Page images
PDF
EPUB

No. 143.]

BRAZIL.

No. 7.

Mr. Blow to Mr. Fish.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,

Rio de Janeiro, November 5, 1870. (Received December 22.) SIR: I now have the honor to state, in reply to your dispatch No. 39, that I have inquired particularly about the American emigrants at Para supposed to be in destitute circumstances, without obtaining any information concerning them. No complaint has been addressed me in any way by them, and I therefore indulge the hope that by some good providence they have been enabled to return to the United States. The principal American colony remaining in Brazil is engaged in the culture of cotton, and claims to be doing well, though most of the members are dissatisfied, living frugally, and will doubtless return to their old homes as soon as their means will permit.

I am, &c.,

HENRY T. BLOW.

No. 52.]

No. 8.

Mr. Fish to Mr. Wright.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, January 31, 1871. Sir: I transmit a copy of a letter of the 21st instant addressed to this Department by C. A. Washburn, esq., late minister of the United States to Paraguay, relative to certain property, the most valuable part of which was placed in his custody by residents of Asuncion, and which, on leaving there, he says remained at his place of abode. That building was taken possession of by the Brazilian forces on their entrance into Asuncion, and the property adverted to is alleged to have been seized as booty by soldiers in the service of that empire.

Mr. Washburn also says that he warned the depositors that, in accepting the trust which they thought proper to confer upon him, neither his Government nor himself personally was to be held accountable for the safe-keeping of the property. This Government claims no right to interfere for the recovery of the value of such part of it as did not belong to itself or to citizens of the United States, but it may be supposed that, under the circumstances attending the trust, and in view of the standing of the depositors, that government might of its own accord make amends to them. So far as appears, the owners of the foreign property were women, helpless non-combatants, whom a powerful and generous enemy would not voluntarily or unnecessarily injure. Their property, too, was lodged in a house which was the legation of the United States, and though the minister himself was absent at the time of the seizure, it is understood that the flag of the United States was still flying there. The capture of the property of merely technical enemies so situated, seems not to be in harmony with the rule of the freedom of enemy's property at sea, which is understood to be respected by the Brazilian government.

You will consequently sound the minister for foreign affairs upon this subject. If you should find him not averse to entertaining the complaints of the Paraguayan ladies, measures may be adopted toward obtaining such proof as to the extent of their losses as may be attainable. You will, in any event, give him to understand that reparation will be expected for the seizure of the property of this Government, of Mr. John A. Duffield, and of Mr. Washburn himself.

I am, &c.,

[blocks in formation]

SIR: I have to acknowledge the receipt of your dispatch (without number) of the 10th, with inclosure, relating to the complaint of Mr. Thomas Rainey against certain action of the authorities of Brazil. I have examined these voluminous documents sufficiently to ascertain that Mr. Rainey's grievances, real or supposed, arise out of one or more contracts into which he voluntarily entered with the Brazilian government, as well in his private capacity as that of the representative of a corporation or joint-stock association, organized under the laws of Brazil.

The following extract from instructions recently addressed to Mr. De Long, minister to Japan, and which, in substance, have been repeatedly addressed to other ministers, will apprise you of the views of this Department in relation to such cases. The considerations which forbid public intervention have peculiar force where the parties asking it are the members of a foreign corporation:

"Another class of claims is those against the government of Japan, not springing from torts, but founded on contract, express or implied. In respect to such claims, the policy and practice of this Government has been in accordance with the principle stated by John Quincy Adams, then Secretary of State, in a letter to the Spanish minister at this capital, dated April 29, 1823, in these terms: 'With regard to contracts of an individual born in one country with the government of another, most expressly when the individual contracting is domiciliated in the country with whose government he contracts, and formed the contract voluntarily for his own private emolument, and without the privity of the nation under whose protection he had been born, he has no claim whatever to call upon the government of his nativity to espouse his claim, this government having no right to compel that with which he voluntarily contracted to the performance of that contract.

"Such cases have accordingly not been regarded as proper subjects of public intervention, but have, when the merits of the claim appeared clear, been commended to the attention of our diplomatic representatives,. with a view to the exertion, unofficially, of his friendly influence to procure an examination and equitable adjustment by the government con

cerned.'"

You would appear from the papers to have given to Mr. Rainey's case all the attention to which it is entitled.

I am, &c.,

HAMILTON FISH.

No. 164.]

No. 10.

Mr. Wright to Mr. Fish.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,

Rio de Janeiro, March 20, 1871. (Received April 24.) SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your dispatch No. 52, in reference to certain property of Paraguayans, of the Government of the United States, of Mr. Washburn, and Mr. Duffield, alleged to have been seized as booty at the legation of the United States in Asuncion, by soldiers in the service of the empire of Brazil, upon their entrance into that capital. Your instructions upon this subject have my attention, and I shall seek an early occasion for a conference in conformity therewith, with the minister of foreign affairs. Of the result you shall be duly informed.

I have, &c.,

ROBERT CLINTON WRIGHT.

No. 167.]

No. 11.

Mr. Wright to Mr. Fish.

[Extract.]

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,

Rio de Janeiro, March 24, 1871. (Received April 24.) SIR: In continuation of my dispatch No. 161, I have now the honor to inform you that I yesterday had a conference with the minister of foreign affairs in reference to the subject of your dispatch No. 52. preferred to confer with him personally in the first place, rather than to make the matter the subject of a note, and after reading to him an extract from your dispatch, which I had prepared to leave with him, I called his attention to the fact that the question involved was the recognition of a principle, and that as he would naturally desire to consult his colleagues, I should not then press him for any solution. I saw plainly that the whole subject of Paraguay was a sore one; but the minister promised to inform himself, and then give me his views.

I have, &c.,

*

ROBERT CLINTON WRIGHT.

No. 174.]

No. 12.

Mr. Wright to Mr. Fish.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,

Rio de Janeiro, May 22, 1871. (Received June 20.) SIR: I have the honor to refer again to your dispatch No. 52, concerning the invasion of the legation of the United States at Asuncion, upon the occupation of that city by the Brazilian forces.

In my dispatches Nos. 167 and 169 I had the honor to inform you of

the action I had deemed it best to take, under the instructions conveyed to me by your dispatch No. 52, above referred to; that I had placed an extract from your dispatch in the hands of the minister of foreign affairs, and was awaiting a promised solution. Some weeks having passed without my having received any definite reply from the minister, I considered that the time had arrived to present the matter in a more formal shape, and to press the subject a little upon his attention.

I consequently, on the 4th instant, addressed him a note, of which I annex copy, No. 1, but still remain without a reply. Some excuse for this may, perhaps, be found in the meeting of the chambers of which the ministers are members.

I have, &c.,

ROBERT CLINTON WRIGHT.

No. 1.

Mr. Wright to Mr. Correia.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
Rio de Janeiro, May 4, 1871.

The undersigned, acting chargé d'affaires of the United States of America, presents his compliments to his excellency Mr. Manoel Francisco Correia, and has the honor to state that he placed in the hands of his excellency, some weeks since, an extract from a dispatch of the honorable Hamilton Fish, Secretary of State of the United States, dated January 31 last, referring to certain property of Paraguayans, of the Government of the United States, of Mr. John H. Duffield, and of Mr. Washburn, which was left by Mr. Washburn at the legation of the United States, at Asuncion, upon his retiring therefrom.

That legation, as appears from the dispatch referred to, was taken possession of by the Brazilian forces upon their entrance into Asuncion, and the property adverted to is alleged to have been seized as booty by soldiers in the service of the empire.

His excellency will have seen that, while the Government of the United States claims no right to interfere for the recovery of the value of such part of this property as did not belong to itself or to citizens of the United States, it nevertheless appeals to the magnanimity of the imperial government in behalf of those Paraguayans who had deposited their property at the American legation. The Government of the United States goes further, and submits to the government of Brazil whether the position of this Paraguayan property, on deposit at the legation of the United States, was not analogous to that of an enemy's property on board a neutral ship at sea, which is exempt from seizure, under a principle understood to be respected by the Brazilian government. As regards the property of the United States, the property of Mr. John A. Duffield, and of Mr. Washburn, for this the Government of the Unites States will, in any event, expect reparation.

The object of the undersigned in now placing these matters in their present form before his excellency Mr. Manoel Francisco Correia is that he may make it the occasion of requesting that his excellency will have the kindness to inform him what may be the views of the imperial government in regard to the property of the Paraguayans, which was deposited at the United States legation at Asuncion, the claimants for which are believed to be mostly helpless and destitute women. If the government of Brazil, responding to the appeal made so confidently to its magnanimity by the Government of the United States, shall favorably entertain the claims of those unfortunate Paraguayan women, steps will be taken to lay before the imperial government such proof as to the extent of their losses as may be attainable.

The undersigned solicits the early attention of his excellency Mr. Manoel Francisco Correia to this matter, and avails of the occasion to renew to his excellency the assurances of his high respect and distinguished consideration. ROBT. CLINTON WRIGHT.

[blocks in formation]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, May 25, 1871. SIR: Your dispatch No. 169, of the 19th ultimo, reporting an interview with the minister of foreign affairs of Brazil, in regard to the invasion of the legation of the United States at Asuncion, by Brazilian soldiers, has been received. The objection of the minister of foreign affairs to the complaint cannot be regarded as by any means conclusive. The mere fact that some time may have elapsed between the departure of Mr. Washburn and the entrance of the Brazilian forces into Asuncion does not admit a presumption that the legation could have been sacked by Paraguayans.

The obvious probabilities are so much the reverse, that we may deem ourselves warranted in stating that the whole burden of showing that the robbery was committed by Paraguayans must be assumed by Brazil. Of course, if this can be satisfactorily done, the accountability of Brazil in the matter will be at an end.

I am, &c.,

HAMILTON FISH.

No. 14.

Mr. Fish to Mr. Partridge.

No. 3.1 DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, June 10, 1871. SIR: By an instruction of the 7th of October, 1869, your predecessor was authorized to use his good offices unofficially toward bringing to a successful close certain negotiations, which were understood to be on foot at Rio de Janeiro, between Brazil and Bolivia, with reference to the navigation of the Madeira River. We are not informed what progress has been made in those negotiations.

On the 29th of June, 1870, however, Congress passed an act incorporating the National Bolivian Navigation Company. It is understood that one of the purposes of that company is to prosecute navigation by steam on the river adverted to. As the company is believed to be composed mainly of citizens of the United States, this Government is naturally desirous that any obstacles to the success of their enterprise should be removed. Mr. James S. Mackie, one of the directors, has addressed a letter to the Department, requesting that the instruction to Mr. Blow might also be addressed to you.

You will consequently so regard it.

I am, &c.,

HAMILTON FISH.

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »