Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

penalty that does not affect the delinquent captains, but the owners and shippers, who may perhaps have no culpability in the proceedings of the former. So summary a proceeding against the property is not in conformity to our usages, and every species of confiscation is forbidden by our laws. For this reason the consul ought not to deem it strange that the superior authority of this island should hesitate to be officious in a foreign affair which is initiated with such grave proceedings on the part of him who has in this place the character of commercial agent to protect and support the interests of the citizens of the United States, and not the severe office of a judge. It is likewise well founded that if there is responsibility involved in the consul's action, it belongs solely to the government of his nation to demand it of him; but for the same reason his and his only should be the responsibility; and the consul should not unnecessarily demand the foreign assistance, as the authority rendering it might find itself involved therein. The apprehension of being disregarded by the captains is not a sufficient reason to justify that assistance, which, being extemporaneous, would have a character of officious and voluntary. As the consul has already referred the solution of this affair to Washington, transmitting the registers of the 'Bamberg' and the 'Allan,' he might await the resolution of his government, which may perhaps save all future difficulty; and to this end it might be expedient that his excellency the governor, captain general, should also, with a copy of all the communications and reports, bring the subject before his excellency the minister of her Catholic Majesty in Washington, in order that his excellency may be posted up for the event of any communication being addressed to him thereupon by that government, or may avail himself of the occasion, should it present itself, of avoiding other reclamations of the same nature from the consul, if he deems it expedient, or considers himself authorized therefor. Notwithstanding all that is stated, your excellency will be pleased to inform his excellency the governor, captain general, what you may deem most proper."

And in conformity with what is above set forth I have the honor of transcribing it to your excellency in answer, returning the two documents that your official letter refers to. God preserve your excellency many years. Most excellent sir, in the absence of his excellency the commanding general, the 2d in command.

[blocks in formation]

After having closed our conversation on the Mexican business, I called Mr. Calderon's attention to a report going through the American and European press that Spain was about to recognize the independence of the Southern Confederacy and to break up the blockade of our southern ports. I added that it was impossible for me to believe that Spain could entertain any such intentions, and inquired whether anything had occurred to give rise to such a rumor.

Mr. Calderon replied with the strongest protestations of good faith and friendship towards the United States. He assured me that nothing could be further from the intentions of her Majesty's government than to depart from the policy indicated in her Majesty's proclamation of neutrality. But, he added, there are things-and, interrupting himself, he asked me whether I had not, within the last two days, received despatches from my government. I answered in the negative. Then he went to his desk and took out a paper, which turned out to be a copy of your despatch (No. 30) addressed to me, bearing date September 18. This despatch, as he said, had been communicated by you to Mr. Tassara, and Mr. Tassara had sent it to him. He handed it to me, and you may well imagine that I was somewhat disagreeably surprised. Instead of my communicating this despatch to him, he communicated it to me, and I found myself obliged to confess that I had not the least official knowledge of a matter to which, according to the contents of the despatch, my government attached the highest importance. Mr. Calderon informed me that he had received the document the day before; that he had at once inquired whether any report had been sent in by the captain general of Cuba; and that, there being none, he was not prepared to give an answer to your despatch. I replied that I would not ask for an answer until I should have received the original of your instructions and the reports of our consular officers on the Island of Cuba; that as soon as I should be in possession of these documents, I would lay them before him, and then discuss the matter with him in all its bearings. He replied that this would be agreeable to him, but that it would be impossible for him to give a definite answer without having heard from the captain general of Cuba.

[blocks in formation]

I am, sir, with the greatest respect, your obedient servant,

Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD,

Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.

*

C. SCHURZ.

Mr. Schurz to Mr. Seward.

[Extract.]

No. 30.]

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
Madrid, October 17, 1861.

SIR After having waited for the arrival of your despatch No. 30 until yesterday, I deemed it necessary to make an effort to obtain an answer from Mr. Calderon as to the general merits of the case. I therefore called on Mr. Calderon yesterday, and have the honor to transmit a report of our conversation.

I noticed, in the course of that conversation, that Mr. Calderon, although he denied the receipt of official communications from the captain general of Cuba, seemed to be well informed of what had happened there, while I had no other knowledge of the facts referred to in your despatch than a general impression gathered from newspaper statements, which, in this case, had been distressingly indefinite and contradictory.

You will notice that, in my conversation with Mr. Calderon, I confined myself entirely to putting questions, partly because I was ignorant of what actually had happened, and partly because I consider it impolitic, under present circumstances, to join issue with foreign governments on things

which may or may not happen. The latter is especially applicable to the case under consideration.

[blocks in formation]

Memorandum of a conversation between Mr. Calderon Collantes and Mr. Schurz on October 16, 1861.

Mr. Schurz informed Mr. Calderon that the original of Mr. Seward's despatch [No. 30,] a copy of which had been forwarded by Mr. Tassara to him, (Mr. Calderon,) had not reached the American legation, and that he was therefore unable to lay before Mr. Calderon the reports of the consular officers of the United States alluded to in the despatch; but that he considered it important that a matter which was so apt to lead to disagreeable consequences should be promptly disposed of, and that he therefore requested Mr. Calderon to state the views of the Spanish government in a general manner, even if it was impossible, in the absence of special information, to judge of the exact merits of the cases which had occasioned Mr. Seward's despatch.

Mr. Calderon replied that he had received no official communication on this subject from the captain general of Cuba, but that he was prepared to make the following statement:

Spain had followed, in relation to vessels coming from the ports of the socalled Southern Confederacy, the same rules of action which she had adopted in the case of vessels clearing from the ports of the kingdom of the Two Sicilies after the assumption of royal authority in that kingdom by King Victor Emanuel. It was well known that Spain had not recognized the socalled kingdom of Italy, and that the consular agents of King Francis I were still exercising their functions in the Spanish ports. Nevertheless, Spain did not oblige the masters of vessels arriving in Spanish ports from the ports of the kingdom of Naples to submit to the authority of the consuls of Francis I, but permitted them to address themselves either to these or to the consular officers of King Victor Emanuel, as they saw fit. But this permission given to vessels coming from the Neapolitan ports to transact their business with the consuls of Victor Emanuel was by no means intended to imply a recognition of the Italian kingdom; for Spain recognized in the kingdom of the Two Sicilies no other authority as lawful and legitimate than that of King Francis I.

In like manner it was permitted to vessels coming from the ports now under the control of the so-called Confederate States, upon their arrival in Spanish ports, to address themselves to the consular authorities of the United States, if they saw fit to do so; but, as in the case of vessels coming from Neapolitan ports, Spain did not think proper to oblige them to do so. This practice, however, was by no means intended to imply, in any manner, a recognition of the so-called Confederate States as an independent nation. But in the case of these vessels the action of Spain was still more justifiable than in the case of the Neapolitan vessels. The government of the United States was, with its naval forces, blockading the southern ports, and it was their business to see to it that no vessels should escape from the ports thus guarded. It could not be expected of Spain to supply the deficiencies of the maritime police of the United States, nor was it reasonable to expect

that she should turn away from her ports vessels engaged in ordinary peaceful commerce, and which had not been able to obtain regular papers even if they had wanted to do so. Nor could Spain oblige such vessels by force to submit to the authority of the consular officers of the United States. Spain was acting solely with a view to the protection of her commercial interests, and nothing else.

Mr. Schurz replied that the only ground upon which such proceedings could legitimately be placed was that of necessity, and asked Mr. Calderon whether this was the ground taken by the government of Spain.

Mr. Calderon replied that it was. It was nothing but an ex necessitate proceeding, and that as soon as that necessity ceased the Spanish government would cease to follow that rule of action.

Mr. Schurz asked whether the Spanish government would admit into its ports vessels without papers regularly issued by the authorities of the United States as soon as the authority of the government of the United States should be re-established in the southern ports.

Mr. Calderon answered that they would not, because then the necessity would cease. But he would not admit the ground taken by Mr. Seward in his despatch, that the admission of vessels without regular papers under the actual state of things depended on a "concession" on the part of the government of the United States, which might be granted or withdrawn at pleasure. The Spanish government claimed a right to adhere to its rule of action as long as the necessity existed. But he protested most emphatically against the construction placed upon this rule as implying a recognition of the so-called Confederate States; the government of Spain did not think of taking such a step and of interrupting the friendly relations existing between the two countries, the preservation of which was undoubtedly considered important by the United States, and had always been sincerely desired by Spain.

Mr. Schurz replied that, as to these peaceful relations, the United States desired to preserve them with equal sincerity, not because they were afraid of a conflict, but because they loved peace. He added that if Spain in this case followed an established policy, founded on precedent, he did not wish to carry the discussion further at present, especially in the absence of all reliable information as to the recent occurrences in the ports of Cuba; but he wished to say that while the United States would set up no unreasonble pretensions, any act on the part of a foreign government which might be justly interpreted as a recognition of the independence of the States now in rebellion against the legitimate government of the North American republic would necessarily and inevitably lead to a rupture.

Mr. Calderon repeated that no such intention was entertained by the government of Spain, which entertained none but friendly feelings towards the United States. He informed Mr. Schurz that he was about to address a despatch on this subject to Mr. Tassara, which the latter would be instructed to read to Mr. Seward.

Mr. Schurz to Mr. Seward.

No. 33.]

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
Madrid, October 20, 1861.

SIR: Last night I called upon Mr. Calderon, for the purpose of reading to him the memorandum of our conversation of the 16th instant. After having suggested some additions, which were forthwith incorporated into the report,

he approved it as correct. He informed me that he had meanwhile received an official communication from the captain general of Cuba on the occurrences which had occasioned your despatch No. 30, and that he would read it to me at our next interview. He wanted to prove to me that the Spanish government had acted with entire fairness and loyalty in this transaction. I informed him that the London "Times," of October 16, contained the following telegraphic despatch:

"There are several vessels loading ammunition at Havana for the confederates."

And asked him whether he knew anything of this.

Mr. Calderon exclaimed at once, with great warmth: "That is impossible; it cannot be true. This would be a violation of the royal decree of the 17th of June, and will never be tolerated. General Serrano cannot have permitted this."

I replied that I was happy to hear him express his opinion so unequivocally and emphatically; for it would be impossible for the government of the United States to look on quietly while the Cuban ports were used as war depots for the rebels.

Mr. Calderon assured me repeatedly that this telegraphic despatch would most certainly turn out to be unfounded, and reiterated in very strong language the assurance of the loyal and friendly feelings of the Spanish government towards the United States, and of its firm determination to adhere faithfully to the principles laid down in the royal decree.

I am, sir, with high respect, your obedient servant,

Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD,

Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.

No. 46.)

Acting Secretary of State to Mr. Schurz.

[Extract.]

C. SCHURZ.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, November 5, 1881.

SIR: Your despatch of September 2 (No. 13) was duly received.

*

[blocks in formation]

I am gratified to learn that the public opinion around you is less injurious than formerly. I trust that it is the beginning of a better understanding in Europe of the real character and determination of the American people. I am, sir, your obedient servant,

CARL SCHURZ, Esq., &c., &c., &c., Madrid.

F. W. SEWARD,

Acting Secretary.

Acting Secretary of State to Mr. Schurz.

No. 47.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, November 5, 1861.

SIR: Your despatch of September 5 (No. 14) was duly received. It is very interesting, and I deeply regret that, owing to its having been accidentally mislaid, it failed to receive earlier attention.

« ForrigeFortsett »