her naval forces which should indicate any partiality of preference for either party in the con- test that may ensue.'''' On tiie 4th of Mav- Lord John Russel Lord John Russell , , , . . . , * • t • i i i and the insurgent held an mterview With some individuals, whom crs"thriecofe?i'l I'c described as "the three gentlemen deputed tion of Southern by the Southern Confederacy to obtain their independence. ' , . . -, " c^ v » i i i recognition as an independent State. Although he informed them that he could hold no oflicial communica- tion with them, he did discuss with tliem the question of recognition, and he indicated to them the })oints to which they must direct their attention in tlie discussion of the sub- ject. He also listened to their views in response thereto; and when, on the termination of the interview they informed him " that they should remain in London for the present, in the hope that the recognition of the Southern Confederacy would not be long delayed," he interposed no objections to such a course, and suggested no improbability of such a re- cognition. 1 Vol. I, page 33. Vol. I, page 37. Comi with UOV( 1 1 UNFRIENDLINESS UF GREAT BRITAIN. 29 missioners On the 5th of May the steamship Persia Communication •' . /» xt with the French arrived at Liverpool with advices from rsew York to the 25th of April. Lord John Rus«ell stated on Monday, the 6th of May, hi a communication to Lord Cowley,^ '•'that Her Majesty's Government received no dispatches from Lord Lyons by the mail which has just ar- rived, [the Persia,] the communication between Washin^j^ton and New York being interrupted." In the same dispatch Lord Cowley is informed "that Her Majesty's Government cannot hesitate to admit that such Con- federacy is entitled to be considered as a belligerent, and as such invested with all the rights and prerogatives of a belliger- ent," and he is instructed to invite the French Government to a joint action, and a line of joint policy with the British Government, toward the United States. Lord Cowley, under these instructions, had an interview on the 10th of May with the French Minister for Foreign Affairs. The Tribunal may infer from the published correspondence that is was assumed at this interview that the two Governments should act to- gether, and that the letters of marque which might be issued by the insurgents should be respected. Lord Cowley reported ^ that- ''His Excellency said further that in Answer of the ^ •' French (.overu- 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." The answer to these instructions was received at the Foreign Office on the 1 1 th of May. The United States are iirmly convinced that no correct or complete copy of the President's Proclamation could have been received there in advance of it. It is known that the official copy forwarded by Lord Lyons to his Gov- ernment reached London on the 14th of May.^ The offi- cial copy sent by Mr. Seward to Mr. Dallas reached South- ampton on the evening of the 9 th of May, and London on the 10th. It is stated in the British notes on Mr. Fish's * Vol. I, page 36; see also same volume, page 48. 2 Vol. I, page 49. ^ British Blue Book on the Blockade, 1861, page 1. h 30 UNFRIENDLINESS OF GREAT BRITAIN. I: It ■1.1, ; I instruction of September 25th, 1860, to Mr. Motley, that the Proclamation was communicated oflicially by Mr. Dallas When the Presi- to Lord John Russell on the 11th. There S was^7ecei'"'d i« "« evidence of this fact in the archives of by (ireat Britain, the Legation of the United States at London, or at the Department of State at Washington. But even if the statement in the notes be correct, still the British Gov- ernment received, in the afternoon of the 11th of May, 1861, its lirst complete and oflicial copy of the President's Proclamation, ten days after Lord John Russell had decided to award the rights of belligerency on the ocean to the in- surgents, eight days after the subject had been referred to the Law Oflicers for tlieir opinion, and live days after the dtcisicm of Her Majesty's Government upon that opinion had been announced in the House of Commons, as liereinafter set forth. On the same day on wliich Lord John Kussell wrote Lord Cowley (May 6th) he wrote to Lord Lyons, ^ calling the United States "the northern portion of the late Union,"' and reiterating that Her Majesty's Government "cannot question the right of the Southorn States to be recognized as a belli- gerent;"' and in the House of Commons, on the same even- ing, he announced that the Attorney and Solicitor General, the Queen"s Advocate, and the Government had come to the conclusion that the Southern Confederacy of America must be treated as a belligerent. On the same evening, Lord Palmerston said in the House of Commons,- "No one can regret more than I do the intelligence which has been re- ceived within the last few days from America; but at the same time, any one must have been short-sighted and little capable of anticipating the [)robable course of human events, who had not for a long time foreseen events of a similar character to those we now deplore. From the commence- ment of this unfortunate quarrel between the two sections of the United States, it was evident that the causes of dis- union were too deeply seated to make it possible that separa- i Vol. I, pages 36, 37. 2 Hansard's Debates, 3d series, Vol. CLXH, pages 1622—23. tion woul sions wer improbabl contest. Effect of rei tion of a 8t war. sea which Palmersto should he to make On th€ pruclamat the eomm 10th, Lo: of Lords, speakers letters of It is b to Her ^: Adams w administr£ iidential ^ Mr. Dalla Lord Jot presented him to Y' of his ir Niagara, would pr or 15th of disreg to be b reasons i view, H< their coi 1 Vol. UNFRIENDMNESS OF GREAT BRITAIN. 31 By, that ^ Dallas There hives of London, even if ish Gov- )f May, isident s decided the in- rred to fter the ion had fter set te Lord ing the n,'' and [uestion a belli- i even- reneral, to the a must , Lord ne can ?en re- at the i little events, similar oience- ?ctions )f dis- epara- 2—23. tion would not take place, and it was also obvious that pas- sions were so roused on both sides as to to make it highly improbable that such separation could take place without a contest." „ - .A question was asked in the House of Coin- Effect of recogni- „ , tion of a state of mons on the 7th of May, ^ the next evening, as to the extent of the belligerent rights at sea which would be acquired by the South, to which Lord Palmerston declined to make answer " until the Government should be in a condition, after consulting its legal advisers, to make some distinct communication on the subject."' On the 9th of May,^ Sir George Lewis announced that a proclamation would be issued, stating "the general effect of the common and statute law on the matter;"' and on the 10th, Lord Granville -repeated the declaration in the House of Lords. In the discussion there it was assumed by all the speakers that the insurgent Government might lawfully issue letters of marque. It is believed by the United States that it was well known to Her Majesty's Government during all this time, that Mr. Adams was about to arrive with instruction from the new administration, and that lie came possessed of its most con- iidential views on these important questions. On the '2d May Mr. Dallas wrote Mr. Seward thus:^ "The solicitude felt by Lord John Russell as to the effect of certain measures re- jiresented as likely to be adopted by the President, induced him to request me to call at his private residence yesterday. * * * * I informed him that Mr. Adams had apprised me of his intention to be on his way hither in the steamship Niagara, which left Boston on the 1st May, and that he would probably arrive in less than two weeks, by the 12th or 15th instant. His Lordship acquiesced in the expediency of disregarding mere rumor, and waiting tlie full knowledge to be brought by my successor." The United States, for reasons already given, have no doubt that, before that inter- view, Her Majesty's Government had already decided upon their course of action. Mr. Adams did actually arrive in 1 Vol. IV, page 484. 2 Vol. IV, page 480. ^ Vol. I, page 34. •Ji 32 UNFRIENDLINESS OF GREAT BRITAIN. The Queen's Pro- Loiidou on the evening of the 13th of May. ciamation. 'f^j,^. Queen's Proclamation of neutrality was issued on the morning of that day. .. ^ . ^ cTi A careful examination of the published cor- Uncertainty of Her ^ Majesty's (Jovern- respondence and speeches of Lord John Russel shows that Her Majesty's Government was at that time by no means certain that tliere was a war in the United States. On the 1st of May/ he directs the Admi- rality as to the course to be i)ursued \N'ith reference to the insurgent cruisers in the war which, he tliinks, ma^ "have already begun." On the 2d of May'^ he asks the Law Officers of the Crown what course the Government shall pursue. On the 1st of June, however, he is in doubt on the subject, and he writes to the Lord Commissioners of the Admirality, informing them of the rules to be observed by the British naval'^ forces "in the contest which appears to hf" imminent between the United States and the so-styled Confederate States of North America." It would seem, therefore, that on the 1st of June, 1861, Her Majesty's Government regarded only as "imminent" tl'c- hostilities which Her Majesty's Proclamation of the 13th of the previous May alleged had "unhappily commenced between the United States of America and certain States styling themselves the Confederate States of America." In point of fact, Lord John Russell's dispatch of the 1st of June d» 'scribed with fidelity the condition of things so far as then known in London; for at that time the intelligence of the exhilarating effect of the Queen's Proclamation upon the insurgents, and its depressing effect upon the Govern- ment and loyal population of the United States , had not reached Europe. _„. , . ^, Whatever Lord John Russell, and his Effect of the . ' Queen's Prociama- coUeaguts in the Government, when decided to counsel Her Majesty to issue the Pro- clamation of May 13th, may have thought, the debates in Parliament removed any excuse for jignorance as to the effect of that instrument. As early as the 29th of April, in the House of Com- 1 Vol. I, page 33. ^ Vol. IV, page 482. '^ Vol. T, page 335. mons, an no doub countrv privateer Chancello replied : between privateers to say feel it n touch mc matter ir In a May, Loi House si] which w vessels s letters of it did 1 piracy, the hand piracy an State enj to make rving on of nation In the Kith of Chancello Prociama service ol Atlantic, would be of his ov interferen 1 Hansj 2 Hans a Vol. UNFRIENDLINESS OF GREAT BRITAIN. 33 1 of May. rality was ished cor- iiii Russcl rit was at ar in the he Adaii- ice to the lay "have w Officers L'sue. On e subject, dmirality, je British imminent :ate States at on the rded only )clamatioii unhappily nd certain America." the 1st of igs 80 far itelligence AOn upon } Govern- had not and his n decided the Pro- iebates in the effect mens, an opposition member liad said that '• there could be no doubt that if tiie war shouhl be continued in that country [the United States] there would he thousands of privateers hovcriug about those coasts:" ^ to which the Chancellor of tlie Exchequer (Mr. Gladstone) immecUately replied: ''AH that relates to the dangers which may arise between Ik'itisli merchant -ships and American or other privateers * =^ * I shall })retermit. not because I presume to say or think that they are insigniticant , but i)ecause E feel it mv duty to address myself to those points which touch more directly and more practically [the Budgetj the nuitter in hand,"' - In a debate in the House of Lords, on the 10th of May, Lord Hardwicke ^ said that he "'was anxious that the Hmise should not enter too strong a protest against that which was a natural consequence of war. namely, that vessels should be fitted out by private individuals under letters of marque. That was , no doubt , privateering , but it did not by any means follow that privateering was piracy. He believed that if privateering -ships were put in the hands of proper officers, they were not engaged in piracy any more than men-of-war. He thought that a feeble State engaged in a war with a ]iowerful one had a right to make use of its merchant-vessels lor tlie purpose of car- rying on the contest, and there was no a 'olation of t!ie law of nations in such a proceeding." In the more elaborate discussion which followed on the Kith of the same month in the House of Lords, the Lord Chancellor ^ said: "If, after the publishing of the present Proclamation, any English subject were to enter into the service of either of the belligerents on the other side of the Atlantic, there could be no doubt that the person so acting would be liable to be punished for a violation of the laws of his own country, and would have no right to claim any interference on the par*" of his Govenmient to shield him ■'* *!■ k • V \ #■# ! of Com- page 335. ^ Hansard's Debates, 3d series, Vol. CLXTI, page 1276. 2 Hansard's Debates, ;id series. Vol. CLXll, page 1277. a Vol. IV, page 486. * Vol. IV, page 490. 3 I*' 34 UNFRIENDLINESS OF GREAT BRITAIN. :,f from any coiisoquences which ini;i;ht arise. Thore could, however, at the same time, he no douht that, although he Avould be guilty of a breach of the law!s of his own country, he ought not to be regarded as a pirate for acting under a commission from a State admitted to be entitled to the exercise of belligerent rights, and carrying on what might be called a jasttim helium. Anvbodv dealing with a man under those circumstances as a ])irate. and putting him to death, would, he contended, be guilty of murder." The distinguished jurist, who then sat upon the woolsack, described in that speech one legal effect of this hastily issued Proclamation ^vith undoubted correctness. It relieved English- men or foreigners in England, and Englishmen on insurgent cruisers carrying on war against the United States, from the penalties of a high class of felonies. Lord Lyndhurst, one of the most eminent predecessors of Lord Campbell, in an opinion in the House of Lords in 1853, cited with respect by Sir George Cornwall Lewis, (himself one of Lord Palmerston's Cabinet), said: "If a number of British subjects were to combine and conspire together to excite revolt among the inhabitants of a friendly State, * * * and these persons, in pursuance of that conspiracy, were to issue manifestoes and proclamations for the purpose of carrying that object into effect ; above all, if tJicij were to suhscrihe money for the purpose of purchasing arms to give effect to that intended enterprise-, I conceive, and I state with confidence, that such persons would be guilty of a misdemeanor, and liable to suffer punishment by the laws of this country , inasmuch as their conduct would tend to embroil the two countries to- gether, to lead to remonstrances by the one with the other, and ultimately, it might be, to war. * * * Foreigners residing in this country, as long as they reside here under the protec- tion of this country, are considered in the light of British subjects, or rather subjects of Her Majesty, and are punishable by the criminal law precisely in the same manner, to the same extent, and under the same conditions, as natural-born subjects of Her Majesty. * * * The offence of endeavoring to excite revolt against a neighboring State is an offence against the law of nations. No writer on the law of nations states decision Mr. Br views Bright , 18G5. 2 occurred lired at of April a new i intimatei the new of impo would a on a gi he will London j)aper nc acknowl the pro till Mr. matter upon w1 bound not doi: United taken, effect : at Mon and irri most sti relations The sov( right to is a proclami denii 1 On by the '. London, 2 Vol UNKKlENDLlNJiSS OK CiKKAT IJRIIAIN. 35 states otliorwise. ]3ut the law of nations, according to llie decision of our greatest judges, is part of the law of ICngland." ^ Mr. Brighi's '^''^ United States will close this brancli of views. ^\^^, examination by citing tln' hmguage of Mr. Bright, in the Houses of Commons, on the l.'Jth of ISIarch, 1865.^ "Going back nearly four years, we recollect ^vhat occurred when the news arrived of the lirst shot having been lired at Fort Sumter. That, I think, was about the 1 2th of April. Immediately after that time it was announced that a new minister was coming to this country. Mr. Dallas had intimated to the Government that, as he did not represent the new President, he would rather not undertake anytliing of importance; but that his successor was on his way, and would arrive on such a day. When a man leaves New York on a given day you can calculate to about twelve hours when he will be in London. Mr. Adams, I tliink, arrived in London about the 1 3th of May, and wh(;n lie opened his news- })aper next morning he found the Proclamation of Neutrality, acknowletiging the belligerent rights of the South. I say that the proper course to have taken would have been to wait till Mr. Adams arrived here , and to liave discussed the matter with him in a friendly manner, exjilaining the ground upon which the English Government had felt themselves bound to issue that proclamation, and representing that it was not done Vs any manner as an unfriendly act toward the United States Government. But no precaution whatever was taken. It was done with unfriendly haste, and had this effect : that it gave comfort and courage t(^ the conspiracy at Montgomery and at Richmond, and caused great grief and irritation a^iong that portion of the people of America most strongly desirous of maintaining amicable and friendly relations between their country and England."' The sovereign The United States have made this review right to issue such ^f l\^^, course pursued by Great Britain in a proclamation oot , , ^ "^ , denied. recognizing the insurgents as belligerents, with ^ On Foreign Jurisdiction and the Extradition of Criminals; by the Right Hon. Sir George Cornwall Lewis, Bart , M. P., London, 1859, page 66. 2 Vol. V, pages 639, 640. t ** w 1^ 3() UNFRIKNDMNESS OF GRKAT RPITAIN. I i I ! r II ' i;, f no j)ur|)0>o of (}iio8tionin'^" the ^o\oi(Mo;n ii;ilit ot' tliat Power t() (lotermhie for itself whether tlie facts at tliat thne jiistilied Micli a ri?POelling France to do the same thing, yet tliey nn-ognize and insist that (in the laniiuaiie of the President to Congress on the (Uh day of Dt'cember, lS6i>) a "nation is its own judge when to accord the rights of belligerency, either to a j)eoi)le struggling to frc^e themselves fr(jm a government they b«'!lieve to be op- pressive, or the independent nations at war with each other." ^ It was an un- ^^"^ while thus limily insisthig upon the friendly act, sovereign rights of indejH'ndent nationality, they also maintain " that the rightfulness of such an act de- })(>nds upon the occasion and the circunjstances, and it is an act, like the sovereign act of war, which the morality of the public law and practice requires should be deliberate, seasonable, and just in reference to surrounding facts;" - and "they regard the concession of belligerency by Great Britain as a part of this case only so far as it shows the beginning and animus of that course of conduct which resulted so disastrously to the United States." -^ . , . _, ^. Viewed hi this light, the United States. And issued with , an unfriendly pur- with deep and unfeigned regret, have been pose. forced to conclude, from all the circumstances, that Her Majesty's Government was actuated at that time by a conscious unfriendly purpose toward the United States. M. Roiiu-Jac- I^^ ^^^ language of a continental publicist, quemyns on the u L'Angleterre a ete bien pressee de faire Queen s Proclama- ^ ^ , ^ tion. usage de sou droit strict pour constater solen- nelleni(mt que I'Union Americaine etait ebranlee, et donner aux insurges ce que le monde entier a considere tout au moins comme un appui moral; * * Tacte a ete pose la veille ^ Annual Message of the President to Congress, 18(59. 2 Mr. Fish to Mr. Motley, September 25, 1869. Vol. VI, page 4. 3 Mr. Fish to Mr. Motley, May 15, 1869. Vol. VI, page 1 iii l;J rNFRIKNDI.lNKSS (»F (.IJKAT niilTAlX. 37 (III Jour OM le nouvcl Hnilmssadfur aiiu^iieain. M. AdaDis, (levait (lebarquer k Londres, et au riioiiK'nt ou jn • 'tivenionr les insurges rrexistai«'nt pas coinm<' |tMissanee navalo , on ils ifavaieiit do iii.irin*' «'t df tribunaiix (]«.' [iriso ([uc sur le papier."' ^' I'lifrif-ndly con- Tliitj firei'ipitatr and uiit'riondly ad of Great (i.ict (.f(ir.atBrit- l^Htain did not iro forth alone. On the r,th ;iin ii8 to the decia- _ ^ rations of the Con- of Mav, l^^dl. live davs before the receipt i^rt-ss of Paris. i> o^i. "^ xi ^' V ^i t> • i ^" r> oi the authentic copy of the President s rro- clamation, Lord 'Fohn Kussell in.vtrueted Lord C'owh'v, the British Ambassador at Paris, to ascertain whether the Iin{)erial (-lOvernnient was dispos«'d to make a joint endeavor with Her Maiestvs Government ''to obtain from each of thf l)elliy;erents [observe that the insurgents were tftiiled ^'heU?f/erents'' seven (la>/s in ndcanee of the (Jnecn\s procJcunation] a formal recognition of the second and third articles of the Declaration of Paris." Lord Cowley, o:: the 9th of May, informed Lord John Russell that "the Imperial Government concurred entirely in the views of Her Majesty's Government and would be prepared to join Her Ma'esty's Government in endeavf»ring to obtain of the belligerents a formal recognition of the- second and third articles of the Declaration of Paris/' -'. Tliis proposition to f)peii direct negotiations vvitli the in- surgents was the second step in the joint action which had been agreed upon. For reasons which Her Majesty's Govern- ment is in a position to exf)lain, but whicii can only be conjectured by the United States and by the Tribunal, care appears to have been taken to prevent the knowledge of it from reaching the Government of the United States. On the receipt of the information from Lord Cowley, Lord John Russell prepared at once a draught of instructions to Lord Lyons, the l>ritish Minister at Washington, and. on the Ittth of May, sent them to Lord Cowley to be submitted to the Emperor's Government. ^. t' ^ De la neutraliie de la Grande-Bretagne pendant la guerre civile americaine d'apres M. Montague Bernard, par G. Rolin- Jacqnemyns, page 11. '^ Vol. I, page 49. ^ Vol. I, page 50. 38 UNI'MIIKNDLINES.S OF ORKAl' UHITAIN. On th(» iK'iXt (lay, Lord Cowley n»[)lii'vith him, if desii'ed. These previous instructions, numbered 13(j, may be found on the 107th page of the lirst of the accompanying volumes. It was not oidy to be shown to Mr. Seward, but a copy of it was to be shown to Mr. JetTerson Davis. - The attention of the Tribunal of Arbitration is, in this connection, })articularly invited to the fact that these instructions, numbered 13G, contain nothing ' Vol. I, page 5i. - Vol. I, page 5L UNFRIKNDMNESS OF GREAT BRITAIN. :)\) 'i indicating a design on tin' part of tlif British Govcriinu'iit to put itself in coninmnioation with tho insur^ifnt authorities, nothin""; to induce Mr. Seward to tliink that thev were oflier than what, ou their fa<^o, they purported to he, a conwniuii- cation from the Government of Great liritain to tiie Government of the United States, through the ordinary diplomatics channel. It is not improbalile that the Arbitrators Th<' i'lstrtictioiu to , ... , , • i t» • Lord Lyons mij^ht »>uv i)e ot opinion that the use ot the Hrit- ar^'^u^rwi:;:! i^l^' r.egation at Washh.^ton t\)r such a pur- pose was an act which the I'nited States would have been justiliod in regarding as a cause of war. It was, to say the least, an abuse of diplomatic privilege, and a violation, in the person of Her Majesty's principal Secretary of State for Foreign Aftairs, of the iluties of ntni- trality which Her Majesty's Government was about to impose upon her subjects. Before relating what Lord Ly()n.■^ did, under these in- structions, it is necessary to [)ause in order that the Tril)unal may be informed what Mr. Seward and Mr. Adams had been doing in the same matter sinudtaneously with the pro- ceedings which have been detailed. Former negotia- In the year lS,j4 the Government of the Srianuion'o't- ihe ^'"^^^'^l ^^'^'t^'" •Submitted to the princi[)al mar- Con-r.'ss of Paris, itime nations two proj)ositions, soliciting their assent to them as permanent principles of international law. Th-^^se propositions were, that free ships should make free goods; and that neutral })roperty on board an enemy's vessel should not be subject to conliscation unless contraband of war. Great Britain, being then at war with Russia, ilid not act upon these propositions; but in the Congress which assembled at Paris when the peace or ISoij was made, Great Britain and the other nations, parties to the Congress, gave their assent to them, and to two other propositions — the abolition of })rivateering, and the necessity of efliciency to the legalization of a blockade. It was also agree(' that the four propositions should be maintained as a whole and indi .isible, and that the Pow(!rs wlio might accede to them should iccede to them as such. ^ ' 24th rrotocol, April IG, 185(3, C<^ngress of Paris. i ■I 40 VNFRIENDI.INKSS oF CRKAT lUUTAlN. Groat Hritiiiii tlicii joined in invitin^f lln' I'nitcd Statos to [Tiw its jidliosion to tin* tour indivisihh' |(oints. Tlu' Wasliiiiji- ton Caltinet of tliat day replied tliut the Tnited States was williiiji to assent to all tl»e j»ro|i(»sitions, except tho one ro- iatin}! to j)rivateerin"^. as bein'^. in taot, reeo<^nitions of principles wliicii iiad always heen maintained Ky tlieni: Itut tiiat they could not consent to aludisii privateerii"^ without a further aj^freement to ext'nipt private ]»roperty from cajtture on the high seas: and tiiey jir(»|»oseil to amend tiie declaration of the Congress of Paris in that sense, and otfered to give their adhesion to it wiien so amende*!. In flanuary, 1S'>7, the proposals of the I'nited States not having heen acted upon, their Minister at London was directed to suspend negotiations until tlie new President. Mr. l>uchanan. could examine the sul»ject: and tiie >uspension continued until after Mi'. Lincoln was inaugurated. On the iMtii April, l>(;i. less than two months after Mr. Lincoln's accession to power, Mr. Seward resumed the suspended negotiations hy instructing ]\Ir. Adams ^ (similar instructions being given to the Ministers of the United States to the otiier maritime powers) to give an unqualified assent to tli*^ four propo>itions, and to bring the negotiation to a speedv and satiipec Matter Lyons to ington an Lord 1 (III the 2i It was a; so as to IJient'" -' o of what 1 structions that it w should at i-oncessior recognitio Lord Lyon's view witli Ml It I'll. joint inte l^ord \au accounts < Minister to read i him if h( to be re: to acquai liim Lore oflicial e: insurgent." permit it tliat he I Lyons le Russeirs instruct I The ir 1 Vol. 3 Vob l'NKRIEM>I.INF>S OF (;RF.AT nfMI AIN. 41 tu'trotiations witli tlio iii>ur;;ents, ii(»r lind Mr. Ailanif< rensou to su-|M'et tliJit tact. Matters w«'r»' x\ni< suspeiulcd in London, to t'nal»lt' Ltunl Lyons to work out Lord dolm llusst.'irs in>truetions at NVasli- in;:tun and in Kidnnond. Lord Lyons refoivcd the dispatch's ot' the l>th ni" May on th«' "_M of •Junt.',' and at OJice cont'crrcd with Mr. Mcrcicr. It was agreed that thcv shoidd trv to nutna^e the hu>in»\»J8 .^0 as to prevent *"an inconvenient outhreak t'rom the CJovern- uient'" - of the Unitetru('tio intimateil that it would he iinreasonahle to expth ot" duiuj that Lord Lord Lyon s intei- vicsv with Mr. JSfw- Lvou- and Mr. Mer<'ier conunuidcated the luir- port ot' their instructions to Mr. Seward in u joint interview, ot" which we have Mr. Seward's account' and Lord J^y(jns*s account,'* both dated the 1 Ttli ot" dime. These accounts do not dilVer materially. The action as to the British iMinister was this: Lord Lyons stated that he was instructed to read a dispatch to Mr. Seward and to leave a coi)y with liim if he desired. ^Nfr. Seward refused to permit the dispatch to be read oflicially, unless \i li- ^ Vol. I, page 205. - Vol. 1, page 71. siirgen iicutra Hr Hi coiinnu Carolin letter Icrter He coiinnui serve h Carolim dispatch letters be takei The agt receive recjuest, Nuutajie this wo ••^pontane ileclared tion, aiK that thi e\e(piatu only lool tion, yet reco2:niti( breach , i^VoT " Mam UNFRIENDLINESS OF (J RE AT BRITAIN. 43 he British take joint e are two r'sret that 11118 before IS covered 3 w ledge of lunications DLisly con- »rred again irise"- of e 10 th of that Great ited States that Her iient which on the in- )iit upon a Independent ord Lyons, , and tlie e that Her 2;nized the t' l)Ound to eclarations IS to have issued by the two invitations ■chirations, |a previous ssible that 's (jovern- jelligerents, letters of in [U-que, and intended to legalize thosc^ letters in the eye of British law, and to countenance the I learers o f tl leni in tlu of A nierican ct)ninu'r('e clostrut'tion Meanwhih' Lord Lyons had not forgotten his instructions to secure the assent of Mr. JetVerson Davis to the second :ind third rules of the Declaration of Paris. On the 5th of Julv he sent instructions Negotiations :it ({iclimoiul. to Mr. Bun<"h, British Consul at Chariest on, to "obtain from the existinir o•o^ernnlent in those [the in- th ^lu'gentj States securities concerning the proj)er treatment of ne H. utral; H( UK losed CO{ )v of Lord Russeirs 13G. advised Mr. Bunch not to go to Richmond, but to coimnunicate through the govei'iior of the State of South Carolina; and he accompanied this with ''a long private letter on the same subject."' ^Tlie nature of that private letter may be gathereil from what Mr. Bunch ilid. He put himself and his French colleague at once in conmuinicatimi with a gentleman who was well ([ualilii'on their re(juest, thus giving to the Confederate (rovernment the ad- \antage before the worhl of such an implied recognition as tliis would aftbrd."" - Thev replied that thev "wished a Spontaneous declaration C" "that to make this nnpiest the declared basis of the act would be to ])roclaim this negotia- tion, and the intense iealousv of the United States wa s sue that this would be followed bv the revocat ion o f tl leir i'xe{ piatur; which thev wished to avoid: that ••thev could only look upon this step as the initiati\e toward a re(H)gni- tioii, vet the object of their (Government being to reai.h that reco2"nition graduallv, so as not to give good ground for a breach, this indirect way was absolutely necessary." And ' Vol. I, page 12.). - Manuscript in Department of State. %^ 44 UNFRinNDLINESS OF (iREAT BRITAIN. tlu'V added. '-All avo liave a ri;j:lit to ask is that voii shall not ;iive [)ul)licity to this ne;iotiati a whole and indivisible, and that the Power.- who might accede to them .-luiuld accede to them as such. The practical eftect of this diplomacy, had it been successful, would have ijeen the destruction of the commerce of the United States, (or its transfer to the British Hag,) and the disarming a |)rincij)al weapon of the United States upon the ocean, should a continuation of this course of insincere neutrality unliaj)pily force the United States into ii war. Great Britain was thus to gain the benelit to its neutral commerce of the recognition of the second and third articles, and their devastation legalized, while the United States were to be deprived of a dangerous weapon of a>.sault upon Great Britahu iir. Adams s com- When the whole story of these negotiations ments. ^^..^^ understood by Mr. Adams, he wrote to his Government as follow s : ^ "It now a})pears plainly enough that he wanted, from the fu'st, to get the lirst article of the Declaration of Paris out of the negotiation altogether, if he could. But he did not say a word of this to me at the outset, neither was it con- sistent with the position heretotori' taken respecting the neces- sity of accepting the declaration -pure and simple.' What I recollc' him to have said on the 18th of May was, that it had been the disposition of his Government, as comnumicated to Lord Lyons, to agree upon almost any terms, respecting the lirst article, that might suit the Government of the United States. When reminded of this afterward, he modilied the statement to mean that the article might be omitted altogether. It now turns out, if we may judge from the instructions, that he did not precisely say either the one thing or the other. Substantially, indeed, he might mean that the general law of nations, if aflirmed l^etween the two Governments, would, to a certain extent, attain the object of the lirst article of the Declaration of Paris, without the adoption of it as a new principle. But he must have known, on the day of the date of these instructions, which is the very day of his first con- ^ Vol. I, page lOa. 4G UNFRIENDMNESS OF GREAT BRITAIN. i! 'i K\ fcrcncc ivith me, and four days after the issue of the Queen's Proclamation, tliat tlie Govcnnnent of tlie United States con- templated, in the pending strn^g;le, neither encoura«hould be borne in mind that the eft'ect, if adopted, would have been, instead of a simj)le adhesion to the T^'^claration of Paris, to render it necessary to reopen a series of ne;iotiations fo. a modilication of it between all the numerous })arties to tiiat instrument. Moreover, it is admitted by his Lordship that no powers had been given to make any convention at all — the parties could only agree. Yet, without such ])owers, what was the value of an agree- ment? For the Declaration of Paris was, by its very terms, binding only between j)arties who acceded to it as a whole. Her Majesty s Government thus jdaced themselves in the position of a i)arty which proposes what it gives no authority to perform, and which negotiates upon a basis on which it has already deprived itself of the j)ower to conclude. "How are we to reconcile these inconsistencies? Bv the terms of the Queen's Proclamation his lordshij) must have been aware that Great Britain had released the United States from further responsibility for the acts of its new-made belligerent that was issuing letters of marque, as well as from the j)Ossible offences of privateers sailing under its flag; and yet, when the Government of the United States comes forward and declares its disj)oi:;ition to accejit the terms of the Declaration of Paris, pure and simple, the Government of Her Majesty cannot consent to receive the very thing that they have been all along asking for, because it might possibly compel them to deny to certain privateers the rights which may accrue to them by virtue of their voluntary recognition of them as belonging to a belligerent power. Yet it now appears that, on the 1 8th of May, the same Government was willing to reaflirm the law of nations, which virtually involved the very same d'fliculty on the one hand, while on the other it had given no powers to negotiate a new convention, but contem- plated a sim})le adhesion to the old declaration on the part of the United States. The only way by which I can explain I I UNFRINEDI.INESS ftF fiRRAT BRITAIN. 47 those various involutions of policy witli a proper rojiard to Lord Russoll's chs'ractcr for straightforwardness, which I have no disposition to impugn, is this: He may have instructed Lord Lyons prior to the 18th of May. the day of our lirst conference. I certainly received the inijtression that he had (lone so. Or lie may have written the j)aper before one o'clock of that day. and thus have referred to the act as a tiling completed, though still within his power, in order to (fet rid of the proj)Ositions to negotiate directly here. Of that I do not pretend to judge. But neither in one case nor in the other was there the smallest intimation of a desire to j)ut in any caveat whatever of the khid proposed in his last declaration. That seems to have been an afterthought, sug- gested when all other obstacles to the success of a negotiation liad been removed. "That it originated with Lord Russell I cannot credit consistently with my great respect for his character. "That it was suggested after his proposed consultation with his colleagues, and by some member who had in view the defeat of the negotiation in the interests of the insurgents, I am strongly inclined to believe. The same influence may have been at work in the earlier stages of the business as well as the latest, and have communicated that uncertain and indirect movement which I have commented on, not less inconsistent with all my notions of his lordshiji's character than with the general reputation of British policy.*' Contrast between The jiartial purpose which was thus dis- Sain'to"Jard7he ^losed in the first oflicial act of the Queen's United States, in Government, after the issue of the proclama- the Trent artair, . . ' . /. • i i and toward viola- tion ol neutrality, appears often m the sub- tors of British ^ a i. * i» ^i .. /-> ueutrai'ty, in the ■'^^'(juent conduct ot that (jovernmeiit. insurgent interest. Thus, when, a few months later, an officer of the Navy of the L'nited States had taken from the deck ol' a British vessel on the high seas four prominent agents traveling on an errand that, if suci^essful, would result in disaster to the L^nited States, against which they were in rebellion, the course of the British Cabinet indicated an un- friendliness so extreme as to approach to a desire for war. The news of this reached both countries at about the same 4>6 INFRIKNDLINKSS OF GRKAT BRITAIN. 1;.; time. In the United States, while there was some excite- ment and some manito.^tation of plea.siire. Lord Lyons l)eai> witness to the moderation of tiie tone of the j)ress. ^ Mr, Seward immediately wrote Mr. Adam.> to acquaint him that the act of Captain Wilkes was unauthorized, and Mr. AdaiUh communicated this fact to Lord lvus>ell.- The excitement in Enuiand, on the contrarv, was intent', and was fanned int(^ animosity by tlie pres>. Although with- out information as to the purpose of the Government of iW United States, peremptory instruction.^ were immediately sent to Lord Lyons to demand the relvnise of the' four gentle- men, and to leave Washington with all the members of the legation, if the demand was not complied with in seven days.^ Li antlcipati(jn of a refu.sal, vessels of war were hurrieilly lltted out at the naval stations, and troops were pressed forward to Canada. Li the Hiidst of this preparation Lord Russell received from Mr. Adams oflicial information that the act had not been authorized by the Government of the United States; but this intelligence was suppressed, and public opinion was encouraged to drift into a st;ite of hostility to- ward the United States. The arming continued with osten- tatious publicity; the warlike preparations went on, and the peremptory instructions to Lortl Lyons were neither revoked nor in any sense modilied. Contrast this conduct of Great Britain wdth reference t.j a violation of British sovereignty that had not been authorized or assumed bv the Government of the United States, and that, to say the least, could be plausibly defended by ref- erence to the decisions of Sir William Scott, "* with its course ^ Lord Lyons to Earl Russell, Nov. 25, 1861, Blue Book No. 5, North America, 1862, page 10. - Earl Russell to Lord Lyons. Same, page 11. 3 Earl Russell to Lord Lyons. Blue Book No. 5, North America, 1862, page 3. * The Atlanta, 6 Charles Robinson's Reports, page 440. On the receipt of the news in London, the Times of November 28, 1861, published a leading article which contained some state- ments worthy of note. Among other things it said: "Unwel- come as the truth may be, it is nevertheless a truth, that we conceri iiidefen of the Na>».-au, r.ritisii tilt' int Maje>t\ Jie inte When iiaina w too late torious th<' two the sanl h(unclie( nation c have oui now tel manner ^ which hi of the w the ships out of tl Memoirs hy our c as commi have alw liferents as they i oontirmat into bein and whic were not facts the too nume belligeren disputed. "It is, and bvffo Englishma and insult of Revolul ' Mr. r I NFRIENnMNE^S (W (iRKAT HRirAIN. 40 )me exfitt;- ivons \h'uv> 'e-*s. ^ Mr. it liiiu that Mr. Adan»^ ^vas inten^e, louali Nvith- nent of tlu' .'iliately sent four gontk'- ibers of the ;li in seven ?re hurriedly ,'ere pressed iration Lord ■luation tluU [luent of the and public lostility to- Nvith osten- on. and the ler revoked •eference to n authorized States, cand ided by ref- h its course Blue Book . 5, North ige 440. On lovember '28, some state- id: "Unwel- [ith, that we roncorninf;; the open. undi>fiuisod. oft-n'poated. tlaiirant. and indefensible violations of British sovereijiiity by tiie apjents of the insurpL'ents in Liverpool, in Cila>u:ow. in London, in Nas>au. in Bermuda, it may alnuvst br said wherever the, Ihitish flag oould <^ive them shelter and proti'etinu. When the information as to the Florida was convryod to Her ^Majesty's Priiieii)al Seoretary of .State foi- Foreign AtVairs, he interposed no objeetion tt^ her sailing from Liverpool. When the overwhelming })roof of the complicity of the Ala- bama was laid before him, he delayed to act until it was too late, and then, by his neglect to take notice of the no- torious criminals; he encouraged the liuiltv Laird to construct the two rebel rams — the ketd of one of them being laid on the same stocks frt)m which the Alabama had just bt»en launched. ^ When the evidence of the character and d<>sti- nation of those rams was brought to his notice, he held it have ourselves established a system of International Law wiiich mnv tells agaiuiit us. In high-handed and almost despotic manner we have, in former days, claimed privileges over neutrals which have at difterent times handed all the maritime powers of the world against us. "We have insisted even upon stopping the ships of war of neutral nations, and taking British subjects out of them: and an instance is eiveu by Jefferson in his Memoirs in w hich two nephews of Washington were impressed by our cruisers as they were returning iri-m Ein-ope, and placed as common seamen under the discipline of !>!ups of war. We have always been the strenuous asserters of the rights of bel- ligerents over neutrals, and the decisions of our courts of law, as t)»ey must wow be cited by our law ofticers, have been in confirmation of these unreasonable claims, which ha"e called into beiuij; confederations and armed neutralities against us, and wdnch have always been modilied in practice when we were not supreme in our dondnion at sea. Owing to these facts the authorities wdiich may be cited on this question are too numerous and too uniform as to the right of search by belligerent ships of war over n?utral merchant vessels to be disputed. ********* "It is, and it always has been, vain to appeal to old folios and bygone authorities in justification of acts which every Englishman and evcy Frenchman cannot but feel to be injurious and insulting." See also the case of Henry Laurens, Dip. Cor. of Revolution, Vol. I, page 708, et seq. ' Mr. Dudley to Mr. Seward, Vol. II, page 315. 50 INFIUENDLINESS OF GREAT IJRITAIN. I ! :i -''} L H for alint>st two iiiontlis, altlioiiLili tliev were tlion nearlv ready to go to siea, aiitl then jit lirst refused to stop tliein. Wiser and more just counsels prevailed four days later. ^ Aiul when Mr. AcUinis, under in.-truetions Irom lils Government, trans- mitted to J'^arl llussell convincing j»roof of '-a deliberate at- tempt to establisli witliin the limits (»f this kingdom [Great liritainl a svstem of action in direct hostilitv to the Govern- ment of the United States,""- embracing "not oidy the build- ing and fitting out of several shi{)s of war und'-'r tlie direc- tion of agents esj)ecially commissioned ft)r tiie })urpose. but tlie pre])aration of a series of measures under the same ausj)ices for the obtaining frc»m Her Majesty's subjects the pecuniary means essential to tlie execution of those hostile j)rojects,"'' - Lord Russell refused to see in the inclosed papers any ev- idence of those facts worthv of his attenti(»n, or of the ac- tion of Her Majesty's Government. ^ It is not surprising that the consistent course of partiality towards the insurgents, which this Mi nster evinced througli- out the struggle, should have drawn from ^Mr. Adams the despairing assertion that he was "})ermitting himself to be deluded by what I cannot help thinking the willful blindness and credulous partiality of the British authorities at Liver- pool. From experience in the 2)asi I have little or no confidence in any application that may he made of the Idndy ^ The probable exj)lanation of Lord Russell's course is to be found in his own declaration in the House of Lords: ^' There may be one end of the war that would prove a calamity to the United States and to the world, and especially calamitous to the negro race in those countries, and that would be the subjugation of the South by the North.'' ^ He did not desire that the United States should succeed in their efforts to obtain that result. The policy of Great Britain, under his guidance, but for the exertions and sacrilices of the people of the United States, might have prevented it. „ „ ,. ^ The insincere neutrality which induced the M. lloliii- Jacqiie- _ •' myns on the ]5rit- Cabinet of London to hasten to issue the ish neutrality. .-. • n ^ ^- ^i <« ^i (^ueen s proclamation upon the eve ol the 1 Vol. II, page 303. - Vol. I, page 5C2. 3 Vol. I, page 578. * Vol. I, page 529. ^ Vol. IV, page 535. day t: jiromj) course ]ia\(' j lu)lin-« (■"e>l h avah' (\c\\\ 1 scrupid de la ] precede lable. une res (ti- (;i;i:ai r.iMT.MN. 51 TO arrive in Loinloii, ;iiul wliicli day lluit Mr, Adams w; ])r(iii)]>tL'(l the eouiKseliiigs with France, and life tortnim- (Oil rses as to the Oechiration ol" tlie (.'(»nure>> of I'aris w lii.h laNe iiii .t I >een unraveled, has been well de-eribed bv Mr Kolin-JaequeinyiKs: -I/ideal i.U\\)Qvsom\i\{ le jiige qui, dans Tajxtlogne de riiuitre et Ir* plaideurs, avale le contenu dii ni(illu>que, et adjiigf les /eailles aux deux bellijierents. 11 n'est d'aueun ])arti. niai^ il s"enij!,rai>se scrui-uleusenient aux dejtens de toun deux. I'ne ti'lle eoniluite de la part d"un grand peujde })eut etre au>>i eonfornie aux precedents que celle du venerable nuigi>trat dont parle le j'uble. Mais quand elle se fonde sur win' Idi ]Kt>iti\e, sur une regie adniisc, c'est une }ireuve que cette regie est inauvaise, (onnne contraire a la science, a la dioli( dariti luniaine, •' 1 This feeling of personal unfriendline?s towards the Tnited States in the leading members of the ]>riti?ii Government continued during a long jtortion or the whole of the time of the commission or omission of acts hereinafter couqdained of. l'roof()f iiiifriciKlly loeJiiiy ol iriciii of the British Ca- Tl lUS. vn the 14th dav of C)ctober, in th bers }<^'''i' li^Cil,' l^arl Kussell- said, in a })ublic bii)ot. sj)eech made at Newcastle: "'We m )W see tl le two j)arties (in the United States) contending together, not U])on the question of slavery, though that I believe was jirobably the original cause of the quarrel, not contending with respect to free trade and }»rotection, but contending, as so many States in the Old A\'orld have con- tended, the one side for empire and the other ft)r indepen- dei-ce. [Cheers.] Far be it from us to set ourselves up as judges in such a ccmtest. l)Ut I cannot help asking myself frequently, as I trace the progress of the contest, to what good end can it tend? [Hear I Hear!] Supjiosing the contest to end in the reunion of the different States; supposing that the South should agree to enter again the Federal T'nion with all the rights guaranteed to her by the Constitution, ^ De la neutralite de la Grande-Bretagne pendant la guerre civile amcricaine, d'apres M. Montague Bernard, par G. Kolin- Jacquemyns, page 13. 2 London Times, October 16, 18G1. 4* 52 I'NFRIKNDLINKSS OF fJRKAT BRITAIN. ,i i if hlujiild w t' luA then 1i;i\l' deljatt'd over a^ain tin.' fat.il (jiu'.-tion of slavery, a;j;ain proNok'mg dix-ord between North and South? * '"'■ '^' But, on the other iiand, su[»j)o>in;j; that the Federal Gt)veiinnent eoni])letely confjuer ani) Mibdiie the Southern States; su[!|)osin;j; that be tliv. result of a long military conilict and some vears of civil war, would not the national jjrosperity of that country, to a great degree, be destroyed? ^ '^ * If such are the unhajjpy I'csults which alone can be looked forward to from the reunion of those dilferent part> of the North American States, is it not then our elutv, thouuh our voice, anil, indeed, the voici* of any one in tliis country, mav l)e little listened to — is it not the dutv of men who wt.'re so lately fellow-citizen- — i> it not the duty of men \\ho profess a regard for the i»rinciples of (.'hristianity — is it not the duty of men who wish to ])re.serve in per[)etuity the sacred inheritance of libert;, to endeavor to see whether this sanguinary conflict cannot be })ut an end to?'' Mr. Gladstone also spoke at Newcastle on the 7th day of October, 18(3l?. It is scarcely too much to say that hi.s language, as well as much of the other language of members of Her Majesty's Government herein quoted, might well have Ik'CU taken as ofteusive by the United States. He said:^ '"We may have our own oj)hiions about slavery; we may be for or against the South; but there is no doubt that Jefferson Davis and other leaders of the South have made an armv. They are making, it appears, a navy; and they have made ^vhat is more than either — they have made a nation. [Loud cheers.] * '" * We may anticipate with certainty the suc- cess of the Southern States so far as regards their separation from the North. [Hear I Hi'ar!] I cannot but believe that that event is as certain as any event yet future and con- tingent can be." [Hear! Hear!] In a debate in the House of Lords, on the 5tli of February, ISGo, Lord Russell said:- '•There is one thing, however, which I think may be the result of the struggle, and which, to my mind, would be a great calamity. That is the subjugation of the South by 1 London Times, Octwber 9, 18G2. 2 Vol IV, page 535. UNFR1I:MiI.INL<- (■!•' C.I.'LAr ukitain. 1)3 the Nnrtli. It' it wcro ]M)s>il)le that thr I'la-i-i cMiihl l«e it'-lnniK'il ; if t!i«* old fcclini^^s of alVrrtioii and attacliment toward it could be revived in the Soiitli, I, t'oi' on"', would be jj;lad to sfo the Union restored. It", on the otln-r hand, the Nortli were to t'ocl that separation wa«< linally decreed by the events ot' the war, I -hould be ;j;lad to >«••' peace established niton those terms. lUit there niav be. I y.w, one end ol' the war that would prove a (idaniity to tlu; Uniteil States and to the world, and e>pecially calamitous to the nc'iiro race in those countries, and that would be the snbjue in a speech which was received with jtrolonged cheerin;j; and satisfaction by a larjie portion of tin' House. Amon;i; other thin;j;s which he then said, and whicii were received as expressive f»f the views and sentiments of those who ebeered him, was the foUowin;:;: ^ "I will allude to a n*mark which was maile elsewhere last night — a remark, [ jtresume, ajtplying to me, or to somebody else, which was utterly uncalled iov. [Hear!] I have onlv to sav that I would rather be handed down to posterity as the builder of a dozen Alabamas than as the man who apf)lies himself deliberately to set class against class [loud cheersj and to ory u\) the institutions (jf another ct)untry, which, when thev come to be tested, are of no value whatever, and which reduced liberty to an utter absurdity."' [Cheers.] Two vears later, on the loth dav of March, 1865, the course of this member of the J>ritish House of Commons, and tliis extraordinary scene, were thus noticed bv Mr. Bright: - '•Then I come to the last thing 1 shall mention — to the question of the ships whicli have been preyhig u]>on the commerce of the United States. I shall conline mvself to that one vessel, the Alabama. She was built in this countrv ; 1 London Times, March 28, 1863. - Vol. V, page 641. 5-1 INFRIKNhl-IMCs-. DF LIlKAi" HIIITAIN. ( ft il! i all lii'i' iiiiiiiitioii-. of \vai' sscii' t'n>m thi- (otiiitry: jilmost I'VtM'v in.'iii oil Ijoiii'il ln'r w;!- :i Mihjt'ct ol llff Miii<'»tv. Sli«' ft »' I 1 ."iiiltMl tV(>m out' of our cliifl' jmrt*. Sin* i« rcportfd to luivt^ hft'U Itiiilt !)'.' il tirm in wlioni ;i iiu'inhfr of thi* llousi' was, Now. >ir. I ijo not coiiiplaiM. :iii< I. r iii't'-i lint' I', lutiTt'^ti^d I know t!i;it onci.', wlu-n I rffriTcil fo tlii« (|Ut".tion two vcar^ a;j,o, >vln'n my lionora!il«' fr'K'nil. tli»' nu'inl)i.'i' for Hrailfortl, l)i'on;zlit it forward in tlti,^ Hoii*i', tli«' hoiioi'al)li' nirmlicf for I'irkonln'atl [Mr. Lairdi ^va^ ox('»>>«iv('lv an^rv. I did not (•oinjjlain that the nirinlu'i' for Hirkcnlu^ad had .«tru('k \\[> a fii('nd>liij» with (/aptain Srninic>. who may he dt'scrihrd as motlicr .""ailor once wa> ol >innlai' jiur^nit-. a nu'X 'thi mildot-nianrnTt'd man tliat »\('r scnttli-d >ii![>.* 'riirrcfori' I do not complain ot a man who lia> an a,c(|naintan(t' with that notorious jh'I'x'Ii. and I do not <'om[ilain, and did not tiu-n. that tin' nn'mhi-r for Biikcnhoad look* adinirin;ily upon the ;;i't'atL'>t examph' wliidi nun \n\\>' o\ov sofii of tho ^^roiit- c>t crime w Jiich I men iia\(' cM-r commi ttcd. I .1 o not com- ])lain ('\('n that he >hould applaud that wliiih is founded ujion a ;^iLi'antic traflie in li\in;j; tle«h and Moetl, which no .subject of this realm can enter into without hein^" deemed a ftdon ill th t'\'e.» (I our 1; iw ail' )uni >hed as >ucli. But what I do com[>lain (»f i> thi*: that tho honoralile ;j;entleman. the member for r)irkenhead, deputy lieutenant — whatever mai;istrate of a couiitv that mav 1) 1 represen- tativ e ot a con>tituencv and havm;:; a >eat in this aiKMeut and honorable asM-iulilv — that he >]iould. I helieve lie did. if concerned in the l)uilding of this ship, break the law of hi* coinitrv, dri\in:j, u* into an infraction of International aid treating' with undeserved disrespect the Proclama- Law tion of Neutrality of the C^ueen. I have another complaint to make, and in allusion to that honorjd)le member. It is w ilhin vour recollection that wlam on the formtn* occa>i on he made that speech and ilefended hi> ct)urse, he dt^clared that he would rather be the builder of a dozen Alabamas tl lan do «o methinii which nobodv luul dene. That li miiuaiie wa> received with repeated cheerinp: from the o})position sid* of the House. Well, sir, I undertake to sav that that wa-^ at least a verv un foitunate circumstance, and I Ijeii to tell the h when mark, had I turned plaint sliouM hoiiora ooukl On of Con Lord 1 -Th di.'uuisi or out ••ulties, tiii;^ wl That is Ion-- as hope th carried hu'Ut' p; c>peciall a coursi between oI)iect o tore we excited. Her Ma contrary derou-;ito ing' our then all accompli On th of a Ion J "Why ^ Vol. IM"IMI;M)MM>s uF liRKAI HKITAIN. I the honoralilo u;ontli'mjin tluit at tin- rinl nf fho la>t mnsIoii, re w hen tlie '^rt'at di'liatf todk j»lu<'i' uu tln' nin'-tioii oi' |)fii- mark, thfi'i' wcrr numy nifii on this >i(|t' (if tin' iloiix' wlio had ii(» (»I>j»'('tinn \vliatt'\('r to si«o the ju'csiMit ( iovci'iimt'iit ruiiit'd out ot" ot'liri' , for tln'V had iiiaiiv iintimd> of com- jdaiiit a;i;dn.-t tln'in; hut tlicy felt it iinjto^sihh' that thi'V >hoidd taUt' till' n'>|)(»n>ihilitv of hriiiLiiu'z into oflici' thr ri«>;ht honorahh' mcndjcr for Hn('kin'2han)>hin' or th«' party who <■!• idd Mttt'i" >inh chct'is nn .siirh a siilijoct at that."" On the I'Tth of March. I Si;.",, in a dchatc in the Hou>c of ('ommon> on the liltin;j; out of tlie.-o piratical cfuisors, Lord Palmcrston said: ^ "Tliere i> no (.•onccalini; the fact, and there i» no n^c in (iio'jLnisin-j, it, that whcncvei' any political party, whcthci- in (»!• out of oflice, in the L'niti'd States, linds it>elf in difli- (iiltics, it raix's a cry a;j,ainst IOn;j;land as a niean> of cfea- tini; what, in American lanu.nat deplure. As lonm a> it i> conlined to their internal atVairs wc can otdy hope that, hein:;" rather a danp;er()us intended. When a Li'overnment oi' a lar^ie party excite tlie pas>ions of one nation against another, opeciallv if there is no just eau.>e, it is manifest that >uch a course has a tand, however, tlu' object of tliese proceedings in the jiresent instance, and there- fore we do not feel that irritation which might otherwise he excited. But if this cry is raised for tlu' puri)o>e of driving Her Majesty's Government to do something which may be contrarv to the laws of the countrv, or which mav be derogatory to the dignity of the country, in the way of alter- inii" our laws tl leii for tin* purpose of pleading another government, •I ill I can say is that s-ucli a course is not likely to accomplish its purpose." On the oOth of June, 1863, Mr. Gladstone, in the course of a long speech, said:- "Whv, sir, -we must desire the cessation of this war. No .? 1 Vol. IV, page 530. - Vol. V, page CGG. 50 UNFRIENDLINESS OF (;REAT IJHITAIN. I : I I ' ijijiii is justilied in wisshing for tlie continuance of a war unless that war has a just, an adecjuate, and an attainalile object, for no object is adequate, no object is just, unless it also be attainable. We do not believe that the restoration of the American Union by force is attainable. T believe that the j)ublic o[)inion of this country is unanimous upon that subject. [No!] Well, almost unanimous. I may be right or I may be wrong — I do not pretend to interpret exactly the public opinion of the country. I exjjress in regard to it only my private sentiments. But 1 will go one step furtlier, and say I believe the public opinion of this country bears very strongly on another matter upon which we have lieard much, namely, whether the emanci}»ation of the negro race is an object tliat can be legitiinately pursued by means of coercion and blood- shed, r do not believ(? that a more fatal error was ever committed than when men — of liigli intelliiience I crant, and of the sincerity of whose philanthropy I, for one, shall not venture to whisper the smallest doubt — came to the conclusion that the emancipation of the negro race was to be sought, although they could only travel to it by a sea of blood. I do not think there is any real or serious ground for doubt as to the issue of this contest." In the same debate, Lord Palmerston, with an unusual absence of caution, lifted the veil that concealed his feelings, and said:^ "Now, it seems to me that that which is running in the head of the honorable gentleman, [Mv. Ijright.] anil which guides and directs the whole of his reasoning, is the feeling, although perhaps disguised to himself, that the Union is still in legal existence; that there are not in America two belligerent parties, but a legitimate government and a rebellion against that government. Now, that places the two i)arties in a very different position from that in which it is our duty to con- sider them." As late as the 9th of June, 18C4, Earl Russell said- in the House of Lords: "It is dreadful to think that hundreds of thousands of men » Vol. V, page G95. Vol. V, page 507. UNFRIEM)LINE>> OF (iRFAT BRITAIN. 57 are being" slaughtered for the ])urpose of preventing the Soutlieni States from aeting on tlutse very prineij)les df independence whicli in 177G \vert» asserted bv the wlioh' nf America against tliis country. Only a few years ago the Americans were in the habit, on tlie 4th of July, of celebrating the promulgation (if tlie Declaration df Indejiendence, and >ome eminent friends of mine never failed to make ehxiuent and stirring orations on tliose occasions. I wish, while they keejt uj) a useless ceremony — for the })resent generation of I'^nglishmen an* not responsible for the War of Independence — that they had in- culcated upon their own minds that they should not go to war with four Jiiillions. five millions, or six millions of their fellow-countrymen who \vant to put the })rinciples of 17 70 into operation as regards themselves."' The United States have thus presented for the consideration dt' the Tribunal of Arbitration the [)ublicly expressed sentiments (tf the leading members of tiie J^ritish (Jabinet of that day. Lord Palmerston was the recognizetl head of the Ciovernment. Earl Russell, who, at the commenceinent of the insurrection, sat in the House of (Jommous as Lord John Russell, was (luring the whole time Her Majesty's Princifial Secretary (jf State for Foreign Affairs, specially charged with the expression of the view% and feelings of Her Majesty's Government on tlicse questions. Botli were among the oldest and most tried >tatesmen of Europe. ]Mr. Gladstom?, the })resent distinguished I hief of the Government, was then the Chancellor of the Exchequer; and Lord Campbell, well known in both hemi- ."pheres as a lawyer and as a lover of letters, sat upon the woolsack when the contest began. Lord Westbury, who suc- ceeded him in June, 1861, was the chief counselor of the policy ])ursued by the I^ritish Government. These gentlemen were entitled to speak the voice of the governing classes of the Empire: and the United States have b(?en forced with sincere regret to the conviction that they did express the opinions and wishes of much of the cultivated intellect of Great l)ritain. The United States would do great injustice, however, to the sentiments of their own people did they fail to add. that some ol' the most eloquent voices in Parliament were raised in behalf of the {)rinciples of freedom which they represented 58 um'i?ii;m)MMvss ()v (ini:AT Britain. m ! . < f ill tli(^ contest; and tlutt moniljer.s of the governing classes most elevateil in rank, and distinguished in intellect, and a large ])art ot' the industrial classes, were understood to svui- pathizi' witli tiiem. Thev cannot, liowcner, >hut tlu'ir evis to the tact, and tliey must a>k the Trihunal ot' Arhitratioti to take note, that, with the few exceptions referred to, the leading statesmen of that country, and nearly tlie wlndi' ])eriodical jnvss and otlun* channels through which the Briti.>li cultivated intellect is accustomed to inlluence public atfair>. su>tained the course of the existing (Tovernment in the un- friendly acts ixud on)issions which resulted so disastrously to the United States. I'he United States com])lain before thi> Ti'ibunal only of tlie act> and omission> of the Hritish Govern- ment. They refer to the exj)re-;sioii> and statements from unoflicial sources as evidence of a state of ])ublic opinion, which would naturally encourage the members of that Govern- ment in tlu' policy and acts of which the United State> complain. It is not worth while to take up the time of the Tribunal of Arbitration. l)v an inciuirv into the rea.sons tor this earlv and long-continuiHl unfriendliness of the British Government, ttnvard a government which was su}»posed to be in sympathy with its political and moral ideas, and tow-ard a kindred people with whom it had long maintained tit* attitude uf friendship. They may have been partly [solitical, as expressed in Parliament by an im[)etuous member, who spoke of the bursting of the bubble republic.^ (for which he received a merited rebuke fron\ Lord dohn Russell)-: or they may have l)etMi those declared without rebuke at a later date in the House of Commoux by the present Marquis of Salisbury, then Lord Robert Cecil, when he said '* that '-they [the peoplt' of the Southern States] were the natural alliivs of thi> country, as gn^at producers of the articles we necnltHl and great con- sumers of the articles we supplied. Tdie North, on the other hand, kept an opposition-shop in the same de2)artment-. of trade as ourselves;'' or they may have l)een those an- nounced by Earl Russell last year, when saying,^ ''It was ' Hansard, 3d series, Vol. IGo. page 134. - Same, page 270. " Vol. V, pau;e G7L ^ Earl lUisselPs Speeches and Dispatches, Vol. II, page 261). die 'jreat tlie subje the legiti C' iiilusioiis United S to the fa In appro; .-nhjects 1 (Muleavor tiuvard tl in the see fnid in tl the mind."- induce tin MtttMnpts ( neutrality Some ( dity seem cvitably 1 wrongs w to the ad Lord ^ death of House of flir neiffy The neutr >oniething lie dcnie A ^\lu■ther. \ jMid with neutrality. • Whether tpiestion ii el' the wl merely up bama. I i teiul that, eiu'e arid rNFRlF.NOr.INESS OF (iRKAT BIJITAIN. 50 * i 'm iln' p:r.''!it ol)ii'et of tin' Briti>lj GoM:'rniiieiit to pi'os(M've for till' subjoet tlu' security of trial by jury, and for the nation till' legitimate and lucrative trade of ship-huildin'^."' Without ])ursuin;4 an inquiry in this direction, f' in'lnsioiis. \s hich at the i)est. won Id 1. th )rontiess tl 10 I'liited States in^ite the careful attention of the Arbitrators to the facts which appear in the previous pages of this Case. Ill a[)proachin;j; the consideration of tiie third branch of the Mihji'cts herein discussed, in which the I nited States will OIK leavor to show that (treat Britain failed in her duties tiuvartl the United States — as tliost* duti es wi 11 tit: lined in the second branch th^reot" — rhe 'rribunal of Arbitration will fill 1 in tiie>e facts circumstances which could not but inllumiee the minds of the members of Her Majesty's Government, and induce them to look with disfavor ui)on etftu'ts to re[ires> the iitrempts of I)riti>h subit'ct>. ami of other persious. to violate the iit.'ii tralitv of l)ritish si>il and waters in fnor of the rebel- Soni e o t tin UK mbers of tlie Briti>h (iovernment of that (l:iy seem to have anticijnited the conclusion whi<'ii must in- evitably be drawn from their acts, should the injuries and wrongs which the United States have sutVered ever be brought to the adjudication oi an impartial tribunal. Lord Westbury, (appointed Lord Iligli Chancellor on the th o'i Lord Campbell, in dune, 18GI.) declared, in the (lea House of Lordf \\\ ISC) 8, that "tlip avimiis with ivhicJi Ihr ueiifral Poircrs nrfed iv((s the o))!)/ trur critcy'ion. The neutral Power might be nnstaken; it might omit to do something which ought to be (hjne, or direct something to be dime which ought not to l)e done; 1)ut the (piestion was whether, from beginning to end, it had acted with sincerity :ind with a real desire to promote and })reserve a spirit of neutrality. "'^ •'' •'' He [Mr. Seward] said, in effect, ■Whether you were a sincere and loyal neutral was the question in dispute, and that must be judged from a "\iew ol' the whole of your conduct. I do not mean to put it merely upon the particular transaction relative to the Ala- Iiama. I insist ui)on it in that case lUKhnibtedly : but I con- tend that, from beiiiiniing to end, vou had an undue iirefer- enee arid predilectii^.n foi- the Confederate States; that you m VM 'niLNDLINES-^ OF ORE AT BRITAIN. r i ' ■ ji; were tlicrelore not loyal in your neutmlity: and I a[>pcal to the precipitancy Nvitli wliicli yon issued your Proclamation, tliereby involving a reco.>nition of the Confederate States as a belligerent powe . as a proof of your insincerity and wan: of impartial attention." And now, could we prevent him from using that document for such a pur{iose? IIow unreasonahli' it was to sav, when you -jio into arbitration, vou shall not use a particular document even as an argument upon tin' (piestion whether there was sincere neutrality or not."*' Sucli is the use ^vhich the United States ask this Tribunal to make of the foregoing evidence of tlie unfriendliness and insincer' neutrality of the British Cabinet of that day. When the leading members of that Cabinet are thus found coun- selling in advance with France to secure a joint action of the two governments, and assenting to the declaration of ;i state of war between the Uniti-d States and the insurgents, before they could possibly luive received intelligence of tlif purposes of the Government of th<^ United States: when it is seen that the r)ritish Secretary of StJ^^e for Foreign Affairs advises the representatives of the insurgents as to the course to be pursued to obtain the recognition of :heir independenc'% and at the same time refuses to await th:^ arrival of the trusted representative of the United States before deciding to recognize them as belligerents: when he is found opening" negotiations through Her jMaiesty"s dijdomaiic representative' at Washington with persons in rebellion against the T'l'nitecl States; when various members of the British Cabinet are seen to comment upon the efforts of the Government of the United States to suppress the rebellion in terms that indicate a strong desire that those efforts should not succeed, it is not unreasonable to suppose that, when called upon to do acts which might bring about results in conflict with their wishes and Cunvictions, they would hesitate, discuss, delay. and refrain — in fact, that thev would do exactly what in tlie subsequent pages of this paper it will a|)pear that they did do. ' Hansard's Parliamentary Debates, od series. Vol. CXCI, page« 347 — 348. PART III. THE DUTIES WHICH GREAi BRITAIN. AS A NEUTRAL SHOULD HAVE OBSERVED TOWARD THE UNITED STATES. Vol. CXCT. Tin- Queens Pro- '^^^^ secoiid branch of the subject, in the ciamation a reco;^- order in Nvhich the United States desire to iiition of obliga- . i n- -i i ,. 4 i • lim undor the Uw present it to the iriounal 01 Arbitration, lu- of nations. yoives the Consideration of the duties wliich Great Britain, as a neutral, should have observed toward the United States during tiie contest. However inconsiderately and precipitately issut.'d, the Proclamation of Neutrality re- coauized tlie obligation, under the law of nations, to under- take the performance of those duties, and it becomes im- portant to have a correct understanding of their character. (Treat Britain has In attempting to ileiine these duties it is 'SnsTn'^var'ious i^^itLiral, lirst, to endeavor to ascertain whether ways. Great Britain itself has, by legislative or ofli- cial acts, recognized any such obligations, and next, to in- (juire whether the canons of international law, as ex])0unded ]»y publicists of authority, demand of a neutral the observance of any other or In'oadei rules than have been so recognized. The United States will pursue the examination in this order. ,, J u .1 They liiid, lirst. an evidence of Great Brit- K •cognized by the ..*.',. Forei-n Enlist- aiu's cc iception of its duties as a neutral hi luent Act of 18ly. ^1 ^ • i? i- ^ 4. \ ^ \ • \ * i the roreign Lnlistment Act which was enacted in 18 U), and was in force during the whole of the Southern rebellion. ui^ DL'JIES or A Mil THAL. I1 V I. \ "I Munici|ial laws It nius t l.c 1 •(inu' III 111 iiul. Nvllt' II «()ii- desigm-d lo aid a sideling the iii.tiiicipal laws of Great Britain. government iii per- formance of i:itt'r- natioiial duties. t, tl U'V liiat, wlictiier cl'ti'ctivt' or (k-lit-ieii but inachiiicrv to cnaliK' the Government arr ])erl'oriii tiie international duties wliieb they recognize, or Itent ujion it from its ]K»sition in ilir AV hieh 1 mav lie ineum family of nations. Tiie obligation of a neutral .>tate to \nv- vent the violation of the neutrality of its soil is iiulepeiuknt of all interior or loeal la \v Ti le municipa il 1; tw mav aiut ought to recognize tliat obligation: but it can neither cre.itc nor (le>troy it, for it is an obligation resulting directly from International l^aw. which I'orbids the u^e of neutral territory for hostile |)ur])Ose. ^ The local law, indee<.l, may justly be regarded as evidence, far as it goes, of the nation's e.-tiinate of its international as duties, but it is not to be taken a< the limit of thosv. obli- iiations in the eve of the law of nations. .^ . It is said bv Lord Tenterdeii, the distiii- Ilistory oIForeijjn lOiiiisfment Act of ^uislied Secrctarv of the British Hi^h (.'oiii- ]Sli». . • • 1 • 1 111 missioners, in Jus memorandum attached to tlic report- of Her ^lajestys Commissioner.s upon the neutrality law,"' that the neutrality law of the United States formed the foundation of the neutrality law of ]']ngland. ^ '"The act for the amendment of the neutrality laws," he says, ''wa? m troduced bv Mr. Canning on the 10th of June, lSl!b 111 an eloquent speech, in the course of which he said, 'It surely could not be forgotten that in 17!>o this country complained of various breaches of neutrality (though much inferior in d"gree to those now under consideration) committed on tlic part of subjects of the United States of America. What was the conduct of that nation in consequence? Did it resent the complaint as an inlringement of its independence? Did it refuse to take such steps as would insure the immediato (ireat Brit liduiid to I'ei the duties i uized by thai -I > \ 1 I I ^ Ortolan, Diplomatic de la iner, Vol. 2. page 215. ^ Vol. IV, page 79. ^ Vol. IV, page 93, Appendix No. u, by Mr. Abbott, now Lord Tenterden. 4 Vol. IV, page 124. DIMES OF A NLL TRAI.. (53 ion in ilir te to jtrc- ulepcmloiit may and ther crcMtc ■ectly iViiin il territurv (•bscrvaiue (»!' iK-utrality ? NeitliiT. In ITl't. imiiu'diaicly tiftt'i' til 3 ;'|t]ili(ati(iii iVoni tin.* I'n'itish GovcnmK'iit. tlu' Li'i:is- lutiire of tbe Unitod Statt-s pastsed an act ]ir(»liiltitin^. under itavv ])C-naltic tl ic oniiau'cnient oi" x\uieri(.-an citizms in tlic iirni ies of any belliiieivnt Powi'i-. Was tliat tli u' onlv instance (,f the kind? It was but last vear that the I nited States passed an act by Nvliich the act ()f 1T!'4 was conlirnied in every respect, again pi'ohibiting the engagement ctf their citizens in the ser\ic'e ot any foreign P.twer. and pointing distinctly to the service of Sjiain or the South American Provinces."^ It ai)})eai's from the whole tenor of the debate which })receded the ])assage of the act that its sole purpose was to oiahlc the Ilictuticc to pcrfonH with fidclif// the duties toward ucidrals ichkli ivcrc yccOf/)u.:cd as i)}tpuscd iipcm tJic Govcrnmcut hy the Law of Nations. Great Britain The United States as.sume that it will be .'"'l..?^.''"/'':"' conceded that Great Britain was bound t the duties lecoL'- O iiized by tiiat act. perform all the duties of a neutral touard tlio United States which are indicated in this statute. If this obligation shoidd be denied, the Unitetl States bi'g to refer the Tribunal of Arbitration to the declaration of ]Carl Kussell in liis communication to Mr. Adams of August 30, 18C5, where he- "lays doN-^n with conlidence the following "That the Foreiiin Enlistment Act is intended jiroj)Osition in aid of the duties ''^ of a neutral nation. Tl ey also refer to Lord Palmerston's s}>eech in the House of Com- mons. July 23, 18G3,"* in which he says: '"The American (lovernment have a distinct right to ex{)CCt that a neutral will enforce its municipal law, if it be in their favor."" Indeed, Great Britain is fully committed to this ]»rinciple in its dealings with other Powers. Thus, during the Crimean war, Her Majesty "s Government, feeling aggrieved at the acts of the Prussian (iovernment in tolerating the furnishing of arms and other contraband of war to Bussia, were advised Ity the Law Oflicers of the Crown that they might justly remonstrate against violations of Prussian law.^ 1 Vol. IV, pages 123—124. - Vol. Ill, page 549. ^ Vol. Ill, page 550. * Vol. V, page 695. ^ Earl Granville to Count Bernstorfl', September 15, 1870. 64 UUTIlis OF A NELTHA1-. |f 1,; if 1 1 Alter tlit'se (iedarations hy I'ritisli authorities, it will iScarcely be (•(jnteiided that the United States had not the right t nnght be a> an ex[)re.-siou of international obligations. ^ . . , The liriti^h Foreiun I'^nlistinent Act of 1 S 1'.* Duties n-f-oi^iii/.t'd _ - i)y Foreign Ki list- c'onsistetl of t^\el^e sections, written in the verljiagt; wlm li tlie customs or hnglanu make neeessii; iti '-q laws providing for the ])unishment of crimes. These s*^ /^-ons r date to four distinct subjects. First, thi'y repeal all forniLi statutes: seeondlv. tlu.'v define the act* which the Ikitish leti'islators re^iarded as a<'t.> which a neutral ought not to permit to be done within its jurisdiction; thirdly, they provide modes lor j)rosecuting j)ersons foimd guilty of conmiitting the acts which are {)r(jhibited In- the statute, and they indicate the j)unis]nnents which may Ije inflicted u])ou them when convicted; fourthly, they exemj)t certain parts of the ]!]m])ire from the operaticjn of the statute. ^ This Tribunal need take no notice of the penal ])ortions of the statute, which alVect only the relations between the State and those who owe allegiance to its laws by reason of residence within its territory. The United States will therefore conline themselves to attempting to deduce from the statute the definitions of the i;rinciples, and the duties, ^vhich are there recognized as obligatory on the nation in its relations with other Powers. The adjudicated cases often disregard the distinction between tlu; duties of a neutral, however delined, and the jfroceedings in its courts against persons charged as cruninals for alleged violations of its laws for the preservation of neutrality. Even some of the best publicists, in referring to this class of decisions, have not always remembered that, while in the former we have only to do with princij)les of public law, in the latter we are dealing with the evidence necessarv for the conviction of an offender. Bearing this distinction in mind, the Tri- :\ ! 1 Vol. IV, page 86. service ol IHTIKS «)F A MCCTRAr,. 65 luiual of Arbitration may he al)l(' to rcfoncile many apj)arontly conflicting authorities, and arrive at just ron(iu>ions. The acts which, if coniniitcil within tli>' territory of the neutral, are to be regarded as violations of its inter)iational (hities, are enumerated in the second, iifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth sections of the statute. Translating liiis statutory language into the ex])ressions commonly emph)yed by publicists and writers on International Law, this statute recognizes the following as acts which ought to be prevented within neutral territory during time of war: 1. The recruitment of subjects or citizens r '" the neutral, to be emploved in the military or naval servit • o u foreign government or of persons assuming to exer^ ;e :h\i powers of government over any part of foreign territory; or the accei)tance of a commission, warrant, or ap_ ointment for such service by such persons; or the enli ing or agreeing to enlist in such service ; the act in each case being done without the leave or license of the Sovereign. 2. The receiving on board a vessel, for the purpose of transporting from a neutral port, persons who may have been so recruited or commissioned; or the transporting such persons from a neutral port. Authority is given to seize tlie vessels violating these provisions. 3. The equipping, furnishing, fitting out, or arming a vessel, with intent or in order that it may be employed in the service of such foreign government, or of persons assum- ing to exercise the powers of government over any part of a foreign country, as a transport or store-ship, or to cruise or carry on war against a power with which the neutral is at peace; or the delivering a commission for such vessel, the act in each case being done without the leave or license of the Sovereign. 4. The augmenting the warlike force of such a vessel of war by adding to the number of guns, by changing those on board for other guns, or by the addition of any equip- ment of war, if such vessel at the lime of its arrival in the dominions of the neutral was a vessel of war in the service of such foreign government, or of such persons, 5 m DUTIES OF A NKl TRAL. tlu' a OF A NF.rTn.M-. 67 Kojal Coinmis- Diirin;^ the iiiMirrfCti(»ii. ii» will In- .-t'cn 1Z^ ^illsur!^^ iH'ival't.T, this act >v:,.s, h.v th- cunstnirtion ..f Art of 181H. the I'ji;i;lish courts, strijiixHl of its ctVoetivc |.(i\v('j'. I'lie United States repeatedly and in vain invited Her Majesty's Crovcrnnicnt to amend it. Althon;ih these calls proved abortive durin^i the contest with tiie South, tlir apjiallinfi; niafinitudt' of the injury which had heeii in- llicted by Hritish-btiilt and Hritish-inannt'd cruisirs uj)on tjie coninieree and industry of a nation witli which (Ireat Hritain was at peace, appears to have awakened its senses, and to have imjielh'd it to take some steps toward a ilian;ie. In January, KSOT, the Queen's Cominission was issued to some of tlie most eminent of the l>riti>h lawyers lits of the ship or vessel, with intent tinit such sliip or vessel shall be employed in the service of either of the said hollij^'crents. .,0. Issuini ni'TIKS itV A SKI TRAI,. and ju(J;j;('.>, aiitlKuiziu^ tlit'in to iiujuirt' into and con^idtT tho fhuracUT, vvorkin;^, and rlVcct of tla* laws of the Ri'altn. a\ailal)le tor the enfofctMnunt of neutrality, dmin'^ the exist- (MKM' of liostilitit's Iji'twecn (»th«.'r States with whom (.Jrcai i»ritain nii;j;ht be at |)ca.-"e, and to infiuirc and report whether any and what chani^jes on;j,ht to l>e made in sncli laws for tiie |)ni|>o!jo of j^ivin*^ to them increased eHieiency, and brin;:;- inj^ tlieni into fidl eonl'ormity with international obligations. ' U.port of thut That Connnission hehl twenty-four sittin}j;>. Commission. .,^1 ii„.,lly n-porttMl that the old Foreij^n En- listnu'iit A(;t of 1 S I D was caj.-able of improvement, and miiiht be made more i'fiieient bv the ena<-tment of several provisions set forth in the re})ort. " Amonu: other things, the Connnission reeommended that it be nnide a statutory olfense to "lit out, arm, dispatch or cause to he dispatched, avij ship, iiith intent or hnoivledyc that the same shall or will be employed in the military or naval service of any foreign l*ower in any war then being waged by such Powt?r against the subjects, oi' j)roperty of any foreign belligerent Power with whom Her Majesty shall not then be at war."'' It was also proposed to make it a statutory offense to '•'■huild or equip anff ship tvith the intent that the same shall, after heinfj Jit fed Old and armed, either within or heyond Her Ma- jestfj^s Dominions, he employed as aforesaid f ^ and it was propt)sed that the Executive should be armed with sum- mary pcjwers similar to those conferred upon the President of the United States by the eighth section of the act of 1818. It was further proposed to enact that "in time of war no vessel employed in the military or naval service of any belligerent, which shall have been built, equipped, fitted out, armed, or dispatched contrary to the enactment, should be admitted to any port of Her Majesty's Dominions." '' The Tribunal of Arbitration will not fail to observe that these recommendations were made by a board composed of I 1 Vol. IV, page 79. 3 Vol. IV, pages 80, 81. 5 Vol. IV, page 82. 2 Vol. IV, pagd 80. * Vol IV, page 81. I>irn> <>!•• A M.CTRAI,. (;o ir sittin<*;>. tlio most einiuoiit jiulncs, jurists, jpiil)li('ists, and »tatt'siin'n ft' the ICrniiiiv. wIjo had liccn in iiiiblic lit«' and had I'articipatcd in the din'ction ot' atVairs in fircat nritain (lurin;j; the w hol*^ jxM'iiid ol' the S(»utln't'n rthcHinn: and that they wore made imdtT a coniinissiun whicli auth(iriz«'d tlicsc distinguished •jienth'nien to ronsidor and report what ciuin^t's ou^iht ho niado in the laws ot' the Kin;i(h>ni, tor tiif iturposf itt' giv- ing; to thrni increased et'lieioney, ((tnl hrinr/iiff/ tlirni iitto ffdl coh/ormiff/ iriflt fJ/c intrnwfionfd ofJif/afions of ]'Jnf/h())(I. The TrihiMial of Arhitration will searcli tiie wliolc ot" that report, and of its various ajipendiees, in vain, to 1intin«inished hodv iniajiined, or tiioti'^lit, or heliev»'d tiiat the njoasures which tiwy rcconi- inendt'd were not ''in fnll coid'orrnity wltii international oltli- Uin;:; the Triltnnal to assunu; that that eminent body repirded the acts which they ])ro[)ose(l to {trevent by legislation, as forbidden by Internati(»nal Law. ,.., ^ . ,. The report of the (Jomniissicmers was made Ihc Frtrc'ign hii- * listraciit Act of in 18().S. but was not acted upon until after 1870 » the breaking out of the late war between (iermany and France. On the l>th of August, 1.S70. Par- liament passed "An act to regulate the conduct of Her Ma- jesty's subjects during the existence of hostilities between foreign States with which H<'r ^lajesty is at peace.'' 'J'his act. which mav be found in Volume VI [, - embodies the rccomwieiidations of the commissioners which arc cited above?, except that which excludes a ship which has been illegally built or armed &c., &c., from Hei- Majesty's ports. Soon after the enactment of tiiis statute, a vessel called ^ ,. . , the "International," was i)roceeded against Judicial con- ^ .... . . structiou of that for au alleged violation of its [)rovisiv>n . The case came before Sir Robert J. Phillimore, 1 Vol. IV, page 82. - Vol. VII, page 1. 70 DUTIES OF A M:1 TRAI. ' I O lie of Flcr ^riiiostv's C 111 18ioners who s;ij;no(l tiie report I th 11 r( ndi'r nv lus (lecision on the ITtli Ja muirv 1 >S7 1, lie sjtid: "This statuto, passed during- the hist session, under wlifrh the authority of this court is now for the lir.-t timr evoked is, in my jud^iinent, very iin[)ortant and verv valiialih': strengthening]:; the liaiids of Her Maiestv's tiovern- nient, and cnahVnig tJiem to fulfill more casilf/ than hereto- fore that particular class of intcniatioi/al ohligatums wh'ch )uaf/ arise out of the couducf of Her Majest/f> snhjcets toward hellif/crent Foreign States, vitJi a-how Her Majesty is at peace. ^ These eminent (•(unmissioiiers and this (Ustin«iuislied juri.>r preeision wliich mi;j;hr nave cuosen tl leir words wi th til liave been expeeted of them. Tliey declare that, in the execution of the eominission, they have only sought to bring the law of England into harmony with the law of nations. Their functions ceased when thev re. >. amended certain charges with that object in view. Parliament then took up the ^vork and ado[)ted their suggestions. TMien, Jis if to prevent all inisaj)i»reliension , one of the commissioners, acting as a judge, held that the act of 1870 is intemled to bring the law of the realm into harimmy with the international duties of the Sovereign. Intcriiiitioiiiii law The United States conlidently submit that Lmnjr i^w 't*; tl'^' »*'^^' pi-<)visions, inserted in the act of Kiigiaiui. 18 70, were intended, at least as against th(! British (Tovernment. as a reenactment of tiie law of nations, as understood by the Unitetl States to be a[)[)licable to the cases of the Alabama, and other ships of war constructed in I'^ngland for the use of the insurgents. They conceive that Great Britain is committed to tht; doctrines therein stated, not merelv bv the articles of Inter- national Law exj)ressed in its statutes, but also by the lonii-settled Common Law of I'^ngland coniirmed bv acts of Parliament. ' London Times, January IS, 1871. See also Admiralty and Kc'lesiastical Reports, Vol. o, page Wo'l. See also Ueport of the Debate on the Foreiu'u Kiilistmcnt Act in the House of Commons, in the London Timesi of August 2, 1870. DUTIES OF A NKUTRAL. 71 The act of 7 Anne, ch. 12, enacted in consequence of the violation of tlie law of iiatit)n.s by the arrest for debt (if the Ambassador of tlie Czar, Peter the Great, in London, is prominent in .the history of the legislation of Great liiitain. ^ Lord Manslield, commenting on this act in the case of Triquet vs. Bath, o Burrow's Reports, p. 148, says that this act was but declaratory. All that is new in this act is the clause which gives a summary jurisdiction for the punishment of the infraction of the law. He further remarks that the Ambassador who had been arrested couhl have been discharged on motion. This act of Parliament was passed as an apology from the nation. it was sent to the Czar, lincly illuminated, by an Ambassador Extraordinary, who made the national excuses in an oration. •■ The act was not occasioned l)y any tloubt whethc'r the law of nations, particularly tin; part relative to public ministers, was not part of liie law of J'^ngland, antl not intended to vary an iota from it." Lord Manslield further says, in I'eference to the case of Brevot fs. Barbot, that Lord Talbot declared '•that the law of nations, in its full extent, was part of the law of England;*' and adds^ "I remembi'r, toian Ambassador.'' -' To the same effect is the remark of Loi'd Tenterden, when he says "that the act of Anno is only declaratory of the common law. Tt must, therefore, be construed accord- ing to the common law, of which tlie law of nations nuist be deemed a part." •' lUackstone states the doctrhie in general terms as foUows: '"The law of nations is a system of rules, deducible by natural reason, and established l)v universal consent amonii! the civilized inhabitants of the world, in order to decide .* 'Ur ' See Phillimore's International Law, vol. 2, ch. 8, section 194. ^ See I'urther 1 Black. Cum., pp. 4o, ;5.>1; 1 Woodson's Lectures, p. 31. ^ Novillo vs. Tuogood, 1 Barnwell and Ores well's Keports, 5G2. , I 7-2 DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. all dispute^;, to regulate all ceremonies and civilities, and to insure tlie observance of justice and gcxul taitli. in tlint intercourse which must freciucntly occur between two or more inde})endent States, and the individuals belonpiinii to each. * :|: * * * * "In arbitrary States this law, wherever it contradicts, or is not provided fur by the municipal law of the country, is enforced bv the lloval J^)W('r: but since in Enjjrland n^ Royal Power can introduce a ntnv law or suspend the execu- tion of the old, therefon; the law of nations (whenever any (juestion arises which is ])roj)er]y the object of its juris- diction) is here adopted in its fidl (extent Ijy the common law of the land. And th(»se acts of Parliament which have from time to time been mac'e to enforce this univ(U'sal law. or to facilitate the execution ot" its decisions, are not to be considered as introductivc of any new rule, but merely as declaratory of the old fimdamental constitutions of the Kingdom: icii/toiif tvhich if nutsf cmsc to he (i part of the cicilized tvorld." ^ In the j)resence oi' these authorities it cannot be doubtec that the law of nations enters integrally into the comm i law of England, and that any enactment bv Parliament on this })oint derives force only from its conformity with tln^ law of nations, having no virtue beyond that, except in so Jar as such enactment may afford means for the better enforcement of that law within the realm of I'^ngland. That eminent judg(^ and jurist, Lord Stowell , even goes so far as to say that, while an act of Parliament can aflirm the law of nations, it cannot contradict it or disaflirm it to any effect as respects fi)reign (lovcrnments. - Lord Stowell's })osition is in perfect accordance with tli(i observation of Lord Manslield, in anotlun* caze, Vf'.": Heath- lield vs. Chilton, that, "The i)riviU'ges of ])ublic ministers and their rethuie depend upon the law of nations, which ^ Blackstune's Com., vol. 4, ch. o. See also Lord Lynd- hurst's opinion, ante page Ci. ' The Louis, Dodson's Admiralty Reports, vul. 2, p. 210. i- ])art o: Parliamen can alter Duties recoij hy the Qi Protlitraatioi; Neutralit that G0V( States, is already al It is n( custom of favor an e its own ( between ( liinding ]>] ITfJ^, dii presentatix nut to Ml which wei to be "b the Presi( the Unite( acts, and that the Relying (ireat Bri nations , United St vite the a ci[)les, in Ijilistmeni Proclamat 1. Th: neutralit V ^ Heath "f Lord ^ p. 541. - Vol. i DUTIES OF A NKLTRAL. 73 is ])art of the coinmon hiAV of EiifilaiHl. And tlie act of Parliament of 7 Anno, eh. 12. did not intend to alter, nor can alter tlie la^ • of nations." ^ Duties recognized The next aet of the liritisli Government Pmri!,raatioir'''of ^" ^^■''^'■^' t^'' ^''lited States invite tht? attention Neutrality. ,)f tji^' Tribunal, a.s .showin^i' to some I'xtent that Government's sense of its duties toward the United Srates. is the Proclamation of Ncutraliry of May llj, 18(11. already alluded to. It is not claimed that a beUij;erent has the ri^iht, by the custom of nations, to require a neutral to enforce in its favor an executive Proclamation of the nc;utral, addressed to its own (.-itizens or subjects: but it is maintained that, as between Great Britain and the United States, there is a binding ])recedent for such a reijuest to Great Britain. In ITOo, during (leneral Washington's administration, the re- jirescntative of (Jreat Britain in the United States ])ointe(l (lilt to Mr. Jefferson, who was then Secretary of State, acts which were deemed bv Her Britaimic Maiestv's Government t(» be "breaches of neutralitv,'' tlone "in contravention of the President's Proclamation" of Neutrality, and he united the United States to take steps for the repression of such acts, and for the restoration of captured prizes. It appears that the United States c(jm])lied with these requests. - Relying, therefore, upon this precedent, established against (Ireat Britain, rather than upon a right under the laws of iiations , whicli can be asserted or maintained against the Lnited States or against other nations, the I'nitecl States in- vite the attention of tij(^ Tribunal to the fact that two prin- ciples, in addition to those already deduced from the Foreign r^nlistment Act of 1819, appear to bo conceded by the Proclamation of May 13, ISGI: 1. That it is the duty of a neutral to observe strict neutrality as to both belligerents during hostilities. r. ^ Heathfield vs. Chilton, 4 Burrows, p. 2010. This observation ">f Lord Mansfield is cited and adopted l)y Philliinore, v(d. 13, p. 541. - Vol. IV, pages 04—102. 74 DUTJKS ol- A NKITHV; Definition oi ueu- Neutrality is (lt'lint>tl '.y Pliiliii'.iun' • "^o coii- trahty. ^[^^ jjj ^^^^ pi'incipal circiimstunccs : 1. Enth" abstinence from any partici])ation in the war; 2. Impartialit v of conduct toward both belUj^crents,"' '-Thi.^ ahathiCHCC aiul this imj)artlalfff/ must be combiii».'d in the ciiaracter of ;i bona-fith neutral." ^ Bluntschli delines it thu.>; "La neutralite est la ??0«-2)f/>- ticJpation a la '^'utn're. Lurn([ue i'etat neutre s(ji.tient iiii (l«'s b('lli;j;errnts, il {)rend part a la guerre, en faveur do cehii quil soutient, et des lors il ct'SSe cVctrc nnihe. L'advi'i- saire est autoris/' a voir (bins cette [)articipation uu ac'.' d'liostilite. VA ct'la n\'st pas seulement vrai quand l\'ta' neut!"0 livre lui-meme, des troupes ou de-. vai.>seaux des guerri\ mais aussi lorscpi'il prete a un dt's belligi'rents un aj)i)n; mediat en permettant, tcUlfUs qu'il pOUVniit I't'mpechci. que, de son tcrritoire neutre, on envoie des ti'"Upes ou ilt> navires de gut-rre." -' Hautefeuille says : '• Cet etat nouveau impo>e aux neutre- des devoirs particuliers: ils doivent s'abstenir completemeiu de tout acte d'immixion aux hostilites et garder une strict'' impartialite envers les deux ixdligerents. * ^- ''■ L'impartialit' consist(3 a traiter les deux belligerents de la nieme nianiei"' et avec une parfnite egsdite dans tout ce qui concerne If- relations d'etat a etat." Lord Stowell says: • Tb^e high pri\ ilege.^ yA a neutral ar forfeited by tlie abandonment of that [)erfect inditferenc' between the contending [)artit's, in which the essence ui neutrality consists.*' ■* Calvo collects or refers to the deiinitions given by tli'' various writers on International Law, and expresses a preference for Hubner's: 'vLa mas aceptable es la de Hubner, por la claridad y precision con <{uc iija, no solo la situacion de' la-^ 1 3 Phillimore, Ch. IX. '^ Opinior. impartiale sur lu (piestiun de TAlabama. Berlin, 1S70, page 22. -' Nee '.-site d'une loi maritime pour rogler les rapports de> ne-utres et des belligerents. Paris, 1862, page 7. * The Eliza Ami, (I Dudsun's Reports, 244.) Ill a neut '*..- DLTIKS OF A M.LiRAI.. 75 laeion de la- iiiici(»iies paciiicas, sino lu extension que lient- soNri! ell;;s el .status belli.'' ^ 2. The [ii'oclaniation al-o distinctly recoonizt's the piinciple that the duties of a n» Mitral in time* ot" war do not <^ro\v' ((lit of, and are not dependent upon iMuniei[)al laws. Oll'enders against the provisions of the act are therein exjiressly forewarned tliat such ort'enses will ho '-acts in derogation of tiieir duty as subjects of a neutral sovereign in the said contest, or hi ri()lafi(»t or co)ifr(ivc)>fio)f of the law of naifo}is in that hchalf." Duties recognized The' next acts of th" British (iov(?rnnient, by instructions to indicating its sense of its duties as a neutral British odicials ^ . , (luri'ijj the insur- toward tlie United States, to which the atten- tion of the Tribunal is invited, are the several instructions issued chu'ing the contest, for the regulation of the oflicial conduct of its naval oflirer> and of its colonial authorities toward the belligerents. - These various instructions ,>tat»' or recognize the following principles and rules: I. A belligerent may not use the harbors, ports, coasts, and waters of a neutral in aid of its warlike j)Ui-{>oses, or as a ^tation or place of resort for any warlike i)urpose, or for the purpose of obtaining any facilities of warlike c(iiiii)ment. '1. Vessels of war of the belligerents in;iy be recpiired to (h'part from a neutral port within twenty -tour hoiu- after entrance, except in case of stress of weather, or rerjuiring provisions or things for the crew, or repairs; m which case they should go to sea as soon as possible after the exj)ira- tion of the twenty-four hours. o. The furnishing of sup})lies to a belligerent vessel of \s;tr in a neutral port may i>e proiiibited, except such as may lit' necessarv for the subsistence of a crew, and for their immediate use. 4. A belligerent steam-vc-sel of war ought not to receivt^ ill a neutral port more coal than is necessary to tak*3 it to , et sei^. 70 IHnrs OF A NEUTRAL. the nearest j)(»rt of it> own country , or to soinr nearer destination, and slioald not rt'ceive two sii[»j»lie.s of (Mtal from j)orts of the same neutral witliin h'ss than thrci; months df eacli other. Correspondence '^'^'^ attention of tlie Tribunal is furthi'!' between the two inyitgd to the oflleial opinions expressed liv 1793— '.t4. the represcintative of Cxreat Britain in the United States during the administration of I'resident Washinv them. Ou the 22d of April, 1793, M. (Jeuet not havin<^ vi't reached Phihidelphia , President Washington issutnl his celebrated proehiniation, the lirst of its kind, in which lie ilt'chired that '"the duty and interest of the United States iv(iuire that they sliould , with sincerity and <;"ood faith, a(l()I)t and pursue a conduct frientlly and iin[)artial toward the belligererit Powers;" and he warned all persons arocess.- The Government r>f Genei'al Washinfiton determined, however, as it had been informed of these attemj)ts at violating the sovereignty of the nation, that it was the duty of the United States not only to repress them in future, but to restore ])rizes that might be c{)])tured by vessels thus illegally iitted out, manned, equij>j)ed, or eonmiissioned within the waters of th(> I'^nited States; or, if tmable to restore them, then to make compensation for them. The reasons for tliis course are stated in a letter from Mr. elefferson to j\Ir. Hammond, dated the 5th of Sep- tember, 1793.^ The United States Government also, on the 4th of August, 1 793, issued instructions to collectors of the customs,^ which were intended to enforce the President's Proclamation of April 22. We have the authority of Lord Tenterden for saying that the result of the publication of those instructions was, that the system of privateering was, generally speaking, suppressed. ^ 1 Vol. IV, page 97. ^ Dana's Wheaton, section 439, note 215, page 536. This note, which contains an exliaiistive review of the American policy, may be found in Vol. VII, page 11. 3 Vol. IV, page 100. The United Stales also refer to Mr. Jefferson's letter to Mr. Hammond, of November 14, 1793. ' Vol. IV, page 97. Vol. IV, page 101. From t and extenc States, win Executive representat was su})pri that the f for the i}i place who power to J The Treaty of] 19, 1794. I he prizes s he ascertaii Treaty of ^ made by tl tion. The of some ye oventually Construction that Treaty by cominissioners pointed under have been 'Tamaica,) never broi Uj)on this neglect by arming of contended to make C( [one gentle was not w cummission* A reheai delivered t ^ 'J'reaty liritain , at "Jay's Trea juigo 11 G. ni TIES OF A NEURAL. '9 (> ]»rcv('iit rt'storiii'i first, 1m- and thr states liiid le owner- secondly. a renidtf ini])ossil)l.' have l»(Tii »rt to the ;'e re.stored 1, however, lating tilt' he United to restore i-allv iittcd the waters hem, then etter from h of Sej)- le 4 til of ' customs, ■* oclaniatiou iterden for nstructions V speakiu American gfer to Mr. , 1793. 101. From this examination, it appears that a well c()nceiv(!d and extended system of violatinji the neutralitv (»f the Tnited States, when they were weak and the j)Owers conlided to their Executive were untried, was put in operation in April by the representative ol" one of the j)owerful nations of l*]uroj)e, and was .su})pressed before Aujiust without lejiislation : and also that the United St((tes n)((lntool' to mnhe r()ni})e)/soti.on for the injuries resulti)if/ from riolatioiif^ that had tfdoi place where tJietf liad failed to exert all the means in their power to j>rere)it them. The Treaty of Nov. I^ '^^''^^ subsequently agreed between the two 19, 1794. Governments ^ that in cases where restituticm of ihc prizes should be impossible, the amount of the losses should 1)0 ascertained by a method similar to that provided by the Treaty of Washington, and that a money payment should be made by the United States to Great Britain in lieu of restitu- ti(in. The examination of these claims extended over a period (if some years, and the amounts of the ascertained losses were eventually paid by the United States to Great Britain. Construction of In the case of the "Jamaica,"' before the that Treaty by the ^^,„,„.;.. ;,,„ ,„.J,>r fl.o 7fU o^tlr.l.. ,.*' +1.^ tr.-^ :... ' It 80 1)1 riKS «)1' A NKITKAL. Aitcr r<'viovvinj> JJritish proct.'dent.s c;it(Ml by tlic n*un.st'l lor the claimant.-, as suj»[)orting liis view of international law, Mr. Gore savH : "The counsel for the chiimant scenusd to suf)p()>e that tlu; ol>li^ation to eompensate arose from the circunistanee of the privateer's havinj;" becMi originally armed in the I'nitcd States: but as there is not the s^nullcat ecidmce to induce a /jclirf that in this or in cunj othvr case the (jotcrnmeiit pcrmittjd, or in any degree con)iir<:d at, such arming, or failed fo use all the mea)ts ii/ their poieer to jtrevent such e'liiipmod. there is no ground to support a charge on the I'act that tln' armament originated in their ports." ^ All these st(!j)S prior to 171)4 were taken by the United States under the general rules of International Law, without the aid of a local statute, in oder to perform what Mr. detferson called ''their duty as a neutral nation to prohibit such acts a.«. wouh I injure one of the warring Powers." - In 1 7 4 , h( )wever, the Congress of the United States, on the apjdication of Great Britain, passed a statute prohibiting such acts, under heavy penalties. ^ ^ ,. The general provisions of the United State> The neutrality '^ ^ ^ laws of the United Act of 1818 (whicli is still in force) are set .states enacted at ,. . , . , , , - . rpi • . thore(iue.stof(iroat h>™i "1 "ote 1, on page 114. 1 his act was Britain. |)assed at the request of the Portuguese Governtnent. The act of 1838 was enacted on the suggestion of Great Britain: In the year 1837 a formidable rebellion against Great Britain broke out in Canada. Sympathizers with the insurgents beginning to gather on the northern frontier of the United States, Mr. Fox, the British Minister at Washington, "solemnly appealed to the Supreme Government promptly to interpose its sovereign authority for arresting the disorders." and inquired what means it proposed to employ for that purpose. The President immediately addressed a commu- nication to Congress, calling attention to defects in the existing statute, and asking that the Executive might be clothed witli adequate power to restrain all persons within the jurisdiction ^ 2d Vol. Mms. Opinions, Department of State. 2 Mr. Jefferson to M. Genet, June 5, 1793. Jefferson's Works, Vol. Ill, page 572. ^ Mr. Canning's speech, cited ante, page 107. was con nrriF^ of a NF.nRAf.. M nf tilt' United Stati's tVum tlif (•tnnini*.>i()ii i<\' jn-ts of tlu' character coinplaiiit'd <(f. ('(tijjxres>. tlit-rciipon, jtiosed the act (tt' 183kt'd the rnitcd States t<» amend their nentnditv laws, in Uriti^h interest, so a- t(» ^ive more pcnver to th(.' Kxeciitive, and the re(|ne>t was com[»lit'd witli. Case of tlie bark J" ^^^'^ }'^"i' l''^-^'^^ TJrt'at Britain Itein^ tiien Maury. ^^^ ^y.,,. ^^[(j, J^ussia, it was supposed by tlie IJriti.sli Consul, at New York, tiiat a \e»el called the ^lanrv, wliicli was being innocently litted out at New York for the China trade, was intended as a Russian privateer. I'he liriti>h Minister at Washinp:ton at once ealled the attention of Mr. Marov, the then Secretary of State, to this vessel. The at'lidavits which he inclosed for tln» consideration of the Secretary of State fell far, very far, short of the evidence which Mr. Adams submitted to I'^arl Russell in refjard to the Liverpool cruisers. The whole foundation which the lU'itish Mini>ter furnished for the acti(m of the Cnited States was the "beliet"' of the Consul, his lawyer, and two j)olice officers, that the ves5el was intended for Russian service. This was conununicat«Ml to the Government of the United States on the 11th of October. Notwithstanding the feebleness of the suspicion, the prosecuting oflicer of the United States was, on the 1 "ith of October, instructed by telegraph to ''prosecute if cause ap])ears," and was at work on the 13th in order to prevent a violation of the sovereignty of the United States to the injury of Great Britain. ^ The proceedings given at length in the accompanying volumes show with what rapidity and zeal the investigation was made, and that the charge was at once proved to be unfounded. ^, . . . ^ In all this corres])ondence and these prece- Priiiciples thus re- .... cognized by the dents, the following |)rinciples appear to have two (ioverniueuts. i i i ..i ^ t^ been assumed by the two Governments : 1. That the belligerent mav call upon the neutral to en- force its municipal proclamations as well as its municipal laws. 2. That it is the dutv of the neutral, when the fact of « ♦ . . * • « ^ - 4 * .. « -.-^y'., . 1 Vol. IV, pages 53—62. G IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) A % .5.^ |// .^v^- 1.0 I.I 1.25 uiy,8 |2.s 150 "^^ ■■■ ■^ Uii |2.2 Ao 12.0 U 11.6 ill ^ V] /^ / 0> M Photographic Sciences Corporation m 4 V ^ V \\ lV O^ 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 "^■^' 82 DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. tlie intended violation of its sovereignty is disclosed, either through the agency of the representative of the belligerent, or through the vigilance of the neutral, to use all the means in its power to prevent the violation. 3. That when there is a failure to use all the means in the power of a neutral to prevent a breach of the neutrality of its soil or waters, there is an obligation on the part of the neutral to make compensation for the injury resulting therefrom. The United States are aware that some Obligation to make . », ,. i i i. • • • i i corapensatit.n for emment English ])ublicists, writmg on the sub- injuries, j^^^ ^^ ^^^ "Alabama Claims," have maintained ^hat the obligation in such case to make compensation would not necessarily follow the proof of the commission of the ■Wrong; but the United States confidently insist that such a result is entirely inconsistent with the course pursued by Great Britain and the United States, during the administra- tion of General Washington, when Great Britain claimed of the United States compensation for losses sustained from the acts of cruisers that had received warlike additions in the ports of the United States, and the United States admitted the justice of the claim, and paid the compensation demanded. The United States also point to the similar compensation made by them to Spain in the treaty of 1819, for similar injuries inflicted on Spanish commerce during the War of the Independence of the Spanish American Colonies, as show- ing the sense of Spain on this point. Correspondence In the coursc of the long discussions be- Smes^'and^ Porfu- ^'^'^^'^^ the two Governments on the Alabama ga'- claims, Great Britain has attempted to justify its course by a reference to the conduct of the United States toward Portugal between 1816 and 1822.^ The several replies of Mr. Adams amply defended the course of the United States in that affair. From the replies and from the official documents referred to in them, it would appear that in the year 1850 the United States had brought to the point of settlement a long-standing claim against Por- ^ Vol. Ill, pages 55G— 560. DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. 83 tugal, for the destruction of the American armed brig General Armstrong, in the harbor of Fayal, in the year 1814. They were at the same time pressing some other claims against Portugal, and were conducting a correspondence with the Portuguese Legation at Washington, growing out of the seizure of a Portuguese slaver.^ The Portuguese Government, as an oftk't to tliese claitns of the United States, revived some exploded claims of Por- tugal against the United States, for alleged violation of neu- trality, that had slumbered for nearly thirty years. These are the claims referred to by Earl Russell in his note to Mr. Adams of May 4, 18G5,'- and his note to the same of August 30, 1865,^ and his note to the same dated November 2, 1866.^ Lord Russell asserts that the complaints of Por- tugal were more frequent and extended to a larger amount of property after 1818 than they had done before. Mr. Adams denies this allegation, ' and his denial is supported by the evidence in possession of tl.e Government of the United States. The facts appear to be these: On the 20th December, 181G, the Portuguese Minister informed the then Secretary of State (Mr. Monroe) of the fitting out of privateers at lialtimore to act against Portugal, in case it should turn out that that Government was at war with the "self-styled Gov- ernment of Buenos Ayres.'' He further stated that he did not make the application in order "to raise altercations or to require satisfaction," but that he solicited "the proposi- tion to Congress of such provisions by law as will prevent such attempts for the future,"' being "persuaded that my [his] magnanimous Sovereign will receive a more dignified satisfaction, and worthier of his high character, by the enact- ment of such laws by the United States." Mr. Monroe re- plied, on the 27th of the same month, "I have communicated your letter to the President, and have now the honor to transmit to you a copy of a message which he has addressed .^' ' Executive Document No. 53, 32d Congress, 1st session. 2 Vol. Ill, page 525. ^ Vol. Ill, page 584. * Vol. Ill, page 548. ^ Vol. Ill, page 621. G* 84 nUTIKS OV A NELTRAL. to Congress on the subject, with a view to obtain such an extension, by hivv, of the Executive i)ovver as will be ne- cessary to j)reserve the strict neutrality of the United States, sv- * :v- .,|^(j effectually to guard against the danger it>. rcizard to the vessels of your Sovereign which you haw anticipated." The act of 1S17 was passed and oflicially comnuniicated to the Portuguese Minister on the 1 8th v.\' March 1817. On the 13th of May, 1817, the Portuguese I\Iinister infornuHl tlie Secretary of State that although "the law passed at tlie last session of Congress obviated a great part of the evils'' of which he complained, he feared there would be a lack of vigilance on the })art of some of the oflicials, ami he asked for special instructions to them. On the 8th of Marcli, ISIS, he complained to Mr. John Quincy Adams, then Secretary of State, of the capture of "three Portuguese ships, captured by ])rivateers fitted in the United States, manned by American crews, and conmianded by American eaj)tains, though under insurgent colors;" and he asked for satisfaction and indemnification for the injury. The note mak- ing this complaint contained neither proof of the allegations in the note as to the fitting out of vessels in the United States, or as to their being manned by Americans, nor in- dications from which the United States might have discovered those facts for themselves. The Secretary of State, there- fore, in reply to such an allegation, very properly stated the fact that the United States had " used all the means in its power to prevent the fitting out and arming of vessels in their ports to cruise against ar^y nation with whom they were at peace," and had "faithfully carried into execution the laws to preserve inviolate the neutral and pacific obligations of the Union;" and therefore could not consider themselves "bound to indemnify individual foreigners for losses by cap- tures." It will not escape the notice of the Tribunal that Mr. Adams call-, attention to the distinction between the national obligations under the law of nations and the dutv of the Government to execute the municipal law; and that he grounds his refusal upon the fact that both have been complied with. The Portuguese Minister next complains (October 15,1818) DUTIES OF A NKirnAI.. 85 that a ])rivateei' is littiii^ out in Baltiinore, and the Secretaiy of Slate orders a prosecution and asks for tlie names of the witnesses, and it appears tliat before November 13th the Portuguese Minister is informed that the grand jury have found a bill against the accused. On the 14th of November tlie Portuguese Minister sends to the Secretary of State de- positions and the names of witnesses, and informs liiiii that he is alarmed at the "thick crowd of individuals wlio are engaged in tlus iniquitous business," and that "great care has been taKen to intercept the notice of such facts from tlie knowledge of the Executive.*' Mr. Adams, on the liStli of November, informs the ^linister that the evidence has been placed in the hands of the prosecuting attorney of the United States. It thus appears that the second complaint was disposed of to the satisfaction of the representative of Portugal. Tlie third complaint, n\ade on the 1 1 th of December, 1818, states that an armed vessel called the Irresistible, -ailiiiii' under so-called Artigan colors, was committing de- predations on the coast of Brazil, and that the commander and crew of the vessel were all Americans. It will be ob- served that in this c(>nplaint there is no charge made of an illegal use of the soil or waters of the United States in violation of their duties as a neutral. The charge is that citizens of the United States, beyond their jurisdiction, have taken service under a belligerent against Portugal. The next communication from the Portuguese ^linister is made on the 4th of February, 1819. He asks to have the neutrality act of 1817 continued. The Secretary of State answers, on the 9th, that that has already been done by the passage of the act of 1818. This api)ears to have been regarded as entirely satisfactory. The next note is dated the 17th March, 1819. Although stathig that there were persons in the United States "in- terested in this iniquitous pursuit of [)lundering the lawful property of an inoffensive friendly nation,"' in which state- ment the Minister undoubtedly supposed that he was correct, he savs that he has "abstained from written applications about the new individual offenses,""' and he makes no parti- . *' '.i 86 DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. cular complaint, furnishes no evidonco, an«l indicates no suspicion!*. It appears to be the object of the note to in- duce the Government of tlie United States to withdraw its recognition of the Artigan flag. "If this," he says, -^s once declared illegal, and the prizes made under it acts of piracy, all occasions of bitterness and mistru.t are done away." "I can, in the capacity of Minister of my Sovereign, certify you solemnly, and oflicially too, if necessary, that Artigas and his followers have been expelled far from the countries that could afford them the least means and power of navigating, and consequentlg have no right to Jight by sea. What becomes, then, of the rights of privateers under this flag?" When the Tribunal come to consider the case of the Shenandoah at Melbourne they will lind this language, which was referred to with approbation, and assumed by Karl Russell,^ to be exactly in point in disposing of the claims ffrowin"; out of the acts of that vessel. On the 2 2d of April the Secretary of State acknowledges the note of December 11, 1818, and savs that he is informed the commander of the Irresistible has returned to Baltimore, and will be prosecuted for a violation of neutrality, and asks the Minister to furnish proof for the trial. On the 23d of November, 1810, the Minister again com- plained. He says: "One city alone on this coast has armed twenty -six ships, which [)rey on our vitals, and a week ago three armed ships of this nature were in that port waiting for a favorable occasion of sailing for a cruise." Hut he furnisiies no facts, and he gives neither proof nor fact indicat- ing the city or the district which he suspected, and nothing to atVord the Government any light for inquiry or investigation. On the contrary, he says: "7 shall not tire you with the numerous instances of these facts f^ and he adds, as if attaching little or no real importance to the matter: "Relying conlidently on the successful efforts of this Government, / choose this moment to pay a visit to Brazil.'''' On the 4th of June, 1820, the Minister, not yet having departed, informs the Secretary of State that he desires to ^ Vol. Ill, page 55(1. DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. 87 offer his "thanks for the law that prohibits the entrance of privateers in the most important ports of the Union;" that he "acknowledges the salutary influence of the Executive in obtaining these ameliorations;" and that he is "fully persuaded of the sincere wishes of this Government to put a stop to practices so contrary to friendly intercourse." On the 8th of June, 1820, he gives information of a formidable privateer, which he says is to l)e litted out at Baltimore, and adds that he "has not the least doubt that th<^ supreme Executive has both the power and the will of putting a stop to this hostile armament;" to which the Secre- tary of State, on the 20th July, replies that "such measures have been and will continue to be taken, under direction of the President, as are within the competency of the Executive, and may serve to maintain inviolate the laws of the United States applicable to the case." On the IGth of Julv the Minister "laid before this Govern- ment the names and value of nineteen Portuguese ships and their cargoes, taken by private armed ships fitted in the ports of the Union by citizens of these States;" but he did not accompany this allegation with proof of such fitting, or with anything tending in the remotest degree to fix a liability on the United States, or to afford them the means of an in- de[)endent examination. He also proposed a joint commission for the settlement of these matters, which the Secretary of State, on the 30th September, 1820, declined, saying that "the Government of the United States has neither countenanced nor permitted any violation of neutrality by their citizens. They have, by various and successive acts of legislation, mani- fested their constant earnestness to fulfill their duties toward all parties to the war. They ha\e repressed every intended violation of them which has been brought before their courts and substantiated by testimony." Other claims were trans- mitted to the United States Government on the 4th December, 1820, unaccompanied, as had been the invariable case before, by anything tending to show a liability in the United States to make compensation. The case appears to have been closed by an offer from Portugal, on the 1st of April, 1822, to grant to the United :a •■/ 88 DUTIKS OF A NKUTRAL. States exrcntional ooinineicial a(|vaiita;;vs if tln3 United States Avould ivcogtiize the claini^, and the refusal of the United States, (in the oOth of Aju-il, to do so. It is worthy of remark tliat in Earl Iviissell's elaborate statement of tliis corresii'indence, in liis note of the ?>Oth of Au<;ust, ISC..'), he omits, with a eomjih'teness which argues dt'si-'ii, eertaiu parts of it wiiich showed that the United Stales were animated witii u constant ch'sire to perform tlieir inter- national duties. Thus, nothing is said of the Portuguese note of February 4, 18111, a king that the neutrality act of 1817 may be continued in force, and the American reply, stating that it had been so xontinued. Notliing is said of the American note of the -JlM of April, 1818, stating that th<' commander of the Irresistible, the vessel referred to in the Portuguese note (tf l)e<'ember 11, 1818, had retarned to UaltiuKjre and would be prosecuted. The American note of the l?Oth of July, 18'JU, is also omitted, in which, in answer to the Portuguese note (»f the 8th of June, 1820, it is stated that measures have been, and will continues to be. taken to maintain inviolate the laws of the United States. The Tribunal of Arbitration cannot fail to observe that these suppressed notes had an imi)<)ituit bearing in forming a judgment upim the correctness of tise conduct of the Govern- ment of the United States in tins ct.se — a case whicli has received the oflicial approval {)f lii\v\ Kussell, as Her Majesty's Princi})al Secretary of State for Foreign Atlairs. From a candid review of the wln)le correspondence, it ap[)ears that the United States admitted or asserted the following propositions, to which Her Majesty's Government, through Earl Kuss(-ll, has given Its assent r, ■ • , !• That a neutral government is bound to rrjiiciples ro- ^ ^ cogiii/id in that use nil the means in its power to prevent the ecjuippuig, littmg out, or armuig, witlnn its jurisdiction, of vessels intended to cruise against a Power with which it is at peace. "2. If the means within itN })ower are, in the oi)inion of either belligerent, inadequate I'or the purpose, it is bound to receiv.' snsiaestions of chanaes from the belli-ierent, and if it be true that the means are inadequate, it should so amend DUTlIiS UF A MU'TRAL. 89 its laws, cither in accfirdanco wiili such Mjfrfiestious or other- Avisc, as to put new and more eth'cti\e means in the hands ol' its Executive. [». That it is bound to institute j)rocet'dings under its laws {(gainst all vessels as to wiiicli reasonable grounds for suspicion arc made to appear, oven if the grounds for susj)icion fall sliort of legal j)ro^^uch an intimation of the facts as would enable them to jiursue the investigation themselves, they acted with the vigor which was required of tliem l»y International Law, and wliich Great Britain failed to show in similar cases during the rebellion. The claims lay buried until they were exhumed by Mr. Figa.iiere, in 1850, ^ts an offset to the "General Armstrong"' case; and would have been forgotten if Earl Russell had not rescued tiie?n from oblivion. ihiW's ill the Treaty 1'^*^ latest oflicial act of Her jNIajesty's Govern- or WiishiiiKioii. ment, indicating the views of Great Britain as to the duties of a neutral in time of war, is to be found in the Kulcs contained in Article VI of the Treaty of Wash- ington. It is true that it was thought essen^^ial by the British negotiators to insert in that instrument a declaration on the part of Her Majesty's Government that they could not consent to those Rules as a statement of principles of International Law wiiicn were in force at the time when the claims now under discussion arose. But the United States were then, and are still, of the opinion, and they confidently think that ri "t- •':-i 00 ni TIKS OV \ NKimiAT,. the Tribuna! of Arbitration will jii^rcc with tin-m, not only that tboso rules were then ni torce, but that there were also other rules o\' International Law then in t'oree, not inconsistent with them, delinin;;, with still }^r«»ater strictness, the duties of a neutral in time of war. Article V'[ of tlie Treaty of Washington contains the follow- ing rules: "A neutral {•overiunent is lH)un(l — "b^irst, to use due diligence to prevent the fitting out, arming, or equipping, within its jurisdiction, of any vessel which it has reasonable ground to believe is intended to cruisi! or to earrv on war auainst a Power with which it is at peace: and also to use like diligence to prevent the departun; from its jurisdiction of any vess»d intended to cruise or carry on war as above, such vessel having be«'n specially adapted, in whole or in part, within such jurisdiction, to warlike use. "Secondly, not to permit or suffer either belligerent to make use of its ports or waters as the base of naval operations against the other, or for the j)urpose of the r-^newal or augmentation of military sui)plies or arms, or tht? recruit- ment of men. ''Thirdly, to exercise due diligence in its own ports and waters, and, as to all persons within its jurisdiction, to prevent anv violation of the foreij;oinli juri.-t.s »»J<1 to a <'t'rtain t LUicncan <•<> urts, tlie (juotion has «^i.'iu'rally been put ii< (me of ijef the matter which it luav atlcct, bv tlio relative (•(.iiditioii of the parties, by the ability of the party in<*urrin^ the liability to exercise the dilip;enee retpiired by the exi^iencits I bv the »'\tent of the injury which nuiy o e ca^e an( f th follow neiili^ence. One of the earliest and one of the best of the En^lisii expositors o f the Konian law is AvlilVe, (New i*anilects ol' Koinan Civil Law a- anciently established in that Knipire and |)racticed in most ICuro|)ean Nations, Lt)nd(m. IT.'M.) He savs: '"A fault is blamable through want of takin<^ j)roper care: and it obliges the person who does the injury, because by an applicatitm of due diligence it might have been foreseen anil prevented." - * Vinnins, Comment, ad Inst., lib. 3, tit. 15. - Aylitie, in his Pandects, (B. 2, tit. 1:;, pp. 108, 109, 110.) has given an elaborate view of the dift'erent sorts of fault or negligence, and fraud and deceit. The passage is long, but as it contains a very ample view of the opinions of the Civilians it may be useful to place a part of it in a note. "The word fault, in Latin called cu/pn, is a general term; and according to the definition of it, it denotes an oft'ense or injury done unto another by imprudence, which might other- wise be avoided by human care. For a fault, says Donatus, has a respect unto him who hurts another not knowingly nor WMllingly. Here we use the word oflFense or injury by way of a genus, which comprehends deceit, malice, and all other mis- demeanors, as well as a fault; for deceit and malice are plainly intended for the injury of another, but a fault is not so designed. And therefore we have ad'^'^d the word imprudence in tliis deiinition, to point out and distinguish a fault from deceit, malice, and an evil purpose of mind, which accompanies all trespasses and misdt eanors. A fault arises from simplicity, a dullness of mind, and a barrenness of thought, which is DITIK"* n| A NKMRAr,. U3 Mr. •histicj* Storv ha> claltoruti'lv <]i.-cu.s.>t'«i tlic inciminu; of tlit'so tiTiiis, niul flu' I'xtcnt of tlili^ciuc rctjuirt'd to avoid lv^|)()I»^«ilMlit)'. 111' Miv.'«, a> rht' u'.-ult of a cumparativi' ox- always attenilecl with inipnideiwio; lut deceit, oalled (Ay/t/s, lias its ri.se from a aiuliciuus purpo.se of mind, wlddi acts in con- tempt of all honesty and pindonce, with u full intent of doin;; mi.xchief, or an injury. And by these last words in tlie (h'linitioii, namely, which mi^?ht otherwise he avoided hy liuniun care, we distingui.sh a fault from a fortuitous case. For a fault is blamable through want of taking proper care; and it throws an obligation upon the person that does the injury, because by an application <»f due diligence it might have been foreseen and prevented. But fortuitous cases often cannot he foreseen, or (at least) prevented by the providence ot man ; as death, tires, great tlottds, ahipwrecks, tumults, pira- cies &.C. Those things are superior to the prudence of any nmn, and rather happen by fate, therefore are not Ijlamable. JJut if fraud or some previous fault be the occasion of these noo uments. they are not then deemed to be fortuitous cases. A tault is a deviation from that which is good; and, according to Bartolus, erring from the ordinance aiid dispttsition of a law. U is sometimes difticult to judge what is the ditference betwixt a fault and a dolus, since these words very often stand for one and the same thing. There is no one in this life lives without a fault: but he that would speak distinctly and properly, must impute a dolus to some wickedness or knavery, and a fault to imprudence. The first consists chietly in acting, and the other ill not acting or doing something which a man ought to do. According to Bartolus, a fault is divided into five species, viz. culpa latistiima, latior, lata, levs, and /erisaima. The first he makes to be equal to manifest deceit, and the second to be equivalent unto presumptive malice or deceit. The first and second of these distinctions (he says) approach unto fraud, and are sometimes called by the name of fraud. But a lata culpa, which is occasioned by gross sloth, rasliness, improvidence, and want of advice, is never compared unto deceit or malice. For he that understands not that which all other men know and understand may be styled (says Bartolus) a supine and unthinking man, but not a malicious and deceitful person. But, I think, none of those distinctions of his have any founda- tion in law; for such things as admit of any degree of com- parison, in respect of being more or less so, do not admit of any specific difi'erence ; as majus et minus diversas species noii cunstituunt. For that which the law says de latiore culpa sometimes is to be understood de lata culpa, after the manner 94 DUTII^.S OF A >ErTRAI>. J ■ » "i r ) . {iniinatioji of the autliorities of different rations, "What is usually done by j)rudent men in a particular country in respect to things! of a like nature, whether it be more or thf.t a word of the comparative degree is sometimes put for a word of the positive, as in Virgil: Tristior et Incrymis ocw/o*- fiiiffiiHa niientfs. "Wherefore I shall here distinguish a fault into two species only, to wit, into lata and lecis^ though others mention a culpa levissima too. The first denotes a negligence extremely blamable; that is to say, such a negligence as is not tempered with any kind of diligence. The other imports such a kind of negligence, whereby a person does not employ tbrtt care in men's affairs which other men are wont to do, though he be not more diligent in his own business. But as often as the word culpa is simply used in the law, it is taken for that which we style culpa /eins, a light fault, because words are ever understood in the more favorable sense. A culpa levlssima , or simple negligence, is that which proceeds from an unaffected ignorance and unskillfulness, (say they,) and it is like unto such a fault, which we easily excuse, either on the account of age, sex, rusticity, &c. Or, to set the matter in a clearer light, a lata culj)a is a diligence in a man's own affairs, and a negligence in the concerns of other men. And H fevis culpa is, when a man employs the same care or diligence in other men's affairs as he does in his own, but yet does not use all care and fidelity which more diligent and circumspect men are wont to make use of; and this may be called an accustomed negligence as well in a man's own affairs as in the business of other men. A lata culpa, I mean a great fault, is equivalent or next unto deceit or malice. And it may be said to be next unto deceit or malice two wavs, namelv, either because it contains in it a presumptive deceit, as when a man does not use the same diligence in another's concerns as in his own; or else because the fault is so gross and inexcusable, that, though fraud be not presumed, yet it difl'ers but little from it. As when a person becomes negligent in favor of a friend; for though favor, or too great a facility of temper, excuses a man from malicious or knavish purpose, yet it is next of kin thereunto. And it is a rule laid down in law. that when the law commands any act of deceit to be made good, it is also always understood of a lata culpa, or a grost; fault. Wherefore, since a great fault is equivalent or next unto deceit, it follows, thai ^n every disposition of law where it is said that an intent or dli courts have laid down a rule Avhich is perhaps more philosophical, — that where an injury has been sufiered through the act or omission of another, it must be shown, in order to avoid liability, that tl)e accident was caused without any fault of the party doing or suffering the act or omission, and through some latent cause, which could not be discerned, obviated, controlled, or averted. - In the discussion upon the Treaty of Washington in the House of Lords, Lord Granville, the Minister for Foreign AtTairs, is represented as saying: "The obligation to use due diligence implies that tiie Government will do all in its power to prevent certain things, and to detain vessels which it has reasonable ground for believing are designed for warlike jiurposes." ^ I^ord Cairns, in the same debate, is represented as saying: "The point turns upon the words *due diligence.' Now, the moment you introduce those words you give rise to another question, for which I do not find any solution in this rule. What is the standard bv whii^h you can measure due diligence? Due diligence by itself means nothing. What is due diligence with one man, with one Power, is not due diligence with another man, with a greater Power."'' Sir Roundell Palmer, in a subsequent debate in the House of Connnons, said that he supposed that due diligence "meant that a neutral should use, within a reasonable sense , all the means legitimately in its power." It is needless to say that the United States do not agree in these official definitions by Lord Granville and Sir Roundell Palmer, in the sense in which they are probably made. The delinition to which Lord Cairns has given the 1 Steamboat New World v^. King, 17 Howard Reports page 475. See also the authorities there cited. '^ Hay on Liabilities, ch. 8. ^ London Times, June 13, 1871. * A opeech delivered in the House of Commons, on Friday, August 4, 1871, by Sir Roundell Palmer, M. P. for Richmond. London and New York, Macmillan & Co., 1871 — page 28. DUTIES OF A NKUTRAL. 97 -\veigbt of his authority appears to be nearer to the ophiioiis as to these words, entertained by the United States. The United States understand that the diliuenee which is called for by the llules of the Treaty of Washington is a due diligence; that is, a diligence proportioned to the magni- tude of the subject and to the dignity and strength of the Power which is to exercise it: — a diligence which shall, by the use of active vigilance, and of all the other means iu the power of the neutral, through all stages of the trans- action, prevent its soil from being violated; — a diligence that shall in like manner deter designing men from committing acts of war upon the soil of the neutral against its will, and thus possibly dragging it into a war which it would avoid: — a diligence which prompts the neutral to the most energetic measures to discover any purpose of doing the acts forbidden by its good faith as a neutral, and imposes upon it the obligation, when it receives the knowledge of an intention to commit such acts, to use all the means in its power to prevent it. No diligence short of this would be "due;" that is, coin- mcnsurate with the emergency^ or with the magnitude of the results of negligence. Understanding the words in this sense, the United States lind them identical with the measure of duty which Great Britain had previously admitted. ^..,. It wil also be observed that littin"; out, or Fitting out, arm- ^ ^ ^ ... iug, or eiiuipping. arming, or equipping, each constitutes iu it- each an oti'euse. i,. ^ j. iv mm r i sell a complete onense. ihereiore a vessel Avliich is fitted out within the neutral's jurisdiction , with intent to cruise against one of the belligerents, althou;j;h not equipped or armed therein, (and vice versa.) commits the otlense against International Law, provided the neutral govern- ment had reasonable ground to believe that she was intended to cruise or carry on war against such belligerent, and did not use due diligence to prevent it. The second clause 'i'be neutral is required by the second clause of the first Rule, ^f ^l^Q ^[Yiit Rule of the Treaty to prevent the departure from its jurisdiction of any vessel intended so to cruise or carry on war, such vessel having been specially adapted, in whole or in part, ivithin such jurisdiction, to tvarlihc use. 98 DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL, Reasons for change '^^^^ Tribunal of Arbitration i)robably will of language. dqj; ],ave failed to observe that a new term is employed here. In the first clause of the first Rule the obligation of the neutral is limited to the prevention of the "fitting out, arming, and equipping"' the vessel. In the second clause, the language is much broader: a vessel which has been " specially adapted , in whole or in part , to war- like use," may not be permitted to depart. The reasons for this change may probably be found in the different inter- pretations which have been put by the Executive and Judicial Departments of the two Governments upon the words "fittin ■ ! ' ■ -'I- ■•!i 102 nUTlKS OF A NKIJTRAI-. her tvlicn sho reached jf our jurisdiction. I saj, thero- foi'o, ill the same way, prevent their entering your harbors until they give an account of themselves, to show how they became possessed of that vessel. This has a most important bearing, Jind one so apparent that it must be plain to th. apprehensions of every honorable gentleman wiio hears it." Also r-cognized 'A'he French (rovernment, during th.-* in- by France. surreetion, practically asserted the same power in the neutral to protect its violated sovereignty. The iJritish Government in 18G4 sold a screw gun -boat to persons who proved to be agents of the insurgents. This was done at a time when it was a matter of public notoriety that those agents were in England making great efforts to lit out a navy. The purchasers took the vessel to Calais to complete the equipment. On the way from the Thames to Calais the name of the vessel was changed to the "Rjippahannock," the insurgent flag was hoisteil, an insurgent officer, holding an insurgent commission, took the command, and the crew were mustered into the service of the insurgents. On arrival at Calais, attempts were made to complete the equipmt;nt. The French Government stopped this by placing a man-of-war across the bows, and holding the vessel as a prisoner, and the Rappahannock was thus prevented from destroying vessels and commerce, sailing under the flag v f a nation with which France was at peace. The second Rule '^^^ second Rule [>rovides that a neutral of the Treaty, government is bound not to permit or sufl^er either belligerent to make use of its ports or waters as the base of naval operations against the other, or for the pur- jiose of the renewal or augmentation of military supplies or arms, or the recruitment of men. A question has been raised whether this rule is under- stood to apply to the sale of military supplies or arms in the ordinary course of commerce. The United States do not understand that it is intended to apply to such a traffic. They understand it to apply to the use of a neutral port by a belligerent for the renewal or augmentation of such military supplies or arms for the naval operations referred to in the rule. Taken in this sense, the United Slates main- DUTIKS OK A NRUTRAI,. 103 tain that tlio same obli^itions are to be found, (expressed in other words,) first, in the Foroiji;n Enlistment Act of 1819; and, secondly, in the instructions to the naval forces of Great Britain during the rebellion, Ti»e Tribunal of Arbitration will not fail to observe the bicadth of this rule. The ports or waters of the neutral are not to be made the base of naval operations by a belligerent. Vessels of war may come and go under such rules and regulations as the neutral may p. .vscribe; food and the ordinary stores and supi)li(vs of a ship not of a warlike character may be furnished without question, in quantities necessary for immediate wants ; the moderate hospitalities which do not infringe upon im- partiality may be extended; but no act shall be done to make the neutral port a base of naval operations. Ammuni- tion and military stores for cruisers cannot be obtained there; coal cannot be stored there for successive supplies to tht^ same vessel, nor can it be furnished or obtained in such supplies; prizes cannot be brought there for condemnation. The repairs that humanity demand can be given, but no re- pairs should add to the strength or efficiency of a vessel, beyond what is absolutely necessary to gain the nearest of its own ports. In the same sense are to be taken the clauses relating to the renewal or augmentation of military supplies or arms and the recruitment of men. As the vessel enters the port, so is she to leave it, without addition to her effective power of doing injury to the other belligerent. If her magazine is supplied with powder, shot, or shells ; if new guns are added to her armament; if pistols or muskets or cutlasses, or other implements of destruction, are put on board; if men are re- cruited; even if, in these days when steam is a power, an excessive supply of coal is put into her bunkers, the neutral will have failed in the performance of its duty. Tiie third Rule of '^^6 third Rule binds the neutral to exercise the Treaty. f\^Q game measure of diligence as required by the first Rule, in order to prevent, in its own ports and waters, and as to all persons within its jurisdiction, any vio- lation of the obligations and duties prescribed by the first 104 IHTIKS t)F A NIU'TRAL. r > • and scrond Riili's. Tlio snino wakofiilnoss and wntclifulnoss, proportioned to t\w- «'xc', out whieli the neutral will have failed in the ])erfornianre of iiis duty. The express rccopiition in tlie Trcatv of Diitv to innko / i i' i \\ , compensation for an ohli-zation (in case the iribunal Imds that '"J"""'- Great Britain has failed to fulliU any of her duties in these respects) to i)ay to the United States the amount or amounts that may be found due, '^011 account of the liahilitii arising from such failure'' makes it unne- cessary, in this connection, to do more than to refer to what has already been said on that subject. Foregoing views The doctrines of International Law which in imr.non> with ] . ^1,^^^ |j^.^.,j deduccd from the practice of opinions ot huro- '^ pean publicists. Great l^rltain are in harmony with the views of the best publicists. The discussions between the two Gov- ernments growing out of the acts herein complained of, and unfortunately made necessary by the unwillingness of Great Britain to apply to the United States the same measure of justice which was applied to Spain in 1819, to Portugal in 1827, and whicli was received bv Great 15ritain from the United States in 1793, have evoked the comments of many writers in England, in America, and on the continent of Europe. For obvious reasons the opinions of the English or American writers favorable to their respective countries — (as for instance Professor Bernard in Great Britain or President Woolsey in America) — will not be regarded. On the 20th of May, 1805,^ Mr. Adams had occasion to quote to Lord Russell the opinion of Hautefeuille : " What the obligation o^ Her Majesty's Government really was, in this instance," he said, "is so clearly laid down by a distin- guished writer, notoriously disposed never to exaggerate the duties nor to undervalue the privileges of neutrals, that I will ask the liberty to lay before you his very words: 'Le fait de construire un batiment de guerre pour le compte ' Vol. Ill, page 538. 1)1 TIKS OF A NKITRAL. lo: ;) Bluntschli. (I'lm bellii^tTant, ou dc rannor dans les ('tats ncutrcs, est iiiu' vii)lation dii territoiro. Toutes l«'s prises faites par un Imtiiuent de cette naturo sout ill/'ij^itinics, en (juehpu' lieu (|u"ell<'s out ete faites. Le souveraiti olVeiise a lo droit de s'eii emparer, meme de force, si elles soiit ainenees dans ses ports, ct d'en reelanier la restitution lorsquelles sont, conune oela arrive en jfeneral, eonduites dans les ])orts liors de sa juri- diction. II ])eut e}j;alenient reclainer le desarnienient du bati- iiicnt illei^alenu'nt arnie sur son territoire, et memo le drtcnir, s'il entre ilans (juehjue lieu sounds a. sa souverainete jus(|u"a ce (|U*il ait ete desarme.' "" ^ The distinijuished Dr. Bluntschli, professor at the University of Heidelbero rendit c()ui)able lors de IVMpupement de I'Alabama, fut la circonstance la plus eclatante, mais non la seule dans laquelle so revelerent les dispositions hostiles du gouvernement anglais. II y cut encore d"autres croiseurs sudistes du meme genre. Les nombreux coureurs de blocus qui transportaient en memo temps de la contrebandc do guerre, avaient tous egalement lour origine et leurs proprietaires en Angleterre. Partout ou les troupes de Tunion fuiirent par remporter ct s'emparerent des jdaces ennemies, elles trouverent des armes anglaises et des canons anglais. " Tous les faits ainsi ail 'gues n'ont pas la memo importance, ^lais plusieurs d'entre eux, si tant est qu'il faille les tenir pour avoues ou prouves, — ce dont nous n'avons pas a juger ioi, — doivent certainement etre consideres comme constituant ime infraction aux devoirs d"un etat neutre. "L'etat neutre qui veut garantir sa neutralite, doit s'abstenir d'aider aucune des parties belligerantes dans ses operations de guerre. II nc pent preter son territoire pour permettre ^ Hautefeuille. Des droits et des devoirs des nations neutres, Paris, 1849,) tome 11, pages 79-80. _I,.-ll 10() piTTii:^ OK A NKrrnvr-. ,| I u runo (los purtu's d'organiser en lii'ii mu- (ios entreprisos inilitaircs. II ost ohligi' do vi'illor lidi'lt'tiKMit a re quo dos purticulions irarmont point sur son tonitoiiv ;anls aii\ juillet 181 i) contient a f*e sujet (art. 7) la disposition suivante: " ^And he it farther eriaefcd. That if any person within any part of the United Kingdom, or in any part of His Majesty's Dominions bevond the seas, shall, without the leave and license of His Majesty for that purpose lirst had and obtained as aforesaid, equip, furnish, lit out, or arm, or attempt DUTir.s itV A NKUTRAr., 107 •ontiont a CQ ni t'n(l«'avor to ecjuip, furnlsli, fit out, or iinii, or procure to Im" (M|ui|>|M'tl, t'lirnisluMl, littcd out, or ariucd, or shall kiio\vinliiM;i, littinii out, or arniinjj; of any sliip or vessel, with intent or in (trdcr ih;it >uch sliip or vessel >!iidl he cmjjlovcd in the scrv ice ot' any r()n'i«i"n prine«', state, or potentate, or ot' any toreii aineri(^aine de 1818, sur la neutralit('', hupielle ne faisait clle-momo rpie rmiser et retahlir la loi antijrieure de 1794. ('"est memo pr(3cis('ment la qu(3stion do ri''([uipement de corsaires sur un territoire noutre, au prolit dune partie belligerante, qui d(mna la premiere impulsion a cette h'l^islation. l^n 1793 I'Anoloterre, qui (itait a cette (^'])()([ue en f^uerre avec la France, se ])laignit de ce qn'k New- York on (jquipat des corsaires fran<,!ais, pour nuire au connnerce maritime anglais. Le Pr(!'sident Washington sijvit avec une grande (hiergio contre cette violation iKi la neutralit(3 et, malgrc" la sympathie de la population americaine pour les l'ran9ais, malgn? les d(imarclies de I'am- bassadeur fran^ais Genet, il lit saisir les corsaires. II em- pecha de la memo maniere la construction, en Gt'orgie, d'un oorsaire destine a entraver la navrgation fran9aise. Des deux I -,, ''«ij ' I! Il " ' 108 DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. ... . *- cotes, il observa conscicncieuscmcnt et raisonnablement los devoirs cVun »'tat neutre, ct detcrmina ensiiite le Congres ii n'^lcr ces devoirs par voie lejiislative. ^ "Le niiuistre liberal Canning; invoqiia dans le Parlement anglais, en 18"2o, eette lionorabli^ attitude de Washington. ])0ur delendre de son cote la loi anglaise sur In neutraliti; contre les attaques d'liommes politiques passiones ou de par- ticuliers egoistes. - "L'opinion du nionde savant et dii monde politique eclairr est presque unanime a reconnaitre ces principes, que le peupje americain et son premier President ont Tlionneur d'avoir proclames avant tons les autres, dans des textes de lois clairs et formels."' KolinJacquemyns. ]Mr. Rolin-Jacquemvns, in a notice of the ablo treatise of ISlr. Mountague l>ernard, published in the same review in 1871, says : "Dans le cas special de TAlabama, ^L M. Bernard insisto sur le fait que ce vaisseau, en sortant du port de Liverpool, n'avait ni un canon, ni un mousquet. II reput dans la bale de Moelfra environ quarante hommes d'equipage qui lui furent amenes de Liverpool, mais sans aucun materiel de fiuerre. C"est seulement a, Terceira, une des iles Azores, par consequent dans les eaux portugaises, (ju"il fut rejoint par la barque Agrippine, de Londres, et un })eu plus tard par le steamer Bahama, de Liverpool, qui lui amenerent ses ofllciers, son armement, les habits de I'equipage et un supplement do charbons. ^ Un fait antdogue s'est presente })0ur les corsaires Shenandoah et Gl'orgie, qui. egalement construits en Angleterri', en etaient egalement partis sans amies ni equipement. 'II est vrai,' dit M. M. Bernard, (p. ?y^'l.) 'que Tarmement fourni a ces vaisseaux leur fut expedie de dillerents ports anglais, cha<|ue 1 {Nute Inj M. Blunfsc/tli. )— ^^BEMiti , American Neutnditij, Boston, 18G6, p. 17, seq. ' {Note by M. Bluntschli.)—"'PiULhinoiiK, Intern. Laic, III, 217. ^ {Note by Mr. Rolm-Jacquemyns.) — "Ce point n'etait pas net- tement indique dans la version donnee par M. Sumner, V. t. I, p. 452, de la Hevue, ainsi que i'article de M. Bluntschli. V. aussi les publications citees plus haut de MM. Esperson et PlER.\NTOSI. i*,>®-v DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. 109 blement Ics fdis L'videuimont en vertu trun concert prealiible, mais c'est ce que le gouverncmont aiigljii.s ne .savait ui ne ])0uvait savoir,' rt })lus loin il essaie dV-tablir la these qu'iiii Lrouverneinent UL'Utre n'est pas oblige, en droit international, d'empeclier la f-oi'tie de ses ports de batiment.s ayant ra])parence de vaisseaux (le guerre, mais de.sarme.s, alors nieme (]ue Ton a des rai.sons de les croire construits pour le service d"un des belligcrants. (V. p. 385 et i)p. oi}0 et ss.) '•il nous semble que Tadoption d'une i)areille proposition equi\audrait a I'indication d'un moyen facile d'eluder la regie, (jui declare incompatible avec la neutralite d"uu ])ays I'or- ^iiuisation, .sur son territoire, d'expeditions militaires au service (run des belligerants. II suflira, s'il s'agit d"une entreprise maritime, de faire partir en deux ou trois fois les el(!'ments (|ui la constituent; d'abord le vaisseau, puis les liommes, puis les amies, et si tous ces elements ne se rejoignent que hors des caux de la puissance neutre qui les a laisses partir, la ]ieutralite sera intacte. Nous pensons que cette interpretation de la loi internationale n"est ni raisonnable, ni equitable. Sans doute il ne faut pas demander Timpossible, et })uisque le droit international actuel n'empeclie pas les neutres de jierniettre a leurs sujets I'exportation d'armes et de munitions de guerre a. I'usage des belligerants, on ne pent exiger que Ton arrete les armes dans le cas dont il s'agit. Mais cette tolerance n'est qu'une raison de plus pour se montrer scrui)uleux il I'egard des vaisseaux et des liommes. La consideration c|ue la fniude, ineme conlinee dans ces limites, sera encore praticable, (jue les bonimes 2)Ourront etre noniinalement engages jjour line destination })acilique, que la difference entre les vaisseaux de guerre et ceux de commerce ne se reconnait pas toujours il des caracteres certains, pent servir, dans les cas particuliers, il excuser ou a justilier la conduite du gouvernement neutre I qui. se laisse tromper aux apparences. Mais dans Tespece ces motifs de justilication ou d'excuse n'existent certainement pas. Bien que FAlabama n'ait ete armee ni dans la Mersey, ni dans la bale de Moelfra, il est certain que, des le 24 juiu, (plus d'un mois avant son depart,) INI. Adams avait iuforme ofliciellemeut Lord Russell qu'uu nouveau et puissant steamer etait pret a quitter Liverpool, dans le desseiu mauifeste de *» 4 110 DUTIES OF A JSEl'TRAL. i;ervir a 1m guerre maritime, et que les parties interessc'cs dans Tentreprise etaient des persoinies bien connues a Liver- ])Ool comme agents et officiers des insurges sudistes. ^ II est certain que, le 2 1 juillet, comme le coUccteur et les autoriti's des douanes avaient pretend u ne pouvoir agir sur des ren- seignements vagues, le consul des Etats-Unis leur remit six affidavits, et que le 2o juillet il leur en remit deux autres: que trois de ces documents etaient les depositions de marins engages a bord de I'Alabama, et attestant comme cliose notoire 'que le vaisseau etait un vaisseau de combat, (a figliting vessel,) construit et amenage tel, avec de grandes quantites de poudre, de cliarbons et de provisions; que les deposants avaient ete enroles par des personnes bien connues comme agents des Ktats-Confederes ; qu'ils n'avaient pas encore d'articles formels d'engagement, mais qu'il etait generalemeiit su a bord que le vaisseau etait un corsaire du gouvernement federal, destine a combattre les Etats-Unis en vertu d'une commission de JM. Jefierson Davis. " Un des marins ajoutait cette declaration caracteristique, qu'il avait ete deja captuiv comme coureur de blocus, et que son idee fixe etait de re- tourner dans le sud 'pour se venger sur les gens du nurd de ce qu'ils lui avaient pris ses habits.' On lui avait promis que cette occasion ne tarderait pas a se ])resenter. ^ "A ces aflldavits etait jointe une consultation emanee d'lui des premiers avocats d'Angleterre, ]\1. Collier, lequel, sur le vu des pieces, emettait I'opiuion qu'une violation du ^i^oreign £Jfllistmcut Acf etait etablie, et que le collecteur des douanes avait le droit et le devoir d'arreter le vaisseau. "Six jours encore s'ecoulerent avant le rapport des jnris- 1 "M. Bernard, p. 339. ' (Note by Mr. Itolin-Jacquemyns.) — "'It is well known by the hands on board that the vessel is a privateer for the con- federate government to act against the United States under a commission from Mr. Jefferson Davis.' Aftid. No. 1, Bernaiid, p. 3G3. 3 {Note 1)1/ Mr. no/in-Jac(jiie)nj/»s.)—''A{i\d. No. 8, p. 3G0. 'I wanted to get South in order to have retaliation of the Northerners for rohbing me of my clothes. He [I'agfnt dos etats du sud] said that if I went with him in his vessel I should very shortly have that opportunity.' DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. Ill consultes OflicieLs, (Law Oflicer.s.) Ce I'ut le "29 juillet seule- iiient qu'ils conclureiit egalement a ce que le vaisseaii fiit nrrete. Mais le 28, le corsaire, averti qu'on allait reiiipecber de partir, se Latait de quitter, qiiatrc jours plus tot (jltHl ne se Vetait propose^ le bassin ou il «e trouvait, et le 29 il prenait la mer. ^ Cependaut il ne quitta les eaux auglaises que le 31. "M. Bernard ne croit pas que la sortie de F Alabama, effectuee dans ces circonstances, suflise pour justilier I'impu- tation de faute grave, de coupable negligence, a la charge du governement anglais. II couvient toutefois que ni un Anglais, ni un Aniericain n'a peut-etre le droit d'avoir sur cette question une conliance implicite dans son propre juge- iiient. Mais il ne voir pas ce qui I'empecherait de dire que raccusation lui parait legerc et deraisonnahle. Quant a nous, nous ne voyons pas comment il serait possible a quelqu'un qui n'est ni Anglais, ni Americain, de partager cette patriotique indulgence." Mr. Theodore Ortolan, of the French navy, from his practical experience, as well as from his theoretical knowledge and his high reputation as a publicist, is recognized as a writer of authority ou ihese subjects. In a late edition of his Diplomatie de la mer - he discusses the subject of neutral obligations with special reference to the tlitl'erences between Great Britain and the United States. He says : "Si Ton suppose un navire construit sur le territoire neutre, lion pas sur commando d'un belligerant ou jjar suite d'un traite ostensible ou dissinuile avec ce belligerant, mais en vue d'un dessein quclconque, soit de navigation commerciale, soit tout autre, et que ce navire, deja par lui-meme jjropre a H i^uerre ou de nature a etre converti a cet usage, une fois sorti des ports de la nation neutre, soit vendu, dans le cours de sa navigation, occasionellement, a I'un des belligerants, et se mette a naviguer en destination directo pour ce belligerant: un tel navire dans de telles circonstances tombe uniquement ^ {Note by Mr. Jiolin-Jacquenujns.) "Affidavit de Clarence Yonge, cite par M. Bernard, p. 345, en note. " Diplomatie de la mer, tome 2, page 208. Ill *• 112 DUTIES OF A N:^UTRAL. sous le coup (les regies relatives a la contrebaiule do guerre. II est sujet a etre arrete ct conlisque par rennenii qui pourra s'en emparer, inais sans qu'aucun grief de violation des de- voirs do la neutralite puisse sortir de ce fait contre I'etat neutre j)0ur n'avoir pas defendu a ses nationaux de telles rentes ou ne les avoir ])as reprimees. C'est une operation de tralic qui a eu lieu, tralic de contrebande de guerre, dont aucune circonstance i)articuliere n'est venue changer le caractere. '•Tel fut, en I'annee 1800, le cas du navire americain Ic Brutus, cai)ture par les Anglais et juge de bonne prise par la cour d'amiraute d'Halifax. * 5K * "Mais la situation change, la contrebande de guerre nVst plus la question i)rincii)ale, d'autres regies du droit des gens interviennent et modilient profondenicnt la solution, si Ton suppose qu'il s'agisse de batinients de guerre construits, armes ou equipes sur un territoire neutre pour le compte d'uu belligerant, par suite d'arrangement ]U'is a Tavance avec lui, sous la forme d'un contrat commercial quelconque: vente, connnission, louage d'industrie ou de travail; que les arrange- ments aient ete pris ostensiblement ou qu'ils le soient d'une maniere secrete oi^deguisee; car la loyaute est une condition essentielle dans la solution des diflicultes Internationales, et sous le convert de fausses apparenees, il faut toujours aller au fond des choses. II v a ici, incontestablement, une seconde hypothese qu'il importe de distinguer soigneusement de lu precedijnte. "Nous nous rattacherons, pour resoudre en droit des gens les diflicultes que jiresente cette nouvelle situation, a un priii- cipe universellement etabli, qui se formule en ce j)ea de mots: 'Inviolabilite du territoire neutre.' Cette inviolabilite est un droit pour I'etat neutre, dont le territoire ne doit pas etre atteint par les faits de guerre, mais elle impose aussi a ce meme etat neutre une etroite obligation, celle de ne pas permettre, celle d'empecher, activement au besoin, Temploi de ce territoire par I'une des jjarties ou au prolit de I'une des parties belligerantes, dans un but hostile a I'autre partie. "Les publicistes eu credit ne font aucun doute pour ce qui JMjb-£ DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. 113 concerne I'armement et rrquipement dans uii port neutre de batiments de guerre destines a accroitre les forces des bellige- rants. lis s'aceordent pour reconnaitre rillegalite de ces armements ou equipements, comme une infraction de la part de Tetat neutre qui les tolererait aux devoirs de la neutralite- "N'est-il pas evident qu'il en doit etre de meme a fortiori de la construction de pareils batiments , lorsque cette construction a lieu dans les conditions prevues en notre seconde liypothese?" Tlie attention of Italian jurists and publicists bas also been attracted to the discussion. A learned and exhaustive pamphlet appeared at Florence in 1870 from the pen of Professor Pierantoni. Without claiming the extreme rights which this learned gentleman concedes to them, the United States invite the attention of the Tribunal of Arbitration to the follow 1;^ expression of opinion: "Dopo die nella sez. XXII, il professor di Pierautoni. n ■ ^- i ^ -i • i < t ravia sostiene clie ne li governo niglese ne gli altri governi debbano assumere la giuridica responsabilita delle depredazioni commesse dai corsari separatisti, nella seguente sez. XXIII, passa ad esaminare il secondo suo assunto: se la neutralita fu violata dalla Gran Bretagna per la costruzione dell' Alabama, legno corsaro, e pel consentito armamento nei cantieri inglesi. Egli in brevi tiermini chiama I'lnghilterra responsabile dei soli danni cagionati dalle depredazioni del detto legno, scrivendo : 'Di queste perdite soltauto deve rispon- dere il governo britannico, per essere le medesime una con- seguenza immediata di un fatto illegittimo, die ebbe luogo da sua parte, violaiido apertamente le leggi della neutralita.' "lo non posso acconsentire a questa mite conchiusione, anzi me ne diseosto per considerazioni di fatto e di diritto. In linea di fatto, io non intendo come il chiarissimo autore tsoluda le altre sjjecie di offese, die il Sumner ed il suo governo adducono di aver patite dalla nazione americana. (sic.) Nella esposizione dell' argomento ho citato i tre capi, nei qiudi riassume il Sumner la serie delle offese patite. II case (id vascello costrutto a Liverpool e il piu grave; ma gli Americani sostengono die avvennero altri simiglianti casi, e sino a prova contraria non e lecito circoscrivere il numero dei fatti addotti come offensivi. 8 t y T " 1, t i H 114 DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. ( ^ "In diritto, io non so, che in questa tjeconda parte lo scrittore non ricorre ad alcuna dimostrazione dottrinale, perehe eoli limiti le conseguenze della violata neutralitk al seinplico rifacimento de' danni eagionati dal legno corsaro. "I principii della neutralitk soltanto accennati dimostrano piu grave la responsabilita del governo che la violb." ^ Lastly, the United States cite, for the con- Lord Westbury. ^.^^.^.j^^iJ^ ^^^ ^j^^ Tribunal, the authority of Lord Westbury, Lord High Chancellor of England during the rebellion, who, on the 7th day of March, 1868, in a dis- cussion in the House of Lords on these questions, said: "There was one rule of conduct which undoubtedly civilized nations had agreed to observe, and it was that the territory of a neutral should not be the base of military operations by one of two belligerents against the other. In speaking of the base of operations, he must, to a certain degree, differ from the noble earl, [Earl Russell.] It tvas not a question whether armed ships had actually left our shores; hut it was a question ivhether ships with a view to ivar had hcen built in our ports hy one of two helligercnts. They need not have hcen armed; hut if they had hcen laid down and built with a view to warliJce operations hy one of two belligerents, {ind this was hnowingly per- mitted to be done hy a neutral Potver, it tvas unquestion- ably a breach of neutrality.'"'^ The public and official acts of other European Govern- ments have also been in harmony with the principles which are claimed in this paper to have been violated by Great Britain. Case of Swedisch During the war between Spain and the vessels. Spanish- American Colonies, the Government of Sweden sold, in the ordinary course of commerce, to some private individuals, some vessels of war, after first di.[)ari'es d"».*lh' sans retour. oonclut avcc Ic Mexique uu trait/' do paix et d'amitit'*. "En agissant aiitn'inent qiiVllo le lit, cV'st-ii-ilire en persis- tant a repousser les rt'cianiations du cliarge d'affaires d'Espagno, la Suede, nous le n'-petons, aurait manque aux devoirs et aux obligations de la neutralite. C'eut «''te se preter a favoriscr Tun des deux belligcTants, (et, dans le cas actuel, en IS 2 5, le belligerant favorise etait un i)euple dont la con- dition politique etait encore indeterniint'e,) (jue de ne pas ])rendre les mesures necessaires pour que les batiments de guerre reformes, vendus avec un demi-armement, u'allassent pas uccroitre les forces navales d'une colonic de TEspagne, insurgee contre Tautorite du roi catliolique."" „„. .. , It may possibly be asserted that the eon- Oftondiiif^ vessels . " , . not simply contra- struction, or the iitting out, or the arming, band of war. ,, . , , x i r- i i* or the equipment by neutrals oi vessels ot war intended for the service of a belligerent were, before tiie Treat}' of Washington, to be regarded as standing upon the same footing witli the dealings in articles ordinarily esteemed contraband of war. Should this be the case, the United States might content themselves with a reference to the history of the legislation of the two countries, ; s a complete answer to such an assertion. While the subjects or citizens of either country have been left by law free to manufacture, or sell muskets or gunpowder, or to export them at their own risk, even if known to be for the use of a belligerent, the legislatures, the executives, and the judiciaries of both Great Britain and the United States, have joined the civilized world in saying that a vessel of war, intended for the use of a belligerent, is not an article in which the individual subject or citizen of a neutral State may deal, subject to the liability to capture as contraband by the other belligerent. Such a vessel has been and is regarded as organized war — more clearly organized war than was that unarmed expedition which left Plymouth in 1828 for Portugal,^ and was arrested by the British navy f "• ^ During the contest in Portugal between Don Miguel and Donna Maria II, an unarmed expedition of the adherents of 120 1)1 r IKS OK A NKITRAL. at tho snTiic Toivoira to wliicli the Alaliania fled to roroiv(j the arms and aininmiltion tliat she iiiiled to takt; on board at Liverpool, cither because tlie jjiirposes of the For.M^ii Oflico were surreptitiously revealed, or because the insurp;ent ap;ents had ri'ason to believe that they could evad(^ the law by the construction of the vessel on one sidy of tho river Mersey, tho collection of the armament on the other side of it, and the })Utting them to^iether more than three miles out at sea. It is not, however, necessary for the United States to rely in this respect upon the action ot" the several bran(;hes of the (iovernments of tlie two countries. Tlie question has been considered by several of the leading publicists of the Continent. Ortolan, in his "Diplomatic de la mer,""' says, in addition to what has already been cited: Opinion of Orto- "^ P''*'^ toute prohibition faitc le|2;islative- ''*"• ment par telle ou telle nation, il faut, err droit international, considerer comme des actes decidement contraires a la neutralite, rcqui[)ement et Tarmement et, a plus forte raison, la construction dans les ports neutres de batiments de gu«MTe a])partenant aux belligerents, ou destines, par concert ostensible ou dissimuh^ avec les belligerants a etre remis en leur pouvoir. Nous croyons fermement qu'il est impossible d'assimiler do pareils actes a la contrebande de guerre proprement aite et que Tobligation pour un etat neutre de s'opposer a, co qu'ils a lent lieu sur son territoire est independante de toute loi interieurc ou particuliere a Donna Maria left Portsmouth, ostensibly for Brazil, but really for the Azores. The British Government of that day pursued it to Toreeira, fired into it and broke it up; and they were sustained in the House of Lords bv a vote of 12G to 31, and in the House of Commons by a vote of 191 to 78. (Hansard for 1830, Vol. XXIII. See also Annual Register for 1829, and Phillimore's International Law, Vol, I, page 229, et seq.) Tlie Tribunal of Arbitration will not fail to observe how dif- ferently the powers and duties of tlie Government were con- strued by the British Government when it was a question of the disintegration and disruption of the commerce of tlie United States. ^ Diplomatie de la mer, Ortolan, tome 2, page 214. encore i nrriEH of a nkituai- 121 And ol" lletrter. (•»>( ('tnt; (\\u' lii l(ti intV'ritum' pent ct doit sjnutionncr cctto (ilili^iition, tnuis (prclli' lie sauruit ni la fn'«'i- ni lu lontaire de d('})eclies de Tun des belligerants. "Ces diverses contraventions, lors(|u"elle.s sont regulierement co^'statees, entrainent la saisie et la conliscation du navire employe au transport. La confiscation s\''tend egalenient a la cargaison, s"il est etabli que les proprietaires avaient connaissauce du but illicite du vovage. Toutet'ois cette penalite u'est pas toujours executee k leur egard avec la meme severite. En ri'-alite elle constitue un acte de legitime defense auquel le neutre qui se rend complice de Tun des belligerants, no saurait echapper du cote de Tadversaire. "En dehors des cas qui viennent d'etre enumeres, il existe encore un certain nombre d'objets dont le commerce est regarde d'uue maniere plus ou moins generate dans la pra- tique des etats comma prohibe. 11 constitue la contrebande de guerre proprcment dite.*' ' HetTter, Droit international^ (French translation by Jules Bergson, Paris,) page 296. . .11 -••4. '• 1 i 122 DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. Casn of the Sail- Without woiirviiig the patience of the Tri- tisima Trinidad, buiial ill the further (Uscussion of this question, it will be assumed that a vessel of war is not to be con- founded with ordinary contral)and of war. Indeed, the only respectable authority which has been cited even apparently to the contrary, is an observation which Mr. Justice Storv thrust into the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States, upon the case of the Santisima Trinidad.^ If that eminent jurist had said that a vessel of war was to be regarded in public law as an article which might be legitimately constructed, fitted out, armed, equipped, or dealt in by a person in the territory of a neutral, with the intent that it i^hould enter the service of a belligerent, subject only to a liability to capture as contraband of war by the other belligerent, the United States would have been forced, with great regret, to ask this Tribunal to disregard an opinion so at variance with common sense, and with the whole current of the action of nations. Happily they are under no necessity of casting an imputation on the memory of one of their brightest juridical ornaments. Durins; the last war between the United States and Great Britain a privateer, called the Monmouth, was constructed at Baltimore , and cruised against the enemy. After the peace she was stripped of her armament, and converted into a brig. She was subsequently loaded with munitions of war, armed with a portion of her original armament, and sent to Buenos Ayres, (which was then a revolted colony of Sintiii recoo'nized as a belliiierent , but not recognized as an inde- pendent government), to lind a market for her munitions of war. The supercargo was also authorized "to sell the vessel to the Government of Buenos Ayres ?'f lie could ohtain u suitable price."' He did sell her, and she went into the service of that Government as a man - of- war. She sub- sequently put into a port of the United States , and while there enlisted thirty new men, and took with her, when she put to sea, the newly -enlisted men, and a tender, whieli carried some mounted liuns and twentv-live men. After thi-> ^ 7 Wheaton's Reports, page 283. DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. 123 addition to her oi?ective power for injury, assisted by the tender, she captured the Spanish vessel Santisima Trinidad, nnd carried her cargo into Norfolk, one of the ports of the United States. On the instigation of the Spanish authorities, proceedings were taken for the restitution of this property, on the ground, first, that the Independencia had been origin- ally illegally litted out, armed, or equipped in the United States; secondly, that she had, after entering the service of Biionos Ayres, illegally recruited men and augmented her force within the United States. The court decreed a restitu- tion of the property on the second ground. Any remarks, therefore, upon the lirst point were outside of the require- ments of the case, and, under the American practice, would be regarded as without authority; but inasmuch as they were made by one of the most eminent writers on public law, they deserve the consideration which they have received. Taking them in connection with the facts as shown in evidence, it is clear that the distinguished judge intended to oonfme his statement to the case of a vessel of war equipped and dispatched as a commercial venture, without previous arrangement or understanding with the belligerent, and at the sole risk of the owner. "It is apparent," he says, "that she was sent to Buimos Ayres on a commercial venture." The whole of his subsequent remarks turned upon the ab- sence of an intent, in Baltimore, in the mind of the owner, before she sailed, that she should, in any and at all events, whether sold or not , go into the service of the belligerent. The judges who were brought in contact with the wit- nesses in that case, and had access to all the original papers, and knew personally both the men and the facts, and who, therefore, had opportunities wl ich are denied to us of judging of the merits of the case, seem to have reached the con- chision that this particular transaction was a jjurely com- mercial venture; and they placed the decree of restitution of the captured property upon later violations of law. It may, honever, be said that the ordinary experiences of litunan life show that such deeds border U})on the debatable ground between good faith and fraud. The court which de- cided that case evidently did so on tlie impressions which • 1 t .. ■ I' 4' 124 DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. . ♦ ^i \ tlie iu(l;Te.s received from the partieular evidence before them; for, on the very next day, the most illustrious case o/the (irau of American judges, »John Marshall, then Chief ^*^^" Justice of the United States in the parallel case of the Irresistible, a vessel built at Baltimore, sent to Buenos Ayres, and there commissioned as a privateer, pro- nouncing the opinion of the same court, declared that the facts as to the Irresistible showed a violation of the laws of the United States in the original construction, equipment, and arming of the vessel; and that, should the court decide otherwise, the laws for the preservatmi of the neutralitij of the country would he completely eluded. ^ In justice to the highest court of the United States , these two cases should be read together by all persons wishing to know its views upon the duties of a neutral nation in time of war, since if there be any difference in the principles involved in the two cases , then the true construction of the law is to be found in the carefully considered language of the court in the case of the Gran Para. The cases were both argued in February, 1822: the Gran Para upon the 20th, and the Santisima Trinidad on the 2Sth. The opinions were de- livered in March : that of the Santisima Trinidad on the 12th; that of the Gran Para on the loth. There can be no doubt that thev were considered together in the con- sultation-room. Therefore any apparently broad or ill con- Effect of a com- sidered expressions in the 0})inion rendered on mission of the ot- ^j^g i2th of March are to be regarded as iender as ;i vessel ^ '^ of war. limited and corrected by the carefully con- sidered expressions of the Chief Justice on the follow- ing day. Having thus demonstrated that the principles for which the United States contend have been recognized by the states- men, the jurists, the })ublicists , and the legislators of Great Britain: that they have the approbation of the most eminent authorities upon the continent of l*]urope: and tliat they have been regarded by the other Powers of Europe in their deal- ing with each other, it only remains to show how tlu- ^ The Grand Para, 7 Wheatoii's Reports, 471. DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. 125 :^\ liability of the neutral for the acts of crui?>era illegally built, or equipped, or fitted out, or armed within its ports, may be terminated. It has been intimated, in the course of the discussions upon these questions between the two Governments, that it may be said, on the part of Great Britain, that its power to interfere with, to arrest, or to detain either of the bel- ligerent cruisers whose acts are complained of ceased when it was commissioned as a man-of-war; and that, consequently, its liability for their actions ceased. The United States might well content themselves with <;alling the attention of the Tribunal of Arbitration to the utter uselessness of discussing these questions, if the liability to make compensation for the wrong can be escaped in such a frivolous way. It is well known how the several British- built and British-manned cruisers got into the service of the insurgents. Few of them ever saw the line of the coast of the Southern insurgent States. The Florida, indeed, entered the harbor of Mobile, but she passed the blockading squadron n a British man-of-war. In most cases the commissions went out from England — from a branch office of the insurgent Navy Department , established and maintained in Liverpool at the cost and expense of the insurgent so-called Govern- ment. From this office the sailing orders of the vessels were issued; here their commanders received their instructions; and hence they departed to assume their commands and to begin the work of destruction. They played the comedy of completing on the high seas what had been carried to the verge of completion in England. The parallel is complete between these commissions and those issued by Genet in 1793, which were disregarded by the United States at the instance of Great Britain. If a piece of paper, emanating through an English office, from men who had no nationality recognized by Great Britain, and who had no open port nito which a vessel could go unmolested, was potent not only to legalize the depredations of British built and manned cruisers upon the commerce of the United States , but also to release the responsibility of Great Britain therefor, then this arbi- tration is indeed a farce. Such, however, cannot be the case. • ,' -I ' » .» i !; » t . 1' 126 DUTIES OF A KEURRAL. i Opinion of Sir ^^^ Rouiidell Palmer, the Attorney General Roundeii Palmer, ^f Lord Palnierstou's Cabinet, as well as of the present Government, well said, in the House of Com- mons, in 1864, when defending the course of Great Britain as to the Tuscaloosa, a tender of the Alabama, "Can it be said that a neutral Sovereign has not the right to make orders for the preservation of his own neutrality, or that any foreign Power whatever violating these orders, provided it be done willfully or fraudulently, is protected to any ex- tent, by International Law, within the neutral territory, or has the right to complain , on the ground of International Law, of any means which the neutral Sovereign may see lit to adopt for the assertion of his territorial rights?" * * "It is a mere question of practical discretion, judgment, and moderation what is the proper way of vindicating the offended dignity of the neutral Sovereign." ^ Opinion of ciiief '^^^ United States do not deny the force Justice Marshall. of the commission of a man-of-war issuing from a recognized Power. On the contrary, they point with a pardonable pride to the exhaustive language of Chief Justice Marshall on this subject - as evidence of what they under- stand to be the practice of nations. Nor do they deny that since Great Britain had, however precipitately and un- justly, recognized the existence of a civil war between the United States and the insurgents , and avowed a determina- tion to remain neutral between the parties, she might, with- out a violation of the law of nations, commit the further injustice of allowing to such vessels of war of the insurgents as had not been built, armed, equipped, furnished, litted out, supplied, or manned within her territory, in violation of her duty to the United States, the same rights of asylum, hospitality, and intercourse which she conceded to the vessels of war of the United States. They do, however, most con- fidently deny that the receipt of a commission by a vessel like the Alabama, or the Florida, or the Georgia, or the ^ Hansard, 3d series, vol. 174, page 1595. - The Schooner Exchange against McFadden et als., 7 Cranch's Reports, llG. DUTIES OF A NFUTRAL. 127 . '\- Shenandoah, exempted Great Britain from tlie liability grow- ing out of the violation of her neutrality. To this point they are fortunately able to cite two from the many pertinent cases adjudicated in the Supreme Court of the United States, which show directly what the public law in this resT)ect is understood to be, not only by the United States, but also by Spain and by Portugal. ^ . . , ^. The first is the case of the Santisima Trinidad. ^ Decision oi tne Supreme Court of the facts of which havB already been given. The the United States 2. r u- i. ^.-^ j.' i • i • in the cases of the property tor which restitution was claimed in Santisima Trinidad ^his case was Spanish. The libel was filed by and the bran Fara. _ ^ J the Spanish Consul at Norfolk on behalf of the owners. The capture was shown to have been made after a commission to the vessel, expressly recognized by the court rendering the decision. Nevertheless, restitution was decreed on the ground of an illegal increase of armament in the neutral territory after the commission. The second case is that of the Gran Para, - also already alluded to. The libel was filed by the Consul General of Portugal. The opinion of the court was given by Chief Justice Marshall. The facts are set forth so clearly in the opinion that no other statement is necessary. The Chief Justice, in announcing the judgment of the court, said: "The principle is now firmly settled that prizes made by vessels which have violated the acts of Congress that have been enacted for the preservation of the neutrality of the United States, if brought within their territory, shall be restored. The only question, therefore, is, Does this case come within the principle? "That the Irresistible was purchased, and that she sailed out of the port of Baltimore, armed and manned as a vessel of war, for the purpose of being employed as a cruiser against a nation with whom the United States were at peace, is too clear for controversy. That the arms and ammunition were cleared out as cargo cannot vary the case. Nor is it thought to be material that the men were enlisted in form as for a common mercantile voyage. There is nothing re- 4 i. '<^ . 4 \a . >! r^ . ■ * ^ 7 Wheaton, 283. ^ 7 Wheaton, 471. 128 DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. sembling a commercial adventure in any part of the transaction. The vessel was constructed for war and not for commerce. There was no cargo on board but what was adapted to the purposes of war. Tlie crew was too numerous for a merchant- man, and was suflicient for a privateer. These circumstances demonstrate the intent with which the Irresistible sailed out of the port of Baltimore. But she was not commissioned as a privateer, nor did she attempt to act as one until she reached the river La Plata, when a commission was obtained, and the crew reenlisted. This court has never decided that the offense adheres to the vessel, whatever changes may have taken place, and cannot be deposited at the termination of the cruise in preparing for which it was committed; and as the Irresistible made no prize on her passage from Baltimore to the rive of La Plata, it is contended that her offense was deposited there, and that the court cannot connect her subsequent cruise with the transactions at Baltimore. "If this were to be admitted in such a case as this, the laws for the preservation of our neutrality would be com- i^letely eluded, so far as this enforcement depends on the restitution of prizes made in violation of them. Vessels completely fitted in our ports for military operations need only sail to a belligerent port, and there, after obtaining a commission, go through the ceremony of discharging and reenlisting their crew, to become perfectly legitimate, cruisers, purified from every taint contracted at the place where all their real force and capacity for annoyance was acquired. This would, indeed, be a fraudulent neutrality, disgraceful to our own Government, and of which no nation would be the dupe. It is impossible for a moment to disguise the fact, that the arms and ammunition taken on board the Irresistible at Baltimore were taken for the purpose of being used on a cruise, and that the men there enlisted, though engaged in form as for a commercial voyage, were not so engaged in fact. There was no commercial voyage, and no individual of the crew could believe there was one. Although there might be no express stipulation to serve on board the Irre- * sistible after her reaching the La Plata and obtaining a commission, it must be completely understood that such was DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. 129 1 the Irre- to Le the fact. For what other purpose could they have undertaken this voyage? P^verythhig they saw, everything that was done, spoke a language too plain to be misunderstood. * :!« The principle re- cognizi'd by France,Great Brit- ain, Spain, Por- tugal, and the United States. "It is, therefore, very clear that the Irresistible was armed and manned in Baltimore, in violation of the laws and of the neutral obhgations of the United States. We do not think that any circumstances took place in the river La Plata, by force of which this taint was removed." The course of the French Government during tlie insurrection in the caseof theRappahaonock, already referred to, practically asserted the power of the neutral to protect its violated sovereignty, even against a commissioned vessel of war. The British Government itself recognized this principle when it ordered the Alabama to be seized at Nassau, and when it found fault with the Governor of the Cape of Good Hope for not detaining the Tuscaloosa at Cape Tov.n. The principle for which the United States contend has therefore been recognized by Great Britain, Spain, Portugal, France, and the United States. Deposit of the ^t is not deemed necessary to add to the offense. forcible views of Chief Justice Marshall in the case of the Gran Para, as to the deposit of the offense of the cruiser. The United States only ask that the same just rules which they, through their highest judicial ofticer and most eminent jurist, have established for offenses committed on their own soil, may be applied to the offenses against British neutrality from which they l.dve suffered. The Ala- bama, tlie Georgia, the Florida, the Shenandoah, and the other insurgent vessels of war made no cruise that was not planned on British soil. Their respective cruises were to last till the independenc^e of the Confederacy should be estab- lished. The career of the Florida terminated at Bahia — that of the Alabama oft' Cherbourg. The Shenandoah and the Georgia came eventually into the possession of the United States. The principal injuries, which will be hereinafter set forth, came from the acts of these vessels. There were, however, other vessels, whose careers and crimes, as well as those of the above-named four, will now be given in detail. 9 »>r • J 130 DUTIES OF A NEUTRAL. ue8un.e of prin- Before procGcdin^r to do so, it will b(; well to ripies. ,iot(- the points which have been thus far made. The United States trust that they have established to the satisfaction of the Tribunal of Arbitration as against Great Britain — 1. That it is the duty of a neutral to preserve strict and impartial neutrality as to both belligerents during hostilities. {See the Queen^s rroclamation; also extracts from various writers on International Laiv above cited.) 2. That this obligation is independent of municipal law. {See as above.) 3. That a neutral is bound to enforce its municipal laws and its executive proclamation; and that a belligerent has the right to ask it to do so; and also the right to ask to have the powers conferred upon the neutral by law increased if found insufficient. {See the precedents in General Wash- ington's administrations; Lord JPalmerston's speech of July 23, 1863; the opinion of the British Attorn eu General during the Crimean war; and the United States Special Law of March 10, 1838.) 4. That a neutral is bound to use due diligence to prevent the fitting out, arming, or equipping, within its jurisdiction, of any vessel which it has reasonable ground to believe is intended to cruise or to carry on war against a Power with which it is at peace. {See 1st Hide of the Treaty; also the Foreign Enlistment Acts of 1819 and 1870; also the precedents in General Washington's administration; also the writers on hiternational Law who have been cited.) 5. That a neutral is bound to use like diligence to prevent the construction of such a vessel. {See Foreign Enlistment Act of 1870; also the action of the United States Govern- ment in 18G9; also the writers on hiternational Laic above cited.) (!. That a neutral is bound to use like diligence to prevent the departure from its jurisdiction of any vessel intended to cruise or carry on war against any Power with which it is at peace: such vessel having been specially adapted, in whole or in part, within its jurisdiction, to warlike use. {See 1st Bide of the Treaty; also the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1870.) DUTIES OF A NEUTUAL. 131 7. That a neutral may not permit or .suffer either belligerent to make use of its ports or waters as the base of naval operations against the other. {See 2d liuU of the Treatif^ the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1870, and ike writers on International Law above cited; also the instructions to the British naval forces during the Southern insurrection.) 8. That a neutral is bound to use due diligence in its ports or waters, to prevent either belligerent from obtaining there a renewal or augmentation of military supplies, or arms for belligerent vessels, or the recruitment of men. {See 2d Bute of the Treaty ; also the precedents of General Washington's administration; also the Foreign Enlistment Acts of 1810 and 1870; also the Queen's Proclamation). 0. That when a neutral fails to use all the means in its power to prevent a breach of the neutrality of its soil or waters, in any of the foregoing respects, the neutral should make compensation for the injury resulting therefrom. {See precedents of General Washington'' s administration he- tivecn Great Britain and the United States; treaty of 1794 bet ween Great Britain and the United States; treaty of 1819 between the United States and Spain; correspondence between Bortugal and the United States, 1817—22, and Articles VII and X of the Treaty of Washington.) 10. That this obligation is not discharged or arrested by the change of the offending vessel into a public man-of-war. {See the cases of the Santisima Trinidad and the Gran Para, above cited.) 1 1 . That this obligation is not discharged by a fraudulent attempt of the offending vessel to evade the provisions of a local municipal law. {See the Gran Para, as above; also Bluntschli and other writers on International Laiv.) 12. That the offense will not be deposited so as to re- lease the liability of the neutral even by the entry of the offending vessel in a port of the belligerent, and there be- coming a man-of-war, if any part of the original fraud con- tinues to hang about the vessel. {Sec the Gran Para, as above.) i ■ "•i vi 9= PART IV. WHEREIN GREAT BRITAIN FAILED TO PERFORM ITS DUTIES AS A NEUTRAL. Admissions of "There is no doubt that Jefferson Davis and British Cabinet other leaders of the South have made an army; Ministers. ^.|jgy ^^e making, it appears, a navy." — Speech of Mr. Gladstone, Chancellor of the Exchequer, October 7, 1862. "It has been usual for a power carrying on war upon the seas to possess ports of its own in which vessels are built, equipped, and fitted, and from which they issue, to which they bring their prizes, and in which those prizes when brought before a court are either condemned or restored. But it so happens that in this eouflict the Confederate States have no ports except those of the Mersey and the Clyde, from which they fit out ships to cruise against the Federals; and having no ports to which to bring their prizes, they are obliged to burn them on the high seas." — Speech of Karl Russell, Principal Secretari/ of State for Forein Affairs, April 26, 1864. "Her Britannic Majesty has authorized her High Commis- sioners and Plenipotentiaries to express in a friendly spirit the regret felt by Her Majesty's Government for the escape, under whatever circumstances, of the Alabama and other vessels from British ports, and for the depredations committed by those vessels." — Treaty of Washington, Article I. The extracts which are placed at the head of this di- vision of the Case of the United States are at once evidence of the facts which will now be set forth, and a condensation of the line of argiinieiit which those facts logically suggest. The United States summon no less illustrious a jierson thau WUEREIN (iliEAT BKITAIN FAIJ.KD TO &C. 133 FORM ITS the present Prime Minister of Eii;^lai)(l, to prove, not only that the insurgents were engaged in the year 1802 in mak- ing a "iivy, but tluit the i'aet was known to the gentlemen who tlien constituted Iler Majesty's Government. Tliey phiec on the stand as their next witness Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs during the whole period of the rebellion, to [)rov(! where the insurgents were constructing that navy, and why they were constructing it in the Mersey inid the Clyde; and further, to prove that these facts, also, were known at the time to th(^ gentlemen who then constituted Her Majesty's Government. And lastly, they lay before the Tribunal of Arbitration the graceful and kindly testimony of the regret of Her ^lajesty's Government that the escape ■■ of the cruisers, which were built in Great Piritain, with tlie knowledge of the Ciovernment, and whieh consti- tuted that navy, should have resulted in the subsequent de- struction of the projierty of citizens of the United States. In discussing this question, except so far as may be ab- solutely necessary for the protection of the interests wliich they are bound to guard, the United States will not attempt to disinter from the grave of the past the unhappy passions and prejudices , and to revive the memory of the injuries, often great and sometimes petty, which caused such poignant regret, such wide-spread irritation, and such deep-seated sense of wrong in the United States. Over much of this feeling the kindly expression of regret in the Treaty of AVashington has forever cast the mantle of oblivion. The reports of the di})]omatic and consular oflicers of the '' I wish the word 'escape' liad not been found in tlie apo- logy, as it is termed in describing tlie exit from our ports of the Alabama and other ships of that kind. I cannot help thinking that was an unguarded expression, which may affect the course of the future arb'trr.tion. I can easily imagine tliat in some minds the word 'escap'r would be construed unfavorably to this country, for it mears that something has got away which might have been retained. We speak of the escape of a prisoner; and the meanir.g of tlie term is that there was power to prevent the escape, and that the escape happened in spite of it." — Lord Cairn's {ex-Chancellor) speech in the House of Lords, June 12, 1871. See London Tinie><, June lo, 1871. 1 M«: , *-j; and thwarting Ins movements. '-It is difficult,"* he says, "for a stranger to keep his actions secret when spies are on his path."" He savs that he shall have readv, bv the 1st of August, some of the goods that had been ordered on tlie 17th of tlie previous April, and more by the 1st of Octolter, ^ "Of twenty Steamers, which were said to have been kept plying in 1863 between Nassau and two of the bloJkaded portt;, seven belonged to a mercantile firm at Charleston, who had a braiieli-house at Liverpool, and through whom the Confederate Govenmient transacted its business in England." "The name of the Charleston iirni was John Fraser & Co.; that of the Liverpool house, Fraser, Trenholm & Co. Of the live members of the house, four, I believe, were South Carolinians, and one a British subject." — Benutrd's Nentraliti/ of Great Britain, paye 289 and note. The British subject referred to by Mr. Bernard was Prioleau. naluralized for the purpose. 3 ^ Be PERFORM ITS DUTIES AS A NEUTRAL. 137 and that "the shipping of the articles will be left in the hands of the Navy Department." ^ On the 18th of September, the steamer "Bermuda" ran the blockade, and arrived at Savannah with "arms and muni- tions on board." - She came from Fraser, Trenholm & Co., consigned to John Fraser & Co. Information of the character and purposes of this steamer, and of the nature of her freight had been given to Lord Russell by Mr. Adams on the 15th of the previous August,-"^ and he had declined to "interfere with the clearance or sailing of the vessel." ^ On the fourth day after her arrival at Savannah, her consignees oft'ered to charter her to the insurgents, and the offer was accepted." ° The experience of the "Bermuda," or the difliculties which she encountered in runnino; the blockade, seem to have in- duced the insurgent authorities to think that it would be well, to have some surer way for receiving tiic. purchases made by their agents in Liverpool. The stringency of the blockade established by the United States, and the nature of the coast that was blockaded, made it necessary to have a set of agents in the West Indies also. Character of the '^^^^ coast of the United States, from Chesa- hiockaded coast, peake Bay to the Mexican frontier, is low, with shoaly water extending out for some distance to sea. A range of islands lies off the coast, from Florida to Charleston, and islands also lie off Wibninoton and the coast to the north of it. The waters within these islands are shallow, affording an inland navigation for vessels of light draught. The passages to the sea between the islands are generally of the same character. This outlvin^ frontier of islands, or of shallow waters, is brok(Mi at Wilmingten, at Charleston, and at Savannah. At these three points large steamers can approach ;ui(l leave the cdast ; but these points were at that time ^ Huse to Gorgas, Vol. VJ, page X). ■ Lawtoti to Cooper, 20th September, 18(51, Vol. VI, page 36. ^ Adams to llussell, Vol. I, page 760. •* Russell to Adams, Vol. 1, page 762. '^ Benjamin to John Fraser & Co., 27th September, 1861, Vol. VI, i)age 37. ■..■ » ■■;. i 138 WHEREIN GREAT BRITAIN FAILED TO » India iKlauds, where the steamers could break bulk.' Ilusc called the attention of his principals to the efiiciency of the blockade; said that the vessels which brought the cargoes across the Atlantic could ^A enter the blockaded ports; urged them to continue the system of transshipment; and complained of the activity of the United States oflicials.- It was considered important to have a naval officer in charge of the transshipments, and Maflitt was detailed for the {)!»•- pose.^ He arrived there on or about the 21st of May, and reported that he had assumed command of the Manassas, [Florida;] which had arrived there from Liverpool on the 28th day of April; said that his "ambition was great;"' and promised to give "annoyance to the enemy." ^ In May the supply of coal for the insurgent vessels fell short, and Heyliger went to Bermuda to buy some.*^ The steps taken about this time for the detentign of the Florida will be alluded to later. Contraband of war The cargoes of contraband of war that e'd"at"Nas8au^^for ^"^^^^ ^^^^^ transshipped were entered on the British ports. manifests as for St. John's, New Brunswick. It could not but have been well known at the custom-house that this was a fraud; yet the customs authorities winked at the fraud, and gave the vessels clearances as British vessels sailing for British ports. *^ Heyliger continued to report the transshipment and forward- ing of these arms and military supplies. He noticed the arrival and departure of the "Kate," and other vessels, on account of the insurgent authorities, and on the 26th of July, 1862, he reported that the "Steamer Scotia, a private venture,'''' was about to leave with a large supply of rifles, powder, and other ammunition. He did not report any other "private venture," so far as known to the United States. 1 Benjamin to Huse, 10th March, 1862, Vol. VI, page 68. 2 Huse to Gorgas, I5th March, Vol. VI, page 69. 3 Randolph to Heyliger, 11th April, 1862, Vol. VI, page 72. * Maftitt to Randolph, 21st May, 1862, Vol. VI, page 83. '" Heyliger to Randolph, 28th June, 1862, Vol. VI, page 87. " Hawley to Seward, 27th June, 1863, Vol. VI, page 127. ^ Heyliger to Randolph, Vol. VI, page 92. i'KUFOU.Nf ns DUTIKS AS A NEUTKAL. 147 Rt'sumo for the Tlio Operations of 11 use during this year, year 1862. ,„,(| j,;^ shi])meiits thnm-rli He5li{j;cr, arc dc- tailecl as follows in u letter from Colonel (4or^as, insurgent Chief of Ordnance, to the insurgent Secretary of War, dated December '6, 18(12 J "The purchase of ordnance and ordnanct! stores in foreign markets on (Jovernment account are made by Major Caleb Huse, C. S. Artillery, who resides in London, and whose address is No. o8, Clarendon Koad, Notting Hill, London, West. Major Huse was detailed for this duty in April, 18G1. * * =!* He lias purchased arms to the amount of 157,000, [stands?] and large quantilies of gunpowder, some artillery, infantry equi[)ments, harness, swords, percussion caps, saltpeter, lead, &c. In addition to ordnance stores, using a rare ibrecast, he has purciiased anil shipped large supplies of clothing, blankets, cloth, and shoes for the (quartermaster's department, without specific orders to do so. * * To pay for these j)urchases, funds have been from time to time sent to him by the Treasury De- partment, on requisition from the War Department, amount- ing in the aggi-egate to ^3,095,1 39 18. These have been wholly inadequate to his wants, and have fallen far short of our requisitions. He was consequently in debt at latest advices to the amount of j£444,850, a sum equivalent, when the value of exchange is considered, to ^'5,925,402 of our currency. * * An agent, Mr. Norman S. Walker, was lately dispatched with ^2,000,000 in bonds of the Confederate States. The instructions to Mr. Walker direct him to return to Bermuda, after the disposition of the bonds in England, and after conference with Major Huse. He is to remain there as a resident disbursing agent, and is, in conjunction with Mr. S. G. Porter, charged with the transfers of the cargo of the 'Harriet Pinkney,' now there, and other ships hereafter to arrive, to the ports of the Confederate States. * * * A large part of the cargoes have been landed at Nassau, and thence transmitted to the ports of the Con- federate States in fast steamers. Their destination has lately been changed to Bermuda, where several most valuable car- I • . « ^ Gorgas to Seddon, Vol. VI, page 104. 10* 14H WIIKRI'-IN «JUKAT HIMTAIN I AIMID TO t> .• v< ' *■' * --» o-oc-i :iro iioNV uwaitiii;; transportation. It appears to mo to be tlit^ api)ropriate duty of the Navy Department to assist in the runnin;ust.^ The reason given was that "the port of Nassau had beeome dangerous;" and h(^ had appointed as agent there "Mr. S. G. Porter, a gentleman highly reeonnnended by (loinmander J. D. l^uUoek.'' Gorgas incpiired of the insurgent Secretary of War whether lluse's ap[)ointment of Porter shouhl be approved," and the reply is to be found in the above extract. Walker went there before January 1, IcSG.S,^ and on the 9th day of February, 1SGI5, it was reported that Ik'rmuda was a good depot for the purpose, and that the insurgent authorities "had then three steamers running there.""* Having thus shown that the branch of the insurgent War Department, established in Great Britain had, during the years 1861 and 18G2, purchased arms, annnunition, and su])plies to the amount of about nine millions of dollars, and that the branch of their Treasury established at Liver- pool, had during the same time, j)aid on account of these purchases over threes millions of dollars, and that vessels either belonging to or chartered by the insurgent authorities were occupied as transports, (in violation of the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1819,) in carrying this large quantity of war material from British ports to the insurgents, and in bringing back cotton, the property of the insurgent author- ities, to be used in making payments therefor, it is now necessary to see what the branch of their Navy Department, under the direction of Bullock, was engaged in during the same period. * Huse to Gorgas, 4th August, 1862, Vol. VI, page 93. ^ Gorgas to Randolph, 1st November, 1862, Vel. VI, page 103. 2 Gorgas to Huse, 1st January, 1863, Vol. VI, jjage 107. * Gorgas to Huse, 9th February, 1863, Vol. VI, page 111. ."'- I'KIMnU.M ITS DIIIKS AS A Mll'TKAI,. 141) Tlu! Uiiit(;(l Stiitts are not altk' to truer tlicse tfjiiisactions witli tlir iniiiuU'Ht'fullock, as has been said, establislKul him- \\ hat vvas doru' at Liv.ijxioi by self ill Li\erpool in the summer ol" lS(il. The United States Consul reports him on the 20th of Sejitember as "residing in j)rivate lodgings in Liver- pool,"' and as being "chiefly in communication with Fraser, Trenholm tS: Co., whose office he visits ihiily." IVioleau, one of the iirm of Fraser, Trenholm iS: Co., says that lie occu[)ied for u year after his arrival a room in their ofiice.^ It is probable that as early as October, IS'^Il, he had made the contracts for the two gim-boats which were after- ward jknown as the Florida and the Alabama. The drawings of the Alabama were signed by the Lairds, who built her, on the 9th of October, 18G1. The Uniteil States have no means for determining the date when the contract was made with Fawcett, Preston & Co., for the Florida. Their Consul at Liverpool lias stated that on his arrival at the consulate hi November, 18G1, his attention was called by the acting consul to this vessel, then called the Oreto, and to the Ala- bama. It is clear, therefore, that the work was advanced at that time. - Prioleau also testilies tliat he introduced Bullock to Fawcett, Preston & Co., for the purpose of making the contract for the Florida. ^ By the 4th of February, I8G2, the Florida was so nearly completed that the Consul at . M The Florida. ' Vol. VI, page 185. 2 Dudley to Edwards, Vol. Ill, page 17. '•^ Dudley to Seward, Vol. VI, page 18G. ii 150 WHKREIN GREAT BRITAIN FAILIiD TO « I* Liverpool wrote, "Slu? is now taking in her coal, and appear- ances indicate that slie will leav(^ here the latter part of the week without her armament." Her gun-carriages were soon taken (m hoard, in pieces, some in a rough state, and were put in the hold, ^ and a day or two later she received her provisions, and the crew was shipped. The steamer Bahama preceded Iwv by a few days with her armament, but reached Nassau after her. When the Florida sailed she took a crew of tifty-two men and sonn; guns,- and was in every respect a man-of-war except that her armament w^as not in place. It was con- clusively shown at Nassau that she might have been fitted for battle in twenty-four hours after leaving the dock in the Mers'\y. ^ The vessel in that condition was consigned by Bullock to Hevlijrer. * The condition of Bullock with the vessel from the beginning is established by this act, as well as by tlie evidence of Prioleau. The connection of Eraser, Tr(udiolm & Co, is shown by the admission of Prioleau, and by the fact that a member of that linn accompanied her on her trial trip and on her departure. '' Mr. Adams called the attention of Earl Russell \,o the character and desthiation of this vessel on the 29th of February, and again on the 25th of March, 1S61. Her Majesty's Government had ample time to ascertain her character and to detain lier. They did go through the form of an examination which, seen in the light of subsequent events, reads like a farce. '* The work on tlie Alabama [)rogressed more slowly that that on the Florida, jjossibly be- cause it was a larger vessel. She was launched on the loth of May, and made her trial trip on the 12th of June.' The AlalKUua. ^ Dudley to Seward, Vol. H, page 593. " Report of Board of Customs, Vol. H, page 605. •' Captain Hickley's affidavit, VoL VI, page 263. ' Heyliger to Randolph, 2d May, 1862, Vol. VI, page 76. ■> Dudley to Edwards, Vol. HI, page 17. I Vol. 11, pages 595 and 604. ■ Dudley to Seward, Vol. HI, page 1. PERFORM ITS DUTIES AS A NEUTRAL. 151 <' The money for her was advanced by Fraser, Trenholm & Co." ' Captain Bullock was "all the time in communication with Fawcett, Preston & Co., who litted out the Oreto, and with the Lairds, who were titting out this vessel," and went '•almost daily on board the gun-boat, and seemed to be re- cognized as in authority." It was even said in Liperpool that he Avas to command her.- Mr. Adams, on the 23d of June, invited Earl Russell's attention to this vessel, and an examination was ordered. The examiners reported to the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury that it was "most apparent that she is intended for a ship of war," and that "the description of her hi the communication of the United States Consul is most correct, with the exception that her engines are not constructed on the oscillatory principle." ^ The evidence of the criminal character of the vessel be- came so overwhelming that Her Majesty's Government was at length induced to give an order for her detention. Be- fore the order reached Liverpool she had escaped. She ran down to Moelfra Bay, on the coast of the Isle of Anglesey, and there took on board twenty or thirty men from the tug Hercules, with the knowledge of the British officials at Liverpool. She then sailed to the Azores, where she was jiiet by the Agrippina from London and the Bahama from Liverpool. These vessels brought her officers, her armaments, and her coal. The transshipments wen' made, and then the Ijritisli ensign was hauled down, and the insurgent tlag hoisted. It is not deemed necessarv to examine further, in this connection, the -evidence showing the palpable character of this vessel, especially as Lord Russell, in the course of the discussion which ensued, admitted that "if is ^mihmhtcdly trnc that the Alabama was x^arthj fitted out hi a British ixni.'^'^ That evidence will be discussed more at length in it> approi)riate place. For the present, the United States ^ Dudley to Edwards, Vol. Ill, page 18. - Dudley to Adams, Vol, III, page G. ^ Report of Board of Customs, Vol. Ill, page 7. ■ ^ Earl Russell to Mr. Adams, -JGth September, 18G4, Vol. Ill, page 299 . lit .• vf! "J 152 WHEREIN GREAT BRITAIN FAlf-KD TO . tS •■ * only aim to satisfy the Tribunal that, flagrant as was the violation of noutralitv in the case of the Alabama, it was but a part of the great scheme wiiich was set on foot when Huse, Bullock, and Fraser, Trenliolm & Co., combined to- gether in Liverpool. The Sumter at '^^^ operations of Captain Bullock were Gibraltar. manifest about this time in quite another quarter of the globe. The insurgent steamer Sumter put into Gibraltar in January, 1862, out of coal, and not being able immediately to obtain any was obliged to remain there until United States men-of-war arrived in those waters. Deeming it impossible to escape she was then ottered for sale, and when the sellers came to make title, the oflicer in charge produced "a power of attornev from a certain Bullock, who styles himself senior naval ofiicer in Europe." ^ Great Britain, in t^pite of tlu; protests of the United States officials,- permitted a sale to take place, ^ and it is not improbable that, if the sale was bona fide, the money went to the insurgent agents to swell the fund for the payment of tiie Alabama and the Florida, then in the Mersey. The Florida at When the Florida reached Nassau, it was Nassau. again found necessary to depend upon the Liverpool combination for funds. The insurgent Secretary of the Navy making application to their Secretary of the Treasury for fifty thousand dollars, to fit out and equip the C. S. Steamer '-Manassas," [Florida.] "now at Nassau,"'* was answered that "the department had funds in England," and that he could have "a bill of ex- change on England for the amount required."'' Mallory ac- cepted the suggestion, and requested Memminger to "transmit to Nassau, through Messrs. J. Fraser & Co., of Charleston, a bill of exchange in favor of Lieutenant John N. Maflitt, ^ Sprague to Adams, 9th December, 1802, Vol. II, page 507. ' Sprague to Freeling, Vol. II, page hXi. •'' Sprague to Adams, Vol. II, page 516. ^ Mallory to Memminger, 26th May, 1862, Vol. VI, page 84. 5 Memminger to Mallory, 27th May, 1862, Vol. VI, page 85. PERFORM ITS DUTIES AS A NEUTRAL. 153 for fifty thousand dollars, (^'50,000,) or its equivalent in pounds," ^ which was done. r, , , e I'li^ construction and dispatch of these vessels Contracts for con- t^ stnuting six iron- were bv no means all that was planned in clads. • ^ . Liverpool during that year. On the 2 1st day of August, 1862, Mallory, the insurgent Secretary of the Navy, wrote Mr. Jefferson Davis: "A contract has been made for the construction abroad and delivery of six iron-clad steam-vessels of war, upon plans and specifications prepared by this department, which, with the outfits to be furnished, together with six complete extra engines and boilers, are estimated to cost about ,^3,500,000."'- The estimates an- nexed to this letter are to the same amount. Thus it appears that, before the 1st of January, 186.3, Bullock had dispatched from Great Britain two formidable cruisers, tln! Alabama and the Florida, to prey upon the commerce of the United S<"Htes, had sold another cruiser at Gibraltar, and had possibly turned the proceeds into the Treasury of the insurgents, at the office of Fraser, Trenholm & Co., and had, by himself or through another agent, made some sort of a contract for the construction of six iron-dads; and that Fraser, Tren- holm & Co. had provided the funds for these vessels, and also for what Avas necessary in order to complete the fitting of the Florida at Nassau. at Before proceeding further in this history, it is better to pause to take note of two other acts of the Colonial Authorities, which, so far as known, were not censured by Great Britain. The first of these was the hospitality extended to the Sumter in Trinidad, in August, 18G1. She was allowed to remain five days in port, and to "supply herself with coals and other necessary outfits."'^ The second case was the reception of the Florida at Nassau, in I860. The Florida steamed into Nassau on the morning of the 26th of January, in that year. What took place is ' Mallory to Memminger, 27th May, 1862, Vol. VI, page 85. - Vol. VI, page 96. See also, on the same point, Mallory to Mason, oOtli October, 1862, Vol. I, page 573. " Bernard to Seward, Vol. II, page 485. The Sumter Trinidad. • •" i ■■; 1 ■I 'i % ■^ ! • * h E 154 WHEREIN GREAT BRITAIN FAILED TO The Florida at thus described by an insurgent writer: "This Nassau. seems to be our principal port of entry, and tiie amount of money we throw into the hands of the Nassau- ites prohahhj influences their sentiments in our favor. We fooJc on board coal and pyovisions to last us for several wonthsy ^ Mr, Adams re- Tills history lias now arrived at the time pr.'sents the for.- j ^y^^ United States were in a position to j;oing tacts to Earl ^ Russell. conlirm to Great Britain all, and more than all, that Mr. Adams had represented to Earl Russell as to : o course of the insurgents in Liverpool, and to place iii the havds of Her Majesty's Governnnait the thread for the discovery of all the violations of British sovereignty, and of all the injuries to the United States perpetrated on British soil, which have been set forth in this paper. On the 19th of January, IS 03, Mr. Seward transmitted to Mr. Adams "a copy of some treasonable correspondence of the insurgents at Richmond, with their agents abroad, which throws a flood of light upon the naval preparations they are making in Great Britain.'''- On the Dth day of February-, 18G3, Mr. Adauis hielosed this correspondence to Earl Russell, with a note in which he said — what could be said without the least ex- aggeration — "These papers go to show a deliberate attempt to establish within the limits of this Kingdom a system of action in direct hostility to the Government of the United States. This plan embraces not only the building and iitting out of several ships )f war under the direction of agents especially commissioned for the purpose, but the preparation of a series of measures under the same auspices for the obtaining from Her Majesty's subjects the pecuniary means essential to the execution of those hostile projects. '^ "'' * Taken as a whole, these papers serve most conclusi^•ely to show that no respect whatever has been paid in her own realm by these parties to the neutrality declared by Her Majesty at the outset of these hostilities; and that, so far as may be in their j)Ower, they are bent on making her ^ Journal of Confederate Steamer Florida, Vol. \T, page 335. - Seward to Adams, Vol. I, page 546. PEIIFOUM ITS DUTIES AS A NEUTRAL. 155 Kingdom subservient to their purpose of conducting hostilities agiiinst a nation with which she is at peace." ^ Earl Kusseii de- Lord Russell deUiyed liis answer to this (lines to act. communication exactly one nionl;)!. On the Dth day of March, 18G3, he made a reply, the substance of which was that Her Majesty's Government would not examine into the truth of Mr. Seward's and Mr. Adam's allegations, because, even if they were true, the ])apers which had been submitted by Mr. Adams went -'merely to show that the agents of the so-called Confederate States resident in this country [Great Britain] have received instructions from their own Gov. . nment to endeavor to raise money on securities of that Government in England, and to enter into contracts for the purchase of munitions of war, and for the buililing of iron-clad vessels; but tliere is no proof in these j)aj)ers that the agents referred to have as yet brought them- selves within the reach of any criminal law of the United Kingdom." - , ,,. . , ,. In order fully to comprehend the force of liieilicieucy of ti\e _ _ "^ •■ Foreign Enlist- this answcr, it is neccssarv to ask the Tribunal ment Act. r i.i "^ v • • • • j. to pause, tor the purpose oi nicpiu'mg mto what had taken place between the two Goscrnments as to alleged defects in tlie Foreign Enlistment Act, and as to the necessity of amending it so as to give the Government greater powers. It was found when the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1819 eanit to be put into opei'ation , under the direction of a Government inspired by unfriendly feelings toward the United States, that there were practical and multiplying difficulties in the way of using it so as to prevent the departure of tlie cruisers. Earl Russell, as early as March, 1862, in reply to an earnest representation ^ made by Mr. Adams under instructions, said that '-'•tlie duty of notions in amity iritJi each other is not to suffer their good faith to he I'iotafcd h)j evil' disposed persons within their harder s, nterelfj fr m the inefficiency of their x)rohihitor}) policy.''''^ .. ' I \\ < t ♦.r , I ' ' Adams to Russell, Vol. T, page 562. - Vol. I, page 578. '-^ Adams to Russell, Vol. I, page 30. ^ Russell to Adams, Vol. I, page 533. : I 1 ^1 15() WHEREIN (tURAT P.RITAIN FAILED TO ^t Within ji few months after tliis the Ahibania escaped from the port of Liverpool, and never returned. The openness and the audacity witli which this was done seemed at one time to induce tlie British Cabinet to entertain the idea nf amending the Foreign Enlistment Act. On the lltth dav of December, 18G'J.i Propositions to ,, • "i i n i t» ' amend the Foreign Lord Kussell, m reply to what he called Mr. Enlistment Act. ^j^j.^^^j^^^ "demand for a more effective preven- tion for the future of the fitting out of such vessels from British ports,'' informed him that Her Majesty's Government were "of opinion that certain amendments might be in- troduced into the Foreign Enlistment Act, which, if sanctioneil by Parliament, would have the effect of giving greater power to the Executive to prevent the construction in British ports of ships destined for the use of belligerents."' He also said that he was ready at any time to confer with Mr. Adams, and to listen to any suggestions which he might have to make by which tlie British Foreign Enlistment Act and the corresponding Statute of the United States miglit be made more efficient for their purpose. Mr. Adams ccmmunicated with his Govern- Propositions de- clined by (ireat inent , and, having obtained instructions, in- formed Lord Russell that his "suggestion (if possible amendments to the enlistment laws in order to make them more effective had been favorably received. AlthouLiii the law" of the United States was considered as of very sufficient vigor, the Government were not unwilling to con- sider propositions to improve upon it."" Lord Russell replied that, since his note was written, the subject had been con- sidered in Cabinet , and the Lord Chancellor had ex[)ressed the opinion that the British law was sufiiciently effective, and that under these circumstances he did not see that he could have any change to propose. " The United States are unable to state what amendments to the Foreign Enlistment Acts of the two countries the British Government might have proposed had they not changed 1 Russell to Adams, Vol. I. page GG7. * Adams to Seward, Vol. J, page GG8. ,r PERFORM ITS DUTIES AS A NEUTRAL. 157 i ■ • their minds between December, l."^G2, and March, 18G3. It is to be presumed, from the use of the word ^' am- ^tnidion"' in Lord Russell's note, that it was in contempla- tion to make some proposition to remedy a supposed defect in the British statute as to the constrnctiou of a vessel intended to carry on war, as distinguished from the '"'eq^uippitig, furnishiug^ fitting out, or arming"' such a vessel. It was understood to be the opinion of the l^ritish lawyers that the construction of such a vessel vas not an oftense under the act of 1819. It is also possible that Her Majesty's Govcrn- iiicnt may have desired to give to the P^xecutive in Great Britain some power similar to that possessed by the Execu- ti\e of the United States for the arrest ot vessels so con- structed. As the proposal for negotiations on the subject was withdrawn, it is impossible to do more than conjecture Avhat was contemplated. From the hour when Lord Russell informed Mr. Adams that the Lord Chancellor was satislied that the British laws were sufficiently effective , the British Government resisted every attempt to change the laws and give them more vigor. Mr. Adams again, on the 26th of March, Propositions re- . ... iiewed and de- 1863, sought an interview with Lord Russell on the subject of the rebel hostile operations ill British territory. What took place there is described by Lord Russell in a letter written on the following day to Lord Lyons. ^ " With respect to the law itself, Mr. Adams said either it was sufficient for the purposes of neuirality, and then let the British Government enforce it; or it was insufficient, and then let the British Government apx:>ly to Parliament to amend it. I said that the Cabinet were of opinion that the law was sufficient, but that legal evidence could not always be jirocured ; that the British Government had done everything in its power to execute the law , hut I admitted that the cases of the Alabama and Oreto .i. II 4 . ^ Vol. I, page 585. See also Mr. Hammond's letter to Messrs. Lamport and Holt and others, Vol. I, page 602; also Lord Palmerston's speech already cited, Vol. IV, page 530. ; 158 WIIKRKIN GREAT BRITAIN FAILED TO •- were a sca)idal, and, in some decree, a reproach (o our laivsy The Tribunal oi' Arbitration will thus see that about three weeks before Earl Russell made his extraordinary olli- cial reply to the representations of Mr. Adams, he had in- fcrined Mr, Adams "that the Lord Chancellor had expa-essod th") opinion that the Brititsh [neutralityj law was sufficiently effx'tive, and that, under these circumstances, he did not •H <> *'\at he could have any change to propose " ^ in it. it ,vill a 'so now be observed that when that declaration was made, l.h . Adams's note of February l>, 1863, with the proof of the complicity of the insurgent agents in England, had been in Earl nusselFs })ortfo]io four days. It will also be observed that that proof established , or afforded to Earl Russell the clew by which he could , and , as the United States say, should have satisfied himself — 1. "That con- tracts were already made for the constructions of iron-clad 'fighting-ships' in England."^ 2. That Eraser, Trenholm & Co. were the "depositaries" of the insurgents in Liverpool, and that the money in their hands was "to be applied to the contracts." ^ 3. That they (E., T. & Co.) were to pay purchases made by Mr. Huse and other agents. ** 4. That other contracts for the construction of vessels besides those for the six iron-elads hr.d been taken by parties in Great Britain.'' 5. That parties in England were arranging for an insurgent cotton loan, the proceeds of which were to be de- posited with Eraser, Trenholm & Co. for the purpose of carrying out all these contracts. " When the United States found that the proof of such aggravated wrong was not deemed worthy of investigation 1 Vol. I, page G68. 2 Mallory to Mason, Vol. I, page 573. ^ Menuminger to Spence, Vol. 1, page 574. * Memminger to Eraser, Trenholm & Co., Vol. I, page 574; and same to same, Vol. I, page 575. '^ Memorandnm No. 11, in Vol. I, page 572. ^ Benjamin to Mason, Vol. 1, page 564. Memminger to Masun, Vol. I, page 565. Memmiuger to Spence, Vol. I, page 574. Memminger to Eraser, Trenholm & Co., Vol. I, page 574. ^-- PERFORM 1T>; DlTIE.s AS A NEUTRAL. 159 l)V H«'r ]\Iiij(!sty's Goveniineiit, because it contained no state- ments which could be used as evidence to convict a criminal l)efore an English jury,^ they were most reluctantly forced from that time forward, throughout tlie struggle, to belie , that no complaints would be listened to by Her Maje!-'.'s Government wliich were not accompanied by proof that the persons comj)lained of had brought themselves "within reach of the criminal law of the United Kingdom;" that the penal provisions of the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1819 were to he taken by Great Britain as the measure of its duty as a neutral; and that no amendment or change in that act was to be made with the assent of the f isting Government. These pro. eedings '^'^^7 earnestly and 'Oi> dcntly insist before were an abandon- this tribunal, that thi: decuS^.on of Her Majesty's ment, in advjiiice, . r -^ i i- ^- " of "due dili- Government was m violation oi its obligations gence. toward the United i .ates : that it was an abandonment, in advance, not c 'y of that "due diligence"' which is delined in the Treaty of Washington as one of the duties of a neutral, but of any measure of diligence, to restrain the insurgents from using its territory for purposes hostile to the United States. Encouraged by the immunity afforded by these several decisions of Her Majesty's Government, the insurgent agents in Great Britain began to extend their operations. Early in April, 1863, a steamer, called the "Japan," which was afterward known as the "Georgia," left the Clyde, "with intent to depredate on the commerce of the United States." - This vessel had been publicly launched on the lOth of the previous January as an insurgent steamer, at which time "a Miss North, daughter of a Captain North, of one of the Confederate States, offi- ^ It is supposed to be a principle of English law that a person accused of crime has the right to have the witnesses against him subjected to a personal cross-examination. The absurdity of Earl Russell's position is shown by the fact that every witness whose correspondence was inclosed in Mr. Adams's note of February 9, 1863, was then in Richmond, behind the bayonets of General Lee's army. '^ Mr. Adams to Earl Russell, Vol. ^' page 666. The Georgia. Vt ► H ^ #>• * •• 160 >VI1I:RF-IN (iRliAT HRITAIN I AIMil) TO The Alexandra. dated as priostoss, and christened the eraft " Virgniia." ' *'Soine seventy or ei;j;l»ty men, twice, the number that wouhl be reijuired tor any leah'" ' to a hel- ligerent; and that, a fortiori, "if any man may huiUl a vessel for the {)ur{)Ose of otfering it to either of the belligerent Powers wlio is minded to have it, may he not execute au order for it?" He also instructed them that "to 'equip' is 'to furnish with arms;'" "in the case of a ship, especially, it is to furnisii and com[)lete with arms:"- that "'equip,' 'furni.sli,' 'fit out,' or 'arm," all mean precisely the same thing;" and he closed that branch of the instructions by saying, "the question is whether you tiunk that this vessel was litted. Armed she certainly was not, but was there an intention that she should be linished, litted, or equipped, in Liverpool? Because, gentlemen, I must say, it seems to me that the Alabama sailed away from Liverpool without any arms at all; merely a ship in ballast, unfurnished, unequipped, unprepared: and her arms were put in at Terceira, not a port in Her Majesty's Dominions. Tiie Foreign Enlistment Act is no more violated by that than by any otlun* indif- ferent matter that might happen about a boat of any kind whatever." The jury gave a verdict without delay for the gun-boat. An appeal on this construction of the statute was taken to a higher court. The rulings of the judge on the trial were not reversed, and the decision stood as the law of England until and after the close of the rebellion, and still stands as the judicial construction of the act of 18 ID. » I i three masts were up, and had lightning conductors on each of them ; she was provided with a cooking apparatus for 150 or '200 people; she had complete accomodation for men and offi- cers ; she had only stowage room sufticient for her crew, sup- posing them to be 32 men; and she was apparently built for a gun -boat, with low bulwarks, over which pivot guns could play. The commander of Her Majesty's ship Majestic, stationed at Liverpool , said that she was not intended for mercantile purposes." {Neitiralitij of Great Britain during the A erican Civil War, by Mountayue Bernard, M. A., page 353, note 1.) 1 Vol. V, page 128. - Vol. V, page 129. 11 *■ ■!, 162 WllKUlilN (ilMCAT IHUTAIN FAILED TO . .. rims, Jiltor the pohtKal brnnch of Her Ma- The rulings in tho » Aiexaiidrii einaH- jesty s CTOveriiiiiciit liiid jiimouiicccl its purpose culutt'd iho For- ' ,. i. ... .^ j a- * aI i' . ,• eign lOiiiistinpiit ot liimtin^ its dutios to the entorcemoiit ot ^^^- Uie Foreign Knlistinent Acts, and had practically, stripped that act of all features except those rehiting to the prosecution of olfenders as criniinals, the judicial branch of that (fovernmcnt emasculated it by a ruliny cither of these formidable vessels." The United States fully and earnestly shared this desire with Great Britain, and they were relieved tVom a state of painful suspense when the dangers which Mr. Adams pointed out were averted. But they would have felt a still greater relii'f, could thev have received at that time the assurance, or could they have seen in the transaction any evidence from which they could assume, that the Executive Ih'anch of the Iiritish Government was no longiH' of the opinion ex})ressed. in Lord Russell's note of September 1 as to its duties in regard to evidence such as that inclosed in ]\Ir. Adams's [irevious notes, and no longer intended to regard the I'^orelgn ilnlistment Act, as expomuled by the court in the Alexandra ease, as tlie measure of its international duties. ' Russell to Adams, Vol. 11, page :'(iG. -' Layard to Stnart, Vol. 11, page oGil. 1()6 wiiKRKiN <;ri:at rritain failki) to Ik-' m »■ The contracts with Extensive as were the arrangements made from Armaiifortheoou- T.iverpool by the insiiro'ent ao-ents, at that time, stniction of vessels i .... in France. for the construction in Great Britain of vessels of war intended to carry on war ap;ainst the United States, their operations were not confnied to Great Britain. Captain Bullock, witliout shifting his oflice from Liverpool, signed an agreement, "'for the account of his principals," on the IGtli of Ajjril, ISGo, witli Jjucien Arman, sliip-builder at ]5ordeaux, whereby Mr. Arman engaged "to construct four steamers of 400 horse-power, and arranged for the reception of an armament of from ten to twelve cannon." As it was necessary in France to obtain the consent of the Government to the armament of such vessels witliin the limits of the I'hnpire, Mr. Arman informed tlu» Goven ment that these vessels were ''intended to establish a regular communication between Shanghai. Yedo, and San Francisco, passing the strait of Van Dieman, and also that thev are to be litted out, should the opportunity present itself, for sale to the Chinese or Japanese Empire." On this representation permission was given to arm them, the armament of two to be sup])lied by Mr. Arman at liordeaux, and that of the other two l)y Mr. Vorus at Nf tes. On the iGth of duly, 186.'>, another agreement mas made ih Bortlcaux between ]Mr. Arman and Mr, Bullock, "acting lor the accoiuit of [)rincipals." Arman agreed to construct two screw stt'amsliips of wood and iron, with iron turrets, of oOO horse-])OW'.'r. Bullock was to supply the armament: the ships were to be linished in six months: one-lifth of the price was to be \k\\(\ in advance. Lnder these contracts Bullock is said to have paid Arman .J,'-? 80,000 francs.^ But one of tlie vessels ever went into the ])Ossession of the insurgents, and tliat by^ fraud. It may inti'rest the Tribiuial of Arbitration to learn, in a few words. ' Mr. Moreau, counsel for the Unite62 lo5. 4(7., in favor of Commander James 1). Bullock, on the C. S. Depositary in Liverpool, were forwarded to him."'- Other funds ^vere sent that the United States are not able to trace. In September. 18Go, his contracts had been so heavy that he was low in funds. ]Maflitt sent to him at Liverpool a number of ''men. discharged from the Florida, with their accounts and discharges."" ^ He could not pay them, and the men "began to get restive."' Mallory made an effort to send him further fund', and asked Mem- minger to instruct "the Depositary at Liverpool'" to countersign certain cotton certilicatcs "on the a}>plication of Commander Bullock.""'^ Li this, or in some other way, the funds were replenished, and large sums were spent after that time. ' While these extensive 2^r*^pai"'tions for a tleet were going on in England and France, an event took place at the Cape of CTOod Hoi>e wl "'■(» tested afresh the purpose of Her Ma- jesty's Governmeir ' maintain British neutrality and enforce the Queen's proclamation rru T ^ . On the 5th of August. 1863, the Alabama Ine luscaloosii at _ v. - the Cape of (Jood arrived in Table Bav and gave information that the Tuscaloosa, a prize that had been captured olf Brazil, would soon arrive in the character of a tender. On the ^ith that vessel arrived in Simon"s Jiay, having her original cargo of wool on board. She lay in port about a week, and while there "overtures were made by some ])ar- ties in Cape Town to purchase the cargo of wool."" -^ The other maud :i sufli' icnig 1 Tiillnck to Elmore, July 3, 1863, Vol. VI, page 129. - Mallory to Elmore, June 2.0, 1863, Vol. VI, page 126. "• iMaflitt to Bulh.ck, September :;, ]SC>:\, Vol. II, page 639. ■| Mallory tnMemminger, September 12, 186:;, Vol. VI, page 132. •' Walker to the Secretary of the Adiuiraltv, Vol. IV, page 216: Vol. VI, page 456. I'EllFORM IIS DUTIES AS A MITRAL. IGli wool was (lisjjosvHl of to a Cape Town rtT' liant, on < on- dition that he should sent it to Europe for side, and two- thirds of the price shouhl be paid into the insurgent treasury; and it was landed for that purpose by the Tuscaloosa, O'. a wild spot, called Angra Pequena. outside of British juri^ diction.-^ When the Tuscaloosa made her ap[)earance at Cape Town, Rear-Admiral Sir Baldwin Walker wrote to the Governor, desiring to know" ^'whether this vessel ought still to be looked upon in the light of a prize, she never having been condemned in a prize court."' - He was instructed to admit the ves- sel. The practical experiei.je of the honest sailor rebelled at this decision, and he replied, "I apprehend that to bring u captured vessel under the denomination of a vessel of war, she must be iitted for warlike purposes, and not merely have a few men and a few small guns put on board her, (in fact nothing but a prize crew,) in order to disguise her real character as a prize. Now, tliis vessel has her original cargo of wool still on board, which cannot be recpiired for warlike jinrposes, and her armament and number of her crew arc quite insuflicient for any services other than those of sligh'' defense. Viewin«i all the circumstances of the case, they afford room for the supposition that the vessel i.- .styled ;i tender, with the object of avoiding the prohibitioe against her entrance as a prize into our ports, where, if ' . captors wished, arrangements could be made for the disposal of her valuable cargo." ^ Siie is released The Governor n .died that the Vttorney ofs^^'^Brmviln <^^^'nf'r«l ^vas of opinion that "if the vessel Walker. received the two uuns from the Alabama or other Confederate vessel of war. or if the person in com- mand of her iias a connnission of war, *'•• ••' ''•'' there will be :i suflicient setting forth as a vessel of war to justify her 'icing held to be a ship of war." ^ The Admiral replied, ( 1. ' Monntague Bernard's Neutralit- nf Great Britain, &c.. page 4'_M, note 1. - \'ol. IV, page '217; Vel. VI, page 458. •' Walker to Wodeliouse, Vol. IV, page 218: Vol. VT, page 459. ' Wodeliouse to Walker. Vcd. 1\', page 219; Vol. VI, page 459. 170 WHERKIN GRKAT BRITAIN FAILED TO i I I . *»• tersely, "As there are two guns on board, and an oflicer of the Alabama in charge of her, the vessel appears to conic within the meaning of the cases cited in your communica- tion." ^ He did not seem to tliink it worth while to repeat his opinion as to the frivolous character of such evidence, since it had been disregarded by the civil authorities. Tlie facts were in due course reported by The course of , ^ in r\ the Governor dis- the Governor to the Home Government at approve . London " and the Colonial Minister wrote back that Her Majesty's Government were of opinion that the "Tuscaloosa" did not lose the character of a prize captured by the Alabama merely because she was at the time of her beino; brought within Britisli waters armed with two small rifle guns, and manned with a crew of ten men from the Alabama, and used as a tender to that vessel under the authority of Captain Semmes.^ He said that he ''considered that the mode of proceeding in such circumstances most con- sistent wit! I Her Majesty's dignity, and most j)roper for the vindication of h i territorial rights, would have been to pro- hibit the exercise of any further control over the Tuscaloosa by the captors, and to retain that vessel under Her Majesty's control and jurisdiction until 2)roperly reclaimed by her origi- nal owners." These instructions were looked upon by the The Tusciioosa Governor as a censure;'* anper suj)ply of coal." Ik- also says: 1^'rom all that I eat/ lear)f, anji Corfederate man-(f-war whkh may come to this port ivill hace no difjienltji in eoaHne/ and pro- curing SKpidiesT'"^ The blockade-runners of the Kichmond authorities were by this time well known, and were niaking regular voyages. The Cornubia was running bct'ore January, ISGo."* The (iriratVe and the Cormd)ia ran regularly to Bermuda and to Nassau.'* in February, 186 -"5. One or two more were thouglit "highly desirable."' In ]\Iai'ch there was "enough to employ three steamers for some time to come,"" and Huse w;i- ^ MeiTimin<;er to Mallory. May C, 18()3, Vol. VT, page 110. - Seddon to Seixas, April 7, ISb:), Vol. \T, page li:'.. •■ Walker to Huse, April 18, ISC.-J, Vol. VI, i)age 11-'). * (l«»rgas to Huse, January 1, ISC.:;, Vol. \TI, page 48. ^ Same to same. February -JG, KsG:'>, Vol. Vll, page 48. PKItFoHM ITS DUTIICS AS A NKUTRAL. 173 niitliorized "to juld to llu' ilcct two more ^•oixLswil'i .stciimcrs,'"^ 1111(1 w.is funiislu'd uith a civdit of X'"200.()UO on Fra.sLT, TiTiiliolm (k Co.- Tlie insurgent govcrnnicnt uas all this ^vllile urging its jigents to dispateh arms and munitions ol' war. In April, IbG.'l, twenty thousand I'^nlield lille bayonets were wanted ;is soon as possible.-' On the Gth of May "one hundred ami tifty thousand bMyonets"* were wanted, and 'dead anil saltpeter in large (juantities."'"' On the Jst of June, Walker is odered to send "jjaper for making eartridges by the first boat;" ''if there is none on hand send imnu'diatelv to Major Jluse to buy a large (piantity."'"' Two days later he wafe orilert'd to send '"Colt's })istol-caps as soon as possible.'"^ They were wanted for Lee, who was ])reparing to move to- ward Gettysburg. Walker sliows in all this emergencv a fear of beinji ciipjded for want of coal. On the 21st of March he was arranging for a cargo in the ])ort of JJermuda." On the 2ytli of March he writes that he has purchased that cargo, and wants more.^ On the IGth of May he urges Huse to s'Mid coal. "Every steamer takes from one hinidred and sixty to one hundred and eighty tons." He has but six liiindred tons left." On the *23il of May he again calls attention "most earnestly to the importance of keeping him siii)j)lied with good steam coal." He "hopes that some are already on the way." His "stock is almost exhausted."^*' On the oOth of June he cries "send us coal, coal, coal! l"]ach steamer takes one hundred and eighty tons, so that six hundred tons will be quickly consumed."^ ^ Again on ' Same to same, March 8, Vol. VII, page 48. - Same to same, March 9, Vol. VII, page 49. •'' Gorgas to Huse, Vol. VII, page 51. •^ Same to same, May 0, Vol. VII, page ol. ^ (lorgas to Walker, Vol. VII, page 54. '' Same to same, Vol. VII, page 51. ' W^alker to Huse, 21 March, Vol. VII, page 50. ^ Same to same, Vol. VII, page 50. " Same to same. May 16, I860, Vol. VII, page 52. '^ Same to same. Vol. VII, page 53. ' ' Same to same, Vol. ^TI, page 55. ( . 'torest- .mtii^jfities in Bermuda and Nassau, Vunds eu m blockade ' running. could not be forwarded fast enough to Major Huse to meet the great demands made upon him at this time. On the 2od of July, ISC'I, "on behalf of the Con- federate Government,' he made an arrangement with the Mercantile Trading Company for an advance of i£ 150,000. to be extended to i^300,000, for the purchase of goods for the insurgents, and their shipment by the company, "via Bermuda, Nassau, or Havana;" "the Confederate Gov- ernment to have two-thirds cargo space in each vessel, the company one-third each way;'' "the cotton received from the Confederate States to be consigned to the company'.s agency in Liverpool."'^ Stringer, the managing director of the company, soon became doubtful of Huse's powers, and wrote Mr. Mason, saying that he had already advanced him £20,000 on saltpeter, and inquiring about the powers;^ to which Mason replied that he did not know about the extent of Huse's powers, but that he had no doubt that the salt- peter would be taken by the insurgents.^ Stringer's doubts were soon set at rest; for it would seem that about that time there must have been received in London an agreement ^ Same to same, Vol. VH, page 56. - Walker to Huse, Vol. VII, page 57. ^ Memorandum made in London July 2o, 18G3, Vol. Vf, page 136. ■^ Stringer to Mason, September 16, 1863, Vol. VI, page 134. " Mason to Stringer, September 19, 1863, Vol. VI, page 138. the II 1 V ' B IT-UFORM ITS Dl TIi:S AS A NKUTItAL. 175 ivt'ii by tlic without (late, oxecutod in Kicliinond hy "J. CJorgas, Colonel, (Ihief of Ordnance," and "approved"' by "J. A. Seddon, Secretary of War,'' which probably replaced the temporary agreement of July 23. l^'ive steamers were to be put on to run from Bermuda or Nassau to Charleston or Wihnin"-- ton, two-thirds to be owned by the insurgents, and one- third by the liritish contractors. The insurgents were to [)ay for their two-thirds in cotton, at Charleston, and were to be allowed commissions for theh- part of the work, the other contracting parties having a similar allowance. The portion of the proceeds of cotton belonging to the insurnents was "to be paid to the credit of the War Department with Messrs. Eraser, Trenholm & Co., of Liverpool.'' The hisur- gents were to furnish officers to command the vessels. The document was signed by "C. E. Thorburn,'' and by "Chas. H. Reid & Co.," and by "The Mercantile Trading Co., Limited; Edgar P. Stringer, Managing Director, London, 23d Sej»tember, 1863."^ Mr. Thorburn was a shareholder in the Trading Company,- and on the 3d October Mr. Stringer is found corresponding with him about the purchase of these vessels.^ Meanwhile the operations of the insurgents at Nassau and Bermuda had gone on with even mol'e vigor than during the previous year. II use's credit had been strained to the utmost, but was now restored. The purchases and supplies for the Quartermaster's Dej)artmeut appear to have been transferred during this summer exclusively to Nassau. Seixas was instructed to place one thousand bales of cotton at Nassau for the Quartermaster's Department, before the close of the year, and was told that "the wants of the Quarter- master General are at Nassau, not Bermuda.'"^ Heyliger diligently complied with his instructions to for- ward quartermaster's stores. On the 29th October he sent •40 tons by the "Antonica," "Margaret," and "Jessie." On the 2d November he shipped by the "Hansa" 19 tons; the next day by the "Beauregard" 40 or 50 tons; and a 1 Vol.VI, page 140. - Vol. VI, page 144. » Vol. VI, page 143. ^ Bayne to Seixay, September -29, 1863, Vol. VI, page 139. ^ ■>. "%^, IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) k // //^.*^!^ A :/. ^ % 1.0 I.I 1^ no 1^ 1^ us 14 IL25 1 1.4 i 2.0 1.6 Photographic Sciences Corporation 33 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 b s^ ^ A '^ :a % ^ 170 \viii:ri:in great Britain failed to large quantity by the ''Alice;'' and on the 5th NoveuibiT he sent 20 tons by the "Bansliee." The "Margaret'" ami the "Jessie" were captured; the others ran the bhjckado. The Quartermaster's Dei)artnient was much employed in collecting and forwarding cotton to meet these purchases.^ ^lajor Ferguson was in Liverpool at this time as an agent for the purchase of quartermaster's stores, and was sending large amounts forward. Fraser, Trenholm & Co. refused his drafts, because Heyliger had already overdrawn the Quartermaster's account.- Ferguson thereupon wrote, urging that cotton should be forwarded. "I have," he says, "more faith in cotton than I ever had. If we can but get that out, we can buy all England, for most of the men, as well as their merchandise, have a })rice." ^ On the 3d of November, 18G3, Mr. Adams These facts brought to Earl laid bclore Larl Russell "new proofs of the usse s notice, jj^yj^j^^j. jjj -which the neutrality of Her Ma- jesty's ports is abused by the insurgents in the United States, in order the more elfectually to procrastinate their resistance," which he contended showed the "establishment in the port of St. George's , in the island of Bermuda , of a depot of naval stores for their use and benelit in the prosecution of the war.'' ■* This information should have put Lord Russell on the track of all the ficts in regard to Bermuda. Had Her Majesty's Government pursued the investigations to which it gave them the clew , it would have done so. Earl He sees no ofleiise Russell, on the 27th of November, answered in them. ^^^^^ « jj^j. Majesty's Government do not con- sider that they can properly interfere in this matter.'"' The dates would seem to indicate a possibility that no inquiries were made at Bermuda. On the 29th of December, 1863, Mr. Adams wrote Earl Russell that he had "information entitled to credit," that Ralph Cator, "an oflicer in Her Majesty's naval service," jvas was :\iai in This taki A calk liab con( he subj to ' Bayle to Lawton, November 13, 18G3, Vol. VI, page 147. ^ Fraser, Trenholm & Co. to Lawton, November 26, 1863, Vol. VI, page 14i). ^ Ferguson to Lawton, December 23, 1863, Vol. VI, page 149. * Vol. I, page 735. * Vol. I, page 738. PERFORM ITS DUTIES AS A NEUTRAL. 177 »viis '• engaged in violating the blockade;"' and that there ivas "a strong disposition on the part of a portion of Her ^Majesty's navy to violate the neutrality of their Sovereign in aiding and assisting the enemies of the United States." ' Tliis, too. was answered in a week from its date, without taking the trouble to inquire in the AV^est Indies. - Again, upon the 25th day of January, 1864, Mr. Adams called attention to "the manner in which the insurgents Jiabitually abuse the belligerent privileges which have been conceded to them by Great Ikitain." It would seem that lie had lately had a conversation with Earl Russell on the subject, for he says that he "deems it almost superfluous to enlarge further on the difficulties which must grow out of a toleration of the outrageous abuses of the belligerent privileges that have been granted to the insurgents.'" ^ " It would be difficult," he adds, " to find an example in history of a more systematic and persistent effort to violate the neutral position of a eeuntry than this one has been from its commencement, that has not brought on a war. That this has been the object of the parties engaged in it I have never for a moment doubted."" "It must be obvious,'" he says, "to your Lordship that, after such an exposition, all British subjects engaged in these violations of blockade must incur a suspicion strong enough to make them liable to be Ireated as enemies, and, if taken, to be reckoned as pris- oners of war."^ Earl Russell's Earl Russell replied to this note on the J)th of March. ° He ignored the evidence and charges of the hostile use of the British West India ports. He alluded to a charge against Lieutenant Rooke, which he set aside as unimportant, and to a charge against one flames Ash of a purpose to build ships for the insurgents. As to the latter charge, he reiterated the oft- repeated plea that there was no "legal and proper evidence" to sustain it; and having disposed of these, he confined attention again called to ttie.se facts. %,i 1 Vol. 1, page 7^9. - Vol. I, page 740. ^ Vol. I, page 746. ■• Adams to Russell, Vol. I, page 74.3. ^ Russell to A(lanie insurgent States, and calling Earl Russell's "particular attention to the express condition exacted from all vessels in trade with the insurgent ports, that one-half of the ton- nage of each vessel may be employed by the so-called (Government for its own use, both on the outward and liomeward voyage;"^ to which Karl Russell replied in an answer in which he said, in substance, that admitting all the facts stated to be true, there was nothing in them He a^ain sees no worthy of attention; for "the subjects of Her ortense in them. Majesty are entitled by International Law to carry on the operations of commerce equally with both belligerents, sitbject to the capture of their vessels and to no other penalty.'' ^ This tliscussion closed the correspondence which took j)lace between tlie two Governments on this branch of the subject. It left Great Britain justifying all that took i)lace, after actual knowledge of much, and possible knowledge of all, had been brought within its reach. It left, too, the Queen's Proclamation as to this subject virtually revoked, and Her Majesty's subjects assured that it was no violation of international duty to break the blockade. It is worthy of remark that Loi.! Westbury, the Lord High Chancellor, gave a judicial dicision to the same effect, ' which was soon after followed by the High Court of Admiralty. ■* The ex- ecutive and judicial branches of the British Government were thus a second time brought into accord in construing away Her Majesty's Proclamation. ^ Adams to Russell, Vol. I, page 7'i6. * Russell to Adams, Vol. I, paj^e 757. 3 11 Jurist N. S., 400. ^ Law Reports Admiralty and Ecclesiastical Courts, Browning, Vol. I, page 1. .».j* mt it ini "built of steel, and to carry one thousand bales of rotton each, on a draught of seven feet water, and with au average speed of thirteen knots per hour." Arrangements were at the same time made for the purchase of supplies lor Huse and Fer iuson pending the finishing of the vessels. The "Owl" was the first of these vessels to arrive. The insurgent Navy Department claimed the right "to place a naval ofUcer in charge of her in conformity with regula- tions."' - The treasury doubted this, but Mallory insisted upon his right. ^ This drew from liullock an indignant letter, complaining that the navy had taken these vessels., (iood s} ips were building for the navy; why take these vessels, wluch were not suited for naval purposes.^ On the 5 til of October, 18(?4, orders were given for more arms, and McRac was ordered to supply Huse with j£ 50.000 for the purpose." On the 'iOth of November, Ferguson reports his doings in the purchase of woolen goods, ^ McRae to Seddon, July 4, 18('.4, Vol, VI, page 16.'J. 2 Mallory to Trenholm, September 21, 1864, Vol. VI, page 171. 3 Same to same, September '22, I8t;4, Vol. VI, page 172. » Bullock to McRae, November 1, 1864, Vol. VI, page 17o. ^ Gorgas to Seddon, Octuber 5, 1804, Vol. VI, page 172. 1'2* ? ♦< • I* 180 WIIKK'KIN (iRKAT BUITAIN lAIUKD TO and ""ives the re;i.s(>n lor "iDakiiip; Livci-jool hi> lu-aci- quuitors."' ^ As Itite :is tin- 7tli of Jamiarv, 1 ISG'), McKai' is ordered to pay to lUillock .€10.">,0U(). The sti'aincr '•Laurel,' the sauw wliich took the arms and men to the Shenandoah, was then in \Vihninj:;ton. »She was sent out with n cargo of cotton, witl- instructions to tlie oflicer in i'om- inand to sell the steamer and the cotton, and to pay Bullock i^l2,U0O out of the proceeds, puttinji the bahince to tlic <'redit of the treasury, with Fraser, Trenholm »& Co. - No ertbrts seem to have been spared to sustain the dying fortuni's of the insurrection. The insurgents, at the last, fell inti; the unaccountable error of supposing that the British (lovern- nient intended to interfere with their blockade-running. They changed the apparent ownershi]> of the Stag into the name of Jolm Fraser & Co., lest it sJiould be seized as -'a transport owned by the Confederate States , (Migaged in tlu' blockade. "' ^ It is needless to say that the precaution was not required, l^^vidence had over and over again been laid Ivefore Lord Russell that these blockade -runners were, in fact, transports of the insurgents, carrying their funds for Liverpool , and bringing back their arms and munitions of war, and tliat the operations of these vessels were brought clearly within the terms of the Foreign Enlistment Act; but he ever turned a deaf ear to the charges. Continued par- ^^^ ^^^*^ 15th of March, 1865, Mr. Adams tiality. eomphuucd of this matter for the last time. The United States steamer San Jacinto having been wrecked on the Bahamas, and her oflicers and crew having found shelter at Nassau, the "'Honduras,'' also a man-of-war, wa.> sent there for the purpose of paying in coin the claims for salvage. The Consul asked permission for the "Honiluras"' to enter the port, which w as refused, although the " Florida* had, less than six months before, remained eleven days at Bermuda, and taken on board a full supply of coal. In bringing this breach of hospitality to the notice of li)arl ' Ferguson to Lawton, November "20, 13G4, Vol. VI, page 17.'). - Trenholm to Fraser, Trenholm & Co., December 24, 18U4, Vol. VI, pase 1*3 7. ■' Trenholm to Mallory, December 17, 1SG4, Vol. VI, page 17G. PKKKORM ITS ni"rn:s as a nkitrai.. ISI Kiissell jMr. Ackiiis said: ''I shall not sock to (Iwcll on tlu» paini'iil impression this jji-orcedini^' has made in the Naval Uepartnient of the Unitotl States, which at the sanu^ time jiad too miu'h reason to be co^ini/ant of the abnse made of that port by persons pnietically eniiajied in hostilities in violation of Her ^Iajesty"s Proclamation. There was uo single day during the month in which this incident happened that thirty -live vessels, engaged in breaking the bkxtkade. were not to be seen flaunting their eontraband flags in that port. Neither has its hospitality been restricted to that livbrid class of British ships running its illegal ventures on joint account with the insurgent authorities in the United States. The Chameleon, not inaj)tly named, but before known as the Tallahassee, and still earlier as a British steamer litted out from London to play the part of a privateer out of Wilming- ton, was lying at that very time in Nassau, relieved indeed of her guns, but still retaining all the attributes of her hostile occupation. But a few days earlier the steamer Laurel, whose history is already too well known to your Lordship, by my note of the 7th instant, had re -appeared after its assnmj)tion of the name of the Confederate States, and had there been not only received, but commissioned with a post mail to a j)ort of Her Majesty's Kingdom."' ^ Lord Russell took no notice of Mr. Adams's charge, that many of these blockade - runners were in fact transports in the insurgent service, and that the ports of Nassau and Hermuda were depots of ordnance and quartermasters' stores. His only reply, made four daya after the surrender of Lee at Apj)omattox, was a repetition of the old story, "there is nothing in the law of nations which forbids the attempt of neutral ship- owners or commanders to evade the Wockade."' - To the last the British Government rijfused to interfere. The fears which induced the insurgents to try to cover up the owner- ship of the "Stag" were groundless. The j)artnership con- tinued until the United States interfered, and closed the business, before the English partners could deliver the last vessels under the contract. • . « ^I, page 17(5. ' Adams to Russell, Vol. I, pa7, 735, 738, 747, 751, 754, 771, 77G, 787. PERtORM ITS DUTIES AS A NEUTRAL. 183 r, across tht ilaiming to be an insurgent mun-of-war. What wys dono there is described in the statement of the Solicitor General to the jury on the trial of Rumble. '-The prei)arations for equipping, which had been interrupted, were proceeded with: V, number of boiler-makers were sent for from England, and many of them were induced to leave their employment in the dock-yard withou,: leave, and when tliey returned they were discharged as being absent without leave; attemj)ts v.^erc made to e;)list more me»; a large store of coals was taken in; bat at this point the French Government stepped in. The French Government, not choosing their ports to be made the scene of hostile operations, interposed, and prevented any further equipment of the vessel, and, by the short and summary process of mooring a man-of-war across her bows, prevented her going out of the port, and she has been kept a prisoner in the harbor ever since." ^ Contrast again the course of the French Government Avith that of the British Government in like cases. What vessel bearhis a commission from the Richmond authorities was ever disturbed by a British gun-boat, no matter how flagrant might ha\ e been her violations of British sovereignty? In the summer or autumn of the year 18(14, The Shcnanaoah. , • ■, ^ i n i i o there was m hondon a vessel called the oea King. She was a merchant steamer which had belonged to a Bombay company, and had been employed in the East India trade. ^ On the 20th of September in that year siie was sold in London to Richard Wright, of Liverpool,^ the father-in-law of Prioleau, of South Carolina, the managing partner in the Liverpool house of Eraser, Trenholm & Co. On the 7th of October Wright gave a power of attorney to one Corbett, an Englishman, "to sell her at any time within six months for a sum not less than £45,000 sterling. On the next day she cleared for Bombay, and sailed with a large supply of coal and about fifty tons of metal and a crew of forty-seven men."^ Corbett sold her to the insurgents 1 Vol. IV, page 583. - Bernard's British Neutrality, page 359. 3 Vol. Ill, page 319. * Dudley to Seward, Vol. Ill, page 319. t 4m «'t ♦.#• ;•■ ■' :\ 184 WIIKFfKIN 5. •' Vol. Ill, pages 393, 394, 39C, 398. 1 ■ IMCRFORM VIA nVTlKS AS A NKITRAL. 185 two vessels cliiirged and allowed to mako extensive repairs; to }Zo upon :i dry-dock; to take on board tlire«' hundred tons of eoal, iiavinji at the time four hundred tons on board; and tiie autiiorities deliberatelv shut their eves wliile sjje enlisted about liftv nien.^ The Siienandoah, with its British crew, continued its career of destruction until long after the insur — The Phantom and tlie SouthrrtHr, Referred to the Treasury and the Home Office March 27, to the Law Officers of the Crown June 2. Tiie Phantom was litting at l/ivtT- pool, the SoHthcravr at Stockton-on-Tees. Hoth proved to be intended for blockade-runners. * * * * — March is, IjS()4 — 'V\\Q Amphion. Referred to Home Oflice March IS. This vessel was said to be equipped for the Cofifederatt' service. The Law Officers reported that no case was made out. Slie was eventually sent to Copenhagen for sale as a merchant ship. — April IG, 1864 — The llaivk. Referred to the Home Oflice, to the Lord Advocate, and the Treasury April 18. This case had been already (April 4) reported on by the customs, and the papers sent to the Lord Advocate. On the 1 3th April the ship, which was suspected of having been built for the Confederates, left the Clyde without a register, and came to Greenhithe. The Law Officers decided that there was no evidence to warrant a seizure. She proved to be a blockade-runner. * * * — January 30, 180 5 — Tiie Virginia and the Louisa Ann Fanny. Referred to Treasury February 1. Vessels said to be in course of equip- ment at London. No case was established, and they proved to be blockade-runners, as reported by the Governor of the Bahamas, who had been instructed to watch their proceedings. — February 7, 1865 — The Hercules and Ajax. Referred to Treasury and Home Office February 8 and 9. Both vessels built in the Clyde. The Ajax first proceeded to Ireland, and was detained at Queenstown by the mutiny of some of the crew, who declared she was for the Confederate service. She was accordingly searched, but proved to be only fitted as a merchant ship. The Governor of the Bahamas was instructed to watch her at Nassau. On her arrival there she was again overhauled, but nothing suspicious discovered, and the '^'overnor reported that she was adapted, and ho believed intended, for a tug-boat. The Herciiles being still in tlie Clyde, incjuiries were made by the customs officers PEUKOKM ITjH duties AS A NEUTRAL. 13' tlicio, who reported tliat she wns ui'(loul)te(lly u tu^-bout, and tlie sister slup to the AjdJ.'^ This is tl»r wlioie cutalo^iie of uood w«)rks, ndditioiinl to tiioso already alluded to, which the a perusal, appear minute, and to refer to transactions which will be claimed on the part of Great Britain to have been conducted in conformity with some construction of alleged International Law. These transactions are, however, histori- cally narrated; and even those which come the nearest to a justilication, as within some precedent, or some claim of neutral right, exhibit a disinclination to investigate, not to say a foregone conclusion of adverse decision. J^ritish muni- cipal statute rather than recognized International Law wa> the standard of neutral duty ; and the rigid rules of evidence of the l^nglish common law were applied to the complaints made in behalf of the United States, in striking contrast to the friendlinefcss of construction, the alacrity of decision, and the ease of proof in the interest of the insurgents. Before proceeding to relate in detail the acts of the several cruisers, which will constitute specific claims against Great Britain, the United States ask the Tribunal to pause to see what has been already established. The charges in I" ^ dispatch from Mr. Fish to Mr. Mot- Mr. Fish's iuatruc- ley on the 25th of September, 1869, hi tiou of September , . , , ^ /• i tt . i o 85, 1869, sustained which the Government oi the Lnited otates, by this evidence. ^^^ ^j^^ j^^^ ^j^^^ ^^^^^^ diplomatically its grievances against Great Britain, certain statements were made which were esteemed to be of sufficient imi)ortance to be transferred to Mr. Mountague Bernard's book. Mr. Bernard was pleased to say of these statements, that si "rhetorical color, to use an inoftensive phrase, [was] thrown over the foregoing train of assertions, which purport to be statements of fact." The United States now repeat those » * 188 WHEREIN tiUEAI BRITAIN FAILED TO statements which Her jMajestys High Commissioner did them the lionor to incorporate into his able work, rnd to comment upon, and t' \ coniidently insist that every statement therein contained hat, .een more than made good by the evidence referred to in this paper. Those statements were as follows,^ the references to the proof being inserted for the con- venience of the Tribmial: "As time went on; as the insurrection from political (^ame at lenajth to be military; as the sectional controversy in the United States proceeded to exhibit itself in the organization of great armies artd fleets, and in the prosecution of hostil- ities on a scale of gigantic magnitude, then it was that the spirit of the (Queen's Proclamation showed itself in the event, seeing that in virtue of the Proclamation maritime enter- prises in the ports of Great Britain, which would otherwise have been piratical, were rendered lawful, [sec Lord Camp- helVs speech in the House of Lords, May 16, 1861: cited ante, page 14,] and thus Great Britain became, and to the end continued to be, the arsenal, [sec Iluse and Ferguson's letters, and Gorgas\^ report of Huse's pur- chases,] the navy yard [sec the foregoing account of Bul- loch's doings,'] and the treasury, [sec the foregoing evidence as to Fraser, Trenholm d' Co.'s acts as depositaries,] of the insurgent Confederates. i • ' "A spectacle was thus presented without precedent or parallel in the history of civilized nations. Great Britain, although the professed friend of the United States, yet, in time of avowed international peace, permitted [see the de- cision in the Alexandra case; also the refusals to pro- ceed against the Florida, Alabama, and the rams] armed cruisers to be fitted out and harbored and equipped in her ports to cruise against the merchant ships of the United States, and to burn and destroy them, until our maritime commerce was swept from tlie ocean. [See Mr. Cobdcn's speech in the House of Commons, Mag 13, 1864.J Our merchant vessels w ^re destroyed piratically hy captors who had no ports of their own [see Earl Ititsseirs speech in ^ Bernard's Neutrality of Great Britain, 378—^,80. PERFORM ITS DUTIES As A NEUTRAL. 180 the House of Lords, Ajml 2(>, 18G4J in which to relit or to condemn prizes, and whose only nationality was the quarter-deck of their ships, built, dispatched to sea, and, not seldom ii name, still professedly owned in Great Britain. [See the evidence in regard to the transfers of the Georgia. and of the Shenandoah. \ * 1^ ^ ^ n. it "The Queen's Ministers excused themselves by alieiied delects in the municipal law of the country. [See Earl llnsselVs constant pleas of want of sufficient pro(f to convict criminals.] Learned counsel either advised that the wrongs committed did not constitute violations of the municipal law, or else gave sanction to artful devices of deceit, to cover up such violations of law. [See the decision us to the Florida; as to the Alabama until she tvas ready to sail; as to the rams; and as to the ox^erations at Nassau^ Bermuda, and Liverpool.] And, strange to say, the courts of England or of Scotland, up to the very highest, were occupied month after month with juridical niceties and technicalities of statute construction, in tliis respect, [see the Alexandra case,] while the Queen's Gov- ernment it&eli, including the omnipotent Parliament, which might have settled these questions in an hour by appro])riate legislation, sat with folded arms, as if unmindful of its inter- national obligations, and sulVered ship after ship to be con- structed in its ports to wage war on the United States. [See the decision of the Cabinet, communicated to Mr. Adams, February 13, 1863, and Lord Falmerston's speech in the House of Commons, March 27, 18 (5 3. J * * * * * * "When the defects of the existing laws of Parliament had become apparent, the Government of the United States earnestly entreated the Queen's Ministers to provide the re- quired remedy, as it would have been easy to do, by a l)roper act of Parliament: but this the Queen's Government refused. [Sec the account of Jjord LiussclFs infcrvictv with Mr. xidams, February 13, 18G3.J * :V * * * * *'0n the present occasion, the Queen's Ministers seem to • «r •■ ^ 1 190 WHEREIN GliliAT BRITAIN FAlLIiD TO liave committed the error of assuming; that they needed not to look beyond their own local law. enacted for their own domestic convenience, and might, under cover of the delicien- cies of that law, disregard their sovereign duties toward nnother sovereign Power. Nor was it, in our judgment, any adequate excuse for the Queen's jNIinisters to profess extreme tenderness of private rights, or apprehension of actions for damages, in case of any attempt to arrest the many ships which, either in England or Scotland, were, with ostentatious publicity, being constructed to cruise against tlie United States. See the evidence as io the Florida^ the Georgia, the Alabama, the rams, the Bermuda, the Tallahassee, the Pampero, the BappahannocJi, the Laurel, and other vessels.] •jC •{• rjfi I* *5« I* "But although such acts of violation of law were fre- quent in Great Britain, and susceptible of complete technical proof, notorious, flaunted directly in the face of the world, varnished over, if at all, with the shallowest pretexts of deception, yet no efficient step appears to have been taken by the British Government to enforce tlie execution of its municipal laws or to vindicate the majesty of its outraged sovereign power. [The Alabama, the Florida, the Georgia, and the Shenandoah escaped. The rams ivere seized, bat never condemned ; no guiltg party ivas ever punished; Bulloch and Prioleau were never interfered with.] "And the Government of the United States cannot be- lieve — it would conceive itself wanting in respect for Great Britain to impute — that the Queen's Ministers are so much hampered by juridical difficulties that the local administration is thus reduced to such a state of legal impotency as to deprive the Government of capacity to uphold its sovereignty against local wrong-doers, or its neutrality as regards other Sovereign Powers. [Contrast with this the course of the British Government and Parliament during the Franco- German war.] "If, indeed, it were so, tlie causes of reclamation on the part of the United States would only be tlie more positive and sure, for the law of nations assumes that eacli Govern- PERFORM ITS DUTIES AS A NEUTRAL. 191 ment is capable of discharging its international obligations; and, perchance, if it be not, then tlie absence of such ca- pability is itself a specific ground of responsibility for con- sequences. [This statement prohaUy tvill not he denied.'] "But the Queen's Government would not be content to admit, nor will the Government of the United States presume to impute to it, such political organization of the British Empire as to imply any want of legal ability on its part to discharge, in the amplest manner, all its duties of sovereignty and amity toward other Powers. "It remains only in this relation to refer to one other point, namely, the question of negligence; neglect on the })art of officers of the British Government, whether superior or subordinate, to detain Confederate cruisers, and especially the Alabama, the most successful of the depredators on the commerce of the United States. "On this point the President conceives that little needs now to be said, for various cogent reasons: "First, the matter has been exhaustivelv discussed alreadv by this Department, or by the successive American Ministers. "Then, if the question of negligence be discussed with frankness, it must be treated in this instance as a case of extreme negligence, which Sir William Jones has taught us to regard as equivalent or approximate to evil intention. The question of negligence, therefore, cannot be presented without danger of thought or language disrespectful toward the Queen's Ministers; and the President, while purposing, of course, as his sense of duty requires, to sustain the rights of the United States in all their utmost amplitude, yet in- tends to speak and act in relation to Great Britain in the .same spirit of International respect which he expects of her in relation to the United States, and he is sincerely desirous that all discussions between the Governments may be so conducted as not only to prevent any aggravation of exist- ing differences, but to tend to such reasonable and amicable determination as best becomes two great nations of common origin and conscious dignity and strength. "I assume, therefore, pretermitting detailed discussion in this respect, that the negligence of the officers of the British ■ • fcf ! :.l 192 WIIEKKIN GRKAT BHITAIN 1 AILED TO &C. Government in the matter of the Alabama, at least, was i^ross and inexcusable, and such as indisputably to devolve on that Government full responsibilitv for all the depreda- tions committed bv her. Indeed, this conclusion seems in efiect to be conceded in Great Britain. [Sec the preface to Earl JinsselVs Speeches and Dispatches.] At all events, the United States conceive that the proofs of responsible ne£fli 194 lNSURtiP:NT CRUISERS. remains the same. It is a proceeding totally unjustiliabi'?, and manifestly offensive to the British Crov.'n. " — Iiarl Uusselts Letter w Messrs. Mason, Slulel/, and Mann, Februari/ 13, 18G5. Vol. I, pafje GuO. Earl Russell de- '^^"^' Tribunal of Arbitration will probably nounces the acts a<2;rec witli Eaii Russcll in Ills statement to of which the *=' . . , United StatP': coin- the insurgent agents, that "the practice ot Sed Tmi "ouil"; buildino- ships" in Great Britain "to be used unjustitiable. ^s vessels of war" against the United States, and the "attempts to make the territorial waters of Great Britain the place of preparation for warlike armaments against the United States" in pursuance of contracts made with the Confederate agents," were "unwarrantable" f.ud "totally un- justiliable." British territory British territory was, during the whole navar^operations ^^truggle, the base of the naval operations of of the iusurycnts, tlio insurgents. The lirst serious light had scarcely taken place before the contracts were made in Great Britain for the Alabama and the Florida. The contest was nearly over when Waddell received his orders in Liverpool to sail thence in the Laurel in order to take command of the Shenandoah and to visit the Arctic Ocean on a hostile 1 There also was the arsenal of the insur- gents, from whence they drew their munitions of war, their arms, and their supplies. It is true that it has been said, and may again be stiid, that it was no in- fraction of the law of nations to furnish such supplies. But, while it is not maintained that belligerents may infringe upon the rights which neutrals have to manufacture and deal in such military supplies in the ordinary course of commerce, il is asserted with conlidence that a neutral ought not t> permit a belligerent to use the neutral soil as the main, if not the only base of its military supplies, during a long and bloody contest, as the soil of Great Britain was used by the insurgents. cruise. Their arsenal 1 Vol. Ill, page 4G1. GENERAL REVIEW. 195 The systematic ^^ "^^7 ^^^ ulwayy be easy to determine optrations of the what Is aucl what is not hiwful commerce in insurgents a viola- x ^ .i it -. i tion of the duties amis and inanitions ot war; but the United o» a neu ra . States conceive that there can be no doubt on which side of the line to place the insurgent 0[)erations on British territorry. If Huse had been removed from Liver- pool, Heyliger from Nassau, and Walker from Bermuda; or if Fraser, Trenholm & Co. hud ceased to sell insurgent cotton and to convert it into money for the use of Huse, Heyliger, and Walker, the armies of the insurgents must have succumbed. The systematic operations of these persons, carried on openly and under the avowed protection of the British Government, made of British territory the "arscnar' of which Mr. Fish complained in his note of September 25, 1809.^ Such con- duct was, to say the least, wanting in the essentials of good neighborhood, and should be frowned upon by all who desire to so establish the principles of International Law, as to secure the peace of the world, while protecting the in- dependence of nations. It is in vain to say tliat both parties could have done the same thing. The United States were under no such ne- cessity. If they could not manufacture at home all the sup- plies they needed, they were enabled to make their purchases abroad openly, and to transport them in the ordinary course of commerce. It was the insurgents who, unable to manu- facture at home, were driven to England for their entire military supplies, and who, linding it impossible to transport tliose supplies in the ordinary course of commerce, originated a commerce for the purpose, and covered it under the British ilag to Bermuda and Nassau. Under the pressure of the naval power of the United States, their necessities compelled them to transport to England a part of the executive of their Government, and to carry on its operation in Great Britain. They were protected in doing this by Her Majesty's Government, although its attention was called to the injustice thereof.- This conduct deprived the United States of the ^ Vol. VI, page 4. '^ Lord Russell to Mr. Adams, Vol. I, page 578. 13* •I' 190 lNSrRritain carried into practice eratt" ^11 BrUish ^^"^ theory of neutrality, it was equally insincere possessions. .^y^^\ partial. Its municipal laws for enforcing its obligations as a neutral, under tlie law of nations, were confessedly inade([uate, and, (hu'ing the striiggle, were stripped of all their force by executive and judicial construction. Yet Great Britain refused to take any steps for theii* amendment, although requested so to do.^ The Queen's proclamation inhibited blockade-running; yet the authorities encoiu'aged it by enacting new laws or making new regul'itions which permitted the transshi])ment of goods contraband of war within the colonial ports: by oflicially in- forming the colonial oflicers that "British authorities ought not to take any steps adverse to merchant vessels of the Confederate States, or to interfere with their free resort to ] )ritish ports ;'' - by giving oflicial notice to the United States that it would not do to examine too closely, on the high seas, British vessels with contraband of war; ^ and by regulations which operated to deter the United States vessels of war from entering the British ports from which the illicit trade was carried on. The Foreign Enlistment Act of 1 819 forbade the employment of a British vessel as a transport: and yet vessels known to be owned by the insurgent authorities, and engaged in carrying munitions of war for them, were allowed to carry the British Hag and were welcomed in British ports. Still further, the same vessel would appear one day as a blockade-runner, and ^ Ante, page 251. 2 Dnke of Newcastle to Governor Qrd, Vol. II, page 558. 3 Earl Russell to Lord Lyons, Vol. II, page 591. 198 INfilTR(JRNT fRUHKRS. nnothcr (iay as a luan-of-war, rcoeivinj^ an equal wolcomu in each capacity. Theinistri"cf'^"s otMamiary 31,1 8G2, tbrliade both bclli<^ereiits alike to ei. ao port of Nassau «»xccpt by permission of the f^overnor, or in .stress of weather. Tliat permission was lavishly <2;iveu to every insurgent cruiser, but was granted churlishly, if at all, to the vessels of the United States. The sam(^ instructions forbade the ^rantinp, to a steam man-of-war of either belligen'nts in British ports a supjjly of coal in excess of what would be necessary to take the vessel to the nearest port of its own country or some nearer destination. This rule was enforced upon the vessels of the United States, but was utterly disregarded as to the vessels of the insurgents. Those instructions also forbade the granting of any supply of coal to such a vessel if it had been coaled in a British port within three months. Yet in three irotable instances this salutary rule was violated, that of tlie Nashville at Bernuulii in February, 186ii; the Florida at Barbadoes, in February, 1863; and the Alabainii at Capetown in March, 1 8()4. „. . , ,. These admitted facts were repeatedly, and These facts throw _ _ .... suspicion upon the in detail, brought to the notice of the British acts of British ^ ^ , ^ n ^i ofHciais toward Crovernnii'nt, and as re])eatedly, the answer was insurgent cruisers, ojypti ti,jjt there was no cause for interference. At length they were, as a system, In'ought to Lord Russell's attention, by Mr. Adams, with the threads of evidence, which furnished him with the proof of their truth. Yet he declined to act, saying that "this corresj)ondence does not a})pear to Her Majesty's Government to contain any sufficient evidence of a system of action in direct hostility to the United States:"' that it furnished no proof as to the building <^f iron-clads that "could form matter for a criminal prosecution;" and that the other acts complained of were "not contrary to law." ' In other words, he declared that the only international offense of which Her Majesty's Government would take notice was the building of iron-clads; and that no stei)s would be taken, even against ])ersons guilty of that violation of neutrality, until the officials of the United States would act thg i)art of ^ Earl Russell to Mr. Adams, Vol. I, page 578. riRNERAF. RKVIEVV. 191) lal welcome in detectives, and secure the proof Avliich a liritish court could hold competent to convict tlie oftendcn* of a violation of a local law. It i.s important, in considcrin;^ the I'videncc which Ik about to be referred to, to bear in mind thes<' constant (h'monstratious of j)artiality for the insurgents. They .show a persistent absence of nml neutrality, wliich, to say the least, should throw suspicion upon the acts of the r>ririsii oflicials as to those vessels, and sliould incline the Tribunal to ch)sely scrutinize their conduct. ,,., . The United States, however, jio farther than lliey show an , , . . • . abnepatioii of all tliis. Tliev insist that I bn* Majestv's Government diligence to pre- , , \ . , -.1 ' '• r *i . 1 vent the acts coin- Jd)andone{i, in advance, tn(» exercise ot tliat due pianied of. diligence which the Treaty of Washington de- clares that a neutral is bound to observe. They say that the position of Her Majesty\s Government just cited, taken in connection with the construction put upon the Foreign Enlistment Act by the British courts in tiie Alexandra case, was a practical abandonment of all obligation to observe tructit>ns of the Government of the United States. Findin|ji; it impossible to escape, an attempt Avas made to sAl the Sumter, with her armament, for ^4(100. "* The cdusul of tlie United States at Gibraltar, by direction of Mr. Adams , protested against this sale. ^' The sale was linally made "by public auction"' on the 19th of December, IbG:?." Mr. Adams notilied Earl Ilussell that the sale would not be recognized by the United States, and called upon Great r»ritain not to regard it, as it had been made in violation of principles of law that had been adopted by British courts and publicists." He maintained that -'Her Majesty's Govern- ment, in furnishing shelter for so long a period to tije Sumter in the harbor of Gibraltar, as a ship of war of a belligerent, had determini^nl the character of the vessel;'' ^ ^ Adams to Russell, Vol. II, page 484. - Russell to Adams, Vol. II, page 486. •' Spragne to Seward, Vol. II, page 502. * Spragne to Adams, Vol. II, page 507. ^ Spragne to Codrington, Vol. II, page 509. ^ Sprague to Adams, Vol. II, page 515. ^ Adams to Russell, Vol. II, page 522. ^ Adams to Russell, Vol. II, page 523. 202 INSURGKNT CRUISERS. and that " the purchase of ships of war belonging to enemies is Jield in the British courts t^ be invalid." ^ After reflecting upon this simple i)roposition for more than five weeks, Earl Russell denied it. He said, "The Britisli Government, when neutral, is not bound to refuse to a British subject the right to acquire by purchase a vessel which a belligerent owner may desire to part with, but it would not deny the right of the adverse belligerent ^o ascertain, if such vessel were captured by its cruisers, whether the vessel had rightfully, according to the law of nations , come into the possession of the neutral."' '-^ JMr. Adams also maintained that the sale was lictitious, - to which I'^arl Russell replied that he "could not assume that the Sumter had not been legally and hoifa fide sold to a Britisli owner for com- mercial and peaceful purposes." ^ Mr. Adam's insisted (and the result proved that he was correct) that the sale of the Sumter was lictitious, and that the purchaser was an agent of Fraser, Trenholm & Co., the treasury agents and de- positaries, &c., for the insurgent authorities at Richmond. * His representations were disregarded, and the vessel was taken to Liverpool and thoroughly repaired. She then tooic on board a cargo of arms and munitions of war, and, under the name of the Gibraltar, fortilied with a British register, became an insurgent transport. •'' In all these proceedings on the part of British officials the United States find a partiality toward the insurgents, which is inconsistent with the duties of a neutral. 1. The Sumter was permitted to receive at Trinidad a full sup])ly of coal. The United States, however, were for- bidden by Great Britain even to deposit coal in the British J * ' y- •: ■ ^ Russell to Adams, Vol. II, page 52(;. - Adams to Kussell, Vol. II, pa'^e 520. '• Russell to Adams, Vol. 11, page ;V21. ■* The nominal purchasers were M. G. Klingerder & Co. (Vol. II, page 529.) This house was connected with Fraser, Trenholm & Co., and paid regularly a portion of the wages of the men on the Alabama, to their families in Liverpool. (See Dudley to Adams, Vol. Ill, page 210.)] ^ Vol. II, pages 521—538. THE SUMTER. 203 ging to enemies ns , come into West Indies for their own use, under such regulations as might be prescribed by Her Majesty's Government. What took place at Nassau in December, 1861, has already been told. In Bermuda, on the 19th of February, 18G2, their consul was officially informed that "the Government of Her Britannic Majesty had determined not to allow tlie forma- tion in any British colony of a coal -depot for the use of their vessels of war, either by the Government of the United States or of the so -styled Confederate States." ^ Before this Case is fmished it will be seen how thoroughly this determination was disregarded as to the " so - styled Con- federate States." If it should be thought that the habitually insincere neutrality of Great Britain, as already detailed, did not con- stitute snch a violation of the duties of a neutral as would entail responsibility for the acts of all the insurgent cruisers, (which the United States, with coniidence, maintain that it did,) it is clear that the Sumter was furnished with an ex- cessive supply of coal at Trinidad, which supply enabled her to inflict the subsequent injuries on the commerce of the United States. It is not contended that at that time there were any precedents which settled absolutely the quantity of coal which might be furnished to a belligerent steam man-of-war by a neutral. When the proclamation of neutrality was issued, it seemed to be the opinion of leading members of the House of Lords , (Lords Brougham and Kingsdown, for instance,) that coal for the use of vessels of war might be rejiarded as contraband of war. - The instructions issued by Her Majesty's (jiovernment a few months later permitted this article to be furnished, provided the supply should be measured by the capacity of the vessel to consume it, and should be limited to what might be necessary to take it to the nearest port of its own country . or to some nearer 1 Ord to Allen Vol. II, page 590. See also the reports of the officers of the Keystone and the Quaker City, who, in December, l8Gi, were refused supplies of coal at this port. Vol. VI, pages 52 and 53. See also the case of the Florida, post^ where this subject is more fully discussed. 2 Vol. IV, pp. 486-491. •• »' ■X -' s 204 IxNS URGENT CRUISERS. destination. This rule, as subsequently niodilicd by the United States, ^ appears to be a just medium between the excc^'^sivc supply furnished to the Sumter in Trinidad and the absolute refusal to permit the United States to sup[)ly itself. Under this rule the Sumter would have been entitled to receive only what Avould be necessary to take her to New Orleans or to Galveston. 1'. The Simiter was in the port of (librrdtar when the instructi(ms of January 1(1, 18G2, (Vol. IV, p. 175,) were published there , - on the 1 1 th February. By their terms they Avere to go into elfect six days after that date. Under those instructions the Sumter, having been recognized as a man-of-war, ought to have been required to leave the port of Gibraltar within twenty - four hours . or , if without coal, within twenty -four hours after getting a supply of coal. Instead of that she was allowed to remain thert^ for twelve months . while Lord Russeirs instructions were rigidly en- forced against the vessels of the United States. The reason for this partiality may be easily gathered from the cor- respondence of the United States Consul at Gibraltar. ^ The vessels of war of the United States were on her track, and had the instructions of Earl Russell been complied with, the well-laid schemes of the United States oflicers for her destruc- tion would have been successful. But the Tribunal will ob- serve that the instructions, which were so offensively enforced against the United States vessels Connecticut and Honduras, were ignored as to the insurgent vessel Sumter. o. The sale of the Sumter was pal])al)ly an evasion. Slie went into the hands of Fraser, Trenholm »S: Co.; and, know- ing the connection between that hrm and the insurgents, it is not too much to ask the' Tribunal to assume as a pro- ^ The President's Proclamation of October 8, 1870, issued during the Franco-German war, limited the supply of coal to the war vessels or privateers of the belligerents to so much as might be sufticient, if without sail power, to carry the vessel to the nearest European port of its own country ; if with sail power, to half that quantity. - Vol. II, pages 502—503. ^ Sprague to Adams, Vol. II, pages 502, 503, 5011, 507. THE SUMTER. 205 bability that there >vas never any change of ownership. But if it should be thought that the transaction was made hona fidc, then there is an equal probability that the money found its ^vay to the credit of the insurgents in their ] Liverpool transactions. By reason of these repeated acts of insincere neutrality, or of actual disregard of the duties of a neutral, the United KStates ^vere great sufterers. J^efore arriving at Trinidad, the Sumter captured eleven American vessels.^ After leav- ing that port, and before arriving at Gibraltar, she captured six other vessels belonging to citizens of the United States. The injury did not stop there. The United States made diligent efforts to capture this vessel which was destroying their commerce. For this purpose they diqjat-ched across the Atlantic two of their men-of-war, the Kearsarge and the Tuscarora. These vessels followed on the track of the Sumter, and the plans of the United States would have been successful had Earl Russell's instructions of January ol, 1862, been carried out toward the Sumter in the port of Gibraltar, as they were carried out toward the vessels of the United States in all the colonial ports of Great Britain. Under these circumstances, the United States ask the Tribunal to find and certify as to the Sumter that Great Britain, by the acts or omissions hereinbefore recited or referred to, failed to fulfill the duties set forth in the three rules in Article VI of the Treaty of Washington, or recog- nized by the principles of International Law not inconsistent with such rules. Should the Tribunal exercise the power conferred upon it by Article VII of the Treaty, to award a sum in gross to be paid to the United States, they will ask that, in considering the amount so to b^ awarded, the losses of individuals in the destruction of their vessels and cargoes by the Sumter, and also the expenses to which the United States were put in the pursuit of that vessel, may be taken into account. u- • # « ' »( .1 ». ^ Bernard to Seward, Vol. II, page 485. 206 liNSUIiGENT CRUISERS. THE NASHVILLE. „. „ , .,, The Nashville, a laro;e paddle-wheel steamer, The Nashville. i xt ^r formerly engaged on the New York andCiiarles- ton line, lightened to diminish her draught, armed with two guns, and commanded by an oflieer Avho had been in the Navy of the United States, ran out from Charleston on the night of the 26th of October, 1801.^ She arrived at the British port of St. George, Bermuda, on the afternoon of the 30th- of the same month, having been about three and a half days makhig the passage. She took on board there, by the permission of the Governor, six hundred tons of coal,^ and this act Avas approved by Her Majesty's princijjal Secretary of State for the Colonies.^ This approval seems to have been elicited by the com})laints which had been made to the Governor by the Consul of the United States at that port.'' It may also be that Her Majesty's Govern- ment preferred to have the question settled, before it could be made the subject of diplomatic representation on the part of the United States. In view of the rule as to supplies of coal whicli was soon after adopted by Her Majesty's Government, the United States insist, as they have already insisted in regard to the Sumter, thfit a sup])ly of six hundred tons was greatly in excess of the needs of the Nashville. There are no means of knowing whether she had any coal on board at the time she arrived in the port of St. George. Assuming that she had none, the utmost she should have received was enough to take her back to Charleston, from ^vhich port she had just come in three days and a half. Instead of that, she received more than a supply for a voyage to Southampton. She left Bermuda on the afternoon of the 5th of November,*^ and anchored in Southampton waters on 1 Bernard's Neutrality of Great Britain, page 267. - Wells to Seward, Vol. II, page 538. ^ Governor Ord to the Duke of Newcastle, Vol. II, page 557. * Duke of Newcastle to Governor Ord, Vol. II, page 558. ■' Wells to Ord, Vol. II, page 539. •5 Weils to Seward, VoL li," page 5-10. t:Ji&AK THE NASHVILLE. 207 the morning of the 21st of the i^ame month, ^ havhig des- troyed at sea the United States merchant ship Harvey Birch - on the passage. A correspondence ensued between Earl Russell and Mr. Adams as to the character of this vessel, in which Lord Russel said, "The Nashville appears to be a Confederate vessel of war."^ She was received as such, was "taken into dock for calking and other repairs,"' and "received one hundred and iifty tons of coal" on the 10th of January. On the 25th "C.'.ptain Patey, of Her Majesty's Navy, re- ported the Nashville coaled and necessary repairs completed."'' On the 4th of the following February the Nashville left Southampton and proceeded to Bermuda, where she arrived on the evening of the 20th. On the day previous to that (the 19 th) the Consul had received from the G* ci'nor the official notice already alluded to, that the Government of Her Britannic Majesty had determinetl not to allow the formation, in any British Colony, of a coal depot for the use of the vessels of war of the United States.'' The Gov- ernment of the United States was, therefore, not a little astonished to learn from the Consul at Bermuda that the Nashville had taken on board one hundred and fifty tons of coal at that place, and that she left "under the escort of Her Majesty's steamer Spiteful."" These circumstances, in accordance with the principles hereinbefore stated, justify the United States in asking the Tribunal of Arbitration as to this vessel, to lind and certify that Great Britain, by the acts or omissions hereinbefore recited or referred to, failed to fulfill the duties set forth in the three rules in Article VI of the Treaty of Washington or recognized by the principles of international law not inconsistent with such rules. Should the Tribunal exercise -•, ti.;i * ' ' V t • ^ Captain Patey to the Secretary of the Admiralty, Vol. II, pages 543, 544. ^ Russell to Adams, Vol. II, page 555. 3 Vol. II, page 587. ^ Ord to Allen, Vol. II, page 590. ° Adams to Seward, Vol. II, page 542. " Allen to Seward, Vol. II, page 591. 208 INSURGENT CRUISERS. the power coiifoiTcd upon it by Article VII of the Treaty, to award a sum in gross to be paid to the United States, they will ask that, in considering the amount iH) to be awarded, the losses of individuals in the destruction of their vessels and cargoes by the Nashville, and also the expenses to which the United States were put in the pursuit of that vessel, may be taken into account. THE FLORIDA, AND HER TENDERS, THE CLARENCE, THE TACONY, AND THE ARCHER. The Florida and The Florida, Originally known as the Oreto, Jier tenders. ^y^s an iron screw gun-boat, of about seven hundred tons burden, bark-rigged, and had two smoke-stacks and three masts. ^ The contract for her construction was made with Fawcett, Preston & Co., of Liverpool, by Bul- lock, soon after he came to England in the summer of 1861. He was introduced to them by Prioleau, of the firm of Fraser, Trenholm & Co., in order that he might make the contract. ^ It w^as pretended, for form's sake, that she was constructed for the Italian Government; but it was a shallow pretense, and deceived only those who wished to be deceived. The Italian Consul at Liverpool disclaimed all knowledge of her, ^ and people at that port who were familiar with shifj-building understood from the first that she was being built for tjje Southern insurgents.^ The precise date of the making of the contract cannot ^ Dudley to Adams, Vol. 11, page 594. ^ Prioleau's evidence, Vol. VI, page 181. ^ Dudley to Seward, Vol. II, page 592. * See Mr. Dudley's dispatches of January 24 and 31 , and of February 4, 12, 17, 19, 21, 22, 20, and 27, and of March 1, 5, 12, 15, 19, and 22, in the year 18G2, Vol. VI, page 214 et seq. THE FLORIDA AND llER TENDERS. 209 ontract cannot be given by the United States. The ran<;e of time within which it must hiivi> been niadc can be determined. J^uHock left En«ihind in the autnnm of iSlil, ;it or about the time that the Bermuda sailed with lluse's lirst shij)ment of stores; ;ind returned in March, on tla^ Amiic (Jliilds, which ran the l)lockaile from Wilmington. ^ The contract was made before he left, and the Florida was constructed (hu'ing his absence. The contract for the construction of tlie Indl was sub-let by Fawcett, Preston t^ Co. to Miller & Sons, of Liverpool.'-' The payments to Miller & Sons were made by Fawcett, Preston & Co.: the payments to Fawcett, IVeston cfc Co. were made by Fraser, Trenholm & Co. By the 4th of February the Florida was taking in her coal, and appearances indicated that she would soon leave without her armament. ^ She made her trial trip on the 17th of February. By the 1st of March she had taken in her in-ovisions, "a very large quantity, enough for a long cruise,*' and was getting as many Southern sailors'*^ as possible. She was registered as an English vessel.'' Although apparently ready to sail, she lingered about Liverpool, which gave rise to some speculations in the minds of the jieople of that town. It was said that she had '' injured herself and vvas under- going repairs." '^ The mystery was solved by the arrival, on the 11th of March, in the Mersey, of the Annie Childs from Wilmington, bringing as passengers Caj)tain Bullock^ and four other insurgent naval ofiicers, who came on board of her ''some twenty miles down the river from Wilmington,"*^ and who were to take commands on the vessels which were contracted for in Liverpool. As soon as they arrived they went on board the Florida, and were entertained there that evening." On the 2 2d of March the Florida took her fmal 1 Dudley to Seward, March 12, 1862, Vol. VI, page 223. 2 Same to same, February 12, 18G2, Vol. VI, page 215. 3 Dudley to Seward, Vol. II; page 592; Vol. VI, page 215. ^ Same to same. Vol. II, page 596; Vol. VI, page 220. ^ Same to same. Vol. II, page 597; Vol. VI, page 221. ^ Dudlev to Seward, March 7, 1862, Vol. VI, page 222. 7 Sarae^o same, March 22, 1862, Vol. VI, page 224. *^ Dudley to Adams, Vol. II, page 601. 14 , v» , 1 . \ 210 INSUR(JENT CRU1SER8. departure from the Mersey,^ with "a crew of fifty-two men, all British, with the exception of three or four, one of whom only was an American."'-' She was consigned by Bullock to Heyliger. Another account says that she was consigned to Adderley & Co. Simultaneously with these proceedings, shipments were being made at Hartlepool, on the eastern coast of England, of cannon, rifles, shot, shells, &c., intended for the Florida. They were sent from Liverpool to Hartlepool by rail, and there put on board the steamer Bahama for Nassau. It was a matter of public notoriety that this was going on.' Ail the facts about the Florida, and about the hostile expedition which it was proposed to make against the United States, were open and notorious at Liverpool. Mr. Dudley's correspondence, already cited, was full of it. The means of intelligence were as accessible to British authorities as to the consular officers of the United States. Nevertheless, it was esteemed to be the duty of the officers of the United States to lay what had come to their knowledge before Her Majesty's Government. Mr. Dudley, the Consul at Liverpool, wrote to Mr. Adams that he had information from many different sources as to the Oreto, "all of which goes to show that she is intended for the Southern Confederacy."'* Mr. Adams transmitted the intelligence to Earl Russell, and said that he "entertained little doubt that the intention was precisely that indicated in the letter of the Consul, the carrying on war against the United States." * * * He added, "Should further evidence to sustain the allegations respecting the Oreto be held necessary to effect the object of securing the inter- position of Her Majesty's Government, I will make an effort to procure it in a more formal manner.'"^ The United States ask the Tribunal to observe that, not- withstanding this offer, no objection was taken as to the 1 Vol. II, page 604. 2 Customs Report, Vol. II, page 605; Vol. VI, page 231. ^ See Mr. Dudley's dispatches of March 7, J2, and 15, Vols. II and VI. * Dudley to Adams, Vol. II, page 594; Vol. VI, page 216. ^ Adams to Russell, Vol. II, page 593; Vol. VI, page 21G. THE FLORIDA AND IIEK TENDERS. 211 form of the information suhmittcd hy Mr. Adams, nor was he asked hj Earl Bnsscll for further particulars. Lord Kussell, however, in reply, transmitted to Mr. Adams a report of the British Commissioners of Customs, in whicli it was stated that the Oreto was a vessel of war "pierced for four guns;" that she was "built by Miller & Sons tor Fawcett, Preston & Co.," and was "intended for the use of Messrs. Thomas Brothers, of Palmero;" that she "had been handed over to Messrs. Fawcett & Preston; that Miller & Son stated their belief that the destination was Palmero;" and that "the examiners had every reason to believe that the vessel was destined for the Italian Government." ^ Further representations being made by Mr. Adams, the same officers subsequently reported that, having received directions "to inquire into the further allegations made in regard to the Oreto," they found "that the vessel in question was registered on the 3d of March in the name of John Henry Thomas, of Liverpool, as sole owner; that she cleared on the follow- ing day for Palermo and Jamaica, in ballast, but did not sail until the 2 2d, * * * having a crew of fifty-two men, all British, with the exception of three or four, one of whom only was an American."^ The Tribunal of Arbitration will observe that even from the reports of these British officers it is established that the Florida was a vessel of war, "pierced for four guns;" and also that notwithstanding their alleged belief that she was intended for th King of Italy, she was allowed to clear for Jamaica in ballasi. Attention is also invited to the easy credulity of these officials,- who, to the first charges of Mr. Adams, replied by putting forward the "belief" of the builders as to the destination of the vessel, and who met his sub- sequent complaints by extracting from the custom-house re- cords the false clearance which Bullock, and Fraser, Tren- holm & Co., had caused to be entered there. Such an examination and such a report can scarcely be regarded as the exercise of the "due diligence" called for by the rules of the Treaty of Washington. i Vol. II, pages 595—96; Vol. VI, page 218. 2 Vol. II, page 605; Vol. VI, page 231. %'\ •« ' ••v i 14* -:! 212 INSUnr.KNT CnUISERS. The Florida arrived at Nassau on the 'i8tli of April, and was taken in <'liai'«i;e by Heyliger, who was then a well- known and recognized insurgent agent. The Bahama arrived a few days later at the same ])ort by ])reeoncerte(l arrange- ment. Tlu^ two branches of the hostile expedition, vvhicli had left Great Britain in detachments, were thus united in British waters. They were united in their conception in tlic eontrarts with Kawcett, Preston ^ Co. They were temporarily separated by the shipment of a portion of the annnunitiou and stcn'es by rail to Hartlepool, and thence by the I'ahama. They were now again united, and the vessels went together to Cochrane's Anchorage, a ])lace about nine miles from the harbor of Nassau, not included in the })ort limits. While there Caj)tj>in llickley, of Her Majesty's ship Grey- hound, thought it his duty to ii'ake a careful examination of the vessel, and he reported her <'ondition to the Governor. In a remarkable certiiicate, signed by himself, and by the officers of th(^ Greyhound, dated June 13, 18G2, it is stated that he "asked the cajjtain of the Oreto whether the; Oreto liad left Liv(3rpool m all respects as she was then; his an- swer was yes; in all respects.'"'^ As, therefore, no changes had been made in her after leaving Liverpool, Captain Hick- ley's report may be taken to be the official evidence of a British expert as to her character, at the time of Mr. Adams's complaints, and of the customs examinations. He says, "1 then proceeded to examine the vessel, and found her in every respect fitted as a war vessel, precisely the same as vessels of a similar class hi H(>r Majesty's Navy. She has a magazine and light-rooms forward, handing-rooms and handing-scuttles for powder as hi war vessels; shell-rooms aft, fitted as in men-of-war; a regular lower deck with hammock-hooks, mess- shelves, &c., &c., as in our own war vessels, her cabin ac- commodations and fittings generally being those as fitted in vessels of her own class in the Navy. * * ^ She is a vessel capable of carrying ;njns; she could carr\ four broad- side-guns forward, four broadside-guns aft, and two pivot- guns amidships. Her ports are fitted to ship and unship; 1 Vol. VI, page 24G. of Ai)nl, }iii(| tlicn a \vcll- inlumiji iirrivcd uTtod arninop- xMiition, vvliicli til lis united in i('('j)ti()n in the I've toniporarily ic iiniinunitioii )>• tlio ]*alianiii. went togetlior miles IVom tlic imits. ty's .si lip Grey- Ill oxjiininatioii ' tlie Covornoi". f, and by tlic 2, it is stated tlier the Oreto then; liis aii- re, no chanjies Captain Hiok- evidence of a )f Mr. Adams's Ho says, "I id her in every a me as vessels has a mufriiz'uw landing-scuttles 't, fitted as in k-hooks, mess- her cabin ac- se as fitted in ^ She is a ■ry four broad- nd two j)ivot- ip and unship; TUK FLORIDA AND IllOli TENDJiliS. U13 pott-bars cut llir()Uliip also. Tlif coMstruction of her ports. I consider, are jn'culiai' to vessels of war. I saw vjiot-ltoxcs all round her iipjicr deck, calculated to receive Armstrong; shot, or shot similar. Slu! had hi'ceching bolts and shackles, and side-tackle li(dts. Maga/ine, shell-rooms, and li-iht-rooms are entirelv at variance with th(3 littin<^s of a merchant shiji. She had no accommodation whatever for tlu; stowa}!;(; of carecially adapted within British jurisdiction, to wit, at Liverpool, to \varlike use, will scarcely be questioned after the positive testimony 1 Vol. VI, pages 264 and 2CC. 2 Vol. V, page 513. <(« V I ) ! 214 INSURtJENT rUUWERf*. of Cuptain IlicUley. That lu»r lieparturc IVoin the jurisdiction of Gn^ut Britain miglit hav(^ been pn'vtMitod aft«M' the in- fonnatiou furnished by Mr. Achuns wouhl seem to be beyond doubt. And that a neglect to prevent such departing' was a failure to use the "due diligence" ealletl for by the second clause of the first rule of the Tn^aty obviously follows tlie last conclusion. If these several statements are w«'ll founded, Great Britain, by pernutting the construction of the Florida, at Liverpool, under the cinuunstances, and by consenting to her departure from that port, violated its duty as a neutral Government toward the United States. The United States Consul, soon after the arrival of the Oreto at Nassau, called the attention of the Governor to her well-knowu character.^ The Governor ahama were arrested and brought up from Cochrane's Anchorage into the harbor of Nassau. On the 8th the mail- steamer IVIelita, arrived from England, with Captain Raphael Semmes and Ids o^^'ticers from the Sumter as passengers. They '•became lions at onee.''^ The Oreto was immediately released. The Consul reported this fact to his Government, and said that "the character of the vessel had beconu; the theme of general conversation and remark among all classes of the citizens of Nassau for weeks.""'' On the same day Captain Uickley, whose professional eye had detected the purj)ose of the vessel from the beginning, signed with his officers tlie certilicate quoted above. The Consul, linding that renewed representations to the 1 Consul Whiting to Governor Jiayley, May 9, 1862, Vol. VI, page 235. '^ Nesbitt to Whiting, Mav 13, 1862, Vol. VI, page 236. 3 Vol. VI, pages 238—239. ^ Whiting to Seward, June 19, 1862, Vol. VI, page 241. ^ Whiting to Seward, June 13, 1862, Vol. VI, page 242. THE KI.ORIDA AND HER TKNDKRS. 215 tations to the (JoviTiior ' \\vi\' met hy an answer that the ajjcnts of the Oroto assured him of their intention to clear in baUa.st for Havana, and that he had ^iven his assent tt) it,- applied to ('aptain lliikley, of the Greyiiound, and laid before Iiini tlie evidence wliich had already l>een laid before the civil authorities. He answered by sendin*; a lile of marines on l^oard the Oreto and taking- ]»er into custody. ' The civil authorities at Nassau were all actively friendiv to the insur<2;ents. With the ('(»nsul of th(} United States tliev ha«l only the formal relations made necessary bv hiH oflicial |)osition. With the insur;j;ents it was quite tlilVerent. We have already seen how Heyli<^er thought they regarded him. Maflitt, Semmes, and many other insuriient oflicers were there, and were often thrown in contact with the Govern- ment officials. Adderley, the correspondent of Fraser, Trim- holm & Co., and the mercantile agent of the insurgents, was one of the leading merchants of the colony. Harris, his partner, was a member of the Council, and was in intimate social relations with all the authorities. The principal law ofticer of the colony, who would have charge of any pro- secution that might be instituteil against the Oreto antl tiie cross-examination of the witnesses summoned in her favor, was the counsel of Adderley. All these circumstances, combined with the open partiality of the colonial authorities for the cause of the South, threw the insurgent agents and oflicers at that critical moment into intimate relations with those local authorities.^ If it had been predetermined that the Oreto should be released by going through the form of a trial under the Foreign Enlistment Act,'' the steps could not have been better dii-ected for that purpose. The trial commenced on the 4th of July, 18G2.'' The prosecution was conducted by a gentle- » Whiting to Bayley, Jiuie 1'2, 1862, Vol. VI, page 243. ■^ Nesbitt to Whiting, June 13, 18G2, Vol. VI, page 244. •^ Whiting to Seward, June 18, 1862, Vol. VI. page 250. ^ Kirkpatrick to Seward, Vol. VI, page 327. ^ This seemingly harsh statement is fully borne out by the report of the trial. See Vol. V. page 509. '* Governor Bayley to Captain Hickloy, June, 1862. i 216 INSURGENT CRUISERS. 1.. • n of Maffitt, drawinji; pav from him as an officer in that navy, and iiivin*]: receipts as such."* They knew all about it, but were not called. Harris.'' a member of the tirm of Adderley & Co., was called, but his cross-examination was so conducted as to bring out nothing damaging tcs the vessel." He said, for instance, that the Oreto was consigned to him by Fraser, Trenholm und Co., and was to clear for St. John's, New '' x' ^ Whiting to Seward, August 1, 1862, Vol. VI, page 201. 2 If the Tribunal will read the summary of this case in the opinion of the court, which may be found at pa£,^e 509 of Vol. V, it will be found that this statement is not too stroni;-. ;, Tiie Oreto had in fact been ordered by Bullock, as agent of the Confederate Government, from one ship-building lirm, as the AK'ibania had been ordered by him from another; and Captain Maffitt. the officer apijointed to command lier, was all this while at Nassau, awaiting the result of the trial. — Bernard's Neiitralitt/ of Great fh-ifain. page 351. ■* See Evans and Chapman's vouchers, Nassau, Julv 28th, Vol. VI, page 330. ^ See Consul Kirkpatrick's dispatch to Mr. Seward, July 7, 1865 as to the standing of these men, Vol. VT, page 327. ^ Vol. V, page 517. ii» THE FLORIDA AND HER TENDERP. u, July 28th, ?. 217 Brunswick. It might have been supposed that counsel de- sirous of ascertaining the truth would have followed up these clews, and would have shown from this witness the origin and the real purposes of the vessel; but that was not done. The direct examination of Cai)tain Hicklcy, of the CTrev- hound, disclosed that oflicer's opinion of the character and destination of the Oreto. His cross-examination was con- ducted by a gentleman who was represented to be the Soli- citor General of the Colony, but who, in this case, appeared against the Crown. The testimony of sailors was also received to show that the vessel carried Confederate flags, and that Semmes and the other insurgent officers were in the habit of visiting her. The judge, in deciding the case, disregarded the positive proof of the character, intent, and ownershij) of the vessel. He said that he did not believe the evidence as to the in- surgent flaii's. coming from common sailors, and h(^ added, "Had there been a Confederate flag on board the Oreto, I should not consider it as very powerful evidence.''' The over- whelming testimony of Captain Hickley and liis officers was sunnnarily disposed of. To this he said, "I have no right whatever to take it into consideration; the case depends upon what has been done since tlie vessel came within this juris- (Uction."' While thus ruling out either as false or as irrele- vant evidence against the vessel which events proved to be true and relevant, he gave the willing ear of credence to the misstatements of the persons connected with the Oreto. He could see no evidence of illegal intent in tlie acts of those who had charge of the Oreto. It is no wonder that the trial ended on the 2d of August with a judgment that, ^•I'nder all these circumstances I do not feel that I should h.' justihed in condenming the Oreto. She will therefore be restored." ^ The United States call the attention of the Arbitrators to the important fact that the principid ground on which this vessel was released, namely, the irrelevancy of the evi- dence of Captain Hickley and his associates, was believed by 1 Vol. V, page 521, Vol. VI, page 285. •i ,i I ,1 .- i? < ' . * X . f 218 INSURGENT CRUISERS. Her Majesty's Government not to be iu accordance with British law. When the news of the seizure of the Oreto arrived at London, Earl Russell directc'd inquiries to be made, "in order that a competent officer should be sent to Nassau in order to give evidence as to what occurred at Liverpool in the case of that vessel." ^ Her Majesty's Government evi- dently considered that it would be relevant and proper to show the condition of the vessel when she left Liverpool; and should it appear, as it did appear in Captain Hickley'.s testimony, that at the time of her leaving she was fitted out us a man-of-war, with intent to cruise against the United States, then it would be entirely within the scope of the powers of the court in Nassau to condemn her for a viola- tion of the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1819. Had the trial not been hurried on, such probably would have been the instructions from London. Both before and after the release of the Oreto, Maffitt was shipping a crew at Nassau. One witness deposes '^ to shipping forty men. On the 8th of August she cleared for St. John's, New Brunswick. This was on its face a palpable fraud. On the 9th the schooner Prince Alfred went to the wharf of Adderley & Co., the Nassau correspondents of Eraser, Trenholm & Co., and there took on board eight cannon and a cargo of shot, shells, and provisions, and then went over the bar and laid lier course for Green Cay, one of the British Bahama Islands, about sixty miles distant from Nassau. The Oreto, having been thoroughly supplied with coal whih.^ at the island of New Providence, lay (nitside with a hawser attached to one of Her Majesty's ships of war. Wiien the Prince Alfred aj)peared she cast off the hawser, and followed and overtook tiie Prince Alfred, and gave her a tow. It was a bright moonlight night, with a smooth sea, and the voyage was soon made. The arms and ammuni- tion, and so much of the supplies as she had room for, were then transferred to the Oreto ; the rest were taken back to Nassau, where the Prince Alfred went unmolested for hei' ' Vol. II, pages 610— (HI. ^ Solomon's deposition, Vol. VI, page 310. THE FLORIDA AND HER TENDERS. 219 a ' violation of the law. The two vessels parted company, and the Oreto, now called the Florida, made for the coast of Cuba. The United States ask the Tribunal of Arbitration to find that in these proceedings which took place at Nassau and in the Bahamas, Great Britain was once more guilty of a violation of its duty, as a neutral, toward the United States, in regard to this vessel. The Oreto had been, within the jurisdiction of Great Britain at Liverpool, specially adapted to warlike use, with intent that she should cruise or carry on war against the United States. She had come again at Nassau within the jurisdiction of Her Majesty, and no steps were taken to prevent her departure from that jurisdiction. This alone was a violation of the duties prescribed by the second clause of the first rule of the Treaty; but it was not the only failure of Her Majesty's officials to perform their duties at that time as the representative of a neutral Government. The Oreto was armed within British jurisdiction; namely, at Green Cay. The arrangements for arming, however, were made in the harbor of Nassau; and the two vessels left that port almost simultaneously, and proceeded to Green Cay to- gether. The purpose for which they went was notorious in Nassau. This was so palpable an evasion that the act should be assumed as having taken place in the harbor of Nassau. In either event, however, the act was committed w-ithin British jurisdiction, and was therefore a violation of the first clause of the first rule of the Treaty. In like manner, tlie same acts, and the enlistment of men at New Providence, were violations of the second rule of the Treaty. I'here was no diligence used to prevent any of these illegal acts. From Green Cay the Florida went to Cardenas, in the island of Cuba, and attempted to ship a crew there. "The matter was brouuht to the notice of the Government, who sent an official to Lieutenant Stribling, commanding during Li(mtenant Commanding J. N. Maffitt's illness, with a copy )f the [Spanish] Queen's Proclamation, and notification to him that the Florida had become liable to seizure." ^ This 41 *' '1 i ^ Copy of voucher of Manuel Corany, Vol. VI, page 331. 220 INSURGEJ^T CliUISERS. efficient conduct of the Spanish autliorities made the oflicers of the Florida feel at once that they were no longer in British waters. She left Cuba, and on the 4th of Scptend)er slie ran through the blockading squadron of Mobile, pretend- ing to be a British man-of-war, and Hying British colors. Durinii the nio;ht of the IGth of Jt muary, 18G3, the Florida left iVIobile. On the morning of the 2Gth of the same month she reentered the harbor of Nassau. Between Mobile and Nassau she had destroyed three small vessels, the Corris Ann, the Estelle, and the Windward. At Nassau she was received with more than honor. She "entered the port without any restrictions,"^ and "the officers landed in the garrison boat, escorted by the post adjutant. Lieutenant Williams, of the Second West India Regiment." ^ The Gov- ernor made a feint of iindiug fault with the mode in whicli she had entered, but ended by giving her all the hospitality whicli her commander desired. She was at Nassau for thirty- six hours,- and while there she took in coal and provisions to last for three months.^ This coal was taken on board by "permission of the authorities." ** The attention of the Tribunal of Arbitration h also in- vited to the excess of these and all similar hospitalities, as violations of the instructions issued on the 31st of January, 1862.5 "These orders required every ship of war or privateer of either belligerent, which should enter British Avaters, to depart within twenty-foui hours afterward, except in case of stress 1 Whitino- to Seward, January "JC, 18(i3, Vol. VI, page 333. ^ Whiting to Seward, January 27, 18G3, Vol. VI, page 333. ^ Journal quoted ante. See tdso Vol. II, page. 617. See also Vol. VT, pa^e 335, the disposition of John Demerith, who saySi "We filled her bunkers with coal; and placed some on deck and in every place that could hold it. I suppose that she had on board over one hundred and e'ghty tons that we put there. She did not have less than that cpiantity. The coal was taken from the wharves and from vessels in the harbor. The money for coaling her was paid from Mr. Henry Adderley's store." •' Whiting to Wells, Vol. IT, page 61G. 5 Vol. IV, page 175. !e the oflicers THE FLORIDA AND HER TENDERS. 221 of weather, or of her re<]iih'ing provisions or thingK neces- t^ary for the subsistence of her crew, or repairs. ]n either oi' these cases she was to ])ut to sea as soon after the ex- piration of the twenty-four hours as jtossihle, taking in no supplies beyond what might be necessary for immediate use, and no more coal than would carry her to the nearest port of her own country, or some nearer destination, nor after coaling once in British waters was she to be suffered to coal again within three months, unless by special ].>ermission.'' ^ These rules were rip idly enforced against the United States, They were not only relaxed but they were oftentimes utterly disreg.arded in the treatment of the insurgent vessels. The Florida when at Nassau, in the months of May, June, and July, 18G2, and again in the month of January, 1863, Avas distant from Wilmington, Charleston, or Savanah, only two, or at most three, days' steaming. She ordinarily sailed under canvas. Even when using steam in the pursuit and capture of vessels her consumption of cval, as shown by her log-booU, did not average four tons a day. Thirty tons, (more than the amount taken by the United States Steamer Dacotah in Sei)tember, 18G2,) was all that she should have been allowed to take on board under the instructions, even had she been an honest vessel, and one that Great Britain was not bound to arrest and detain. Yet in July, 1862, she received all the coal she wanted, and in January, 1863, she took on board a three months' su[)ply. The Tribunal also will note that in January, 1863, the entry into the harbor, though made without permission, was condoned; that the visit lasted thirtv-six hours instead of twenty-four; and that the "sup])lies" exceeded largely what was immediatelv necessarv for the subsistence of the crew. This excessive l.osj itaiity was in striking contrast with the receptions given to vessels of the United States at that port. It has already been shown that in December, 1861, the United States had been forbidden to land coals at Nassau or Bermuda, e^ceI t on condition that it should not be used for their vessels of war. It has also been shown that in 4 <. 41 • ■ if «, ; 3 * Bernard's Ne. ti'ality of Great Britain, pages 265 and 266, 222 INSURGENT CRUISERS. September, 1862, the United States \vf " steamer Dacotah was forbidden to take more than twenty tons of coal, and that only upon condition that for ten days she would not re-appear in British waters. On the 20th of the previous November the commander of the Wachusett was informed that he could not be allowed even to anchor, or to come Avithin three miles of the shore, without permission of the Governor. In fact, the indignities to which the vessels of the United States were subjected were so great that the Rear-Admiral in command of the fleet, on the 2d tTanuary, 1863, wrote to the Secretary of the Navy, "I have not entered any British port except Bermuda, nor do I intend to enter, or permit any of the vessels of the squadron to ask permission to enter, or subject myself and those under mv >mmand to the discourtesies those who had entered heretofore had received." ^ The United States insist that these excessive I ospitalitie.s to the Florida and these discourtesies to the vessels of war of the United States constituted a further violation of the duties of Great Britain as a neutral. By furnishing a full supply of coal to the Florida, after a similar hospitality had been refused to the vessels of the United States, the British officials permitted Nassau to be made a base of hostile operations against the United States ; and for this, as well as for other violations of duty as to that vessel, which have been already noticed. Great Britain became liable to the United States for the injuries resulting from her acts. The Florida left the port of Nassau on the afternoon of the 27th of January, 1863. By the middle of the follow- ing month her coal was getting low. On the 26tb day of February Admiral Wilkes, in command of the United States Squadron in the West Indies, wrote to his Government thus: " The fact of the Florida having but a few days' coal makes me anxious to have our vessels off the Martinique, which is the only island at which they can hope to get any coal or supplies, the English islands being cut off under the rules * Rear-Admiral Wilkes to the Secretarv of the Navy, January 2, 1862. 4 6 THE FLORIDA AND HER TENDERS. 223 Navy, January of Her Majesty's Government for some sixty days yet, which precludes the possibility, unless by chicanery or fraud, of the hope of any coal or comfort there." ^ Admiral Wilkes's hopes were destined to disappointment. On the 24th of February, two days before the date of his dispatch, the Florida had been in the harbor of Barbadoes, and had taken on board about one hundred tons- of coal in violation of the instructions of January 31, 1862. Rear-Admiral Wilkes, hearing of this new breach of neu- trality, visited Barbadoes ten days later to inquire iato the circumstance. He addressed a letter to the Governor, in which he said, "I have to request your Excellency will afford me the opportunity of laying before my Government the circumstances under which the Florida was permitted to take in a supply of coal and provisions to continue her cruise and operations, after having so recently coaled and provi- sioned at Nassau, one of Her Majesty's Colonies in the West Indies, ample time having been aftbrded, some thirty days, for the information to have reached this island and Govern- ment; and if any cause existed why an investigation was not instituted after the letter to Your Excellency was re- ceived from the United States Consul." ^ The Governor evaded the question. He "doubted very mnch whether it would be desirable to enter into correspondence upon the points ad- verted to," and said that "in sanctioning the coaling of the Horida, he did no more than what he had sanctioned in the case of the United States steamer of war San ehicinto." * There was no parallel or even resemblance between the treat- ' ent of the San Jacinto and that of the Florida. On the 13th of November, 1863, the San Jacinto received seventy- five tons of coal and some wood of Barbadoes. W^ith that exception she received no coal or other fuel from a British port during that cruise.'^ Under these circumstances the United States must ask the 1 Admiral Wilkes to Mr. Welles, Vol. VI, page 338. ' Trowbridge to Seward, Vol. II, page 619, Vol. VI, page 339. "^ilkes to Walker, Vol. U, page 628 ; Vol. VI, page 343. alker to Wilkes, Vol. II, page 629; Vol. VI, page 344. )beson to Fish, Vol. VI, page 345. ^ W •* Walk ^ Rob A i. 1 .ii i • i *, • k u ■1 224 INSURtJKNT ( IIUISERH. Tribnnnl to dcrlare that tlio burdon is upon Great Britniu to establish that this express viohition of Her Majesty's pro- chiinytioii was innocently done. Whether done innocently or designedly, they insist, Tor the reasons already set forth, tlmt the act was a new violation of the duties of a neutral, aiul furnished to the United States fresh cause of complaint against Great Britain. Before completing the history of this vessel, the United States desire to show to the Tribunal how the vessels of the United States were received at Barbadoes , the port at which the Florida received the last-mentioned supply of coal. They have already referred to the treatment of their vessels at Nassau and Bermuda. Captain Charles Boggs arrived at Barbadoes in April, 18G5, in the United States war steamer Connecticut, and made application for permission to remain there "a few days for the purpose of overhauling the piston and feedpump of the engine." ^ Tlie Governor replied, " It will be necessary for you, before I can sive my sanction to your staying here longer than twenty-four hours, to give ii definite assurance of your inability to proceed to sea at the expiration of that time, and as to the period within which it would be possible for you to execute the necessary re- pairs." '^ Captain Boggs replied, "Your letter virtually refuse- the permission requested, inasmuch as it requires me to give a definite assurance of my inability to proceed to sea at the termination of twenty-four hours. This I cannot do, as an Amerii^an man-of-war can always <2;o to sea in some man- ner. I snail do this , although with risk to my vessel and machinery. Regretting that the national hospitality of re- maining at anchor for the purposes named in my lettei' of this morning is refused, I have the honor to inform you that I shall depart from this port to-morrow at 10 A. M." 3 Barbadoes as well as Nassau having been thus made a base of hostile operations against the United States, the ^ Captain Boggs to Governor Walker, Vol. VI, page 178. ^ Governor "Walker to Captain Boggs, Vol. VI, page 178. '^ Captain Boggs to Governor Walker, Vol. VI, page 179. THE FLORIDA xVND HER TENDERS. 22o Florida again .sailed out on her work of destruction on th(; evening of the 2Gth of Fehruary. hSG3, ;.nd in a short time captured or destroyed tlu; following vessels of the commercial marine of the United States, viz.: the Aldebaran, the Clarence, the Commonwealth, the Crown Point, the (;eneral Ik'rry, the Henrietta, the M. J. Colcord, the Lapwing, the Oneida, the Kienzi, the Southern Cross, the Star of Peace, the William B. Nesh, and the Red Gauntlet. An intercepted letter from her commander to Bidlock, dated April 25, 1863, says, "The Florida has thus far doni; her duty. Six million dollars will not make good the devastation this steamer has committed." ^ On the 16th of July, 1863, the Florida arrived at i5ermuda. She remained nine days in that port, and was thoroughly repaired both in her hull and machinery. She also took on board a full supply of the best Cardiff coal, whlcii had been brought to her from Halifax by the transport Harriet Pinckney. ^ This was permitted notwithstanding the general order that neither belligerent was to be permitted 10 make coal depots in British colonial ports. Here, again, were fresh - recurring violations of the duties of Great Britain as a neutral , to be added to the ac- cumulated charges that have already been made as to this vessel. With the improvements, repairs, and supplies obtained at Bermuda the Florida started for Brest. In crossing the Atlantic she destroyed the Francis B. Cutting on the 6th of August, and the Avon on the 20th. On the 3d of September Maftit reports from Brest to Bullock, at Liver- pool, "a list of men discharged from the Florida, with their accounts and discharges," and be asks him "to provide them situations in the service." ^ W^e have already seen that when Bullock received this letter he was low in funds. He was, however, able to send from Liverpool tc> Brest for the M . I it *'■. , 1 Vol. II, page 629; Vol. VI, page 346- ^ Consul's report to Mr. Seward. 3 Vol. II, page 63U; Vol. VI, page 349. 15 226 INSURGENT CRUIHERS. Florklti some new machinery and armament,^ and also a crow. ^ The Florida left Brest in January, 18G4, and entered thc^ port of Bermuda in the following May, remaining, however, only long enough to land a sick ofiiccr. In June she re- turned to that port and made application for permission to repair. The Governor directed an examination to be made by experts, who reported; ^ "1. She can proceed to sea with such repairs as can be made good here, which, as far as we can judge, will recjuire live days for one man, viz. : a diver for two days and a litter for three days; or three complete days in all. 2. She can proceed to sea with safety in her present state under steam, but under sail is unman- ageable with her screw up in bad weather, and her defects aloft (cross-trees) render maintop -mast unsafe. This could be made good in two days." On this report, the Florida received permission to remain there live days; she actually remained nine days. While there she took on board one hundred and thirty - live tons of coal , half a ton of beef, half a ton of vegetables, a large supply of bread, provisions aud medicines, a large supply of clothing and other stores, and twenty days of carpenter's work were done upon the vessel. ^ Morris, the new commander, then drew upon Bui- lock, in Liverpool, in order to pay these bills and provide himself with means for a cruise; and on the 27th of June, 18G4, the Florida, being thus completely fitted out, left the port of Bermuda, and cruised oft' the harbor, boarding all vessels approaching the island. ^ The. breach of neutrality and violation of the instructions issued for the observance of British officials involved in these transactions w'ere brought to Earl RusselFs notice by Mr. 1 Dudley to Seward, January 21, 1864. Fraser, Trenholm & Co. to Barney, September 22, 1863, Vol. VI, page 352. 2 Morse to Seward, January 8, 1864, Vol. VI, page 353. " Vol. VI, page 357. ^ See the vouchers for their payments, Vol. VI, page 358, et seq. ^ Welles to Seward, Vol. II, page 652. THE FLORIDA AND HER TENDERS. 227 ic'.iit,' Jind also e man, uiz. : u Adams. ^ Earl Ruasel replied that "althouj^h some disposi- tion was manifested by the commander of the Florida to evade the strin^jrency of Her Majesty's re^^ulations, the most commendable diligence and strictness in cnforcin^r those reji;ula- tions was obs(>,rved on the part of the autliorities, and no substantial deviation, either from the letter or from the spirit of those regulations, was permitted to or did take place." ^ With the evidence now submitted to the Tribunal, which are the original vouchers for the purchases made at Bermuda by the Florida, it is evident that Earl Russell must have been misinformed when he stated that there had been no deviation from the regulations. The live; days' stay which was granted was extended to nine. Twenty days' carpenter work were done instead of live; suppliers for a cruise were taken instead of supplies for immediate use; clothing, rum, medicines, and general supplies were taken, as well as sup- plies for the subsistence of the crew; one hnndred and thirty -live tons of coal were taken instead of twenty. In all this the United Stat^KRS. 2Gtli of Soptembor, all boinp; vossols belonjiinp to tbe com. mcrcial murine of the I'nitcil Stativs. On thi; 7tli of October, lbG4, her career us an insurj^ent cruiser terminated at Bahia. Durinf]; her cruise, three tenders were litted out and manned fi'om her oflicers and crew. Tlie Clarence was caj)ture(l by her off the coast of lirazil on the Gth of May, l8Gu. Slie WHS then litted out with guns, oflicers, and men, and during the first part of the month of June, 1803, captured and destroyed the Kati; Stewart, the Mary Alvina, the Mary Schindler, and the Whistling; Wind. On the 10th of that month she captured the Tacony. The ('larence was then destroyed and the Tacony was converted into a tender, and, in the same month, destroyed the Ada, the Byzantiau, the Elizabeth Ann, the (Joodspeed, the L. A. Macomber, the Marengo, the Rij){>le, the llufus Choate, and the Umpire.^ On the 25th she cai)tured the Archer. The crew and arma- ment were transferred to that vessel and the Tacony burned. On the 27th the United vStates revenue cutter Caleb Cushhig was destroyed by the Archer. The amount of the injury which the United States and its citizens suffered from the acts of this vessel and of its tenders will be hereafter stated. The United States, with conlidence, assert, that they have demonstrated that Great Britain by reason of the general [)rinciples above stated, and in consequence of the particular acts or omissions herein- before recited, failed to fulfill all of the duties set forth hi the three rules of the sixth article of the Treaty, or re- cognized by the principles of International Law not incon- sistent with such rules, and they ask the Tribunal to cer- tify that fact as to the Florida and as to its tenders. Should the Tribunal exercise the power conferred upon it by Article VII of the Treaty, to award a sum in gross to be paid to the United States, they ask that in considering the amount so to be awarded, the losses of individuals in the destruction of their vessels and cargoes, by the Florida, or by its tenders, and also the expenses to which the United States were put in the pursuit of either of those vessels , may be taken into account. ' Vol. VI, page 370. Tin; AI.AHAMA AND Ul'Al TKSUKU. 229 tup: ALABAMA, AND UKll TENDER, THE TUSCALOOSA. Th.- Alabama ami '^^^'^ Miihumu, :i vessel uhuh hiis -iven l,er tender, the tho {ijeuerie luiiiie to tlu^ ehiiins bt'fore tliis Irihiiniil, IS thus described by kSeninies, hei' commjinder: "Slie wjis of about 1)00 totis burden, "J.'JO feet in lenh water that her crew might require. * "''' ''" Her ai-mament consisted of eight guns; six o2-pouuders in broadside, and two pivot-guns amidship, one on the forecastle, and the other abaft the mainmast, the former a 10i)-pounder rilled lilakeley and the latter a smooth-bore 8-inch."^ The Alabama was built, and from the outset was "in- tended for, H Confederate vessel of war."" The contract for her construction was "signed by Captain Bullock on the one part and Messrs. Laird on the other."'' The date of the signature cannot be given exactly. The drawings were signed October 9, ISGl, and it is supposed that the con* tract was signed at or about the same time. "The ship cost in United States numey about ^20 5,000." The pay- ments were made by the agents of the hisurgents. Bullock "went almost daily on board the gun-boat, and seemed to be recognized in authority ;" in fact, "he sujierintended the building of the Alabama."^ On the 15th of May she was laum-iied under the name ^ Semmes's Adventures Afloat, pages 402, 403. 2 Journal of an officer of the Alabama. See Vol. IV, page 181. 3 Dudley to Edwards, Vol. HI, page 17; Vol. VI, page 383. A .: I 230 INSURGENT CRUISERS. of the 290.^ Her officers were in England awaiting her completion, and were paid their salaries "monthly, about the lirst of the month, at Fraser, Trenholm & Co.'s office in Liverpool."- The purpose for which this vessel was being constructed was notorious in Liverpool. Before she was launched she became an object of suspicion with the Consul of the United States at that port, and she was the subject of constant correspondence on his part with his Government and with Mr. Adams. ^ The failure of Mr. Adams to secure in the previous March the interference of Her Majesty's Government to prevent the departure of the Florida, appears to have in- duced him to tliink that it would be necessary to obtain strictly technical proof of a violation of the municipal law of England before he could hope to secure the detention of the then nameless Alabama. That he had "ood reason to think so is not open to reasonable doubt. On the 23d of June he tli ought he had such proof. Ho wrote Earl Russell that day,^ recalling to his recollection the fact that .lot withstanding the favorable reports from the Liverpool customs in regard to the Florida, there was the strongest renson for believing that she had gone to Nassau, and was there "engaged in com})leting her armament, provisioning, and crew," for the })urpose of carrying on war against the United States.'' He continued, "T am now under the pain- ful necessity of apprising your Lordship that a new and still more powerful war-steamer is nearly ready for depar- ture from the port of Liverpool on the same errand."" The parties engaged in the enterprise are persons well known at Liverpool to be agents and officers of the United States." ^ Dudley to Seward, Vol. Ill, page 1; Vol. VI, page 371. 2 Vol. Ill, page 14G; Vol. VI, page 435. ^ See Vol. Ill, ])assi>n. * Adams to Russell, Vol. Ill, page 5; Vol. VI, page 375. '' The Florida arrived at Nassau April 28, and the Bahama with her armament a few days later. These facts were undoubtedly known, to Lord Russell and to Mr. Adams wlien this letter was written. THE ALABAMA AND HER TENDER. 231 VI, page 371. ^'Tliis vessel has been built and launched from the dock- yard of persons, one of whom is now sitting as a member of the House of Commons, and is fitting out for the especial and manifest object of carrying on hostilities by sea." He closed by soliciting such action as might "tend either to stop the projected expedition, or to establish the fact that its purpose is not inimical to the people of the United States." Earl Russell replied that he had referred "this matter to the proper department of Her Majesty's Government,"^ and on the 4th of July, 1862, he inclosed the customs report on the subject, in which it is stated that "the officers have at all times free access to the building yards of the Messrs. Laird, at Birkenhead, where the vessel is lying, and that there has been no attempt, on tke part of her hidlders, to disguise, what is most apparent, that she is intended for a ship of ?i'ar." It was furtl^i said that "the descrip- tion of her in the communication of the United States Consul is most correct, with the exception that her engines are not constructed on the oscillatory principle." "With reference to the statement of the United States Consul thac the evi- dence he has in regard to this vessel being intended for the so-called Confederate Government in the Southern States is entirely satisfactory to his mind," it was said that "the proper course would be for the Consul to submit such evidence as he possesses to the collector at that port, who would thereupon take such measures as the Foreign Enlist- ment Act would require;" and the report closed by saying "that the officers at Liverpool will keep a strict watch on the vessel."^ The point that the vessel was intended for a vessel of war being thus conceded, Mr. Adams thereupon, at once, relying upon the promise to keep watch of the vessel, instructed the Consul to comply with the directions indicated in the report of the Commissioners and furnish all the evidence in his possession to the Collector of Customs at Liverpool." ' Russell to Adams, Vol. HI, page 6; Vol. VI, page 376. 2 Vol. Ill, page 7; Vol. VI, page 379. •■' Adams to Wilding, Vo!. HI, page 8; Vol. VI, page 381. .1- •: ■ « i: -I* J -I t 232 INSURGENT CRUISERS. *s Mr. Dudley did so on the 9th of July, in a letter to the Collector of Liverpool,^ and the attention of the Tribunal of Arbitration is called to the fact that every material allegation in that letter has been more than borne out by subsequent proof. The Collector replied that he was "respectfully of opinion that the statement made was not such as could be acted upon by the oflicers of the revenue unless legally sub- stantiated by evidence." - And again, a few days later, he said to Mr. Dudley, "The details given by you in regard to the said vessel are not sufficient, in a legal point of view, to justify me in taking upon myself the responsibihty of the detention of this ship."' ^ Thus early in the history of this cruiser the point was taken by the British authorities — a point maintained through- out the struggle — that they would originate nothing themselves for the maintenance and performance of their international duties, and that they would listen to no representations from the officials of the United States which did not furnish technical evidence for criminal prosecution under the Foreign Enlist- ment Act. The energetic Consul of the United States at Liverpool was not dislieartened. He caused a copy of his letter to be laid before R P. Collier, Esq., one of the most eminent barristers of England, who, a few months later, became Solicitor Gl leral of the Crown, under Lord Palmerston's administration, and who is now understood to be the principal law adviser of the Crown. Mr. Collier advised that "the principal oflicer of the customs at Liverpool * ••' * be applied to to seize the vessel, with a view to her condemnation,"' and, "at the same time, to lay a statement of the fact before the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, coupled with the request that Her Majesty "s Government would direct the vessel to be seized, or ratify the seizure if 4dt has been made.*' "* It was useless to attempt to induce the collector to seize 1 Dudley to Edwards, Vol. IH, page 17: Vol. VI, page 383. 2 Edwards to Dudlev, Vol. HI, page 19; Vol. VI, page 385. 3 Vol. VI, page 389'. 4 Vol. Ill, pa^e IG; Vol. VI, pa^'e 388. THE ALABAMA AND HER TENDER. jllector to seize 233 the vessel. Mr. Dudley thereupon set about to get the direct proof required by the authorities as to the character of the Alabama or 290. "There were men enough," he said, "who knew about her, and who understood her character, but they were not willing to testify, and, in a preliminary proceeding like this, it was impossible to obtain process to compel them. Indeed, no one in a hostile community like Liverpool, where the feeling and sentiment are against us, would be a willino- witness, especially if he resided there, and was any way dependent upon the people of that place for a livelihood"'.^ At last Mr. Dudley succeeded in finding the desired proof. On the 21st day of July, he laid it in the form of aflidavits before the Collector at Liverpool in compliance Avith the intimations which Mr. Adams had received from Earl Russell.^ These affidavits were on the same day transmitted by the Collector to the Board of Customs at London, with a request for instructions by telegraph, as the ship appeared to be ready for sea and might leave any hour.^ Mr. Dudley then went to London, and on the 23d of July laid the affidavits before Mr. Collier for his opinion.'* Copies of the affidavits will be found in Vol. Ill, page 21 to 28, and Vol. VI, page 391, et seq. It is not necessary to dwell upon the character of this proof, since it was conclusively soon passed upon by both Mr. Collier and by Her Majesty's Government. It is sufficient to say that it showed affirmatively that the 290 was a "lighting vessel;" that she was "going out to the Government of the Confederate States of America to cruise and commit hostilities against the Government and people of the United States of America:" "that the enlisted men were to join the ship in Messrs. Laird & Co.'s yard;" that they were enlisting men "who had previously served on lighting ships;" that the enlistments had then been going on for over a month, and that there was need of immediate action bv the British ^ Dudley to Seward, Vol. Ill, page 13. 2 Dudley to Seward, Vol, III, page 13; Vol. VI, page 390. 3 Collector to Commissioners, Vol. Ill, page 20; Vol. VI, page 395. ^ Voh III, page 29; Vol. VI, page 398. 41 r I'i- <-:■■::•., 234 INSUROKNT ('RUISEKS. Government, if action was to be of any service in protecting its neutrality against violation. Mr. Collier said immediately, "It appears difficult to make out a stronger case of infringement of the Foreign Enlistment Act, which, if not enforced on this occasion, is little better than a dead letter. It well deserves consideration whether, if the vessel be allowed to escjipe, the Federal Government sv'ould not have serous grounds of remonstrance."^ The 290 was a: this time nearly ready for sea, and time was important. Mr. Dudley, through his counsel, in order that no time might be lost, on the same day laid Mr. Collier's new opinion before the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Aifairs and before the Secretai of the Board of Customs. The Under Secretary "was not disposed to discuss the matter, nor did he read Mr. Collier's opinion."- The Secretary of the Board of Customs said that the Board could not act without orders from the Treasury Lords. ^ The last of these answers was not communicated until the 28th of July. The additional proof and the new opinion of Mr. Collier were also oflicially communicated to Her Majesty's Government through the regular diplomatic channels. On the 2 2d of July copies of the depositions of Dudley, Maguire, DaCosta, Wilding, and Passmore were sent to Lord Russell by Mr. Adams;'* and on the 24th of July copies of the depositions of Roberts and Tavlor were in like manner sent to I^ord Russell. These ft/ were acknowledged by Earl Russell on the 28th. On that day "these j^apers were considered by the law oflicers of the Crown; on the same evening their report was agreed upon, and it was in Lord Russell's hands early on the 2i)th. Orders were then immediately sent to Liverpool to stop the vessel."^ Thus it appears that this hitelligence, which Great Britain 1 Vol. Ill, page 29; Vol. IV, page 398. - Squary to Adams, Vol. HI, page 29; Vol. VI, page 397. ^ Vol. Ill, page 31; Vol. VI, page 4()G. * Vol. Ill, page 21; Vol. VI, page 397. ^ A speech delivered in the House of Commons on Friday, August 4, 1871, by Sir iloundell Talmer, M. P. for Richmond, page 16. ce in protecting ifficult to make eign Enlistment is little better 'ation whether, :'al Government mce."^ Dr sea, and time (unsel, in order lid Mr. Collier's tate for Foreign rd of Customs, cuss the matter, le Secretary of could not act be last of these ,h of July. of Mr. Collier ty's Government ;he 22dof July iCosta, Wilding, Mr. Adams;'' tions of Roberts llussell. Those 28th. red by the law their report was ;ids early on the liverpool to sto[) ['h Great Britain 1. VI, page 397. luons on Friday, for Richmond, THE ALABAMA AND HER TENDER. 235 'i regarded as sufficient to require the detention of the 290, was communicated to Her Majesty's Government in three ways: lirst, on the 21st of July, through the channel at Liverpool which had been indicated by Earl Russell; second, on the 2 2d by the solicitor of Mr. Dudley in person to the Customs and to the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs at the Foreign Office; and thirdly, on the 23d and on the 24th hy Mr. Adams officially. It also appears that the information communicated on the 21st was transmitted to London by the collector, with the statement that the vessel might sail at any hour, and that it was important to give the instructions for detention by telegraph; and it still further appears that not- Avithstanding this official information from the collector, the papers were not considered by the law advisers until the 28th, and that the case appeared to them to be so clear that they •jiave their advice upon it that evening. Under these cir- (tumstanccs, the delay of eight days after the 21st in the order for the detention of the vessel was, in the opinion of the United States, gross negligence on the part of Her Majesty's Government. On the 29rh the Secretary of the Commission of the Customs received a telegram from Liverpool saying that "the vessel 290 came out of dock last night, and left the port this morning." ^ Mr, Adams was justly indignant at the failure of the customs authorities to redeem their voluntary })romise to watch the vessel.^ On the 3Lst of July Mr. Adams had a "conference with Lord Russell at the Foreign Office," at which "his Lordship first took up the case of the 290, and remarked that a delay in determining upon it had most unexpectedly been caused by the sudden development of a malady of the Queen's Advocate, Sir John D. Harding, totally incapacitating him for the transaction of business. This had made it necessary to call in other parties, whose opinion had been at last given for the retention of the gun-boat, but before the order got down to Liverpool the vessel was gone. He should^ how- fvcr, send jlirections to have her stopped if she went, as was jn'obable, to Nassau."'^ The judgment of Her Majesty's 1 Vol. HI, page 36. ^ Adams to Russell, Vol. HI, page 536. =^ Vol. HI, pages :35, 36; Vol. VI, page 414. n 236 INSURGENT CRUISERS. ^••[•\ Government upon the character of the Alabama and upon the duty of Great Britain toward her was, therefore, identical with that of Mr. Collier. The departure of the 290 from Birkenhead was prob- ably, it may be said certainly, hastened by the illicit re- ceipt of the intelligence of the decision of the Government to detain her.^ After leaving the dock she "proceeded slowly down the Mersey. Both the Lairds were on board, and also Bullock. On the way doAvn the river Laird settled with the paymaster for some purchases for the vessel, and paid into his hands a small sum of mone}^.^ At the bell-buoy the Lairds and the ladies left by a tug, and returned to Liverpool. The 290 slowly steamed on to Moelfra Bay, on the coast of Anglesey, where she remained "all that night, all the next day, and the next night." No effort was made to seize her. During this time the tug Hercules, which had returned from the bell-buov with the Lairds and the ladies, took on board at Liverpool a number of new hands for the 290. One account says there were as many as forty. ^ The master of the Hercules admits :hat there might have been thirtv.^ This was done publicly — so publicly that the United States Consul knew of it, and notified the Collector. The Collector had his orders to seize the 290, and had only to follow the Hercules to get the information which would enable him to obey those orders. He did cause the Hercules to be ex- amined. The Surveyor who did that work reported to him that there Avere a number of persons on board, who ad- mitted "that they were a portion of the crew, and were going to join the gun-boat,"^ and yet he neither stopped ^ Semnies says in his Adventures, "Fortunately for tlie Con- federate vessel tidings of the projected seizure were conveyed to Birkenhead." "Our unceremonious departure was owing to the fact of news beim? received to the eft'ect that the customs authorities had orders to board and detain us that morning. Vol. IV, page 181. 2 Vol. HI, page 147; Vol. VI, page 437. ■^ Vol. VI, page 408. ^ Vol. VI, page 411. ^ Vol. VI, page 409. THE ALABAMA AND HER TENDER. 237 the Hercules, nor folloAved it. In an emergency ^vLen, if ever, the telegraph ought to have been employed, he wrote a letter by mail to the Commissioners of Customs at London,^ Avhich could not be received until the foUowino; dav. When this letter was received the Commissioners took no notice of the admitted recruitment of men, but ordered inquiries to be made as to powder and guns.^ Before these inquiries could be commenced, the offender was at sea.^ Under the circum- stances this hesitation and delay, and the permitting the Alabama to lie unmolested in J3ritish waters for over two days, is little short of criminal in the officials who were or should have been cognizant of it. When the Alabama left Moelfra Bay her crew numbered tibout ninety men.^ She ran part way down the Irish Channel, then round the north coast of Ireland, only stopping near the Giant's Causeway. She then made for Terceira, one of the Azores, which she reached on the 10th of August.^ On the 18th of August, while she was at Terceira, a sail was observed making for the anchorage. It proved to be the "Agrippina of London, Captain McQueen, having on board six guns, with ammunition, coals, stores, &c., for the Alabama." Preparations were immediately made to transfer this important cargo. On the afternoon of the 20th, while employed dis- charging the bark, the screw-steamer Bahama, Captain Tes- sier, (the same that had taken the armament to the Florida, whose insurgent ownership and character were well known in Liverpool,) arrived, "having on board Commander Raphael Semmes and officers of the Confederate States steamer Sumter."^ There were also taken from this steamer two 3 2 -pounders and some stores,^ which occupied all the remainder of that day and a part of the next. 1 Vol. VI, page 410. 2 Voh IV, page 410. ^ Vol. VI, page 413. ' Vol. Ill, page 46. Two crew-lists are in the accompanying volumes. One will be found in Vol. Ill, page 150; the other, in Vol. Ill, page 213. 5 Vol. IV, page 182. ^ Journal of an Officer of the Alabama. See Vol. IV, page 182. ^ The Bahama cleared from Liverpool on the 12th of August. Fawcett, Preston «S& Co. shipped on board of her "nineteen ... ,. ' » 1 ! j ■) It is not necessary, however, to consider this question; for her guilty status at that time is conclusively established against Great Britain. 1st. By the opinion of Mr. Collier, who, soon after giving it, became a member of Her Majesty's Government, under the lead of Lord Palmerston, and with Earl Russell as a colleague. They must, therefore, be held to have adopted his views on one of the most important questions, half legal and half political, that came before Lord Palmerston's Gov- ernment for determination. 2d. Her Majesty's Government, by ordering the detention of the 290, admitted her illegal character. Earl Russell himself hints that it is not impossiblo that "the officers of the customs were misled or blinded by the general par ulity to the cause of the South known to prevail at Liverpool, and that a prima facie case of negligence could be made out.^ 3d. Earl Russell stated to Mr. Adams in an official note that "it is imdoubtedly true that the Alabama was partly fitted ouG in a British port." ^ This is all that is necessary to be said in order to bring it within the operation of the rules of the Treaty of Washington. Thus constructed, equipped, fitted out, and manned as a ship-of-war in Liverpool, and armed under the original con- tract made at the same place with arms and munitions there collected by the contractors of the vessel, but sent out from Great Britain by a separate vessel in order to comply with the official construction of British municipal law, the Alabama commenced a career of destruction which proved highly dis- astrous to the commerce of the United States. She was found to be a "fine sailer under canvas," "a quality of inestimable advantage," as it enabled Captain Senmies "to do most of his work under sail."^ "She carried but an' eighteen days' supply of fuel," which induced her commander •'to adopt the plan of working under sail in the very begin- ning," and "lo practice it unto the end." "With the ex- ^ Speeches and dii^patches of Earl Russell, Vol. II, pages 259, 2H0. - Earl Russell to Mr. Adams, Vol. Ill, page 29^. ^ Semmes's Adventures Afioat, page 419. ,,. • ii t • V 240 INSURGENT CRUISERS, ception of half a dozen prizes, all caj)tures were maciu witli the screw hoisted and ship under sail." ^ The United States will confine their comments to the ofli(i;il treatment which this vessel received within British jurisdiction. Her history for a large part of her career may be found in Vol. IV, between pages 181 and 201. It has also been made the subject of an elaborate volume, from which some short extracts have been quoted above. From Tercel ra she crossed to the West Indies, taking ut ^Martinique coal again from the luirk Agrippina, wiiich had been sent from England for the purpose;- and she passed up thence into the Gulf of INlexico, marking her course by the destruction of vessels of the merchant marine of the United States, and of their war-steamer Hatteras. On the Ibtli of January, 1862, she arrived at Jamaica. Three British men- of-war were in the harbor, but the i)romised orders of Earl Russell to detain her for a violation of British sovereignty were not there. In lieu of that, "the most cordial relations were at once established between the officers of all these ships and of the Alabama," ^ and the Governor of the island prom2itly granted Semmes's request to be permitted to re])air his ship.* On the 2r)th of January, having been refitted and furnished with supplies, she left Jamaica, "bound to the coast of Brazil, and thence to the Cape of Good Hope." '^ On the 30th of the previous November, after Cai)tain Semmes's mode of carrying on w^ar was known in England, Mr. Adams made to Lord Russell the first of a long series of representations concerning this vessel. This communication ^ Semmes's Adventures Afloat, page 420. ^ Same, page 514. The Agrippina is the same vessel that took coal and supplies to her at Terceira. ^ Semmes's Adventures Afloat, page 555. * Ibid. "By the act of consenting to receive the Alabama in Kingston, and permitting her to relit and supply herself at that, we had considered the British Government as having given her a positive recognition, and having assumed the responsibility for the consequences of that sanction." — Mr. Adamses statement to Lord Russell^ described in a dispatch to Mr. Seward, Vol. Ill, page 247. ^ Semmes's Adventures Afloat, page 563. THi: ALABAMA AND UKR TKNnKR. 241 were made with ; same vessel that <;ontains a summary of all that the L'niti'd States deem it necessary to say about the Alabama in this plaee. "It now api)ears," Mr. Adams says, "from a survey of all the evidence, First. That this vessel was built in a dock-yard belonffins to a commercial house in Liverpool, of which the ciiief member, down to October of last year, is a member of tlie House of Commons. Secondly. That from the manner of her construction, and her peculiar adaption to war purpose, there could have been no doubt by those en^^aged in the work, and familiar with such details, that she was intended for other purposes tlian those of legitimate trade; and, Thirdly. That during the whole process and outlit in the port of Liverpool, the direction of the details, and the engagement of persons to be employed in her, were more or less in hands known to be connected with the insurgents in the United States. It further appears that since her departure from Liverpool, which she was suffered to leave without any of the customary evidence at the custom-house to designate her ownership, she has been supplied with her armament, with coals, and stores, and men, by vessels known to be litted out and dispatched for the purpose from the same port, and that although com- manded by Americans in her navigation of the ocean, she is manned almost entirely by English seamen; engaged and forwarded from tliat port by persons in league with her commander. Furthermore it is shown that this commander, claiming to be an officer acting under legitimate authority, yet is in the constant practice of raising the flag of Great Britain, in order the better to execute his system of ravage and depredation on the high seas. And lastly, it is made clear that he pays no regard whatever to the recorf;nized law of capture of merchant vessels on the high seas, which re- quires the action of some judicial tribunal to confirm the rightfulness of the proceedings, but, on the contrary, that he resorts to the piratical system of taking, plundering, and burning private property, without regard to consequences, or responsibility to any legitimate authority whatever."^ Tlie course of conduct so forcibly sketched by Mr. Adams 1 Vol. Ill, pages TO, 71. >*!■ «t It 16 242 insik(;i:nt ( kiiskks. was continiu'd by tlio ot'lifers of the Alaluima until that vessel was sunk l>y the Kearsarf Maury when he assumed command, and that he had told the men, as an inducement to them to remain, that "of course they would get the prize money." ^ On the 11th of January, 1864, Mr. Adams inclosed to Lord Russell copies of papers which he maintained went "most clearly to establish the proof of the agency of Messrs. Jones & Co. in enlisting and paying British subjects in this 1 XXIV; Annual XII, page 187. 1 Vol. II, page 682; Vol. VI, page 519. 2 Vol. II, pages 683, 684, 686, 689, &c. 3 Stanley's affidavit, Vol. II, page 684; Vol. VI, page 522. See also Charles Thompson's affidavit. Vol. Ill, page 87. 252 lNSUR(iKNT CRUISERS. Kine;dom to carry on war against the United States."' ^ Proceedings were taken against Jones & Highatt, as hux already been sliown. They 'were convicted, and were lined but iifty pounds each — manifestly a punishment not calculated to deter them from a repetition of the offense. - After all this information was before Lord Russell, the Georgia, on the 1st day of May, 18G4, reappeared in the port of Liverpool. During her absence she had been busy in destroying such of the commerce of the United States in the Atlantic as had escaped the depredations of the Floridji ;Vid the Alabama. She had been to the Western Islands, and from thence to the Brazilian port of Bahia. From thence she went to the Ca])e of Good Hope. On the way she fell in with the Constitution, a merchant vessel of the United States, laden with coal. "We Idled our vessel with coal from her," says one of the witnesses. In a few days after that she entered Simon's Bay, Cape of Good Hope. There she staid a fortnight, having repairs done and getting more coal. She left Simon's Bay on the 29th of August. It is not probable that the supply from the Constitution was exhausted at that time."^ She then worked her way to Cherbourg, and in a short time after came again into the port of Liverpool. Her career and character were rapidly but forcibly sketched by Thomas Baring, Esq., in a speecii in the House of Commons on the loth of May, 18(54. He said: "At the time of her departure the Georgia was 1 Vol, II, page G98; Vol. VI, page 534. - "Five prosecutions were instituted at different times against persons charged with havin* nd were lined not calculated 3 -' I Russell, the )peared in the lad been busy [lited States in of the Florida estern Islands, Bahia. From On the way vessel of the ur vessel with n a few days f Good Hope, le and getting )th of August, e Constitution ed her way to isain into the were rapidly in a speech May, 18G4. Georgia was It times against id men for the ;se, three were ;ed or pleaded been instituted pages 361—2.) le magnitude of zeal shown in United States. I.) It is to be l Russell with {Mr. Atlams 130.) seq. THi: (JKORCJIA. 253 V. registered as the i^roperty of a Liverjjool niercliant, a partner of th(; llrm which shipped the crew. Siie remained thr ])roj)erty of this person until the 23d of June, when the register was canceled, he notifying tlie CoUecto of her sale to foreign owners. During tlas period, nann 'y, from the 1st of April to the 23d June, the Georgia being still registered in the name of a Liverpool merchant, and thus his property, was carrying on war against the United States, with whom we were in alliance. It was while still a Uritish vessel that she captured and burned the Dictator, and captured and released, under bond, the Griswold, the same vessel which had "" rought corn to the Lancashire sufferers. The crew of ti, 3 ' eorgia were paid through the same Liverpool lirm. L. copy of an advance note used is to be found in the Diplomatic Correspondence. The same lirm continued to act in \.a\& capacity throughout the cruise of the Georgia. Afte cruising in the Atlantic, and burning and bonding a number of vessels, the Georgia made for Cherbourg, where she arrived on the 2Sth of October. There was, at the time, much discontent among the crew; many deserted, leave of absence was given to others, and their wages were paid all along by the same Liverpool lirm. In order to get the Georgia to sea again, the Liverpool lirm enlisted in Liverpool some twenty seamen, and sent them to Brest. The Georgia left Cherbourg on a second cruise, but having no success she returned to that port, and thence to Liverpool, where her crew have been paid off without any concealment, and the vessel is now laid up. Here, then, is the case of a vessel, clandestinely built, fraudulently leaving the port of her construction, taking Englishmen on board as her crew, and waging war against the United States, an ally of ours, without once having entered a port of the power the commission of which she bears, but being, for some time, the property of an English subject. She has now returned to Liverpool' — and has returned, I am told, with a British crew on board, who, luu ing enlisted iu war against an ally of ours, have committed a misdemeanor in the sight of the law. ^ ^ Hansard, third series, \o\. ^ib, page -167; Vol. V, page 577. 1, 254 INSURCiKNT CRVISERS. The Attorney Cionerul , Sir RoundcU Palmer , replied on bebulf of the Government to this speech. He did not seriously dispute the facts as stated by ]\Ir. Baring. "The whole of the honorable gentleman's argument," he said, "as- sumes that the facts, and the law apphcable to the facts, are substantiated, that we are in a j)Osition, as between our- selves and the Confederates, to treat the matter as beyond controversy, and to assume that the Georgia was , in fact, litted out in violation of our neutrality. Now we may have very strong reason to suspect this, and may even believe it to be true; but to say that we are to act upon strong suspicion or belief against another state, upon certain facts which have never been judicially established, and which i"" is not easy to bring to the test as between Government and Government, that is a proposition which is not without grave consideration to be accepted." ^ He found a defense for the irresolution and inactivity of the Government, in the fact that the United States were unwilling to abandon their claims for compensation for the losses by the acts of the Alabama. "I have no hesitation," he said, "in saying that the United States by advancing such demands, and by seek- ing to make our Government responsible for pecuniary com- pensation for prizes taken by the Alabama upon the high seas, and never brought within our ports or in any way whatever under our control, are making demands directly contrary to the principles of International Law laid down by their own jurists, and thereby they render it inlinitely more difficult for us at their request to do anything resting on our own discretion." - When it was apparent that the Georgia was to be allowed to remain in Liverpool, and that she was not to be made subject to the rules of January 31, 1862, Mr. Adams ad- dressed a note to Lord Russell in which he said: "I learn that she is about to remain for an indefinite period, the men having been discharged. I scarcely need to suggest to your Lordship that it has become a matter of interest to my ^ Hansard, 3d series, Vol. CLXXV, pages 484—5. 2 Same, page 488. THK (iKOR(;iA. 255 (iovernniont to Icurn ^vhetll»'r this vossd assiunes the ri-:ht to remain in virtue of her t'ormcr character, or, if received in a later one, why she is permitted to overstay the period of time specified by the terms of I lor :\Iajesty's i)roclamu- tion. * * I cannot but infer, from the course previously adopted toward the armed vessels of the United States, that any such proceeding, if taken by one of them, would have heen attended by an early request from your Lordship to myself for an explanation." ^ Having received no answer to these questions, Mr. Adams, on the 7th of June, 1SG4, informed Lord Russell that he had received from the Consul of the United States, at Liver- pool, information that a transfer purporting to be a sale had been made of the Georgia by the insurgents or their agents at Liverpool, and on bahalf of the Government of the United States he "declined to recognize the validity of the sale." - While Mr. Adams was vainly endeavoring to ascertain from Lord Russell whether the Georgia entered the port of Liverpool as a merchant ship or as a man-of-w'ar, that vessel ^vent into dock at Birkenhead and had her bottom cleaned and her engines overhauled. ^ The insurgent agents went through the form of selling her to a person who was sup- posed to be in collusion with them. All this was com- municated to Earl Russell bv Mr. Adams. ^ Lord Russell, in his reply to these notes, took no notice of Mr. Adams's protest against the validity of the sale, or of his inquiries as to the character the vessel enjoyed in the port of Liver- pool. He said that the evidence failed to satisfy him that the steamer Georgia would be again used for belligerent pur- poses; and he added that, "with a view to prevent the re- currence of any question such as that which has arisen in the case of the Georgia, Her ]Majesty"s Government have given directions that in future no ship of war, of either Vf 1 Vol. II, page 703; Vol. VI, page 538. - Vol. II, page 710; Vol. VI, page 543. 2 Wilding to Seward, Vol. II, page 711; V'ol. VI, page 543, ^ Vol. II, page 713; Vol. VI, page 545. 25G INSfHtiliNT ( Kl'lSKUS. • V . • belliji'i.'rent, sluiU l)o iillowt'd to Ik^ l)r()n^lit into any of Her IMjijcsty's ports tor the purpoM' of l)i'in;j; disinimtlcd or sold/' ' This tcrmiuiited tho discussion on tlic (jut'stions raised bv Mr. Ad;inis. A lew days later, tiie career ol" the Geor^i;i itself >vas terminated by its capture by the Unit«'d States vesst'l of war Nia elicit ere taken against fitting her out, one concerned in iiited States, with enlistments. The origin and history THE (IKOmilA. 257 of the Nc^Hs^el, and hy reason of this neftligenci' of Ilcr Majesty's (lovernnient, (ireat lUitaiu bi'canie iustlv liable to the United States for tla; injuries done bv this ves^^'l. 2.^(jreat I^ritain did not us*.' due diligence to prevent the litting out and e4uii)[)ing (d" the (ieorgia \\ithin its jurisdic- tion. It was notorious that she was i>eing constructed for use undei' the insurgent Hag. (Set' the cjifnitt from the Ncivs, und UmJcrivoods dispatth.) Her litting.^ were of such a nature and character as to have alfor own, Great Britain failed to detain her. This was a viola i.-n of the duties of a neutral as set forth in the second clause of the first rule I ^^ ^ » -in A' 1 \'T ft ^^ tlie Treaty of Washington, ge < 1 J ; > oi. > i, 1 1 '' ^ 17 258 INSURGENT CRUISERS. • ' I ^y^. . .*. , • I • THE TALLAHASSEE, OR THE OLUSTEE. The Tallahassee or ^^'^^^ TallaliiiSf^ee was "a British steamer Olustee. fitted out from London to play the part of a privateer out of Wilmington." ^ She was originally called the Atlanta. " Under that name she arrived in Bermuda from England on the 18th day of April, 18G4. She maue two trips as a blockade-runner between there and Wilming- ton , and then went out for a cruise as a vessel of war. Her captures were principally made under the name of the Tallahassee. Some were made under the name of the Olustee, It is not quite clear whether she made two trips, one under each name, or whether the name was changed in one trip in order to blind the pursuers.^ On the 19tli of August, 1864, she arrived in Halifax after destroying several vessels near Cape Sable. Tlie Consul of the United States at HaU- fax reported her as "about six hundred tons burden,"' "an iron double-scnnv steamer,"' having " about one hundred and twentv men/' ■* He also said that the insurgents had es- tablished a coal depot there. On arrival, the officer in command called upon the Admiral and Lieutenant Governor. He gives the following account of what took place. "]My reception by the first [the Admiral] was very cold and un- civil; that of the Governor less so. I stated that I was in want of coal, and that as soon as I could fill up I ^\oul(' go to sea; that it would take from two to three davs. No objection was made at the time — if there had been I was prepared to demand forty - eiglit hours for repairs. The Governor asked me to call next day and let him know how I was progressing and when I would leave. I did so, and then was told that he was surprised that I was still in port: that we must leave at once; that we could leave the harbor with only one liundred tons of coal on board. T protested ' Mr. Adams to Earl Russell, \'ol. I, page 709; see Vol. VI, page 7-28. '^ Morse to Seward, Vol. VI, page 727. '' Boreham's affidavit, Vol. VI, page 732. ■» Mr. Jackson to Mr. Seward, 19tli August, 1864, Vol. VI, page 728. OLUSTEE. Britisli steamer :)lay the part oi" originally called ed in Bermuda 804. SLe made re and Wilmiiig- a vessel of war. "lie name of tlie e of the Olustee. trips, one under iged in one trip 19 til of August, n^T^ several vessels ?d States at Hali- ins burden," "an one hundred and isurgents had es- , the oflicer in Uenant Governor. Dok place, "^ly 3ry cold and un- ted that I was in [ lill up I A^ouk' ) three days. No had been I was :)r repairs. The et him know how 1 did so, and was still in port; d leave the harbor )ard. I protested THE TALLAHASSE. 259 age 709; see Vol. ist, 1864, Vol. Vb against this, as beiug utterly insufficient. He replied that the Admiral had reported that quantity sufficient (and in such matters he must be governed by his statement) to run the ship to Wilmmgton. The Admiral had obtained this information by sending on board three of his officers, os- tensibly to look at our machinery and the twin-screw, a new system, but really to ascertain the quantity of coal on board^ that burned daily, &c. * ^- I am under many obligations to our agent, Mr. Weir, for transacting our busi- ness, and through his management about one hundred and twenty tons of coal were put aboard instead of half that quantity. * * Had I procured the coal needed I intended to have struck the coast at the capes of the Delaware and followed it down to Cape Fear, but I had only coal enough to reach Wilmington on the night of the 25th." ^ Had the British authorities at Nassau, Bermuda, Barbadoes, Cape Town, Melbourne, and other colonial ports, pursued the same course that the Lieutenant Governor at Halifax did, under the wise advice of the Admiral, the grievances of the United States would have been much less, and this case would have been shorter by many pages. The first time that the rule of January 31st, 1862, as to the supply of coal, was fairly carried out, the operations of the insurgent cruiser, to which it was applied, were arrested on the spot, and the vessel was obliged to run for a home port. The Tallahassee apparently remained in Wilmington for some months. On the 13th of flanuary, 1865, she arrived in Bermuda again, under the name of the Chameleon. On the 19th she sailed again, taking a cargo to Liverpool, where at the close of the war she was claimed by the United States. From the fact that she was fitted out in London to be used as a privateer from Wilmington, and that she did go out from Wilmington with what purported to be a com- mission from the insurgent authorities, and did prey upon the commerce of the United States, and for the reasons already given, the United States ask the Tribunal to find and certify as to this vessel as they have been asked to find and certify 1 Wood to McUlory, 31st August, 1864, Vol. VI, page 729. 17* 200 INSURGKNT CRUfSKRS. as to the Sumter and the Nushville, the Fh)i'kia, and the Alabama, and the Georgia. THE CHICKAMAUGA. " «. if The ciiickamaiigii. Auion^' the New British-built bloekade-rim- ners reported by the United States ('onsul at Liiverpool on the 5th of March, 1SG4, was "the l*]dith, new double-screw ; two j)ole masts; forecastle raised one foot liigher than bulwark, two funnels; marked to draw^ nine feet forward and ten aft; no ligure-head." ^ She arrived at Bermuda froni T^nnlaud, on the 7th day of April, I8G4. On tlie 23d of the following June she mailed for Wilmington, and on tlie 7tli of the next July arrived from there with cotton. On the 23d of July she again went to Wilmington. The Edith was one of that class of blockade-runners, like the Tallahassee, which was owned by the insurgent author- ities. In the year 1864 other parties as well as the in- surgent authorities were largely engage in the business of running cotton out of the blockaded .orts. Thus, in the quarter in which the I'Mith left Liverpool, 34,754 bales of cotton were imported itito Liverpool from the Southern States. via Bermuda, Nassau, Havana, and Matamoras, of which only 7,874 w^ere consigned to Eraser, Trenholm & Co.' The p]dith, however, was a vessel belonging to the so-called govern- ment at Richmond, and, being found to be fast, and adapted for the sort of war that was carried on against the commerce of the United States, it was determined to put her in com- mission as a man-of-war. The attention of the Tribunal of Arbitration is invited to the facile manner in which these vessels were permitted to ada})t themselves to circumstances. The Sumter cruised as a man-of-war, and received hosj)italiLies as such. She was allowed to change her character in a British port, and then ^ Manuscripts in Department of State; see Vol. VI, pages 723—4—5. 2 Dudley to Seward, 1st April, L8G4. Only 61)7 bales came by way of Havana. THE CIllCKAMAUCiA. 43l Di'icia, and the hlockade-run- t 1/iverpool on doublc-scTew; than bulwark; d and ten aft; »n\ l^]n<;lau(i, on f tlie following- nil of the next e 23d of July )n is invited to 3 permitted to nter cruised as ueli. She was port, and then Vol. VI, pages 607 bales came to sail under the British flat*; as a blockade-runner, owned and operated by the insurgents. TJie same tiling would undoubtedly have been done with the Georgia iiad slie not been caj^turcd by the Niagara. The Atlanta started her career as a blockade-runner, owned by the insurg(Mits; she was con- verted into a man-of-war under the name of the Tallahassee. When unable to yiursue furtiier her work of destruction, slu; became again a carrier for the benefit of the insurgents, and was' accepted by Great Britain in lier new character. The ICdith was now to go through similar transformations. On the 1 7th of September she was in commission as a man-ol'-war. Between that date and the 2 Stii of October she took on board large supplies of coal from blockade-runners. On the 28th of October, Laving waited for a month for a iiight dark enough to run the blockade, she put to sea I'rom Wilmington, and ran n(»rthward toward Long Island. ( )n the 30th she destroyed the bark Mark L. Potter, of Bangor, Maine: on the 31st. the Emilv L. Hall, the Shooting Star, the Goodspeed, and the Otter IJoch, all vessels uiider the flag of the United States: on the 2d of November, the bark Speedwell, also a vessel of the United States; and on the 7th of November she reached Bermuda. On the Sth of November she was allowed to come into the harbor, and per- en for a stav of fi^e davs for repairs, and mission was ai\ dtl louali sue also to take on board twenty-live tons of coal had at that time one hundred tons in her bunkers. She actually staid seven days and took on board eighty-two tons.^ On the loth of November she sailed from Bermuda, and on the IfHh arrived at Wilmington. alreadv given the United States ask the V or tl le reason Tribunal, as to this vessel, to lind an( ce rtilv as they lave be en asked to liml am' certifv as to llie Sumter, the Nashville^ the Florida, the Alabama, the Georgia, and the Tallahassse. ^ Manuscript diary in the Department of State. ^' 2G2 iKSURfiRNn f RUTSERS. THE SHENANDOAH. The Shenandoah. The British steamer Sea. King, a merchant vessel which had belonged to a Bombay Company, and had been employed in the East India trade/ was "a long rakish vessel of seven hundred and ninety tons register, with an auxiliary engine of two hundred and twenty nominal horse- power, with which siie was capable of steaming ten knots an hour. She was the handiwork of celebrated builders on the river Clyde, in Scotland, and had made one voyage to New-Zealanc\ as a transport for British trooi)S, when she proved herself one of the fastest vessels afloat, her log showing at times over three hundriid and twenty miles in twenty-four hii ■> ours. " In the year 1863, before the voyage to New Zealand, Mr. Dudley had seen her at (Glasgow, and had reported her as a most likely steamer foi the ])urpo.ses of a privateer.^ On the 20th of September, in the year 18G4, she was sold in London to Richard Wright, of Liverpool, a British subject, and the father-in-law of Mr. Prioleau, of South Carolina, the managing partnt'r m the house of Fraser, Tren- holm & Co.,^ and the tran:-^V;r was registered the same day. The Uiiited States assert that the notorious connection of the tir. ot' Fraser, Trenholm & Co. with the insurgents, and their r(.(;eaced violations of the sovereignty of Great Britain in purchasing, constructing, equipping, arming, and contract- ing for vessels of war to be used in carrying on hostilities against the United States, ought by that time to have made tliem objects of susj)icion to every British official, connected with the construction or the transfer of steamers caj^able of being adapted to warlike use. The acquisition, by a near connection of a member of their lirm, of a fast-going steamer, capable of being so converted, and the pro})Osition to send her to sea in ballast, with nothing on board but two mounted guns and a- supply of provisions and coal, ought of itself to ^ Bernard's British Neutrality, pa«j;e 369. ^ Cruise of the Shenandoah, page 9. •' Dudley to Seward and Morse to Seward, Vol. VI, page 555. ^ Dudley to Seward, Vol. Ill, page 319; Vol. VI,' page 560. g, a merchant oany, aud had 'a long rakisli ^ister, with an lomhial horse - ling ten Icnots [id buihiers on one voyage to hen she proved og showing at in twenty-four New Zeahind, d reported her if a privateer.^ 18G4, she was )Ool, a British ;au, of South f Fraser, Tren- the same day. 1 connection of insurgents, and ■ Great Britain , and contract- [2; on hostilities to have made icial, connected ners ea])al)le of ion, by a near !;-going steamer, osition to send t two mounted ght of itself to 1. VI, page 555. I. VI,' page 5G0. '^v*.^^*.,. THE SHENANDOAH. 263 have Pttracted the attention of he Britls]- ofi>ia'tc. The omission to take notice of the fact is a proof ^^ v/anfc of the due diligence required by the Treaty. Under the circum- stances, it would have been the exercise of -A iiio most ordinary diligence to supervise the transfers ot :h\r cUss of vessels in the Government records, and to follow op so pal- pable a clew as was given in the case of the Sea King. On the 7th of October, Wright gave a power of attorney to one Corbett to "sell her at any time within six months for a sum not less than .£45,000 sterling." ^ Corbett was an Englishman who had commanded the Douglas, afterward known as the Margaret and Jessie, one of the kaleidoscopic blockade-runners owned by the insurgents and carrying the British flag. The next day the Sea King cleared for Bombay, and sailed "with a crew of forty-seven men."- Before sailing, while she "lay in the basin," she "took in coal and provision>-= suflicient for a twelve-months' cruise."^ She "had two 18-pounders mounted on the decks," which were the guns generally used in bringing vessels to.^ "She was scarcely cleiir < ^' the ground when a telegram was flashed to Liverpool, advising the Con- federate agent at that port" that she in^l sailed. ' and about 8 or 9 o'clock that evening a screvv-steame»\ cal'ed the Laurel, "nearly new-built, very strong, and ac.'.::ably adapted for a privateer,"*^ left Liverpool, clearing for Matamoias, via Nassau, taking a "score or more of natives of the Hr>uth. who had staked life and fortune m the hazard o\' a desperate game," among whom were "several old Confederate States navy oflicers, who had served on board the Sumter, Alabama and Georgia."'^ The Laurel t(»ok out as cargo "cases marked as machinery, but in realitv containing guns and gun-carriages, such af^ are 1 Dudley to Seward, Vol. Ill, page 319. - Dudley to Seward, Vol. Ill, page 319; Vol. VI, page 5G0. ^ Cruise of the Shenandoah, page 10, ' Temple's aftidavit, Vol. IlL page 478; Vol. VI, page 709. '"' Cruise of the Shenandoah, page 11. " Dudley to Adams. Vol. Ill, page 316; Vol. VI, page 55G. " Cruise of the Shenandoah, page 16. See also Vol. ]V> , page 'MS. t J 2G4 INSrRCiENT (RriSERS. ♦ ■>■ used in wiw vessels. "^ Mr. Diulley. the Consul i\t Liverpool, from the iininber of ^ Dudley to Seward, Vol. Ill, i>a^«.' ;>17; Vol. Vi, page oOG. - Dudley to Seward, Vol. Ill, page I'llH; A'jI. VI, page a57. ^ Cruise of the Shenandoah, pai;e 19. ■> Ellison's affidavit, Vol. III. pa<'C ;559; Vol. VI, page 580. 5 Harris's al'lidavit. Vol. HI, page 3G3 : Vol. VI, page 584. ^ Cruise of tlie Shenandoah, pages 19, 20. ^ Cruise of the Shenandoah, page 21. THK SHKXANDOAH. 2G5 shot, and shell; clothing, and u quantity of other stores, and ulao u quantity of coaLs."^ Corbett then came forward and announced a pretended sale of the vessel, (the real sale ha\ing taken y)lace in Lon- don,) and tried to induce the men who had enlisted to sail in the Sea King to continue their contract in the Siienandoah. The conduct of this person was so palpably a violation of the Foreign I'^nlistment Act that the British Consul at Funchal sent him home as a prisoner, accompanied by depositions to prove his guilt.- Captain Wad'lell, the new commander in the place of Corbett, made a si)eech, "which was received with but little enthusiasm by the majority of those who listened to him."'' "Out of eighty twenty-three only cast in their lots with the new cruiser.*"'^ When the Shenandoah left the Laurel her "oflicers and crew only numbered forty- two souls, less than lialf her regular comj)lement."^ This obliged her "to de[)end upon her auxiliary engine." When the news of these proceedings was fully known in London, Mr. Adams brought the subject to the notice of J']arl Russell.'' In a subsetjuent note he referred to this fact in the following language i'^ "On the 18th of November, 1SC4, I had the honor to transmit to your Lordship certain evidence which went to show that on the 18th of October j)receding u steamer had been dispatched, under the Ik sh flag, from London, called tlie Sea King, with a view to meet another steamer, called the Laurel, likewise bearing that flag, dispatched from Liver- ])Ool on the 9th of the same month, at some point near the island of Madeira. These vessels were at the time of sail- ing equipped and manned by British subjects; yet they were sent out with arm^^^, munitions of war, supplies, ofticers, and I'l ^ Vol. Ill, page :u;3; Vol. VI, page 580. ai'lidavits which follow this. •' Vol. VI, page bl->. •* Cruise of the Shenandoah, page 22. •* Cruise of the Shenandoah, page 23. ■^ Cruise of the Shenandoah, page 24. •' Adams to liussell. Vol. Ill, pa^e 323. ^ Same to same, Vol. Ill, page 377. See also the other 2(3() INSrR(iENT CRUlSKRS. - • enlisted men, for the purpose of initiating a hostile enter- prise to the i)oople of the United States, with whom Great Britain was at the time under solemn oblipjations to i)reserve the peart\ "It further appears that, on or about the 18th of the stune montii, these vessels met at the place agreed upon, and there the British commander of the Sea King made ;i private transfer of the vessel to a i)erson of wliom he then (leelared to the crew his knowledge that he was about to embark on an expedition of tlie kind described. Thus know- ing its natiire, lie nevertheless went on to urge these seamen, being British subjects themselves, to enlist as members of it. "Tt is also clear that a transfer then took place from the British bark Laurel of ihe arms of every kind with which she was laden, for this same object: and, lastly, of a number of persons, some calling themselves oflicers, who had been brought from Liverpool expressly to take part in the enter- prise. Of these last a considerable portion consisted of the very same persons, many of them British subjects, who had been rescued from the waves bv British intervention at the moment when they had surrendered from the sinking Alabama, the previous history of which is but too well known to your Lordship. "Thus equipped, fuied out, and armed from Great Britain, the successor to the destroved corsair, now assumino" the name of the Shenandoah, though in no other respects changing its British character, addressed itself at once to the work for which it had been intended. At no time in her later career has she ever reached a port of the country which her commander has })retended to represent. At no instance has she earned any national characteristic other than that with which she started from Great Britain. She has thus far roamed over the ocean, receiving her sole protection against the consequences of the most piratical acts from the gift of a nominal title wliicli Great Britain iirst bestowed upon her contrivers, and then recognized as legitimating their successful fraud." It is not necessary to follow in detail the cruise of the Shenandoah from Madeira to Mtdbourne. It is enoutih to ajprff'S*'^* THE SHENANDOAH. 267 ; cruise of the say that it lasted ninety days,^ during which time several vessels of the merchant marine of the United States were destroyed, with valuable cargoes. On tlie 25th of January, 18G5, she "dropped anchor otf Sandridge, a small town about two miles from Melbourne."- "The November mail from l^urope, which arrived at Mel- bourne about the middle of January, had brought the news that the Sea King had left England with the intention of being converted into a war vessel to cruise against the com- merce of the United States.'' •' Susj)icions were at once aroused that the newly-arrived man-of-war under the insurgent Hag was no other tlian the Sea King; suspicions wduch were con- lirmed by the statements of the prisoners from the cajjtured vessels, and by others.^ The Consul of the United States appears to have acted with both courtesy and vigor. He placed before the authorities all the information in his possession, tendhig to show the illegal origin of the vessel, and the liabilities which she was imposing upon Great Britain by her depredations on the commerce of the United States.^ He told the Governor that the "Shenandoah, alias Sea King,"' had never "entered a port of the so-styled Confederate States for the jiurposes of naturalization, and consequently was not entitled to l)eliigerent rights;'"' and that the table-service, plate, &c., on the vessel all bore the mark of "Sea King." He earnestly urged that "after the severest scrutiny it should be determined if this vessel and crew are entitled to the rights of belligerency, or whether the vessel should not be detained until the facts can be duly investigated." '' When he found that, in sj)ite ^ Cruise of the ShenaniJoah, page 1)3. - Cruise of the Shenandoah, page 04. 3 Blanchard to Seward, VoL III, page 384; Vol. VI, page 588» * See depositions in Vol. Ill, on pages 390, 401, 402, 405, 407, and 417. The same depositions may be found in Vol. VI. This point appears to have been settled beyond doubt. See extract from Melbourne Herald, Vol. VI, page GoO. 5 See Mr. Blanehard's dispatch to Mr. Seward, Vol. Ill, page 384. " Vol. HI, page 394; Vol. VI, page 508. 7 Blanchard toDarling, \'ol. Ill, page 305; Vol. VI, page 508. 4^ i . 268 INSlRGJiNT CRl'ISKRS. oi' his ivmonstrancc'.^ and ot" the proof ol lii'i* churacH'r, it hud boon decided that the Shonaiidouh .shuuhl be rcpairi'd, and should be allowed to take in siipplii's ami coals, ho protested "in behalf of his (Tovernineiit against the aid, com- fort, and refutestetl afresh, ami notiiied the Governor '-that the United States will claim indemnity for the damages already done to its ship{)ing by said vessel, and also whioh may hereai'ter be committed if allowed to depart from this port."'- lie placed hi the hands of the Attorney Cicneral conclusive ''evidence to establish that the Shenandoah is in fact the Sea King."'' ^Vhen it came to his knowledge that Waddell was enlisting a crew in Melbourne for tlie Siienandoah, he put the proof of it at once into the hands of the Governor.'* When he heard that she was t;dving coal on board he communicated that fact also.'^ From the beginning of the visit of the Shenan- doah at ^b'lbourne to the liour of her departure, the oflicer was constant in his vigilance, and in his elforts to jdd the British authorities in the jierformance of their duties, as the representatives of a neutral nation. As soon as she arrived, almost before her anchor was dropped, her conmiander wrote to the (lovernor for }>ermissioii to "make the necessary repairs and obtain a su})]>ly of coals.""" This letter was ofiicially answered the next day, after the twenty-four hours allowed Ity the instructions of January, 1SG2, for his stay had expired, lie was told that directions had been given to enable him to make the necessary re})airs and to coal his vessel, and lie was asked, at his earliest convenience, to intimate the nature and extent of his ri'quire- ^ Blanchard to Darling, Vol. Ill, page IIOT; \ol. VI, page 600. • Blanchard to Darling, Yob HI, pa}.ve ;;98; Vol. VI, page COl', ^' Vol. Ill, pages 403 and 401, 40o and 407. See also Vol. VI. ^ Vol. Ill, pages 414, 420, 4-2:5, 427, 428. See also Vol. VI. 5 Vol. Hi, pai;e 425; Vob VI, page iVdO. ^ Waddell to Darling, Vol. V, page 591). THK Sin:N\M)0.\TI. 200 cbaniclcr, ii he repaired, ml coals, he tlic aiil, com- was hituniieij that whatever , the G(t\('ni- I ship oi' wuv (I afresh, aiul es will claim s shippiiiLi; hv eoiiimitteil il' I ill the hands to establish ;••• When il listing' a erew ,' proof of it hen he heard iiunieatecl that )f the Shenan- re, the ofiicer rts to aid tlic duties, as the iv anchor \vas for })ermission jily of coals."'" day, after the s of flanuary, that directions cessary repairs at his earliest of his requirc- !. VI, page GOO. .VI, page 60-J, !e also Vol. VI. e also Vol. VI, ments as reoards repairs :ind supplies.' This was the oflicial answer. The real answer had been o;iv(>n the prcxiotis nio;ht to Waddt'll's niess(>nner, who was dis[)atched on shore -'as soon as practicable the afternoon y){ arrival, to confer with tlu' authorities and obtain perniis>ion I'or the ship to remain and prociuv some "necessary rcpaii-s." '-He returned h'forv litiihiitfht, lutr'nKj siiccecrJcd in his ?»/,s',s/o;/."-' Two days were taken to re[»lv to the (piestion as to the natin-e and extiMit of the needed repairs and supplies. Waddell then stated, as a reason why lie could not yet report, that the mechanics had not rej)orted to him. lie sj)oke p;enerally about th(^ condition of his projx-ller shaft, and the bearing's under water, and, he. added, "////" o//icr VCliairs nrc pro- gressing rapidlij^'^ It thus a[)pears that he had been at that time three days in ]»ort, iiad made no oflicial statement of tiie sui)[)lies or the necessary repairs, and that he liiul a ibrce at work upon his vessel, without any report to the (ilovernor showing the necessity. The next day he was asked to furnish a list of supplies required for the immediate use of his vessel.'^ He ap[)ears to have furnished such a statement, but it has not been printed in anv document within the control of the United States. As the list is in the possession of Great Britain, it will doubtless be produced , if it tends to release that (lovernment from responsibility. On the following dav, being the ilfth day after he arrived in port, the fourth day after he received permission to make his repair.", and the third or fourth day after the repairs were commenced, he reported to the Governor that the lining • of the outer sternback (probably meaning the outer stern- bush) was imtirely gone, and that in order to replace it the Shenandoah must go into the Government slip for about ten davs.'' 1 Francis to AVaddell, Vol. V, page 51)9; Vol. VI, page G39. - Cruise of the Shenandoah, page 97. ^ Vol. V, page GOO; Vol. VI, page 6-10. ^ Francis to AVaddell, Vol. V, page GOO; Vol. VI, page G41. ^ Waddell to the Commissioner of Trade, Vol. V, page GOO; Vol. VI, page G-tl. ^' L IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) t/j 1.0 I.I |50 ■^" ■ 40 ■ 2.5 2.0 m L25 j||||.4 1.6 ^ 6" ► Photographic Sciences Corporation s. '^ m ,v W<\ V Sv 33 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14S80 (716) 873-4503 o^ /> ^ .<^\. %■ fvlio liiid been violating; Her Majesty's proclamation and tlu^ laws of the Empire,^ and they aimed tlic; thunders of tlie law aft the Siienandoaii by the water police,'* thus showing that they must have been there all the while. In consequence of this the permission to make re[)airs was suspended ; but it was soon restored. Tlie reason given for the restoration was that, Charley being taken, Waddell Wiis "in a })Osition to say, as commanding officer of the ship, that there were no persons on board except those whoso names are on the shipping articles, and that no one has been enlisted in the service of the Confederate States since arrival in this j)ort.'"''' It docs not appear that Waddell made any such commitment; on the contrary, he said that he considered "the tone of the letter remarkably disrespectful and insulting." The MelbouiMie authorities did not insist upoii having such an assurance. The Secretary of the Governor had said that ^ Tlic second section of the Foreign Enlistnierit Act of 1819 made it illegal to |»rocnie any person to engage to eidist us a sailor in sea servi«'e under i.ny i)er>on assuming to exercise any powers of gnvernnient, or to agree to go from any part of Her Majesty's dominions fur the purpose of being so enlisted; and piT.-ons conimitting that offense were to be deemed guilty of a niisdenjeanor, and to be punished, (»n conviction, by tine or iniprisot;nieiit, or both. It wouhl be; diflicnlt to describe what Captain Waddell actually did at Mi'lbonrne in more accurate langUiige than this. - V(d. V, page e;i8; Vol. VI, page 005. 3 V..1. V, page GIB; V(d. \ I, pjigc G()5. ^ Francis to W.ddell, Vol. V, page G05; Vol. VI, page G47. » Ibid., Vol. V, page G05. 1 officers, >vlio liiid Miul tlu' laws of of tlie law aajjje to enlist as iniing to exercise from any part of )»Mnj? so enlisted; be deemed guilty )nviction, by line "licult to desrrib(^ li in more accurate ol. VI, page 047. TIIK SJIKNA.NDOAH. 273 Waddell was in a position to give the assurance: that was enough. The Chief Secretary said in the Assembly, >p. aking of the enlistment of "Charley,*' "it appears to me and to the Gov^'rnment that if anything can be a violation of strict neutrality, this is it;"» but he added, in a few moments, (his attention being called to th.- fact that there were still ])ersons on board who had joined the ship at Melbourne,) "The particular warrant that was issued for this particular individual (Charley) was satisfied; and if further warrants are issued for other j)ersons who may be on board, the position of the Govermncvf ivill he altered. It may be that there are other persons on board."- There were other persons on boar Vol. V, page 619; Vol. VI, page G6G. - Vol. V, pages 620 and 667. 3 Blanchard to Darling, Vol. Ill, pages 425, 426; Vol. VI, page 630. 18 II \ 274 1NSIR(JKNT CRUISERS, As time wujs oi iinportunce, and a day's delay might be too late, the Consul went with his witnesses to the ofliee of the Crown Solicitor, to wliom the Atto 'ney General had pre- viously directed him to communieate such information. He found that oflicer leaving for his dinner. He told him "his business was urgent,"* and that he had " come as the repn- sentative of the United States to lay before him, as Crowji Solicitor, tlie evidence that a large number of men were about violating the neutrality laws."" ^ The Solicitor said he must go to his dinner, and passed on. The Consul then went to several other oflicers in order to secure immediate action on his comj)laint. Among others, he went to the Attorney Ge- neral, who sent him to another Solicitor; but he could get no one to attend to it, and the Shenandoah left early in the morning of the 1 8th without further British interference. The attention of the Tribunal of Arbitration is invited to the fact that a sworn list of the crew of the Shenandoah is attached to an aftidavit made in Liverpool by one Temjjle ten months after tlie vessel left Melbourne.- Forbes in liis aflidavit. which was submitted to the Governor and laid be- fore the Attorney General, gave the names of live persous who he had reason to believe were about to join the vessel from Melbourne. Temple's aftidavit shows that at least three of those persons did join and did serve, ui^.: "Robert Dun- ning, an Englishman, captain of the foretop ; ^ Thomas Evans, Welchman; and William Green,** an Englishman.'*^ Tliis corroborative, independent })iece of testimony establishes tlie truthfulness of Forbes's affidavit. This aflidavit, so sum- marily rejected by the Crown Solicitor, was the specific evi- dence of the commission of a crime which Her Majesty's Government required to be furnished by the United States. When produced the British authorities declined to act upon it. The United States assert, without fear of contradiction, that there was no tiuiO during the stay of the Shenandoah ' Lnid to Blanchard, Vol. Ill, page 429; Vol. VT, page UoO. ■ Vol. HI, page 477; Vol. VI, page 709. ^ Vol. HI, page 488; Vol. VI, page 719 * Vcl. HI, page 489; Vol. VI, ])age 727. ^ Vol. HI, pages 489, 490; Vol. VI. page 721. THE ISUF.NANDOAH. 275 Vol. VI, i)age GoJ. in jNIelbouriie, when it was not notorious that i^lic was pro- curini5 recruits. Siie went there for that pur])0.^e. Ilor eflect- ive power as a nian-ol-war depended entirely u])on her suc- cess ill obtaining a new crew. When she left the Laurel .she had but twenty-three men besides her oflioers. With every capture between there and Melbourne great etforts were made to induce the captured seamen to enlist; and those who would not enlist were (;omi)ellcd to work as sailors in order to avoid being put in irojis. The author of the " (/ruise of the Shenandoah" says that fourteen were enlisted in this way — ten from the Aliuea and the Godfrey,^ two from the Susan, 2 and two from the Stacey.^ Temple in his aftidavit gives the names of three from the Alina, live from tlie God- frey, one from the Susan, two from the Stacey, and one from the Edward/ It is probable that Temple's statement is cor- rect. Of the twelve whom he names, two appear to have left the vessel at Melbourne, 6W>. : Bruce, of the Alina; and Williams, of the Godfrey, It would therefore appear that, had the Shenandoah received no recruitment of men at Mel- bourne, her force on leaving would have been thirty-three marines, firemen, and ordinary seamen. One officer and two petty officers were discharged tliere, which reduced the nun\- ber of officers to twenty, and her whole force to fifty-three. She was a full-rigged ship, 220 feet in length and 35 feet beam, and carried royal-studding sails, and required double or treble that number of men to make her efiective as a man-of-war/' The Tribunal will see how important it was to recruit men at Melbourne. She took in there, according to the account given by the author of the Cruise of the Shenandoah, forty-five men/ Temple, in his affidavit, gives the names of forty-three, divided as follows: one officer, twelve ])etty officers, twenty sea- men, seven firemen , and three marines. The Uniied States complain of this act, not alone as a technical violation of ' Cruise of the Shenandoah, page 42. ^ Ibid., page 47. ^ Ibid., page 43. * Vol. Ill, pagt'8 487-491; Vol. VI, page il8, et seq. * Cruise of the Shenandoah, page 23. '^ Ibid., page 113. 18* 276 INSl'RGKNT (RriSKRS. 'i^ the duties a> a neutral, as laid down in the stcond rule oi' tho Treaty, but as a great injur}^ to them, from whieh flowed the subsocjuent (hiinafjijes to their eommeroe from the She- nandoah. This rerruiiment miirht have been stopped by the exercise of the most ordinary diiigenoe. It ought to have been stojjped after the Consul's letter of the 10th of February. It ought to have been stopped after his lcii.er of the 14tli. The authorities should have detained the Shenandoah on the information he eommunieated on the I 7th. Most of tne men went on board that night. It was a great negligence not to have pre- vented this. When the Shenandoah sailed on the mornin'jj of the 18th, the whole community knew that she had more than doubled her force in Melbourne. The newspapers of the next day were full of it. The Flerald said: "Rumors are afloat that the She- nandoah shipped or received on board soiaewhere about eighty men."* The Argus said: "It is not to be denied that during Friday night a large number of men found their way on i".)ard the Shenandoah, and did not return on shore again.'" - Atui the Age said: "It is currently reported that she shipped some eighty men."^ It is not probable — it may indeed be said to be most improbable — that a shipment of half tL;'t number of men could have been made without complicii'y of the authorities. Mr. Mountague Bernard intimates that tley could not have come there without the knowledge of Captain Waddoll." * A similar train of reasoning will convince the Tribunal of Arbitration that the least measure of "diligence" would have discovered the fact to the local authorities. The permitting a shipment of three hundred tons of coal at Melbourne was also a violation of the duties of a neutral. The Shenandoah was a sailing vessel. Iler steam-power was auxiliary. From early in December until two days before her arrival at Melbourne, some seven weeks in all,^ she was under sail, without using her steam; she went from Land's 1 Vol. Ill, page 435; Vol. VI, page 683. 2 Vol. Ill, page 436; Vol. VI, page 684. 3 Vol. Ill, page 436; Vol. VI, page 685. * Bernard's Neutrality, page 4.34. ^ Cruise of the Schenandoah, pages 63 — 94. THE SHENANDilAII. 277 VAxd to Madeira in the saino wayj She tcx.k on board, when she left London, a suijply of coal for twelve months. Four hundred tons of it remained when she reached Melbourne. She required no fresh supjdy to enable her to return to an insurgent port, and she sought it only for the purpose of cruising against the commerce of the United Slates, thus making Melbourne a base of the insurgent naval operations. The United States arc of the opinion th:.t it was a breach of the duties of an imj)artial neutral to ])ermit mdiinited supplies of coal, to be furnislied to the Siienandoali in a British port, under circumstances similar to those in which like supjdies had been refused to the vessels of the United Stat(?s; and that it was a still greater violation to iiermit the sui)i)ly to be furnished from the insurgent transport John Uraser, dispatched from Liverpool for that purpose, while the United States were forbidc'.en to sujjply their vessels in like manner. When the Shenandoah left London she took gent'ral su}»- j)lies for a year; yet she was allowed to replenish at ^Nlel- boiirne within less than six months from the time of leavinc: London. It must be concluded from the dech rations of the author of the Cruise of the Shenandoah, that when this was done she had enough supplies on board for the subsistence of the crew to the nearest insurgent p(U*t. The addition obtained at Melbourne enabled her to continue lier hostile cruise and to light uj) the icy seas of the north with the iires of American vessels , long after the military resistance to the United States had ceased. TJie United States further insist that .vhen the authorities at Melbourne permitted the Shenandoah to make repairs to her machinery in that port, a still greater violation of the duties of Great Britain as a neutral was committed. It has just been shown that this vessel was under no necessity of usinfr her steam : that she had iione to ]NLideira under sail: that she had come from the Cape of Good Hope to Melbourne under sail. For manv davs before arriving at Melbourne "a heavy and continuous gale" prevailed.- At 1 ^ Schutcher's affidavit, Vol. Ill, page oG5 ; Vol. VI, page 580. ^ Cruise of the Shenandoali, page (jG. 278 INSrRdUNT CRllISICKS. its height it w:us "sublinu^ beyond description," and tlie Slienandoali '•'drove before it at the rate of eleven knots an hour, under ch)se-reefe(l topsuils and reefed foresail." ^ Yet the author of the Cruise of the Shenandoah makes no men- tion of any injury to the vessel, or of any leak, and there is nothing to show that the hull needed repairs, or that anything was done to it exc(;pt that "a gang of calkers were procured and went to work uj)()n the decks with pitcii and oakuui." '-' The United States arc convinced tliat no other renairs were necessary for the hull, and that if the departure of the vessel was d(;layed for the ostensible pur- pose' of further repairs to the vessel itself, the pretenses wa.s made solely for tlie i)urpose of delay. The repairs to the machinery, as distinguished from the hull, were made with the object of enabling the Shenandoah to go to the Arctic Ocean, t\u'Vo to destroj'' the whalers of tlie United States, in accordance with Bullock's instructions to Waddell before he left Liverj)ool. •' It is evident, not only from the absence of any mention of injury to the hull by the author of the cruise of the Shenandoah, but also from the statement of experts of the repairs which the macliinery retpiired, that the hull was sound and seaworthy, and that the Shenandoah as a sailing vessel, without steam, could at once iiave proceeded to sea , and have made her way to the insurgent j)orts. ^ When Captain Boggs, of the United States Navy , two months later, (after the surrender of Lee,) asked permission tc 'emain at Barbadoes "a few days, for the j)urj)0se of overhauling the i)iston and engine," he was required , as a preliminary to the permission , to "give a definite assurance of his inability to proceed to 1 Ihia., page 07. '^ Ibid., page 104. ^ Vol. Ill, pag.^ 4(;i; Vol. VI, i)age 705. * It is true that the insurgents had no jxirts at that time which the Shenandoah could enter. Wilmington, the last of their ports, was olojed by the capture of Fort Fisher. This, howt'ver, v as an additional reason why the Shenandoah should not hav<^ been allowed to leave Mellx urne, carrying a Hag that had no port to receive it. See the correspondence between the United States and Porttigal referred to ante, page 82. |)tion," and the f eleven knots an foresail." ' Yet ti makes no nien- ' leak, and there repairs, or that •lanc; of calkers ' decks with pitch )nvinced that uo and that if the e ostensible pur- the pretenses wa.-^ j;uished from the g the Shenandoah )j the whalers of lock's instructions , is evident, not injury to tlie hull uidoah, but also ■opairs which the id and seaworthy, '1, without steam, d have made her [dn Boggs, of the ter the surrender iarbadoes "u few )iston and engine," le permission , to y to ])roce('d to )ai5e 104. ports at that time i.ngton, the last of <\n-t Fisher. This, Shenandoah should carrying a Hag that spondence between ante, page 82. rHK rtllENAND ui. 279 sea.'' ' As a man of honor and truth he couKl not do this, and he went to sea without iiis repairs. The same rule nj)|)lit'd to the Shenandoah would have j)rodue*' instnictidiis were apjilicil ti) tlic vt'>s»'Is of the linited States, and siidi sin>|)lies as wrvc li';jLally jht- mittt'd, could also be taken on, and the vessel eoidd be ready to -io to sea again in fronj tw(» to four (hiys after lier arrival in port. Or. ishould it be nec.essarv for the ves.sel to go into a >lip for the purpose of repairing tlu' propeller, this class of repairs might also be going on in the >lip, at the same tiuu; with the others. The other class of ri-pairs were those which Langland jirothers i^ Co. were t(» rejxn't upon — re[)airs to the pro- ] teller. It ap[)ears from the report maile by these mechanics on the oUth of January, tliat they founded their estimate upon the report of a diver. Mechanics orduiarily have to depend upon sucii a report, and to found their estimates upon it. The examination of the propeller «)f a screw- steamer, and of its bearings below the water-lini', is a simph^ matter, and takes but a short time. It is conlined to the stern of the vesM'l. A j)racticed expi-rt can go down , sat- isfy himself of the I'Xtent of the injury, and return and report in a few minutes. Had the Governor treated Captain Waddell as Captain lioggs was treated, the examination could easily have been made on the morning of the '2Gth, and the whole extent of the injury could have been re[)orted to the Governor on the afternoon of the same day within twenty- four hours after tlie arrival of the vessel in port. Captain Waddell, however, was not required to move so raj)idly. He did not send his diver down until the 2Sth; he did not get the oflicial rei)ort of his mechanics until the 30th. Thus he spent live days in doing what coultl have been done in live hours. There must have been a motive for that delay : tiie United States lind that motive in his ne- cessity to enlist a crew. The Tribunal will also observe that his own report on the L'Sth of the extent of his injuries diifers from t^"it made by his mechanics on the 30th. He reported that ''the com- position castings of the propeller-shaft were entirely gone, and the bracings (probably a mis})rint for "bearings") under water wore in the fame condition. This was a more serious of 'lamijirv .'» 1 . to the vt'sst'ls of viTo K'^ally jut- vesst'l ooulcl bo four (lay si a tier ary tor tlif vosscl my; till' jifopclliT, 1 in tlie >lii>, at which Laiiixhimi lairs to the j)ro- r these luechanios tl thch" t'stimate •(.riiiarily have to il their estimates ler of a screw - -line, is a siinj»h' ; eonlined to the n sio down, sat- and return and r treated Cajttain xamination could ic '2Gth, and the rejtorted to the within twenty- port. Captain move so raj)idly. 2Sth: he did not until the 30th. ould have been en a motive for otive in his ne- own report on ■i from t^"it made that "the com- t entirely gone, bearings") under s a more serious THK s(|b:.NAM)()AII. 281 V injury tiian the i-iir re|»(.rted by his ini(liiinir,> two (hiys lut(!r, namely, the necessity of (riving the shaft a new outer sternbu>h. The hitter would, it is true, ncjuire the dock- ing of the sliip to acbnit of tlm removal of the .shaft. Hut when the ship was once in tiie slip, tht- propcUer could be easily hoisted, bein-i a movable (me: > and then the renewal of the lignumvita- iinin;>r, teclinicaliy known as the stern- bush, the only repairs which the experts reported to be necessary, could be completed two (»r three i\iiss afttr the ship shouhl Ite on the slip. If the vessel was necessarily longer on the slip she nuist have received more repairs than are described in the ofiicial report of the Langlands, whicii embraced all for which the [lermission was grant«'d. Jt therefore appears that, on the supposition that the authorities at jNIelbourne could, under the circumstances, with- out violating;- the duty of Great Uritain as a neutral, permit the repairs reported by Langland Hrotiiers tfc Co. to be made, the Shenandoali should havt' gt)iie tt> sea in ten days after her arrival. This estimate gives the extreme time for every requisite step, ci.z.: one calendar day for the examination of the diver, excluding the day of arrival; three days (the estimate of the Langlands) for putting the vessel in the slij); three days for the repairs by the Langlands: one day for getting her out of the slip; and two days for reloading and getting to sea, which was the time actually taken: but as, during this time, she unwarrantably took on board three hundred tons of coal, this is j^robably too large an estimate. Instead of requiring these repairs to be com})K'ted in ten davs, the Melbourne authorities allowed the Shenandoah to stay there twenty-four days. The extra fourteen days were occupied in the recruitment of the forty-three men whom she carried away with her. It is difhcult, untler the circum- stances, to resist the conclusion that the repairs were dawdled along for the ])urpose of securing the recruits, antl that the authoriti<'s, to say the least, shut their eyes while this was going on; esj)ecially if it be true, as said by Temple, that the Government engineer was on board three or four times * '- ..II-— ■- 1 Wilson's affidavit, Vol. Ill, page 325; Vol. VI, page 56G. I 1l 1 282 INSURGENT CRUISERS. 1^ a day while they wore undorgoin;}; repairs, and assisted them with his opinion and advice. ^ It is fiiir to say that this fact is doubted by the Governor of the Colony. - If the Government engineer was not there, however, he should have been, in order to see that Waddell was not violating British neutrality. Leavinjx Melbourne, the Shentuidoah went through the Pacific Ocean to the Arctic Seas, via Behring's Straits, under the instructions issued by Bullock , in Liverpool , for the ])urpose of destroying the whalers of the United States. How successful she was in her attacks upon these intrepid and daring navigatwi's is .shown by the long li;;t of captured vessels, for whose destruction thv United States claim com- pensation. On the cruise to those seas she used her sails only. After nrrival there she commenced steaming on the 25th of June, and "from that time till she left the Arctic seas she made comparatively little use of her sails." ^ Many of the most valuable vessels were destroyed after that time. Temple names, in his aflidavit, lifteen that were destroyed after Waddell knew of the suppression of the insurrection.** Bul- lock wrote him a letter, instructing him "to desist from anv further destruction of United States property," '' and ICarl Russell undertook to send the letter "through the l^ritish Consuls at the ports where the ship may be ex- pected.'' It was not until the 17th day of October, 1865, that she ceased to be officially registered as a British vessel. Waddell arrive'! at Liverpool with the Shenandoah on the 6th of the following November, and wrote Earl Russell that the destructions committed on tlie 28th of June — when Temj)le said that he knew of tlie surrender of Lee — were committed "in ignorance of the oblit/^ration of the Govern- ' 'IVmple's aflidavit. Vol. Ill, pane 481; Vol. V, page 712. ' Darlino- to Cardwoll, Vol. Ill, page iVMJ. ■' Cruise of the Shenandoah, page 187. * Vol.111, pages 482, 48o-, Vol." VI, page 700, et seip This statement by Temple is conlirmed by Hathaway's affidavit, Vol. Vll, page 95. 5 Vol. Ill, page 458; Vol. VI, page 608. nd assisted them to say that this 'olony. - If the ner, ho should as not violating nt through the 5's Straits, under erpool , for the tod States. How oso intrepid and list of captured :ates claim corn- sails only. After 10 25th of June, 2 soas she made nv of the most time. Temple destroyed after urroction.'* Bul- "to desist from roi)orty," ^ and " throu2;h the lip may be ox- Octobor, 1865, a British vessel, nandoah on the Earl Russell of Juno — when r of Lee — were of the Govern- ol. Y, page 712. 00. et seep This awav's affidavit, i-» THE SHENANDOAH. 283 ment." He said that he received his lirst intelligence on the 2d of August. The author of the Cruise of the Shenan- doah says that they received, on tho 28th > i Juno, while burning the whalers, the news of the assassination of Mr. Lincoln. ^ This event took place a week after tho sur- render* of Lee. The affidavits of Temple and Nyo in Vol. VII indicate still earlier knowledge. It would seom, tliere- fore, that WaddelFs statements to I'^arl Ruf-soU could not have been correct. "The re-appearance of the Shenandoah in British waters" was regarded as "an untoward and nnwelcomy eveni.'' The Times reminded the public tl^at "in a certain sense it was doubtless true that the Shenandoah was built and manned in fraud of British neutrality."- Great Britain dealt with the "untoward'' question as it had dealt with others during the contest — bv evadino- it. The vessel was delivered to tho United States. The men who Iiad been preying upon the commerce of the United States for montlis without a semblance of authority behind them, most of whom were British subjects, with unmistakable British bearing and speech, were called before an officer of the British Navy to be examined as to their nationality, they understanding in ad- vance that it was a crime for British subjects to have served on the Shenandoah. "Eacli one stated tiiat h(^ belonged to one or the other of tho States of America,"'^ and they were discharged without further in«]uiry. On the 2Sth of December, 18{)5, Mr. Adank>, comment- ing upon these proceedings, wrote to ICarl Chirendon slr follows:"* "[ trust it may be made to appear — "1. That tho Sea King did depart from a British port armed with all the means she over had occasion to use in tlie course of her cruise against the commerce of the United States; and that no inconsiderable portion of her liostilo career was passed while she was still rsgistered as a Hritisli \ossel, with a British owner, on the ofiicitd records of th(^ Kingdom. ^ Cruise of the Slienandoah, page 20G. ■' London Times, November Shenandoah. On the 7th of March, 1SG5, Mr. Adams wrote as follows to Earl Russell : '•I am paininl to be obligetl once more to call your attention to tlie jiroceedings of thi- vessel called the steamer Laurel. "This is the vessel concerning; which I hail the honor to TIIK SIlENAN'nOAII. 285 W * I fully aware of dav before he industrious, and Sea of Okhotsk, •ticulars attend- 3 drawn, \^ bc- to set at rest hat there were they have in- aimed by Mr. id armed within the purpose of ?at Britain had tlie case, and :-isdiction, where ind the British her departure, niissioneil man- n she received nee being used the men were urne. and to receive of the United el, which, with on against the le sincerity of nandoah. On as follows to to call your etl the steamer the honor to make a representation, hi a note dated tlie lOtli November last, wliich appears to have ])rovod, in substance, correct. "Her departure from Liverjjool on the i)th October, laden with men and arms desthied to be ])]ace(] on board of tlie steamer Sea King, her meeting with that vessel at Porto Santo, in tlie Madeira Islands, her sulisequeiit transfer of her freight to that steamer, which tliereujjon assumed the name of the Shenandoah, and proceeded to capture and destroy vessels belonging to the ])eople of the United States, are all facts now established by incontestable evidence. "It now a])pears that this steamer liaurel, having accom- l)lished her object under British colors, instead of immedi- ately returning to tliis Kingdom, made her way through the blockade to the port of Charleston, where she changed her register and her name, and assumed to be a so-called Con- federate vessel. In this shape she next made her appearance at the port of Nassau as the 'Confederate States.' From that place she cleared, not long since, to go, via Madeira, to the same port of Liverpool, from whence she had origin- ally started. "It further appears that, notwithstanding tiie assumption of this new character, this vessel carried out from Nassau a ship mail, made up at the post oflice of that port, and transported the same to liiverpool. I have the honor to transmit a copy of a letter from the postmaster at that j)lace establishing that fiict. "Under these circumstances, I have the honor to inform your Lordship that I am instructed by my Government to remonstrate against the receipt and clearance with mails of this vessel from Nassau, and to request that such measures may be adopted in regard to her as may prevent her from thus abusing the neutrality of Her Majesty's territory, for the purpose of facilitating the operations of the United States."! To this Earl Russell replied "that Her Majesty's Gov- ernment are advised, that although the proceedings of the steamer Confederated States, formerly Laurel, may have 1 Vol. IH, page 339. ;i 286 lNSUR(iENT CRUISERS. rendered her liable to capture on the high seas by the cruisers of the United States, sJie has not^ SO far as is known, commitled any offense punishahle hy British law:'' From all these various facts, the United States ask the Tribunal of Arbitration to find and certify as to the Shen- andoah, that Great Britain has, by its acts and by its omissions, failed t^) fullill its duties set forth in the three rules of the Treaty of Washington, or recognized by the principles of law not inconsistent with such rules. Should the Tribunal exercise the power conferred upon it by the seventh article of the Treaty, to award a sum in gross to be paid to the United States, they ask that, in considering the amount to be awarded, the losses in the destruction of vessels and their cargoes by the Shenandoah, and the ex- pense to which the United States were put in the pursuit of it, may be taken into account. Summary. In the course of the long discussions be- tween the two Governments, which followed the close of the insurrection, it became the duty of Mr. Adams to make a summary of the points which he main- tained had been established by the United States. This he did in the following language, addressed to Earl Russell:- "It was my wish to maintain — "1. That the act of recognition by Her Majesty's Gov- ernment of insurgents as belligerents on the high seas before they had a single vessel afloat was precipitate and un- precedented. "2. That it had the effect of creating these parties bel- ligerents after the recognition, instead of merely acknowledging an existing fact. "o. That this creation has been since effected exclusively from the ports of Her Majesty's Kingdom and its depend- encies, Avitli the aid and co-operation of Her Majesty's subjects. » Vol. HI, page 341. Vol. Ill, page 533. ligli «eas by the )<, SO far as is Me hy British d States ask the as to the Shen- acts and by its rth in the three 3cognizcd by the h rules. Should upon it by the sum in gross to at, in considering he destruction of ah, and the ex- it in the pursuit g discussions be- which followed the duty of Mr. which he main- States. This he Earl Russell :- r Majesty's Gov- high seas before cipitate and un- hese parties bel- 3ly acknowledging Fected exclusively md its depend- f Her Majesty's page 533. fSLMMARY OF Tllli POINTS E.STABI.ISUKD. 287 "4. That during the whule course of the struggle in America, of nearly four years in duration, there has been no appearance of the insurgents as a belligerent on the ocean excepting in the shape of British vessels, constructed, equipped, supplied, manned, and armed in British ports. "5. That during the same period it has been the constant and persistent endeavor of my Government to remonstrate in every possible form against this abuse of the neutrality of this Kingdom, and to call upon Her Majesty's Government to exercise the necessary powers to put an effective stop to it. "6. That although the desire of Her ]Majesty"s Ministers to exert themselves in the suppression of these abuses is freely acknowledged, the efforts which they made proved in a great degree powerless, from the inefliciency of the law on which they relied, and from theii- absolute refusal, when solicited, to procure additional powers to attain the objects. "7. That, by reason of the failure to check this llagrant abuse of neutrality, the issue from British ports of a number of British vessels, with the aid of the recognition of their belligerent character in all the ports of Her Majesty's de- pendencies around the globe, has resulted in the burning and destroying on the ocean of a large number of merchant vessels, and a very large amount of property belonging to the people of the United States. "8. That, in addition to this direct injury, the action of these British built, manned, and armed vessels has had the indu-ect effect of driving from the sea a large portion of the commercial marine of the United States, and to a cor- responding extent enlarging that of Great Britain, thus enabling one portion of the British j)eOple to derive an unjust advantage from the wrong counnitted on a friendly nation by another jjortion. "9. That the injuries thus received by a country which has meanwhile sedulously endeavored to perform all its obligations, owing to the imperfection of the legal means at iuiL ' to prevent them, as well as the unwillingness to seek for more stringent powers, are of so grave a nature as in reason and justice to constitute a valid claim for reparation and indcmnilicatiou."' 1 Hi ■« - 288 INSUR(iENT CRUISERS. The United States, with confidence, maintain that every point thus asserted by Mr. Adams has been established by tlie proof hereinbefore referred to. In leaving in the Jiands of the Tribunal this j)art of their Case, they think it no im- propriety earnestly to call attention to the magnitude of the issues to be decided. Many a vindictive and bloody war has grown out of less pro- vocation than the United States thus suffered from a nation with which they supposed that they were holding friendly relations. On the 4th of July, 1777, during the war of the American Revolution, Lord Stormont whs instructed to say to the French Ministers that "the shelter given to the armed vessels of the rebels, the facility they have of disposing of their prizes by the connivance of the Government, a^id the conveniences allowed them to relit, are such irrefragable proofs of support, that scarcely more could be done if there was an avowtd alliance between France and them, and that we were in a . tate of war with that Kingdom." He was also directed to sav that bov^ever desirous of maintaining the peace. His Britannic Ma- jesty could not, "from his respect to his honor and his regard to the interest of his trading subjects, submit to such strong and public instances of suj)port and protection shown to the rebels by a nation that at th'^ same time professes in the strongest terms its desire to maintain the present harmony subsisting between the two Crowns." ^ The injuries inflicted upon the United States during the insurrection, jnder the cover of professions of friendship, are well described in this language of the Ministers of George in, except that the insurgents were allowed to burn, instead of assisted to disjjose of their prizes. But the United States, although just emerging from a successful war, with all the appliances of destruction in their grasp, preferred to await a better state of feeling in Great Britain, rather than follow the example of that Government in resorting to war. The time came when Her Majesty's Government felt that it would not be derogatory to the elevated position of their Sovereign, to express regret for the escape of the cruisers and for the ^ Vol. Ill, page 599. lintain that everv ill established bv 'n\ oat of less pro- froni a nation with friendly relations. ■ of the American say to the French lied vessels of the heir prizes by the iveniences allowed of support, that ti avowtd alliance ire in a .tate of ected to sav that lis Britannic Ma- or and his regard lit to such strong on shown to the professes in the present harmony Jtates during the of friendship, are rs of George III, burn, instead of 3 United States, ar, with all the erred to await a ther than follow g to war. The bit that it would their Sovereign, isers and for the srMMAKV !NTS liSTAHI-ISHKr). 281) di'pndfctions which they committed. '1 he United States, receiving this ex])ression of regret in the s[)irit in which it was made, stand before this Tribunal of Arbitn.tion to abide its judgment. If the facts which they bring here constitute, in the opinion of the Tribunal, no just cause for <'laim against (ireat ]5ritain, they must bow to the decision. Dut if, on the other hand, Grept ii!'itain shall not be able to explain to tiieir complete satisfaction the ciiarges and the proof which they jiresent, the United States will count upon an award to the full ex- tent of their demand. They feel tliat it is tiieir dutv to insist before this August Body, not only in their own hiterest, but for the sake of the future peace of tiie worUI, that it is not a ju't performance of the duties of a neutral to permit a belligerent to carry on organized war from its territories against a Power with which the neutral is at peace. If this Tribunal shall hold that combined operations like those of ]Jullock, Fraser, Trenholm & Co., Huse, Heyliger. and others, (which in the judgment of the United States con- stituted an organized war,) are legitimate, their decision will, in the opinion of the United States, lay the foundation for endless dissensions and wars. If wrongs like those which the United States suffered are held by this Tribunal to be no violation of the duties which one nation owes to another, the rules of the Treatv of Washington can have little effective force, and there will be little inducement for nations in future to adopt the j)eaceful method of arbitration for the settlement of their differences. If it was right to furnish the Nashville at Bermuda with a full supply of coal, suflicient to carry her to Southampton, instead of what might be necessarv for lier to retiirn to Charleston, the United States and the other maritime nations must accept the doctrine in the future. If there was no violation of international duty in receiving the Sumter at Trinidad, and in supplying her witli the fuel necessary to enable her to continue her career of destruction, instead of giving her what was requisite, with her sailing power, to enable her to return to New Orleans or Galveston, it is important that the maritime Powers should know it. If recoiiuized vessels of war, like the Sumter and the 19 limn^iMi I I I 290 INHl'RiJLNT t'RUISERt*. Georgia, may he lawfully Kold in a neutral port during time of war, the United States, as a nation whose normal condi- tion is one of neutrality, accept the doctrine. If the duties of a neutral in preventing, within its territory, the construction, arming, equipping, or litting out of vessels by one belligerent, which may be intended to cruise against the other belligerent, or the furnishing of arms or military supplies to such vessel, or the recruitment of men for such belligerent, are to be limited to the exercise of the powers conferred upon the neutral Government by municipal law, the United States, with their extended frontier on both oceans, have more interest than any other maritime Power in recog- nizing that fact. If the recognition of belligerency by a neutral, in favor of an organized insurrection, authorizes a so-called Govern- ment of insurrectionists to issue commissions, which are to protect vessels that may have violated the sovereignty of the neutral from examination, inquiry, or punishment by the neutral authorities when again within their jurisdiction, the United States, and other nations here » spresented, must hold themselves at liberty in future to conform to such measure of dutv, in that respect, as may be indicated by this Tribunal. If Georgias, Alabamas, Floridas, and Shenandoahs may be allowed to go out from neutral ports without violations ot international duty, to prey upon the commerce of friendly nations; if it be no offense to recruit men for them and to send the recruits to join them in Alars, Bermudas, l^ahamas,. and Laurels, the United States as a neutral will be relieved, when other States are at war, from a great part of the difficulties they encounter in watching a long line of coast. If Tallahassees and Ohickamaugas may be constructed in neutral territory, without violation of international duty, to serve as it may suit the pleasure of a belligerent, alternately either as blockade-runners or as men-of-war, those maritime nations whose normal condition is one of neutrality need not regret such a doctrine, when viewed, nor. in the light of principle, but as effecting their pecuniary interests. And if it be no offense, as in the cnse of the Retribu- tion, to take a captured cargo into a neutral port, and there KIMMAKY OK THE I'OINTS KSTAIMISIIKD. 291 )ort during time B normal condi- ^ • liin its territory, (f out of vessels to cruise against irms or military 3f men for such 3 of the powers f municipal law, • on both oceans. Power in recog- neutral, in favor lo-called Govern- as, which are to sovereignty of the ent by the neutral ition, the United 5t hold themselves asure of duty, in tribunal. nandoahs may be lOut violations ot nerce of friendly for them and to :mudas, Bahamas, I will be relieved, reat part of the i\(r line of coast, je constructed in national duty, to erent, alternately r, those maritime eutrality need not in the light of nterest*. e of the Retribu- al port, and there to dispose of it with the knowledge and without the interference of the local magistracy, the maritinie Powers, knowing that such buiccaneering customs are to be j)ermitted, will be the better able to guard agamst them. It vail depend upon ..his Tribunal to say whether any or all of these precedents are to be sanctioned and are to st«nd f ( 1* iiiture guidance. The conduct of The Trited States, in closing this branch 'r«Ted '" hh th^t' of the Case, desire to call tlie attention of the of Great Britain. Tribunal to the fact that they came out from this long and bloody contest without serious cause of com- plaint against any nation except Great Britain. The Executives of other nations issued notices to their citizens or subjects, enjoining upon them to remain neutral in the contest. Belgium issued a notice on the 25th of June, 1861, warning Belgians against engaging as privateers.^ The United States had never any cause of complaint in this respect against Belgium. The Emperor of the French, on the 10th of June, 18G1, issued a proclamation commanding his subjects to "maintain a strict neutrality in the struggle entered upon between the Government of the Union and the States which pretended to form a separate confederation."^ The United States refer to the foregoing recital of the proceedings against Mr Arman's vessels, as a proof of the fidelity with which the Imperial Government maintained the neutrality Avhich it imposed upon its subjects. The Government of the Netherlands forbade privateers to enter its ports, and warned the inhabitants of the Nether- lands and the King's subjects abroad not to accept letters of marque. 2 The United States have no knowledge that these directions were disobeyed. ^ Vol. IV, page 3. 3 Vol. IV, page 6. 2 Vol. IV, page 4. 10* 292 INSI'W(;KNT cuviskhs. I •»« The GovtTiiMU'ut of Portuf»;al .sliut the luirbors of tlio P()i'tu{j;uesc' dominions aIiall be allowed to proeure no j!iU|t|ilies."' Tiiese rules were enforced. The Alabama was refused the hospitality td' Brazilian ports in conse(]uence of viidations of the neutrality which the lOuiperor had determined t(t maintain. When the Tuscaloosa canie to St. (Catharine's from Simon's Hay, in November, 1803, she was refused supplies and ordered to leave, because slu' was a tender and prize of the Alabama, and was tainted by tin; aets (if that vessel. The. commander of the Shenandoah boarded a vessel between Cardift' and J5ahia, opened the manifest, and broke tlie seal of the Brazilian Consul: for this act his vessel, and any vessel which he might connnand, were excluded from Jirazilian ports. ^ The Imperial (Jovernment, in all these proceedings, appeared desirous of asserting its sovereignty, and of maintain- ing an honest neutrality. Mr. Fish, in one of his lirst utterances after he became Secretary of State, expressed the sense which the United States entertained of this difference between the conduct of Great 15ritain and that of other nations. " There; were other Powers,"' he said, "that were contemporaneous with I'^ngland in similar concessions: but it was in England only that that concession was supplemented by acts causing direct damage to the United States. The President is careful to make this discrimination, because he is anxious, as nmch a possible, to simplify the case, and to bring into view these subsequent acts, which are so important in determining the question be- tween the two countries."^ 1 Vol. VI, page 588. ^ Mr. Fish to Mr. Motley, May 15, 18G0, Vol. VI, page 4. Correspondence, ?, 18G5, part )>, PART vr. THE TRIBUNAL SHOULD AWARD A SUM IN GROSS TO THE UNITED STATES. oticr or the Ame- In tho openin<»' conferonce of the Joint High '''"'"in^'*'the''!j!,Tnt Commission rohithig to the Alabama Claims, ers High Commission, the American Commissioners stated the nature of the demands of the United States. Thev said that there were "extensive direct losses in the capture and destruction of a large number of vessels with their cargoes, and in the heavy national expenditures In the pursuit of the cruisers, and indirect injury in the transfer of a large part of the American commercial marine to the British flag, in the en- hanced payments of insurance, in the prolongation of the war, and in the addition of a large sum to the cost of the war and the suppression of the rebellion.*" They further said that the amount of the direct losses to individuals "which had thus far been presented, amounted to about fourteen millions of dollars, without interest, which amount was liable to be greatly increased by claims which had not been presented;" and that the direct loss to the Government "in the pursuit of cruisers could easily be ascertained by certificates of Government accounting ofiicers." They added that "in the hope of an amicable settlement, no estimate was made of the indirect losses, without prejudice, however, to the right of indemnification on their account in the event of no such settlement beinij niade."'^ ^ Ante, pages 2. A MUM IN (;m)SS SIIOULI) UK AWAUDKl). 29; ;) UM IN GROSS )f the Joint High Alabama Claims, tated the nature ■ said that there and destruction 2;oes, and in the of the cruisers, rge part of the flag, in the en- ongation of the the cost of the They further to individuals anted to about , which amount which had not the Government ascertained by ," They added int, no estimate judice, however, uit in the event vujectioii of th.> '^^*^ Hritish Connnissioners deelinetl to mak»^ ^fferbythfiBrUiiHii tiie "amicable settlement" which was proposed ComioissioiierM. • ., ^ ^, . ... , ^, ,,' ' . Terras of the Hub- on the part ot the United States. Ihe .louit '"'"Treat*/. *''* ^'^*' Commissiim then entered into negotiations which resulted in an agreement "in order to remove and adjust all complaints and claims on the part of the United States, and to provide for the speedy settle- ment of such claims," that all the claiujs "growing out of the acts committed by the several vt'ssels wliich liave given rise to the claims generically known as the Alabama Claims," should be referred to this Tribunal of Arbitration. It was further agreed that this Tribunal, should it fuid tliat Great Britain had, by any act or omission, failed to fullill any of the duties set forth in the rules in the sixth article of the Treaty, or recognized by j)rinciples of International Law not inconsistent with such rules, might then "proceed to award a sum in gross to be paid by Great Britain to the United States for all the claims referred to it." United States. 2. Claims tor the destruction of vessels and j)roperty under the flag of tlie United States. 3. Claims for damages or injuries to persons, growing out of the destruction of each class of vessels. In the accompanying Volume, \1L the Tribunal will rind ample data for deter- mining the amount of damage which should be awarded, in consequence of the injuries inflicted by reason of the destruction of vessels or property, wliether of the Government or of private persons. (Jovernmont ves- '^'^^^^ Government vessels destroyed were of 8el8. ly^Q classes — those under the charge of the Treasury Department, and those in charge of the Navy Depart- ment. The Tribunal of Arbitration will find in Volume VII detailed statements of this class of losses, certified by the Secretary of the Navy, or by the Secretary of the Treasury^ as the case may be. . . The United States reserve, however, as to this and as to all other classes of claims, the right to present further claims and further evidence in support of these and such further claims, for the consideration of this Tribunal; and also similar rights as to all classes of claims, in case this Tribunal shall determine not to award a sum in gross to the United States. The United States, with this reservation^ present a detailed statement of all the claims which have as yet come to their knowledge, for the destruction of vessels and property by the cruisers. The statement shows the cruiser which did the injury, the vessel destroyed, the several claimants for the vessel and for the cargo, the amounts insured upon each, and all the other facts necessary to enable the Tribunal to reach a conclusion as to the amount of the injury committed by the cruiser. It also shows the nature and character of the proof placed in the hands of the United States by the sufferers. The originals of the documents referred to are on lile in the Department of State at Wash- ington, and can l)e produced if desired. The United States only ask a reasonable notice, giving them suflicient oppor- tunity to produce them. Injuries to per- It is impossible, at present, for the United States to present to the Tribunal a detailed Merchant vessels. sons. n of vessels and ates. 3. Claims in 2 out of the le accompanying data for deter- be awarded, in >f the destruction (vernnient or of istroyed were of e charge of the ihe Navy Depart- . in Volume VII certilied by the of the Treasurv- ) this and as to nt further claims ind such further and also similar is Tribunal shall le United States* this reservation^ ■ all the claims the destruction statement shows destroyed, the ;o, the amounts essarv to enable amount of the lows the nature ds of the United the documents State at Wash- e United States uflicient oppor- for the United jnal Ji detailed SHOULD BE AWARDED. 297 statement of the damages or injuries to persons growing out of the destruction of each class of vessels. Every vessel had its officers and its crew, who were entitled to the i)rotection of the flag of the United States, and to be included in tlie estimate of any sum which the Tribunal may see lit to award. It will not be difficult, from the data which are furnished, to ascertain the names and the tonnage of the different ves- sels destroyed, and to form an estimate of the number of hardy, but helpless, seamen who were thus deprived of tlieir means of subsistence, and to determine what aggregate sum it would be just to place in the hands of the United States on that account. It cannot be less than hundreds of thousands, and possibly millions of dollars. Expenditures in '^^^^ United States present to the Tribunal pursuit of the a detailed statement of the amount of the national expenditure in the pursuit of the in- surgent cruisers, verified in the manner proposed by tlie American members of the Joint High Commission. The ag- gregate of this amount is several millions of dollars. Transfer of vessels '^^^^ United States ask the Tribunal of 10 the British flag. Arbitration to estimate the amount which ought to be paid to them for the transfer of the American com- mercial marine to the British flag, in consequence of the acts of the rebel cruisers. On the 13th of Mav, 1864. Mr. Cobden warned the House of Commons of the great losses which the United States were suffering in this respect. He said:^ "You have been carrying on hostilities from these shores against the people of the United States, and have been inflicting an amount of damage on that country greater than would be produced by many ordinary wars. It is estimated tliat the loss sustained by the capture and burning of American vessels has been about'j^i'l 5,000,000, or nearly ^£3,000,000 sterling. But that is a small part of the injury which has been inflicted on the American marine. We have rendered the rest of her vast mercantile property for the present value- less. Under the system of free trade, by which the com- 1 Hansard, 3d series, Vol. 175, pp. 490— 500; Vol V, page 589. 298 A SUM IN GROSS t . •.,, > .*«:> merce of the world is now so largely carried on, if you raise the rate of insurance on the flag of any Maritime Power you throw the trade into the hands of its com- petitors, because it is no longer profitable for merchants or manufacturers to employ ships to carry freights when those vessels become liable to war risks. I have here one or two facts which I should like to lay before the honorable and learned gentleman, in order to show the way in which this hHS been operating. When he has heard them, he will see what a cruel satire it is to say that our laws have been found sufficient to enforce our neutrality. I hold in my hand an account of the foreign trade of New York for the quarter ending June 30, 1800, and also for the quarter ending June 30, 1863, which is the last date up to which a comparison is made. I find that the total amount of the foreign trade of New York for the first -mentioned period was ^92,000,000, of which #62,000,000 were carried in American bottoms and #30,000,000 in foreign. This state of things rapidly changed as the war continued, for it ap- pears that for the quarter ending June 30, 1863, the total amount of the foreign trade of New York was #88,000,000, of which amount #23,000,000 were carried in American vessels and #65,000,000 in foreign, the change brought about being that while in 1860 two-thirds of the commerce of Nev. York were carried on in American bottoms, in 1863 three-fourths were carried on in foreign bottoms. You see, therefore, what a complete revolution must have taken place in the value of American shipping; and wliat has been the consequence? That a very large transfer has been made of American shipping to English owners, because the proprietors no longer found it profitable to carry on their business. A document has been laid on the table which gives us some important information on this subject. I refer to an account of the number and tonnage of United States vessels which have been registered in the United Kingdom and in the ports of British North America between the years 1858, and 1863, both inclusive. It shows that the transfer of United States shipping to English capitalists in each of the years comprised in that period was as follows: SHOULD BK AWAltDEI). 299 ried on, if you f any Maritime ids of its com- for merchants or iffhts when those Lve here one or re the honorable tie way in which ird them, he will \r laws have been I hold in my [ew York for the for the quarter date up to which ;al amount of the mentioned period were carried in reign. This state inued, for it ap- , 1863, the total vas #88,000,000, ried in American change brought of the commerce bottoms, in 1863 toms. You see, have taken place liat has been the las been made of ise the proprietors their business. A c '\\ gives us some 3fer to an account ites vessels which ;dom and in the the years 1858, t the transfer of ts in each of the ows: "In 1858, vessels 33, tonnage 1-2,684. "In 1859, vessels 49, tonnage 21,308. "In 1860, vessels 41, tonnage 13,638. "In 1861, vessels 126, tonnage 71,673. "In 1862, vessels J 35, tonnage 64,578. "In 1863, vessels 348, tonnage 252,570. ^ "I am told that this operation is now goin^- on as fost as ever. Now, I hold this to be tlie most serious aspect of the question of our relations with America. I care very little about what newspapers may write, or orators may utter, on one side or the other. We may balance oft" an inflammatory speech from an honorable member here against a similar speech made in the Congress at Washington. We may pair off a leading article published in New York against one published in London, but little consequence, I suspect, would be attached to either. The two countries, I hope, would discount these incendiary articles, or these incendiary harangues, at their proper value. But what I do fear in the relations between these two nations of tlie same race, is the heaping up of a gigantic material grievance, such as we are now accumulating bv the transactions connected with these cruisers; because there is a vast amount of individual suffering, personal wrong, and personal rancor arising out of this matter, and that in a country where popular feeling rules in public affairs. I am not sure that any legislation can meet this question. What with the high rate of in- surance, what with these captures, and what with the rapid transfer of tonnage to British capitalists, you have virtually made valueless that vast property. Why, if you had gone and helped the Confederates by bombarding all the accessible sea-port towns of America, a few . lives might have been lost which, as it is, have not been saeriliced, but you could hardly have done more injury in destroying property than you have done by these few cruisers." Enhanced rales of With the reservations already stated, the United States present the amount, so far as insiirauce. ^ In the year 1864 one hundred and six vessels were transferred to' the British flag, with an aggregate tonnage of 92,052 tons. 300 A SUM IN (iROSS -> :.^ it lias come to their knowledge, of the enhanced payments of insurance, caused by the acts of the insurgent cruisers. All of these cruisers came from England: and should the Tribunal lind Great Britain responsible for the injuries caused by their acts, it cannot be denied that the war risk was the result of their dispatch from British ports. The amount of this injury, so far as yet known to the United States, aj)pears in Vol. VII. Prolongation of It is impossible for the United States to the war. determine , it is perhaps impossible for any one to estimate with accuracy, the vast injury which these cruisers caused in prolonging the war. The great exertions which were made in the months of April, May, and June, 1863, to secure arms and ammunition for immediate use in Richmond have already been noted. Letter followed letter in rapid succession, urging Walker to forward the desired articles without delav. The energetic measures which Walker took to obtain coal to enable him to coniply with his instructions have been commented on. Tlie insurrection was at that moment gathering itself up for a blow wliich was intended to be linal and decisive. On the 29 th of April in that year Grant, having taken an army past the fortifications of Vicksburg, began the attack upon Grand Gulf, and from that day conducted his operations with such vigor, that, by the 21st of May he had defeated the armies of the insurgents in live pitched battles, and had commenced the investment of Vicksburg. In the Atlantic States the fortunes of the United States had been less favor- able. The army of tlie Potomac under Hooker had met witli a decided reverse at Chancellorsville, and was resting inactive after the failure. The military authorities at Richmond, having received the su}»plies whicli Walker had forwarded, selected this moment for a blow in Pennsylvania, which was intended at once to relieve Vicksburg, and decide the contest. History tells how utterly they failed. After three days of bloody lighting, Lee retired from Gettysburg discomfited. The same day Grant entered Vicksburg and opened the Mississippi. The 4th day of July, 1863, saw the aggressive force on SHOULD BK AWAHDKI). 301 enhanced payments insurgent cruisers. I: and should the the injuries caused the war risk was orts. The amount the United States, i United States to impossible for any iijjury which these in tlie months of IS and ammunition [•eady been noted, urging Walker to y. The energetic oal to enable him en commented on. ering itself up for id decisive, rant, having taken 5, began the attack cted his operations he had defeated i battles, and had In the Atlantic d been less favor- Hooker had met , and was resting iving received the icted this moment ;ended at once to History tells how lody lighting, Lee same day Grant ppi. mressive force on land of the insurrection crushed. From that (hiy its onlv hope lay in prolonging a defense until, by tlie continuance of the permitted violations of British neutrality by the in- surgents, the United States should become involved in a war with Great Britain. The insurgents liad, at that time, good reason to look for that result. The Florida, the Ala- bama, and the Georgia had left British ports for the pur- pose of carrying on war against the United States, and were, nevertheless, received with unusual honors and hospitality in all the colonial ports of Great Britain. Only ten days be- fore the battle of Gettysburg, the judge who presided at tiie trial of the Alexandra had instructed the jury that no law or duty of Great Britain had been violated in the construction and dispatch of the Alabama. About tliree months before that time Her Majesty's Government had decided that they would not recommend Parliament to enact a more effective law for the preservation of neutrality. Laird was constructing the rams in Liverpool under the existing interpretation of the law, and the British Government was refusing to inter- fere with them. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, five days before the battle of GettAsburo-, had declared in the House of Commons, speaking not individually, but in the i)lural, *'We do not believe that the restoration of the American Union by force is attainable." Under these circumstances the insurgents made great exertions to keep tlie Florida, the Alabama, and the Georgia afloat, and to stimulate their oflicers and crews to renewed destruction of the commerce of the United States. Thev counted, not without reason, upon inflaming popular passion in the United States by the continuance of these acts, until the people should force the Government into a retaliation upon Great Britain, the real author of their woes. In pursuance of this policy they with- drew tlieir military forces within the lines of Richmond, and poured money into Bullock's hands to keep afloat and in- crease his British-built navy, and to send it into the most distant seas in pursuit of the merchant marine of the I'nited States. Thus the Tribunal will see that, after the battle of Get- tysburg, the oifensi\i' o[)erations of the insurgents were con- 302 A SUM IN GROSS SHOULD BE AWARDED. , . «.# .». , .' ducted only at sea, through the cruisers; and observing that the war was prolonged for that purpose, will be able to determine whether Great Britain ought not, in equity, to reimburse to die United States the expenses thereby entailed upon them. On Jill these points evidence is presented which will enable the Tribunal to ascertain and determine the amount of the several losses and injuries complained of. To the amount , , . ^ thus shown should be added interest upon the Interest claimed . _ * to the date of claims to the day when the award is payable paymen . ^^ ^^^ terms of the Treaty, namely, twelve months after the date of tiie award. The usual legal rate of interest in the city of New York, where most of the claims of individuals are lield, is seven per cent, per annum. In some of the States it is greater; in few of them less. The United States make a claim for interest at that rate. The computation of the interest should be made from an average day to be determined. The United States suggest the 1st day of July, 1863, as the most equitable day. . They earnestly hope that the Tribunal will Reasons why a _ ♦' , gross sum should exercise the power conferred upon it, to award be awarded. . ^i "ii r^ i. -n -j. • a sum m gross to be paid by. Great Britain to the United States. The injuries of which the United States complain v/ere committed many years since. The original wrongs to the sufferers by the acts of the insurgent cruisers have been increased by the delay in making reparation. It will be unjust to impose further delay, and the expense of presenting claims to another Tribunal, if the evidence which the United States have the honor to present for the con- sideration of these Arbitrators shall prove to be sufficient to enable them to determine what sum in gross would be a just compensation to the United States for the injuries and losses of which they complain. Above all it is in the highest interest of the two great Powers which appear at this bar, that the causes of difference which have been hereinbefore sot forth should be speedily and forever set at rest. The United States entertain a con- lident expectation that Her Majesty's Goverment will concur with them in this opinion. RDED. d observing that will be able to t, in equity, to thereby entailed vhich will enable amount of the To the amount nterest upon the Lward is payable namely, twelve ual legal rate of st of the claims per annum. In them less. The that rate. Tlie from an average suggest the 1st lay. he Tribunal will pon it, to award y. Great Britain le United States The original asurgent cruisers reparation. It the expense of evidence which nt for the con- to be sufficient OSS would be a Jie injuries and f the two great ises of difference uld be speedily sntertain a con- ent Avill concur INDEX. rj.i;e. Adams, Charles Francis: day of probable arrival in London known in advance ol arrives in London 32 comments on negotiations regarding declaration of Paris 45 complains of doings at Nassau 143 complains of insurgent operations in British jurisdiction 154 says insurgent government is interested in blockade- running . . . • 176—178 further representations as to blockade-running . . . 180 representations as to the Honduras 180 notifies Earl Russel that sale of Sumter will not be recognized 203 informs Earl Russel of the character of the Florida 210 brings to Earl Russell's notice treatment of Florida in colonies 22G calls Earl Russell's attention to the Alabama . . . 230 sends Earl Russell affidavits regarding Alabama . . 234 confers with Earl Russell about the Alabama . . . 235 complains to Earl Russell of the Georgia 249 complains to Earl Russell of enlistments for the Georgia 251,252 complains to Etrl Russell of the Georgia . . . 254, 255 complains to Earl Russell about the Shenandoah 265, 283 complains to Earl Russell about the Laurel .... 284 Adams, John Qiincy: correspondence regarding claims of Portugal . . 84 — 87 Admiralty and colonial ijcstructions: of January 31, 1862, unfriendly to United States . . 141 abstract of those instructions 144 Agrippina, Tue: takes stores and coal to Alabama at Terceira . . . 237 takes coal to same at Martinique 240 304 INDKX. ■.XT*' >a Ajax, Iiik: * inquires as to 186 Alabama, Tub: short sketcli of 150 Lord Kussell thinks it a scandal to British laws . . 158 discription of 229 built for insurgent man-of-war 229 contracted for by Bullock 229 crew of, wages paid by Fraser, Trenholm & Co . . 230 customs officers report her a man-of-war 231 attention of Liverpool collector called to her . . . 232 he sees nothing w^rong in her 232 Mr. R. P. Collier's opinion taken as to 232 affidavits as to character of, obtained and officially communicated to British government 233 these affidavits remain a week unacted upon . . . 234 orders then given to detain 234 orders revealed and Alabama escapes 235 goes to Moelfra Bay and the Hercules follows next day with crew 236 gross inefficiency, or worse, of the collector .... 23G the Alabama proceeds to Terceira 237 receives arms, stores, and coal from Bahama and Agrippina 237 was adapted for warlike purposes when she left Liverpool 238 was fitted out there, at least in part 239 Semmes's opinion of the vessel 239 she receives coal from Agrippina at Martinique . . 240 is received at Jamaica as ^. man-of-war ...... 240 goes to Brazil and the (^ape of Good Hope .... 240 Mr. Adams complains to Earl Russell 240 her tender, the Tuscaloosa, (see Tuscaloosa) . . 242, 243 she coals at Singapore 242 coals again at Table Bay 242 is sunk off Cherbourg by the Kearsarge 243 reasons why Great Britain is liable for her acts . 244 Alar, Thk: takes arms and stores to the Georgia 249 Alexandua, Tiik: ruling of the court in the case of 98 seizure, trial, and acquittal 160 ruling of the court in, emasculated the foreign enlist- ment act of 1S19 162 Amkndmkxts: of numicipal laws may be asked by a belligerent. . 88 of law of 1819 asked by United States and refused 156, 156 186 150 ritish laws . . 158 229 229 229 olm & Co . . 230 ar 231 to her . . . 232 232 232 and officially 233 [ upon . . . 234 234 235 5 follows next 236 lector .... 236 237 Bahama and 237 hen she left 238 239 239 artinique , . 240 :...... 240 Elope .... 240 240 oosa) . . 242, 243 242 242 243 her acts . 244 240 98 160 breign enlist- .'. . . . 162 elligerent. . 88 d refused 156, 156 INDliX. 305 Ampiiion, The: . I'^^e inquiries as to ^on Archer, Tiik: career of »).>8 Arman. (See Bullock; France.) when arminj; a vessel is a violation of neutrality. . 97 should be prevented by due dilii^^ence i;i() Ayliffk: views as to dili-rence and ne<,dii;ence note 92 Bahama: takes out Florida's armament -jlo arrival at Nassau .jl2 arms and crew from, for Alabama 237 Barijadoes: a base of hostile operations '}-)\ Baring, Thomas: speech on the Georgia 2'o> Belgum: course of the government of, contrasted with that of the British government 291 Belligerents, (see Blockade; Russell:) insurgents recognized as 25 recognition determined upon before May 1, 1861 . 27 France consulted as to recognition 28 answer of the French government 2'.' President's proclamation .:ot then received 29 privateering of, legali?:ed by Queen's proclamation . 32 right to issue such proclamation not denied .... 35 it was an unfriendly act 36 and issued with an unfriendly purpose 36 may ask to have defective neutrality laws air»nded 88 Benjamin, Jidah P.: sends agent of insurgent war department to Nassau 138 Bermuda : (steamship) runs blockade with arms, &c 136 (island) well adapted as a depot of insurgent supplies 138 an insurgent depot established there 147 Bernard, Mr. Montagie: computes amount of cotton in 1861 note 135 statement regarding Fraser, Trenholm & (Jo. . note 136 describes Nassau , note 138 describes the Alexandra note 160 gives list of vessels detained by Great Britain ... 185 his criticism on Mr. Fish's dispatch not sustained . 187 his statement concerning the Florida note 216 his statement as to prosecutions for offenses against foreign enlistment act 251 20 ^ I 306 INDKX. •:-i-4 ■ ♦ i' Blackstone, Sir William: "'^*^ defines extent and force of law of nations 71 Blockade: notice of by proclamation 24 proclanoation of, when news of received in England 25 an imperfect copy submitted to law officers for opinion 27 Blockade-runners : general character of determined by insurgent govern- ment 13^8 converted into men-of-war, and vice versa 260 Blockade-rlnning : operations in 1862 146 operations in 1863 171 insurgent government interested in 174 complaints thereof to British government 176 answer that it is no offense 176 further proof of insurgent interest in 179 Buntschli, Dr.: definition of neutrality 73 criticism on the Alabama 105 Brazil: course of the government of, contrasted with that of the government of Great Britain 292 Bright, Mr. : views as to the Queen's proclamation 35 speech of, March 13, 1865 53 Bullock, James Dunwoody: sent to England by the insurgents 134 arrives there in the summer of 1861 149 has an office with Fraser, Trenholm & Co .... 149 contracts for Florida and Alabama 149, 22& superintends construction of rams 162 contracts for construction of men-of-war in France . 1G6 remittances to 168 writes Waddell to stop destruction by Shenandoah . 282 Burden of proof: thrown upon Great Britain to show that it exercised diligence 200 Cairns, Lord: definition of due diligence 96 comment on the word "escape" note 133 Calvo : collects authorities defining neutrality 74 Campbell, Lord : views as to effect of Queen's proclamation .... 33 was Lord Chancellor when proclamation issued . . 57 rage ns 71 24 J in England 25 ' officers for 27 rgent govern- 1&8 Ki 260 14G 171 174 It 176 176 179 73 105 with that of 292 35 53 134 149 Co ... . 149 . . . 149, 229 162 in France . 166 168 henandoah . 282 it exercised 200 96 . . . note 133 74 ion .... 33 \ issued . . 57 INDKX. 307 Canning, Mk.: ''"K" his opinion regarding ronduot of United Statos as a neutral (j2 Cape Town, (sec Tuscauioosa:) Alabama at 242 Georgia at 252 Chickamaloa: description t)f and her career .... 260 shifts from blockade-runner to man-of-war .... 260 reasons why Great Britain is liable for acts of . , 261 Claims of thk Unitkd States: general statement of, by American commissioners . 2, 295 rejection of, by British commissioners 3, 295 detailed statement of, where to be found and should be met by award of a gross sum 295, 3(»2 Clarence, The: career of 228 Coal, (see Alabama; Georgia; Florida; Shenandoah:) great need of insurgents of, at Bermuda, in 1863 173 what is a just rule regarding supplies of . . . note 204 permission refused to United States to deposit at Nassau 206 CocKBUBN, Sir Alexander: charge to jury in Highatt's case 248 Cobden, Richard : says Great Britain has recognized duty to detain vessels coming within its jurisdiction .... 100, 102 comments on loss of mercantile marine of United States 297 Collier, R. P.: solicitor general in 1863, and now attorney general. 232 his opinions in the Alabama matter 232, 233 Commission: as man-of-war, effect of on offending vessel .... 125 how regarded by France, Great Britain, Spain, and Portugal . . . • 129 Common law of England : international law is part of ... 35, 70 Compensation for injuries: when it should be made 82, 104 Confederate States. (See Insurrection.) Connecticut. repairs refused to, at Barbadoes 224, 278 Contraband of war: a ship constructed in a neutral port for the use of. a belligerent not to be coniounded with 119 opinion of Ortolan, as to 120 20* 308 INDKX. • * CONTKAIIAM) OK WAI{. Opinion of Hffltor, ns to l-M opinion of Cliicf Justice Marshall, as to ... . 124 dt'alin^s in, in what tlu' tradf at Nas.^an (lilV»'r»'i:x. ,*JUU -m l*»ue of u vessel, wlieii a violation of duties o\' a ncutml 97 slioidd bo pn'vcnte3 Lord llusscll thinks it a scandal to IJritish laws. . l')H Bullock makes c»mtract tor 20^ coals at Liverpool and registers as ii IJritish vessel 20!) armament for, shipped in the Bahama 209 clears for Palermo and Jamaica 211 customs officers report to be a man-of-war .... 211 arrives at Nassau 211 proceedings against, at Nassau '212 complaints as to, disregarded 214 civil authorities neglect duty in proceedings against 215 judge disregards law and evidence in decision as to 217 crew enlisted for, at Nassau 218 clearance of, for St. John's a fraud 218 receives arms and stores in British waters . . . 218 attempts to elude Spanish laws and fails 220 enters and leaves Alobile 2-^ coals and provisions in excessive quantities at Nassau 220 receives fresh suj)plies at Barbadoes in one month thereafter --•* protest of Admiral Wilkes as to . . -23 receives repairs at Bermuda .... 224 goes to Brest --'^ receives crew, armament, and machinery from Liverpool 22.) receives repairs and supplies at Bermuda 220 these repairs of, and supplies excessive 22(> termination of cruise at Bahia -- * career of tenders of -'-8 reasons why Great Britain is liable for acts of . . 228 FoRKiON Enlistment Act of 1819: is founded on the United States laws g2 intended to aid in performances of international duties ^*'* duties recognized by it b.> . ('7 commission to revise '" report of commissioners as to Gb object of proposed commission ^'^ inefficiency of the act • ^^^ propositions for amendment of 156, lo7 declined by Great Britain 150, 157 310 INDEX. sc ', s Foreign Enlistment Act of 1811): ^^* emasculated by ruling in Alexandra case 160 Foreign Enlistment Act op 1870: provisions of . . 69 judicial construction of 69 its object, to enable Great Britain to fulfill inter- national duties 69 France : joint action of, invited and secured '24 how regards the effect of a commission on a cruiser illegally fitted out 129 detains vessels constructed by Arman 166 course of, contrasted with Great Britain's 291 Fraser, Tresholm & Co. : firm of, when founded in Liverpool. lo5 treasury depositaries insurgents J 36 insurgent remittances to Bullock through 168 supply Walker with coal at Bermuda 174 pay wages of Alabama crew 230 Genet, (see Washington:) commissions French privateers in United States in 1793 7G Jefferson's rebuke of 77 Georgia, The: sketch of career 159 built for insurgents, description of 246 crew for, engaged and shipped in Liverpool .... 247 registered as a British vessel 247 armed from the Alar 249 negligence of British government as to 250 complaints of enlistments for 251 returns to Jjiverpool 252 her career sketched by Mr. Thomas Baring .... 252 goes into dock at Liverpool 255 captured by the Niagara 255 reason; why Great Britain liable for acts of . . . 255 Georgian A, The: inquiries as to 185 Gettysburg: preparations for the battle of 166, 173 Gladiator, The: insurgents contract in London to purchase .... 139 arrives in Nassau with arms and munitions of war . 139 gets permission to break bulk and transship .... 140 Gladstone, Right Hon. W. E. : declines to consider effect of Queen's proclamation on privateering 37 INDEX. 311 a cruiser Qclamation Gladstone, Right Hon. W. E.: ^"^^^ speech of October 7, 1862 52 13-2 speech of June 30, 1863 ............ ^ bj Gran Para, The: opinion of the court in the case of 124, 126 Granville, Lord: definition of due diligence 06 Great Britain, (see United States; Crimean war:) friendly relations of, with United States before 1860 15 various treaties with 15, 161T early informed of views of Mr. Lincoln's Government 22 joint action of, with France 24 invitation of, for such joint action unfriendly . . . 24 law of nations part of law of . . 34, TO conduct in Trent aflair 47 cabinet of, personally unfriendly to United States . 57 people of, with some exceptions, unfriendly .... 57 possible reasons for such unfriendliness 58 action of, influenced by it 60 its neutrality laws 62 — 70 proclamation of its neutrality * 32, 73 instructions to officials of, during insurrection ... 75 minister of, intervenes against course of Genet . . 77 reply of Mr. Jefferson to 77 duties recognized in its correspondence with United States 81 branches of insurgent government established in . . 136 admiralty instructions of, unfriendly to the United States .* 187 the base of the insurgent naval operations. 194 the arsenal of the insurgents 194 the systematic operations of the insurgents is a violation of its international duties 195 its neutrality partial and insincere 19(5 hostile and unfriendly acts tolerated in 196 abandons all diligence in advance 198 confidential instructions of, supposed to conflict with published instructions of January ol, 1862 . . . 271 course of, contrasted with the course of other Powers 293 Gross sum : reasons for awarding a, to the United States . . . 294 Hammond, Mr.: British minister to United States in 1793 77 complains of acts of Mr. Genet 77 receives Mr. Jefferson's reply . T7 Harowick, Lord: views as to privateering 33 I 312 INDEX. ■ Me, ■ ., , y. . »• Hautefkijlle: definition of neutrality 74 his views regarding construction of a vessel of wrar on belligerent account in neutral territory 105 Hawk, The: a blockade-runner, inquiries as to 185 Hector, The: built for Great Britain 185 Heffter: on contraband of war and the illegal construction of ships of war 121 Heyliger, Lewis: appointed agent at Nassau for disposal of insurgent cotton, and for shipment of arms and supplies . . 130 has confidential relations with colonial authorities . 141 operations of, in 1862, reviewed 147 takes charge of Florida and Bahama at Nassau , , 211 Hercules, The, (see Alabcma:) inquiries as to 18G HiCKLEY, Captain, R. N. : his opinion of the Florida at Nassau 212 Hlse, Caleb: sent to England by the insurgents 134 ships arms and munitions thence in 1861 136 ordered to ship purchases to West India Islands . . 145 operations of, in 1862, reviewed 147 Insurgents: government interested in blockade-running 176 make Great Britain the base of their naval operations 194 Insurrection, (see Belligerents:) secession of South Carolina and other States ... 18 election of president and vice-president 19 a large party in the South opposed to 20 letters of marque authorized 24 would have succumbed earlier but for aid from Great Britain 195 International, The: decision as to under foreign entlistment act of 1871 69 International Law: a part of the common law of England 34, 70 Iron clads, (see Lairds' rams:) insurgents' contract for six, in 1862 153 Jacquemyns. (See Ji'olin.) Jamaica : the Alabama at 240 Jay's Treaty. (See United States.) INDEX. 313 lel of war truction of !t of 1871 69 Jefferson, Mr.: ^'''S® reply to Mr. Hammond's representations 77 his views of the duty of a neutral nation 80 Joint High Commission : meeting at Washington 1 protocol of conferences 2 Jones & Co.: ship crew for Georgia in Liverpool 247 trial of members of, before Sir Alexander Cockburn 24S Klingender, M. G. & Co. : , connected with Fraser, Trenholm & Co . . . . note 202 purchase the Sumter at Gibraltar 202 and pay the wages of Alabama crew note 202 Laird, John: speech of, April 27, 1863 53 & Son's contract for Alabama 149 and accompany her as far as the buoy when slie sails 236 Lairds' rams: contract for and construction 162 various representations by Mr. Adams, as to ... . 164 Lord Russell refuses to interfere with 1G4, 165 the seizure and detention of, not an abandonment of previous lax rule by British government .... 165 Laurel, The: takes arms and crew to Shenandoah 263 Mr. Adams complains of 284 Lewis, Sir George Cornwall: says a proclamation will be issued by the Queen 31 opinion as to the duties of neutrals 34 Lincoln, President. (See United States; Blockade:) elected President 18 inaugurated 22 convenes Congress, and calls out militia 24 Liverpool: branches of insurgent government etablished at 136 collector of, notified as to Alabama 232, 233 LoL'iSA Ann Fanny, The: inquiries as to 186 Lyndhurst, Lord : views as to law of England and duties of neutrals . 34 Maffitt, Commander : arrives in Nassau 140 sends to Bullock men discharged from Florida 168 ships crew for Florida at Nassau 218 Mansfield, Lord: opinion in case of Russian ambassador 71 314 INDEX. Marshall, Chief Justice: ''^* opinion in the Gran Para case. ....... 124, 126 on the effect of a conamission upon a man-of-war , 126 Maury, The bark: seized by request of British minister at Washington 81 seizure without cause and discharged 81 Melbourne. (See Shenandoah.) Mercantile Trading Company; form partnership with insurgent government .... 174 Monroe, James: correspondence regarding claims of Portugal .... ,83 Municipal laws: designed to aid in performance of international duty 62 international obligation not dependent upon them 62, 130 an evidence of the nation's sense of its duties ... 62 neutral bound to enforce 130 belligerent may require enforcement of 130 and enactment of new, if existing laws insufficient . 130 Great Britain held legai proof of violation of, to be necessarv before its action as a neutral could be required 232 Municipal proclamation: the United States had a right to expect the enforce- ment of 81 Nashville, The : escapes from Charleston 206 receives excessive; supply of coal at Bermuda . . . 206 burns the Harvey Bircli 207 arrives at Southampton 207 proceeds to Bermuda and coals there 207 reasons why Great Britain should be held responsible for acts of 207 Nassau: well adapted for a depot of insurgent supplies . . . 138 made an insurgent depot and base of operations .note 138, 139 Mr. Adams complains of, to Lord Russell ..... 143 made depot for quartermaster's stores 175 civil authorities of, act in interest of insurgents . . 214 Netherlands: course of government of, contrasted with that of Great Britain 291 Neutrality: definitions of, by Phillimore, Bluntschli, Hautefeuille and Lord Stowell 73, 74 duty to observe 129 failure to observe as to San Jacinto and Honduras . 180 INDEX. 315 . . . 124, 126 an-of-war . 126 Washington 81 ... 81 ent 174 igal .... • 83 ational duty 62 )on them 62, 130 duties ... 62 . . 130 130 insufficient . 130 on of, to be ral could be 232 the enforce- 81 206 muda . . . 206 . . 207 .... 207 207 d responsible 207 upplies , . . 138 tions.notel38,139 ell. ... . H3 175 surgents . . 214 with that of 291 Hautefeuille .... 73, 74 129 d Honduras . 180 Neutrality laws, (see Forei(/n Enlistment Art:) '"^* of United States enacted at request of Great Britain 80 Neutrals, (see Paris; Belliyerents; Treaty of Washington:) duties of, as defined in the treaty of Washington . 9, 89 duties and rights of, as defined in the declaration of Paris 39 animus of the sole criterion according to Lord Westbury 59 bound to enforce municipal laws in belligerent's favor 63, 130 Neutrals : duties of, recognized in the Queen's proclamation . 73, 74 bound to enforce municipal proclamations ... 81, 13' bound to use all the means in its power to prevent violations of their neutrality 82, 131 when liable to make compensation 82, 131 should amend defective neutrality laws when requested by belligerents 88, i;>0 when should institute proceedings to prevent violations of neutrality 88 should detain offending vessels coming within their juris^iiction 100, 130 should not permit their ports to be made the base of hostile operations 102, 131 summary of the duties of, as applicable to this case 129 — 131 obligations of, as to an offending vessel, not dis- charged by commission as man-of-war 131 nor by evasion of municipal law 131 when they may not set up a deposit of the oft'ense 131 North : sent to England by the insurgents 134 Miss, names the Virginia, (or Georgia) 240 Oreto. (See Florida.) Ortolan, Theodore: views of, as to construction of men-of-war for belli- gerents in neutral ports HI says such vessel not to be confounded with ordinary contraband of war 118 Palmer, Sir Roundel : ' his definition of due diligence 96 his statement of the opinions of British lawyers . note 100 his views as to the effect of a commission upon an offending vessel 124 his speech on the Georgia 254 Palmehston, Lord: thinks separation must take place 31 awaiting opinion of law officers 31 speech of, March 27, 1863 5^^ 1. *t 316 INDEX. li "■ ■■ * t' Palmerston, Lord: speech of, June 30, 18t>3 56 speech of, July 23, 1863 63 minatory conversation with Mr, Adams 145 Pampero, The: seizure of, and trial 162 Paris, Declaration of: unfriendly course of Great Britain as to, detailed 37 — 47 Phantom, The: a blockade-runner 185 Phillimorb, Sir R. J. : decision in the case of the International 69 definition of neutrality 73 Pieuantom: criticism on the Alabama . 113 Portugal: abstract of correspondence between and the United States 82—88 principles recognized by, in that correspondence . . 88 recognizes international duty to make compensation for injuries committed by cruisers fitted out in neutral port 104 how regards eft'ect of commission on such cruiser . 129 course of government of, contrasted with that of British government 291 Prioleau, Charles K. : ■ managing member of Fraser, Trenholm & Co. ... 136 becomes naturalized as British subject ....... 136 Privateering: declaration of congress of Paris, as to 39 Great Britian willing to legalize with insurgents . . 42 but not with tlie United States 44 Proclamation: announcing blockade. (See Blockade.) recognizing insurgents as belligerents. (See Belligerents.) the Queen's, a recognition of the international duties of Great Britain 61 such duties recognized by it defined 73, 75 Prosecutions. ("See Bernard.) Prussia : course of government of, contrasted with that of British government 292 Hams. (See Lairds' rams.) Rappahannock : short sketch of 182 is detained by French authorities 182 INDKX. 317 Page 56 63 U5 162 >, detailed 07—47 185 ..... 69 73 113 1 the United 82—88 londenee . . 88 lompensation itted out in 104 ch cruiser . 129 vith that of 291 & Co. . . . 136 ..... 136 39 isurgents . , 42 44 Belligerents.) tional duties 61 Russell, Lord John, (see Russell, Earl., where references to are indexed:) created Earl Russell during insurrection 57 Russell, Ear;<, (see Dallas; Adams, Charles Francis:) promises to await Mr. Adams's arrival 23 discusses independence with insurgent commissioners 28 calls the United States the Northern portion of the late Union ;iO is doubtful June 1, 1861, whether there is a war . 32 speech of, October 14, 1861 51 speech of, February 5, 1863 52 speech of, June 9, 1864 56 says the insurgents build ships of war in Great Britain because they have no ports of their own .... 132 reply to Mr. Adams's complaints regarding Nassau. 143 declines to act on Mr. Adams's complaints regarding insurgent operations in February, 1863 155 declines to advise amendment of foreign enlistment act \ . . . 156, 157 says the Alabama and Oreto are a scandal to British laws 158 thinks the interest of the insurgent government in blockade-runners should notbe interfered with 176,177,181 letter to Mason, Slidell, and Mann 193 reply to Mr. Adams's note regarding sale of Sumter 302 sends Mr. Adams the report of customs officers on the Florida 2U reply to Mr. Adams regarding treatment of Florida at Bermuda 227 tells Mr. Adams to refer evidence about Alabama to Liverpool collector 230 conference with Mr. Adams after escape of Alabama 235 !> ' ;" 318 INDEX. ii i • t Ri'SSELL, Earl, (see Dallas; Adams, Charles Francis:) **^ says Alabama was partly fitted out in Great Britain 230 reply to Mr. Adams's complaints about Georgia . . 249 forwards Bullock's letter to Waddell 281 reply to Mr. Adams's complaints regarding Laurel , 285 Russia: course of the government of, contrasted with that of Great Britain 292 Russian Ambassador : arrest of, in time of Queen Anne 71 Saldanha's expedition : arrest of at Terceira 119 Salisbury, Marquis of: speech of, when Lord Robert Cecil 58 San Jacinto: how treated at Barbadoes 223 Santisima Trinidad: opinion in case of 121 Sea-King, The: (See She?iandoaIi.) ••; Semmes, Raphael, (See Alabama:) his opinion of the Alabama 239 Seward, Mr.: instructs Mr. Adams to complain of insurgent operations made from British jurisdiction 154 Ships. (See Vessels.) Shenandoah, The; or Sea-King : short sketch of 183 built in Clyde, and attracted Dudley's attention . . 262 description of 262 sold to father-in-law of Prioleau 262 sails armed, and under command of Corbett, a well- known blockade-runner 263 her officers and crew sail from Liverpool in the Laurel 263 is armed from the Laurel at Madeira 264 is short of men 265 arrives at Melbourne 267 her transfer to the insurgents known there in advance of her arrival 267 representations as to , by United States consul to authorities 267 captain of, asks permission to coal and make repairs 268 permission granted 268 delay in reporting what repairs were necessary . . 269 report as to repairs made five days after arrival . . 269 permission to repair again granted 270 captain is requested to name day when he can go to sea 270 INDEX. 319 T. . . Page trdticiS:) Great Britain 239 Georgia . . 249 281 iing Laurel . 285 with that of 292 71 119 58 223 121 239 ent operations 154 183 attention . . 262 2C2 262 rbett, a well- 263 in the Laurel 263 264 265 267 re in advance 267 es consul to 267 make repairs 268 268 ecessary . , 269 er arrival . . 269 270 n he can go 270 Shenandoah, the; ok Sea-King: ^'"^° many men are illegally enlisted for crew of . . , 270 proceedings as to, in colonial legislature 271 correspondence with colonial authorities regarding enlistments for 271 enlistments continue; repairs suspended 272 repairs resumed and completed 273 three hundred tons of coal taken from a transport sent for the purpose from Liverpool 273 consul furnishes proof of illegal enlistments to colo- nial authorities 273 no action taken thereon 274 number and notoriety of enlistments 275 — 276 no supplies or coal needed for 277 repairs prolonged to enlist men 277 no repairs needed 278 critical examination of report of repairs, . . . 278 — 282 returns to Liverpool 282 violations of neutrality by 283 reasons for holding Great Britain liable for acts of 286 Singapore: Alabama coals at 242 Slavery : opposition to the limitation of, the cause of secession 19 Spain: recognizes international duty to make compensation for injuries by cruisers fitted out in violation of international duty 104 how, regards the effect of a commission on such cruisers 129 course of the government of, contrasted with that of the British government 292 Stoerkodder, The; or Stonewall: short sketch of career of 167 Story, Mr. Justice: definitions of diligence 93, 95 opinion in the case of the Santisima Trinidad. . . 121 Stephens, Alexander H.: vice-president of insurgent government 19 his views as to slavery 20 his speech against secession . 20 Sumter: proceedings at Gibraltar as to . . 152 proceedings at Trinidad as to 153 coals at Trinidad 200 arrives at Gibraltar 201 shut up there by Kearsage 201 I 'i 320 INDKX. * SlMTEU: ^''^' sold under protest of United States consul .... '201 treatment of, a partiality toward insurgents .... "202 reasons why Great Britain liable for acts of . . . 205 SiMTKR, Fokt: surrender of 23 Swedish vessels: the case of 115 Tacony, The: career of 22H Tallahassee, The: fitted out in London as a privateer. . 258 her career 258 what was done at Halifax as to 259 reasons why Great Britain liable for acts of . . . 250 Tentekuen, Lord: memorandum on neutrality laws G2 says privateering was suppressed by reason of the course adopted by Washington 79 Terc'Eira, (see Saldanhas expedition:) Alabama arrives there 237 Transshii'Ment of contrauand of war: the permission in colonial ports a failure to perform the duties of a neutral 140 injurious to the United States 140 Treaty of Washington : expresses rej^ret at escape of the cruisers G terms of submission of claims of the United States C! meeting of the arbitrators, provisions for 7 time for delivery of cases and evidence 8 time for delivery of counter cases and evidence . . 8 when originals must be produced 9 duties of agents of each government 9 counsel may be heard 9 rules applicable to the case, (see Neutrak) . . . , 9, 96 award, when and how made 10 board of assessors, how constituted and duties of . 11 the lirst clause in the first rule to be found in United States neutrality law of 1794 91 what is due diligence 91 — 97 fitting out, arming, or equipping, each an offense 97 reasons for words "specially adapted," &c 97 continuing force of second clause of lirst rule . . . lOO limitation and explanation of second rule 102 recognizes obligation to make compensation for in- juries 10-1 Treaty of 1794. (See Cnitcd States.) INDKX. B2I nsnl .... •201 ;ents .... •202 cts of ... •205 23 iin 22 H 258 258 259 LCtS of . . . 259 G2 reason of the 79 237 lire to perform 140 140 ers <; United States (^ fl or i e 8 evideuoe . . 8 9 9 9 •a Is) .... 9,96 10 1 duties of . 11 )und in United 91 9J 97 an offense . 97 kc 97 rst rule . . . 100 lie 102 sation for in- 104 TisDNUOLM, (jii:oiu;K A.: ^*^'""' l)riiieipal ujernber of firm of Fraser, Trenliolm & Co., and secretary of insurfjcnt treasury 135 TiiENT. (See (haat liritain.) Trimoao: The Sumter at .............. . 153,202 TCSCALOO.S.V, OU CONR.M): ;i prize captured by the Alabama 168 claims to be received at Cape Town as a tender 168 is seized, then released, and received as man-of-War 169 this decision reversed in London 170 comes again to Cape Town and is seized ..... 170 this act disapproved in London 171 TwKNTY-rOUR IIOIRS' RILE: contained in admiralty and colonial instructions . , 144 L'lSlTEi) States, (see Gre<.xt Ih-itain; Wdshii/gfo/t:) relations with Great Britain befort; 1860 friendly 15 various treaties with Great Britain 15 — 16 number of States and Territories in 1860 . note 17 election of Mr. Lincoln as President 18 secession of South Carolina and other Statf neutral as sole criterion .... 59 says United States may use Queen's proclaniation to prove animus 59 says ship should not be built in neutral port by bel- ligerent with view to war 114 Wii.KES, Admiral : coj'respondencc with governor of Bermuda .... 223 ■ C: y >. • « • 79 70 561 .. . n . • ■ 57 59 amaticn to 59 )ort by bel- \U PRINTKIJ BY F. A. r.ROCKHAL'$ IN LeIIZIO. • ♦•• ..» " ".i i M 1 I ■;^^ I f . ( I . . T . ■ '1 I m I ■■-55P^'^ t-^-.^iya. WtLIL. I \9 r mi 1 »n»**jn«pf V„ nil. S. K. rOAS I I ,■■. i H'mU /i 1 .VI' 'k..-> t« III)- HIUTfSH WFST INDIA I'OIiO.VIF.S . wi!,M)N<;r ^ V' ^^' T i: '-V il) s t .i/,.A(7«i^ .d'«" ^■,!n"l _. _![ ^{ 'ja^^^SLji ^-.•■.-^' !i.^-^^ /CttaiuUlettr I' . --■x' ' . • ■? ■ ^'^"hiippl It lor litis L Whruli /jl \S Ccilar'hy Htvs \ r M s\ ^ ^6,; . , -•^v-- > ToHu^aa ■;.•■■', i. ! ^r ^H ^'i{.V/jl.i il ' <\\ ..1. X-, -J- Camaetht L .,. y i V'X 1 -v Q G L' A T E M A ij .^ ■ • Swu/i !•! \\^- '-x. V. tf •! to ^yjnv /=•■ yVir .vA./rfftV j.arU tu-t British /M>j.M.ii.ms. H o N n r R A s > "^it^.. & r-X '/ M^.; ■• t,irrt TV J. It-- ■-^^••I'-'V "•«»■""' ■ f^tr^'^T!' Tfcrr-r- .i ^\ f •<>;rr6'iivi ■i^' -tJBKJfcTiJW* \»'!'>( irf iU>'' *'V.- ^ ' WIKMINttT' r" ''•^**jffr- t-%«ia'k'>« * J*fl*««*v-i* "o J ! ^ I- '*»f' : ^--^ . «'S , I'JAi, ;;;"1;::::;::::-:::: "C;:".^;?r--rvi.'K»»«.i^ ""''""""'" ■i.. "> ^. -.'-■.vrfsAi-.; lor *» '» Ilu-^KIIM .'l/„/,i. .trt.V --. J,> Suiuiina t iiv / <5=.. p. ■'•'^s.^iV •. """^ "^Z '■■■■ i>-^^^-'/ .■». •^ AJarf^uniia ..«nl^'' ...u f^ ^ •>* '-- 5 ^"- I. 1. T )pcttoiuiii ifs ' < r * • — i \— '., 1./ ■'I *'''' /. < _.„!-' Iv. ^^ ^v --!■ ' * f. Hiirburfii Snn«n CruT"^ ''..,? "l 1^ S' CiiriiiloiilitrB ^- ^Mo^^t»(.*l•^I^' fiuRdnloupp'"^ ■'? '^llonilniru' MiirlitilquMi,.. J S' Mn.o t() 0.. '•"\ rlitwn TWit; -*.-»■**»"" ■( H A N A 1) A ^-^ ^ ^' / f t A_ '^ ^ r Vi'>( 111" !!l>" ''V' ■ I >