630 MISCELLANEOUS 



Mr. /Reward to Mr. Burnley. 



DEPARTMENT OF STATE, 

 Washington, September 16, 1864- 



SIR: On the 30th day of May last Commander Trenchard, of the 

 United States steamer Rhode Island, while chasing the insurgent 

 vessel the Margaret and Jessie, in the open sea, off the coast of Eleu- 

 thera, in the Bahamas, fired at her at least one cannon-shot, which is 

 alleged to have reached the neutral coast. Her Britannic Majesty's 

 government thereupon complained to this government that the Rhode 

 Island had come and was within the distance of a marine league, or 

 three miles from the shore, when the cannon-ball was fired. On 

 investigating the complaint it did not satisfactorily appear that a 

 cannon-ball was fired by the chaser within the distance of three miles 

 from the land ; but, on the other hand, it was established that a Par- 

 rott gun, which was discharged, had a range of five miles, and that a 

 ball from it might have reached the neutral shore, although fired 

 outside of the line of maritime jurisdiction. Upon this state of facts 

 her Majesty's government have, through you, expressed a hope that 

 the United States will concur with the British government in opinion 

 that vessels should not fire towards a neutral shore at a less distance 

 than that which would insure shot not falling in neutral waters, or 

 in a neutral territory. To this suggestion I at once replied, by order 

 of the President, that the subject would be brought to the attention 

 of other maritime powers, in order that, if any change of the existing 

 construction of the maritime law should be made, it should first 

 receive the assent of all the great maritime states. 



There is reason to apprehend that the subject, although now ab- 

 stractly presented, may soon become a practical question. Spain 

 claims a maritime jurisdiction of six miles around the island of Cuba. 

 In pressing this claim upon the consideration of the United States, 

 Spain has used the argument that the modern improvement in gun- 

 nery renders the ancient limit of a maritime league inadequate to the 

 security of neutral states. 



When it was understood at Paris that an engagement was likely 

 to come off before Cherbourg, between the United States ship-of-war 

 Kearsarge and the pirate Alabama, the French government remon- 

 strated with both parties against firing within the actual reach of 

 the shore by cannon-balls fired from their vessels, on the ground that 

 the effect of a collision near the coast would be painful to France. 



For these reasons I think that the subject may now be profitably 

 discussed; but there are some preliminary considerations which it is 

 deemed important to submit to her Majesty's government : First. That 

 the United States, being a belligerent, now when the other maritime 

 states are at peace, are entitled to all the advantages of the existing 

 construction of maritime law, and cannot, without serious incon- 

 venience, forego them. Secondly. That the United States, adhering 

 in war, no less than when they were in the enjoyment of peace, to their 

 traditional liberality towards neutral rights, are not unwilling to 

 come to an understanding upon the novel question which has thus 

 been raised " in consequence of the improvement hi gunnery." But, 

 thirdly. It is manifestly proper and important that any such new 

 construction of the maritime law as Great Britain suggests should 

 be reduced to the form of a precise proposition, and then that it 



