Mr. Roberts, Spanish minister, to Mr. Fish, Secretary of State.

[775] The undersigned, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of Spain, has the honor to inform the honorable Secretary of State that, in the month of May last, the Spanish government, represented by a commission of naval officers, made, with Mr. Cornelius Delamater, a ship-builder and citizen of the United States residing in New York, a contract, whereby the latter agreed to build, for the account of the Spanish government, thirty vessels of a certain class, designed exclusively *for the coast service, and not for long voyages, which are to be delivered to the chief of said commission at the beginning of the month of December next.

The undersigned deems it his duty to state to the honorable Secretary of State that the building of these vessels was ordered to be done in this republic, in the certainty that there existed no lawful cause which could impede the same, and in view of the numerous antecedents which existed with regard to similar cases of war-vessels purchased in the United States by other foreign nations, and in consideration, moreover, of the traditional friendship, which has always existed between both countries, which friendship the recent revolution in Spain ought apparently to have served to draw closer.

All these things were considered when the contract was made by the Spanish representative with the American citizen, Mr. Cornelius Delamater. Thus it is that the undersigned has seen, with the greatest surprise, in the newspapers of the 24th and 25th instant, the documents connected with the judicial order relative to these vessels, signed by Mr. Edwards Pierrepont, district attorney of the southern district of the State of New York.

[776] The first of these documents is an order for the seizure of the thirty gun-boats, founded on the consideration that Spain being at war with Pent, these vessels may eventually be used against the said republic; the second is an order of attachment, or preventive embargo, citing Mr. De*lamater to appear, on the 14th day of December next, at 11 o’clock in the morning, before the judge of the southern district of the State of New York.

There is consequently no doubt that the continuation of these proceedings may render it impossible for Mr. Delamater duly to fulfill his contract with the Spanish government, and it results, moreover, that the intervention of the Government of the United States would prevent the government which I have the honor to represent from taking due and lawful possession of its property; this intervention would be the de facto cause of the annulment of the contract made by Spain with Mr. Delamater, and, in case of the occurrence of this grave event, an event which is rendered still more grave by the consequences which may ensue from it, I allow myself, beforehand, officially to call thereto the attention of the honorable Secretary of State.

[777] What explanation can be given of these proceedings? At whose request have they been initiated? Can they be legally justified by the state of the relations existing between Spain and Peru? The honorable Secretary of State is aware that Spain had already accepted the mediation of the United States for the negotiation of a peace, or the signing of an armistice, long before the republics of the Pacific decided to do the same, and, as to the relations with Peru, Mr. Hamilton Fish knows that she has given her consent to the proposed mediation, the preliminary negotiations now being so far advanced that it is [Page 744] possible that on the 15th of January next the plenipotentiaries of the aforesaid republics may meet the plenipotentiary of the Spanish nation at Washington, in order to discuss the said question, as is proved by the recent note which the honorable Secretary of State addressed to the undersigned on the 23d of October last, which reads as follows:

The undersigned. Secretary of State of the United States, has the honor to acknowledge the receipt of Mr. Lopez Roberts’s note of the 18th. instant, in answer to the note addressed to him by the undersigned on the 17th of July last, submitting a copy of a proposed instruction to the diplomatic representatives of the United States accredited to the governments of Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia and Chili, suggesting a conference in the city of Washington, on the 15th of January next, between the representatives of i those governments and the representative of Spain upon the subject of a formal armistice or definitive peace.

In reply, the undersigned has the honor to inform Mr. Lopez Roberts that his views upon the subject of the suggested conference are in harmony with those of the undersigned, who hopes that he will in due season be able to communicate to Mr. Lopez Roberts the fact of the acceptance by the governments of Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, and Chili, of the proposition of the conference referred to.

[778] Spain, as is a notorious fact, and as appears from diplomatic documents, has always been disposed to sign a peace ever since hostilities on her part ceased in the Pacific, and she accepted at once, and without hesitating *for an instant, the mediation of her ancient ally the United States, for the settlement of her differences with the aforesaid republics, disregarding the violent but harmless demonstrations which Peru recently thought proper to make in favor of the bandits (or outlaws) of Cuba, following herein the example of the Government of the United States, which attached no importance on a recent occasion to the proceedings of the accredited representative of Peru, who allowed himself, clothed in his official and diplomatic character, to utter, in New York, offensive and highly improper language against a nation friendly to the United States, disregarding the most common rules of the law of nations, and invading the high prerogatives of the sovereignty of the nation, represented in the person of General Grant, President of this republic.

[779] In the year 1868, a case arose similar to the one which is the principal object of this note, and which the undersigned thinks this a fitting occasion to recall to the recollection of the lion or able Secretary of State, with which case Peru was connected. The government of the latter republic purchased two vessels of war from that of the United States, and on what ground did Mr. Garcia y Garcia, at that time minister of Peru, ask that they might be authorized to sail from the ports of the American Union? On the 14th day of April, 1868, he addressed a communication to the Hon. Mr. Seward, then Secretary of State of the United States, declaring that hostilities between Spain and Peru had ceased on the 2d day of May, 1866; that the result was a genuine peace as far as regards the duties and rights of neutral powers; that it was a de facto peace, as had been settled by the United States and other powers under similar circumstances, as in the case of the new Spanish-American republics before their recognition by Spain; that in the present case it had already been so decided by Great Britain; that the state of war had absolutely ceased, and that neither the right nor the duty existed any longer on the part of the American Government to consider Spain and Peru as belligerents, or to subject either of these two governments to any restriction in the ports of the United States.

On the 20th of April, 1868, Mr. Seward replied, asking for further explanations regarding the matter.

Mr. Garcia replied on the 8th of May of the same year, affirming, in [Page 745] the most explicit terms that “there no longer existed a formal state of war between the allied republics (Chili and Peru) and Spain,” and giving further explanations as Mr. Seward desired.

On the 20th of June, 1868, Mr. Garcia again broached the subject in an elaborate argument, with quotations from distinguished publicists, and references to historical precedents, and with reiterated and formal declarations that the state of war between Peru and Spain has ceased, and that a state of peace existed as far as regarded all questions relating to the duties of other nations as neutrals.

[780] *And what was the attitude which, in view of these communications, was taken by the then Secretary of State of the United States? Mr. Seward stated to Mr. Facundo Goñi, minister of Spain at Washington, on the 9th of July, 1868, as follows:

In consequence of the proceedings of the House of Representatives which have been referred to, it seems to the President that the occasion has not yet arrived when it will be necessary for him to decide the grave question which has been raised before this Government, between the ministers of Spain and Peru, namely, the question whether the war which was heretofore waged between those nations has been practically brought to an end or not. Frankness, however, obliges the undersigned to say that unless some unforeseen circumstances shall soon occur, the time for acting upon that question would seem to be near at hand.

The undersigned freely admits the difficulties which are likely to attend the decision of the question. It is certain that a condition of war can be raised without an authoritative declaration of war, and, on the other hand, the situation of peace may be restored by the long suspension of hostilities without a treaty of peace being made. History is full of such occurrences. What period of suspension of war is necessary to justify the presumption of the restoration of peace has never yet been settled, and must in every case be determined with reference to collateral facts and circumstances.

[781] The Spanish government subsequently accepted*the doctrines sustained by the Secretary of State in the foregoing lines, as is shown by the note which Mr. Facundo Goñi had the honor to address him on the 24th of November, 1868.

In view, then, of the considerations set forth in this note, and of the facts therein cited, the undersigned natters himself that no obstacle will be placed by the Government of the United States in the way of the execution of the contract made by the citizen, Mr. Cornelius Delamater, with the representative of the Spanish government, and that Mr. Delamater may be at liberty to deliver the vessels as he may finish them, without any hinderance.

Although the undersigned has no right to interfere in a judicial proceeding instituted by the Government of the United States against an American citizen, it is his duty to state that if these proceedings should result in preventing Mr. Delamater from fulfilling the terms of his contract with the Spanish representative, as from this fact a grave situation would arise, the undersigned, in the name of his government, informs the honorable Secretary of State that he reserves from this day forward, and giving due notice, all his rights and liberty of action.

The undersigned, in fulfilling his duty in calling the attention of Mr. Hamilton Fish to the case of the occurrence of the event indicated in this note which is not to be expected, will rely under all circumstances on the sense of justice and the distinguished impartiality which characterize the honorable Secretary of State.

The undersigned avails himself of this occasion to reiterate to the honorable Secretary of State of the United States the assurance of his highest consideration.

MAURICIO LOPEZ ROBERTS.

The Hon. Secretary of State
Of the United States, &c.