Sir F. Bruce to Mr. Seward
Sir: Her Majesty’s government have had under their earnest consideration the record of the proceedings of the naval court of inquiry held at Boston in the case of the Night Hawk, a copy of which accompanied the note addressed to Mr. Burnley by the Secretary of State of the United States on the 6th January last.
I have now the honor, in pursuance of instructions which I have received from her Majesty’s principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, to state to you that her Majesty’s government have perused with equal surprise and regret these papers, which, while they in no respect alter the previous impressions of her Majesty’s government as to the case of the Night Hawk, or as to the treatment of the British subjects who constituted the crew of that vessel, furnish in themselves serious grounds of complaint, both with respect to the manner in which the naval court of inquiry was conducted, and as to the continued detention in prison, while that inquiry was pending, of the officers of the Night Hawk.
[Page 183]The court of inquiry appears to have been ordered by the Secretary of the Navy of the United States “for the purpose of inquiring into the circumstances attending the capture and destruction of the steamer Night Hawk;”and the court was most properly instructed to “direct its particular attention to the treat ment of her officers and crew at the time of and subsequent to her capture and destruction,”
When the inquiry was directed and held, the captain and three officers of the Night Hawk were still detained as prisoners, her crew having been released about a week previously; and the only ground which was or could be alleged for lengthening their imprisonment (originally unjustifiable) was that their evidence would be wanted before the court of inquiry.
How, then, was the inquiry conducted? The judge advocate called as wit nesses all the officers and some of the crew of the Niphon, whose conduct was the subject of investigation; among the rest Mr. Seaman, the officer in charge of the boarding party, and the person most directly responsible for any wrong which might have been done. It appeared, even on their own evidence, that while the Night Hawk was lying aground, without any signs of armed resistance some shots were fired into her by the boarding party. Mr. Seaman, in his evidence, acknowledges to have hailed the Night Hawk to know if she would surrender, and to have at the same time fired several rifle shots into and about the wheel-houses. It appeared, further, that a passenger, Dr. Taylor, was wounded by one of those shots, and that Mr. Seaman used personal violence towards the chief engineer, striking him and knocking him down with the but end of a pistol, so that he remained senseless on the deck, and that this latter violence occurred after he (Mr. Seaman) had set the ship on fire.
The persons responsible for these occurrences were the only witnesses called upon for explanation concerning them. After they were heard, the judge advo cate stated that he “knew of no other person whom it toas necessary to summon before the court;” and, “the testimony being finished,” the court found in accordance with the version of the facts given by these witnesses, and placed upon those facts the most favorable construction. All this time the officers of the( Night Hawk (including the chief engineer, whom Mr. Seaman had knocked down) were kept in prison; their evidence was neither asked nor obtained they had no opportunity of tendering it, and that detention, for which no justification could be alleged except a bona fide intention to secure and make use o; their testimony, resulted in its total suppression.
Her Majesty’s government, I am directed to state, are convinced that the government of the United States would never be satisfied with such an inquiry, or admit that the imprisonment of their citizens was justified under such circum stances if the case were their own. Nor can her Majesty’s government forge the recent case of James O’Neill, in which, after an ex parte inquiry had resulted in the exculpation of an officer of the United States navy by whom O’Neill had been causelessly wounded, a subsequent inquiry by court-martial which the justice of the United States government induced them to direct, re suited in the condemnation and dismissal of that officer.
Her Majesty’s government cannot but hope that the government of the United States will acknowledge that the course actually followed in the present instance is not that which the Secretary of the Navy of the United States intended when he directed the inquiry to be instituted, and that, upon further consideration or further examination, some satisfaction may yet be given to her Majesty’s government in the case of the Night Hawk.
I have the honor to be, with high consideration, sir, your most obedient humble servant,
Hon. William H. Seward, &c., &c., &c.