This note will best explain itself, as well as the contents of the
letters of Mr. Morse above referred to.
Hon. William H. Seward
Secretary of State, &c., &c.,
&c.
Mr. Dayton to Mr. Drouyn de l’Huys
Paris,
January 22, 1864—2¼ p.
m.
Monsieur le Ministre: I have called at the
Foreign Office this morning in the hope of seeing your excellency,
but finding that you were out, and the hour of your return
uncertain, I think it most prudent to send you at once the copy of
extracts of a letter received this morning from Mr. Morse, our
consul at London. If the statement in these extracts be correct, I
am sure that the orders and intentions of this government as to the
reparations on the Florida, in port of Brest, have been violated,
and that such measures will at once be taken as will cancel the
wrong which has been done. Mr. Morse, the consul, writes to me,
under date of January 21, 1864, as follows:
“I have learned that the rebel privateers now in the French ports,
but more especially the Florida, are being carefully prepared to
capture the Kearsarge, if possible. Besides the 80-pounder Whitworth
rifled guns which the Florida had on board, she this week received
from an English yacht two steel Blakely rifled cannon, with
steel-pointed elongated shot to fit them. These guns were taken to
Dieppe from the English coast; I think from New Haven by steamer,
and put on board there, and taken thence to Brest by the yacht, and
put on board the Florida. I learn also that the Florida is very
heavily armed and manned. About one hundred and fifty have been sent
there from this country Within the last two or three weeks.”
Our consul adds in his letter to me: “I have also been informed, by a
person who saw them put on board, that gun-carriages have been
received on board the Rappahannock since arrival at Calais. They
were sent from this country. There are strong grounds for believing
that her guns have been received in the same way. The custom house
examinations at Calais afford no protection against arming her
there, Should a dozen or twenty cases be sent to the Rappahannock,
however large or heavy, only one will be opened, and that one will
be selected or made up for such official examination.”
I cannot but believe that our consul has in some way been deceived in
reference to this last statement; but the report, made from the
prefect or other authority at Calais, to the minister of marine,
enclosed to me with your excellency’s despatch, dated January 13,
1864, is so much at variance with my understanding, and the apparent
understanding of the British government, of the facts in reference
to the Rappahannock, that I respectfully submit the extract to your
consideration.
That vessel was a British ship-of-war, now claiming to be, not a mere
commercial vessel, but a confederate cruiser, which escaped by night
from Sheerness, without papers and without a crew, and, as admitted
by the report of the prefect or local authority above referred to,
with her masts even insecured. She could [Page 24] not be said to have suffered from stress of
weather, but came directly into the port of Calais, where men were
awaiting her arrival, and which men, I am informed, were
subsequently taken on board. It is admitted by all that she was not
in condition for sea. If she did not mean to come directly across
the channel into the port of Calais, she must have intended to come
into some other neighboring port; and this, so far as the principle
of law is concerned, would not vary the question; Since she has been
at Calais she has been engaged in shipping a crew, not for a vessel
of commerce, but for a vessel of war. The copies of affidavits which
I have heretofore submitted, and others, to wit, the affidavits of
Andrew McEune, Thomas Bryant, and William Fewson, which I now
enclose, prove this, I think, beyond a doubt. The rule which your
excellency informed me would be applied to the Florida, that she
will not be permitted to ship more men than she brought into port,
nor her fighting force increased, is not, I submit, being applied to
the Rappahannock, unless it be intended, which I can scarcely
suppose, to extend that rule so far as to say they may ship as many
sailors or fighting men as there were workhands or mechanics on
board, temporarily employed in making repairs; and even in that case
I know not how the account would stand.
Accept, sir, the assurances of high consideration with which I have
the honor to be, your excellency’s very obedient servant,
His Excellency M. Drouyn de l’Huys,
Minister of Foreign Affairs, Paris.
