Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward
Sir: In consequence of the reception of your despatches Nos. 1183, 1186 and 1189, I decided to ask an interview with Lord Russell. I preferred to [Page 70] take this course rather than to make the papers the subject of successive written communications. His lordship received me on Wednesday at the Foreign Office, where I had a frank conversation with him.
Before commencing on the main subject, however, I took the opportunity to convey to him your message in respect to the departure of Lord Lyons. I referred to the tone of the note which you had addressed to that gentleman, a copy of which you had sent to me. His lordship expressed much satisfaction with this communication. Lord Lyons had left his post only under a conviction of his physical inability to continue to perform the duties properly. The government would be glad to have him return; but this must depend upon the probability of his restoration to health. He had seen him but once, and then no allusion had been made to Mr. Seward’s note. He might have some delicacy in mentioning it, as it was complimentary to himself. I said, that in that case, perhaps, his lordship would like to have me furnish him with a copy; he assented, and I have since transmitted it to him.
I then referred to the serious increase of the difficulties occasioned by the operation of the rebel emissaries in Canada. On that subject I now had in my hands three different despatches, each relating to a distinct matter. At first I had thought of making my communication in writing, but after reflecting upon the very strong assurances given to me in his lordship’s note of the 16th instant, as to the determination of her Majesty’s government to do everything in its power to put a stop to these abuses, it had seemed to me that to write again might imply a. doubt of its good faith, which I was far from entertaining. Under these circumstances I had preferred to bring copies of the material papers with me, for the purpose of placing them in his hands, as cumulative proof of the systematic abuse of the neutral territory practiced by the rebels and their agents. I then gave him a copy of the intercepted letter to Mr. Benjamin, contained in your No. 1183, as well as of the letters of General Dix and Colonel Townsend, which came with Nos. 1186 and 1189. His lordship read over the first of these in my presence, making now and then a comment as he went on. He then explained the precise nature of the legal difficulty which had led to the release of the St. Albans raiders. It grew out of an effort of the Canadian legislature to consolidate the provisions of former laws to carry out the extradition, which had had the effect to repeal those, whilst the new act had not yet obtained the necessary sanction of the privy council here. It was much to be regretted, on every account, that this should have happened.
His lordship, however, went on to remark, that if the fact could be clearly made out that this action in Canada was carried on by the belligerent authorities at Richmond, and under their instructions, it was the opinion of the law officers of the Crown that they might at once be proceeded against in the courts, as guilty of a high offence against her Majesty’s authority, and the peace of the kingdom. He alluded particularly to the lord chancellor, as clear on that point. I replied that this had always seemed to me the alternative. If these people were not acting under belligerent authority, they were liable, as criminals, to the claim of extradition, under the treaty. If, on the other hand, they could prove that they were so acting, then they were liable as violators of the neutrality of her Majesty’s territory.
His lordship likewise gave me to understand that the government had recommended to the authorities in Canada to procure the passage of an act by the legislature, which was about to assemble, similar to that passed by Congress in 1838. This is in accordance with the desire expressed in your despatch to me, No. 1136, of 24th October last, and in my note to his lordship, of the 23d November, based upon the instructions in that paper.
I then referred to the growth of the excitement on this subject in America, in consequence of the vagueness as well as the variety of the alleged schemes of these people, as they were reported in the newspapers. The anxiety and [Page 71] suspense occasioned to the inhabitants along the whole border were worse than any definite assault could possibly be. It was, doubtless, in consequence of this that the order of General Dix had been issued, which was referred to in the telegraphic intelligence received through the newspapers this evening. I could not tell how correctly the language might be reported, but I was convinced, from my personal knowledge of General Dix, that if he had issued such an order, it had been drawn from him only by the great pressure of the public feeling demanding protection from violence.
His lordship expressed great concern at this proceeding. Whilst he was desirous of doing everything in his power to give security to the frontier, and he believed the Canadian authorities anxious to co-operate as effectively as possible, he could not but view any such acts as General Dix appeared to authorize on the Canadian territory as likely to complicate matters very gravely.
I replied, that, from my knowledge of General Dix, I did not believe that he acted with any desire to magnify the difficulties between the two governments.
His lordship said that Lord Lyons had seen him when at New York. He concluded the interview by expressing a hope that we might find a safe issue from this, as we had from so many other troubles that had sprung up during this war.
There is a good deal of uneasiness felt here on account of the act of General Dix. The funds were affected by it yesterday. The hopes of the rebel sympathizers were also raised by it.
I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,
Hon. William H. Seward Secretary of State,&c., &c., &c.