Papers Relating to Foreign Affairs, Accompanying the Annual Message of the President to the Second Session Thirty-eighth Congress, Part I
Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams.
Sir: I transmit herewith a copy of a despatch of the 5th of February last, No. 6, from the United States consul at Mauritius, respecting the case of the American ship Sea Bride. If the view taken by the governor of his instructions in regard to the treatment of uncondemned captured cargoes, or parts thereof, is correct, you are expected to point out the defectiveness of these instructions, and ask to have them so far corrected as may be just and necessary.
I am, sir, your obedient servant,
Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &c., &c., &c.
Mr. Mellen to Mr. Seward.
Sir: In my despatches No. 15 and 17, of 1863, I informed you of the efforts then making by the confederates and their agents hereabouts to dispose of the American merchant ship Sea Bride and her cargo, captured by the Alabama in or off Table bay. I also informed you of the steps I had taken to prevent the improper sale of the said ship and cargo, and to reclaim them for their lawful owners, should either or both of them reach this port. Having, towards the latter part of last month, gathered what information I could, and all that it was likely I should be able to obtain before action was necessary, I addressed the honorable colonial secretary a letter, of whieh enclosure No. 1 is a copy. A copy of his reply you have in enclosure No. 2, to which I rejoined in a communication of which enclosure No. 3 is a copy.
What more is possible for me to do, except to wait and watch and avail myself of any possible chance for interference after the arrival of the said cargo, I do not see. A suit in admiralty would be almost interminable, very expensive, and, if unsuccessful, would render me liable to a suit for heavy damages. It seems probable, therefore, that I shall be doomed to see the pirated property of my countrymen sold within a stone’s throw of my office, with no power to prevent it. Not a very pleasant spectacle.
The narrative of these things affords another illustration of the necessity of a man-of-war in these waters. One such vessel could so easily have retaken the Sea Bride and her cargo; could exert so excellent an influence over the semi-civilized authorities of Madagascar and in all this region, that it is greatly to be deplored that none is here; and when the Mohican was at Cape Town, especially as the facts concerning the Sea Bride had been communicated by me to the consul there, and were by him laid before the captain of the Mohican, it seems [Page 563] unaccountable that that vessel did not extend its cruise to Madagascar and Mauritius. It is to be hoped that Captain Glissa had sufficient to justify his conduct in turning back. Still I can but hope that some other vessel from our now very large navy may very soon appear in the Indian ocean.
I have the honor to be, sir, your most obedient servant,
Hon. William H. Seward, &c., &c., &c.
Mr. Mellen to the Colonial Secretary.
Sir: In my letter to you dated December 8, 1863, I informed you that in a certain contingency I should have the honor of calling your attention again to the same subject, and of requesting the action of the colonial government for the protection of American interests. Allow me briefly to state the grounds and the object of the interference demanded:
1. Some time during the month of September, 1863, there arrived at Foul Pointe, Madagascar, an American vessel which had been captured by the so-called confederate cruiser Alabama, but which had not been condemned by any competent prize court.
2. This vessel was the Sea Bride, of 447 tons register, belonging to Boston, United States of America, and owned by C. F. White, of said city.
3. On her arrival at Foul Pointe, or when first seen by my informers, she was under the Hamburg flag, and had the name “Helen” upon her stern, which had been recently painted.
4. While the said vessel was lying at Foul Pointe one Christopher Elmstine, who represents himself as a British subject, resident at Cape Colony, and who also represents himself to be the owner of the so-called Helen’s cargo, chartered the brig Reward, of this port of Port Louis, to convey the said cargo to this place.
5. This cargo, as appears by the bills of lading, copies of which are herewith enclosed, and the originals of which are at any time producible, was an assorted one, consisting of flour, tobacco, hams, &c., &c., &c.
6. A large part, if not all, of this cargo was transhipped directly from the so-called Helen to the Reward without having been landed.
7. Having received her cargo, the said Reward started on her voyage towards this port, but springing a leak, was compelled to put into St. Marie, where the said Reward was condemned and the merchandise placed in store.
8. Soon after disposing of her cargo, the Sea Bride, alias Helen, appeared in the port of St. Marie, having then no name upon her stern, and flying the so-called confederate flag.
9. The aforesaid Christopher Elmstine having arrived on this island, and having learned the fate of the Reward and the position of her cargo, chartered of the same agent or owner another vessel, called the Sirene, to proceed to St. Marie and bring hither the aforesaid cargo.
10. The said Sirene sailed from this port on the 6th instant, and may therefore, should circumstances be usually favorable, be expected to return here somewhere from the first to the tenth of next month.
11. The witnesses on whom I rely to substantiate the truth of these statements are Messrs. Gustave Hugen, late master of the said Reward, Adolph Cardier, late first mate of said Reward, the honorable commandant of St. Marie, and a seaman [Page 564] named Henri Clarence, now on his way to Cork, but whose affidavit I expect from there immediately on his arrival. He was for a considerable period on board the Sea Bride, alias Helen, and can depose to the identity of the two.
12. I have the honor to lay before you these facts to indicate the evidence by which they can be proved, to point out to you the evidently piratical act committed by those who have thus sought to appropriate uncondemned American property. It becomes my duty, also, to point out to you the breach of neutrality already committed by the said Christopher Elmstine, one of her Majesty’s subjects, and the still further breach of neutrality threatened in bringing the aforesaid uncondemned merchandise to this port for sale.
13. As a private individual, I beg to inform you of these acts and purposes, and to ask for the vindication of her Majesty’s laws.
14. As the representative of American interests in this island, I beg to call your attention to them, and respectfully to demand the interference of the colonial government for the protection of these interests, and the seizure of the aforesaid merchandise immediately upon its arrival, until the question of its legal ownership is determined.
I have the honor to be, sir, your very obedient servant,
The Hon. the Acting Colonial Secretary, &c., &c., &c.
Mr. Rushworth to Mr. Mellen.
Sir: In reply to your further demand for interference by this government, made in your letter of the 27th ultimo, concerning the disposal of the cargo of the American ship Sea Bride, captured by the confederate cruiser Alabama, I have the honor, by direction of his excellency the governor, to inform you that his excellency has, by recent instructions, been apprised that her Majesty’s orders, while authorizing the restoration to their proper owners of uncondemned cargoes of every kind which may be brought by any armed ships or privateers of either belligerent into British waters, or of the captured vessels themselves, do not apply to the articles which may have formed part of any such cargoes if brought within British jurisdiction not by armed ships or privateers of either belligerent into British waters, or of the captured vessels themselves, do not apply to the articles which may have formed part of any such cargoes, if brought within British jurisdiction not by armed ships or privateers of either belligerent, but by other persons who may have acquired, or may claim, property in them by reason of any dealings with the captors.
I have the honor to be, sir, your most obedient servant,
The Consul for the United States of America, &c., &c., &c.
Mr. Mellen to Mr. Rushworth.
Sir: Your reply of the 3d instant to my letter of the 27th ultimo, demanding the interference of the colonial government in regard to the disposal of the [Page 565] cargo of the American ship Sea Bride, captured by the so-called confederate cruiser Alabama, has been received. You will pardon me for saying that my regret is equalled only by my astonishment at the seemingly evasive and altogether unsatisfactory character of your communication. Though there be little hope that anything which may be added can induce his excellency the governor to reconsider and reverse his decision, yet I should fail in my duty were I not to urge upon his attention what seems to me sufficiently valid reasons for his doing so, and to present to him my formal and solemn protest against the determination which he has announced.
You inform me that his excellency has, by recent instructions, been apprised “that her Majesty’s orders, while authorizing the restoration to their proper owners of uncondemned prize cargoes of every kind which may be brought by any armed ship or privateer of either belligerent into British waters, or of the captured rebels themselves, do not apply to the articles which may have formed part of any such cargoes if brought within British jurisdiction, not by armed ships or privateers of either belligerent, but by other persons who may have acquired, or may claim, property in them by reason of any dealing with the captors.”
Of course, as I am not in possession of the “recent instructions” referred to, I am bound to accept your summary of them on this point as correct; but I must express my surprise at them, for if an unbroken cargo, coming within British jurisdiction uncondemned, should be returned to its lawful owners, it is difficult to say why a portion of such cargo should not be. If a captured cargo brought into British port in a belligerent vessel, or in the vessel in which it was captured, should be surrendered to the real owners, then why not when brought here in some other vessel into which it may have been transhipped merely for the purpose of covering an illicit transaction? Can the mere transhipment divest the true owner of his property? If the title to capture property cannot vest in the captors previous to its condemnation, then how can they, who themselves have no title to it, convey one to others, especially when the latter are perfectly well aware of the character of the merchandise they are purchasing? It seems, therefore, that a wide distinction in action is here made, where there exists little, if any, distinction in principle. Since informed of the seizure of the Tuscaloosa at Cape Town under special instructions from the imperial government, I had confidently expected that his excellency would find therein a safe precedent for him to follow in the seizure of the cargo of the Sea Bride. And remembering how the first decision of the governor of Cape Colony, in regard to the seizure of the Tuscaloosa, was reversed, I do not wholly despair of a similar result in regard to what seems to me the equally unhappy decision of his excellency the governor of Mauritius concerning the cargo of the Sea Bride.
I beg to call his excellency’s very serious attention to the grave consequences which must naturally result from his decision. If the principle he has adopted be correct, I see not why Mauritius is not open as a market for any and all uncondemned captured merchandise which the so-called confederate cruisers may send here. Captain Semmes may dispense with his mock prize court, whose sessions are held in the cabin of the Alabama, the only prize court which the confederates have yet instituted, for he has only to sell his captured cargoes to British subjects, who, transhipping them into British bottoms on the high seas, may immediately bring them, and without peril, to this port. Indeed, he may convey his prizes to a point just outside the recognized three-mile line from the shore, and in plain sight thereof, where a nominal sale and an actual transhipment effected, all the operations of which may be directed from the land, and in a few hours after the merchandise may be spread upon the quays of this port. Credible information has reached me, through a person in communication with those who are endeavoring thus piratically to appropriate the cargo of the Sea Bride, that there are other captured American cargoes in a similar situation, the present [Page 566] holders of which are waiting to see what will be the result of the shipment of the Sea Bride’s cargo hither, to determine whether it will be safe for them to try the same market. It is certainly lamentable (I wish it could be characterized by no harsher phrase) that these persons are thus to be advertised that they are at liberty to prosecute their thievish purposes on this island. I am accordingly constrained respectfully to present to his excellency my official and solemn protest against the decision he has announced.
1. I protest against it as making an unreal distinction between an unbroken captured cargo arriving in an armed vessel, or the vessel in which it was captured, and a broken cargo reaching here in an unarmed ship, or in some other than that in which it was captured.
2. I protest against it as at variance with the universally recognized principle of public law, that no title can vest in or be given to captured merchandise previous to its condemnation.
3. I protest against it as leading to results so grave and disastrous as to make the principle on which it rests absurd.
I have the honor to be, sir, your very obedient servant,
The Hon. the Acting Colonial Secretary, &c., &c., &c.