« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »
From when and
1866. 1286 Mr. Adams to Dec. 7 | Has received from Lord Stanley copies of 644 Mr. Seward.
his dispatches to Sir F. Bruce, in reference
bama claims. 1885
Mr. Seward to Dec. 10 Has received No. 1275. Incloses extracts | 644
from the President's message, which ex-
the claims question.
1867. Sir F. Bruce to | Jan. 7) Transmits copy of his note to Mr. Seward, 645 Lord Stanley.
inclosing Lord Stanley's dispatches of the 30th of November. Lord Stanley, in his first dispatch, recounts the history of the Sumtër, Florida, Alabama, and Shenandoah, and defends their reception in British ports. He then justifies the recognition of rebel belligerency on the ground of the President's proclamation of blockade, and quotes a Supreme Court decision in support of his position. The foreign enlistment act, he claims, was identical with that of the United States. Its evasion by the Alabama could not have been prevented, and sufficient evidence was lacking to have detained the other vessels. The British government, however, proposed an alteration in the laws of both countries, and the United States replied that their law was believed to be sufficient. The provisions contained in the latter law, which are not to be found in that of Great Britain, would have been ineffectual if adopted. The case of the prompt suppression of the Fenians could not fairly be cited, as their movements were all public and evidence against them easily procured. In his second dispatch of November 30, Lord Stanley proposes to submit the question of the Alabama claims to arbitration, excluding the question of premature recognition, and all other claims to a
mixed commission. Mr. Seward to Jan. 12 Acknowledges the receipt of his note, cover 654 Sir F. Bruce.
ing copy of Lord Stanley's dispatch, and
has replied through Mr. Adams. 1906 Mr. Seward to Jan. 12 Has received from Sir Frederick Bruce Lord | 655 1 Mr. Adams.
Stanley's review of his No. 1835. Mr. Seward renews his argument based on the reception and sale of the Sumter in British ports, and the outfit of the Alabama and other vessels, the several parts of which were completed in England, although joined together outside of British jurisdiction. Their character was essentially British. In regard to recognition of belligerency, the decision of the Supreme Court referred to does not admit that the proclamation of blockade recognized the existence of a civil war. The recognition was premature and unnecessary. Mr. Seward gives a history of the blockade proclamation, and the recognition of belligerency by Great Britain, and says that the latter proceeding and not the
From whom and
Sir F. Bruce to
Lord Stanley. Lord Stanley to
Sir F. Bruce.
former stamped the insurrection as a civil war. Every government has the right to close ports in insurrection against it, and doing so does not confer belligerent rights upon the insurgents. The plea that the recognition of belligerency was necessary for the protection of British interests is invalid, as the British government could not directly protect their subjects in America. The blockade could have been acknowledged without recognition, as las been uniformly the practice of the United States. Mr. Seward again contrasts the conduct of Great Britain with our own toward the Fenians. While the United States think their claims should be paid at once, they will agree to submit them to arbitration, but cannot except from consideration any question which has been
raised in the correspondence. Incloses copy of Mr. Seward's note of Jan
uary 12. Approves his note to Mr. Seward, communi 666
cating proposals for settlement of Alabama
claims. Transmits copies of a volume of correspond 666
ence between himself and Lord Russell,
printed by the Foreign Office. Incloses note to Lord Stanley, transmitting 667
copy of No. 1906. Has received copy of Mr. Seward's dispatch, 667
which will receive full consideration. Transmits copy of Mr. Seward's reply to his 668 dispatch of January 30. Without desiring to revive the controversy, Lord Stanley insists that the President was responsible for the recognition of rebel belligerency by foreign powers. Her Majesty's government cannot consent to refer the question of premature recognition, but propose limited arbitration in reference to the Alabama claims, and a mixed
commission to consider all other claims. Refers to growing desire in America for set- | 670
tlement of Alabama claims, and danger of delay. The House of Representatives passed a bill which failed in the Senate, to alter the neutrality laws so as to agree with those of Great Britain, and also a resolution forbidding claims upon the Uniter States to be allowed before being submitted to Congress. Lord Stanley's proposal of separate consideration of the Alabama
claims cannot be accepted. Has had an interview with Lord Stanley, for | 671
the purpose of having a definiteunderstanding of the difficulties in the way of the settlement of existing questions. On learning, however, that the latter's proposal of March 9 had not yet been submitted to Mr. Seward, Mr. Adams refrained from pressing immediate action. Mr. Adams doubts the expediency of insisting that the ques
1952 | Mr. Seward to Mar. 28
1355 / Mr. Adams to | April 15
From whom and
tion of premature recognition should be
position. 1965 | Mr. Seward to | April 16 The British minister has presented Lord | 672 Mr. Adams.
Stanley's proposal of March 9. The United
tion of the Alabama claims. 1971 ...... do........ May 2 Has received No. 1355. The President sees 673
no prospect of coming to an agreement
waived in the settlement of their claims. 1361 | Mr. Adams to | May 2 Has received No. 1965, and communicated its 674 Mr. Seward.
contents to Lord Stanley. The latter agreed that the government having consented to arbitration for the Alabama claims, might easily submit the less important claims to the same tribunal ; but the difficulty would be to find an umpire willing to decide upon so many unimportant questions. As Mr. Seward in his dispatch had not noticed Lord Stanley's exception of the recognition question from consideration, Mr. Adams alluded to it as making an essential point in Lord Stan· ley's reply. Mr. Adams thought itinexpe
dient to print the recent correspondence. Lord Stanley to | May 2 | Communicates the substance of Mr. Seward's 676 Sir F. Bruce.
reply to his dispatch of March 9, just re
ceived from Mr. Adams. 1986 | Mr. Seward to | May 20 | Has received No. 1361. No limitation upon 676 Mr. Adams.
the arbitration of the Alabama claims can
be consented to.
for arbitration was meant to cover claims
waived by the United States.
reply to Lord Stanley's letter upon his re
turn to Washington. 2037 Mr. Seward to Aug. 12 In reply to Lord Stanley's dispatch of May 679 Mr. Adams.
24, the United States understand the Ala-
From whom and
also understand that Lord Stanley propo-
for all classes of claims.
letter of August 12, received from Mr.
Adams. 1447 Mr. Adams to Sept. 13 Has read No. 2037 to Lord Stanley, who 681 Mr. Seward.
wished to consider its terms before an-
settlement of the difficulties. 2060 Mr. Seward to Sept. 25 Has received No. 1447. Lord Stanley's sen- | 682 Mr. Adams.
timents coincide with his own. 1474 | Mr. Adams to Nov. 2 Has had a conference with Lord Stanley, in 682 Mr. Seward.
which the latter expressed his opinion
be submitted to arbitration. 2093 | Mr. Seward to Nov. 16 The sentiment of the American people is 683 Mr. Adams.
equally as unanimous as that of the Eng-
premature recognition to be waived.
12, her Majesty's government cannot refer
mission, of general claims." 2102 | Mr. Seward to | Nov. 29 Has received from Mr. Ford Lord Stanley's 685 Mr. Adams.'
proposal of November 16, and, as it in-
be entertained. 2103 ...... do ......... Dec. 2 Directs Mr, Adams to give Lord Stanley a | 686
copy of No. 2102. 1488 | Mr. Adams to | Dec. 4 Transmits published correspondence between 686 Mr. Seward.
himself and Lord Stanley in reference to
Lord Stanley's tone in connection with it,
and supposed the negotiation to be over.
2118 Mr. Seward to Jan. 13 | Has received No. 1503. His suggestion to 688 Mr. Adams.
Mr. Ford did not refer simply to mutual
friendly and satisfactory relations..
dispatch from Mr. Seward, expressing a
of the nature of the conference. 1539 Mr. Adams to | Feb. 18 Has communicated contents of No. 2118 to 690 Mr. Seward.
Lord Stanley, wlio desires further explana-
ceremony if a settlement can be effected. 2141 Mr. Seward to Mar. 7 Has received No. 1539, and approves Mr. 690 Mr. Adams.
Adams's proceedings. Further considera-
in regard to naturalization.
relation to questions at issue between the
claims to decision of a commission. 2144 | Mr. Seward to Mar. 23 Has received No. 1549. The change in Brit 691 Mr. Adams.
ish opinion is gratifying. Has suggested
tion. 2 Nir. Seward to July 20 Instructs Mr. Johnson to attempt a settle 692 Mr. Johnson.
ment of the naturalization and San Juan