Papers Relating to Foreign Affairs, Accompanying the Annual Message of the President to the Third Session Thirty-seventh Congress

Mr. Seward to Lord Lyons.

Department of State, Washington April 5, 1862.

My Lord: Your note of March 19 recalls the subject of a bag, which was found, in October last, in the trunk of a person named Cross, in his attempt to pass the military lines of the United States.

On the 23d of that month you informed me that you had been referred by General Dix to me, and you therefore asked me for such information concerning the transaction as it seemed proper that you should receive.

I answered, on the 24th of October, substantially as follows: That I had received information from General Dix that a bag had been found concealed in the trunk of Cross, who was a spy of the insurgents, and who, by his escape, avoided arrest; that I therefore directed General Dix to send the bag to the Department of State; that on its arrival here it had a label attached, upon which was an address to Mr. Archibald, her Majesty’s consul at New York, and the words “On her Britannic Majesty’s service,” but there was nothing to authenticate the bag as one having been forwarded by the British vice-consul at Richmond; that this fact, taken in connexion with the circumstances under which the bag was brought through the military lines of the United States, naturally excited doubts whether the bag contained official correspondence of the British authorities; that I therefore directed that the bag should be opened; that when it was opened it was found to contain not a single communication for Mr. Archibald, or for any other officer of the British government on this continent; that it did contain a few apparently official letters, addressed to functionaries of that government at London; that these letters were promptly forwarded, in the same condition in which they were received, to Mr. Adams, with instructions to cause them to be delivered to the persons to whom they were addressed, and that the other contents of the bag were and they would be retained here; that I thought it was unnecessary to specify their character, further than to state that they were such as no consul or acting consul of a foreign government has a right to forward in any way from a place in rebellion against the United States.

In the note of the 19th of March, which is now before me, you state that her Majesty’s government have obtained from her Majesty’s acting consul at Richmond a description of the bag as it was when it left his hands; that this description is as follows :

“The bag in question was of canvas, as usual, and was closed in such a manner as to prevent access to its contents without cutting the tape or cord, which was sealed through parchment with the seal of this consulate. The parchment had the following address on it: ‘On her Majesty’s service. E. M. Archibald, esq., her Britannic Majesty’s consul, New York. Consulate of Virginia.’ ”

You add that her Majesty’s government consider that this seal and address ought to have been respected by the United States authorities, and her Majesty’s government have, consequently, instructed you to complain of the bag’s having been opened.

I have the honor to say, in reply to your lordship’s note, that I entirely agree with her Majesty’s government in the principle that when a bag purporting to convey despatches on her Majesty’s service is found sealed and duly authenticated by a consul, that seal and authentication ought to be respected by the United States authorities. I add, with pleasure, that in all cases where such an occurrence has happened the consular seal and authentication have been so respected, and in all cases of that character which shall happen hereafter the consular seal and authentication will be respected, and the bag or parcel will be left unopened and transmitted to its proper address, relying on the good faith of her Majesty’s government that it will not suffer the consular privileges to be abused to the injury of the United States.

I cannot, however, admit the fact, implied by your note, that a consular seal was violated in the case now under consideration, and for that reason alone I cannot admit the justice of your lordship’s complaint.

The bag, when it came to this department, had no consular seal or any other seal, nor were any traces of a seal observed. There was no signature to authenticate it as having been put up or despatched by the acting consul at Richmond, or any other agent of the British government. It was closed only with a simple twine, like an ordinary parcel sent out from a retailer’s shop. The label might, for aught that it expressed, have been written by any hand, without any authority whatever.

I have now taken pains to inquire of the deputy provost marshal at Baltimore, the provost marshal, and General Dix, through whose hands it had passed before coming to me, and I learn from them that when it came to their hands, respectively, it bore no seal whatever, and was not supposed by them to have ever been sealed.

I have not been able, by pushing my inquiries beyond this point, to ascertain what other persons belonging to the service of the United States had possession of or control over the bag before its delivery to the deputy provost marshal at Baltimore, and so to ascertain whether it was sealed or authenticated when taken from the trunk of the spy in whose possession it was found. The inquiries will be continued, and the result, when ascertained, will be promptly communicated to your lordship.

In the meantime you will excuse me for suggesting, first, that I cannot but remark the appearance of some reservation on the part of the acting consul at Richmond, in withholding the necessary explanations to whom he delivered the bag, how it happened to contain objectionable correspondence, and how it chanced to fall into the hands of a spy, who fled and abandoned the official correspondence when he was detected.

Secondly, I notice, not without regret, that her Majesty’s government do not express any disapprobation of the conduct of the consul at Richmond in placing objectionable correspondence in a bag of despatches, and covering it, as he alleges, with the seal of his consulate.

I avail myself of this opportunity to renew to your lordship the assurance of my high consideration.

WILLIAM H. SEWARD.

Right Hon. Lord Lyons, &c., &c., &c.

Memorandum of conversation.

Lord Lyons called to-day upon Mr. Seward, and said, as perhaps was not extraordinary, the capture of New Orleans, which was expected by Mr. Seward to be a relief in the relations between the United States and other countries on the contrary, was at the beginning attended with new causes of uneasiness. He had received complaints from his consul in behalf of British subjects in new Orleans of harsh proceedings by General Butler. He had not had time fully to digest them, but he called to see that if the Secretary of State would not think it worth while to have the military authorities at New Orleans cautioned against exercising any doubtful severities which would produce irritation, and aggravate what had already happened. Lord Lyons, especially, said that it had been reported to him that a British subject had been sent to Fort Jackson, which is understood to be a very unhealthy place at this season, and he trusted the military authorities would be requested not to expose the health of such prisoners to unnecessary risks. Mr. Seward replied that he cordially appreciated the value of Lord Lyons’s suggestions, and that he would submit to the Secretary of War the expediency of giving instructions to General Butler of the character suggested, and he felt authorized to say at once that they would be adopted.

Department of State, Washington, May 30, 1862.