Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams.
Washington, October 23, 1861.
Sir: I recur once more to your despatch of September 14, No. 44. On the 3d of that month you addressed a note to Earl Russell, in which you informed him, by my direction, that from the contents of the many letters found in the possession of Mr. Robert Mure, bearer of despatches to the government of Great Britain, but detained at New York as an agent of the enemies of the United States, the following statement is made of the action of Mr. Bunch in Charleston. “Mr. Bunch, on oath of secrecy, communicated to me also that the first step to recognition was taken; that he and Mr. Belligny together sent Mr. Trescot to Richmond yesterday to ask Jeff. [Page 165] Davis, President, to ____ the treaty of ____ to ____ the neutral flag covering neutral goods to be respected. This is the first step of direct treating with our government. So prepare for active business by first of January.”
You submitted this information to her Majesty’s government with a request on the part of the President of the United States that, if it should be found to be correct, Mr. Bunch might be at once removed from his office. And you further added, by my direction, that the President would cheerfully accord an exequator to any person who might be appointed to succeed Mr. Bunch, who would faithfully perform his functions without injury to the rights and interests of the United States.
There is appended to your despatch now before me the written answer of the Earl Russell to your note thus recited.
His lordship answers that he will, without hesitation, state to Mr. Adams that, in pursuance of an agreement between the British and French governments, Mr. Bunch was instructed to communicate to the persons excercising authority in the so-called Confederate States the desire of those governments that the second, third, and fourth articles of the declaration of Paris should be observed by those States in the prosecution of the hostilities in which they were engaged. His lordship then asked you to observe that the commerce of Great Britain and France is deeply interested in the maintenance of the articles providing that the flag covers the goods, and that the goods of a neutral taken on board a belligerent ship are not liable to confiscation. Earl Russell thereupon proceeds to say that Mr. Bunch, in what he has done in this matter, has acted in obedience to the instructions of his government, who accept the responsibility of his proceedings, so far as they are known to the foreign department, and who cannot therefore remove him from his office for having obeyed their instructions. But his lordship adds that, when it is stated in a letter from some person not named that the first step to the recognition of the southern States by Great Britain has been taken, he, Earl Russell, begs to decline all responsibility for such statement; and he remarks on this branch of the subject that her Majesty’s government have already recognized the belligerent character of the southern States, and they will continue to consider them as belligerents, but that her Majesty’s government have not recognized, and are not prepared to recognize, the so-called Confederate States as a separate and independent State.
You are instructed to reply to this note of her Majesty’s principal secretary of state for foreign affairs:
First. That her Majesty’s government having avowed that Mr. Bunch acted under their instructions, so far as his conduct is known to the foreign department, and that government having avowed their responsibility for his proceedings in that extent, it is admitted that, so far as that portion of the subject is concerned, the matter is to be settled directly with her Majesty’s government.
Secondly. That a law of the United States forbids any person not specially appointed or duly authorized or recognized by the President, whether citizen or denizen, privileged or unprivileged, from counselling, advising, aiding, or assisting in any political correspondence with the government of any foreign state whatever, with an intent to influence the measures of any foreign government, or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the government. The proceeding of Mr. Bunch was clearly and distinctly in violation of this positive law.
Thirdly. This government finds no sufficient justification or excuse for the proceeding of Mr. Bunch, thus shown to be in violation of the law of the United States, in the consideration that Great Britain was deeply [Page 166] interested in the maintenance of the articles which provide that the flag covers the goods, and that the goods of a neutral taken on board a belligerent ship are not liable to confiscation.
It is enough to say on this subject that, in our view, the proper agents of the British government, to make known that interest here, are the diplomatic, not the consular agents of her Majesty; and that the only authority in this country to which any diplomatic communication whatever can be made is the government of the United States itself.
Still less can the United States admit that communication by Mr. Bunch, while exercising consular privileges with which he was clothed by the consent of the United States, with insurgents in arms against the federal government, is justified by the declaration of the British ministry that they have already recognized the belligerent character of the insurgents, and that they will continue to consider them as belligerents. It is understood to be true that her Majesty’s government have heretofore issued a royal proclamation which they interpret as declaring that they recognize the insurgents as a belligerent. But it is also true that this government has, with equal decision and with equal resolution, announced to the British government that any such declaration made by the British government would not be accepted as modifying, in the least degree, the rights or powers of this government, or the obligations due to them by Great Britain as a friendly nation. Still adhering to this position, the government of the United States will continue to pursue, as it has heretofore done, the counsels of prudence, and will not suffer itself to be disturbed by excitement. It must revoke the exequatur of the consul, who has not only been the bearer of communications between the insurgents and a foreign government, in violation of our laws, but has abused equally the confidence of the two governments by reporting, without the authority of his government, and in violation of their own policy as well as of our national rights, that the proceeding in which he was engaged was in the nature of a treaty with the insurgents, and the first step towards a recognition by Great Britain of their sovereignty. Moreover, the conduct of the person in question, even while this correspondence has been going on, as well as before it commenced, has been that, not of a friend to this government, or even of a neutral, but of a partisan of faction and disunion.
In reviewing this subject it would be unjust to her Majesty’s minister residing here, as well as to her Majesty’s government, to omit to say that that minister has, in all his proceedings, carefully respected the sovereignty and the rights of the United States, and that the arrangements which have been made by him, with the approval of this government, for communication between the British government and its consuls, through the national vessels of Great Britain entering blockaded ports without carrying passengers or private letters, seems to forbid any necessity for a recurrence of such proceedings as those which have brought about these explanations. You will inform the Earl Russell that the exequatur of Mr. Bunch has been withdrawn because his services as consul are not agreeable to this government, and that the consular privileges thus taken from him will be cheerfully allowed to any successor whom her Majesty may appoint, against whom no grave personal objections shall exist. It is a source, of satisfaction to the President to reflect that the proceeding which I have been considering occurred some time ago, and that the part of it which was most calculated to offend, and to which exception is now especially taken, finds no support in the communication of Earl Russell.
I am, sir, your obedient servant,
Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &c., &c., &c.