Mr. Yeaman to Mr. Seward.

No. 13.]

Sir: Your despatch of the 26th of March, No. 11, has been received, and I have the honor to state that I have accepted, for the government, the naval stores mentioned in my despatch No. 10 of the 3d of March, as directed by you. They are left in store with Mr. Puggaard, I not deeming it necessary to incur the expense of removing them until I am finally instructed as to their disposition.

In receipting for them I have followed your suggestion and said nothing about the particular derivation of the title of the United States, but only mentioned the facts of Mr. Arman’s original ownership, their being a part of the armament of the Stonewall, his tender of them, and my acceptance for and on behalf of the government. A duplicate of the inventory of the goods, as made out by [Page 154] Mr. Puggaard, is herewith enclosed, upon which I have indorsed a duplicate of the receipt I gave him for them, and also a copy of his statement that they are still in his possession and subject to my order, all which I hope will prove satisfactory. I have examined specimens of the shells and projectiles, all designed for rifled guns, and to me they appear to be made with great care and skill. I am now advised that they are not and never have been filled and primed.

In your despatch you speak of these stores as “guns and other naval munitions,” and again, as “guns, &c.” If anywhere in my despatch I spoke of guns as a part of the property and munitions offered to be given up, it was purely a mistake, as I have never so understood it. By reference to my office copy of the despatch, on record here, I find that I spoke of the munitions as being “all adapted to Armstrong guns,” and as being “valuable in the use of the guns of the Stonewall, or guns of similar pattern and calibre.” I call your attention to this, as the erroneous impression you are resting under might have some influence upon the order you may make for the disposition of the property. If that order has not already been made, it would appear to me that by far the best thing to be done with them is to ship them to the United States, as any disposition of them here would be apt to be at a ruinous sacrifice.

Referring to political affairs here, it seems to me that some of the leading officials connected with the administration are not grieved at the idea of Prussia and Austria going to war in a quarrel over the disposition of the spoils they jointly wrested from Denmark. However natural this feeling may be with the people and the government of this kingdom, and whatever may be said of the justice of the conduct of the great powers towards Denmark upon the curious question of the duchies, that conduct, so far as it affected Denmark, is probably past discussion; it would be only a remote possibility that another war about the duchies would result in their restoration to this kingdom, and a great German war would give unalloyed pain to everybody except those who imagine that their own views of dynasty and boundary might be facilitated in the midst of the calamity. There is evidently more interest felt in the matter here than at the date of my last despatch. The leading paper here states that late advices have made it proper for government to abandon its entirely passive position in the affair, and to make important orders in view of the occasion, and supposes that Denmark may yet find compensation for the wrongs done her. I have no information of the matters thus alluded to. It is also alleged that there is an increased activity in military and especially in naval circles, a fact I have not been able to discover, and which, if it exists, I would be inclined to attribute to a wise and just precaution.

In a late conversation with Count Frys, I alluded to the imminence of hostilities, and suggested the great incidental advantage that would result to the commerce and carrying trade of Denmark by her neutrality in the contest. He replied, “Yes, if we can remain so.” There was a doubt in his language and manner which I was not expecting; still I am unable to believe that this government has any serious warlike intentions, and am yet impressed with the belief that the great German powers will not fight about the duchies.

It has been spoken of here, in the form of rumor and report, that Prussia has proposed an alliance with Denmark upon the terms of ceding and guaranteeing to her the north half of Schleswig, that part of the disputed territory which is most purely Danish in its language, feelings and manners. I have no material reason to believe this is true, and it would seem inconsistent with the absolute tone and uncompromising position assumed by Prussia for some months past upon the whole question.

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

GEORGE H. YEAMAN.

Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.