No. 246.
Mr. Fish to Mr. De
Long.
Washington, December 5, 1872.
Sir: Your dispatches No. 271, under date of 3d September, and No. 282, under date of 27th September, reached this Department at the same time. They relate to your proceedings with regard to the Peruvian bark Maria Luz.
Mr. Shepard’s previous proceedings in relation to the same vessel were reported in his No. 55, under date of July 20, in which he stated that he had informed the captain of the vessel that, “although always ready and anxious to render aid and assistance to vessels bearing the Peruvian flag, and engaged in legitimate business, still, as the coolie trade is prohibited by the laws of the United States, and as the ship, by the captain’s own confession, was engaged in that trade, he withheld his official name, aid, and sanction, and therefore declined to assist or protect the captain in any manner whatsoever.”
In my reply, No 133, under date of August 29, Mr. Shepard was informed that, as that vessel was engaged in the coolie trade, his proceedings, as reported by him in that dispatch, were approved.
In the papers which you have submitted, reference is made more than once to my instruction No. 15, under date of April 13, 1870. In that instruction you were requested “to attend to any matters which may be intrusted to your charge by the government of that republic, (Peru,) so far as this can be done compatibly with other instructions from this Department.”
In my No. 127, under date of December 21, 1871, in speaking of the appointment of envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to Japan, as proposed to be conferred upon you by the government of the Hawaiian Islands, you were informed “that, while holding an office of profit or trust under this Government, you are not at liberty to accept the position conferred upon you by the King of Hawaii, unless by consent of Congress. At the same time no objection exists to the exercise of your good offices in behalf of the Hawaiian government, so far as you can do so consistently with the provisions above referred to.”
It does not appear that the Peruvian government had in any way intrusted to your charge the case of the Maria Luz, or that that government [Page 564] had made any communication to you with regard to any occasion that might arise for the exercise of your good offices. On the contrary, it is stated in your dispatch that no answer whatever has been returned by the Peruvian minister of foreign affairs to communications which you have heretofore addressed to him.
Under these circumstances, it is regretted that you deemed it proper to take any steps which might wear the aspect of giving the support and countenance of the United States to a vessel suspected by the Japanese government, not without reason, of complicity in a nefarious traffic, of a character particularly odious to the Government and people of the United States.
I am, &c.,