Mr. Bayard to Mr. Gresham.

No. 153.]

Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge your cablegram of this date, and have just returned from an interview with Lord Rosebery at the foreign office, in which I communicated the full purport of your cablegram.

I have just sent you by cable his reply, which I think will be entirely satisfactory, in relation to the attitude and contemplated action of this Government in the questions now pending in Brazil.

I repeated in substance the facts stated in your cablegram and the concurrence of opinion by Sir Julian Pauncefote, as well as your coincidence of opinion as to the rule of international law as stated by Wheaton, and Dana’s note to section 23, applicable to the Brazilian case.

I stated the case to be that of a naval officer entrusted with the command of what was virtually the entire naval force of his country and accepting such command under a government with whom he cooperated for several months and then suddenly threw himself into opposition, carrying with him his entire fleet, and creating an insurrection. That, with full information of the facts, but with no intention of interfering in the struggle, living up to their treaty stipulations, and an unbroken amity of nearly seventy years with the Brazilian people and their Government, the Government of the United States had three times refused to recognize as belligerents Admiral di Mello and his associates in arms, such recognition not being justified by the facts and circumstances and the well-established rules of international law.

Lord Rosebery expressed his concurrence in the judgment of the Government of the United States, and stated very clearly and decidedly the intention of his Government to act in accordance with their decision in the matter.

I am, etc.,

T. F. Bayard,