DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE AND FOREIGN RELATIONS. 



might think proper to choose to the end of making 

 the laws of Great Britain more effective. And it was 

 in that form only that her Majesty's Government de- 

 cided to decline the proposal. The decision was not 

 against the adoption of the law of the United States. 

 It was against doing any thing at all. 



Neither in presenting the argument which I have 

 been called to do, in the course of my duty here, can 

 I for a moment permit an implication that my Gov- 

 ernment has either "made a demand which aims at 

 the diminution of British freedom, or which assumes, 

 without warrant from any previously recognized au- 

 thority or practice, the existence of an extent of ob- 

 ligation on the part of neutrals toward belligerents, 

 going beyond any which the Government of a free 

 country could have power, though acting with entire 

 good faith, punctually to fulfil." 



I feel very sure that my country is quite as jealous 

 of the preservation of the true principles of freedom 

 as Great Britain is, or ever has been, and, further, I 

 fully believe that neither Government would consent 

 to give to the term that latitude which would en- 

 courage the power of doing wrong with perfect im- 

 punity. 



The suggestion which his Lordship has been 

 pleased to make toward the close of his note of im- 

 provements in the statutes of both nations, to the 

 end that greater security may be given to the respec- 

 tive nations against those who endeavor to evade its 

 laws, though it appears to me to be in substance little 

 more than it has been the object of my Government 

 from the outset of the war to obtain, is yet one which 

 I cannot but receive with great respect, and which I 

 shall transmit to my Government with pleasure. If 

 the reasons for it are sound now, I am at a loss to 

 perceive why they did not avail during a period when 

 my country could have felt the benefit of them. I 

 trust that I need not rfepeat how much pain it has 

 given me heretofore to witness the evil consequences 

 that ensue from the alienation of sentiment that has 

 grown out of this struggle between people of the 

 same race, and how cheerfully I welcome every ap- 

 pearance of a desire to bring them back to harmony. 

 Yet, with regard to the proposition immediately be- 

 fore me, I cannot forbear to observe that it is predi- 

 cated upon an assumption that the legislation of the 

 two countries is now equally inefficacious which I 

 cannot entertain for a moment. On the contrary, 

 the necessity for some action in future seems to me 

 to be inoperative, because that legislation as it now 

 stands is not coextensive. 



For it is hardly possible for me to imagine that the 



Eeople of the United States, after the experience they 

 ave had of injuries from the imperfection of British 

 legislation, and a refusal to amend it, would be ready 

 cheerfully to respond to another appeal like that 

 made in 1855 by her Majesty's Representative to the 

 more stringent and effective protection extended to 

 their own. The great preservative of harmony be- 

 tween nations is the full recognition of reciprocity in 

 their obligations. So long as the heavy list of dep- 

 redations upon American commerce, consequent 

 upon the issue of a succession of hostile cruisers, 

 built, fitted out, armed, manned, and navigated from 

 British ports with perfect impunity, continues to 

 weigh upon their minds, it would be the height of as- 

 surance in me to hold out any encouragement to the 

 acceptance of proposals the practical consequence of 

 which might be to place Great Britain in precisely 

 the same degree of security in dangerous emergencies 

 which she herself, when applied to, had deliberately 

 refused to accord to them. 



In regard to the parting words of his Lordship's 

 note, I nave already too often had occasion to ex- 

 press the sentiments of my Government to leave any 

 doubt of the sense in which I accept them. 



In the performance of a duty which has been too 

 often painful, while his Lordship has been officially 

 the person to whom it has been my lot to address my 

 representations, I have been steadily cheered by the 



conviction that he was substantially animated by the 

 feeling that prompted those lines. I have the 

 greatest pleasure in believing that, in assuming the 

 duties of his post under his auspices, my country 

 may rest satisfied that the accession of your Lord- 

 ship has brought about no unfavorable change. 

 I pray, &c.. 



CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. 



Mexico, Three subjects have given rise to 

 correspondence in connection with our relations 

 with Mexico : 



1st. As to the emigration from the South to 

 Mexico. 



2d. Respecting the occupancy of Mexico by 

 French troops. 



3d. In regard to the steps taken by the so- 

 called Emperor of Mexico, or by European 

 Powers, to obtain from the United States a 

 recognition of the so-called Empire of Mexico. 



In reference to emigration from the South, 

 Senor Romero had, in July, 1864, called the 

 attention of Mr. Seward to the address of Gen- 

 eral Magruder and Governor Vidaurri's reply, 

 claiming that they showed a perfect under- 

 standing between the French and their ad- 

 herents in Mexico and the insurgents in the 

 United States, and intimating that the French 

 Minister to Mexico was working to that end, 

 and that armed emigration from the Atlantic 

 States and from California was in immediate 

 contemplation. Under date of February 6, 

 1865, Senor Romero notifies Mr. Seward of 

 the understanding that a settlement had been 

 proposed by Napoleon, by virtue of which 

 the Mexican States of Tamaulipas, New Leon, 

 and Coahuila, with parts of San Luis Potosi, 

 Zacatecas, Durango, and Chihuahua, and al- 

 most the whole of Sonora and the peninsula of 

 Lower California were to be ceded to France ; 

 and that to make so considerable cession of 

 Mexican territory acceptable, the Emperor 

 would plant there a military colony, which 

 would shelter the remainder of the country 

 from filibustering attacks from the United 

 States. 



This arrangement, of which he cites evidences 

 from Mexico, California, and Paris, he protests 

 against, reminding the Secretary of a fact 

 slightly resembling the present, when the Rep- 

 reseutatives of the French Government in 

 Mexico protested against a treaty concluded 

 between Mexico and the United States of much 

 less importance than the present, only because 

 of a vague rumor, more or less founded, that it 

 had been concluded, and before they had official 

 notice of its execution. 



Mr. Seward replies, under date of February 

 25, 1865, that the protest had been placed on 

 file as testimony to the course of Mr. Romero, 

 and additional evidence of the zealous and pa- 

 triotic discharge of his functions, and for such 

 other purposes and uses as future events may 

 render it necessary to apply it. 



On the 20th of April Mr. Romero communi- 

 cated to Mr. Seward the correspondence be- 

 tween the rebel Gen. Slaughter and the Mexi- 

 can Gen. Mejia relative to the capture of the 



