Mr. Tassara to Mr. Hunter.
The undersigned minister plenipotentiary of Her Catholic Majesty must again call the attention of the honorable Secretary of State ad interim to the affair of the steamer Meteor, of which he spoke in his note of yesterday, with so much the more urgency as the efforts are the more notorious which, precisely in the ratio of the general conviction which exists as to the destination of the Meteor and her definitive detention, are being made to draw from the government of the United States a resolution contrary to the laws of neutrality.
As must be known to the honorable Secretary of State ad interim the Meteor being detained, at the instance of the Spanish consul, by the district court in New York, the case has been communicated to the department.
[Page 594]The advices which this legation have had to this time, and which probably will he corroborated and amplified by others of the same nature, are that the Meteor was expressly built by subscriptions made principally in Boston to pursue and capture the Alabama, combining all the conditions of speed and strength necessary for that purpose, and being intended to carry three guns with a calibre of 60 pounds at the side, 100 at the prow, and another of 300 at the stern.
That the southern war being ended, it was intended to sell her to the government of the United States, and even to some foreign government, always on the belief that she might be considered a formidable war vessel, and yet pass to experienced even eyes as a real merchant ship; that the agents of Chili having entered into treaty for her two months ago, the negotiation was ultimately closed in consequence of the arrival of a new Chilian agent by the steamer of the 12th from Panama, with the necessary funds for the purchase; that the plan was, when once out of the country, with papers for Panama, under the flag, and with a crew in part American, to take in artillery, complete her crew, and change her flag at a neighboring port, thence proceeding at once to operate not only against merchant vessels, but also against the naval force of Spain; that, among various circumstances, which even without these antecedents would have been sufficient to render her suspicious at this late day, was that of her having secretly and at night taken in her supply of coal, there not being in her, beside what might be deemed necessary, any supply; and it being worthy of special attention, as one of the most serious indications, that there was no sign of any cargo for any kind of trade; and, in fine, and it is not the least essential, at the time of her detention there was on board Captain William Rebbolido, commander of the Chilian corvette Esmeralda, who came expressly to take command by the last steamer, there existing an affidavit of an officer of the United States navy that it was he who was to command the vessel ad interim and who confirms that fact by his testimony. These circumstances, without speaking of others which the New York press mentions, but which do not appear in proof at this legation, are, in the judgment of the undersigned, sufficient to constitute one of the plainest cases to which section third of the statute of neutrality of 1818 literally refers, to wit: the case of a’ vessel which prepares and arms, or attempts (to fit out and arm, or procure to be fitted out and armed) with the intent of being employed in the service of a belligerent power with which the United States are at peace, as actually happened with Spain in the hostilities she has been obliged to recur to against Chili, and such being the case, the vessel ought to be confiscated and the persons connected with her punished by fine and imprisonment, according to circumstances.
If the act of the United States had no existence, the prescriptions of international law would always be existent for the purpose of giving it effect and supplying its place. Far from being so, the said law, for the purpose of making more effective the execution of the prohibitions and penalties established by it, authorizes the President of the United States to detain the ships which may be in such conditions, and to use, if needful for that purpose, the land and naval forces and the militia of the United States.
It seems, however, that in view of the tenor of these definitive clauses in the act of neutrality, the efforts of the Chilian agents are now directed to having the case of the Meteor decided in conformity with section tenth of the same act of neutrality, permitting them to give security, more or less considerable, and to depart with their vessel from the territory of the United States. Very well; but the honorable Secretary of State will very well understand that said section ten is merely a general measure of precaution in respect of any armed vessels belonging to citizens of this country, which have to sail from its ports in time of war between two powers in friendship with the United States. This measure does not suppose either a charge or suspicion even against the owners [Page 595] of the vessel, who, notwithstanding, are obliged to give security that they will observe the national neutrality; therefore, very illy could reference be had to it, of the case of a vessel like the Meteor, against which there exists much more than suspicion, which belongs, therefore, to a different category, and in respect to which there does not exist, nor can exist, any provisions in virtue of which she can be allowed to sail from these ports on condition of giving security. The case assumes much more gravity when it is considered that in accordance with report believed in New York, the true purpose is to give effect to the original plan, not fearing to break openly the very regulations which are invoked, and according to the text of which the purport of the security is no other than that the bonded vessel be not employed by her owners to cruize or act hostilely toward the subjects, citizens, or property of any prince or foreign state with whom the United States are in peace. It would, in effect, be in view, according to the indications referred to, to forfeit the security as an expenditure the more on the expedition, and always to arm vessels in like condition outside of the North American jurisdiction. In this way the good faith of the government of the United States would be mocked, and the act of neutrality of the United States would be converted into an instrument for a deep enterprise essentially contrary to the object which the lawmakers had in mind.
The undersigned does not venture to suppose this; and protests on his part against the whole gratuitous supposition, but his duty compels him to say, what is clearly understood by the very notices which are published on the matter, and to forewarn the honorable Secretary of State ad interim against eventualities which are represented as possible.
It would not suffice, no, neither in this case, nor even in any case less grave, to take a security which it would be from the beginning intended to forfeit, and to proceed subsequently as if nothing more were involved than a sum of money.
Neither the letter, nor spirit, nor construction of a law can be at any time so contrary to the principle which dictated it, and the act of neutrality could not have been framed to authorize the breaking of its purport. The security is not in any case more than a caution to hinder a transgression, and its forfeiture by the commission of the transgression does not exonerate from the penalties that are applicable to the transgression itself. So, therefore, if the Meteor should depart from port, under security, and at once be armed as a cruiser, irrespectively of the sum which may have been deposited, her owners would be liable to trial in the courts of this country; the Chilian government, from the moment she hoisted its flag, would also be responsible to the government of the United States, and the government of the United States would became responsible, in turn, to the government of Spain. Meantime, notwithstanding, a violation of the law of nations of the greatest transcendance would have been committed, and such considerations as these are what the legislation had in view, when authority was vested in the President to supplement the jurisdiction of the courts, by requiring in such case greater guaranties than the bond to prevent the neutrality of the government from being scandalously violated through the bad faith of belligerent agents. The undersigned, nevertheless, cannot admit the possibility that the Meteor should in any view of the case go forth from New York. To the facts alleged, another is alleged, which is of great weight, to wit, the notorious existence of a very real conspiracy against Spain, which shows itself in New York—conspiracy, at the head of which are Chilian agents, who say they are invested with official character, and accredited near this government; a conspiracy, the public demonstrations of which have been such as to permit no doubt of their secret operations; a conspiracy, in fine, to which the undersigned calls the attention of the government with the more confidence, as the good faith of Spain toward the United States during the late war in the observance of the duties of neutrality becomes better known.
If, in fine, more reasons are needful, it would be easy to find them in documents [Page 596] recently published by the Department of State, and which determine the jurisprudence of the government of the United States upon the matter.
Hoping, then, that on this occasion it will not be wanting to the laws of a neutrality whose loyal fulfilment the Spanish government has hastened to recognize in this government from the outset in the question of Chili, the undersigned avails of the occasion to reiterate to the honorable Secretary of State ad interim the assurance of his highest consideration.
Hon. William Hunter Acting Secretary of State.