Earl Russell to Mr. Adams. FOREIGN OFFICE, April 5, 1863. SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of yesterday, enclosing a deposition made by a person named Yonge, respecting the Alabama and her proceedings. I have, at the same time, the honor to acquaint you, with reference to your letter of the 30th ultimo, and to mine of the following day, that orders have been sent to Liverpool for the seizure of the Alexandra, the vessel to which you called my attention, as intended to be employed in the naval service of the so-called Confederate States. I have, accordingly, to request that you will have the goodness forthwith to instruct the United States consul at Liverpool to place at the disposal of the persons who may be employed in collecting evidence on the part of the crown all such information as he may now possess, or may hereafter acquire, leading to establish the guilt of the parties concerned in the Alexandra, against whom proceedings may be taken under the foreign enlistment act. I have the honor to be, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq., &c., §x., &c. RUSSELL. Mr. Adams to Earl Russell. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, MY LORD: I have the honor to acknowledge the reception of your lordship's note of the 5th instant, in answer to mine of the 30th ultimo, making certain representations in regard to the character of a vessel in Liverpool known as the Alexandra. It is with the most lively satisfaction that I learn the decision of her Majesty's government to detain that vessel. Believing that such an act, at the present moment, is calculated to defeat the sanguine hopes of the common enemies of both nations, to sow the seeds of dissension among them, I shall remit no effort to procure all the information possible to support it. To that end I have, agreeably to your lordship's suggestion, sent the necessary instructions to the consul of the United States at Liverpool to put himself in communication with the authorities designated at that place to pursue the subject. I pray your lordship to accept the assurances of the highest consideration with which I have the honor to be, my lord, your most obedient servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Right Hon. EARL RUSSELL, &c., sx., &c. Mr. Adams to Mr. Dudley. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: I yesterday received a note from Lord Russell, in answer to my representation concerning the Alexandra, of the 30th ultimo, announcing that orders had been sent to Liverpool for the seizure of that vessel. It ends with the following paragraph, to which I ask your immediate attention. I do not doubt that you will remit no exertion to obtain evidence in aid of this first effort of her Majesty's government to obtain the condemnation of one of these vessels. The moral effect of such a result could not fail to be great on both sides of the ocean: "I have, accordingly, to request that you will have the goodness forthwith to instruct the United States consul at Liverpool to place at the disposal of the persons who may be employed in collecting evidence on the part of the crown all such information as he may now possess, or may hereafter acquire, tending to establish the guilt of parties concerned in the Alexandra, against whom proceedings may be taken under the foreign enlistment act." I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, THOS. H. DUDLEY, Esq., CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. United States Consul, Liverpool. Mr. Adams to Earl Russell. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, MY LORD: Having received an opinion from eminent counsel that the evidence in the case of the Alexandra is sufficient to sustain proceedings for condemnation, under the 6th section of the enlistment law, I pray your lordship to have the kindness to inform me whether the measures thus far adopted, or intended on the part of her Majesty's government in that case, would be, in any way, deranged by simultaneous action on the part of the United States in a different form. Should no inconvenience be apprehended, I am informed by the lawyers that they are ready to proceed. I pray your lordship to accept the assurances of the highest consideration with which I have the honor to be, my lord, your most obedient servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Right Hon. EARL RUSSELL, &c., &c., &c. Earl Russell to Mr. Adams. FOREIGN OFFICE, April 4, 1863. SIR: My attention having been drawn to a paragraph which appeared in the "Daily News," of the 17th ultimo, in which, under the head of "confederate war vessels," is included the Sumter, now called the Gibraltar, as having been thoroughly repaired at Birkenhead, and being ready for sea, I deemed it advisable at once to request the proper authorities to cause particular attention to be paid to this vessel. I have now the honor to acquaint you that it appears from a report which has been received from the collector of customs at Liverpool, and which has been communicated to me, the lords commissioners of her Majesty's treasury, that, since the arrival of the Sumter at that port on the 13th of February last, she has been carefully watched by the custom-house officer, and that, although the vessel has received some repairs, nothing has taken place regarding her of a suspicious character. The Sumter appears to be laid up in the upper part of the great float at Birkenhead, and there seems to be no sign of her being at present intended for sea. I have the honor to add that the authorities at Liverpool are instructed to continue to observe this vessel, and to report, without delay, any circumstances of an unusual character which may happen to take place with regard to her. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, 1 humble servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq., &c., &c., &c. RUSSELL. Mr. Adams to Earl Russell. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, MY LORD: I have had the honor to receive your note of the 4th instant, in reference to a paragraph which appeared in the Daily News of the 17th ultimo, respecting the immediate preparation of the Sumter for departure from the port of Liverpool. I must confess that the information received by me from Liver pool from wholly independent sources had led me to believe the newspaper statement to be true. It is, however, with very great satisfaction I receive the contradiction of it from your lordship, as well as the assurance that the movements of that vessel are under the observation of her Majesty's government. I am the more led to indulge this that the notice appears to have been spontaneously furnished to me, with a degree of courtesy which I should be wanting in my duty if I were to fail properly to appreciate. I pray your lordship to accept the assurances of the highest consideration with which I have the honor to be, my lord, your most obedient servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Right Hon. EARL RUSSELL, &c., &c., &c. Earl Russell to Mr. Adams. FOREIGN OFFICE, April 8, 1863. SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of this day's date, acquainting me that you had reason to suppose that a steam-vessel, named the Japan, or the Virginia, has just left the Clyde for Alderney, where she is expected to receive on board an armament brought to the island for her by a small steamer, the Allar, and a considerable number of British subjects who have been enlisted to serve on board of her; and having done this, to proceed and depredate on the commerce of the United States. I have to state to you, in reply, that copies of your letter were sent, without loss of time, to the home department and to the board of treasury, with a request that an immediate inquiry might be made into the circumstances stated in it, and that if the result should prove your suspicions to be well founded the most effectual measures might be taken which the law admits of for defeating any such attempts to fit out a belligerent vessel from a British port. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq., &c., &c., &c. RUSSELL. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. [Extracts.] No. 369.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, London, April 9, 1863. SIR Lord Russell has thought it expedient to renew the correspondence about the intercepted despatches in a note of the 2d of April, a copy of which I send herewith. * A copy of my reply, dated the 6th instant, is appended. 1. Lord Russell to Mr. Adams, April 2, 1863. 2. Mr. Adams to Lord Russell, in reply thereto, April 6, 1863. Earl Russell to Mr. Adams. FOREIGN OFFICE, April 2, 1863. SIR: Her Majesty's government have not failed to consider, with the attention it deserved, the letter which you addressed to me on the 14th ultimo, in reply to my letter of the 9th ultimo, on the subject of the intercepted correspondence which you had 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. I have now the honor to observe to you that, while you withhold your acquiescence in the opinion expressed by me of that correspondence, and state that you shall transmit a copy of my note, with profound regret, to your government, you nevertheless do not controvert the principal positions assumed in that note. You do not deny, first, that it is lawful for her Majesty's subjects to lend money on securities, or otherwise, to either belligerent, or, secondly, that it is also lawful to sell, to either belligerent, munitions of war. Upon this subject I beg to call to your notice that no longer ago than the 20th of last November, in answer to the remonstrance of Mexico against an alleged organized system in the United States of aiding France in the war in which she is engaged with that republic, but in which the United States are neutral, Mr. Seward replied by this, among other citations: (Mr. Webster to Mr. Thompson) "As to advances, loans, or donations of money to the government of Texas, or its citizens, the Mexican government hardly needs to be informed that there is nothing unlawful in this, so long as Texas is at peace with the United States, and that these are things which no government undertakes to restrain." You are. without doubt, perfectly aware that many decisions of tribunals in the United States fully establish that a like exposition of the law as to munitions of war and the sale of armed vessels has been always maintained in the United States when they were neutrals. You do not state that the information which you have communicated to me, as to alleged contracts for constructing war steamers, or the proposed establishment of naval officers to superintend them, would be sufficient to found a criminal prosecution in the United States; you are probably aware that it would not suffice for that purpose, and there is, therefore, no reason why you should complain of my statement that the information which you had furnished would not suffice for the like purpose in England. You are not ignorant that agents have been employed, and munitions of war have been purchased, and that it is now again asserted that her Majesty's subjects are being recruited for the purpose of aiding the United States against the so-called Confederate States, and so far it might be urged in vague and popular language by the Confederate States as well as by the United States as the other belligerent (as it was substantially urged by Mexico against the United States last year) "that there is evidence of a deliberate attempt to establish within the limits of this kingdom a system of action in direct hostility to their government;" but the question really is, has there been any act done in England both contrary to the obligations of neutrality as recognized by Great 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 various authorities with whom he is in communication, to endeavor 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 known 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 these 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 an 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 sent 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 law of nations. But there is nothing in our laws, 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 case illustrating the law and practice of the United States while neutral in the war between Spain and her colonies. It The next case (historically the first) illustrates the law and practice of the United States while neutral in the war between Great Britain and France. is so short that I beg leave to cite it verbatim and at length as given in Curtis's |