No. 189. Baron Gerolt to Mr. Fish. [Translation.] LEGATION OF THE NORTH GERMAN UNION, Washington, March 1, 1871. (Received March 2.) With reference to his note.of the 9th of February last in regard to the treatment of articles contraband of war which are found on board of American vessels during the war between Germany and France, the undersigned, envoy and minister plenipotentiary of the North German Union, has the honor to transmit to the Hon. Hamilton Fish, Secretary of State of the United States, a copy of the dispatch which the Chancellor of the Union, Count von Bismarck, has prepared in reply to the notes (of the 14th and 19th of January last) of the honorable Secretary of State to the undersigned in relation to this matter. The undersigned avails, &c. FR. v. GEROLT. Count Bismarck to Baron Gerolt, [Translation.] VERSAILLES, February 9, 1871. With your excellency's kind reports of the 16th and 20th ultimo I have had the honor to receive a copy of the correspondence between the Secretary of State, Mr. Fish, and yourself, in relation to the treatment of private property at sea. In amplification of my telegraphic reply of the 8th instant I have most respectfully to say as follows: When I sent my telegram of the 19th of July last, viz: "Private property on high seas will be exempted from seizure by His Majesty's ships without regard to reciprocity," I supposed that it would be understood as it could only be intended, according to international usages, and particularly according to the principles which have hitherto been advocated by the United States-that is to say, as the reply to a definite question long since propounded in the writings of publicists and in diplomatic correspondence. I think myself all the more authorized to entertain this supposition, as the Government of the United States itself has transferred the question from publicistic to diplomatic ground. The cabinet of President Pierce presented two principles to the consideration of all maritime powers after the outbreak of the Crimean war, viz, that the neutral flag should cover peace-property, except contraband of war, and that all neutral property on board of merchant vessels of belligerent states, except contraband of war, should not be liable to condemnation. It was on account of this initiative that the powers represented at the Paris congress made the treatment of private property at sea the object of a deliberation and resolution, and adopted both principles. The Government of the United States having been asked to give its acquiescence to the four points of the Parisian declaration, declared its readiness to do so only on condition that the property of subjects of a belligerent state should be exempt from capture at sea by the war-vessels of the other party, contraband of war excepted. I take the liberty of referring to these occurrences because I had them in mind in writing my telegram of the 19th of July last, and they explain why I did not particularly mention the presumptive exception of contraband of war in a telegram designed for your instruction. That the North German Union has renounced the right of capture of war material, which is to be conveyed in French or neutral vessels to the enemy, has not been inferred by neutral states from the communication of the same import which has been sent to them. They have therein seen only the proclamation of the principle of "the freedom of private property at sea," to the extent to which this principle, at the instance of the United States, has occupied public opinion on both sides of the ocean since the Crimean war. We regret that the course of the French war-navy has rendered it impossible for us longer to carry out the intention which we expressed at the beginning of the war. If the American Government could successfully use its influence with that of France so the French cruisers would spare private property, but especially that they would no longer destroy German merchant vessels, but take their prizes into a port and subject them to the decision of a court, we would be willing, in return for such a concession in the interest of the advancement of international questions relating to private property at sea, to revoke the order for the capture of such French merchant vessels as have no articles contraband of war on board. Our action towards American vessels will, as a matter of course, be in accordance with the provisions of the treaty of 1799, and this is a question which is independent of the instructions which German vessels of war receive for their guidance during the continuation of a war with other states. Your excellency will have the kindness to send to the Secretary of State, Mr. Fish, a copy of this dispatch. The undersigned has the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the note of Baron Gerolt of the 1st instant, with which the Baron did him the honor to transmit a copy of the dispatch of the Chancellor of the North German Union dated 9th February last. The termination of the war in which the North German Union has lately been engaged happily removes from the questions to which the Chancellor's dispatch and the correspondence between the undersigned and Baron Gerolt alluded to therein relate, any present practical sig nificance. The undersigned notes, however, the qualification which it appears was intended to be attached to the decree of the 19th of July last, viz, "Private property on the high seas will be exempted from seizure by His Majesty's ships without regard to reciprocity." And with reference to the concluding passage of Count Bismarck's dispatch of 9th of February, the undersigned takes pleasure in saying that the confidence of this Government never allowed a doubt that the action of North Germany toward American vessels would be in accordance with the provisions of existing treaties. The undersigned avails, &c. HAMILTON FISH. No. 191. Baron Gerolt to Mr. Fish. LEGATION OF THE NORTH GERMAN UNION, Washington, June 23, 1871. (Received June 24.) SIR: I have the honor to inform you that, according to a telegram received from the acting chancellor of the German Empire, Mr. Von Schlozer, late minister resident of the North German Union at the republic of Mexico, has been appointed my successor to represent the government of His Majesty the Emperor of Germany near the Government of the United States, and that at the same time I have been allowed to leave Washington before the arrival of my successor, after having presented to you the secretary of this legation, Mr. Von Alvensleben, as chargé d'affaires ad interim. I have fixed my departure at the beginning of next month, but having been informed that you will leave Washington for some time, and that I may not be allowed to take my leave from his Excellency the President during his absence from this city, I respectfully request you to present to his Excellency the sentiments of my highest respect and of my sincere wishes for his welfare and for the happiness of the people and the many friends of this country, where I had the honor to represent my august sovereign and the interests of my country for the best part of my life. I also avail myself of this occason to renew to you the assurances of my highest consideration. FR. v. GEROLT. No. 192. Mr. Fish to Baron Gerolt. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, June 26, 1871. SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 23d instant, announcing that Mr. Von Schlozer, late minister resident of the North German Union in Mexico, has been appointed your suc cessor to represent the government of his Majesty the Emperor of Ger many near this Government, and that, having received permission for that purpose, you intend to leave here prior to the arrival of Mr. Von Schlozer, after having presented Mr. Von Alvensleben as chargé d'affaires ad interim. In reply, I have the honor to express, on behalf of the President, his disappointment that, owing to his absence from the city, he will be obliged to forego the usual ceremony of parting with you. He, however, directs me to express his poignant regret that you should relinquish the high trust which you have so long, so faithfully, and so honorably discharged in this capital, a regret which will be deeply shared by your many friends. His best wishes will attend you. I shall not fail to make known to him the kind sentiments which you express towards him and toward the people of this country-sentiments which I am sure that he cordially reciprocates in respect to the Emperor and people of Germany. If you will call here at twelve o'clock to-morrow, I will receive you, in order that you may present Baron Alvensleben. I avail myself of this occasion, &c., HAMILTON FISH. No. 193. Baron Gerolt to Mr. Fish. [Translation.] LEGATION OF THE NORTH GERMAN UNION, Washington, June 26, 1871. (Received June 27.) The undersigned, envoy and minister plenipotentiary of the North German Union, has the honor, in accordance with instructions received, most respectfully to transmit to the Hon. Hamilton Fish, Secretary of State of the United States, a copy of a dispatch of the 19th ultimo, whereby his highness the chancellor of the German Empire informs the maritime powers of the conduct of the French war-navy toward the German corvette Augusta, in the Spanish port of Vigo, of the opinion entertained by the Imperial German government of this conduct, as well as of the reasons for which said government did not make said conduct the subject of a protest. The undersigned gladly avails himself of this additional occasion to renew to the honorable Secretary of State the assurances of his most distinguished consideration. [Translation.] FR. v. GEROLT. BERLIN, May 19, 1871. According to the reports (the truth of which has been otherwise confirmed) of the commander of the German corvette Augusta, the French war-navy observed, while the said vessel was in the Spanish port of Vigo, in January last, a course of conduct toward her which was at variance with unquestionable principles of international law. The French iron-clad frigate Heroine, having entered the port of Vigo on the 13th of January, and having approached so near to the Augusta (with the unmistakable design of reconnoitering) that the latter was forced to draw in her anchor to sixty fathoms, ran out on the day following, not in order to put to sea, but to cast anchor within the Bay of Vigo, among the Cies Islands. She thence came farther into the harbor by night, and sent off her steam-launch to make observations. She also kept making signals from her anchorage in neutral water to several French vessels which were lying or cruising outside, of which several bore her company by turns, (one at a time.) Although the object of this spying in neutral waters was frustrated by the loyal and firm enforcement of the neutrality laws on the part of the Spanish government, and by the signing of a truce on the 28th of the same month, there was reason for the allied German governments to bring the conduct of the French vessels of war, which was in violation of the law of nations, to the knowledge of maritime powers, which, in every naval war, have an equal interest in having the rights of neutrals respected, and the presumptions of the belligerents, which are based upon them, not deceived. In order not to anticipate the royal Spanish government as the one principally interested, I addressed the inquiry to the cabinet at Madrid whether it proposed to issue a proclamation in defense of its territorial rights. I was informed, in reply, that the Spanish government had entered into correspondence with the delegation of the Government of the national defense at Bordeaux, and felt satisfied in consequence of a declaration which had been received from the same, which left the right inviolate in principle, the observance of which in fact (recognition of which?) the Spanish government had obtained. Since, meanwhile, the conclusion of a peace has taken place, I think proper to refrain from making a protest. In order, however, that no inferences may hereafter be drawn from our silence, I take the liberty of bringing the conduct of the French war-navy toward the Augusta, our opinion of this conduct, and our reasons for not making it a subject of protest, to the knowledge of maritime nations. I most respectfully beg your excellency to be pleased to send a copy of this dispatch to the minister of foreign affairs. V. BISMARCK. No. 120.] GREAT BRITAIN. No. 194. Mr. Moran to Mr. Fish. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, London, December 7, 1870. (Received December 22.) SIR: I have the honor to state that Mr. Motley retired to-day from this mission, and, in accordance with the instructions contained in your dispatch No. 285 to him, placed me in charge of the legation, having previously notified Earl Granville that he had been instructed so to do on taking leave of Her Majesty's government. I have accordingly entered upon the discharge of the duties of the post, and I beg to express through you to the President my sincere thanks for this high proof of his confidence, and to assure him and you that I shall endeavor, while holding the responsible position, to acquit myself so as to merit his and your approval. I have, &c., BENJAMIN MORAN. No. 123.] No. 195. Mr. Moran to Mr. Fish. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, London, December 8, 1870. (Received December 22.) SIR: In connection with Mr. Motley's dispatches Nos. 517 and 519, I have now the honor to inclose herewith copies extracted from The Daily News and Times, in English and French, of Prince Gortchakoff's reply, dated the 20th of November, to Earl Granville's note of the 31st October, on the subject of the revision of the treaty of Paris of 1856, together with copy of Earl Granville's answer, dated the 28th November. I have, &c., BENJAMIN MORAN. [From the London Daily News, Friday, December 2, 1870.] THE RUSSIAN QUESTION-PRINCE GORTCHAKOFF'S REPLY TO LORD GRANVILLE-FROM OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT BY SUBMARINE TELEGRAPH. ST. PETERSBURG, December 1—11.15 a. M. The following is the full text of Prince Gortchakoff's reply to Lord Granville, being a dispatch addressed to Baron Brunnow, dated Tsarskoe Selo, 8th (20th) November, 1870: "MONSIEUR LE BARON: The ambassador of England has read and left with me a copy of Lord Granville's dispatch in reply to our communication of October 19. I hastened to submit it to His Majesty the Emperor. Our august master was pleased to point out that it contained, in the first place, an expression of the earnest desire of the cabinet of London to preserve cordial relations between England and Russia; and secondly, an assurance that the cabinet would not have refused to enter into an examination of the results of the treaty of 1856, so far as they have been modified by circumstances. As for the question of strict right stated by Lord Granville, we have no wish to enter into any discussion, recall any precedent, cite any example. Such a |