Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.
Earl Russell to Mr. Adams.
Foreign Office,
September 1, 1863.
Sir: You have already been informed that
the depositions enclosed in your letters of the 11th, 16th and 25th
of July, and 14th ultimo, relative to the iron-clad vessels in
course of construction at Messrs. Laird’s yard at Birkenhead, had
been forwarded to the proper department of her Majesty’s government,
in order that such steps might be adopted as could legally and
properly be taken, and I have now the honor to communicate to you
the result of the inquiries which have been instituted.
In the first place, her Majesty’s government are advised that the
information contained in the depositions is in a great measure mere
hearsay evidence, and generally that it is not such as to show the
intent or purpose necessary to make the building or fitting out of
these vessels illegal under the foreign enlistment act.
Secondly, it has been stated to her Majesty’s government, at one
time, that these vessels have been built for Frenchmen, and at
another that they belonged to the viceroy of Egypt, and that they
were not intended for the so-called Confederate States. It is true,
that in your letter of the 25th of July you maintain that this
statement as regards French ownership is a pretence, but the
inquiries set on foot by her Majesty’s government have failed to
show that it is without foundation. Whatever suspicion may be
entertained by the United States consul at Liverpool as to the
ultimate destination of these vessels, the fact remains that Mr.
Bravay, a French merchant residing at Paris, who is represented to
be the person upon whose orders these ships have been built, has
personally appeared and has acted in that character at Liverpool.
There is no legal evidence against Mr. Bravay’s claim. nor anything
to affect him with any illegal act or purpose, and the responsible
agent of the customs at Liverpool affirms his belief that these
vessels have not been built for the confederates.
Under these circumstances, and having regard to the entire
insufficiency of the depositions to prove any infraction of the law,
her Majesty’s government are advised that they cannot interfere in
any way with these vessels.
I can only assure you that a careful watch shall continue to be
maintained over them, and that if any act or proceeding contrary to
the statute can be shown by trustworthy evidence to have taken
place, or if any trustworthy person will furnish her Majesty’s
government with such declaration as may suffice to justify the
detention of the vessels till further inquiry can be made, I will
apply to the treasury to prevent the departure of these vessels till
such further inquiry can be made.
But I am sure you will be disposed, in justice to her Majesty’s
government, to admit that, in the absence of all evidence upon mere
hearsay, surmise, conversation and conjecture, her Majesty’s
government could not properly direct a prosecution or action under
the foreign enlistment act. A court of justice would never condemn
in the absence of evidence, and the government would be justly
blamed for acting in defiance of the principles of law and justice
long recognized and established in this country.
I feel the more convinced that such will be your opinion, as Mr.
Seward, in answering a note of Lord Lyons respecting a supposed plan
of issuing letters of marque in behalf of the Japanese government,
says: “Prosecutions, however, cannot, it is presumed, be set on foot
without affidavits of credible witnesses, as in other cases of
imputed misdemeanors and crimes.”
Such are in fact the principles of American as well as of British
law.
I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your
most obedient, humble servant,
Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &c., &c., &c.
