taking into consideration the pacific and friendly relations at present existing between Her Majesty's government and the United States, your excellency will be pleased to prevent this vessel from obtaining coal here, or any other supplies that will aid her in carrying on her illegal pursuits. I trust your excellency will be pleased to order that this vessel shall depart from this port at once. As representative for the United States of America, I feel it my duty, and do [96] hereby *protest in the name of the United States against this privateer vessel being permitted to obtain coal or any supplies contraband of war. I have, &c., (Signed) EDWARD TROWBRIDGE, United States Consul. No. 50. Opinion of law-off cers. The law-officers of the Crown to Earl Russell. TEMPLE, April 18, 1863. (Received April 18.) MY LORD: We are honored with your lordship's commands signified in Mr. Hammond's letter of the 6th instant, stating that he was directed by your lordship to transmit to us a letter from the Colonial Office, inclosing a copy of a dispatch from the governor of the Windward Islands, forwarding copies of correspondence which had taken place between his excellency and Rear-Admiral Wilkes respecting a complaint made by the latter that undue partiality had been shown by the governor to the confederate vessel Oreto, and to request that we would take the same into our consideration, and favor your lordship with our opinion whether there has been any breach of Her Majesty's regulations. Mr. Hammond was also pleased to state that he was directed by your lordship to inclose a previous letter from the Colonial Office on the same subject. In obedience to your lordship's commands we have taken these papers into our consideration, and have the honor to report That we are of opinion that his excellency the governor of the Windward Islands does not appear to have been guilty of showing any undue partiality to the Oreto, or to have committed any literal breach of Her Majesty's regulations. We would take the liberty of observing further, that his excellency owes no account to Admiral Wilkes of his conduct in the matter of his discharge of his duties towards Her Majesty; and that the very offensive tone and language of that officer's letter ought to apprise his excellency of the inexpediency of long per sonal interviews and explanations with him. It is manifest that upon this, as upon other occasions, these interviews and explanations are made the pretext for writing subsequent letters of this description, intended to be used hereafter very disingenuously, as proof of charges made at the time of the favor shown by Her Majesty's officers to the Confederate States. We feel ourselves called upon, while giving to Governor Walker full credit for honest and impartial conduct, to add that, in our opinion, the letter and spirit of Her Majesty's regulations (quoted in Rear-Admiral Wilkes's dispatch of the 6th March, 1863) have not been adhered to with sufficient strictness in either of the cases mentioned, that of the San Jacinto or that of the Oreto. The limits of the supply of coal in particular, prescribed by that regulation, ought to be observed, both as to the quantity of coal to be supplied in the first instance, and as to the interval of time which, in the absence of "special permission," (a per mission not contemplated except under "special" circumstances of a kind different, in our opinion, from those which occurred in the two cases in question,) ought to elapse between two successive supplies of coal from British ports. We have, &c., (Signed) WM. ATHERTON. ROUNDELL PALMER. No. 51. Mr. Hammond to Sir F. Rogers. FOREIGN OFFICE, April 25, 1863. SIR: With reference to your letters of the 23d and 31st ultimo, I am directed by Earl Russell to transmit to you, to be laid before the Duke of Newcastle, a copy of the opinion of the law-officers of the Crown with regard to the complaint made by Rear-Admiral Wilkes, that undue partiality had been shown by the governor of the Windward Islands to the confederate vessel Oreto.1 I am, &c., E. HAMMOND. [97] *No. 52. Lord Lyons to Earl Russell. States Government. WASHINGTON, April 17, 1863. (Received April 30.) MY LORD: I have the honor to transmit to your lordship copies of a note from Mr. Seward, and its inclosure, and a copy of my complaint of United reply. They relate to a complaint that the regulations respecting belligerent ships in British harbor shave been transgressed at Barbados, in favor of the confederate steamer Florida; but there does not seem to be any reason for me to enter into direct communication with the governor of Barbados on the subject. Your lordship will see that, in this letter from Rear-Admiral Wilkes, which forms inclosure No. 2, the rear-admiral states that the United States are endeavoring to act up to and carry out the literal construction of Her Majesty's regulations. I have always been myself of opinion that the course best calculated to avoid unpleasant discussions with this Government is to adhere as closely as possible to the regulations. A departure from them, even in favor of the United States cruisers, is likely (as indeed happened at Bermuda) to lead to misunderstandings respecting the nature and extent of the concession intended, and to demands for similar concessions on other occasions; while the displeasure occasioned here by any favor granted to a confederate ship is in no degree diminished by proof that a similar favor had been previously granted to a United States ship. I have, &c., (Signed) LYONS. 1 No. 50. [Inclosure 1 in No. 52.] Mr. Seward to Lord Lyons. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, MY LORD: I inclose a copy of a correspondence between Rear-Admiral Wilkes and the governor of the British Island of Barbadoes relative to an alleged disregard by the latter of Her Majesty's orders, in permitting the insurgent steamer Florida, Maffit commander, to take in a supply of coal at that island, after having taken in a full supply at Nassau only thirty days before. SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 13th instant, inclosing a copy of a correspondence between Rear-Admiral Wilkes and the governor of Barbados relative to the steamer Florida having been permitted to coal at that island. I have, &c., (Signed) LYONS. Mr. Hammond to Sir F. Rogers. FOREIGN OFFICE, May 2, 1863. SIR: With reference to my letter of the 25th ultimo, I am directed by Earl Russell to transmit to you a copy of a dispatch from Her Majesty's minister at Washington, inclosing copies of his correspondence with Mr. Seward respecting undue favor asserted to have been shown at Barbados to the confederate steamer Florida; and I am to request that, in laying the same before the Duke of Newcastle, you will call his grace's attention to the observations of Her Majesty's minister as to the importance of colonial governors and others adhering as closely as possible to the Queen's regulations with regard to the facilities to be accorded to belligerent cruisers in British ports. I am, &c., E. HAMMOND. *No. 52. No. 54. Mr. Elliot to Mr. Hammond. DOWNING STREET, May 15, 1863. (Received May 16.) SIR: I have laid before the Duke of Newcastle your letter of the 25th ultimo, inclosing an opinion of the law-officers of the Crown upon the subject of the complaint of Rear-Admiral Wilkes, that undue partiality had been shown by the governor-in-chief of the Windward Islands to the confederate vessel Oreto. This 2. His grace desires me to submit, for Earl Russell's consideration, the following remarks with reference to the law-officers report. report is not so much a report upon the question of law as a report upon the conduct of the governor in the execution of his instructions; and his grace does not clearly understand whether it is intended to convey a censure on the supposed prudence of Mr. Walker's communication with Admiral Wilkes. If it be so, his grace could not concur in that censure. Assuming it to have been the duty of Mr. Walker to treat Admiral Wilkes with courtesy till his conduct justified a different course, his grace does not see that Mr. Walker made any statement that was imprudent or uncalled for, or which calls for animadversion. 3. With regard to the law-officers' opinion, that the governor did not adhere to Her Majesty's regulations with sufficient strictness, either in the case of the Oreto or in that of the San Jacinto, his grace observes that the law-officers have not afforded any such specification of the governor's errors as might be a guide to him in future. They say that the limits of the supply of coal prescribed by the regulation should be adhered to. But they do not say on what grounds they come to the conclusion that it has been exceeded. The supply is to be limited to such as will enable the ship to reach the nearest of its own ports, or any nearer destination. The supply to the Oreto was 90 tons. The papers do not show (though possibly the law-officers may be aware from other Sources) what was the supply to the San Jacinto. The question, therefore, arising upon these papers is, whether 90 tons is more than would be required by such a vessel as the Oreto to reach the nearest confederate port, or any nearer destination. 4. It would be very desirable to explain to Governor Walker for what destination (supposing all confederate ports to be under blockade) the Oreto, or any other confederate ship under similar circumstances, should be allowed to take in coal. 5. On the next point, of alleged insufficient strictness, his grace is disposed to a certain extent to agree with the law-officers. The regulation requires that "no coal shall be again supplied to any such ship of war, or privateer in the same, or any other port, roadstead, or waters, subject to the territorial jurisdiction of Her Majesty, without special permission, until after the expiration of three months from the time when such coal may have been last supplied to her within British waters, as aforesaid." 6. The Oreto appears to have coaled at Nassau within three months, and, indeed, within thirty days of her arrival at Barbadoes; and though the American consul's vehement remonstrance of the 24th February against her being allowed to coal did not touch the point, and the governor had no official information of the fact, he does not deny that the fact had transpired, and was known to him, but states that the supply of coal was allowed on the ground of the ship having suffered at sea in a gale of wind, had been obliged to exhaust [99] *her coal, the whole of which was gone; so that, if supplies were refused, the captain said he would be obliged to land his men, and strip the ship. The statement of the captain of the San Jacinto was of a like tenor. The first question seems to be, whether the governor ought to have instituted an inquiry into the truth of the statements made to him by the captains of the Oreto and San Jacinto. It appears to his grace that he ought. It is, no doubt, very desirable to avoid resting decisions, of which the impartiality is sure to be questioned, upon the results of inquiries in which, more or less doubtful and conflicting testimony has to be weighed. But in the case of an allegation that a vessel is destitute of coal, all that seems necessary is to send an officer on board to see whether there is coal there or not. Perhaps if the governor were to refuse to take the word of an American admiral for such a fact, and were to send an officer on board to verify it, the admiral would regard the proceeding as offensive; but, nevertheless, his grace thinks that he should be required to submit to it before he should be allowed to coal out of time, unless he be prepared to consent to the word of a confede rate officer being taken in like manner without inquiry. 7. But, supposing the governor to have erred in these cases, it is not explained in the report of the law-officers, whether it is of this, or of what other errors, he has been guilty, so as to help him to avoid a repe tition of error. For example, supposing it had been the fact duly ascer tained, that the Oreto or Jacinto had suffered severely in a gale of wind, had exhausted all her coal, and was disabled from proceeding to sea unless supplied, was the governor to have forbidden her to coal on the ground that she had coaled at some British port within thirty days? On the other hand, did his only error consist in his having allowed her to coal without verifying the fact of her distress? 8. Again, assuming the fact to be, that there is, or may be hereafter, no confederate port unblockaded, and that the real destination of a confederate vessel asking for supplies is a cruising destination, so that she is not bound for any particular port, is this to deprive her of the supplies which would be granted to a Federal cruiser in all respects similarly circumstanced, except that in her case a port can be designated which is in the possession of her government, by the distance of which from the British colony a standard is afforded for measuring the quantity of coal to be supplied. 9. His grace would be glad to be enabled to send out instructions to Governor Walker, founded upon the opinions of the law-officers, so far as they shall appear to have fully and correctly understood the course taken by the governor, together with any further instructions which would serve for the governor's guidance on the points adverted to, and on the nature of the cases, (if not those alleged by the Oreto and San Jacinto,) in which "special permission" is to be given to take in coals. 10. His grace desires me to observe that Governor Walker, by adopting the course of sending immediate notice to all the other governors in the West Indies of a belligerent vessel having obtained coals and sup plies at Barbadoes, appears to have taken a very useful precaution against the violation of the regulations, and that it would, apparently, be expedient to instruct the other governors to do likewise. I am, &c., T. FREDK. ELLIOT. |