Lapas attēli

lodge protests in support of mine with the governor general there. I find I was mis taken; the governors are independent of each other.

On the 30th January I received a dispatch, dated private secretary's office, 30th January, informing me that his excellency the governor general had received my communications of 26th, 27th, and 28th January, and advised with the Crown law-offi cers thereon, and that his excellency the governor has come to the decision that, whatever may be the previous history of the Shenandoah, “the government of this colony is bound to treat her as a ship of war, belonging to a belligerent power,” a copy of wbich is herewith inclosed, (No. 11.)

I immediately entered a protest, in the name of the United States, against the decision of the government of Victoria, a copy of which is herewith inclosed, (No. 12.)

After receiving this decision of the governor, thus closing all arguments and hopes as to the vessel being stopped in her career by the governor, I consulted with several American merchants here, and decided to indict her in the admiralty court. With this view I employed Messrs. Duttett, Grant, and Wolcott, solicitors, who became acquainted with sudry atfidavits and witnesses at my command.

On the 1st February a debate arose in the colonial legislature respecting the Sea King-Shenandoah, in which the chief secretary seemed to think there was no proof of said vessel being the Sea King.

My solicitors considered there was abundant evidence, and that it should be laid before the Crown law-officers, which I authorized them to do. I therefore accompanied Mr. Duffett, of the said firm, to the crown law-offices, where he left the affidavits of Messrs. L. L. Nichols, (No. 13;) William Bruce, (No. 14;) and John H. Colly, (No. 15.) The minister of justice and the attorney general were absent, and the above atfidavits were left with the chief clerk, Mr. Chromley.

On the 3d February Mr. Dutfett, of the above, wrote to the attorney general, as per inclosure No. 16.

On the 4th Febrnary I was informed, as per inclosures Nos. 17 and 18, that on Monday, February 6, the law-officers would be glad to see me in relation to said vessel. At the appointed time, in company with Mr. Duffett, and supported by Mr. J. B. Swasey, a loyal American merchant of this city, I repaired to the officers named, when the case of the Sea King-Shenandoah was discussed with the minister of justice and the attorney general. During the interview I requested Mr. Duffett to read the affidavit of George Silvester, late a seaman on the Laurel, and fireman on the Sea KingShenandoab (No. 19 ;) and Mr. Duffett left with the attorney general the affidavits of Edward S. Jones, (No. 20 ;) James Ford, (No. 21;) George R. Brackett, (No. 22;) Charles Bollen, (No. 23;) Jolin Sandall, (No. 24;) William Scott, (No. 25 :) Frederick Lindborg, (No. 26;) and he withdrew the declaration of William L. L. Nichols, (No. 13,) left on the 20 February, and substituted for it an affidavit of the same person, (No. 27.)

After much discussion both these gentlemen seemed to admit that the Sea KingShenandoah would be liable to seizure and condemnation if found in British waters; but would not admit that she was liable to seizure here, unless she violated the neutrality proclamation while in this port, and if she did they would take immediate action against her.

Finding that I could not proceed in the admiralty court, I continued to take what evidence I could get, and forward it to the governor, and in the month of February I addressed to him a dispatch, in which I sent a list of the affidavits left at the Crown law-offices, a copy of which (No. 28) is herewith inclosed.

On the 10th February, 1865, I sent to the governor a dispatch inclosing the affidavit of John Williams, showing that persons were concealed ou board said vessel, and others on dnty on board, and wearing the uniform, which persons had come in said vessel in this port, a copy of which is herewith inclosed, (No. 29.)

On the 11th February I received a dispatch from the Crown law-officers, informing me that said John Williams may attend on Monday, the 13th, at the Crown solicitor's office, a copy of which is herewith inclosed, (No. 31.)

On Monday, the 13th, I induced Mr. Samuel P. Lord, a loyal American merchant here, to accompany said John Williams and Walter J. Madden, who had given like testimony before me, to the Crown solicitor, to see that the testimony of said persons was properly taken. Just after his departure from the consulate with the abovenamed witnesses, two other sailors, named F. C. Behucke and Herman Wicke, who

said they left the Shenandoah only the day before, came to the consulate and [586] gave substantially the *same evidence. I immediately sent them with my

clerk, Mr. Gage, to the Crown solicitor's office, to support the charge of those already there.

I then sent to the governor a dispatch inclosing the testimony of John Williams, (No. 32,) Walter J. Madden, (No. 33,) and Thomas Jackson, (No. 34,) a seaman on board the Laurel, and fireman on board the Sea King, (Shenandoah,) in support of my protests, a copy of which is herewith inclosed, (No. 35.)

At about 5 o'clock p. m. on the 13th an officer of the police, accompanied by the clerk from the Crown law-office, came to this consulate to obtain a witness to go on board the said Shenandoah to identify the persons who had shipped in this port on board said vessel. I declined to let any of them go on board said vessel unless he would return them to this consulate, as I apprehended they might be seized as deserters, informing him that they were all impressed from American vessels. He gave me such a promise, and selected Walter J. Madden, who left this consulate in his charge.

On the 14th I received a dispatch from the governor's private secretary, informing me that my dispatches of the 10th and 13th were received, and bad engaged, and continued to engage, the earnest attention of the colonial government, a copy of which dispatch is herewith inclosed, (No. 36.)

On the same day I sent a dispatch to the governor, (No. 37,) inclosing the affidavits of F. C. Behucke, (No. 39,) and Herinann Wicke, (No. 38,) these being the two men whom I had sent the day before to the Crown solicitors, and whose affidavits I took after their return.

On the 14th of February Walter J. Madden returned and informed me that the police were not allowed to search the ship the day before, and that two policemeu went on board this morning, and returned without making any arrest, and that he was dismissed for the present. He also informed me that the Shenandoah was then on the patent slip undergoing repairs.

On the evening of the 14th the town was full of rumors about the seizure of said vessel. About 5 o'clock I proceeded to Sandridge to ascertain if said seizure was made. Sandridge is opposite Williamstown, where the said vessel was, and in direct communication by a steam ferry-boat, and distant about three miles. While at Sandridge I was informed by a master of an English ship, who was boarded by the Shenandoah previous to her arrival here, and whose name I do not remeinber, that he was on board the Shenandoal an hour previous, drinking with the ward-room officers, when Captain Waddell came in with a printed paper in his hand and informed them that the ship had been seized. That he left, coming through the police then around the said vessel, by giving his name and occupation.

Ou the morning of the 15th February it was reported in the papers that the Shenandoah had been seized by the authorities; that four persons endeavoring to escape from the said vessel were arrested. Among then was one Charley, who had been named by all the witnesses as being on board and wearing the uniform of the said vessel.

With a view of getting the governor to reconsider his decision as alluded to, (No. 11,) and in answer to the argument used by the Crown law-officers at the interview I had with them before referred to, I forwarded to his excellency a dispatch, a copy of which is herewith inclosed, (No. 40.)

I received the same day a notice from the police department informing me of the arrest of four men, and desiring the presence of some person to identify them, a cops of which is inclosed, (No. 41.)

I went the four men who had given the information to identify the arrested men, who returned same day, stating that Charley was among them, and that the others were also some of the persons referred to in their affidavits as being on board, and that their names were remembered when seen. These men also informed me that the prisoners were remanded, and that they were to appear the next day against them at the Williamstown police court. A few hours after I heard that the ship was released.

In the evening, during the session of Parliament, the chief secretary annonnced that the government had issued no warrant and that there had been no search ; "that a warrant had only been issued for the arrest of one of their subjects, and that, being satisfied, they ought not to proceed to extremities in this matter.” Permission was then given to the workmen to launch the ship, which had been forbidden.

On the 16th February I had the men to attend at the police court in Williamstown, as required, as witnesses. Two of the prisoners were committed, one released on the ground that he was vot a British subject, and the other remanded till the next day. While crossing the bay to the trial at Williamstown on the 16th, I saw the Shenan

doah taking in coal from a ship alongside, and Mr. McFarlane, emigration (587) *officer, a fellow-passenger, informed me that she was taking in 200 tons of

Scotch coal in addition to the amonnt she brought here. On the 17th February I forwarded to the governor a dispatch calling his attention to the fact that the Shenandoah was a full-rigged sailing-vessel, steam being only auxiliary, and to the amount of coal she had upon her arrival here, and the quantity I learned she was taking on board in this port, a copy of wbich (No. 42) is herewith inclosed. The same day I learned that the remanded prisoner was also committed, and the four men held as witnesses to appear at the March term of the court.

On the 17th I forwarded a dispatch to the governor, calling his attention to the affidavits heretofore forwarded him, showing that some ten or twenty persons had been shipped on board said vessel while in this harbor; also notifying him that I had forwarded to the attorney general the solemn declaration of Michael Cashmore, (No. 43,) a highly respectable citizen, to the same purport; and that I had also left with

was one

the attorney general a solemn declaration of J. B. Lydserff (No. 44) in relation to the sale of prize chronometers in this port by the officers of said vessel, and protesting against the vessel being allowed to leave this port with said persons on board, a copy of which (No. 45) is herewith inclosed.

On the evening of the 17th of February Andrew Forbes came to the consulate with the information that several persons were then on the wharf ready to go on board a vessel to join the Sea King-Shenandoah beyond the jurisdiction of this port; that one of said persons, named James Evans, had told him. Deeming the information important, and that no time was to be lost, I, in company with Mr. S. P. Lord, who was then in the consulate, took said Forbes with us to the Crown law-officers to lodge the information, and was met by the Crowu solicitor coming out. Upon my application to take the inforination, he in av offensive manner positively declined, saying he wanted his dinner; that there were plenty of magistrates in town; that of his business. He iuformed me that the attorney general and minister of justice were in Parliament then in session. I then proceeded to the detective police office, and there was informed that if the affidavit of the mau was taken before a county magistrate they would execute his warrant. I then went to Parliament House and called out Mr. Higinbotham, the attorney general, who said that if I would go to Mr. Sturt he would take the affidavit. I then went with witness to Mr. Sturt, more than a mile off, who declined to take it, and said the water police were the proper authorities to act. The water police are at Williamstown, across the bay, and about four miles from Mr. Sturt's. I then took the testimony which is No. 46 at my office, and dispatched it by Mr. Lord to the attorney general, and started with the witness to Williamstown; when the witness found he had to go among his acquaintances he was afraid of bodily barm, and refused to proceed.

During the night several persons endeavored to find me to give information of the shipment of men for said vessel. One Robbins, a master stevedore, found me at 11 o'clock p. m., and informed me that boat-loads of men with their luggage were leaving the wharf at Sandridge, and going directly on board said vessel, and that the ordinary police-boats were not to be seen in the bay. I informed said Robbins that Mr. Sturt, police magistrate, told me the water police were the proper persons to lodge any information with, and that he, as a good subject, was bound to inform them of any violation of law that came under his notice, which he promised to do.

On the morning of the 18th of February, at about 7 clock a. m., the aid Shenandoah left her anchorage and proceeded to sea unmolested.

I forwarded to the governor the affidavit of said Forbes, (No. 46,) inclosed in a dispatch a copy of which is annexed, (No. 47.)

On this day I received a reply from the private secretary, dated the 17th of February, relating to the supply of coal, a copy of which (No. 48) is herewith inclosed.

I learned that the Shenandoah was inquiring for a pilot acquainted with the Australian waters, and I dispatched to the vice-consul at Hobart Town information to that effect, a copy of which is herewith inclosed, (No. 49.)

On the 18th of February the aforesaid Mr. Robbins called at the consulate and informed me that six boat-loads of men left the wharfs with their luggage during the previous night, and that they were taken on board said vessel through the propeller's hoist-hole. "When asked to give his affidavit, he said, as the officials would take no notice, he would only injure his business by so doing, and he declined. He stated that about 70 men went on board of said vessel on the night of the 17th February, and that some of them took and used his boat to go in.

Captain Sears, of the American bark Mustang, was on the wharf watching, who informs me that he saw several boat-loads of men with luggage go to said vessel while

lying in the bay, and that he also saw Robbins go to the police. [588] *On the 20th I received a dispatch from the private secretary of the governor,

dated same day, in answer to my dispatch of the 15th February, a copy of which (No. 50) is herewith inclosed.

On the 20th I requested, in writing, Mr. S. P. Lord to give me an account of my interview with the Crown solicitor referred to above. I inclose herewith a copy of said request, (No. 51,) as well as his answer thereto, (No. 52.)

On the 22d I received a dispatch from the private secretary's office, dated 21st February, in reply to my complaint of the 18th Febrnary alluded to above, a copy of which is herewith inclosed, (No.53.)

In recapitulating the above, I leave the documents to speak for themselves, con vinced that they will meet with the interpretation they deserve. It will be for you to consider whether the Sea King-Shevandoah was heartily and illegally recognized as a war-vessel of a belligerent power, coming as she did armed from one British port to another, with the marks of her identity still upon her, and allowed to depart again to renew her depredations on the commerce of a power friendly to Great Britain. It will be for you to consider whether the shipment of arms and ammunition in Liverpool on board the Laurel to be put on board the Sea King on the high seas, as borne

[ocr errors]

out by the affidavits of Silvester and Jackson, is in accordance with international law and treaty obligations and Her Majesty's neutrality proclamation.

The department will not fail to perceive that with the sworn testimony of four persons before the authorities here to the effect that some ten or twenty persons were shipped in this barbor on board said vessel, and were rationed from her stores, and a part of them at least on duty on board in uniform, said vessel was nevertheless allowed to depart.

The attention of the department is especially called to the interview alluded to above at page 9 with the Crown law-officers, to the effect that if the said ship was found violating the neutrality proclamation in this port, they would take immediate action against her.

A dispatch from the Crown law-officers above referred to (No. 31) alludes to snpporting a charge against certain persons and officers of the Shenandoah. The police examinations took place as stated on the 16th and 17th February instant, at which three men were committed for trial; and yet at the very time these commitments were being made, the officers who thus violated the neutrality of this port were on board the ship within a mile of the said court, unmolested, and the ship was allowed to take in the additional quantity of coal mentioned herein before. A printed report of the investigations of the persons referred to, cut from the Melbourne Argus, is herewith inclosed, (No. 54.)

These commitments do not seem to bave stimulated the authorities to vigilance in regard to the said ship; otherwise, boat-loads of men could not have joined her on the night of the 17th-18th instant, as stated above, and confirmed by the extracts taken from the three Melbourne daily papers of the 20th instant, herewith inclosed, and numbered 55.

What motives may have prompted the authorities, with evidence in their possession as to the shipment of large numbers of persons on board said vessel, substantiated by the capture and commitment of some escaping from said ship, to allow the said vessel to continue to enjoy the privileges of neutrality in coaling, provisioning, and departure with the affidavits and information lodged and not fully satisfied, I am at a loss to conceive. Was it not shown and proved that the neutrality was violated ? And yet she was allowed her own way unmolested, thus enabling her to renew her violations of neutrality on a larger scale.

There are eyes that do not see and ears that do not hear, and I fear that this port is endowed with such a proportion of them as may be required to suit the occasion. For in what other way can my unsuccessful attempts to obtain the assistance of the authorities on the evening of the 17th instant be explained.

The immunities I enjoyed on this occasiou as United States consul were of a peculiar nature; instead of being assisted by the authorities I was only baftled, and taught how certain proceedings could not be instituted.

I send by this inail a tile of the Melbourne Argus, Age, and Herald, the three daily papers of this city, during the time of the stay of the " Shenandoah" in this port, a careful examination of which will be necessary to obtain a complete view of what transpired in this place in relation to said ship and her officers. I also send the Mel. bourne pictorial papers, giving a picture of said vessel and some of the scenes on board of her.

I herewith inclose (No. 62) extracts cnt from said papers in support of some of my statements, which I deem essential to be read in connection with this dispatch, for fear the papers sent by mail may not arrive in time, among which will be found the correspondence between the officials here with the officers of said vessel.

I also forwarded to the governor of the colony affidavits of Edward P. Nichols, [589] *second mate of late bark Delphine, (No. 59;) of E. T. Lingo, steward on board

late bark Delphine, (No. 60;) and of Mary Lingo, (No. 61,) stewardess on late Delphine.

I close by informing the Department that James Francis Maguire, late United States consul here, as far as I could see and learn, acted as consul for the vessel and her ofticers.

I have, &c.,


(Inclosure 3 in No. 32.)

Mr. Blanchard to Mr. Adams.

MELBOURNE, January 26, 1865. Sir: The mail to Europe being about to leave, I basten to inform you that a contederate steamer pamed Shenandoah has made her appearance in this port this morning. I beg to inclose extracts of papers.


Some prisoners on board, who are now being liberated, give the following details respecting her:

She was the original Sea King; sailed from London on the 8th October, 1864, and received ammunition from a ship named Laurel at sea. Part of the name Sea King is still visible, and I shall obtain of these particular letters a photograph. She is represented to have been built at Glasgow, and water-buckets, spoons, forks, &c., are marked Sea King. She is a wooden ship with iron frame, but not plated. Her armament is eight guns, viz: 8-inch shell guns, two on each side, unrifled, weight about 2 tons 15 cwt. ; guns bear number 11,522, 11,524, 11,525; these guys are not breech-loaders; two rifled guns, about 4-inch bore, one on each side; 2 ordinary 12-pouuders, the original ship's guns.

She has the appearance of an ordinary merchant ship, with a long full poop, a large bright wheel-house, oval sky-lights on the poop. She has one telescope funnel. The mizzen topmast and topgailant staysail both hoist from the mainmast head. She is wire-rigged.

The officers declare it would not be safe to fire a broadside. It is the general impression that she is not a formidable vessel, She is leaky, and requires two hours pumping ont. The crew consists of 79 all told.

I have, &c.,

WM. BLANCHARD. [Copy of the above also sent to the United States consul at Hong-Kong.]

(Inclosure 4 in No. 32.)

Protest of William Green Nichols.

Protest of master of Delphine.

I, the undersigned, William Green Nichols, of Searsport, United States, formerly captain of bark Delphine, of Bangor, M: ne, United States, do hereby solemply declare on oath :

That said bark was of 105 tons register.

That on the 12th October, 1864, she sailed from Gravesend, England, under my command, with a crew of fifteen, and two passengers, (wife and child.)

The said bark was bound for Akyab, with cargo of machinery, and that until the 29th December, 1864, nothing unusual occurred.

That on said 29th December last, latitude south 39° 30', longitude' east 69°, I was fallen in with by a ship showing English colors for about half an hour while approaching. I showed American colors in reply. The ship on approaching proved to be a steamer with a telescopo funnel, under sail. She fired a blank shot, upon which I immediately bove to, she hoisting the confederate flag after firing the gun.

That immediately after the gun was tired the confederate flag was hoisted on said steamer, and on my ship Delphine being boarded, I was taken with my mate and ship's papers on board said steamer called Shenandoah.

That on examining said papers the captain of aforesaid steamer, James J. Waddell, declared the ship under my comniand as a prize, granted me permission to remove the wardrobe of myself and family, (consisting of wife and child,) but allowed me to take

nothing else. (590) That the crew were allowed the same privileges, with the exception of their

beds. That I, my wife and child, were taken on board said steamer as prisoners, but paroled, whereas such part of crew as would not join the steamer were put in irons.

The above-named ship Delphine was then ransacked and set on fire by crew of said steamer.

That I declared to the captain of said steamer the value of ship Delphine as being about £3,500 sterling.

The outfit, loss of freight, and wages, which amount to about £3,000, were not included in above amount.

That immediately on being taken on board I was paroled, and on 23d instant a new parole was demanded from me in order to enable me to be released on reaching land.

That to-day, the 26th January, 1865, I was released in Hobson's Bay, under parole, which enjoins upon me not to give any information which might tend to the injury of the said steamer, or to the detriment of the so-called confederate cause.

That not for want of loyalty to the United States, but in consequence of wishing not to violate said parole, I decline divulging anything as to her armament, &c.

That the knives, forks, spoons, &c., in use of the said steamer, bore the mark Sea King, and I heard the captain say that she was formerly the Sea King; that he, with

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »