Papers Relating to Foreign Affairs, Accompanying the Annual Message of the President to the Second Session Thirty-eighth Congress, Part I

Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward.

No. 584.]

Legation of the United States, London, January 28, 1864.

Sir: I have to acknowledge the reception of despatches from the department numbering from 801 to 811, inclusive.

Of these, Nos. 801 and 804, relate to the alleged enlistment of British subjects in the Kearsarge. They direct me to reopen the subject of the conduct of Mr. Eastman and Commander Winslow, as if it were still made a matter of remonstrance by the British government. I do not understand this to be the case. Since my note to Lord Russell, of the 14th December, reporting the reply of Commander Winslow, I have perceived no indication of any disposition to dwell further on the matter. It does not appear that any representation has been made through Lord Lyons to you at Washington. To renew the question under such circumstances would seem rather to imply uneasiness in the strength of our position, and over earnestness in satisfying unreasonable complaints. I have for these reasons concluded to defer any action under these instructions until either Lord Russell shall take some new step in the matter, or else you, after becoming fully possessed of the case, as it now stands, shall, nevertheless, still incline to have me take the prescribed course.

So likewise, your despatches, Nos. 805 and 807, direct me to make representations as to the conduct of the colonial authorities in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick in the case of the steamer Chesapeake. But the latest intelligence received from America leads me to suppose that the decision in that case has been, on the whole, as favorable as could be desired. Inasmuch as this is not, however, as yet put in any shape that can be absolutely depended upon, I have thought it best to put off taking any action under these instructions until the actual facts are ascertained.

For many reasons I hold it wise, just at this moment, not to crowd too many complaints upon the government here, and especially those which do not rest upon the firmest foundations. We have enough of this kind to embarrass them without resorting to others. In connexion with this subject, I may as well mention, that, owing to the difficulty of presenting the remonstrance contained in your despatch, No. 783, of the 8th of December, against the action of the son of the British consul at San Juan, in Porto Rico, I deferred doing so in writing until I could see Lord Russell to speak to him about it. The trouble was this: In the first place, the name of the party complained of was not given. Secondly, I could not find in the official list that there was any British consular officer at all set down to San Juan. The other day when I had an interview with Lord Russell, I took the opportunity to refer to the matter. One of the under secretaries was called in to verify the official list. It turns out that there must have been some mistake in your information as to the person, for there is no British consul at San Juan.

At the same interview I entered upon the line of argument with his lordship which you have marked out for me in several of your late despatches, a large part, but not all of which had been already embraced in my note to him of the 19th, a copy of which was sent to you with my No. 579, of the 21st instant, and is repeated in a note specially based upon your despatch No. 806, of the 11th of this month, a copy of which will accompany this. I alluded to the critical state in which the reciprocity treaty might be put by the omission satisfactorily to dispose of these multiplying causes of difficulty on the boundary, enlarged upon the aggravated nature of the violations habitually and audaciously committed by the rebels against the neutrality of Great Britain, and urged the expediency of some positive action in advance of any possible settlement of the differences in America, which might serve to rectify any popular impression that may have been made as to the proclivities of England during this war.

The conversation which followed was scarcely official on either side. His lordship led me to infer that he had himself been so much impressed with the expediency of doing something that he had proposed to the members of the cabinet to send an armed vessel to the confederate authorities, with an officer instructed to remonstrate, but they had not thought it best to sanction the measure. From this it would appear that the obstacle to action does not lie with him.

I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,

CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS.

Hon. William H. Seward Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.

Mr. Adams to Earl Russell.

Legation of the United States, London, January 25, 1864.

My Lord: I have the honor to present to your consideration copies of certain papers taken in steamers engaged in violating the blockade, the originals of which are on file in the district court of the United States for Massachusetts.

It would appear that this evidence furnishes another strong instance of the manner in which the insurgents habitually abuse the belligerent privileges which have been conceded to them by Great Britain. With the manifest design to protect British subjects who navigate the ships and cargoes purchased by them in this kingdom, and intended to violate the blockade, they give particular directions, forbidding any sign to be made on board or in foreign ports of their ownership. The facilities and privileges these vessels now enjoy by the use of the British flag are, it would seem, not to be curtailed; however, the reputation of her Majesty’s government, as earnestly desiring to maintain neutrality, may be implicated by the fraud.

It must be obvious 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 treated as enemies, and if taken, to be reckoned as prisoners of war. If the flag of the kingdom be fraudulently used to cover the enterprises of the enemy, it will become very difficult to distinguish between those persons actually engaged in their vessels, and those bona fide employed by British owners. A new form of severity may thus be given to the struggle which would be regretted by none more than by my government. Much as the difficulty of their task has been aggravated by the wanton and persistent interposition of British subjects, it has never been their disposition to treat them, when in their power, with unnecessary harshness.

I am pained, in this connexion, to call your lordship’s attention to the fact that Lieutenant Rooke, of her Majesty’s army, after being taken in a steamer running the blockade, and released, has been detected in attempting to carry a contraband mail to Bermuda, to be delivered to insurgent agents at that place.

After the conversation which I had the honor to hold with your lordship on Friday last, I deem 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, as they have been laid before you for your notice. It would be difficult to find an example in history of a more systematic and persistent effort to violate the neutral position of a country than this one has been from its commencement that has not actually brought on a war. That this has been the object of the parties engaged in it, I have never for a moment doubted. Wearied, exhausted, and discouraged, as they notoriously are at this time, they still relax no effort that may bring to them some hope of relief from this source, the only one left to them. I entertain the strongest hopes that the wisdom and prudence of both governments will persevere in searching for the best means of making this expectation as vain as have proved all the others thus far cherished by them.

It has been no part of my instructions to address any argument on the subject to your lordship, based purely upon the possible consequences of permitting any similar toleration of such notorious enterprises in a neutral country to be brought into a precedent in future cases between belligerents. The fact that it must place an instrument of enormous power in the hands of weak nations on the ocean to annoy the stronger ones is too apparent to need exposition. I know not that, viewed as a pure question of interest to the United States, whenever it may again become a neutral power, there would be much reason to object to it. The great and serious difficulty is, to all nations, that it furnishes incentives to a constant extension of the ravages of war on the ocean, equally to he deplored by all—an effort which it has been, of late years, the earnest desire of all to endeavor to restrict rather than to expand.

I pray your lordship to accept the assurances of the highest consideration with which I have the honor to be, my lord, your most obedient servant

CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS

Right Hon. Earl Russell, &c., &c., &c.