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

Mr.Adams to Mr. Seward.

No. 140.]

Legation of the United States, London, April 3, 1862.

Sir: I have to acknowledge the reception of despatches from the department, numbered 209, 210, and 211. They make particular reference only to one subject, the revocation by Great Britain of her recognition of the insurgents as a belligerent. I have already in my despatch, No. 135, of the 27th of March, submitted my views on the expediency of pressing the subject at this time. After consultation with some of our friends, I still adhere to the opinion. A few weeks more of news like that we have received for some time back may dispose of it without further difficulty. On the other hand, a contrary current would subject us to needless mortification in a refusal. There is no change worthy of note in the state of affairs here. The late naval action in Hampton roads has made a great sensation, and is regarded as likely to work a complete change in the policy of this country in fortifications and the naval marine. You will not fail to observe the notice already taken of it in Parliament. The subject is to be resumed to-morrow night. The opinion of the military and naval efficiency of the United States has undergone an astonishing change within the last month.

I transmit herewith a copy of Lord Russell’s note to me of the 27th, in reply to mine of the 25th of March, on the subject of the gunboat Oreto and the agency of British subjects in supplying aid to the rebels. The Oreto has sailed from Liverpool.

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

CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS.

Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of the Navy, Washington, D. C.

Earl Russell to Mr. Adams.

Foreign Office, March 27, 1862.

Sir: Upon receiving your letter of the 25th instant I immediately directed that the treasury and customs department should be requested to take such steps as may be necessary to ascertain whether the Oreto is equipped for the purpose of making war on the United States; and if that fact can be proved, to detain the vessel.

The charge that nearly all the assistance now obtained from abroad by persons still in arms against the government of the United States, and which enables them to continue the struggle, comes from Great Britain and its dependencies, is somewhat vague. I believe the greater part of the arms and ammunition sent from this country to America during the struggle has gone to the United States.

I agree with you in the statement that the duty of nations in amity with each other is not to suffer their good faith to be violated by ill-disposed persons within their borders, merely from the inefficiency of their prohibitory policy. But it is, at the same time, a duty not to punish persons on suspicion, without any proof of their evil intent. It is not the custom of this country to deprive any person of liberty or property without evidence of some offence. If such evidence can be obtained, the laws are sufficient to prevent the accomplishment of their evil designs against friendly nations.

You have not yourself hitherto furnished me with evidence that any vessel has received a hostile or warlike equipment in British waters, which has been afterwards used against the United States. The care that was taken to prevent the warlike equipment of the Nashville, in British waters, must be familiar to your recollection.

With regard to co-operation with the policy of the United States in respect to the blockade, I must remind you that Great Britain has abstained, as far as possible, from complaints of the irregularity of the blockade which has been instituted.

Her Majesty’s government have been mindful of the suddenness of the danger with which the United States were threatened; of the inadequacy of the naval force then at the disposal of the government, and of the great difficulty of blockading a coast of three thousand miles. But beyond forbearance and a liberal interpretation of the law of nations in favor of the United States her Majesty’s government cannot go. If by co-operation with the policy of the United States is meant either taking part in the civil war still raging, or imposing restraints on the Queen’s subjects unknown to international law, I cannot undertake that her Majesty’s government will adopt either of those courses. It would be an unheard-of measure to prohibit merchants from sending ships to sea destined to the southern ports. Should such ships attempt to violate the blockade, capture and condemnation are the proper penalty of such attempts. No authority can be found for any other.

But while these attempts are made on the one side, the United States government have willingly received in the ranks of their army British subjects, who violate the Queen’s proclamation, in order to serve against the confederates. Nay, the law of the United States, by which parents can prevent the enlistment of their sons, being minors, has been set aside, to the prejudice of British subjects, the fathers and mothers of thoughtless lads of sixteen or seventeen years of age.

These evils are perhaps inseparable from the unhappy contest now carried on in America. I can only trust it may have a speedy termination, suitable to the reputation of the United States, and conducive to the future happiness of all the inhabitants of a country so lately prosperous and united.

I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant,

RUSSELL.

Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &c., &c., &c.