her construction was made with Fawcett, Preston & Co., of Liverpool, by Bullock, soon after he came to England in the summer of 1861. He was introduced to them by Prioleau, of the firm of Fraser, Trenholm & Co., in order that he might make the contract.1 It was pretended, for form's sake, that she was constructed for the Italian Government; but it was a shallow pretense, and deceived only those who wished to be deceived. The Italian Consul at Liverpool disclaimed all knowledge of her,2 and people at that port who were familiar with ship-building understood from the first that she was being built for the Southern insurgents.3 4 The precise date of the making of the contract cannot be given by the United States. The *range of time within which it [333] must have been made can be determined. Bullock left England in the autumn of 1861, at or about the time that the Bermuda sailed with Huse's first shipment of stores; and returned in March on the Annie Childs, which ran the blockade from Wilmington. The contract was made before he left, and the Florida was constructed during his absence. The contract for the construction of the hull was sub let by Fawcett, Preston & Co., to Miller & Sons, of Liverpool.5 The payments to Miller & Sons were made by Fawcett, Preston & Co.; the payments to Fawcett, Preston & Co. were made by Fraser, Trenholm & Co. * By the 4th of February the Florida was taking in her coal, and appearances indicated that she would soon leave without her armament. She made her trial trip on the 17th of February. By the 1st of March she had taken in her provisions, "a very large quantity, enough for a long cruise," and was "getting as many Southern sailors" as possible. She was registered as an English vessel. Although apparently ready to. sail, she lingered about Liverpool, which gave rise to some speculations in the minds of the people of that town. It was [334] said that she had "injured herself and was undergoing repairs."9 The mystery was solved by the arrival, on the 11th of March, in the Mersey, of the Annie Childs from Wilmington, bringing as passengers Captain Bullock1o and four other insurgent naval officers, who came on board of her "some twenty miles down the river from Wilmington,"11 and who were to take commands on the vessels which were contracted for in Liverpool. As soon as they arrived they went on board the Florida, and were entertained there that evening.12 On the 22d of March the Florida took her final departure from the Mersey,13 with "a crew of fifty-two men, all British, with the exception of three or four, one of whom only was an American."14 She was consigned by Bullock to Heyliger. Another account says that she was consigned to Adderly & Co. 1 Prioleau's evidence, Vol. VI, page 181. 2 Dudley to Seward, Vol. II, page 592. 3 See Mr. Dudley's dispatches of January 24 and 31, and of February 4, 12, 17, 19, 21, 22, 26, and 27, and of March 1, 5, 12, 15, 19, and 22, in the year 1862, Vol. VI, page 214, et seq. 4 Dudley to Seward, March 12, 1862, Vol. VI, page 223. 5 Same to same, February 12, 1862, Vol. VI, page 215. 6 Dudley to Seward, Vol. II, page 592; Vol. VI, page 215. 7 Same to same, Vol. II, page 596; Vol. VI, page 220. 8 Same to same, Vol. II, page 597; Vol. VI, page 221. 9 Dudley to Seward, March 7, 1862, Vol. VI, page 222. 10 Same to same, March 22, 1862, Vol. VI, page 224. 11 Dudley to Adams, Vol. II, page 601. 12 Vol. II, page 601. 13 Vol. II, page 604. 14 Customs Report, Vol. II, page 605; Vol. VI, page 231. Simultaneously with these proceedings, shipments were being made at Hartlepool, on the eastern coast of England, of cannon, rifles, shot, shells, &c., intended for the Florida. They were sent from Liverpool to Hartlepool by rail, and there put on board the steamer Bahama for Nassau. * [335] It was a matter of public notoriety that this was going on.1 All the facts about the Florida, and about the hostile expedition it was proposed to make against the United States, were open and notorious at Liverpool. Mr. Dudley's correspondence, already cited, was full of it. The means of intelligence were as accessible to British authorities as to the consular officers of the United States. Nevertheless, it was esteemed to be the duty of the officers of the United States to lay what had come to their knowledge before Her Majesty's Government. Mr. Dudley, the Consul at Liverpool, wrote to Mr. Adams that he had information from many different sources as to the Oreto, "all of which goes to show that she is intended for the Southern Confederacy." Mr. Adams transmitted the intelligence to Earl Russell, and said that he "entertained little doubt that the intention was precisely that indicated in the letter of the Consul, the carrying on war against the United States." * * He added, "Should further evidence to sustain the allegations respecting the Oreto be held necessary to effect the object of securing the interposition of Her Majesty's Government, I will make an effort to procure it in a more formal manner.? |336] The United States ask the Tribunal to observe *that, notwithstanding this offer, no objection was taken as to the form of the information submitted by Mr. Adams, nor was he asked by Earl Russell for further particulars. Lord Russell, however, in reply, transmitted to Mr. Adams a report of the British Commssioners of Customs, in which it was stated that the Oreto was a vessel of war, "pierced for four guns;" that she was "built by Miller & Sons for Fawcett, Preston & Co.," and was "intended for the use of Messrs. Thomas Brothers, of Palermo;" that she "had been handed over to Messrs. Fawcett & Preston; that Miller & Son stated their belief that the destination was Palermo;" and that "the examiners had every reason to believe that the vessel was destined for the Italian Government." 994 Further representations being made by Mr. Adams, the same officers subsequently reported that, having received directions "to inquire into the further allegations made in regard to the Oreto," they found "that the vessel in question was registered on the 3d of March in the name of John Henry Thomas, of Liverpool, as sole owner; that she cleared on the following day for Palermo and Jamaica, in ballast, but did not sail until the 22d, * * * having a crew of fifty-two men, all Britich, [337] with the exception of *three or four, one of whom only was an American."5 The Tribunal of Arbitration will observe that even from the reports of these British officers it is established that the Florida was a vessel of war, "pierced for four guns;" and also that notwithstanding their alleged belief that she was intended for the King of Italy, she was allowed to clear for Jamaica in ballast. Attention is also invited to the easy credulity of these officials, who, to the first charges of Mr. Adams, replied by putting forward the "belief" of the builders as to the destination 1 See Mr. Dudley's dispatches of March 7, 12, and 15, Vols. II and VI. 2 Dudley to Adams, Vol. II, page 594; Vol. VI, page 216. 3 Adams to Russell, Vol. II, page 593; Vol. VI, page 216. 4 Vol. II, pages 595, 96; Vol. VI, page 218. 5 Vol. II, page 605; Vol. VI, page 231. of the vessel, and who met his subsequent complaints by extracting from the custom-house records the false clearance which Bullock, and Frazer, Trenholm & Co., had caused to be entered there. Such an examination and such a report can scarcely be regarded as the exercise of the "duė diligence" called for by the rules of the Treaty of Washington. The Florida arrived at Nassau on the 28th of April, and was taken in charge by Heyliger, who was then a well-known and recognized insurgent agent. The Bahama arrived a few days later at the same port by preconcerted arrangement. The two branches of the hostile expedition, which had left Great Britain in detachments, were thus *united in British waters. They were united in their conception [338] in the contracts with Fawcett, Preston & Co. They were temporarily separated by the shipment of a portion of the ammunition and stores by rail to Hartlepool, and thence by the Bahama. They were now again united, and the vessels went together to Cochrane's Anchorage, a place about nine miles from the harbor of Nassau, not included in the port limits. While there. Captain Hickley, of Her Majesty's ship Greyhound, thought it his duty to make a careful examination of the vessel, and he reported her condition to the Governor. In a remarkable certificate, signed by himself, and by the officers of the Greyhound; dated June 13, 1862, it is stated that he "asked the Captain of the Oreto whether the Oreto had left Liverpool in all respects as she was then; his answer was yes; in all respects." As, therefore, no changes had been made in her after leaving Liverpool, Captain Hickley's report may be taken to be the official evidence of a British expert as to her character, at the time of Mr. Adams's complaints, and of the customs examinations. He says, "I then procceded to examine the vessel, and found her in every respect fitted as a war vessel, precisely the same as vessels of a similar class in Her Majesty's Navy. She has a magazine and light- [339] rooms forward, handing-rooms and handing scuttles for powder as in war vessels; shell-rooms aft, fitted as in men-of-war; a regular lower deck with hammock-hooks, mess-shelves, &c., &c., as in our own war vessels, her cabin accommodations and fittings generally being those as fitted in vessels of her own class in the Navy. She is a vessel * capable of carrying guns; she could carry four broadside-guns forward, four broadside-guns aft, and two pivot-guns amidships. Her ports are fitted to ship and unship; port-bars cut through on the upper part to unship also. The construction of her ports, I consider, are peculiar to vessels of war. I saw shot-boxes all round her upper deck, calculated to receive Armstrong shot, or shot similar. She had breeching bolts and shackles, and side-tackle bolts. Magazine, shell-rooms, and lightrooms are entirely at variance with the fittings of a merchant-ship. She had no accommodation whatever for the stowage of cargo; only stowage for provisions and stores. She was in all respects fitted as a vessel of war of her class in Her Majesty's Navy. The Oreto, as she now stands, could, in my professional opinion, with her crew, guns, arms, and ammunition, going out with another vessel alongside of her, be equipped in twenty four hours for battle."2 * * * *The judge before whom the case was tried, commenting on this [340] evidence, said: "Captain Hickley's evidence as to the construction and fittings of the vessel I should consider conclusive even had there been no other; but that construction and those fittings were made, not here, but in England."3 1 Vol. VI, page 246. 2 Vol. VI, pages 264 and 266. 3 Vol. V, page 513. This was, therefore, the condition of the Florida when she left Liverpool. That she was then "intended to cruise and carry on war" against the United States there can be no reasonable doubt; that she was "fitted out" and "equipped" within the jurisdiction of Great Britain, with all the fittings and equipments necessary to enable her to carry on such war, is equally clear from Captain Hickley's professional statement. "Arming" alone was necessary to make her ready for battle. By the rules of the Treaty of Washington either the "fitting out" or the "equipping" constitute an offense without the "arming." That Great Britain had reasonable ground to believe that the fitting out and the equipping had been done within its jurisdiction, with intent that she should carry on such a war, the United States claim to have substan tiated. That she had been specially adapted within British jurisdiction, to wit, at Liverpool, to warlike use, will scarcely be questioned [341] after the positive testimony of Captain Hickley. That her de parture from the jurisdiction of Great Britain might have been prevented after the information furnished by Mr. Adams would seem to be beyond doubt. And that a neglect to prevent such departure was a failure to use the "due diligence" called for by the second clause of the first rule of the Treaty obviously follows the last conclusion. If these several statements are well founded, Great Britain, by permitting the construction of the Florida, at Liverpool, under the circumstances, and by consenting to her departure from that port, violated its duty as a neutral Government toward the United States. The United States Consul, soon after the arrival of the Oreto at Nassau, called the attention of the Governor to her well-known character.1 The Governor declined to interfere, and with an easy credulity accepted the statements of the insurgent agents that the vessel was not and would not be armed,2 and he made no further inquiries. She was then permitted to remain at Cochrane's Anchorage. A second request to inquire into her character was made on the 4th of June, and refused.3 On the 7th of June both the Oreto and the Bahama were arrested [342] and brought up from *Cochrane's Anchorage into the harbor of Nassau. On the 8th the mail steamer Melita arrived from England, with Captain Raphael Semmes and his officers from the Sumter as passengers. They "became lions at once.” The Oreto was immediately released. The Consul reported this fact to his Government, and said that "the character of the vessel had become the theme of general conversation and remark among all classes of the citizens of Nassau for weeks." On the same day Captain Hickley, whose professional eye had detected the purpose of the vessel from the beginning, signed with his officers the certificate quoted above. The Consul, finding that reenwed representations to the Governors were met by an answer that the agents of the Oreto assured him of their intention to clear in ballast for Havana, and that he had given his assent to it," applied to Captain Hickley, of the Greyhound, and laid before him the evidence which had already been laid before the civil authorities. He answered by sending a file of marines on board. the Oreto and taking her into custody. 8 1 Consul Whiting to Governor Bayley, May 9, 1862, Vol. VI, page 235. 2 Nesbitt to Whiting, May 13, 1862, Vol. VI, page 236. 3 Vol. VI, pages 238, 239. 4 Whiting to Seward, June 19, 1862, Vol. VI, page 241. The civil authorities at Nassau were all actively *friendly to [343] the insurgents. With the Cousul of the United States they had only the formal relations made necessary by his official position. With the insurgents it was quite different. We have already seen how Heyliger thought they regarded him. Maffitt, Semmes, and many other insurgent officers were there, and were often thrown in contact with the Government officials. Adderley, the correspondent of Fraser, Trenholm & Co., and the mercantile agent of the insurgents, was one of the leading merchants of the colony. Harris, his partner, was a member of the Council, and was in intimate social relations with all the authorities. The principal law officer of the colony, who would have charge of any prosecution that might be instituted against the Oreto and the cross-examination of the witnesses summoned in her favor, was the counsel of Adderley. All these circumstances, combined with the open partiality of the colonial authorities for the cause of the South, threw the insurgent agents and officers at that critical moment into intimate relations with those local authorities.1 If it had been predetermined that the Oreto should be released by going through the form of a trial under the Foreign Enlistment Act,2 the steps could not have been better directed for that pur*pose. The trial commenced on the 4th of July, 1862.3 The [344] prosecution was conducted by a gentleman who was at once Crown Counsel, Advocate General, and confidential counsel of Adderley & Co. and who, in a speech made in a trial in another court, which took place after the Oreto was libeled and before the decree was rendered, said that the Union of the United States was "a myth, a Yankee fiction of the past, now fully exploded." The temper with which he would manage the prosecution of the Oreto may be imagined from this speech. He hurried on the trial before evidence could be obtained from Liverpool. He conducted his cross-examinations so as to suppress evidence unfavorable to the Oreto, when it could be done. He neglected to summon witnesses who must have been within his control, who could have shown conclusively that the Oreto was built for the insurgents, and was to be converted into a man-of-war.5 Maffitt knew it, but was not called. Heyliger knew it, but was not called. Adderley *knew it, but he was not called. Evans and Chapman were both [345] there-officers in the insurgents' navy, under the direction of Maffitt, drawing pay from him as an officer in that navy, and giving receipts as such. They knew all about it, but were not called. Harris,8 a member of the firm of Adderley & Co., was called, but his cross-examination was so conducted as to bring out nothing damaging to the vessel." He said, for instance, that the Oreto was consigned to him by 1 1 Kirkpatrick to Seward, Vol. VI, page 327. 2 This seemingly harsh statement is fully borne out by the report of the trial. See Vol. V, page 509. 3 Governor Bayley to Captain Hickley, June, 1862. Whiting to Seward, August 1, 1862, Vol. VI, page 261. 5. If the Tribunal will read the summary of this case in the opinion of the court, which may be found at page 509 of Vol. V, it will be found that this statement is not too strong. "The Oreto had in fact been ordered by Bullock, as agent of the Confederate Government, from one ship-building firm, as the Alabama had been ordered by him from another; and Captain Maffitt, the officer appointed to command her; was all this while at Nassau, waiting the result of the trial.-Bernard's Neutrality of Great Britain, page 351. 7 See Evans and Chapman's vouchers, Nassau, July 28, Vol. VI, page 330. 8 See Consul Kirkpatrick's dispatch to Mr. Seward, July 7, 1865, as to the standing of these men, Vol. VI, page 327. 9 Vol. V, page 517. |