Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

Gross

1863.

to their Government;" but the question really is, has there been any act done No. 665. in England both contrary to the obligations of neutrality as recognized by Great britannien, 2. April Britain and the United States, and capable of being made the subject of a criminal prosecution? I can only repeat that, in the opinion of Her Majesty's Government, no such act is specified in the papers which you have submitted to me. ¶I, however, willingly assure you that, in view of the statements contained in the intercepted correspondence, Her Majesty's Government have renewed the instructions already given to the Custom-house authorities of the several British ports where ships of war may be constructed, and by the Secretary of State for the Home Department to the various authorities with whom he is in communication, to endeavour to discover and obtain legal evidence of any violation of the Foreign Enlistment Act, with a view to the strict enforcement of that Statute whenever it can really be shown to be infringed, and Her Majesty's Government would be obliged to you to communicate to them, or to the local authorities at the several ports, any evidence of illegal acts which may from time to time become know to you. I have referred generally to the judicial decisions of the United States on this subject; but it would be as well that I should mention specially two of those decisions, selected out of many, both upon the general question and upon the particular case of the sale of ships of war by the subjects of a neutral to a belligerent State. The first decision is that of the eminent Judge Story, given, it may be well to observe, in a case in which the recognition of the Spanish-American Republics was directly concerned. ¶ After admitting that the capture had been made by a United States' ship, built in the United States, originally owned in the United States, Judge Story proceeds to say: ¶„The question as to the original illegal armament and outfit of the „Independence" may be dismissed in a few words. It is apparent that though equipped as a vessel of war, she was send out to Buenos Ayres on a commercial adventure, contraband indeed, but in no shape violating our laws or our national neutrality. If captured by a Spanish ship of war during the voyage, she would have been justly condemnable as good prize for being engaged in a traffic prohibited by the laws of nations. But there is nothing in our law or in the law of nations that forbids our citizens from sending armed vessels, as well as munitions of war, to foreign ports for sale. It is a commercial adventure which no nation is bound to prohibit, and which only exposes the persons engaged in it to the penalty of confiscation." This is a [ a case illustrating the law and practice of the United States while neutral in the war between Spain and her Colonies. The next case (historically the first) illustrates also the law and practice of the United States while neutral in the war between Great Britain and France. It is so short that I take leave to cite it verbatim and at length, as given in Curtis',,Reports of Decisions in the Supreme Court of the United States," vol. I., pp. 234, 235: ¶„Moodie v. the ship „Alfred". It is not a violation of the neutrality laws of the United States to sell to a foreigner a vessel built in this country, though suited to be a privateer and having some equipments calculated for war, but frequently used by merchantships. The allegation in this case, as supported by the evidence, was that the privateer which took the British prize in question had been built in New York

No. 665.
Gross-

with the express view of being employed as a privateer in case the then existbritannien, ing controversy between Great Britain and the United States should termi2. April 1863. nate in war; that some of her equipments were calculated for war, though they were also frequently used for merchant-ships; that the privateer was sent to Charleston, where she was sold to a French citizen; that she was carried by him to a French island, where she was completely armed and equipped, and furnished with a commission; that she afterwards sailed on a cruize, during which the prize was taken and sent into Charleston. Reed, for the plaintiff in error, contended that this was an original construction or outfit of a vessel for the purpose of war; and that if it was tolerated as legal, it would be easy by collusion to subvert the neutrality of the United States, and involve the country in a war. The Court, however, without hearing the opposite Counsel, directed the Decree to be affirmed." It seems clear, on the principle enunciated in these authorities, that except on the ground of any proved violation of the Foreign Enlistment Act, Her Majesty's Government cannot interfere with commercial dealings between British subjects and the so-styled Confederate States, whether the subject of those dealings be money or contraband goods, or even ships adapted for warlike purposes. I am, &c.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

No. 666. Vereinigte

[ocr errors]

Legation of the United States, London, April 6 (received April 7), 1863.

My Lord, I have had the honour to receive your note of the 2nd Staaten, instant, in reply to mine of the 14th of last month, on the subject of the inter6. April 1863. cepted correspondence submitted to your Lordship's consideration some time since, which, as I alleged, „went to show a deliberate attempt to establish within the limits of the United Kingdom a system of action in direct hostility to the Government of the United States." Your Lordship is pleased to observe that I do not controvert the principal positions assumed in your note, to wit, first, that it is lawful for Her Majesty's subjects to lend money, on securities or otherwise, to either belligerent; secondly, that it is lawful for Her Majesty's subjects to sell to either belligerent munitions of war. ¶And thereupon your Lordship is pleased to call my attention to several citations from eminent authorities in the United States, judicial and otherwise, to establish these positions, just the same as if I had controverted them. ¶ Nevertheless, I have given to all the passages presented by your Lordship the same profound attention which I habitually pay to everything from the same source. I cannot, however, perceive that they have any effect in disturbing the positions which have been heretofore assumed by myself. The sale and transfer by a neutral of arms, of munitions of war, and even of vessels of war to a billigerent country,

66

Vereinigte

1863.

not subject to a blockade at the time, as a purely commercial transaction, is No. 666. decided by these authorities not to be unlawful. They go not a step further, Staaten, 6. April and, precisely to that extent, I have myself taken no exception to the doctrine. ¶ But the case is changed when a belligerent is shown to be taking measures to establish a system of operations in a neutral country with the intent to carry on a war from its ports, much in the same way that it would do, if it could, from its own territory; when it appoints agents, residing in that country, for the purpose of borrowing money to be applied to the fitting out of hostile armaments in those very ports; and when it appoints and sends out agents to superintend, in those ports, the constructing, equipping, and arming ships of war, as well as the enlisting of the subjects of the neutral country, to issue forth for the purpose of carrying on hostilities on the ocean. These are the points to which I desire to call your Lordship's attention in the intercepted despatches. I affirmed that they went to show a system of operations to the extent thus designated. I did not affirm that they absolutely proved the facts; but I did mean to be understood as affirming them to furnish strong corroborative evidence to sustain all the other proof which I have been in the practice of laying before your Lordship for a long time past of the abuses made of Her Majesty's neutral territory for the conduct of the war directly from her ports, without the intervention of time even for the vessels to gain the semblance of a national character. ་ Had your Lordship been pleased to continue your reading of the decision by the United States' Court in the cases of the ,,Independencia" and the „Altravida," some pages further than the passage to which you have done me the honour to draw my attention, you would have been able fully to comprehend the spirit in which the eminent Judge who pronounced the Decree construed the obligations of the United States as a neutral Power. He condemned the outfit of those vessels precisely for the reasons above assigned. Neither is that case the only or the most significant expression of the duties incumbent on the Government of the United States towards nations with which it is in amity in a similar emergency. Since your Lordship is pleased to accord so much weight to the decisions of the Courts, I would respectfully solicit your attention to the case of the United States against John D. Quincy" (6 Peter's Reports, pp. 445 and 468), as giving a full construction of the powers given to it for the protection of foreign countries by the enlistment law. So far as I may be permitted to express an opinion, it clearly embraces within its scope the objects and purposes declared in the intercepted despatches. But I must pray your ¶ Lordship's pardon for thus encroaching on your valuable time with any further discussion of these points. In doing so, I am conscious of having varied from the intention heretofore expressed of abstaining from it, unless prompted by the authority of instructions. I shall do myself the honour to transmit to my Government a copy of your note, and I entertain no doubt that it will receive with satisfaction the assurance which your Lordship is pleased to give of a determination of Her Majesty's Government ,,in view of the statements contained in the intercepted correspondence," to endeavour to discover and obtain legal evidence of any violation of the Enlistment Act, with a view to the strict

[ocr errors]

Staatsarchiv IV. 1863.

22

No. 666. enforcement of it, whenever it can really be shown to be infringed. I trust I Vereinigte Staaten, need not add the assurance that all the efforts of myself, as well as of the various 6. April 1863. officers of my Government within this kingdom, will be at the service of the local authorities at the several ports in prosecuting their investigations.

I pray, &c. Charles Francis Adams.

To Earl Russell.

No 667.

No. 667.

Gross

GROSSBRITANNIEN. Min. d. Ausw. an d. Gesandt. d. Vereinigten Staaten in London. Die Betheiligung englischer Unterthanen an dem nordamerikanischen Kriege betr.

Sir,

Foreign Office, April 20, 1863.

With regard to the complaints which you have made from time britannien, to time of British sailors who have entered the Confederate service, I have to 20. April 1863. remark that no steps have hitherto been taken by the United States' authorities to prevent British subjects from entering the military or naval service of the United States. Mr. Seward has, on the contrary, justified the means used, provided they were not bribery or intimidation, to induce British sailors to enter the Federal service. You will readily perceive the justice of the request I am about to make, namely, that before you repeat your complaints that British sailors have entered the service of the so-called Confederate States, you will furnish me with proofs that all British subjects serving in the Federal army or navy have been discharged, and that orders have been given not to enlist or engage such persons to serve in arms contrary to the tenor of Her Majesty's Proclamation. ¶ I am, &c.

To Mr. Adams, etc.

No. 668.

Russell.

GROSSBRITANNIEN.

Min. d. Ausw. an d. Gesandt. der Verein. Staaten in London. Die Unanwendbarkeit der von Adams angeführten Grundsätze auf die der englischen Regierung bekannt gewordenen Thatsachen

[blocks in formation]

No. 668. In acknowledging the receipt of the further letter which you did me Grossbritannien, the honour to address to me on the 6th instant, on the subject of the intercepted 22. April 1863. correspondence, I will merely add, that while entirely assenting to the principles

laid down in the authorities to which you refer, I am still unable to perceive their application to any facts which have occurred in this country within the cognizance of Her Majesty's Government. I am, &c.

To Mr. Adams, etc.

Russell.

GROSSBRITANNIEN. in London.

[ocr errors]

No. 669.

Min. d. Ausw. an d. Gesandt. der Vereinigten Staaten

Die Anwerbung grossbritannischer Unterthanen für die

Unionsarmee betr.

Foreign Office, November 20, 1862.

Gross

20. Nov.

1862.

The Undersigned, Her Britannic Majesty's Principal Secretary of State No. 669. for Foreign Affairs, has the honour to acquaint Mr. Adams, Envoy Extraordinary britannien, and Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States, that Her Majesty's Government are informed, by persons to whom they are disposed to give credit, that recruits are being raised in this country for serving in the army of the United States, and that bounty-money of a considerable amount is offered by agents of the United States to encourage British subjects to enlist. ¶ Mr. Adams must be well aware that any of Her Majesty's subjects enlisting in the military service of either of the belligerent parties in America, or any persons procuring any of Her Majesty's subjects to enlist in that service, are guilty of a misdemeanour according to British law; and Mr. Adams will readily see that such a practice as that to which the Undersigned now calls his attention is calculated seriously to increase the difficulties already incident to the observance of neutrality by Her Majesty's Government. The Undersigned, &c.,

To Mr. Adams, etc.

Russell.

VEREINIGTE STAATEN von AMERIKA. britannischen Min. d. Ausw. bungen für die Unions armee,

No. 670.

Gesandt. in London an d. königl. grossBitte um nähere Angaben über die Werum Massregeln dagegen ergreifen zu können.

Legation of the United States, London, November 21 (received November 22), 1862. The Undersigned, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States, has the honour to acknowledge the receipt of a note from the Right Honourable Earl Russell, Her Britannic Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, dated the 20th instant, acquainting him that Her Majesty's Government are informed, by persons to whom they are disposed to give credit, that recruits are being raised in this country for service in the army of the United States, and that bounty-money of a considerable amount is offered by agents of the United States to encourage such enlistment. His Lordship is further pleased to warn the Undersigned of the fact that such acts are contrary to British law, and are calculated seriously to increase the difficulties already incident to the observance of neutrality by Her Majesty's Government. The Undersigned flatters himself that the earnestness of his previous and long continued urgency on Her Majesty's Government to enforce the strict observance of neutrality in the ports of this Kingdom in many cases of attempted violation

No. 670. Vereinigte

Staaten, 21. Nov.

1862.

« EdellinenJatka »