Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, Transmitted to Congress with the Annual Message of the President, December 5, 1870
No. 91.
Mr. E. B. Washburne to Mr. Fish.
Sir: I have the honor to inclose you herewith certain proceedings of meetings held by the diplomatic corps, which may be taken in connection with my dispatch No. 301, under date of the 4th instant, and which are in a measure explanatory thereof.
meeting of the diplomatic corps.
In accordance with a previous notice, the diplomatic corps met at the residence of the Pope’s nuncio at eleven o’clock on Tuesday, the 4th day of October, 1870. Twenty-one members of the corps were present.
The nuncio reported to the meeting that, in pursuance of the previous action of the body, he had seen Mr. Jules Favre, and had verbally requested him to communicate with Count Bismarck for the purpose of ascertaining, first, whether he would give notice to the diplomatic corps of a bombardment; and, second, whether he would permit a courier to pass the Prussian military lines to take out and bring in official dispatches for the members of the body. After a long delay Mr. Jules Favre had received the response of Count Bismarck, the substance of which he had in his hands and would read. As to the first matter, Count Bismarck said that he was unable at the moment to state what the necessities of the war might require; and, touching the request for a courier, he would allow one to pass the lines once a week to bear official dispatches, provided such dispatches should not be sealed, and have no reference to the war. The nuncio said the first answer was evasive, and that the condition imposed in relation to the [Page 128] manner of sending dispatches would render it impossible for the diplomatic body to avail themselves of Count Bismarck’s offer.
Mr. Kern, the minister from Switzerland, said there had been a misapprehension as to the communication to Count Bismarck. It should not have been a communication by Jules Favre to Bismarck, but the nuncio should, as the organ of the diplomatic corps have written direct to him and sent it through Favre as the intermediary. In regard to the inquiry which had been directed to Count Bismarck, touching the bombardment, he certainly should have strongly protested against it. The diplomatic corps had a right by the laws of war to a notice of bombardment, and the body had been placed in a false position by requesting something which they had a right to without asking for it.**
Baron Beyens, the Belgian minister, expressed himself as not being very clear in regard to the questions which had been raised; some of the people in the Foreign Office had told him that the diplomatic corps had no right to a notice of bombardment. Mr. Kern replied he considered such opinions of no value; he had himself studied the question, and he had no doubts on the subject. He would further say, in relation to the courier, that, as a matter of courtesy due to their respective governments, the diplomatic corps had a right to be advised by the Prussian authorities of their intention to cut off their communications with their governments. Baron de Zuylen de Nyevelt, minister of Holland, said the Prussian authorities ought to be informed at once of the presence of the diplomatic corps in Paris, and that they rejected the offer of a courier on the terms proposed.
Mr. P. Galvez, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary from Peru, said that body owed it to the countries they represented, to the dignity of the diplomatic service, as well as to themselves, to respond negatively to Count Bismarck’s proposition to have their official correspondence sent unsealed.
Mr. Washburne, minister of the United States, said there seemed to have been a misapprehension in regard to the character of the communication sent by Mr. Jules Favre, on behalf of the diplomatic corps, to Count Bismarck. He had not understood that a request had been sent to have notice given to the diplomatic corps when the bombardment would take place. He conceived that no such request should have been made, for the diplomatic body had a right to that notice without asking for it. He would further reject instantly any concession of a courier, coupled with the condition that his dispatches should go unsealed. He would not write a dispatch to his government which would have to be submitted to the inspection of any other government on the face of the earth.
Mr. Kern, Baron de Zuylen de Nyevelt, and Mr. Washburne were then joined to the nuncio, as a committee to draw up a communication, to be signed by all the members of the corps in Paris, to be sent to Count Bismarck; the same to be submitted to a future meeting for approval.
[Untitled]
Mr. Kern, Baron Nyevelt, and Mr. Washburne met at the residence of the nuncio, at 2 o’clock p. m., to agree upon the answer to be made to Count Bismarck. Mr. Kern submitted the projet of an answer, which was agreed to, and the nuncio was requested to notify the members of the diplomatic body to meet at his residence the next day, at 11 o’clock a. m., to act upon it and to sign it if it met their views.
[Untitled]
The members of the diplomatic body met in accordance with the notice given by the nuncio yesterday. The committee submitted the answer to Count Bismarck that had been drawn up, which was unanimously agreed to and signed by all the members.
The communication is hereto annexed.
Diplomatic corps to Count Bismarck.
The undersigned, members of the diplomatic corps residing at Paris, had the honor to send to your excellency, on the 24th of September last, the expression of their wish, that a courier, carrying their official dispatches, might pass the lines of the besieging army every week on days to be hereafter named, and proceed to some point whence a regular postal communication could be assured.
The minister of foreign affairs of France has informed us, by a letter of October 3, that he had the day before received as the reply of your excellency, ‘‘that a diplomatic courier could not pass the lines of the besieging troops except upon condition that the dispatches be unsealed, and treat of no subject relating to the war.”
[Page 129]We should have made it a duty, as regards the contents of our dispatches, to conform scrupulously to the obligations imposed during a siege upon diplomatic agents by the rules and usages of international law.
On the other hand, our position as diplomatic agents, and our obligations toward our governments, do not permit us to accept the other condition, viz: to address to them unsealed dispatches only.
If this last condition is to be maintained, it will be impossible for the diplomatic representatives of the neutral states, to their deep regret, to keep up official communication with their respective governments.
Receive, sir, the assurance of, &c., &c., &c.
Paris,October 6, 1870.
FLAVIUS, The Apostolic Nuncio, Archbishop of Myre.
KERN, Minister of the Swiss Confederation.
BR. ADELSWAERD, Minister of Sweden.
CTE. DE MOLTKE HAUFELDT, Minister of Denmark.
BR. BEYENS, Minister of Belgium.
LOPEZ DE AROSEMENA, Secretaire Charqé d’Affaires des Légations de Honduras et de Salvador.
BR. DE ZUYLEN DE NYEVELT, Ministre des Pays Bas.
HENRIQUE L. MATTEN, Chargé d’Affaires du Brésil.
VTE. DE LANCASTRE, Chargé d’Affaires du Portugal.
E. B. WASHBURNE, Ministre des États-Unis.
TORRES CAICEDO, Ministre Resident des États-Unis de Colombie.
DUC D’ACQUAIEVA, Chargé d’Affaires de Monaco et San Marino.
WILLIAM MARTIN, Chargé d’Affaires de Hawai.
JULES THIRION, Chargé d’Affaires de la République Dominicaine.
V. DE BALLIVRAN Y RODAS, Ministre de Bolivie.
P. GALVEZ, Ministre du Pérou.
- As to availing himself of a courier to take his dispatches, he would reject it at once, as the condition was disrespectful not only to his government, but to himself.↩