see the effect of two or three shots against the Head, and not having the least idea the shot would miss the Head, I took the liberty to fire three shots, and to guard against doing any injury, I was careful to have the gun depressed, so as to have the shot to fall short, rather than run the risk of carrying over the Head; but, contrary to my expectations, the first shot (as it afterwards proved) ricocheted after striking the water, and passed over the Head, striking as you stated in your letter. At the time we all thought the ball lodged against the ledge, and not until the next day did I know of the facts. I went over immediately on learning the circumstance and saw Mr. Parker, who showed me where the shot struck. I followed the course, and found the shot in an adjoining pasture. The other two shots I found on the beach under the Head. I was treated very kindly by Mr. Parker and others whom I met while on the island, and to whom I apologized, assuring them it would not be repeated, at the same time intending to call on you and do the same. Circumstances since the affair have been such that I have been unable to do so. Hoping the affair will create no ill feeling, I will do myself the honor to call upon you personally at the earliest opportunity, and give, perhaps, a more satisfactory explanation. I am, very respectfully, sir, your obedient servant. J. ROBINSON, THOMAS P. HUTCHINSON, Captain, Commanding Fort Sullivan. J. P. and Captain Royal Navy, Campobello, N. B. Mr. Seward to Mr. Burnley. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, December 15, 1864. SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of Lord Lyons's note of the 5th instant, together with its accompanying copy of a despatch from the governor general of Canada, relative to the schemes of the insurgents in Canada against the United States. Accept, sir, renewed assurance of my high consideration. J. Hume BurnLEY, Esq., &c., &c., &c. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Mr. Seward to Mr. Burnley. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, December 15, 1864. SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 9th instant, relative to the case of the Labuan, and, in reply, to inform you that it will receive attention. Accept, sir, a renewed assurance of my high consideration. J. HUME BURNLEY, Esq., Sr., &c., &c. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Mr. Seward to Mr. Burnley. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, December 16, 1864. SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge with thanks the receipt of your note of the 12th instant, transmitting a copy of a note from his excellency the gov ernor general of Canada relative to the alleged existence of a military organization in Canada of fugitives from the United States, which formed the subject of my communication of the 29th ultimo to Lord Lyons. I have the honor to be, with high consideration, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWARD. J. HUME BURNLEY, Esq., &c., &c., &c. Mr. Burnley to Mr. Seward. BRITISH LEGATION, Washington, December 16, 1864. MY DEAR SIR: I have just received a telegraphic message from Viscount Monck, begging me to convey to you his thanks for the prompt and satisfactory explanation of General Dix's order. He begs me to assure you of his vexation at the turn affairs have taken in the St. Albans case, and that the Canadian government are doing everything in their power to remedy the mischief done by the magistrate's extraordinary decision. As a good deal of excitement, however, prevails in consequence of General Dix's order, Viscount Monck is anxious to know whether you would object to his making public the substance of what I telegraphed to him, which was, "that the order had been issued without instructions, but that steps would be taken to prevent action on that portion of it which related to crossing the border into Canada." I am, very truly, yours, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, &c., &c., &c. J. HUME BURNLEY. Mr. Burnley to Mr. Seward. WASHINGTON, December 16, 1864. SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of your note of the 14th instant relative to the two apprentices of the Cuzco, in which you are good enough to inform me that this government does not deem itself under either a legal or moral obligation to deliver up the aforenamed deserters or to pay any damages for their detention, and that this decision is based upon the ground that in a similar case which occurred in England the British government refused to deliver up two American deserters. I was under the impression, when your note of the 16th ultimo reached me, that it had been implied that the boys would be given up, owing to an expression made use of by R. A. Hill in a letter which formed one of the enclosures with regard to John Williams. "He will be given up to any one authorized to receive him;" the other being in the naval hospital of New York, unfit for service of any kind. I will, however, do myself the honor of transmitting a copy of your note to her Majesty's government, and would beg leave to repeat, what I mentioned in my note of the 18th ultimo, that the name of the other boy is not Arthur Cox but Alfred Dewick. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, &c., &c., &c. J. HUME BURNLEY. Mr. Burnley to Mr. Seward. WASHINGTON, December 17, 1864. SIR: The lords commissioners of the admiralty have received from Vice-Admiral Sir Augustus Kuper, commanding her Majesty's naval forces in the eastern seas, an account of the successful operations lately undertaken by a combined squadron of English, French, Dutch, and United States vessels against the batteries erected by the Japanese prince of Nagato in the straits of Simono-Saki. Sir A. Kuper reports that the most cordial good feeling prevailed throughout the operations between the officers and men of the allied forces, and he attributes, in great measure, to that good feeling the speedy and entire success with which the operations of the combined squadron were crowned. It is with feelings of great pleasure that I am enabled to lay before you the enclosed copy of a letter which Sir A. Kuper addressed to Lieutenant Pearson, of the United States navy, expressing the sense which the British admiral entertains of the important services rendered on that occasion by the officers and men detached from the United States corvette Jamestown. And, in accordance with the wish of the admiralty, her Majesty's government instructs me to request that the United States government will have the goodness to convey to Lieutenant Pearson the acknowledgment of the lords commissioners for the ready co-operation which that gallant officer afforded to the British admiral during the whole of the operations in question. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, &c., &c., &c. J. HUME BURNLEY. Admiral Kuper to Lieutenant Pearson. HER MAJESTY'S SHIP EURYALUS, Straits of Simono-Saki, September 11, 1864. SIR: The operations in the straits of Simono-Saki having terminated, I am desirous of conveying to yourself, and through you to the men under your immediate orders, the expres sion of my best thanks for the assistance rendered by the Takiang throughout the progress of the recent events, which have been attended with the most complete and successful results. The courtesy shown by you in receiving temporarily on board the Takiang the wounded of the squadron has been of considerable advantage to us, and I shall have much pleasure in reporting to her Majesty's government your ready acquiescence in my wishes on all occasions when the services of the Takiang could be made available in any manner towards the success of the operations. I have, &c., Lieutenant PEARSON, U. S. N. AUGUSTUS L. KUPER, U. S. Steam Vessel Takiang. Mr. Burnley to Mr. Seward. WASHINGTON, December 17, 1864. SIR: I have the honor to communicate to you, under the instructions which I have received from her Majesty's principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, the enclosed copy of a despatch addressed to Lord Lyons relative to the intention of the United States government, in conformity with the treaty reservation right, to increase their naval armament upon the North American lakes. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, &c., fr. &c. J. HUME BURNLEY. Earl Russell to Lord Lyons. FOREIGN OFFICE, November 26, 1864. MY LORD: Your lordship, in your despatch of the 28th ultimo, has referred to the intention of the United States government to give notice to her Majesty's government that, in conformity with the treaty reservation of the right to give such notice, the United States government will deem themselves at liberty, at the expiration of six months after the communication shall have been made, to increase their naval armament upon the North American lakes, if, in their judgment, the condition of affairs should require it; and you have enclosed a copy of a despatch from Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams, which, after referring to the case of the Chesapeake, and after relating various acts of aggression from Canada, namely, the seizure and destruction of the Philo Parsons and Island Queen on the lakes, and the attack upon the town of St. Albans, in Vermont, by a party of twenty-five men, issuing from the British territory, proceeds to lay down the following important propositions: 1. "The insufficiency of the British neutrality act, and of the warnings of the Queen's proclamation to arrest the causes of the complaint referred to, were anticipated early in the existing struggle, and the British government was asked to apply a remedy by passing an act more stringent in its character, such as ours of the 10th of March, 1838, which was occasioned by a similar condition of affairs." This request has not been complied with, though its reasonableness and necessity have been shown by subsequent acts. 2. "It is now my duty to instruct you to give notice to Earl Russell, in conformity with the treaty reservation of that right, that, at the expiration of six months after you shall have made this communication, the United States will deem themselves at liberty to increase the naval armaments upon the lakes, if, in their judgment, the condition of affairs in that quarter shall then require it." 3. After again recurring to the measure of 1838, Mr. Seward says: “I should fail, however, to express a sincere conviction of this government if I should not repeat now, what I have heretofore so often had occasion to say, that practically the policy of neutrality which her Majesty has proclaimed has failed as well in the British home ports as in the British colonies, and especially in the latter, and that it must continue to fail more conspicuously every day so long as asylum is allowed there to active agents of the enemies of the United States, and they are in any way able, by evasion or otherwise, to use the British ports and British borders as a base for felonious depredations against the citizens of the United States; nor are we able to conceive of any remedy adequate to the present exigency but the recognition by her Majesty's government of the first and exclusive sovereignty of the United States in all the waters and territories legally subject to the jurisdiction of this government. On the 23d instant I received from Mr. Adams the note which I enclose, and the several documents annexed to it; but as they are the same in substance as the communication you have sent me, I think it will be more convenient to deal with the formal and authoritative despatch of the Secretary of State. 1. The reference to the act of March 10, 1838, (of which I enclose a copy,) will not have any application with respect to vessels leaving the shores of the United Kingdom. The difficulty in regard to vessels fitted out or equipped in our home ports has always consisted in proving that the vessel was provided or prepared for any military expedition or enterprise against the ter ritory or dominions of any foreign prince or state with whom her Majesty is at peace," and a similar difficulty would be found in enacting a law exactly copied from the United States act of March 10, 1838. With regard to "territories conterminous with the United States," it might, indeed, more easily be proved, with respect to any military bodies assembled near the border, that they were intended to cross the frontier in hostility to a state with whom her Majesty is at peace. On this part of the question I have to desire you to assure Mr. Seward that the subject is undergoing the most searching investigation by the law officers of the Crown, with a view to take the most effectual measures to prevent incursions from the bordering British provinces into the territory of the United States. In the mean time I have to observe that in the early part of the war, while active efforts were made to fit out, in British ports, ships intended to be completed in the waters of other neutral States, as ships-of-war, and thence to be employed as cruisers against the United States, but few, if any, attempts were made to disturb the frontier of Canada by military or naval expeditions. Hence the act of Congress of March, 1838, was not considered to be applicable to the existing state of affairs. I may also observe, that during the late insurrection in Poland, although the governments of Austria and Prussia were, from a regard to their own interests, unfavorable to that insurrection, and although their means of repression were much more available and much more energetic than ours ever can be, yet insurgent expeditions from Galicia and from the Duchy of Posen were of very frequent occurrence. The governor of Canada, it is admitted by the United States government, has done all that he could lawfully do, and if his efforts should fail and other measures of repression consistent with the nature of our government shall be found requisite, her Majesty's government will not hesitate to propose them. 2. It is perfectly competent to the United States to give notice that at the end of six months that government will be at liberty to increase their naval force on the lakes. It is certainly true that while both nations are disarmed on the lakes, marauders or depredators may destroy or capture unarmed vessels belonging to either party. Her Majesty will, of course, be at liberty also to increase her naval force on the lakes at the expiration of the six months after notice, if she shall think fit so to do. But it is to be hoped that when peace is restored the former agreement, which was formed upon just and wise considerations, may be renewed, as one that must be advantageous to both parties. 3. The next proposition of the Secretary of State declares the neutrality proclaimed by her Majesty to have failed, as well in the British home ports as in the colonies; that it must continue to fail so long as asylum is allowed there to active agents of the enemies of the United States, and so long as those persons are in any way able, by evasion or otherwise, to use the British ports and British borders as a base for felonious depredations; and the Secretary of State adds, that the only remedy which the government of the United States is able to conceive, is the "recognition by her Majesty's government of the first and exclusive sovereignty of the United States in all the waters and territories legally subject to the jurisdiction of this government." It appears to her Majesty's government that this proposal amounts to nothing less than a demand that Great Britain should cease to acknowledge the belligerent character of the southern States, and treat the southern citizens as felons and pirates. In order to consider this matter fully, I find it necessary to recur to the events of the last three years. President Lincoln, immediately after his accession to power in 1861, found himself face to face with a most formidable insurrection. In the month of April, 1861, he ordered a levy of seventy-five thousand men to meet the danger. Finding this number insufficient, armies of three, four, and even seven hundred thousand men have been raised, embodied, marched, exposed to battles and sieges, worn by fight and fever, exhausted, consumed, and replenished in this mighty contest. With similar purposes the President, in the same month of April, 1861, proclaimed the blockade of the coast of seven States, and the blockade of two other States was added immediately afterwards. A navy was suddenly created, supposed to be adequate to the task of blockading three thousand miles of coast. Her Majesty's government could not, any more than the other powers of Europe, fail to recognize in the vast extent of the territories involved in hostilities, and in the fierce nature of the contest, a civil war of the most extraordinary character. In proclaiming that both parties in this vast war were to be treated as belligerents, and in admitting the validity of a blockade of three thousand miles of coast, her Majesty's government acknowledged an existing fact, and recognized the international law applicable to that fact. But her Majesty's government could not disguise from themselves the difficulties which would beset, under any state of law, the task of preventing undue aid being given by individuals among the Queen's subjects to one or the other of the belligerents. The identity of language, the increasing intercourse of trade, the immense extent of ship-building carried on in this country, and the ingenuity of speculators in defeating laws and proclamations, made it impossible that there should not be many escapes from the vigilance of the government, and many successful stratagems to disguise hostile proceedings. Still her Majesty's government counted on the fair consideration by the government of the United States of what was possible on their estimate of the honest intention of the British Executive, and their knowledge of the latitude, both of opinion and of action, prevailing among a people nurtured like that of the United States in free institutions. Her Majesty's government also thought that the United States must be aware that the law of nations and the circumstances of the war gave an immense advantage to the federalists against the confederates in obtaining warlike supplies. In confirmation of this remark, it may be reckoned that besides very many batteries of artillery, five hundred thousand rifles have been manufactured in this country and conveyed to the shores of the northern States, to be used by the federal troops in the war. It may safely be said, also, that many thousands of the Queen's subjects have held these rifles against the hearts of men whom her Majesty does not regard as her enemies. The supplies sent to the confederates are, on the other hand, very commonly intercepted and captured on the sea by federal ships-of-war. Her Majesty's government, however, have put in force impartially the provisions of the law, and have prosecuted those persons, who, in apparent violation of that law, have fitted out vessels in our ports with the purpose, as it was believed, of aiding in hostilities against the United States, or who have been engaged in enlisting seamen or recruits in the service of either belligerent; and her Majesty's government have succeeded in preventing the departure from the Clyde and the Mersey of several ships intended for the service of the confederates. Such being the state of affairs, her Majesty's government are not prepared either to deny to the southern States belligerent rights, or to propose to Parliament to make the laws of the United Kingdom generally more stringent. To allow to the United States the belligerent rights of blockade and of search and detention to the widest extent, and to refuse them altogether to the other party in the civil war, who have possession of an extensive territory, who have all the forms of a regular government, framed on the mould of that of the United States, and who are wielding large regular armies, would, her Majesty's government presume to think, be as contrary to the practice of civilized nations as it would be to the rules of justice and of international law. Neither can her Majesty's government refuse an asylum to persons landing on our shores |