Mr. Seward to Lord Lyons.
The undersigned, Secretary of State of the United States, has the honor to acknowledge the reception of the note which was addressed to him by Lord Lyons, on the 1st of August instant, concerning the case of the steamer General Rusk, alias the Blanche.
The undersigned again admits, as he always heretofore admitted, that it has been established upon satisfactory evidence that Commander Hunter intentionally [Page 686] violated the maritime jurisdiction of Spain, for which he has deservedly received the censure of the government of the United States, as her Majesty’s government have truly observed. Nevertheless, the undersigned cannot admit that that intentional wrong, committed by a subordinate naval agent of this government, against the sovereignty of Spain, has created, or at all affects, any liability against the United States to indemnify the alleged masters and owners of the steamer General Rusk and her cargo beyond the injuries which the officers and crew of the United States war steamer actually inflicted upon the vessel and cargo. The undersigned thinks it sufficiently proven, however, that the loss of the General Rusk and her cargo resulted entirely from the misconduct of her own master and seamen. But while holding the testimony, taken on the trial of Captain Hunter, as sufficiently establishing this fact, in the absence of rebutting proof to be produced in behalf of the master and owners, the undersigned is far from maintaining that the British government, or the master and owners, are concluded against showing that evidence to be either erroneous or false. On the one side, the claimants have produced ex parte proofs. The United States have replied by ex parte proofs, not, however, without inviting the claimants, through her Majesty’s government, to attend the examination of the witnesses. The case still remains open to either party to supply such further evidence as it can procure.
Nor can the undersigned admit the principle which seems to be advanced by her Majesty’s government, that Captain Hunter, by merely chasing the General Rusk and her cargo into Spanish waters, made this government liable for the loss of the vessel and cargo, even though it resulted from an accidental fire, or from an act of incendiarism of the captain and crew of the General Rusk. A loss occurring in either of these ways was no legitimate consequence of the pursuit or of the boarding of the vessel within the maritime jurisdiction of a friendly power.
The undersigned further thinks that the evidence which was taken on the trial of Captain Hunter shows that Clements and his associates are disloyal citizens of the United States; that they are not, and never were, subjects of Great Britain; that the alleged transfer of the General Rusk was manifestly fraudulent, being attended with no change of possession or payment of consideration money, besides many significant badges of actual fraud, and that the pretence was made simply for the purpose of fraudulently assuming a British character and the protection of a British flag. The undersigned feels assured that her Majesty’s government, upon a careful review of the subject, will disclaim, instead of sustaining, such an unprincipled and mischievous transaction.
In the view which the undersigned has taken it has not been necessary to decide a question which her Majesty’s government has intimated as arising in the case, namely, whether a condemnation by a pretended prize court in the insurgent States would operate to change the property of the General Rusk. It is enough to say that the undersigned is not aware that any such pretended sentence or judgment has been thus far shown to have been passed, and no such court has been shown to exist. The General Rusk was notoriously an American vessel, and it is not satisfactorily shown in the case that the title in her has ever been, in good faith, lawfully vested in any subject of Great Britain. At the same time, it is hardly necessary for the undersigned to remark that the United States have never assented to the pasitiou which her Majesty’s government assumes, namely, that the insurgents are a lawful belligerent, and consequently, the United States insist that, as between those insurgents and the United States, all such proceedings of their pretended authorities are simply illegal and void.
In regard to the alleged transfer of the General Rusk to a British subject, the undersigned will add that the judge of the United States for the southern district of Florida has recently decided in two cases very similar in their circumstances, namely, that of the Emma and her cargo, and that of the Florida, that [Page 687] such a transfer, though apparently regular, is, in point of fact, collusive, and therefore a fraud upon the belligerent right of this government under the law of nations.
The undersigned avails himself of this opportunity to renew to Lord Lyons the assurance of his high consideration.
Right Hon. Lord Lyons.
P. S.—As a proof of at least the domicile of Clement, in Texas, the undersigned has the honor to subjoin a transcript of a business card of that person, which he delivered to Commander Hunter:
ROBERT F. CLEMENT, WHOLESALE AND RETAIL GROCER.
COEN & CLEMENT, FORWARDING AND COMMISSION MERCHANTS,
(Opposite New Wharf,)
INDIANOLA, TEXAS.