Papers Relating to Foreign Affairs, Accompanying the Annual Message of the President to the Second Session Thirty-eighth Congress, Part I
Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward.
Sir: Since my No. 644, of the 8th of April, I have received two notes from Lord Russell, both dated the 9th instant, on the subject of the alleged enlistments [Page 613] by the commander of the Kearsarge at Queenstown. To these notes I replied on the 11th, and received an acknowledgment from his lordship on the 13th instant. Copies of this later portion of the correspondence are herewith transmitted.
* * * * * * * * *
It is, however, quite plain to me that there was some connivance on board of that ship in the scheme of enlisting these Irishmen. I presume that it was mainly the act of Haley, the Irish petty officer. But the case appears to have been now carried to such a point as to render an investigation necessary.
I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,
Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.
Earl Russell to Mr. Adams.
Sir: I have had the honor to receive your letter of the 2d instant, in answer to the letter in which I requested you to inform me whether you had any explanations to offer with regard to the British subjects who were indicted for taking service in the United States ship Kearsarge.
In reply to your letter, I have only to regret that officers Thornton and Haley, who appear clearly to have violated the municipal law of this country, which they were bound to have made themselves acquainted with, should still be retained in the service of the United States.
I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant,
Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &c., &c., &c.
[Untitled]
Sir: I transmit to you herewith extracts from a deposition of one Daniel O’Connell, by which you will perceive that he was examined and sworn before or with the knowledge of officers of the United States ship-of-war Kearsarge, and furnished with the uniform of a United States sailor.
I know not how these circumstances, occurring on board a ship-of war, can have taken place without the knowledge of the captain of the vessel.
I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant,
Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &c., &c., &c.
[Extracts from declaration by Daniel O’Connell.]
“A man that was, I believe, a doctor, examined me, being stripped, and told me I was fit for service. I then went forward, and the ship sailed next day.
* * * * * * * * *
“One of the officers of the ship took me (with eight or nine of the men who had come on board at Queenstown) on shore at Brest in a boat, and when the boat had just touched the beach, the officer said: ‘Any of you that wish can [Page 614] go on shore, but if you wish you can enter on board the ship.’ All the men said ‘they would enter,’ upon which the boat returned to the Kearsarge, and we were all sworn to enter the United States navy for three years at $12 per month each, and our names were entered in the ship’s books, and we were provided with the ship’s uniform.”
Mr. Adams to Earl Russell.
My Lord: I have the honor to acknowledge the reception of two notes from your lordship, both dated the 9th instant. One of these notes expresses regret that officers Thornton and Haley, of the United States steamer Kearsarge, who, in your view, appear clearly to have violated the municipal law of this country, should still be retained in the service of the United States.
The other transmits to me extracts from a deposition of one Daniel O’Connell, in further support of an inference that the captain of the Kearsarge must have known of the enlistment of the Irishmen at Queenstown.
I would respectfully call your attention to the manner in which this latest testimony affects that which has been published heretofore. Edward Lynch. in deposition taken on the 16th of November last, affirms that he went on board the Kearsarge in company with the said Daniel O’Connell, and that he saw the boatswain ship the said O’Connell at Queenstown after he had passed the usual inspection. This was on or about the 3d of November. He admits that the captain was not on board, but that he heard the commander say to the boatswain: “I’ll leave them in charge to you now.” This is all the evidence that appears in any degree to implicate the first officer, here called the commander, Mr. Thornton, in the charge of enlistment within this kingdom.
But Daniel O’Connell himself on his side changes the whole scene of the transaction. He avers in the extract you have been pleased to furnish to me that the enlistment took place when one of the officers, whom he does not name, and who was not likely to have been Thornton, took eight or ten of the men in a boat for the purpose of landing them at Brest, in France. This must have been at the time when Captain Winslow affirms that he ordered them so to be landed for the purpose of getting rid of them. It would seem that this officer, instead of obeying orders, then offered to them the chance of landing, or else of enlisting, upon which they all chose the latter, returned to the vessel, and were then enlisted. This enlistment was then made in a port of France.
It necessarily follows, from this exposition, that if O’Connell were enlisted at Queenstown, as Edward Lynch affirms, there was no enlistment of him at Brest, as O’Connell himself avers. If, on the other hand, O’Connell is right, that he was enlisted by an officer in a boat at Brest, then it is clear that there was no enlistment of him at Queenstown by officer Thornton, as alleged by Lynch. Two successive enlistments of the same man, at about the same time, are not necessary or customary in any service. On the other hand, officer Thornton himself denies that he ever enlisted anybody. He affirms that he expressed himself willing to accept the men at Queenstown if the captain on his return from shore should approve of the proceeding; but the captain did not approve, and nothing more was done about it by him.
If the officer who had charge of the boat to place the men on shore at Brest, in obedience to the order of the captain, took the responsibility of then and there enlisting and returning them to the ship, it is plain that he must have been acting directly in the face of his authority, and, furthermore, that he was immediately disavowed by his principal, for the steamer was forthwith ordered to [Page 615] leave Brest, and make a direct course back to Queenstown, for no other purpose than to get rid of these very men who are said to have been enlisted for three years. The contradiction is too apparent and palpable to permit of further doubt as to the character of the testimony. On the other hand, Captain Wins-low himself says that when he found, after leaving Queenstown, that the men who, against his orders to clear them out of the vessel, were still on board, having been secreted there, he decided upon landing them at his first stopping place at Brest. They were landed accordingly; but upon reconsideration of their destitute condition and of the danger of their falling into the hands of the insurgents, notoriously without scruples about enlisting the subjects of Great Britain, or any other nation, he determined to take them on board again, for the purpose of returning them to Queenstown, which was accordingly done with promptness and despatch.
I am constrained to believe this account to be altogether the most consistent and credible. The others conflict with each other and with probability so strongly that I trust I may be pardoned for withdrawing the little credit I have been heretofore disposed to give them.
The only remaining piece of circumstantial evidence to sustain the idea of enlistment is the admitted fact of the men having been landed whilst dressed in the clothing of seamen in the United States service. That such clothing was given out to them probably with the connivance of the petty officer whose agency first induced them to come on board is very certain. That it was not taken away from them is alleged to be solely owing to the fact that their own clothing was in every respect unfit for them to appear in decently on board. During the period of their stay they were rated on the ship’s books, to make the accounts regular, and when they left it was deemed more proper to let them have the dress they had already worn for some time. Had it been thought that this liberality would be urged by your lordship as a proof of their enlistment, nothing would have been more easy to obviate the suspicion thau to return them in rags, as they came.
I am not, however, disposed to withdraw my former admission that in the original proceedings there is evidence of some connivance on the part of one or more of the petty officers of the Kearsarge in the endeavor to enlist these men in the service of the United States. That the first officer, Thornton, had any intention of the kind I am constrained more seriously to doubt. I do not regard myself as possessed of authority to direct a pursuit of the investigation on this side of the Atlantic. But understanding it from your lordship’s note to be the wish of her Majesty’s government that further measures should be taken to ascertain the precise nature of the action of the suspected parties, and that they should be visited with a suitable penalty if found guilty, I shall do myself the honor to communicate your wish for the consideration of my government. I do not doubt that the proper authority will direct farther proceedings to be had in order to arrive at the precise truth, and to give just satisfaction to your lordship in case of the proof of any offence.
I pray your lordship to accept the assurances of the highest consideration with which I have the honor to be, my lord, your most obedient servant,
Right Hon. Earl Russell, &c., &c., &c.
Earl Russell to Mr. Adams.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 11th instant, relative to the proceedings of the officers of the United States steamer [Page 616] Kearsarge in regard to the enlistment of British subjects for service on board that vessel.
I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant,
Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &c., &c., &c.