SIR, Mr. Jones to Mr. Seward. Vienna, July 20, 1861. A FEW days since Count Rechberg, the Imperial Royal Minister of Foreign Affairs, was' interrogated in the House of Deputies of the Austrian Empire on the subject of the course pursued, or about to be persued, by the Imperial Royal Government in relation to American affairs in the present complication. The report of his remarks is as follows: Count Rechberg rose to answer the question, "What measures has the Government taken to protect its commercial relations with The United States of North America, under the warlike condition of things now existing there," put by Mr. Putzer and his associates. He said: "The Minister of Foreign Affairs has, in connexion with the Ministers of Trade and the Navy, caused information to be obtained through the Imperial Minister resident at Washington as to the measures which other Governments have taken for the same reason. The answer received was, that England and France, as well as Holland, had strengthened their squadrons in the American waters, and had endeavoured to bring the belligerent powers to the recognition of those principles, especially relating to the protection of private property, which were agreed upon at the Congress of Paris. in 1856. The Imperial Government has, for the present, abstained from sending ships-of-war, and has directed the Minister resident to obtain from the belligerent powers the recognition of the following points established by the said Congress : "1. The neutral flag covers enemy's goods, with the exception of contraband of war. "2. Neutral goods, with the exception of contraband of war, are not liable to capture under enemy's flag. “3. Blockades, in order to be binding, must be effective; that is to say, maintained by a force sufficient really to prevent access to the coast of the enemy. "The Government hopes, on account of the friendly relations which have existed between it and the American States for years, to obtain the recognition of these three points on the part of the belligerents." In an interview with Count Rechberg a day or two ago, he expressed to me a hope that the answer might be deemed satisfactory to my Government, as it was his wish to make it so. I replied that, so far as I was advised, no exception could be taken to his language, but that I should transmit to my Government both the question and answer, and if they had anything to say they would make it known to him through their Minister here. He repeated his strong desire to see the integrity of the Union preserved in America, and said Austria was anxious to cultivate the most friendly relations with us, and would be the last to aid or abet any movement looking to the disruption of our Confederacy, or weakening its power. Very respectfully, &c. J. GLANCY JONES. Mr. Hülsemann to Mr. Seward. Washington, August 7, 1861. THE Undersigned, in pursuance of the understanding come to this morning, has the honour to transmit to the Honourable Secretary of State a copy of the instructions received from Count Rechberg concerning the maritime rights of neutrals in time of war; and he takes this opportunity to renew his offer of high consideration to the Honourable Secretary of State. SIR, HULSEMANN. (Inclosure.)-Baron Rechberg to Mr. Hülsemann. Vienna, July 1, 1861. WITH deep regret we continue to follow events in The United States which, shaking the foundations of the Union, have effectively taken the character of an active warfare between powers; whence it has ensued that friendly nations, for the protection of their own commerce and navigation, are placed reluctantly in such position that they must reclaim their rights as neutrals. You already know by my despatch of 14th of June of last year, what principles of international law bearing upon the questions. of maritime rights in time of war we relied upon as between us and the Government of the Union, whether under the provisions of old Treaties, or under more recent arrangements; inasmuch as we have given our adhesion to the Paris declaration of maritime rights in 1856, as tending to improve the heretofore ill-advised mode of dealing with the political fluctuations that lie before us. Albeit the Government of the Union did not explicitly and at once accept, upon the first invitation, the declaration of the European powers, yet we still entertain earnest expectation that such subsequent express assent may be given, as the abrogation of all hindrance to the security of private property on the seas was established on the broadest grounds. By a proposal which, unfortunately, was not accepted on the other side, we, however, as you know, were always ready and willing to sustain the principle. We await, however, in friendly expectation, at least, the express recognition of the second, third, and fourth principles of the Paris declaration on the part of The United States quite distinctly from that, because the Government of the Union, on diffierent occasions, has not only plainly expressed these principles in manner more or less forcible, but has upon its own motion set them forth and explicitly maintained them. We therefore rest securely in the belief that we may soon receive a satisfactory communication upon this subject, and that under the high authority of the President, administering the relations of his Government, the above-mentioned three principles will be authentically asserted by The United States. But you also have it in express charge to invite the earnest attention of the Secretary of State to the matter, and to take the same steps as we see reason to adopt with the other European powers in what may be regarded as definitively settled. You will, I hope, carry this important question through to a favourable close, and I present you the assurances of my cordial sympathies. RECHBERG. Mr. Seward to Mr. Hülsemann. Washington, August 22, 1861. THE Undersigned, the Secretary of State of The United States, has the honour to acknowledge the receipt of a communication from Mr. Hülsemann, Minister resident of His Imperial Royal Majesty the Emperor of Austria, bearing date 7th August instant. Mr. Hülsemann's letter is accompanied by an instruction sent to him by Count Rechberg, the Austrian Minister for Foreign Affairs, calling for information on the subject of the views of this Government concerning the rights of neutrals in maritime war. Count Rechberg expresses a hope that the Government of The United States will give assurances that it adopts and will apply the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th principles of the declaration of Paris, viz: 2. The neutral flag covers enemy's goods, with the exception of contraband of war. 3. Neutral goods, with the exception of contraband of war, are not liable to capture under an enemy's flag. 4. Blockades, in order to be binding, must be effective; that is to say, maintained by a force sufficient really to prevent access to the coast of the enemy. The Undersigned has great pleasure in assuring Mr. Hülsemann that this Government does adopt, and that it will apply the principles thus recited and set forth, and that its liberal views in this respect have not only been long held, but they would have been formally communicated to the Austrian Government several months ago but for the delay which has unavoidably occurred in the arrival of a newly-appointed Minister Plenipotentiary at Vienna. Of course the principles referred to are understood by. The United States as not compromitting their right to close any of their own ports for the purpose of suppressing the existing insurrection. [1860-61. LI.] G in certain of the States, either directly or in the more lenient and equitable form of blockade which has already for some time been established. Mr. Motley, who proceeds immediately to Vienna as Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of The United States, will be directly advised of this communication, while he will be charged with more ample instructions on the general subject involved. The Undersigned avails himself of this occasion to tender assurances of the goodwill of this Government towards the Government of Austria, and of his distinguished consideration for Mr. Hülsemann, personally. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. (Extract.) UNITED STATES AND FRANCE. Paris, April 15, 1861. I CALLED to-day upon M. Thouvenel at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and was promptly admitted to an interview. Agreeably to your request, I handed to him a copy of the inaugural address of President Lincoln, and added that I was instructed by you to say to him that it embraced the views of the President of The United States upon the difficulties which now disturbed the harmony of the American Union, and also an exposition of the general policy which it was the purpose of the Government to pursue with a view to the preservation of domestic peace and the maintenance of the Federal Union. Here M. Thouvenel asked if there was not some diversity of opinion in the Cabinet of the President as to the proper mode of meeting the difficulties which now disturbed the relations of the States and general Government. I replied, upon that point I had no information; under our system the Cabinet was but an advising body; its opinions were entitled to weight, but did not necessarily compel the action of the President; the executive power was, by the Constitution, vested exclusively in the President. I said that I was further instructed to assure him that the President of The United States entertains a full confidence in the speedy restoration of the harmony and unity of the Government by a firm, yet just and liberal policy, co-operating with the deliberate and loyal action of the American people. M. Thouvenel expressed his pleasure at this assurance. I further said that the President regretted that the events going en in The United States might be productive of some possible inconvenience to the people and subjects of France, but he was determined that those inconveniences shall be made as light and transient as possible, and, so far as it may rest with him, that all strangers who may suffer any injury from them shall be indemnified. I said to him that the President thought it not improbable that an appeal would be made before long by the "Confederated States" to foreign Powers, and, among others, to the Government of France, for the recognition of their independence; that no such appeal having yet been made, it was premature and out of place to discuss any of the points involved in that delicate and important inquiry; but the Government of The United States desired the fact to be known that whenever any such application shall be made it will meet with opposition from the Minister who shall then represent that Government at this court. I said to him that my mission at this court would very soon terminate, and that I should have no official connection with the question which, it was anticipated, might arise upon the demand of the Confederated States for the recognition of their independence; that my place would soon be supplied by a distinguished citizen of the State of New Jersey, a gentleman who possessed the confidence of the President, who fully sympathised in his public views, and who would doubtless come fully instructed as to the then wishes and views of the Government of The United States, and that the only request which I would now make, and which would close all I had to say in the interview, was that no proposition recognizing the permanent dismemberment of the American Union shall be considered by the French Government until after the arrival and reception of the new Minister accredited by The United States to this court. M. Thouvenel, in reply, said that no application had yet been made to him by the Confederated States, in any form, for the recognition of their independence; that the French Government was not in the habit of acting hastily upon such questions, as might be seen by its tardiness in recognizing the new kingdom of Italy; that he believed the maintenance of the Federal Union, in its integrity, was to be desired for the benefit of the people north and south, as well as for the interests of France; and the Government of The United States might rest well assured that no hasty or precipitate action would be taken on that subject by the Emperor. But whilst he gave utterance to these views, he was equally bound to say that the practice and usage of the present century had fully established the right of de facto Governments to recognition when a proper case was made out for the decision of foreign Powers. Here the official interview ended. The conversation was then further protracted by an inquiry from M. Thouvenel when the new tariff would go into operation, and whether it was to be regarded as the settled policy of the Government. I told him that the first day of the present month had been prescribed as the period when the new duties would take effect; that |