CASE OF THE PEARL. 177 



[Memorandum prepared by the Russian Minister at Washington.] 

 For the Honorable Mr. Adams' private information. 



According to informations, to which some credit seems to be due, the 

 Russian 'ukase' was publicly known at Boston as early as December, 

 1821. The owners of the Pearl, which sailed in January, 1822, seem to 

 have been not only fully apprised of the existence of this edict, but to 

 have fitted her out expressly to anticipate its operation and to turn to 

 their advantage the indulgence granted to a bona fide ignorance of the 

 ukase. 



The American underwriters refused to pay the insurance, and were 

 justified in their refusal. 



The principal firm of Boston concerned in the northwest trade, and 

 having now several vessels abroad actually prosecuting it, has lately 

 offered to dispose of the whole oi its stock so vested, ships and cargoes, 

 for the consideration of only 7 per cent advance on the original cost. 

 This firm consists of Messrs. Bryant & Sturges. The latter has become 

 interested by purchase in the Pearl subsequently to her return from 

 her voyage. 



The original captain, who resumed his command at Woahoo and 

 brought the Pearl back, has been, on his arrival at Boston, accused by 

 the owners of nefarious and fraudulent practices, threatened with legal 

 prosecution, and proved guilty in a court of arbitration. 



[Memorandum prepared by Bryant & Sturges. No address.] 



The first objection made to the admission of our claim is, in sub- 

 stance, " That the owners of the Pearl fitted out that vessel after being 

 apprised of the existence of the Bussia ukase." Not having been orig- 

 inal owners of that vessel, we cannot assert that such was not the fact; 

 but we think the circumstances of the outfit and voyage most con- 

 clusively prove that the owners could not have been aware of the pro- 

 visions or even the existence of the Russian edict at the time the voy- 

 age was commenced. The ukase received the sanction of His Imperial 

 Majesty in September, 1821, and it was made known at St. Petersburg 

 in October following, but was not communicated to our Government 

 until February, 1822. The Pearl was purchased and preparations for 

 her voyage began in November, 1821. She sailed from Boston in Jan- 

 uary, 1822, and in October of the same year arrived at the port of 

 New Archangel. Had the Pearl been u fitted out expressly to antici- 

 pate the operation " of the ukase, is it probable that the first port she 

 visited on the Northwest Coast of America would have been one 

 known to be in the possession of the Russian Company, and where offi- 

 cial notice of the ukase would of course be given, and its provisions 

 enforced? Would not the commander of the Pearl have avoided all 

 communication with the Russians, and, trading only with the native 

 inhabitants on other parts of the coast, have prosecuted his voyage in 

 comparative security? In the original instruction from the owners of 

 the Pearl to the commander no allusion is made to any interdiction of 

 trade on the Northwest Coast; but he is expressly directed to visit all 

 ports and places where an advantageous traffic could be carried on. It 

 is highly improbable that any merchant, having knowledge of the Rus- 

 sian edict, would have given such instructions. 



It is stated that " the American underwriters refused to pay the in- 

 surance and were justified in their refusal." Payment has never been 

 demanded from the underwriters. An inspection of our policies of in- 

 123G4 12 



