condition annexed to the declaration, which provided that the parties acceding to it should enter into no negotiation for any modifications of the law of maritime war with nations which should not contain the four points contained in the Paris declaration, seemed inconsistent with a proper regard to the national sovereignty of the United States. "On the 29th of July, 1856, Mr. Mason, then minister of the United States at Paris, was instructed by the President to propose to the Government of France to enter into an arrangement for its adherence, with the United States, to the four principles of the Declaration of the Congress of Paris, provided the first of them should be amended as specified in Mr. Marcy's note to the Count de Sartiges on the 28th of July, 1856. Mr. Mason accordingly brought the subject to the notice of the Imperial Government of France, which was disposed to entertain the matter favorably, but which failed to communicate its decision on the subject to him. Similar instructions regarding the matter were addressed by this Department to Mr. Dallas, our minister at London, on the 31st day of January, 1857; but the proposition above referred to had not been directly presented to the British Government by him when the administration of this Government by Franklin Pierce, during whose term these proceedings occurred, came to an end, on the 3d of March, 1857, and was succeeded by that of James Buchanan, who directed the negotiations to be arrested for the purpose of enabling him to examine the questions involved, and they have ever since remained in that state of suspension. "The President of the United States has now taken the subject into consideration, and he is prepared to communicate his views upon it, with a disposition to bring the negotiation to a speedy and satisfactory conclusion. "For that purpose you are hereby instructed to seek an early opportunity to call the attention of Her Majesty's Government to the subject, and to ascertain whether it is disposed to enter into negotiations for the accession of the Government of the United States to the Declaration of the Paris Congress, with the conditions annexed by that body to the same; and if you shall find that Government so disposed, you will then enter into a convention to that effect, substantially in the form of a project for that purpose herewith transmitted to you; the convention to take effect from the time when the due ratifications of the same shall have been exchanged. It is presumed that you will need no special explanation of the sentiments of the President on this subject for the purpose of conducting the necessary conferences with the Government to which you are accredited. Its assent is expected on the ground that the proposition is accepted at its suggestion, and in the form it has preferred. For your own information it will be sufficient to say that the President adheres to the opinion expressed by my predecessor, Mr. Marcy, that it would be eminently desirable for the good of all nations that the property and effects of private individuals, not contraband, should be exempt from seizure and confiscation by national vessels in maritime war. If the time and circumstances were propitious to a prosecution of the negotiation with that object in view, he would direct that it should be assiduously pursued. But the right season seems to have passed, at least for the present. Europe seems once more on the verge of quite general wars. On the other hand, a portion of the American people have raised the standard of insurrection, and proclaimed a provisional government, and, through their organs, have taken the bad resolution to invite privateers to prey upon the peaceful commerce of the United States. "Prudence and humanity combine in persuading the President, under the circumstances, that it is wise to secure the lesser good offered by the Paris Congress, without waiting indefinitely in hope to obtain the greater one offered to the maritime nations by the President of the United States." Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Adams, min. to England, Circular, The same circular, mutatis mutandis, was sent to the American minis- "ARTICLE I. "1. Privateering is and remains abolished. 2. The neutral flag covers enemy's goods, with the exception of contraband of war. 3. Neutral goods, with the exception of contraband of war, are not liable to capture under enemy's flag. 4. Blockades in order to be binding, must be effective; that is to say, maintained by a force sufficient really to prevent access to the coast of the enemy. "ARTICLE II. "The present convention shall be ratified by the President of the United States of America, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and by Her Majesty the Queen of Great Britain and Ireland, and the ratifications shall be exchanged at Washington, within the space of six months from the signature, or sooner if possible. In faith whereof, the respective plenipotentiaries have signed the present convention in duplicate, and have thereto affixed their seals. "Done at London, the day of, in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-one (1861).” . "We should now "There is no reservation or difficulty about their application [i. e., the application of the rules of the Declaration of Paris] in the present case. We hold all the citizens of the United States, loyal or disloyal, alike included by the law of nations and treaties; and we hold ourselves bound by the same obligations to see, so far as may be in our power, that all our citizens, whether maintaining this Government or engaged in overthrowing it, respect those rights in favor of France and of every other friendly nation. In any case, not only shall we allow no privateer or national vessel to violate the rights of friendly nations as I have thus described them, but we shall also employ all our naval force to prevent the insurgents from violating them just as much as we do to prevent them from violating the laws of our own country." Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Dayton, min. to France, No. 19, June 17, 1861, Dip. Cor. 1861, 208, 211-212. SO. "You seem to us to have adopted the idea that the insurgents are necessarily a belligerent power because the British and French Governments have chosen in some of their public papers to say they are Our view is on the contrary. . . . We do not admit, and we shall never admit, even the fundamental statement you assume, namely, that Great Britain and France have recognized the insurgents as a belligerent party. True, you say that they have so declared. We reply: Yes, but they have not declared so to us. You may rejoin: Their public declaration concludes the fact. We nevertheless reply: It must be not their declarations, but their action that shall conclude the fact. That action does not yet appear, and we trust, for the sake of harmony with them and peace throughout the world, that it will not happen." (Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Dayton, No. 24, "strictly confidential," July 1, 1861, MS. Inst. France, XVI. 16.) Mr. Dayton, American minister at Paris, acting upon the circular instruction of April 24, 1861, brought the views therein expressed to the attention of Mr. Thouvenel, minister of foreign affairs of France, in a personal interview. Some correspondence then took place, and on the 31st of May Mr. Dayton, in view of the fact that, since the circular was written, the belligerency of the Confederate States had been acknowledged by England and France, proposed the accession of the United States to the Declaration of Paris, not pure and simple, but with the Marcy amendment. Writing to Mr. Dayton on July 6, 1861, Mr. Seward observed that what was directed to be proposed to France in the circular of April 24 was "equally and simultaneously proposed to every other maritime power." Understanding, said Mr. Seward, that an attempt to obtain the acceptance of the Marcy amendment "would require a negotiation not merely with France alone, but with all the other original parties of the Congress of Paris, and every government that has since acceded to the declaration," as well as the unanimous consent of all those powers, the United States had decided to offer to adhere to the declaration, pure and simple. "In this way," declared Mr. Seward, "we expected to remove every cause that any foreign power could have for the recognition of the insurgents as a belligerent power." Continuing, Mr. Seward said: "We shall not acquiesce in any declaration of the Government of France that assumes that this Government it not now, as it always has been, exclusive sovereign, for war as well as for peace, within the States and Territories of the Federal Union, and over all citizens, the disloyal and loyal all alike. We treat in that character, which is our legal character, or we do not treat at all, and we in no way consent to compromise that character in the least degree; we do not even suffer this character to become the subject of discussion. Good faith and honor, as well as the same expediency which prompted the proffer of our accession to the Declaration of Paris, pure and simple, in the first instance, now require us to adhere to that proposition and abide by it; and we do adhere to it, not, however, as a divided, but as an undivided nation. The proposition is tendered to France not as a neutral but as a friend, and the agreement is to be obligatory upon the United States and France and all their legal dependencies just alike. "The case was peculiar, and in the aspect in which it presented itself to you portentous. We were content that you might risk the experiment, so, however, that you should not bring any responsibility for delay upon this Government. But you now see that by incorporating the Marcy amendment in your proposition, you have encountered the very difficulty which was at first foreseen by us. The following nations are parties to the Declaration of Paris, namely: Baden Bavaria, Belgium, Bremen, Brazils, Duchy of Brunswick, Chili, the Argentine Confederation, the Germanic Confederation, Denmark, the Two Sicilies, the Republic of the Equator, the Roman States, Greece, Guatemala, Hayti, Hamburg, Hanover, the two Hesses, Lübeck, Mecklenburgh Strelitz, Mecklenburgh Schwerin, Nassau, Oldenburgh, Parma, Holland, Peru, Portugal, Saxony, Saxe Altenburgh, Saxe a I. e., the Netherlands. Coburg Gotha, Saxe Meiningen, Saxe Weimar, Sweden, Switzerland, Tuscany, Wurtemberg, Anhault Dessau,' Modena, New Granada, and Uruguay.c "The great exigency in our affairs will have passed away-for preservation or destruction of the American Union-before we could bring all these nations to unanimity on the subject, as you have submitted it to Mr. Thouvenel. It is a time not for propagandism, but for energetic acting to arrest the worst of all national calamities. We therefore expect you now to renew the proposition in the form originally prescribed. But in doing this you will neither unnecessarily raise a question about the character in which this Government acts (being exclusive sovereign), nor, on the other hand, in any way compromise that character in any degree. Whenever such a question occurs to hinder you, let it come up from the other party in the negotiation. It will be time then to stop and wait for such further instructions as the new exigency may require. "One word more. You will, in any case, avow our preference for the proposition with the Marcy amendment incorporated, and will assure the Government of France that whenever there shall be any hope for the adoption of that beneficent feature by the necessary parties, as a principle of the law of nations, we shall be ready not only to agree to it, but even to propose it, and to lead in the necessary negotiations. "This paper is, in one view, a conversation merely between yourself and us. It is not to be made public. On the other hand, we confide in your discretion to make such explanations as will relieve yourself of embarrassments, and this Government of any suspicion of inconsistency or indirection in its intercourse with the enlightened and friendly Government of France." Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Dayton, min. to France, No. 27, July 6, 1861, Dip. Cor. 1861, 215. See Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward, No. 12, June 22, 1861, Dip. Cor. 1861, 213. It may be observed, however, that in the place here cited only brief extracts from Mr. Dayton's dispatch are printed, insufficient to disclose the action he had taken. It appears by a note of Mr. Dayton to the minister of foreign affairs of Aug. 2, 1861, that he had on the 31st of May proposed the accession of the United States with the Marcy amendment. (Dip. Cor. 1861, 223.) See, also, Mr. Dayton to Mr. Seward, No. 15, July 5, 1861, Dip Cor. 1861, 218. On August 2, 1861, Mr. Dayton, who had then received Mr. Seward's No. 27, of July 6, 1861, wrote to the French minister of a I. e., Sweden and Norawy. I. e., Anhalt-Dessau-Coethen. c Frankfort should be added to the list. See supra, p. 562. |