Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

sanction by any act of Belgium. A small State, he continued, whose pros perity depended on the full exercise of the industrial pursuits of its people they did not mingle in foreign politics, their policy being not to imperi their interests by stepping beyond the limits of strict neutrality in thei intercourse with other States. They should, therefore, remain "neutral," a he expressed it, in respect to this question. They had not even yet recog p.219nized the Italian government, he added. We desired, I told him, not to be

subjected to any interference in the settlement of our domestic affairs whether in the form of recognition of political existence, or of belligeren rights of those who were in open rebellion to the government and laws o2 the United States. It was an issue between order and anarchy which we were fully able to cope with, and all Europe was interested that its settle ment be in the most prompt and effective manner, as least liable to cause permanent derangement to commerce.

In reply to my inquiry, he said he had received no official information of the blockade of our southern ports, proclaimed by the President, although. he had late advices from the Belgian minister at Washington. He had only knowledge of it, he said, as printed in the papers. In answer to his inquiry, I said I thought it would not injuriously affect the supply of cotton, as the crop of the past year had mostly gone forward; and, moreover, that while the blockade would be rigorously enforced with regard to supplies, or vessels bearing the "confederate" flag, I presumed, although I had no instructions on the subject, that the vessels now loading, or under engagements to load in those ports, would be allowed reasonable time to leave; that there was every desire to make this condition of things, which was but temporary, as little embarrassing as possible to foreign commerce. The minister expressed great satisfaction at this, and said that the possibility of failure of the cotton supply, growing out of these troubles in our southern States, was causing great anxiety.

M. de Vrière then spoke of the new tariff with a great deal of feeling; said that it was highly prejudicial to their interests, instancing in point that forty furnaces for the manufacture of window glass had been stopped in consequence, and expressed his surprise that, in this age of progress, when Europe was abandoning the exploded system, as he expressed himself, of differential duties, the United States should pursue such a course. Their own experience as a manufacturing people had convinced them of the bad policy of such a system for the interests of the manufacturers themselves. I replied that I presumed the general interruptions of trade consequent upon apprehended war in the United States was, quite as much as the new tariff, a cause for suspension of the traffic he referred to. The tariff had been augmented by the last Congress to produce more revenue; if it failed to produce such result, it would probably be changed; it was a matter dependent on the will of Congress, and he was aware we had had several changes in the past few years, none of which had apparently given satisfaction to the manufacturing States of Europe which desired to supply our markets; still, it was our main source of revenue, and the system of raising means for the expenses of the government by a duty on importations would probably long continue.

*

*

*

I took my leave of M. de Vrière with the repeated assurance that no countenance would be given, in any form, to the rebellion in our southern States.

I have the honor to be, with great respect, your most obedient servant,
H. S. SANFORD.

[blocks in formation]

Mr. Sanford to Mr. Seward.

[Extract.]

Va. 9.]

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
Brussels, June 22, 1861.

SIR: As M. de Vrière is out of town, I directed the attention of Monsieur Saluremont, the secretary general, who is charged with the affairs of the epartment in the absence of the minister, in an interview with him to-day, as the propriety of a proclamation warning Belgians from taking service under hose in rebellion to the federal government, furnishing them "aid and comfart, and, especially, closing the ports of Belgium to their "privateers”— eclared by the President to be pirates-or permitting them to be fitted out her ports. I said that while the assurances I had received from M. de Trière, soon after my arrival, of the attitude of his government had been atisfactory, I hoped it would now give public expression to them, both as e to a friendly power and as a warning to their own citizens of the perils I such enterprises.

Mons. Saluremont replied that the matter had been under consideration; hat the position which England and France had taken had not seemed to e satisfactory to the government of the United States, and they had deyed, in consequence, taking any formal steps; but not, he begged me to be sured, from any want of friendly spirit or desire to do all the occasion

led for at their hands.

I replied that he was correct in his views of our sentiments as to the arse which England and France had seen fit to pursue. We could not ok upon the recognition of belligerent rights to those who, under our laws, Tere rebels, and before we had attempted to employ forcible means of coerdon, as evincing the friendly spirit we had a right to expect; that these people would be treated none the less as rebels on the land as pirates on the as they or those of whatever nationality who joined them; and we counted, on the part of Belgium, upon no such qualification of our citizens rebellion, whom we were engaged in submitting to the action of our laws. He said their legislation provided generally for the cases I had instanced, but that attention would be immediately given to the subject, and he thought we need not have any reason to be dissatisfied with the action they would take in the premises.

He then told me that our new tariff law was a subject of great complaint in Belgium, and great distress in some branches of industry which it had destroyed, referring specially to glass and some kinds of woollen goods. I again explained our system of revenue, which all manufacturing States this side the Atlantic insist upon believing to be disadvantageous to their interests.

*

*

*

*

*

I have the honor to be, with great respect, your most obedient servant, H. S. SANFORD.

Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD,

Secretary of State, &c., &c., &c.

ANNUAL MESSAGE OF THE PRESIDENT.

Mr. Sanford to Mr. Seward.

[Extract,]

No. 10.]

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
Brussels, July 2, 1861.

SIR: Referring to a conversation detailed in my despatch No. 9, I have the honor to enclose a notice published in the official journal (the Moniteur) of the 25th ultimo, in which, basing its action upon the stipulations of the declaration of the congress of Paris of April 16, 1856, it is announced that instructions have been addressed to the judicial, maritime, and military authorities to inform them that privateers of no nation or flag, alone or with their prizes, will be permitted, save in cases of extreme danger by stress of weather, to enter the ports of Belgium; enjoining upon them to recognize no commission or letter of marque as having validity; and warning all subject to the Belgian laws that in taking part or service in any privateers they incur risk of being treated as pirates abroad, and of being prosecuted with the utmost rigor of the laws at home. In thanking the acting minister for this prompt response to my request, I observed that while this was sufficient, in so far as it went, for the occasion that called it forth--as we had, and expected to have, no privateers upon the sea at this time-still, so long as we were not a party to the declaration of Paris, the employment of privateers by the United States was undoubtedly as much a belligerent right as the employment of militia on land; and in the event of a foreign war we should expect, on the part of friendly powers, no such impediment to its exercise by any injurious distinction between it and the other arms of the public

service.

*

*

*

*

*

*

I have the honor to be, with great respect, your most obedient servant,
H. S. SANFORD.

[Translation.]

Belgium has given its adhesion to the principles laid down in the declaration of the congress of Paris of April 16, 1856. This adhesion was published, together with said declaration, in the Belgian Moniteur of June 8, 1856.

The commercial public is notified that instructions on this subject have been given to the judicial, maritime, and military anthorities, warning them that privateers, under whatever flag or commission, or letters of marque, are not to be allowed to enter our ports except in case of imminent perils of the sea. The aforesaid authorities are charged, consequently, to keep a strict watch upon all such privateers and their prizes, and to compel them to put to sea again as soon as practicable.

The same authorities have been charged not to recognize the validity of any commission or letter of marque whatsoever.

All persons subject to the laws of Belgium, who shall fit out or take any part in any privateering expedition, will therefore expose themselves to the danger, on the one hand, of being treated as pirates abroad, and, on the other, to prosecution before Belgian tribunals with all the rigor of the laws.

.4.]

Mr. Seward to Mr. Sanford.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, May 6, 1861. S: Herewith I transmit a copy of a despatch of the 24th ultimo, which s been addressed to the several ministers of the United States accredited the maritime powers whose plenipotentiaries composed the congress of ris of the 16th April, 1856, calling their attention to the importance of avoring to negotiate with those powers conventions upon the subject of rights of belligerents and neutrals in time of war. The government of gium was not represented in the Paris congress; but the negotiation of milar convention with that government is considered desirable, and you -I therefore be governed by the instruction of which I enclose a transcript, dendeavor to effect that object. With this view I herewith send you a Zpower and a draft of the proposed convention.

[blocks in formation]

SIR: Your despatches (No. 5, dated May 26, and No. 6, of the same date) are been received. We are especially pleased with Mr. De Vrière's just and friendly sentiments' in regard to our affairs.

You are aware that the declaration of Paris enjoins each of the parties Cat have signed it not to negotiate any other changes of the law of nations cerning the rights of neutrals in maritime war. We have supposed that this would operate to prevent Great Britain, and probably France, from reeiving our accession to the declaration, if we should insist on the amendment proposed by Mr. Marcy, namely, the exemption of private property of Babelligerents from confiscation. But we should now, as the instructions beretofore given you have already informed you, vastly prefer to have that mendment accepted. Nevertheless, if this cannot be done, let the convention be made for adherence to the declaration pure and simple.

The feverish excitement which prevailed when you left the country is passing away. Public confidence in the ability of the government to repress the insurrection and preserve the Union is practically restored, and the beneficial result that two months ago seemed problematical is now regarded as only a question of time.

I am, sir, your obedient servant,

H. S. SANFORD, Esq., &c., &c., Brussels.

WILLIAM H. SEWARD.

Mr. Seward to Mr. Sanford.

No. 11.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, June 22, 1861.

SIR: Your despatch of the 5th June, (No. 8,) accompanied by a copy o your letter to Mr. De Vrière, on the subject of our proposed adherence to the declaration of the congress of Paris, has been received. We see no reason to doubt the propriety of that communication.

I am, sir, your obedient servant,

HENRY S. SANFORD, Esq., &c., &c., &c, Brussels.

WILLIAM H. SEWARD.

Mr. Sanford to Mr. Seward.

[Extract.]

No. 11.]

UNITED STATES LEGATION,
Brussels, July 3, 1861.

SIR: I have not been unmindful of your instructions (No. 2) respecting a convention for the abrogation of passports for our citizens travelling or sojourning in Belgium.

As already intimated in my first despatch, passports are already almost virtually abolished here, the visa being no longer necessary. The usual

course of this government in respect to this subject is, upon notification by a government that Belgians are not required to be provided with passports to enter upon or travel within its territories, to exempt equally citizens or subjects of such nations in Belgium.

This course has been pursued with Sweden and Holland, and will be soon followed with France and England.

In view of the disturbances in our southern States, and the consequent impossibility of assuring entire reciprocity of exemption from passports throughout our territory, I have not deemed it advisable at this time to make any proposition on this subject.

1 am assured by Mr. De Vrière that, on formal notification that Belgians will not be required to present passports in the United States, the proper authorities here will direct the exemption of citizens of the United States travelling here from the requirement of passports.

They would need, however, in case of domicile here, some document to prove their identity. In this connexion, it may not be out of place to refer to a conversation I had some time since on this subject of the abolition of passports, with the officer in charge of that branch of the public service in France.

He said that they had already exempted British subjects coming to France from the action of the passport regulations, and had lately made similar exemptions with regard to Sweden, and were about to make the same exemptions with respect to Belgium, and would with most other nations on a footing of reciprocity. This was, however, a purely administrative act, liable to be recalled whenever considered for the interest of the state. They would in no case make a treaty which should bind them to the perpetual abolition of passports vis-a-vis to my nation.

In the present aspect of affairs in the United States, they deemed it im

« ForrigeFortsett »