suit the occasion; for in what other way can iny unsuccessful attempts to obtain the assistance of the authorities on the evening of the 17th instant be explained ? 1

The United States believe the Arbitrators will agree with the Consul in all that he has said.

Contrast between the course of Brazilin and of British au

And here again the United States must ask the Arbitrators to contrast the conduct of Her Majesty's Government with that of His Majesty the Emperor of Brazil, who, as early as June 23d, 1863, upon much less provocation from these same belliger. thorities. ent insurgents, caused, among others, the following salutary rules to be promulgated for the guidance of the presidents of his several provinces: 6. Not to admit in the ports of the Empire the belligerents which may once have violated neutrality.

7. To cause to retire immediately from the maritime territory of the Empire, without furnishing them with any supplies whatever, the vessels which attempt to violate neutrality.

8. Finally, to make use of force, or in default, or by the insufficiency of the same, to protest solemnly and energetically against the belligerent, who, being warned and intimated, does not desist from violating the neutrality of the Empire.

From Melbourne the Shenandoah made her way to the Island of Ascension, where, about the 4th of March, she destroyed four whaling vessels at anchor in the harbor. One of these vessels was from Honolulu, under the Honolulu flag, and commanded by a citizen of Honolulu. She remained at this island until about the 14th of March, and then cruised for nearly a month off the coast of Japan. The latter part of May she arrived in the Ochkotsk sea, where, on the 27th of May, she captured and destroyed the whaling ship Abigail, Captain Nye. She then sailed for Cape Thaddeus, a place much frequented by whaling ships, and arrived there about the 20th of June. Between that time and the 28th she captured twenty-four whaling vessels with their cargoes and outfit, and destroyed all except one, the largest number having been taken on the 28th. The United States believe the Arbitrators will find from the testimony of Captain Nye, Captain Hathaway, and W. H. Temple, that most, if not all of these captures were made after Lieutenant Waddell had received news that the war had ended.

3

4

It is true it is said in the British Case, "that the commander of the Shenandoah positively affirmed that he had, on receiving intelligence of the downfall of the Government by which he was commissioned, desisted instantly from further acts of war," but it must be borne in mind that the same commander had previously made some "positive" statements at Melbourne which were afterwards found by Her Majesty's officers there not to have been in all respects true, and under these circumstances the United States believe that, if it becomes material, the Arbitrators will give more credence to the affidavits of the intelligent captains than to the assertions of the late commander. Although the testimony of Temple was severely criticised by the attorney of the commander at the time it was presented, all his statements, material to this question, have been fully sustained by the testimony of the other witnesses obtained since that time.

The insurrection came to an end in the month of April, 1865. On the 20th of June, Mr. Mason, one of the agents of the insurgents in London, addressed a note to Earl Russell in which he said:

It being considered important and right, in the present condition of the Confederate States of America, to arrest further hostile proceedings at sea in the war against the United States, those having authority to do so in Europe desire as speedily as practicable to communicate with the Shenandoah, the only remaining Confederate ship in commission, in order to terminate her cruise. Having no means of doing this in the Aur. App., vol. vi, p. 595. 3 Am. App., vol. vii, pp. 94, 95. Brit. App., vol. i, p. 693. Brit. App., vol. i, p. 295. + Brit. Case, p. 157.

distant seas where that ship is presumed now to be, I venture to inquire of your lord ship whether it will be agreeable to the Government of Her Majesty to allow this to be done through the British consuls at ports where the ship may be expected.1

Mr. Mason inclosed an "order" from Bullock, written at Liverpool, and addressed to Lieutenant Waddell, in which the following appears: I have discussed the above circumstances fully with the Hon. J. M. Mason, the diplomatic representative of the Confederate States in England, and in accordance with his opinion and advice I hereby direct you to desist from any further destruction of United States property upon the high seas, and from all offensive operations against the citizens of that country."

This order of Bullock was sent through Earl Russell to the consuls of Her Majesty at the points where it was expected the Shenandoah might appear.

On the 6th of November she again arrived at Liverpool, and her officers and men were landed there and discharged.

Shenandoah at Liverpool.

X.-THE SUMTER, THE NASHVILLE, THE RETRIBUTION, THE TALLAHASSEE, AND THE CHICKAMAUGA.

The attention of the Arbitrators has thus far been directed, in the progress of this investigation of facts, to vessels which left Great Britain to receive their armament, and which were afterward, without having been engaged in any other service, actually armed for war.

The United States claim, however, that Great Britain failed to fulfill its duties toward them in respect to certain other vessels, to wit, the Sumter, Nashville, Retribution, Chickamauga, and Tallahassee. The facts upon which a claim is predicated for compensation on account of the acts committed by these vessels have already been stated in the Case which the United States have had the honor to present for the consideration of the Tribunal. Her Majesty's Government has, however, in fts Case and Counter Case, submitted some new evidence which makes it proper for the United States to present in this argument, as briefly as is possible, a summary of the material facts in respect to these vessels as they now appear from the evidence and allegations submitted by both the parties.

THE SUMTER.

The Sumter.

This vessel was originally in the merchant service of the United States, and, at the outbreak of the rebellion, was employed as a packet between New Orleans and Havana. Soon after the blockade of the port of New Orleans, she was fitted and armed for a vessel of war, and, having escaped on the 30th of June, 1861, through the blockade at the mouth of the Mississippi River, appeared, on the 6th of July, at the port of Cienfuegos, in the island of Cuba, with six prizes which she had captured on her voyage thither.' The prizes were detained in port upon the order of the Captain-General of the island, and subsequently, on the 28th of the same month, "unconditionally" released "in consequence of investigations made by the authorities of Cienfuegos concerning their capture." The Sumter, during her stay, was permitted by the local authorities at the port to take coal and water. No application was made to the Governor-General for that purpose. She went to sea in the evening of the 7th of July, having remained in port about twenty-four hours.

On the 17th of July she arrived at Curaçao, in Dutch Guiana, where she was permitted to supply herself with coal and pro

6

visions. She next appeared at Puerto Cabello, in the re

At Curacoa.

public of Venezuela, on the 26th of July, with a prize, but being ordered to "take her departure within four and twenty hours," left, without coaling, at daylight on the 27th, and arrived at a British port in the

Brit. App., Counter Case, vol. vi, p. 101.

2 Ibid., p. 108.

3 Ibid., p. 104.

+ Ibid., p. 105.

5 Ibid., p. 104.

6 Ibid., p. 69.

7 Cruise of Alabama and Sumter, p. 27.

At Martinique.

1

island of Trinidad, on the 30th. Here she was "supplied with a new main yard, eighty tons of coal and provisions," and sailed in At Trinidad. the evening of the 5th of August. She next appeared at Paramaribo, in Dutch Guiana, on the 19th of August, and purchased and received coals without objection on the part of the authorities. Remaining at this port until the 31st," she appeared at the Brazilian port of Maranham, on the 6th of September, "to coal and procure supplies." 3 From this port she went to Martinique, where she also received coal and supplies, and from there to Cadiz, at which place she arrived on the 4th of January, 1862. 4 Here she was permitted to go into dock and make some slight repairs." "The captain of that vessel [the Sumter] asked for reparations in her upper works and in her decks, but after a scientific survey scrupulously executed, it was found that such reparations were not necessary, and only those which were justified by an imperious necessity have been authorized." 6 She was ordered away from Cadiz on the 17th. The Minister of the United States at Madrid, in reporting to Mr. Seward, said: "I ought to say, perhaps, that if it had not been for the example of what had taken place with the Nashville in an English port, I am confident that the Sumter would have been forced to go to sea from Cadiz as she came." From Cadiz she went direct to Gibraltar, at which place she arrived on the 18th of Janu

At Cadiz,

At Gibraltar.

ary, 1862.

On the 28th of August, 1861, the United States complained to the Government of the Netherlands of the treatment of the Sumter at Curaçao, 9 and on the 8th of October made similar complaint as to the conduct of the colonial authorities on the occasion of her subsequent visit at Paramaribo.10

On the 15th of October the Minister of Foreign Affairs advised the Minister of the United States at the Hague, "that the Government of the Netherlands, wishing to give a fresh proof of its desire [to avoid] all that could give the slightest subject for complaint to the United States, has just sent instructions to the colonial authorities, enjoining them not to admit, except in case of shelter from stress (relâche forcée,) the vessels of war and privateers of the two belligerent parties, unless for twice twenty-four hours, and not to permit them, when they are steamers, to provide themselves with a quantity of coal more than suf ficient for a run of twenty-four hours." 11

On the 30th of September, 1861, Mr. Adams made complaint to Earl Russell of the manner in which the Sumter had been received at Trinidad, but as early as the 29th of August the Duke of Newcastle had transmitted to the Foreign Office a report from the Governor of the island to the Colonial Office, and which was, of course, in the possession of Earl Russell when he received the communication from Mr. Adams. In that report of the Governor this passage occurs:

A great deal of trade goes on between Trinidad and the northern ports of North America, and Captain Semmes, I imagine, has not failed to take this opportunity of obtaining information with regard to the vessels employed under the flag of the United States in this traffic. Fears are entertained with regard to one or two now expected. It is to be hoped that the presence of the Sumter in these waters will soon be made generally known, and that, while the civil war continues, the lumber and provision trade, any interruption of which would cause serious embarrassment to this community, will be carried on in British bottoms. 12

Brit. App., vol. ii, p. 5.

2 Ibid., p. 81.

3 Ibid., p. 1.

Ibid., p. 111.'

5 Ibid., p. 116.

6 Brit. App., vol. vi, p. 119.

7 Adams to Seward, Am. App., vol. ii, p. 579.

8 Brit. App., vol. vi, p. 119.

'

Ibid., p. 69.

10 Ibid., p. 81.

11 Ibid., p. 84.

12 Brit. App., vol. ii, p. 1.

On the 4th of October Earl Russell informed Mr. Adams, "the Law Officers of the Crown have reported that the conduct of the Governorwas in conformity to Her Majesty's proclamation."1

On the 1st of November the Minister of the United States at Rio Janeiro complained to the Government of His Majesty the Emperor of Brazil of the conduct of the provincial authorities during the stay of the Sumter at Maranham. A long correspondence ensued, connected with the visit of this vessel and those of other insurgent cruisers subsequently, which resulted in the promulgation of the instructions to the presidents of the provinces of the Empire, under date of the 23d of June, 1863, to which reference has already been made.3

It is sufficient for the purposes of this Argument for the United States to say, that during the contest between them and the insurgents, abuse of neutrality was never tolerated in the ports of the Netherlands or Brazil, and these ports were never suffered to be used, by either of the belligerents," as the base of their operations against the commerce of the adverse party."

*

It is true that, on the 31st of January, 1862, certain "orders to be observed in all the ports of the United Kingdom, and those of Her Majesty's transmarine territories and possessions," were issued by Her Britannic Majesty's Government, and that, by the "first and second of the orders, belligerent vessels were absolutely excluded from the ports, roadsteads, and waters of the Bahama Islands, except in case of stress of weather, or of special leave granted by the lieutenant-governor." It is also true that, "to vessels of the Confederate States it [access to these islands] was of great importance, the harbors of these States being generally, though not always, effectively blockaded." But the United States have not yet been able to discover that the "special leave" required by the orders was ever, during the entire contest, withheld by the Lieutenant-Governor from any insurgent vessel of war, and that, too, notwithstanding the long-continued and flagrant abuses of the hospitalities of British ports, to which the attention of the Arbitrators has already been directed.

The Sumter went to Gibraltar for coal. The Consul of the United States was enabled to prevent her obtaining a supply from the merchants at that port, until the arrival of certain vessels of war of the United States in the adjoining waters of Spain, and, after that time, her movements were so closely watched by these vessels, that she was never able to escape in the character of a ship of war.

6

Her crew was discharged and paid off in April, and previous to the 8th of December, while she was yet in port fully armed, a private contract was made by the insurgents for her sale for £4,000. The purchasers were ready with the money to pay for her, and receive the bill of sale, but "all the papers required by them could not be produced by the officer in charge, * who, it appears, holds a power of attorney from a certain Bullock, who styles himself senior naval officer in the Confederate service in Europe, and, I am told, is at present in England, giving his attention to what relates to the marine service of the rebel States." In consequence of this informality, the sale was not consummated, and on the same day, the 8th, she was advertised to be sold at public auction. The Consul of the United States protested

1 Brit. Case, p. 14.

2 Brit. App., vol. vi, p. 5.

3 Ante., p. 287.

4 Brit. Case, p. 15.

5 Ibid., p. 17.

Brit. Case, p. 18.

7 Sprague to Adams, Am. App., vol. ii, p. 507. Ibid., p. 509.