272 



DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE. 



the Government relative to the Confederate 



States : 



Every instruction which this Government has given 

 to its representatives abroad, since the recent change 

 of Administration took place, has expressed our pro- 

 found anxiety lest the disloyal citizens who are en- 

 gaged in an attempt to overthrow the Union should 

 obtain aid and assistance from foreign nations, either 

 in the form of a recognition of their pretended sover- 

 eignty, or in some other and more qualified or guarded 

 manner. Every instruction has expressed our full be- 

 lief that, without such aid or assistance, the insurrec- 

 tion would speedily come to an end, while any advan- 

 tage that it could derive from such aid or assistance 

 could serve no other purpose than to protract the ex- 

 isting struggle and aggravate the evils it is inflicting 

 on our own country and on foreign and friendly na- 

 tions. Every instruction bears evidence of an earnest 

 solicitude to avoid even an appearance of menace or 

 of want of comity towards foreign powers ; but at the 

 same time it has emphatically announced, as is now 

 seen to have been necessary, our purpose not to allow 

 any one of them to expect to remain in friendship with 

 us if it should, with whatever motive, practically ren- 

 der such aid or assistance to the insurgents. We have 

 intended not to leave it doubtful that a concession of 

 sovereignty to the insurgents, though it should be in- 

 direct or unofficial, or though it should be qualified so 

 as to concede only belligerent or other partial rights, 

 would be regarded as inconsistent with the relations 

 due to us by friendly nations. Nor has it been left at 

 all uncertain that we shall, in every event, insist that 

 these United States must be considered and dealt with 

 now, as heretofore, by such nations as exclusively sov- 

 ereign for all purposes whatsoever within the territo- 

 ries over whicli the Constitution has been extended. 

 On the other hand we have not, at any time, been un- 

 mindful of the peculiar circumstances which might 

 excite apprehensions on the part of commercial nations 

 for the safety of their subjects and their property in 

 the conflicts which might occur upon sea as well as on 

 land between the forces of the United States and those 

 of the insurgents. 



The United States have never disclaimed the em- 

 ployment of letters of marque as a means of maritime 

 war. The insurgents early announced their intention 

 to commission privateers. We knew that friendly na- 

 tions would be anxious for guarantees of safety from 

 injury by that form of depredation upon the national 

 commerce. We knew also that such nations would 

 desire to be informed whether their flags should be 

 regarded as protecting goods, not contraband of war, 

 of disloyal citizens, found under them, and whether 

 the goods, not contraband, of subjects of such nation^ 

 would be safe from confiscation when found in vessels 

 of disloyal citizens of the United States. This Admin- 

 istration, free from some of the complications of those 

 which had preceded it, promptly took up the negotia- 

 tions relating to the declaration of the Congress of 

 Paris, just at the point where they had been suspended 

 by President Buchanan. We found it just and humane 

 in itself so far as it goes, and that it had only failed to 

 be accepted by the United States because foreign na- 

 tions had refused to accept an additional principle pro- 

 posed by this Government, yet more just and humane 

 than any which it does contain, namely, that the prop- 

 erty of private citizens, not contraband, should be ex- 

 empted from confiscation in maritime war. While 

 still willing and desirous to have that further princi- 

 ple incorporated in the law of nations, we nevertheless 

 instructed you, and all our representatives in foreign 

 countries, to waive it, if necessary, and to stipulate, 

 subject to the concurrence of the Senate of the United 

 States, our adhesion to the declaration of the Congress 

 of Paris as a whole and unmodified. This was done 

 so early as the 25th day of April last, long before the 

 date of the instructions which Mr. Mercier proposed 

 to submit to us. We have ever since that time been 

 waiting for the responses of foreign powers to this 

 high and liberal demonstration on our part. We have, 



however, received no decisive answers on the subject 

 from those powers. 



It was under these circumstances that, on the 15th 

 day of June instant, the Minister from France and the 

 Minister from Great Britain, having previously re- 

 quested an interview, were received by me. Each of 

 them announced that he was charged by his Govern- 

 ment to read a despatch to me and to give me a copy 

 if I should desire it. 



I answered that, owing to the peculiar circumstances 

 of the times, I could not consent to an official reading 

 or delivery of these papers without first knowing their 

 characters and objects. They confidentially and with 

 entire frankness put the despatches into my hands for 

 an informal preliminary examination. Having thus 

 become possessed of their characters, I replied to 

 those Ministers that I could not allow them to be offi- 

 cially communicated to this Government. They will 

 doubtless mention this answer to their respective 

 States. 



I give you now the reasons of this Government for 



fursuiug this course in regard to the despatch from 

 ranee, that you may communicate them to the 

 French Government, if you shall find it necessary or 

 expedient. 



Some time ago we learned, through our legation 

 at St. Petersburg, that an understanding had been 

 effected between the Governments of Great Britain 

 and France that they should take one and the same 

 course on the subject of the political disturbances in 

 this country, including the possible recognition of the 

 insurgents. At a later period this understanding was 

 distinctly avowed by M. Thouvenel to Mr. Sauford, 

 who had been informally introduced by me to the 

 French Minister for Foreign Affairs, and by Lord 

 John Russell to Mr. Dallas, our late Minister in Lon- 

 don. The avowal in each case preceded the arrival of 

 pur newly appointed Ministers in Europe, with their 

 instructions for the discharge of their respective mis- 

 sions. 



On receiving their avowals I immediately instructed 

 yourself and Mr. Adams " that although we might have 

 expected a different course on the part of these two 

 great powers, yet, as the fact that an understanding 

 existed between them did not certainly imply an un- 

 friendly spirit, we should not complain of it, but that 

 it must be understood by the French and British Gov- 

 ernments that we shall deal hereafter, as heretofore, in 

 this case, as in all others, with each power separately, 

 and that the agreement for concerted action between 

 them would not at all influence the course we should 

 pursue." The concert thus avowed has been carried 

 out. The Ministers came to me together ; the instruc- 

 tions they proposed to me differ in form, but are coun- 

 terparts in effect. 



Adhering to our previous decision, which before this 

 time has doubtless been made known to the Govern- 

 ment of France, we do not make this concert, under 

 the circumstances, a reason for declining to hear the 

 instruction with which Mr. Mercier is charged. 



That paper does not expressly deny the sovereignty 

 of the United States of America, but it does assume, 

 inconsistently with that sovereignty, that the United 

 States are not altogether and for all purposes one sov- 

 ereign power, but that this nation consists of two par- 

 ties, of which this Government is one. France pro- 

 poses to take cognizance of both parties as belligerents, 

 and for some purposes to hold communication with 

 each. The instruction would advise us indeed that 

 we must not be surprised if France shall address her- 

 self to a Government which she says is to be installed 

 at Montgomery for certain explanations. This inti- 

 mation is conclusive in determining this Government 

 not to allow the instruction to be read to it. 



The United States, rightly jealous, as we think, of 

 their sovereignty, cannot suffer themselves to debute 

 any abridgment of that sovereignty with France or 

 with any other nation. Much less can they consent that 

 France shall announce to them a conclusion of her own 

 against that sovereignty, which conclusion France has 

 adopted without any previous conference with the 



