Mr. Sherman to Mr.
Woodford.
Department of State,
Washington
,
November 23,
1897
.
No. 75.]
Sir: Having further reference to instruction
No. 72, of the 20th instant, and particularly to the inclosures
therewith, I transmit for your information copy of a letter, dated the
19th instant, from the Secretary of the Treasury communicating a report
of the surveyor of the port of New York touching the alleged
filibustering expedition of the [Page 614] schooner Silver Heels. This is entirely
confirmatory of the statements previously made showing that the men
detailed at Pier 39, East River, to watch the Silver
Heels were employed by the Spanish consul and acted under his
advice and supervision.
Respectfully, yours,
[Inclosure.]
Mr. Gage to Mr.
Sherman.
Treasury Department, Office of the
Secretary,
Washington, D.
C.
,
November 19,
1897
.
Sir: I have the honor to transmit herewith
a copy of a letter dated the 16th instant, from the collector of
customs at New York, and of its inclosure, consisting of a report by
the surveyor of customs at New York relative to the action taken
October 21, 1897, at the port mentioned, to detain the schooner Silver Heels, and stating particularly that
the men detailed at Pier 39, East River, were representatives of the
Pinkerton Detective Agency, who were employed by the Spanish consul
at New York and acted under his direction.
The surveyor reports that the expedition throughout was under the
full charge and direction of the United States marshal, who informed
the collector that he had had an extended conference with the United
States attorney as to details.
A letter similar to this has been addressed to the Navy Department
and to the Department of Justice.
Respectfully, yours,
[Subinclosure No. 1.]
Office of the Collector of Customs,
Port of New York
,
November 16, 1897
.
Hon. Lyman J.
Gage,
Secretary of the Treasury,
Washington, D. C.
Sir: In a personal conversation with you on
Wednesday last you expressed a desire for a further report in regard
to the Silver Heels matter, and also wished
me to ascertain definitely for you who was assigned to watch the
expedition at Pier 39, East River, New York City.
In pursuance of your request I have had the matter investigated, and
beg to call your attention to the further report (inclosed) made to
me by the honorable surveyor of the port, and to the fact stated
therein that the men detailed at Pier 39, East River, were
representatives of Pinkerton’s Detective Agency, who were employed
by the Spanish consul at this port and acted under his
direction.
Very respectfully, yours,
G. R. Bidwell, Collector.
[Subinclosure No. 2.]
Office of the Surveyor of Customs,
Port of New York
,
November 13, 1897
.
The Collector of the
Port.
Sir: In addition to my report of the 21st
ultimo, in the matter of the filibustering expedition for Cuba from
Pier 39, New York, and at your request, I beg to submit for your
further information:
As previously stated, Assistant Secretary Spaulding’s telegram of
advice and instruction was received at 2.30 p.m., and I at once
directed the captain of the Chandler to hold
both crew and cutter in readiness for immediate use. Immediately
thereafter was visited by Mr. Augustus Noble Hand, who informed me
that he was a member of the firm of Curtis, Mallet-Prevost &
Colt, 30 Broad street, for whom he appeared as counsel in behalf of
the Spanish consul. With him were Mr. David C. Thornhill and H. W.
Bearce, who informed me that they both were assistant super [Page 615] intendents of the
Pinkerton National Detective Agency, 57 Broadway. Mr. Hand,
representing the Spanish consul, stated to me that he did not desire
the vessel detained at dock, but seized after departure therefrom,
and the inference I drew from this conversation, as related to this
action, was that it required a combination of men and arms to
constitute a filibustering expedition, and they wished to emphasize
the situation by permitting actual departure with the two united and
upon the water.
Mr. Hand and Mr. Thornhill stated to me that they proposed that the
detective agency have the watching of the pier, and they would
advise United States marshal promptly of the departure of the sloop.
They seem most anxious that this part of the affair be left entirely
to them, and it impressed me at the time that they felt first that
there would be less chance of a failure if their own men were
assigned to this particular duty, and second, that they feared their
plan of allowing the vessel to leave the dock might be interfered
with if this detail was in charge of a customs officer. I made the
suggestion that the vessel could no doubt be detained at the dock,
and that we might seek advice on this point from the United States
district attorney. Mr. Hand objected to this, and stated
unqualifiedly that they desired the vessel to be taken after she had
left her berth, further stating that the details of the affair would
be arranged with the United States district attorney and United
States marshal. They took their departure, and I did not again see
them until I met them upon the cutter at midnight, in company with
the marshal and his deputies. I was subsequently advised by the
United States district attorney by telephone to hold the cutter in
readiness for the marshal, with whom he would arrange all the
details of the affair. He further informed me that the sloop, no
doubt having a coast license, could not be seized, and that we could
only follow her.
I have since been informed by Mr. Bearce, of the detective agency,
that it was arranged that Mr. Thornhill, one of the marshal’s men,
and himself were detailed to arrest the captain and the mate. I was
not informed as to the names of the detectives who were detailed to
watch the pier and the sloop, and have since been advised that they
have no record of who the men were, they being known only to Mr.
Thornhill, who was directly in charge, and he has since been
transferred to Boston, in charge of the agency there.
As to the manner of transmitting the information to the Barge Office
as to the departure of sloop and tug, I beg to refer to my report of
October 21. The expedition throughout was under the full charge and
direction of the United States marshal, who informed me that he had
had an extended conference with the United States district attorney
as to details. As to their character I have no information except as
evidenced by their subsequent action, and what was conveyed to me by
Mr. Bearce, as before stated.
Respectfully, yours,
