Mr. Marsh to Mr. Seward.
[Extracts.]
Turin, June 27, 1861.
Sir: The interruption of business in the foreign office of this government, occasioned by the illness and death of Count Cavour and a week’s absence of the King, which immediately followed the formation of the new ministry, prevented me from obtaining an audience of his Majesty for the purpose of delivering my letters of credence until Sunday, the 23d day of this month.
On that day I was received by the King, and, in accordance with my instructions, conveyed to him assurances of the high consideration in which he is held by the President and people of the United States, and of their satisfaction in observing the apparent prosperity and happiness of Italy under his Majesty’s government. I further expressed the personal gratification [Page 321] I had derived from being selected to represent the United States near the government of the Italian people—a people which I had long known, and which had always inspired me with deep interest—and especially from the honor of being the first diplomate accredited to the first King of Italy.
His Majesty received these remarks very graciously, using some terms personally complimentary to me, testified much respect for the President and for yourself, and expressed a strong interest in the welfare and prosperity of the United States, as well as much solicitude for an honorable termination of the present contest between the government and the seceding States.
The audience was strictly private, no person but his Majesty and myself being present, and the interview was therefore of a less formal character than is usual with royal receptions. It is, perhaps, proper to add that the communication was conducted in French, which is the usual language of oral intercourse between foreign ministers and the sovereign or the heads of departments at this court.
With Baron Ricasoli, the new head of the ministry and minister of foreign affairs, I have had several interviews, as well before as since my reception by the King, and I therefore am not aware that the public interests have sustained any detriment by the delay of my official reception. In all these interviews American politics have formed a leading topic of conversation, and, though Baron Ricasoli speaks with proper caution, the tenor of his remarks leaves no room for doubt that his personal sympathies, as well as those of his government, are entirely on the side of the President and the constituted authorities of the Union in their great struggle.
The first point which I brought to the notice of the minister of foreign affairs was the prevention of movements hostile to the United States in the territories of the King of Italy. I stated that I had been led to fear that some attempts were making at Genoa to fit out vessels or purchase arms for the service of the rebels, and begged that the attention of the local authorities at Genoa might be drawn to the subject. Baron Ricasoli replied that the government would not knowingly permit any such purchases to be made and that he would request the minister of the interior to direct that the police of Genoa should be watchful to detect and prevent any negotiations for that purpose.
The suggestions I made to Baron Ricasoli on this subject were founded partly on a letter from Mr. H. S. Sanford and partly on vague rumors circulating here, which I have been unable to trace to any certain foundation, though I have made inquiry in all quarters known to me which seemed to be probable sources of information. In the course of the last week I employed an Italian gentleman, then about to proceed to Genoa, and whom I believe to be entirely trustworthy, to investigate the subject on the spot. He is still absent, and as he has not written to me since arrivng at Genoa I infer that he has made no discoveries.
I have communicated to Baron Ricasoli the substance of my instructions with regard to the proposed convention for the suppression of privateering and the exemption of private property from capture by national ships of war in certain cases. He replied that the Italian government had not yet become a party to the convention of 1856, and added that the pressure of business on his department would prevent his giving immediate attention to the subject; but he expressed no objection to a negotiation on the basis proposed in your instructions of the 24th of April, 1861, or even on the broader ground of the total exemption of all private property not contraband of war from capture at sea by ships of war in all cases.
The Italian parliament is now in session, and will probably not adjourn before the 15th or 20th of July. The cabinet ministers are members, as in England, and regularly attend the sessions, which occupy a large part of [Page 322] the day. Many important topics are under discussion in parliament, and still more weighty questions of domestic and foreign policy are making large demands on the time and absorbing the thoughts of the administration. It is, therefore, not probable, as Baron Ricasoli intimated, that he will be able to consider the subject of the convention until the adjournment of the national legislature shall leave him more at leisure. In the meantime the negotiations with the English and French governments on the same subject will probably be brought to a close, and the final decision of the Italian government will be much influenced by that of England and France.
The death of Count Cavour, after an illness of a week’s duration, and which, for the first few days, was not of a threatening character, was a great shock to the friends of constitutional liberty and progress, and an occasion of much ill-suppressed exultation among the advocates of temporal and spiritual despotism throughout Europe, and especially in Italy. To me, personally, it is a source of profound regret, both for less selfish reasons and because I had special grounds for expecting, more from his often expressed high regard for the President and yourself than from any other cause, agreeable private and official relations with this great statesman.
The successor of Count Cavour—and I may apply the same remark to most if not all of the members of the cabinet—is a man of a high order of talent, of great devotion to the interests of his country, of the same general doctrines of national policy as his predecessor, and of sincere attachment to the principles of civil and religious liberty. The remarkable unanimity with which the new cabinet is sustained by the parliament is a favorable omen, so far as respects the domestic success of the government; and there is some reason to think that the death of a prime minister, who was regarded with so much personal ill will by the reactionary party in Italy and elsewhere in Europe, may tend to diminish the asperity with which his policy has been hitherto opposed by that party.
* * * * * *
I am, sir, respectfully yours,
Hon. William H. Seward,
Secretary of State.