No. 35.]

Mr. Seward to Mr. Bigelow.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, February 7, 1865. SIR: I have to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch of the 20th ultimo, No. 7, concerning the purchase and equipment of the Shanghai and San Francisco for the Peruvian navy, and their subsequent departure, and informing me that the purchase for the Peruvian government of a vessel built at Glasgow for the insurgents was the subject of a negotiation which was depending on the news to come from America, which might render it impossible for the projected ship to sail under the Peruvian flag. obedient servant,

I am, sir, your

JOHN BIGELOW, Esq., &c., &c., &c.

WILLIAM H. SEWARD.

No. 36.]

Mr.Seward to Mr. Bigelow.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, February 7, 1865.

SIR: Delays of mails and interruptions in my labors have prevented an earlier acknowledgment of your despatch of January 13, No. 3.

It gives me pleasure to approve and confirm all you said to Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys on the occasion of presenting your credentials. I like well, also, the tone and the general tenor of the conversation on his part, as you have reported it to me. I have only one reservation on that subject to make. It seems to me that a time has come when France at least, of all the European powers, should be able to renew her ancient faith in the stability of the united American republic. You have a pleasant and important duty to perform in leading France to that conclusion, which would be hardly less beneficial to her than to the United States.

SIR: On the 7th instant I received the following despatch from our legation at Madrid:

"The Stonewall is provisionally detained here. Mercier has no instructions. See Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys. I can detain the privateer till they arrive. Your letter received Wednesday."

Yesterday I received the following despatch from the same source:

"The Stonewall is the same as the vessel called Stoerkodder at Bordeaux, and Olinde at Quiberon. Her crew is that which formerly belonged to the Florida."

I also received yesterday from Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys a reply to my communication to him on the subject of this steamer, covering the report from the minister of marine. Both are enclosed. I have this day addressed to his excellency another communication, which also will be found enclosed. I also

addressed enclosure No. 3 to Mr. Perry at Madrid. I presume that the Stonewall is now imprisoned, for a season at least. In the absence of any immediate danger, I have thought it better policy to have no discussion with Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys in regard to the merits of his despatch, even orally, until I receive instructions from you, and until the Danish side of the case, also, is officially presented.

I am, dear sir, very respectfully, yours,

Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD,

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

JOHN BIGELOW. '

Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys to Mr. Bigelow.

[Enclosure No. 1.—Translation.]

PARIS, February 7, 1865.

SIR: Upon the receipt of the letters which you did me the honor to write me the 28th of January last and the 2d of this month, I hasten to call the attention of his excellency M. the minister of marine to the facts which you mention, begging him to be pleased to communicate to me all the information which he could possibly collect concerning the appearance and sojourn upon the coast of France of a vessel-of-war, sailing under the Danish flag, and which your information indicates as destined to cruise on behalf of the Confederate States. I have just received from M. Lecompte de Chasseloup Laubat the information which permits me to answer the questions which you have addressed to me. The Olinde (this is the name which the vessel bore which appeared upon our coast) being, in your opinion, as indeed certain indications also authorize us in supposing, the same vessel which under the name of Sphinx last year went out from the ship-yard of Mr. Arman, a French ship-builder, I think it my duty here first to recall the circumstances under which the Sphinx was authorized to leave the port of Bordeaux. When it was a question of her delivery to her purchaser, the government of the Emperor took care to assure itself that the sale of this vessel was not a cloak to any operation contrary to the neutrality which it observed, and which it has constantly watched, pursuant to the provisions of law, in order that no violation should occur from its own subjects. It proceeded, therefore, to the strictest investigation, and it was only when Mr. Arman had established by the most unexceptionable proofs-that is to say, by the production of his bill of sale-that the Sphinx was really sold to a European non-belligerent power, that its exit from the port of Bordeaux was authorized. The first of October the testimony of M. the minister of Denmark at Paris, supported by that of the minister of his Majesty at Copenhagen, fully confirmed the declaration of Mr. Arman, and the authenticity of the title which he had produced There could then be no doubt as to the real destination of the vessel which in effect, on quitting France, was sent to Denmark.

Here, according to what you write me, sir, arose a new order of facts, a consequence of which was the transfer into other hands of the ownership of the vessel in question. Upon this point the government of the Emperor does not possess any other information than that which you have been pleased to transmit to me, and the absence of Mr. Arman at Berlin at this moment has not permitted us to ask any from him. One cannot be astonished, however, at the ignorance in which the French administration finds itself concerning what passed during the stay of the Sphinx in Denmark, since this vessel had then ceased to be a French vessel. We have neither any reason nor any right to make an inquiry into the matter. It would, indeed, have been, on the part of the government of the Emperor, passing the limits of what comports with the most scrupulous neutrality to pretend to exercise a control over the ulterior destination of a vessel which, having become the property of a neutral power, had definitively escaped from its jurisdiction.

As to the arrival of the Olinde in French waters, the report which M. the minister of marine has addressed to me, and of which I have the honor to send you herewith a copy, establishes, as you will see, sir, that she presented herself there under the Danish flag, manned by a Danish crew-that is to say, with every quality which constituted for her a Danish nationality.

Her arrival upon our coast had nothing unusual in it, nor anything which would call particular attention to her if she was joined there by an English vessel; that was but a very ordinary fact, not being, either, of a nature to arouse any special attention.

There is, therefore, no occasion for being surprised that the stay of this vessel should have passed unnoticed, particularly if one considers the insufficiency of the means of surveillance in open roadsteads, such as those where she anchored. Upon all these points the accompanying letter of M. Lecompte de Chasselough Laubat will furnish you the most conclusive

information.

In announcing to me, sir, by your letter of the 5th of this month, that the vessel which you consider as at present belonging to the confederates had, under the name of Stonewall, entered the port of Ferrol, you expressed the wish that the government of the Emperor would intercede with that of her Catholic Majesty, with the view of procuring her detention. I would be happy to be able to respond to the desire which you had done me the honor to express to me; but it is not possible for me to understand by what right I would be permitted to do so. I need not say that the police of her ports appertains to the Spanish government alone; and in this case no particular circumstance would authorize the intervention of the government of his Majesty. As results from the facts which I have just recalled, the regular sale which has been made of the vessel in question, to a neutral power, took from her her character as a French vessel, and we have no longer, from that moment, any right to ask, that under this title, in a port of Spain, she be subjected to special measures of surveillance or of coercion. You will understand, sir, that to act thus, without any right of our own, and in an interest which is foreign to us, would evidently be to depart by an unjustifiable step from the attitude of strict abstention, which we ought to preserve in the war, and to infringe, to the detriment of one of the parties and to the profit of the other, the neutrality which we desire to observe towards both. The Danish government might, perhaps, if it judged proper, take the initiative in this matter, which to us is in any case interdicted.

The government of the Emperor would certainly, regret sir, as deeply as any one, that the Stonewall should ultimately receive the destination of which you were apprehensive, and the injury which might result thereby to the commerce of the United States. But, unfortunately, it does not depend upon it to place an obstacle to this. It is only conscious of having taken the greatest possible care not to depart from the rules which it has laid down for itself, and which evinces at the same time its kindly feelings towards the United States, and its wish to relieve itself from all responsibility. In this as in all circumstances, it has strictly conformed to the principles of neutrality which have not ceased to govern its conduct and to inspire all its actions.

I will finish, sir, by a last observation upon the subject of the analogy which the situation of the Stonewall in the port of Ferrol seems to you to offer to that of the Rappahannock in the port of Calais. Even were the situations of these two ships the same, the government of the Emperor would not be held to account for it, as far as it is concerned, since the Stone wall is in a Spanish port, where we have no jurisdiction.

But in my opinion, the circumstances under which the two vessels presented themselves— the one at Calais, the other at Ferrol-are entirely different. You will ineffect, remember, sir, that the Rappahannock was, as supposed, a vessel of commerce, having left a port of England, and which, having taken refuge in a French port, attempted to transform herself there into a vessel-of-war. Faithful to its principles, the government of the Emperor did not permit this transformation to take place in its waters, and opposed the going out of the ship. The vessel whose presence at Ferrol you mention, seems to have presented herself there under circumstances entirely different, and which it seems to me do not allow of any assimilation to the precedent which you recall.

Receive, sir, the assurance of the very distinguished consideration with which I have the honor to be, your very humble and very obedient servant,

DROUYN DE LHUYS.

The Minister of Marine to the Minister of Forign Affairs

[Translation.]

PARIS, February 5, 1865.

M. THE MINISTER AND DEar ColleaguE: You did me the honor to transmit to me the copy of a letter which M. the chargé d'affaires of the United States had written to you, and in which he mentions the arrival at Belle Isle, and off the island of Honat, of two vessels, recently constructed in France, sailing at present under the Danish flag, but which, according to him, are destined to cruise on behalf of the Confederate States.

Mr. Bigelow thinks that the ram vessel is the Sphinx, constructed by Mr. Arman, of Bordeaux Your excellency remembers that this vessel, as also the other ships-of-war which left the yards of this shipbuilder, were stopped by my orders until Mr. Arman should have proved to the department of foreign affairs their regular sale to a neutral power.

The 3d of October last, your excellency having made known to me that the proof had been produced by Mr. Arman, and that the Sphinx had been really sold to the Danish government, which had just concluded the preliminaries of peace, there was no longer any motive for de taining the vessel. She left them for Helsingborg, and she does not appear to have carried any other than the Danish flag.

According to what Mr. Bigelow tells me (but what no official document has made known to me) it would appear that, in consequence of difficulties raised between the Danish govern

ment and Mr. Arman, this vessel was refused, and the latter remaining the owner, had arranged with the agents of the Confederate States to deliver her to them.

However this may be, it is certain that the vessel which appeared in the waters of Belle Isle was of a construction similar to that of the Sphinx; she carried the Danish flag and had a Danish crew when she anchored in the roadstead of Palais. She afterwards went to the island of Honat. A side-wheel steamer, under the English flag, joined her there, it appeared, and the bad weather might naturally cause the belief that this vessel had also put into port. At length the French steamer, the Expeditif, brought coal to these vessels. These incidents could not but appear very natural; similar cases constantly occur, and it is not customary to make inquiries into what a foreign vessel-of-war comes into port to do, particularly in bad weather upon a friendly coast.

I think it my duty to direct your excellency's attention to the fact also that we have not the means of exercising an effective surveillance over vessels which anchor in our open roadsteads. Upon the other hand, I would add, that on account of prevailing bad weather, communications have been infrequent between Belle Isle and the island of Honat, situated opposite the bay of Quiberon near which the vessels were anchored, and finally, that there exists upon this little island neither telegraphic bureau nor semaphore.

However, I have asked the maritime authorities of Belle Isle, and at the different points of the coast which are contiguous to the waters of Honat island, for information upon the movements of the vessels mentioned by M. the chargé d'affaires of the United States.

As far as the supposition of Mr. Bigelow is concerned, that the ram vessel was destined to cruise under the flag of the Confederate States, it would be for Denmark to respond to him, since her crew was Danish, she carried the Danish flag, and, as you have remarked, she had been regularly sold to the Danish government.

The facts in question could not then, in any case, concern us, and I believe it unnecessary to recall the fact that, under all circumstances, the government of the Emperor has always made it a duty to observe, and to cause to be observed, the most strict and loyal neutrality between the two parties who at present divide the United States of America.

[Enclosure No. 2.]

Mr. Bigelow to Mr. Drouyn de Lhugs.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,

Paris, February 9, 1865,

SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your excellency's communication of the 8th instant, in reference to the recent equipment of a steamer-of-war of French construction in the bay of Quiberon, together with the report of his excellency the minister of marine on that subject. I shall lose no time in communicating them to my government. I avail myself of this occasion to renew assurances of the very high consideration, with which I have the honor to be your excellency's very obedient and very humble servant, JOHN BIGELOW.

His Excellency M. DROUYN De Lhuys,

Minister of Foreign Affairs.

[Enclosure No. 3.]

Mr. Bigelow to Mr. Perry.

FEBRUARY 8, 1865.

DEAR SIR: I was gratified to learn by your telegrams of Monday and to-day that the Stonewall can be detained a few days; that will suffice for the frigate Niagara, Commodore Craven, which I presume left Dover on Monday, to reach Ferrol.

The French government decliue to meddle with the Stonewall in Spain. Their theory, to which they will naturally adhere as long as possible, is, that she was a Danish vessel until she went into confederate hands, and that it is for Denmark, and not for France, to intercede with Spain for her detention.

As no assistance is to be expected from this quarter, you will need no suggestion from any one to use every proper influence with the Spanish government to detain the Stonewall at least until you hear from our government.

I do not know the relative strength of the two vessels, but the result of a conflict between the Stonewall and the Niagara might be sufficiently uncertain to make it bad policy to risk one unnecessarily. Upon that point, however, Commodore Craven is a competent authority. The Stonewall carries one 300-pounder and two 120 pounders, I am told, in addition to any guns she may have received the other day from the Duke of Richmond.

I remain, dear sir, your very obedient servant,

Hon. HORATIO J. PERRY,

JOHN BIGELOW.

Legation of the United States.

No. 26.]

Mr Bigelow to Mr. Seward.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
Paris, February 10, 1865.

SIR: I have the honor to enclose a communication, received this morning from his excellency the minister of foreign affairs, informing me that the inquiry which had been instituted by the minister of marine into the circumstances connected with the appearance of the Olinde on the French coast had been transferred to the department of his excellency the keeper of the seals and minister of justice, with the view to judicial proceeding if occasion should exist for them.

I hail the omen, and remain, very sincerely, yours,

Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD,

Secretary of State, &c.

JOHN BIGELOW.

Mr. Drouyn de Lhuys to Mr. Bigelow.
[Translation.]

PARIS, February 8, 1865.

SIR: I have had the honor to announce to you that his excellency M. the minister of the marine and colonies had instituted an administrative inquest in relation to the facts which concern the appearance upon our coast of the vessel Olinde, and to make known to you summarily the result.

I can add to-day that the examination into this matter has been handed over to his excellency M. the keeper of the seals, minister of justice, in order that judicial proceedings may be taken should there be occasion for them.

Receive, sir, the assurances of the most distinguished consideration with which I have the honor to be, your very humble and obedient servant,

DROUYN DE LHUYS.

No. 28.]

Mr. Bigelow to Mr. Seward.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,

Paris, February 10, 1865.

SIR: I have this moment received the following despatch from our chargé d'affaires at Madrid:

"The privateer Stonewall will probably leave to-morrow."

"PERRY."

I have not received a line from Mr. Perry by post, nor have I received any information of any kind from any of our naval officers, except that Commodore Craven had received the substance of the despatch which I sent to Mr. Sandford on Sunday. I presume the Niagara was at, or in the neighborhood of, Ferrol before this, but I have no notice of her arrival there, nor indeed any positive assurance that she has sailed for that port.

I hope, however, this mail may take to you fuller intelligence upon all these points. Permit me to suggest that it would be a great convenience, and, possibly, a great advantage, if our vessels on this station were instructed to notify the legations of the United States in countries with which they are in communication when they arrive in port, and, if practicable, the day of their departure, if possible, a few days in advance. If the Stonewall gets off, it is some consola