Mr. Sanford to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] No. 9.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: As M. de Vrière is out of town, I directed the attention of Monsieur Saluremont, the secretary general, who is charged with the affairs of the department in the absence of the minister, in an interview with him to-day, as to the propriety of a proclamation warning Belgians from taking service under those in rebellion to the federal government, furnishing them "aid and comfort," and, especially, closing the ports of Belgium to their "privateers”— declared by the President to be pirates-or permitting them to be fitted out in her ports. I said that while the assurances I had received from M. de Vrière, soon after my arrival, of the attitude of his government had been satisfactory, I hoped it would now give public expression to them, both as due to a friendly power and as a warning to their own citizens of the perils of such enterprises. Mons. Saluremont replied that the matter had been under consideration; that the position which England and France had taken had not seemed to be satisfactory to the government of the United States, and they had delayed, in consequence, taking any formal steps; but not, he begged me to be assured, from any want of friendly spirit or desire to do all the occasion called for at their hands. I replied that he was correct in his views of our sentiments as to the course which England and France had seen fit to pursue. We could not look upon the recognition of belligerent rights to those who, under our laws, were rebels, and before we had attempted to employ forcible means of coercion, as evincing the friendly spirit we had a right to expect; that these people would be treated none the less as rebels on the land as pirates on the seas they or those of whatever nationality who joined them; and we counted, on the part of Belgium, upon no such qualification of our citizens in rebellion, whom we were engaged in submitting to the action of our laws. He said their legislation provided generally for the cases I had instanced, but that attention would be immediately given to the subject, and he thought we need not have any reason to be dissatisfied with the action they would take in the premises. He then told me that our new tariff law was a subject of great complaint in Belgium, and great distress in some branches of industry which it had destroyed, referring specially to glass and some kinds of woollen goods. I again explained our system of revenue, which all manufacturing States this side the Atlantic insist upon believing to be disadvantageous to their interests. * * * * * I have the honor to be, with great respect, your most obedient servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State, &c., &c., &c. Mr. Sanford to Mr. Seward. [Extract,] No. 10.1 LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: Referring to a conversation detailed in my despatch No. 9, I have the honor to enclose a notice published in the official journal (the Moniteur) of the 25th ultimo, in which, basing its action upon the stipulations of the declaration of the congress of Paris of April 16, 1856, it is announced that instructions have been addressed to the judicial, maritime, and military authorities to inform them that privateers of no nation or flag, alone or with their prizes, will be permitted, save in cases of extreme danger by stress of weather, to enter the ports of Belgium; enjoining upon them to recognize no commission or letter of marque as having validity; and warning all subject to the Belgian laws that in taking part or service in any privateers they incur risk of being treated as pirates abroad, and of being prosecuted with the utmost rigor of the laws at home. In thanking the acting minister for this prompt response to my request, I observed that while this was sufficient, in so far as it went, for the occasion that called it forth-as we had, and expected to have, no privateers upon the sea at this time-still, so long as we were not a party to the declaration of Paris, the employment of privateers by the United States was undoubtedly as much a belligerent right as the employment of militia on land; and in the event of a foreign war we should expect, on the part of friendly powers, no such impediment to its exercise by any injurious distinction between it and the other arms of the public I have the honor to be, with great respect, your most obedient servant, [Translation.] Belgium has given its adhesion to the principles laid down in the declaration of the congress of Paris of April 16, 1856. This adhesion was published, together with said declaration, in the Belgian Moniteur of June 8, 1856. The commercial public is notified that instructions on this subject have been given to the judicial, maritime, and military anthorities, warning them that privateers, under whatever flag or commission, or letters of marque, are not to be allowed to enter our ports except in case of imminent perils of the sea. The aforesaid authorities are charged, consequently, to keep a strict watch upon all such privateers and their prizes, and to compel them to put to sea again as soon as practicable. The same authorities have been charged not to recognize the validity of any commission or letter of marque whatsoever. All persons subject to the laws of Belgium, who shall fit out or take any part in any privateering expedition, will therefore expose themselves to the danger, on the one hand, of being treated as pirates abroad, and, on the other, to prosecution before Belgian tribunals with all the rigor of the laws. No. 4.] Mr. Seward to Mr. Sanford. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, May 6, 1861. SIR: Herewith I transmit a copy of a despatch of the 24th ultimo, which has been addressed to the several ministers of the United States accredited to the maritime powers whose plenipotentiaries composed the congress of Paris of the 16th April, 1856, calling their attention to the importance of endeavoring to negotiate with those powers conventions upon the subject of the rights of belligerents and neutrals in time of war. The government of Belgium was not represented in the Paris congress; but the negotiation of a similar convention with that government is considered desirable, and you will therefore be governed by the instruction of which I enclose a transcript, and endeavor to effect that object. With this view I herewith send you a full power and a draft of the proposed convention. SIR: Your despatches (No. 5, dated May 26, and No. 6, of the same date) have been received. We are especially pleased with Mr. De Vrière's just and friendly sentiments in regard to our affairs. You are aware that the declaration of Paris enjoins each of the parties that have signed it not to negotiate any other changes of the law of nations concerning the rights of neutrals in maritime war. We have supposed that this would operate to prevent Great Britain, and probably France, from receiving our accession to the declaration, if we should insist on the amendment proposed by Mr. Marcy, namely, the exemption of private property of non-belligerents from confiscation. But we should now, as the instructions heretofore given you have already informed you, vastly prefer to have that amendment accepted. Nevertheless, if this cannot be done, let the convention be made for adherence to the declaration pure and simple. The feverish excitement which prevailed when you left the country is passing away. Public confidence in the ability of the government to repress the insurrection and preserve the Union is practically restored, and the beneficial result that two months ago seemed problematical is now regarded as only a question of time. I am, sir, your obedient servant, H. S. SANFORD, Esq., &c., &c., Brussels. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Mr. Seward to Mr. Sanford. No. 11.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, June 22, 1861. SIR: Your despatch of the 5th June, (No. 8,) accompanied by a copy of your letter to Mr. De Vrière, on the subject of our proposed adherence to the declaration of the congress of Paris, has been received. We see no reason to doubt the propriety of that communication. I am, sir, your obedient servant, HENRY S. SANFORD, Esq., &c., &c., &c, Brussels. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Mr. Sanford to Mr. Seward. [Extract.] No. 11.] UNITED STATES LEGATION, SIR: I have not been unmindful of your instructions (No. 2) respecting a convention for the abrogation of passports for our citizens travelling or sojourning in Belgium. As already intimated in my first despatch, passports are already almost virtually abolished here, the visa being no longer necessary. The usual course of this government in respect to this subject is, upon notification by a government that Belgians are not required to be provided with passports to enter upon or travel within its territories, to exempt equally citizens or subjects of such nations in Belgium. This course has been pursued with Sweden and Holland, and will be soon followed with France and England. In view of the disturbances in our southern States, and the consequent impossibility of assuring entire reciprocity of exemption from passports throughout our territory, I have not deemed it advisable at this time to make any proposition on this subject. I am assured by Mr. De Vrière that, on formal notification that Belgians will not be required to present passports in the United States, the proper authorities here will direct the exemption of citizens of the United States travelling here from the requirement of passports. They would need, however, in case of domicile here, some document to prove their identity. In this connexion, it may not be out of place to refer to a conversation I had some time since on this subject of the abolition of passports, with the officer in charge of that branch of the public service in France. He said that they had already exempted British subjects coming to France from the action of the passport regulations, and had lately made similar exemptions with regard to Sweden, and were about to make the same exemptions with respect to Belgium, and would with most other nations on a footing of reciprocity. This was, however, a purely administrative act, liable to be recalled whenever considered for the interest of the state. They would in no case make a treaty which should bind them to the perpetual abolition of passports vis-a-vis to my nation. In the present aspect of affairs in the United States, they deemed it im portant to have a control over the movements of their citizens to the United States and vice versa of ours in French territory; and deemed the present an inopportune time to make any change in the passport system with respect to the United States. When matters returned to their normal condition, there would be no objection, he said, to suspend their passport regulations for citizens of the United States, and a simple administrative order was all that was necessary on their part, and could be made at any time when deemed expedient. I have the honor to be, with great respect, your most humble servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, H. S. SANFORD. Secretary of State. No. 12.] Mr. Seward to Mr. Sanford. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, July 8, 1861. SIR: Your despatch of June 22 (No. 9) was duly received. It is, in the main, not unsatisfactory, so far as the subject of our domestic affairs is concerned. In regard to the rights of friendly or neutral powers in maritime war, the subject has become somewhat complicated, and it would be a tedious labor to make a distinct explanation to each of our ministers abroad. I send you instead, confidentially, a copy of my last despatch on this subject to Mr. Dayton. It may serve as a guide to your own conduct in relation to the subject. I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, HENRY S. SANFORD, Esq., Brussels. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. No. 15.] Mr. Sanford to Mr. Seward. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, Brussels, July 18, 1861. SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your despatches Nos. 9, 10, and 11, under dates of the 20th and 22d respectively. I have as yet received no reply from M. De Vrière to my note to him of the 5th ultimo, on the subject of our adhesion to the declaration of the congress of Paris. I referred to it a few days since on the occasion of a visit to the foreign office, and was told that my proposition had been communicated to the French government, and that communication had been made by it to this government of the main points of the note addressed by M. Thouvenel to M. Mercier in the month of May upon this subject of neutral rights. I inferred from this that they were awaiting the result of the communications made to you by the French and English governments through their ministers at Washington. |