1,000,000 dollars. Part of the Custom-house storerooms were burned in this fire the French lost perhaps 15,000,000 dollars. The Intendencia, the Exchange, and railroad station were injured, but are left standing. It is stated that the property of British subjects amounts to 180,000,000 dollars in Valparaiso. The French interest is much less, but much more than the American. The loss of life is given at one man and one woman killed, and four soldiers wounded, on the Chilian side. The fire at first threatened to take great proportions, but by the activity of the fire companies of Santiago and Valparaiso the fire was put out in eighteen hours. They worked all night heroically. Of the 2000 balls and shells thrown by the enemy only 250 did execution. Their calibre was 32 or 36 and 68 lbs. The Peruvians were wild with excitement over the news of the bombardment of Valparaiso. Great fears were entertained for the safety of foreigners, and especially of Spaniards, residing in Lima. So terrible was the excitement of the lower classes, that they threatened an indiscriminate massacre of Europeans, and did not even spare Americans in their denunciations. The feeling was somewhat alleviated by the arrest and imprisonment of all the Spaniards in the city. Yet, fearing a repetition of the terrible scenes following the overthrow of Pezet, the authorities used every precaution to prevent it, and the arrest of the Spaniards removed the pretext for an outbreak. At Callao all was confusion. The warehouses were being relieved of their contents; merchants were sending their goods to Lima; and, in fact, every one seemed to be possessed with the insane fear that Callao would be the next place of attack. But the chances are that Nunez will turn his attention towards easier and less dangerous work before he approaches that city. If they possess the requisite bravery, the Peruvians have the means of returning hard knocks for those received. Admiral Pearson had arrived at Callao, but immediately sailed in the Suwanee for Valparaiso.

The following protest of the consular corps in Valparaiso was sent to Admiral Nunez through the American consul :

Valparaiso, March 27. The undersigned, consuls resident in Valparaiso, have informed themselves of the note which, under date of this day, the chief of her Catholic Majesty's squadron blockading this port has been pleased to address to the consul-general of Portugal, enclosing a copy of the manifesto transmitted by said chief to the diplomatic corps resident in Chili. Informed of its contents, we cannot otherwise than manifest to your excellency with what deep regret we have seen that your excellency has adopted the resolution of proceeding to bombard Valparaiso and any other part of Chili, giving only the period of four days to the foreign residents in which to place their lives and property in safety. It is not our intention to enter into a discussion of the motives which your excellency adduces to justify the adoption of so extreme a measure, but it is our duty to make every effort to cause you to desist from an act which must be the cause of ruin to the interests of thousands of our constituents herein resident. International law does not permit the bombardment of undefended places, and the destruction of ports like this. It is condemned in itself; but in this particular case it will be more so, since Spain upon all occasions has solemnly declared in the present war that she will always respect neutral property, and will endeavour to avoid injuries and damages of the war to neutrals. Under the shield of this promise the foreigners resident in this city have continued in their peaceful avocations, confident that Spain would faithfully comply with such solemn pledges. The port of Valparaiso, your excellency well knows, represents throughout its entire extent valuable neutral interests, and its destruction would fall almost exclusively upon subjects of powers friendly to Spain, while the country itself will scarcely feel the effects of so violent an act. The bombardment of Valparaiso may be rather considered as an act of

hostility against neutral residents, since its effects will be felt by them alone. History will certainly not present in its annals any event which can rival in horror the picture which will be presented by the bombardment of this city. It will be an act of vengeance so terrible that the civilised world will shudder with horror in contemplating it, and the reprobation of the entire world will fall upon the Power which may have carried it out. The burning and destruction of Valparaiso will be the certain ruin and destruction of a flourishing city; but be your excellency well persuaded that it will also be an eternal blot upon Spain. The city of Valparaiso will rise from her ashes, but never will the stain be wiped away which sullies the flag of Spain if your excellency persists in carrying out so cruel an attempt. If, notwithstanding all, your excellency carries it out, we shall find ourselves under the inevitable necessity of protesting in the most solemn manner, as in effect we do now protest, against such a proceeding, as against the interests of our constituents, reserving to our governments the right to reclaim from the government of her Catholic Majesty the enormous injuries which their citizens will suffer. We protest, in the face of the civilised world, against the consummation of an act which is in contradiction with the civilisation of the age.

This was signed by the consuls of Portugal, Prussia, Denmark, United States, Hanover, Austria, Bremen and of Oldenburg, Switzerland, Colombia, Brazil, Italy, Holland, Guatemala, Sweden and Norway, Hamburg, Salvador, and the Sandwich Islands. The consuls of England, France, and the Argentine Republic united in another protest to Admiral Nunez, reiterating the sentiments expressed in the above. The statements made in Parliament by the Duke of Somerset and Mr. Layard show that if the withdrawal of Admiral Denman from before Valparaiso when that city was threatened with bombardment was a fault, the party to be blamed is the British government. The policy of neutrality between Spain and Chili which ministers deliberately adopted is a fair subject of discussion; but it is anything but fair to censure a high-minded officer for a strict and intelligent obedience to the orders which he had received. A naval officer on a foreign station who is suddenly called upon to act in doubtful and unforeseen circumstances ought to be able to reckon on a generous and liberal appreciation of his conduct on the part of his countrymen; but he would deserve the strongest censure who should disregard his instructions in the very case for which they were intended to provide. Trite and obvious as is this maxim, it is ignored by some of our countrymen, who, it seems, would have been glad to hear that Admiral Denman had taken the liberty of setting aside his instructions, and of acting upon his own view of what the honour and interests of his country required. If our officers should ever come to think thus of their duty, and never suffer any wrong to be done which they had the physical means of preventing, we should have almost as many foreign policies as admirals on foreign stations, and should never know when we were at peace. We see a picture of the officer who is ready to "take all the responsibility" of his action in the report of Commodore Rogers, the American naval commander at Valparaiso, to his official superior. This officer has been much praised in England, as well as by some of our countrymen at Valparaiso, at the expense of Admiral Denman. It is on record that Commodore Rogers was ordered by his

government to observe a strict neutrality; but he states in his letter that he was ready to sink the Spanish flagship, in order to prevent the bombardment of Valparaiso, if Admiral Denman would co-operate with him. We may safely presume he would not have done so without the consent of General Kilpatrick, the United States minister to Chili, who, however, does not seem to have contemplated taking any part beyond protesting against the bombardment. Admiral Denman, in his official report, negatives the assertion that he declined the co-operation of Commodore Rogers. and, with all respect to the latter officer, we prefer to rely on the accuracy of our own countryman. But there is no reason why Commodore Rogers should not draw his own portrait, and here it is:

In offering to go beyond the letter of my instructions to observe a strict neutrality, I acted upon the supposition that neutrality among the nations did not preclude all well-directed efforts to keep the peace among them; that as a peaceable citizen is not obliged to stand by inert while another is suffering from the unlawful violence of a third person, but may justly interfere with force to prevent an infraction of the laws-a murder, for example-so a nation, witnessing the like disturbance among her sister nations, need not rest absolutely impassive, but with sincere neutrality might interfere with force if necessary to keep the operation of belligerents at least within the law for the protection of neutral persons and neutral property. I considered that Spain had lost her colonies under a stringent colonial policy and religious intolerance. In the course of time, encouraged by the more liberal laws of a state of freedom, foreigners had been induced to settle in the country, and to embark their capital in commerce and other industrial pursuits. Towns had sprung up along the coast, railroads had been built, and other material interests developed. Ideas as well as manufactures had been introduced, the wealth and intelligence meanwhile remaining with the foreigners. At last Chili had reached the goal in human progress, marked by the establishment of religious toleration; and Spain, on a point of etiquette rather than from any great political end, as I believe, proposes to burn the property and destroy the towns along the sea-coasts as far as she sees fit. Is it right that she should thus exercise her power of destruction, unrestrained, along the shores of this continent? The mode of warfare which Spain proposes is terrible; but it seems to me such as will provoke private animosity rather than coerce national will, and therefore that it is not directed to its legitimate end, and consequently that such warfare might be resisted.

It is reported that when Talleyrand was ambassador at this court a lady having asked him the meaning of non-intervention, he replied, "Madame, non-intervention est un mot diplomatique et enigmatique, qui signifie à peu près la même chose qu' intervention;" and Commodore Rogers appears to have been of the Frenchman's opinion. Neutrality in his view was consistent with deciding that one of the belligerents was in the wrong, and thereupon attacking him. If a nation professing neutrality may interfere by force, and sink, burn, and destroy the ships of one of the parties to a war-what more remains to be done after a declaration of hostilities? These political admirals and generals who know better than the President, or the Secretary of State, or the Senate what the country ought to do, and are ready to do it, trusting to the people to "endorse" their action-have in times past

been one of the greatest curses of the United States, and we must protest against any attempt to set them up as examples for our officers.

For the sake of justice it should be clearly understood that in no case can the inactivity of the British fleet, when outrages such as the bombardment of Valparaiso are perpetrated, in the least degree lessen the responsibility of the perpetrators. It is not to be supposed that Great Britain sanctions every wrongful act which she could, but does not, prevent. Independent natious must answer for their own deeds and take all their consequences. The whole and undivided infamy of this business rests upon the government of Spain. At the same time we believe that the English public is getting to think that something ought to be done by the combined action of the great maritime Powers to put an end to these repeated and unwarrantable Spanish expeditions, which are becoming a general nuisance.-Daily News.

Nautical Notices.

[Communications for the Editor of the Nautical Magazine to be addressed to him at 31, Poultry.]

F. Fixed. F. Fixed and Flashing. R. Revolving. I. Intermitting. Est. Established.

(a.) 22.-The vessel is painted red with the words Utgrunden in large white letters on her sides, has two masts, carries a red ball at each mast-head, and lies about four cables S.W. of the southern spit of Utgrunden. A bell is Bounded in foggy weather.

She will be placed in her position every year as soon as all danger from ice has ceased, and will be removed when the state of the season no longer admits of her remaining.

(b.) 24.-The light is a fixed white light, varied every minute by a red flash. It is elevated 41 feet above the mean level of the sea, and in clear

weather should be seen at a distance of 10 miles.

At the same time, the fixed red provisional light, at the salient angle of the outer jetty of the Napoleon basin, would be discontinued.

(c.) 25.-In entering the roadstead of Banjoewangie, steer in with the light bearing West, and it will lead clear of all dangers.

HARBOUR OF ST. THOMAS,- Virgin Islands.

May 1st, 1866.

The Kior Rock has been scraped down to twenty-four feet below the surface.

W. W. KIDDLE, Commander,
W. I. & Pacific s.s. "West Indian.”

PROVIDENCIAS ISLAND,-Caicos.

May 6th, 1866.

The reported reef marked in sheet 2 of the West Indies off the North point of the island, exists. It was breaking heavily at a considerable distance from the shore when I passed. The wreck of a large ship, with lower masts gone, was on the inside part.

W. W. KIDdle.

SHOAL NEAR CAPE ST. JOHN,-West Coast of Africa.

H.M.S. Espoir, Commdr. M. S. L. Peile, grounded, December, 1865, on a shoal near Cape St. John, northward of the River Gaboon, on which there is about 11 feet water; it lies N.N.E.E., distant four miles from Cape St. John, two miles seaward of a small green island, and three miles from the shore. There are 4, 5, and 7 fathoms water N.N.W. of the shoal. Vessels passing the Cape should give the small green island a berth of 3 or 4 miles, and keep the lead going.

ROCKS AT ENTRANCE TO PORT PHILLIP,-Australia, South Coast.

With reference to notices to mariners, Nos. 13 and 16, dated 17th of February, 1863, and the 12th of December, 1864, relative to the discovery of rocks, and the uneven depth, at the entrance of Port Phillip, an iron vessel, drawing over 21 feet, recently entering the port during a fresh breeze, struck on a rock and passed over it. Several additional rocks, some of which with as little as 24 feet water on them, have been found in the well-known race locally termed the Rip. As unknown rocky pinnacles may yet be found, mariners are hereby warned accordingly.