to me quite within my authority to accede to his request. I did so with pleasure. I then remarked that there was still the latter portion of our transactions on this subject, my report of which had not reached Mr. Seward at the latest dates. This embraced the assent given by his lordship to the general policy which had been suggested as expedient to regulate the cases that might arise in Ireland out of the Fenian disturbance. I had perceived that it had already been carried out in part by the liberation of several of the persons who had been arrested. To this his lordship assented. He added that it was the disposition of the gov ernment to carry out this purpose so far as it could be done consistently with their security. I said I was very glad to learn this, because some difficulties had presented themselves to Mr. Seward in the action taken by the authorities in Ireland, as it appeared from the official correspondence with the consul in Dublin, which might, perhaps, become grave. This more particularly related to the distinction made between the native and naturalized Americans in regard to the degree of Mr. West's right of access to them. I then read to him the substance of your despatch No. 1717, of the 22d of March. His lordship then went into some reasoning to prove that the government could not, consistently with their theory of allegiance, recognize any right on the part of Mr. West to visit the naturalized Irishmen. Here he repeated much of what he had said in our earlier conversation. I then pointed out to him the inexpediency of raising that when there seemed little necessity for it. The distinction made in these cases was purely invidious and embarrassing to my government, without doing any good to them. It appeared that Mr. West might visit native Americans, but he was not allowed to do the same in the case of Irish-born naturalized citizens. Yet he was permitted to correspond with these last, which virtually conceded the point of communication. Surely, then, the question became reduced to so slight a difference that no serious principle could be involved in the additional concession. If he could write, how would it be worse that he should be able to speak to these people? His lordship apparently saw the folly of this distinction, and waived further discussion of the matter, as it seemed to me, with an intention quietly to remove the difficulty. I then called his attention to the case of John A. Commerford, embraced in your despatch No. 1723, of the 26th March. This person had been held to be an Irish naturalized citizen, at Dublin. Such was the reply to Mr. West's representation in his case. I said I might have made it the subject of a note in form, but I preferred on the whole not to take that course, at least, before I had mentioned the matter to his lordship. The papers connected with the despatch seemed to me pretty well to establish the fact that Mr. Commerford was a native American, and that he was innocent of all evil intention. In which case I strongly hoped that he might be released. I had brought copies of them, which I proposed to leave with his lordship, if he would permit me, for his consideration; and I hoped that if they produced the same effect on him that they had on me, there would be no further obstacle to his liberation. His lordship said that he would very cheerfully take them, and send them to Ireland for the consideration of the authorities there. There were so many false allegations made by the prisoners on that subject that much suspicion rested on the accuracy of all of them. He did not, however, doubt that if my impression should prove correct, the case would be acted upon at an early moment. There was some other general conversation upon the course taken towards the government at Washington in the present difficulty. His lordship intimated that much pressure had been put upon members of the cabinet by individuals in both houses of Parliament to bring about some formal remonstrances with us against permitting the Fenian demonstrations to go uncensured. The propriety of a proclamation by the President was suggested. In all these cases he had distinctly declared his policy, which was to abstain from any application to the American government whatever. There had not been a line written to Sir Frederick Bruce to be communicated. So long as no hostile act was attempted in any direction, they preferred to trust the friendly disposition of the government, without embarrassing them by complaints, or by asking for measures which might, if resorted to, do more harm than good. In the present condition of the movement a proclamation might be seized upon by the agitators as a pretext for laying the defeat of their schemes to that cause, and relieving themselves from the odium of their failure. I said that, in my opinion, that was clearly the wisest course. The Fenian movement seemed to me to have no root in the soil in America. With the defeat of all chance in Ireland it could not long flourish there. The prisoners were now all anxious to compound to leave the island, if they could only be released. This I regarded as a sign of complete despair. Under such circumstances the agitation could not be much longer kept up. It was better to let it meet with a natural death. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, SIR: In connection with your despatch No. 1723, of the 26th of March, and with my No. 1181, of Thursday's date, relating to the case of John A. Commerford, I have now the satisfaction to report that by a private note received from Lord Clarendon last evening, I learn that he has been released by the authorities at Dublin, on condition that he leaves the country. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, SIR Referring to instruction No. 1737, of the 11th of this month, relative to the fishery question, growing out of the termination of the reciprocity treaty, I now transmit for your information a copy of a report made by this department to the President, in answer to a resolution of the House of Representatives, of the 10th instant, requesting information on the subject. I am, sir, your obedient servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq.,. Sr., Sr., Sr. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, April 12, 1866. The Secretary of State to whom was referred a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 10th instant, in the following words: "Resolved, That the President of the United States be respectfully requested to inform this House what steps have been taken to protcet the rights and interests of American citizens in the fishing grounds adjacent to the British provinces, and whether any legislation or other action on the part of Congress is, in his judgment, necessary to secure these rights and interests in consequence of the abrogation of the reciprocity treaty of 1854," has the honor to report: That the Secretary of the Navy has, by the President's direction, taken preparatory measures for sending seasonably a naval force to the fishing grounds adjacent to the British North American provinces, which force, it is believed, will be adequate to protect the rights and interests of American citizens against any unlawful violence. It is proper to state, however, that this department has reason to believe that there are at present no good grounds for apprehending any collision or any necessity for the employment of force. The attention of the President, and also the attention of her Majesty's government, has been directed to the question, whether negotiation or legislation could be advantageously employed in adjusting the differences which have heretofore existed between the United States and Great Britain concerning the fisheries. The measures taken in that regard are not sufficiently matured to render it expedient or beneficial to suggest any form of special action by Congress at the present time. Respectfully submitted: The PRESIDENT. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. No. 1183.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: I have to acknowledge the reception of despatches from the department numbered 1721, and from 1724 to 1731, inclusive; likewise a set of the second edition of the diplomatic correspondence from 1776 to 1789, in nine volumes. In accordance with the desire expressed in number 1721, of the 25th of March, I have communicated to Lord Clarendon a copy of the letter of Mr. Savage, which came enclosed. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, CHARES FRANCIS ADAMS. Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. Mr. Adams to the Earl of Clarendon. LEGATION OF the United STATES, MY LORD: I have the honor to transmit a copy of a letter addressed by the United States consul general at Havana, in the island of Cuba, to the Secretary of State, Mr. Seward, relative to a certain number of Africans lately found in an uninhabited part of that island, and carried into Havana by the Spanish steamer Neptuno. I am instructed to lay the same before your lordship for the information of her Majesty's government. I pray your lordship to accept, &c., &c., &c. CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Right Honorable the EARL OF CLARENDON, &c., &c., &c. Earl of Clarendon to Mr. Adams. FOREIGN OFFICE, April 23, 1866. SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 16th instant, enclosing a copy of a despatch addressed by the United States consul general at Havana to Mr. Seward, reporting that the Spanish steamer Neptuno had brought into that port 275 Africans, who were found on an uninhabited part of the island of Cuba, and I beg leave to request that you will convey to Mr. Seward the thanks of her Majesty's government for this communication. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble ser vant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq., &c., &c, &c. CLARENDON. No. 1184.] Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. LEGATION OF the United STATES, SIR: With reference to the application of Governor Smyth, of New Hampshire, in behalf of Cornelius Healy, transmitted to me with your despatch No. 1731, of the 3d of April, I have the honor to report that the individual referred to was discharged on the representation of Mr. Eastman, the consul at Cork, so long ago as the 7th of March last, on the condition that he should leave the country. I am now inclined to believe that little further difficulty is to be apprehended from the questions involved in the late suspension of the habeas corpus act in Ireland. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. No. 1186.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: I transmit herewith a copy of the London Times of the 18th instant, containing a report of the proceedings in the suit against the steamers Sumter and Rappahannock. I presume that a more full report will be made by the professional gentlemen engaged on behalf of the government through Mr. Dudley, the consul at Liverpool, who, in the absence of Mr. Cushing, has had these matters in charge. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. [From the Times, April 18, 1866.] ADMIRALTY COURT-APRIL 17. (Before the Right Honorable DR. LUSHINGTON) THE GIBRALTAR, OTHERWISE SUMTER. This was a suit on behalf of the government of the United States of America as plaintiffs to obtain possession of this vessel. The vessel had been purchased in the year 1861 by the then government of the Confederate States of America, and having been armed and otherwise equipped, proceeded to sea and cruised in the West Indies and elsewhere, and capture1 divers vessels belonging to subjects of the United States. In the month of January, 1562, she put into the port of Gibraltar, where she was sold to Melchior George Klingender, who subsequently employed her in running the blockade, in which service she continued until the close of the war, when, having put into Liverpool, she was arrested in this suit. No appearance had been entered on behalf of any person as owner to dispute the right of the plaintiffs, and the usual notices having been given, the court was now moved to decree possession of her to the plaintiffs. The Admiralty advocate, Mr. Brett, Q. C., and Mr. E. C. Clarkson appeared on behalf of the plaintiffs. The court decreed possession as moved. THE BEATRICE, OTHERWISE RAPPAHANNOCK. A similar suit has also been instituted against this vessel, but the cause is defended, and still undetermined, and shortly after its institution a second suit was commenced to obtain payment for ropes and other supplies furnished to the vessel, and in the second suit the defendants, the American government (who are the plaintiffs in the suit for possession,) had pleaded substantially the same allegations upon which they rely in their pleadings in the other suit. Mr. Pritchard moved the court to direct that as there were in effect the same averments in both suits, the suit for necessaries should be suspended till after the decision in the previous cause. The Admiralty advocate, Mr. Brett, Q. C., and Mr. E. C. Clarkson appeared in opposition to the motion. The court was of opinion that inasmuch as the application was opposed, the court had no right to enforce a suspension of the suit, unless such a course were required by the circumstances of the case, which could scarcely be said in the present instance. Motion refused. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. No. 1187.] LEGATION OF the United States, London, April 19, 1866. SIR: The debate in the House of Commons on the enfranchisement bill continues, and the probabilities now are that it will not terminate before the latter part of next week. Meanwhile, a considerable change in opinion has taken place respecting the chances of its passage. The defections from the ministerial side are becoming more and more marked. It is even doubted whether the amendment of Lord Grosvenor may not be carried, in which case a change of the government will immediately follow. But should this danger be passed, the fate of the bill, in committee, in any shape that the ministry can adopt, is held to be certain; so far as I can learn, no dissolution of Parliament is anticipated, until after the experiment of conducting affairs under some combination or other of the disaffected materials shall have had full opportunities of trial. At this moment it is not easy to perceive how any fusion of principles can be made which will long stand the test of a discussion of measures quite apart from the question of the franchise. Although opinion points distinctly to the Earl of Derby as the nominal chief, the expectation seems to be that the more liberal ideas of his son, Lord Stanley, will be made the shield under which the recalcitrant whigs will have an opportunity to seek protection against the opposition of Messrs. Gladstone, Bright, and the rest of their old associates. The progress of this struggle, as it has a bearing upon the ultimate form to be assumed by the institutions of the country, cannot fail to be of great interest. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. No. 1740.] Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, April 21, 1866. SIR: Mr. M. R. Clark, of New York, on the 16th instant, addressed a communication to this department, relative to the arrest at Dublin, and confinement in Mountjoy, of his son-in-law, Lieutenant Colonel Burke, who it appears from the statements accompanying that communication served with honorable distinction in the Union army during the rebellion. On the same authority it also appears that the wife of Colonel Burke being an invalid, the attending physician recommended a sea voyage as necessary for the restoration of her health; that with this object in view they went to Ireland, and that after arriving there |