Office of the Historian

Mr. Thompson to Mr. Gresham.

Legation of the United States,
Petropolis, February 5, 1894. (Received March 19.)
No. 155.]

Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your cipher telegram dated February 1, stating that my telegram reporting Admiral Benham’s action on the 29th ultimo was satisfactory and expressing the hope that I was in accord with him.

Referring to the last part of the above telegram, wherein you express the hope that I am in accord with Admiral Benham, I have the honor to state that my official and personal relations with him since he assumed command of the South Atlantic station have been of the most cordial and satisfactory character. He has established and maintains the same position with regard to commerce that I have contended for from time to time since the revolution commenced.

No positive action was taken jointly by the commanders until the 6th of November, when they informed Admiral Mello that he must not interfere with the free operation of commerce on the bay. Admiral Mello respected this notice, and no difficulty was experienced until [Page 122] Admiral Saldanha da Gama succeeded him, about the 12th of December, when he at once announced that he would endeavor to prevent the passage of goods to the custom-house or to the shore. Without any notice of the abandonment of their former position the English acquiesced in Admiral Saldanha’s ruling, and the commander of their naval forces went so far as to threaten prosecution of the masters of the vessels of his country who in defiance of this order went to the shore, thereby causing loss of life. Protests alleging similar action on the part of our naval forces were filed at the consulate about the same time.

This ruling of the insurgent admiral and the acquiescence of the naval commanders virtually amounted to a blockade, until the timely action of Admiral Benham on the 29th ultimo, which has been fully reported. In my opinion the action of Admiral Benham falls clearly within your instructions to me of November 1, and it was with the view of carrying out these instructions that I addressed my communication of December 22 to Capt. Picking, which he declined to consider.

In this connection it gives me pleasure to transmit copy of a letter from Admiral Benham to Admiral Saldanha defining his position. This letter is in substance a reiteration of the notice given by the commanders on November 6, which was subsequently abandoned when Admiral Saldanha assumed command. Had the notice been consistently maintained the incident which occasioned the necessity of displaying force to sustain our rights would not have occurred.

I have, etc.,

Thos. L. Thompson.
[Inclosure in No. 155.]

Rear-Admiral Benham to Admiral da Grama.

U. S. Flagship San Francisco (Second Rate),
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, January 30, 1894.

Sir: In reply to your communication of yesterday, which I had the honor to receive, asking if my action of the 29th “means positive interference in our domestic trouble, or if it only refers to the protection of commerce under the American flag,” permit me to say that a careful perusal of the letters which I have had the honor of addressing you would, I think, make this question unnecessary, as they all refer to acts of violence and interference committed by your orders against American vessels, and of my intention to protect these vessels. However, that there may be no misunderstanding, I have to say, that in no case have I interfered in the slightest way with the military operations of either side in the contest now going on, nor is it my intention to do so. That is not my mission. My duty is to protect Americans and American commerce and this I intend to do to the fullest extent. American vessels must not be interfered with in any way in their movements in going to the wharves or about the harbor, it being understood, however, that they must take the consequences of getting in the line of fire where legitimate hostilities are actually in progress. I am not laying down any new principle of action. My course rests upon well-established principles of international law.

There is another point which it may be well to speak of now: Until belligerent rights are accorded you, you have no right to exercise any authority whatever over American ships or property of any kind. You can not search neutral vessels or seize any portion of their cargoes, even though they be within the class which may be clearly defined as contraband of war, during hostilities between two independent Governments. The forcible seizure of any such articles by those under your command would be, in your present status, an act of piracy. Regretting that I am forced to speak thus plainly,

I have, etc.,

A. E. K. Benham,
Commanding U. S. Naval Force on South Atlantic Station.