Papers Relating to Foreign Affairs, Accompanying the Annual Message of the President to the Second Session Thirty-eighth Congress, Part II
Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward..
Sir: I now have the honor to transmit copies of three notes which have passed between Lord Russell and myself subsequently to that sent to you with my despatch No. 779, of the 8th September, embodying the substance of your instructions relating to the case of the yacht Deerhound.
* * * * * * * * * *
It would have been easy for me to expose the fallacies of his conclusions.
* * * * * * * * * *
I have thought it more prudent not to precipitate matters here by assuming responsibility which seems to my eye to be one involving difficulties as serious as any that have been elicited by the war.
I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,
Hon. William H. Seward, &c., &c., &c.
[Enclosures.]
1. Lord Russell to Mr. Adams, 12th September, 1864.
2. Same to same, 26th September, 1864.
3. Mr. Adams to Lord Russell, 27th September, 1864.
Earl Russell to Mr. Adams.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 6th instant, respecting the case of the Alabama and the proceedings, on the occasion of the sinking of that vessel, of the owner of the Deerhound; and I have to inform you that your communication will receive a reply as soon as it can be prepared.
I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant,
Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &c., &c., &c.
Earl Russell to Mr. Adams.
Sir: I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 6th of this month upon the subject of the officers and men belonging to the Alabama who were saved by the owner of the Deerhound yacht from drowning, and afterwards landed at Southamptom. It is not my intention, in replying to that letter, to repeat arguments already exhausted, or to refer to observations already made. It seems to be sufficient that I should state to you the conclusions at which her Majesty’s government have arrived, and which differ from those which your government have come to from the same facts.
In the first place, it is undoubtedly true that the Alabama was partly fitted out in a British port. But as soon as evidence was obtained that acts had been committed with regard to that vessel in violation of a British statute, orders were sent to seize her; she, however, escaped from British waters, in a state of half equipment, under a fraudulent pretence of making a trial trip. Her equipment was afterwards completed in a foreign port, neither British nor American, and a commission from the so-styled confederate government was there delivered to Captain Semmes, her commander, himself an American citizen.
Secondly, I have to state that it appears to her Majesty’s government that the commander of the private British yacht, the Deerhound, in saving from drowning some of the officers and crew of the Alabama, after that vessel had sunk, performed a praiseworthy act of humanity, to which, moreover, he had been exhorted by the officer commanding the Kearsarge, to which vessel the Deer-hound had, in the first instance, gone, in order to offer to the Kearsarge any assistance which, after her action with the Alabama, she might stand in need of; and it appears, further, to her Majesty’s government that, under all the circumstances of the case, Mr. Lancaster was not under any obligation to deliver to the captain of the Kearsarge the officers and men whom he had rescued from the waves.
But however that may be, with regard to the demand made by you by instructions from your government, that those officers and men should now be delivered up to the government of the United States, as being escaped prisoners [Page 312] of war, her Majesty’s government would beg to observe that there is no obligation by international law which can bind the government of a neutral state to deliver up to a belligerent prisoners of war who may have escaped from the power of such belligerent, and may have taken refuge within the territory of such neutral. Therefore, even if her Majesty’s government had any power by law to comply with the above mentioned demand, her Majesty’s government could not do so without being guilty of a violation of the duties of hospitality.
In point of fact, however, her Majesty’s government have no lawful power to arrest and deliver up the persons in question. They have been guilty of no offence against the laws of England, and they have committed no act which could bring them within the provisions of the treaty between Great Britain and the United States for the mutual surrender of offenders, and her Majesty’s government are, therefore, entirely without any legal means by which, even if they wished to do so, they could comply with your above-mentioned demand.
Thirdly, with regard to the statement made to the United States government, that British authorities afford pecuniary assistance or supplies, or furnish regular payment of wages to persons forming the crew of the Alabama, for the purpose of enabling them more effectually to carry on hostile operations against the United States, I have to say that her Majesty’s government have no knowledge whatever of any such circumstances, and do not believe that there is any foundation for such statements. Private individuals may very possibly have contributed to relieve the necessities of the persons in question, but with the pecuniary contributions of private individuals her Majesty’s government have no power to interfere.
I beg further to assure you that her Majesty’s government have adopted, and will continue to adopt, to the utmost of their lawful power, such measures as may be effective to prevent the preparation, equipment, and outfit of any naval expedition from British shores to make war against the United States.
The detention and seizure of the Birkenhead iron-clads, and the discussion in Parliament on that subject, suffice to show that if complete prevention in this respect has not been attained, all that the government of this free country can do to stop such expeditions has been fully performed.
Lastly, in expressing the regret of her Majesty’s government that they should find themselves unable to comply with any application which the government of the United States may have thought themselves entitled to make, I cannot refrain from observing that her Majesty’s government have been far more successful in preventing breaches of neutrality with regard to the fitting out of cruisers to take part in the civil war in North America, than the government of the United States were in preventing the fitting out of ships-of-war to aid the South American republics in their revolt against Spain, which power then stood in the position of a central authority resisting insurrection.
I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant,
Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &c., &c., &c.
Mr. Adams to Earl Russell.
My Lord: I have the honor to acknowledge the reception of your note of the 26th instant, communicating to me the conclusions at which her Majesty’s government [Page 313] have arrived on the representations which I submitted on the 6th instant, under special instructions, respecting the proceedings of the owner of the yacht Deerhound, and the collateral questions involved therein.
Regretting to perceive so wide a divergency in the views taken by the two governments of a subject involving grave principles of law, not less than important rules of international comity, I shall not venture upon the consideration of the contents of your lordship’s note in advance of their passing under the examination of my government. Meanwhile, I shall avail myself of the earliest opportunity to transmit the paper to the United States, and await the return of further instructions.
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,
The Right Hon. Earl Russell, &c., &c., &c.