Mr. Walker to Mr. Burnley. BRITISH CONSULATE, Charleston, March 7, 1865. SIR: I have the honor to submit for your consideration some remarks in reference to the requirements of an oath of allegiance to the United States government from her Majesty's subjects before permiting them to pursue any business whereby they may obtain a livelihood. This practice affects all; no exceptions whatever are allowed; employment is even denied to the common laborer, unless he can produce a certificate that he has taken the oath. Permission, however, will be given to all to leave the port, but I humbly beg of you to consider how very inadequate the remedy is to the evil complained of, by presenting to your notice how very many there necessarily must be whose circumstances will not admit of their removing themselves. From the registration that has been made at this consulate during the last fortnight under the circumstances mentioned in my former despatch No. 3, I am enabled to form an estimate of the number of British subjects now remaining in the city. Up to this time 352 names have been registered, and of these 188 are laborers and draymen, and many of the others are persons without the command of means in ordinary times, and at present quite destitute. I enclose herewith an analysis of the register for the purpose of showing the occupations, &c., of several persons registered, making due allowance for wives and children. I imagine this British population may number as many as 1,500. J. H. BURNLEY, Esq., &c., &c., &c., at Washington, &c. H. P. WALKER. Analysis of register showing the occupations, &c., of the British subjects at Charleston. John Fitzgerald maketh oath and saith, that he is a native of Ireland; that he arrived in the United States about twelve years ago; that he is a mariner, and has never become a citizen of the United States, nor in any way failed in the performance of his duty as a British subject; that he has a wife and two children, and has supported himself of late by running a small boat from Charleston to Mount Pleasant, carrying passengers. Deponent saith, he applied at the provost marshal's office on this morning (3d of March) for a permit to employ himself and boat in oystering and fishing; that he was then directed to apply to Colonel Woodford for a license; that he proceeded to Colonel Woodford's headquarters, and showed to him his consular certificate of nationality, and made a request for a license. Colonel Woodford then asked deponent if he had been to the citadel to take the oath of allegiance. Deponent said he had not. Colonel Woodford then said that no licenses could be granted to those who did not take the oath of allegiance. Sworn to before me this 3d March, 1865. his JOHN FITZGERALD. mark. H. P. WALKER, H. M. Acting Consul. Deposition of William F. Paddon. BRITISH CONSULATE, City of Charleston : William F. Paddon, of 7 Marion street, and 447 King street, Charleston, gas-fitter, maketh oath and saith as follows: I have been engaged for two or three years past in salt-boiling, in connexion with which I have employed two vessels (wood-floats) in bringing to the city from landings up the river, cord-wood; that at the time of the occupation of the city by the forces of the United States, I had not less than twelve cords of pine wood stacked in Harrison's and Hamep's wood-yards on Gadsden's Green. On the 21st ultimo it was taken possession of by the United States troops and a guard put over it. On the 24th I was allowed by Major Willoughby, provost marshal, to whom I applied for the restoration of it, one load (one-quarter of a cord) for my own family use. On Saturday, the 4th of March, I again applied to him for my wood, and also for a pass for a servant to go up the river for one of my wood-boats detained there. Major Willoughby told me first to go to Captain Appleton, provost marshal general, and get a pass, as the boat was beyond the limits of the city. On applying to Captain Appleton, I was told to go to Colonel Woodford, the commandant of the city, for a license. On applying at Colonel Woodford's office, his adjutant, Captain Jenks, referred me to Lieutenant Haviland, the post treasurer. On applying to him he told me he could not give me any license unless I took the oath of allegiance. I made known that I was a British subject, and showed him the papers I had received from the British consulate. He told me his orders were to give no licenses for any business to any parties who did not take the oath of allegiance to the government of the United States. I then went to Captain Jenks, and he said such were the orders that had been received. He permitted me to see Colonel Woodford, and I asked him whether it was actually necessary to take the oath of allegiance. He said he understood my position exactly; he said, if Charleston was to be attacked would I take up arms? I said I would not. And he told me that he did not want any one to do business in Charleston that would not fight for it, and no one could do business that could not take the oath and fight for the place. On leaving he said he would be delighted to give us passes to leave the country. Mr. George Dowie and Mr. W. McComb, also British subjects, were in company with me during the interviews I had to-day with Lieutenant Haviland and Colonel Woodford. Sworn to before me, this 6th March, 1865. W. F. PADDON. H. P. WALKER, H. M. Acting Consul. Depositions of George Dowie and Wm. McComb. BRITISH CONSULATE, Port of Charleston: George Dowie, of Bee street, druggist, and William McComb, of No. 33 Vanderhorst street, dealer in dry goods, severally make oath and say that they were present this morning at the interviews had by W. F. Paddon with Lieutenant Haviland and Colonel Woodford, and that his statement of what transpired, detailed in the foregoing affidavit, is correct. GEO. DOWIE. W. MCCOMB. Sworn before me, this 6th March, 1865. H. P. WALKER, Mr. Seward to Mr. Burnley. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, March 21, 1865. SIR In reply to your note of the 16th of March, I have the honor to say, that it would be useful if it could be shown that the Mr. Adderly who moves the application to this government for a favor in behalf of John Warrington is not, as is inferred from his name, an enemy to this government. I do not see what would be gained by suppressing the name of Mr. Adderly, for the request for the soldier's discharge would then be without such special foundation as to distinguish it from any similar request that might be made to discharge any other British subject from a voluntary enlistment. It seems hardly necessary to say that the discharge of any soldier weakens by just so much the national forces at the very moment when the greatest activity is required in the field. I will, however, make the inquiry upon the grounds upon which, in your memorandum of the 17th instant, you rest the case. I wish I could accept the fact of Mr. Adderly's being a member of Parliament and a privy councillor as conclusive against the prejudice that his name excites. But I remember that the mayor of Liverpool is a blockade-runner, and so is the late mayor of Hull. Lord Brougham, Mr. Lindsey, Mr. Roebuck, Sir Henry Houghton, Lord Wharncliffe, Lord Clanricarde and Lord Campbell are members of Parliament. I do not know how many of these are privy councillors. I should hardly suppose that it would be expected of this government that an appeal by either of them to the United States for a favor upon personal grounds would be impulsively granted. Î have the honor to be, with high consideration, sir, your obedient servant, WILLIAM H. SEWARD. J. HUME BURNLEY, Esq., &c., &c., &c. Mr. Burnley to Mr. Seward. WASHINGTON, March 21, 1865. SIR: The state of Lord Lyons's health having obliged him to retire definitively from the post which he has held for the last six years as her Majesty's envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary at Washington, the Queen has been graciously pleased to appoint Sir Frederick Bruce, now her Majesty's envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary at Pekin, to be his lordship's successor in that character. I am accordingly instructed to notify this appointment to you, and to say that Sir Frederick Bruce will be instructed to repair to Washington so soon as he can make arrangements for doing so, and that her Majesty's government trust that the appointment will be in every respect acceptable to the President of the United States. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. J. HUME BURNLEY. Mr. Burnley to Mr. Seward. WASHINGTON, March 21, 1865. SIR: I have the honor to transmit to you copies of a despatch and of its enclosures which I have received from his excellency the governor general of Canada, relative to an order which is stated to have been issued from the Treasury Department in this city, respecting the mode of dealing with articles. exported inland from Canada to the United States. I feel sure that you will take this matter into your serious consideration, with a view to arrange on a friendly basis a reciprocal trade between the two countries in question, to avoid all antagonistic feelings on the subject, and to smooth the way for the advantages which it is hoped may result from a remodelling of the reciprocity treaty. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, &c., &c., &c. J. HUME BURNLEY. Tiscount Monck to Mr. Burnley. QUEBEC, March 13, 1865. SIR: I have the honor to transmit copies of a letter addressed to me by the managing director of the Grand Trunk Railway Company, and an order which it is stated has been issued from the Treasury Department at Washington, respecting the mode of dealing with articles exported inland from Canada to the United States. It is evident that the requisitions referred to in the order from the Treasury Department will, if enforced, very seriously interfere with the trade between the two countries. I shall feel much obliged if you will bring this subject before the notice of the Secretary of State of the United States, with the view of ascertaining whether some such arrangement as that suggested by Mr. Bridges might not be found effectual for the protection of the revenue of the United States, without seriously impeding the course of trade. I have, &c., J. HUME BURNLEY, Esq., &c., &c., &c. MONCK. Mr. Bridges to Viscount Monck. GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY OF CANADA, Managing Director's Office at Quebec, March 9, 1865. MY LORD: Referring to the interview which I had with you upon the subject of the orders lately issued from the Treasury Department at Washington, I now beg to enclose copy of communication addressed to the collectors at the different ports of entry of the United States where the different railway lines cross the frontier from Canada into the States. This order, if intended to be enforced strictly, will have the effect of entirely stopping the flow of trade between the two countries, and will in effect put an end to the reciprocity treaty before it expires under the notice which is to be given for its termination. I have certainly myself not heard of any such threats as are referred to in the first clause of Mr. Sargeant's letter, and I think it could hardly have occurred that any such threats could have been made without its having been brought to the notice of the railway authorities. The act of Congress to which Mr. Sargeant refers enacts, first, that all vessels, cars, or other envelopes (as the act expresses it) shall be unloaded at the first port of entry after arrival in the United States, and if upon examination by customs authorities found to be correct, allowed to proceed to their destination. The second clause of the act appears to be intended as an alternative to this arrangement, and enacts that upon goods being put into a car at the place of export, it may, upon being sealed by a consul and accompanied by his certificate in triplicate, pass the frontiers and proceed to its destination without being unloaded or disturbed. The latter regulation, if attempted to be carried out, would in practice prevent almost completely the transport of goods or produce grown in Canada into the United States under the terms of the reciprocity treaty. The reason of this will be at once apparent when I state that freight of various kinds is shipped from about one hundred and fifty stations in Canada, and that there are only twelve consuls appointed by the United States government; such consuls, of course, being located in the principal cities and prominent points and the different stations upon the lines of railway being scattered through the country, and many of them at considerable distances from the residence of the consuls. This applies with considerable force to the district of country lying east of Montreal. There is a consul now at Quebec, and one lately appointed at Coaticoak, near the boundary, but between Montreal and Rivière du Loup. There are some forty stations, from all of which at the present time grain_purchased by American buyers is being sent to Portland, and much of it going to Fortress Monroe and other places for the use of the American army. If the United States government insist upon every car-load of this grain being inspected before it is allowed to leave a station by the consul, and sealed by him, and his certificate given that it is the growth and produce of Canada, it is quite clear that the existing consular machinery is entirely inadequate to enable such regulations to be carried into effect, and of course, therefore, the only result must be that the traffic will be entirely stopped. I have pointed out the mode in which this matter will operate, in order that your lordship, if you think it desirable, may communicate with the embassy at Washington, for the purpose of having the matter brought to the attention of the Secretary of State of the United States. I need not say that although this matter is one of importance to the railway interests of the country, it is equally so to the producing classes, who, on the faith of the terms of the reciprocity treaty, have entered largely into the growth of articles which under that treaty can be forwarded to the United States. It is also, of course, important to the interests of Americans themselves, who I suppose, from the impossibility of getting the supplies they want in their own country, come to Canada for the purpose of securing that which they find necessary to get for their own internal consumption. If I might make a suggestion, I think the authorities of the United States would, upon examination, find that the plan which has been in general adoption for some time back would meet the necessity of the case, as far as customs requirements are concerned, and would not at the same time interfere with the flow of trade. The plan I propose would be that consuls should be appointed at the frontier ports where the lines of railway pass from Canada into the United States; that they should be authorized to seal cars upon arrival there, (the cars, of course, having been locked during their journey to the frontier port,) and the contents of the car being vouched for by affidavit, made before a justice of the peace, of whom, of course, there are plenty in the neighborhood of each one of the railway stations in the country. An affidavit of this kind, sworn to before a justice of the peace, would be evidence to the consul at the frontier that the produce of the car was the growth of Canada, and entitled to pass into the United States under the terms of the reciprocity treaty. I don't, of course, make these remarks with any other intention than as a mere suggestion, which the authorities of the United States would, I think, find ample security against all possibility of difficulty. And if your lordship thinks the suggestion is one which would be likely to be acceptable, it could, I am quite satisfied, be carried out without any difficulty whatsoever. If your lordship will be good enough to make a representation to Washington on the subject, we shall at any rate be enabled to understand precisely the position in which matters of trade are hereafter to stand, and whilst begging it to be understood that I do not make this communication in any spirit of complaint, at the same time desire to know exactly the footing upon which matters of trade regulations are to stand for the future. It is of course unnecessary to remind your lordship that smuggling, if it takes place at all from Canada into the United States, would not take the great lines of travel, such as railways, but would seek a less conspicuous mode of entrance into the United States. The history of smuggling, I believe, shows that it is carried on in the most secret way possible, and certainly not attempted to be carried on at points where there are a large staff of custom-house officers ready to see that nothing contraband passes there. I have, &c., His Excellency VISCOUNT MONCK. C BRIDGES, Managing Director. [Enclosure.] TREASURY DEPARTMENT, Office of Commissioner of Customs, February 15, 1865. SIR: I understand that the State Department has received information from several of our consuls in Canada that violent opposition is made by Canadians against the carrying into execution the 2d and 3d sections of the smuggling acts, and that threats even have been made, with a view to prevent the act being carried out by our consuls. These sections of the act alluded to were intended to relieve owners of goods, wares, and merchandise, vessels, cars, &c., from the burden of having such vessels, cars, &c., unloaded and examined at the first stopping-place after entering the United States, and I have now to instruct you to carry the 1st section of the smuggling act into full and vigorous effect in all cases. If the people of Canada choose to quarrel with the remedial portion of the act, they may try the other portion awhile. You will hereafter enforce the law strictly. N. SARGENT, Commissioner. P. S.-It will be advisable, probably, to give the railroad companies reasonable notice of this order before enforcing it. N. S. |