Papers Relating to Foreign Affairs, Accompanying the Annual Message of the President to the Second Session of the Thirty-ninth Congress

Mr. Washburn to Mr. Seward.

No. 64.]

Corrientes, July 27, 1866.

Sir: I have just received a long letter from President Mitre in reply to my note of the 21st instant, a copy of which I sent with my despatch of yesterday, No. 63. A copy of this letter is enclosed herewith. He still declines to give me a passage through the military lines to Paraguay, and claims it as a “perfect right” of the allies to prevent me or any other person whatever from crossing over into the territory of their enemies. He justifies himself in this position by saying that Admiral Godon had explicitly recognized it as just, and as the exercise of a perfect right. In my different interviews with President Mitre he has alluded to the opinions of Admiral Godon, and to the fact that he had admitted that the allies had only exercised a right in accordance with the practice of all civilized nations in refusing me or any other person a passage through their military lines. In my interview with Admiral Tamandare, on board his flagship, on the 7th of April last, an account of which I gave in my despatch of April 27th, he also justified himself in detaining me by quoting the admissions of Admiral Godon. I always denied that I was in any way bound by the admissions of the admiral, and insisted that my detention was in direct violation of the laws of nations. I had never understood that foreign ministers were to accept the interpretation of laws from naval commanders, or that foreign governments were to treat with them to the derogation of the diplomatic representatives, especially in matters affecting the rights and courtesies due to the latter.

I shall leave this place in a day or two and return to Buenos Ayres, and at once send a copy of your despatch No. 43 to the admiral. I learn that the squadron has gone back to Rio, so that it may be some weeks before I shall be able to communicate with him.

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

CHARLES A. WASHBURN.

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

[Translation.]

President Mitre to Mr. Washburn.

Headquarters, Tuyuty, July 24, 1866.

Sir: I have had the honor to receive the note of your excellency, dated the 21st instant in which, making reference to the diverse circumstances that have inte6rvened since you presented yourself soliciting a passage to the Paraguay territory in order to continue there your diplomatic duties with which you were charged by your government, you terminate your note by protesting against the delay of a definite answer on that matter, in the supposition that it may have been the mind of the Argentine government or of the allied governments to hinder the United States from having a diplomatic representation in Paraguay.

Without entering on my part into a discussion of the point of international right that your excellency touches upon, I limit myself to consider the acts of which you make mention, referring to whom it pertains such discussion, as likewise the consideration and answer to your protest if it should take place.

When your excellency presented yourself for the first time at my headquarters soliciting, in terms most frank and friendly, your passage to the Paraguay territory, the operations of war against the republic of Paraguay had not yet commenced, and all the allied forces, land and naval, were yet in Argentine territory. I then manifested to your excellency that I believed that it would not be inconvenient that you should continue your voyage to Paraguay, but that this being a matter that pertained to the decision of the government, in which it ought to co-operate with its allies, and not being myself in the exercise of the executive power, I would refer it to my government in order that, with the consent of said allies, it should dictate to me the line of policy that I ought to pursue. Your excellency having assented to this, returned to Buenos Ayres and obtained from the Argentine government, with the approbation of their allies, the passage which you solicited. But in these circumstances, the admiral of the allied squadron being in Montevideo, mentioned to the United States admiral whom he met there that there would be no obstacle in the way of the minister continuing his voyage to Paraguay all the while that things should be in the state in which they then were, that is to say, the allied forces being in Argentine territory, as when your excellency honored me with your visit at headquarters; but that such a thing could not take place after the allies should establish their line of war, since it was a right, recognized by all nations, that the military lines of belligerents could not be crossed by neutrals, whatever might be their character, except by an express concession, and in so far as it would not damage their arrangements or prejudice their operations. This principle was recognized, without any restriction, by the admiral of the United States, declaring that we are in our perfect right in not allowing any neutral to cross our lines of war once established.

From unforeseen accidents, and in circumstances that are made clear by our confidential correspondence, your excellency arrived at Corrientes, after much delay, at a time when the invasion of Paraguay was already effected and when our lines of war controlled their coasts. Thus far the circumstances had varied, as your excellency may yourself remember. Notwithstanding this, being desirous of giving to your excellency a proof of esteem towards your person and of the consideration of the allied governments towards that of the great republic of the United States, I referred it again to the decision of the allied governments, a proceeding to which your excellency willingly gave your assent.

I then thought, as I manifested to your excellency, to be able to give very soon a definite answer to the question; but the minister plenipotentiary of Brazil not finding himself authorized to decide the case, the definitive resolution of the allied governments being yet pending—having to make their communications through such long distances, and in the midst of the pressing engagements of a war to which they have been provoked without reason and without justice—it has not been possible for me to give such answer to your excellency in my quality of general-in-chief of the allied armies, in which I have only been a simple intermediary, without assuming in any case the character of a diplomatic personality to treat or discuss with your excellency, for which reason I have limited myself always to communications confidential and friendly; this also being the reason for which I sent my military secretary to your excellency to give some explanations in my character.

Not having, then, to the present time obtained any definite answer from the allied governments, from the circumstance that it has not been possible for them to act in concert, it is not possible for me to accept the conclusions that your excellency deduces in the note to which this is an answer, neither the diplomatic personality in which you invest me, nor to take into account the protest that you make in consequence.

Notwithstanding, I cannot let pass in silence that, in compliance with the instructions of the allied governments to permit no one to cross over lines of war, they have had in view only the exercise of a perfect right, a right explicitly recognized by the admiral of the United States, before that your excellency commenced your voyage on distinct conditions, and that, this being in harmony with the practice of all civilized nations, and as the exercise of their own right, it cannot give offence to a third; and it is correctly deduced from this that the allied governments, in making use of their own right in establishing a general rule for all, have not had in view to offend any other, and much less that of the United States, respecting which they cherish sentiments of confraternity and sympathy.

With only this, I hope that your excellency will yourself acknowledge the violence of your deduction, when, starting from the fact of a definite answer not having been given to this late time, you suppose that the intention of the allied governments may be to prevent that of the United States from having a diplomatic representative in Paraguay, which cannot be deduced, not even from the refusal itself, since it would import only the use of a proper right, foreseen and acknowledged beforehand; so much the more as your excellency having obtained, in time fit and opportune, the definite answer that you solicited and the passport to continue your journey to Paraguay, and having arrived at Corrientes at a time when the circumstances under which condition the passport was given had entirely changed, the act itself fails to serve as a base for such deduction.

Therefore I refer everything to my government, in order that, together with the allied governments, it may decide this matter and may give to your excellency in the form, and by such action as may pertain to it, the definite answer, taking into consideration your protest, if there should be occasion for it, leaving this correspondence for my part thus terminated, since finding myself engaged in an active war and of daily combats, and without the exercise of other than military functions, it is not possible, neither is it permitted me, to enter into diplomatic disputes.

Having thus answered the note of your excellency, I cannot avoid showing that if the sentiments of the government of the United States have been friendly towards the government and the institutions of the Argentine Republic, greater and more spontaneous have been those that the Argentine people and government have manifested towards the government and institutions of the United States in times of real trial, the same to the diplomatic agents, including your excellency.

With this motive, I have the honor to salute your excellency with my most distinguished consideration.

BARTOLOME MITRE.

His Excellency Charles A. Washburn, Minister of the United States in Paraguay.