1862.

CHAP. III. attention; but they still insisted, July 15th, that there was not sufficient prima facie proof to justify the seizure of the vessel. Undaunted by these repeated rebuffs, Mr. Adams continued to ply the Foreign Office with documents of the most convincing character, and on the 24th of July sent Lord Russell an opinion of one of the most eminent of English lawyers, Mr. Collier, afterwards Lord Monkswell, declaring positively that on the case as presented it was the duty of the Liverpool authorities to detain the vessel, and that they would be incurring a heavy responsibility in allowSpencer ing her to go. He added, "It appears difficult to make out a stronger case of infringement of the Foreign Enlistment Act, which, if not enforced on this occasion, is little better than a dead letter."

"Life of Lord John

Russell."

Vol. II., p. 353.

It is claimed on behalf of Lord Russell that this most important letter only reached him on the 26th and that it was immediately sent to the law officers. The next day was Sunday, and it was the afternoon of Monday, the 28th, before the law offiIbid., p. 354. cers began their leisurely examination of the case. Even while Sir Roundell Palmer and Sir William Atherton were examining the papers, the "290" left her moorings and anchored in the Mersey, and the next morning, before they had communicated to the Foreign Office their opinion that she ought to be stopped, she had sailed away. The injunction to stop her reached Liverpool too late, and the Government sent useless orders in several directions to Ibid., p. 355. detain her. It is said that Lord Russell and the Duke of Argyll were in favor of issuing orders to seize her in any colonial port she might enter, but they were outvoted in Cabinet.

The corsair evaded the Tuscarora by passing CHAP. III. out through the North Channel and was joined at the Western Islands by a bark which had taken on at London a cargo of arms. While she was completing her armament another English vessel arrived with Captain Raphael Semmes, formerly of the Sumter, and his staff on board, a further supply of arms, and the rest of her crew. Captain Semmes took command, and drawing up the crew read his commission as a post-captain in the Confederate navy, and opened his sealed orders in which he was directed to hoist the Confederate ensign and pennant and "to sink, burn, or destroy everything which flew the ensign of the so-called United States of America." The flag was raised, a gun was fired, and Semmes declared his vessel duly commissioned in the Confederate service. The vessel was English, the armament was English, almost all the crew were English. The Alabama sailed at once on her mission of robbery and destruction. Her method of procedure was unique in the annals of war; there was not a port in existence into which she could carry a prize; she therefore destroyed every merchant vessel sailing under the American flag which she could fall in with, robbing them of whatever portable articles of value she could find on board, bonding those who would sign a bond, crowding her own decks with sailors and passengers until the throng was so great that there was no more room for them, and then putting them aboard some passing vessel. Captain Semmes amused himself by occasionally putting the captain of some petty trader or whaler in irons, informing them that it was in retaliation

CHAP. III. for the treatment of Confederates by the Washington authorities.

J. R. Soley,

"The Blockade and the Cruisers," p. 196.

Great efforts were made by the American Government to track and find this rover of the deep; but the pursuit of a single vessel on the high seas is almost like the pursuit of a single bird in the immensity of the heavens. While the Sabine was searching the coast of the Azores, the Alabama was supplying herself with coal from a British bark at Martinique; while the Wyoming was watching off Manila, the Alabama was enjoying British hospitalities at Singapore; and in brief, she never came in contact with any armed vessel of the United States except on two occasions. On the night of the 11th of January, 1863, she approached near enough to the Hatteras — a mere Delaware River excursion boat-under the false hail of "Her Majesty's Ship Petrel," to fire a broadside into the American vessel which sent her to the bottom, and in June, 1864, she met the Kearsarge in the English Channel, and a just retribution at the mouth of her guns.

British commerce was itself not entirely exempt from damage from this piratical cruiser. Many of the vessels destroyed bore cargoes belonging to English merchants, and though, in the long run, the destruction of American commerce inured to the benefit of English shipowners, the inconveniences and damage inflicted upon British interests at the beginning of this Confederate piracy were not inconsiderable, and an attempt was made by British shippers to induce their Government and their legation at Washington to interfere for their protection by application to the Confederate Gov

ernment to grant immunity to British goods on American vessels, or, failing that, to furnish British shippers with letters protesting against the destruction of British merchandise-requests which, of course, were refused.

On the last day of September, 1862, Mr. Adams, addressing the British Government in regard to the injuries inflicted by the Alabama on American commerce, informed them that he had strong reasons to believe that other enterprises of the same kind were in progress, in the ports of Great Britain, of such notoriety as to be openly announced in the newspapers of Liverpool and London; to which Lord Russell made the dry reply: "I have to say to you, that much as her Majesty's Government desire to prevent such occurrences, they are unable to go beyond the law, municipal and international." On the 16th of October Mr. Adams reported to the State Department: "It is very manifest that no disposition exists here to apply the powers of the Government to the investigation of the acts complained of, flagrant as they are, or to the prosecution of the offenders. The main object must now be to make a record which may be of use at some future day." The record was made, and it proved to be of use.

There was a moment, indeed, at the close of the year 1862, when the British Government had apparently some idea of so amending their Foreign Enlistment Act as to give greater power to the Executive to prevent the construction of ships in British ports to be used against friendly powers. This suggestion was made to Mr. Adams, who communicated it to his Government, and, having ob

CHAP. III. tained their instructions, informed Lord Russell that his suggestions of amendment which would make the Enlistment Act more effective had been favorably considered; that although the law of the United States was regarded as sufficient, the Government were not unwilling to consider propositions to improve it. But Lord Russell then replied (March, 1863) that since his note was written the subject had been considered in Cabinet, and the Lord Chancellor had expressed the opinion that the British law was sufficiently effective, and that under these circumstances he did not see that he could have any change to propose.

On the 19th of January, 1863, the State Department transmitted to Mr. Adams a large amount of evidence from Confederate sources showing a systematic violation of the neutrality laws in England. He laid this testimony before Earl Russell on the 9th of February, saying, in his grave and measured style: "These papers go to show a deliberate attempt to establish within the limits of this kingdom a system of action in direct hostility to the Government of the United States. This plan embraces not only the building and fitting out of several ships of war under the direction of agents especially commissioned for the purpose, but the preparation of a series of measures under the same auspices for the obtaining from her Majesty's subjects the pecuniary means essential to the execution of these hostile projects." It was a month before Lord Russell replied to this communication; he then treated it as of little importance, saying that, even if the allegations were true, there was no proof in the papers that the agents