by means of which the letter of the law has on these occasions been constantly eluded are sufficiently known, and even the combination of interests in persons who are well known, among whom are some holding public offices. With a view to afford you and the President more complete demonstration of the abuses, aggressions, and piracies alluded to, I inclose you correct lists, extracted from authentic documents deposited in the archives of this legation, exhibiting the number of privateers or pirates fitted out in the United States against Spain, and of the prizes brought by them into the Union, as well as of those sent to other ports, together with the result of the claims made by the Spanish consuls in the courts of this country. Among them you will find the case of two armed ships, the Horatio and Curiazo, built at New York, and detained by his Majesty's consul there on the ground of their having on board 30 pieces of cannon concealed, with their carriages, and a crew of 160 men. On which occasion it was pretended that it could not be proved that these guns were not an article of commerce, and they finally put to sea without them, the extraordinary number of officers and crew passing for passengers. The number of privateers or pirates fitted out or protected in the ports of this republic, as well as of the Spanish prizes made by them, far exceeds that contained in the within lists; but I only lay before your government those of which I have certain and satisfactory proofs. The right of Spain to an adequate indemnity for all the spoliations committed by these privateers or pirates on the Crown and subjects of his Catholic Majesty, is undeniable; but I now submit it to your government, only to point out the extreme necessity of putting an end to these continued acts of hostility and depredation, and of cutting short these enormous and flagrant abuses and evils, by the adoption of such effectual precautions and remedies as will put it out of the power of cupidity or inge nuity to defeat or elude them. In vain should we endeavor amicably to settle and accommodate all existing differences, and thus establish peace and good understanding between the two nations, if the practice of these abuses and the course of these hostilities and piracies on the commerce and navigation of Spain should, as heretofore, continue uninterrupted in the United States." (The Chevalier de Onis to Mr. Adams, November 16, 1818.)

State Papers, vol. vi, p. 291.

The Secretary of State, in reply, expressed the readiness of his gov ernment to continue the negotiations, provided the Spanish minister would consent to waive a certain portion of his proposition, (relating to the transactions in Florida and the western boundary,) but added, that if he did not feel at liberty to proceed with the negotiations on those terms, he (Mr. Adams) was ready to exchange with him the ratifications of the convention of 1802. (Mr. Adams to M. de Onis, November 30, 1818.)

On the 22d of February, 1819, a treaty of amity, settlement, and limits was concluded at Washington between the United States of America and his Catholic Majesty, and the following is a statement of the claims which each party consented to renounce:

ARTICLE IX. "The two high contracting parties, animated with the State Papers, vol most earnest desire of conciliation, and with the object of putting an viii, p. 530. end to all the differences which have existed between them, and of confirming the good understanding which they wish to be forever maintained between them reciprocally, renounce all claim for damages or injuries which they themselves, as with as their respective citizens and subjects, may have suffered until the time of signing this treaty.

"The renunciation of the United States will extend

"1. To all the injuries mentioned in the convention of 11th August, 1802.

"2. To all claims on account of prizes made by French privateers and condemned by French consuls within the territory and jurisdiction of Spain.

"3. To all claims and indemnities on account of the suspension of the right of deposit at New Orleans in 1802.

"4. To all claims of citizens of the United States upon the Spanish government, statements of which, soliciting the interposition of the government of the United States, have been presented to the Department of State, or to the minister of the United States in Spain, since the date of the convention of 1802, and until the signature of this treaty.

"The renunciation of his Catholic Majesty extends

"1. To all the injuries mentioned in the convention of 11th August, 1802.

"2. To the sums which his Catholic Majesty advanced for the return of Captain Pike

from the Provincias Internas.

"3. To all injuries caused by the expedition of Miranda, which was fitted out and equipped at New York.

"To all claims of Spanish subjects upon the government of the United States arising from unlawful seizures at sea or within the ports and territorial jurisdiction of the United States. "Finally, to all the claims of subjects of his Catholic Majesty upon the government of the United States, in which the interposition of his Catholic Majesty has been solicited before the date of this treaty, and since the date of the convention of 1802, or which may have been made to the department of foreign affairs of his Majesty or to his minister in the United States.

"And the high contracting parties respectively renounce all claim to indemnities for any of the recent events or transactions of their respective commanders and officers in the Floridas.

"The United States will cause satisfaction to be made for the injuries, if any, which by process of law shall be established to have been suffered by the Spanish officers and individual Spanish inhabitants by the late operations of the American army in Florida."

This treaty concludes the published correspondence respecting the Spanish claims. The correspondence between Portugal and the United States will be found in a convenient shape for reference in the appendix to the "Alabama" papers, republished by Messrs. Longmans, Green & Co., in 1867.

It was laid before Congress on the 4th of February, 1852, together Executive Docwith the correspondence relating to the claims of United States citizens uments, House of Representatives, in Portugal arising out of the case of the General Armstrong. No. 53, 32d ConSee also British State Papers, vol. 222. The following is the succinct gress, 1st session. account of this correspondence, given in Lord Russell's note to Mr. Adams of the 30th of August, 1865, (Parliamentary paper, North America, No. 1, 1866, p. 26.)

"The correspondence to which I refer began in December, 1816, and closed with a letter of the Portuguese minister in November, 1850. It cannot be pretended that the reclamations of a friendly power extending over 34 years did not receive the gravest attention of the American government.

"In his first letter, the Portuguese envoy at Washington complains that Mr. Taylor, of Baltimore, an American citizen, had directed Captain Fish, of the Romp, an Ameriean ship, to cruise as a privateer under the insurgent colors of Buenos Ayres against the subjects of Portugal.

"He adds, "The 18th of last month (November) the frigate Clifton, Captain Davis, armed with 32 guns of various calibers, and a crew of 200 men, sailed from Baltimore for Buenos Ayres. This ship anchored below that port, where it has remained for about a fortnight or more waiting for the American ship Independence of the South, armed with 16 guns, and for the ships Romp, Tachahoe, Montezuma, and Spanker, and two others newly constructed, which were fitting with great activity and which had not yet got names. All were to sail together, to cruise in the eastern and western seas of South America, under the insurgent colors of Buenos Ayres. No doubt can be entertained of their instructions being the same as those of Captain Fish, and that they will act hostilely against Portuguese ships.'

"The Portuguese envoy, Joseph Correa de Serra, prays for an amendment of the law of the United States with a view to render it more efficient in such cases. A law having been passed by Congress for this purpose, the Portuguese envoy, in May, 1817, requests that the President will desire the United States officers on the outposts to use greater vigilance.

"In March, 1818, he complains that three Portuguese ships have been captured by privateers fitted in the United States, manned by American crews, and commanded by American captains, though under insurgent colors.'

"In October of the same year the Portuguese envoy complains that a Portuguess prize is fitting in the Patuxent, to cruise against Portuguese commerce.

"In November of the same year the Portuguese minister states to Mr. Adams that, obliged by his duty to inquire into the nature of the armed ships that had of late insulted the flag of his sovereign and committed incalculable depredations on the property of his subjects, he had found, to his sorrow, multiplied proofs that many of them were owned by citizens of the United States, and had been fitted in the ports of the Union. He goes on to complain of the difficulties in the way of prosecution, but compliments the President on his 'honorable earnestness.'

"In December of the same year the Portuguese minister complains of the armed vessel Irresistible, which had been committing 'depredations and unwarrantable outrages on the coast of Brazil.' He says, it is proved by depositions that John_Daniels, the commander of the ship, is an American, and all the crew are Americans. He prays that, if the ship should come into an American port, means may be taken to bring the said captain and crew within reach of the laws made to punish such scandalous proeeedings.

"In March, 1819, M. Correa de Serra states, as minister of his sovereign, that Artigas, whose flag is frequently waving in the port of Baltimore, and which is carried by Portuguese prizes in the ports of the Union, has been expelled far from the countries which could afford him the power of navigating, and has not a foot length of sea-shore in South America where he can show himself. He prays that the Artigan flag may be declared illegal.

"In November, 1819, after expressing his gratitude for the proceedings of the Executive, the same minister complains that the evil is rather increasing. He is in possession of a list of fifty Portuguese ships, almost all richly laden, some of them East Indiamen, which had been captured during a period of profound peace. One city alone

on the coast of the United States had 26 armed ships which preyed on Portuguese commerce, and a week ago three armed ships of this kind were in that port waiting for a favorable occasion for sailing on a cruise.'

"In June, 1820, the Portuguese minister complains that a Portuguese prize had been sold by auction at Baltimore to Captain Chase, (a notorious privateersman,) and was to be immediately fitted out as a privateer to cruise against the Portuguese Indiamen. "In July of the same year, the Portuguese minister sends a list of 'the names and value of 19 Portuguese ships and their cargoes, taken by private armed ships, fitted in the ports of the Union, by citizens of those States. His Sovereign wishes the affair to be treated with that candor and conciliating dignified spirit which becomes two powers who feel a mutual esteem and have a proper sense of their moral integrity. In this spirit I have the honor to propose to this government to appoint commissioners on their side, with full powers to confer and agree with his Majesty's ministers on what reason and justice demand.'

"In December, 1820, the Chevalier Amado Grehon transmitted to Mr. Adams a copy of 12 claims, with the value of the ships, desiring him to add them to the list furnished by the Chevalier Correa de Serra.

"In April, 1822, the same minister repeats the proposal made in July, 1820, of having recourse to commissaries chosen by both governments for the purpose of arranging the indemnities justly due to Portuguese citizens for the damage which they have sustained by reason of piracies supported by the capital and the means of citizens of the United States; an essential condition which, in this way repairing the past, secures also the future.'

"On the 25th of May, 1850, the chargé d'affaires of Portugal, writing to the Secretary of State of the United States, declares, 'The undersigned is authorized to come to an understanding with the new Secretary of State upon the subject, and to submit the voluminous documents and papers in his possession to the joint examination and decision of the commissioners or arbitrators appointed by the American government on the one part, and the undersigned on behalf of her Majesty's government on the other,' &c.

'Having thus related the complaints of the Portuguese government during the years which elapsed from 1816 to 1822, and from 1822 to 1850, I will now give from the organs of the United States the answers which that government gave to these solemn and reiterated complaints.

"In March, 1817, the Secretary of State transmitted to the Portuguese minister at Washington an act of Congress, passed on the 3d of that month, to preserve more effectually the neutral relations of the United States. On the 14th of March, 1818, in answer to a letter complaining of the capture of three Portuguese ships by privateers, Mr. Adams says:

"The government of the United States having used all the means in its power to prevent the fitting out and arming of vessels in their ports to cruise against any nation with whom they are at peace, and having faithfully carried into execution the laws enacted to preserve inviolate the neutral and pacific obligations of this Union, cannot consider itself bound to indemnify individual foreigners for losses by captures, over which the United States have neither control nor jurisdiction. For such events no nation can in principle, nor does in practice, hold itself responsible. A decisive reason for this, if there were no other, is the inability to provide a tribunal before which the facts can be proved.

"The documents to which you refer must of course be ex parte statements, which in Portugal or in Brazil, as well as in this country, could only serve as a foundation for actions in damages, or for the prosecution and trial of the persons supposed to have committed the depredations and outrages alleged in them. Should the parties come within the jurisdiction of the United States, there are courts of admiralty competent to ascertain the facts upon litigation between them, to punish the outrages which may be duly proved, and to restore the property to its rightful owners should it also be brought within our jurisdiction, and found, upon judicial inquiry, to have been taken in the manner represented by your letter. By the universal law of nations the obligations of the American government extend no further.'

"The Secretary of State in subsequent letters promises to prosecute in the United States courts persons chargeable with a violation of the laws of the United States in fitting out and arming a vessel within the United States for the purpose of cruising against the subjects of the Queen of Portugal.

"To the proposal to appoint commissioners, made in July, 1820, the United States Secretary of State, on the 30th of September of the same year, replies as follows:

"The proposal contained in your note of the 16th of July last has been considered by the President of the United States with all the deliberation due to the friendly relations subsisting between the United States and Portugal, and with the disposition to manifest the undeviating principle of justice by which this government is animated in its intercourse with all foreign governments, and particularly with yours. I am directed by him to inform you that the appointment of commissioners to confer and agree

with the ministers of his most faithful Majesty upon the subject to which your letter relates, would not be consistent either with the Constitution of the United States nor with any practice usual among civilized nations.'

"He proceeds to say:

"If any Portuguese subject has suffered wrong by the act of any citizen of the United States within their jurisdiction, it is before those tribunals that the remedy is to be sought and obtained. For any acts of citizens of the United States committed out of their jurisdiction and beyond their control, the government of the United States is not responsible.

To the war in South America, to which Portugal has for several years been a party, the duty and the policy of the United States has been to observe a perfect and impartial neutrality.'

"The same reply is again given to Chevalier Amado Grehon in a letter dated the 30th of April, 1822:

"I am at the same time directed to state that the proposition of the Chevalier Correa de Serra, in his note of the 16th of July, 1820, for the appointment of commissaries chosen by both governments to arrange indemnities claimed by Portuguese citizens for damages stated by them to have been sustained by reason of piracies supported by the capital and means of citizens of the United States, cannot be acceded to. It is a prineiple well known and well understood that no nation is responsible to another for the acts of its citizens, committed without its jurisdiction and out of the reach of its control.'

The policy of the United States is further explained in a dispatch of Mr. Secretary Adams to General Dearborn, dated the 25th of June, 1822. It is there set forth that in the critical state of the relations of the two countries it is necessary to employ the agency of a person fully qualified to represent the interests of the United States. It is affirmed that whenever Portuguese captured vessels have been brought within the jurisdiction of the United States, decrees of restitution have been pronounced.

"In referring, however, to the list of captures, and the demand of a joint commission to determine and assess the damages to be paid by the United States, the former refusal was thus repeated: As there was no precedent for the appointment of such a commission under such circumstances, and as not a single capture had been alleged for which the United States were justly responsible, this proposal was of course denied; and nothing further was heard upon the subject until the 1st of April last, when a note was received from the present chargé d'affaires of Portugal, leading to a correspondence, copies of which are now furnished you.'

"The correspondence seems not to have been resumed till 1850, when, as has been shown, the demand for a commission was repeated.

The Secretary of State of the United States thereupon gave this summary and final answer, dated May 30, 1850:

"The undersigned is surprised at the reappearance of these absolute reclamations, accompanied by the renewal of the ancient proposition to appoint a joint commission to determine and assess damages, a proposition which was rejected at the time upon substantial grounds; and without the minister's assurance to that effect, the undersigned would not have supposed it credible that Portugal seriously cherished any intention to revive them. In reply, therefore, to the note which the minister of her most faithful Majesty has presented in the name of his government, the undersigned must now, by the President's order, inform him that he declines reopening the proffered discussion.'

"This dispatch is signed 'John M. Clayton.'

"A long and able dispatch of the Portuguese minister at Washington, recapitulating all the grievances of Portugal, dated November 7, 1850, does not appear to have received an answer."

After the close of the war between Spain and Portugal, Brazil and the South American provinces, the foreign enlistment act seems not to have been called into requisition in any prominent case until 1848, when the United States prohibited a ship of war, purchased for the German fleet during the war with Denmark, from sailing from New York except under the bond required by the act of 1818.

Annual Register,

In 1850 a remarkable instance was afforded of the manner in which the foreign enlistment act could openly be defied, when the sympathies of the American people were in favor of the offenders, in the expedition against Cuba under Lopez. Lopez had been for some time preparing an expedition for the invasion of Cuba, and on the 7th of May, 1850, left New Orleans in a steamer with about 500 men, accompanied by two other vessels, and on the 17th landed at Cardenas, a small town on the northwest side of the island. Lopez occupied the town; but shortly afterwards troops arrived from Havana, and he was compelled to re-embark, and escaped to Savannah.

1850.

On the 27th of May Lopez was arrested, (see Judge Betts's charge in Memoir of Lopez the Times of the 13th of June, 1850,) but "no delay being granted by in the New York the district judge to procure evidence against him, he was discharged, Herald, quoted in

President's mes

1851.

the Chronicle of amid the cheers of a large crowd. On the 15th of July, 42 of the connthe 23d of Septem- try prisoners (passengers) were liberated by the Spanish authorities, and ber, 1851. were taken to Pensacola by the United States ship Albany. Ten of them were retained for trial. On the 21st of July the grand jury of the United States district court at New Orleans found a true bill against Lopez and 15 others for violating the act of 1818. The government failed in making out its case against one or two of the parties, and finally abandoned the prosecution." Undeterred by the failure of the first expedition, Lopez at once set to sage, December 1, work to organize another, in which he was "countenanced, aided, and joined by citizens of the United States." "Very early in the Annual Register, morning of the 3d of August, 1851, a steamer called the Pampero departed from New Orleans for Cuba, having on board upwards of 400 armed men, with evident intentions to make war upon the authorities of that island.” The United States government having received intelligence that such designs were entertained, had issued a proclamation warning American citizens of their unlawful character, and had also given instructions to the proper officers of the United States. However, in spite of these measures, the steamer in which the fillibusters were embarked "left New Orleans stealthily and without a clearance, and, after touching at Key West, proceeded to the coast of Cuba."

1851.

The expedition landed in Cuba on the 12th of August, and proved an entire failure. The Spanish troops defeated the invaders without difficulty, and either took prisoner or dispersed the whole body. Fifty of the prisoners were shot, and Lopez publicly executed at Havana. The intelligence of the execution of Lopez and the prisoners, 40 of whom are stated to have been Americans, produced a great excitement in the United States. A riot took place at New Orleans, in which the Spanish consulate was sacked; mass meetings were held at the principal cities for the purpose of denouncing the conduct of the Cuban authorities, and further expeditions projected. The Spanish government, however, released and sent back to the United States a number of prisoners, who complained bitterly of having been deceived by Lopez by exaggerated accounts of the condition of affairs in Cuba; and the public feeling in the United States gradually cooled down, without any more attempts being made against the island.

In 1855 the Maury was detained at New York on the information of her Majesty's consul that she was intended for a Russian privateer. The evidence, however, failed, and Sir Joseph Crampton, her Majesty's minister, withdrawing the charge against her, the Maury sailed, and nothing more was heard of the matter. It was supposed that she really was intended for a privateer to act in the China seas, but that the peace of 1856 prevented her from being thus used.

The expeditions of Miranda in 1806, and of Lopez in 1850 and 1851, were rivaled in flagrant violation of the foreign enlistment act by the proceedings of Walker and the Central American fillibusters in 1857, 1858, 1859.

The disturbed state of the Central American republics, especially Nicaragua, rendered them a tempting prey to such adventurers, and in November, 1857, it was notorious that Walker was fitting out a fillibustering expedition.

On the 10th of that month he was arrested at New Orleans and held to bail in $2,000 (about £400) to appear on the 11th for examination, on a charge of infringing the act of 1818. On the morning of the 11th, however, he embarked with 300 unarmed followers for Mobile, where the party were met by a steamer called the Fashion, with 50 recruits on board, and set sail, as was supposed, for Central America. The United States government gave orders for them to be pursued, and Commodore Paulding succeeded in arresting Walker.

In reporting these occurrences, Lord Napier, then her Majesty's minParliamentary Paper correspond. ister at Washington, states, "I believe that the President and General respecting Cass sincerely deprecate and regret the present attempt to invade the Central America, peace of Central America." (Lord Napier to the Earl of Clarendon, No1856-60. Present- vember 16, 1857.)

ence

*

#

#

ed 1860, page 67. It does not appear whether Walker was brought to trial for this offense, but if so the proceedings could not have been very efficacious, as in the following year he renewed his preparations for an expedition on a larger scale, and on the 30th of October, 1858, President Buchanan issued a proclamation: "Whereas Ibid., p. 136. information has reached me, from sources which I cannot disregard, that certain persons, in violation of the neutrality laws of the United States, are making a third attempt to set on foot a military expedition within their territory against Nicaragua, a foreign state with which they are at peace." "From these circumstances the inference is irresistible that persons engaged in this expedition will leave the United States with hostile purposes against Nicaragua. They cannot, under the guise which they have assumed that they are peaceful emigrants, conceal their real intentions, and especially when they know, in advance, that their landing will be resisted, and can only be accomplished by an overpowering force. This expedient was successfully resorted to previous to the last expedition, and the vessel in which those composing it were conveyed to Nicaragua obtained a clearance from the collector of the