4

protection, and a suitable apology for the aggression which has been Chap. IX. committed.

"Should these terms not be offered by Mr. Seward, you will propose

them to him.

"You are at liberty to read this despatch to the Secretary of State, and if he shall desire it, you will give him a copy of it." 1

A second despatch of the same date contained the following additional instructions:

"In my previous despatch of this date I have instructed you, by command of Her Majesty, to make certain demands of the Government of the United States.

"Should Mr. Seward ask for delay in order that this grave and painful matter should be deliberately considered, you will consent to a delay not exceeding seven days. If, at the end of that time, no answer is given, or if any other answer is given except that of a compliance with the demands of Her Majesty's Government, your Lordship is instructed to leave Washington with all the members of your Legation, bringing with you the archives of the Legation, and to repair immediately to London.

"If, however, you should be of opinion that the requirements of Her Majesty's Government are substantially complied with, you may report the facts to Her Majesty's Government for their consideration, and remain at your post till you receive further orders.

"You will communicate with Vice-Admiral Sir A. Milne immediately upon receiving the answer of the American Government, and you will send him a copy of that answer, together with such observations as you may think fit to make.

"You will also give all the information in your power to the Governors of Canada, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Jamaica, Bermuda, and such other of Her Majesty's Possessions as may be within your reach.

Anxious, as it appears, to mitigate the effect of this peremptory demand, made still more peremptory by the difficulties which then surrounded the American Government, Lord Russell added in a private letter:—

"The despatches which were agreed to at the Cabinet yesterday, and which I have signed this morning, impose upon you a disagreeable task. My wish would be that at your first interview with Mr. Seward you should not take my despatch with you, but should prepare him

1 Earl Russell to Lord Lyons, 30th November, 1861.

Chap. IX. for it, and ask him to settle with the President and the Cabinet what course they would propose.

"The next time you should bring my despatch and read it to him fully.

"If he asks what will be the consequence of his refusing compliance, I think you should say that you wish to leave him and the President quite free to take their own course, and that you desire to abstain from anything like menace."

In the meanwhile, Captain Wilkes's exploit had been received with general but not unanimous applause. From his official superior, the Secretary of the Navy, he received warm congratulations. "Your conduct in seizing these public enemies has the emphatic approval of this Department." "The forbearance shown," added Mr. Welles," in omitting to capture the Trent herself, must not be permitted to constitute a precedent hereafter for infractions of neutral obligations." The House of Representatives, which met on the 2nd December, passed a resolution tendering to him the thanks of Congress; and this was coupled with another, likewise passed unanimously, by which the President was requested to confine Mr. Mason and Mr. Slidell in felons' cells, and treat them as persons convicted of infamous crimes. But there were those who thought differently.. Doubts whether the act was warranted by public law, or consistent with principles which America had always cherished with peculiar jealousy, were freely expressed. These doubts appear to have been shared by Mr. Seward himself. Very early in December, he wrote to Mr. Adams a despatch, which the latter was authorized to read to Lord Russell, stating that Captain Wilkes's act had been done without instructions from his Government, that no decision had been formed upon the subject, and that none would be formed without waiting for any representations which might be made by Great Britain.

1 Mr. Welles to Captain Wilkes, 30th November, 1861.

19

6

It was the good fortune of the British Government Chap. IX. and people to be represented at Washington, during the whole of the war, by a Minister who, to a thorough acquaintance with his duties, added prudence, caution, a most conciliatory temper, and an upright and truthful character. Lord Lyons saw at once how critical was the occasion. "I have deemed it right," he wrote to Lord Russell on the 19th November, "to maintain the most complete reserve on the subject."

"To conceal the distress which I feel would be impossible, nor would it, if possible, be desirable; but I have expressed no opinion on the questions of international law involved; I have hazarded no conjecture as to the course which will be taken by Her Majesty's Government. On the one hand, I dare not run the risk of compromising the honour and inviolability of the British flag by asking for a measure of reparation which may prove to be inadequate; on the other hand, I am scarcely less unwilling to incur the danger of rendering a satisfactory settlement of the question more difficult by making a demand which may turn out to be unnecessarily great. In the present imperfect state of my information I feel that the only proper and prudent course is to wait for the orders which your Lordship will give with a complete knowledge of the whole case."

In communicating to Mr. Seward the demands of Great Britain, which he did on the 19th December, he punctually obeyed his private instructions. He afterwards wrote:Russel

Lond

"I added, that Her Majesty's Government hoped that the Government of the United States would of its own accord offer this reparation; that it was in order to facilitate such an arrangement that I had come to him without any written demand, or even any written paper at all in my hand; that if there was a prospect of attaining this object, 1 was willing to be guided by him as to the conduct, on my part, which would render its attainment most easy.

"Mr. Seward received my communication seriously, and with dignity, but without any manifestation of dissatisfaction. Some further conversation ensued in consequence of questions put by him, with a

1 "Lord Lyons, who although a man of prudent reserve, is at the same time entirely truthful."—Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams, 5th February, 1862.

Chap. IX. view to ascertain the exact character of the despatch. At the conclusion he asked me to give him to-morrow to consider the question, and to communicate with the President. On the day after he should, he said, be ready to express an opinion with respect to the communication I had made. In the meantime he begged me to be assured that he was very sensible of the friendly and conciliatory manner in which I had made it." 1

The attention of other European Governments was by this time fixed on a question which might become, by its consequences, so important to all neutral Powers. France, Austria, and Prussia took part in the discussion of it by despatches addressed to their respective Ministers at Washington

"Monsieur,

M. Thouvenel to M. Mercier.

"Paris, le 3 Décembre, 1861. "L'arrestation de MM. Mason et Slidell à bord du paquebot Anglais le Trent, par un croiseur Américain, a produit en France, si non la même émotion qu'en Angleterre, au moins un étonnement et une sensation extrêmes. L'opinion publique s'est aussitôt préoccupée de la légitimité et des conséquences d'un acte semblable, et l'impression qu'elle en a ressentie n'a pas été un instant douteuse. Le fait lui a paru tellement en désaccord avec les régles ordinaires du droit international, qu'elle s'est plu à en faire exclusivement peser la responsabilité sur le Commandant du San Jacinto. Il ne nous est pas encore donné de savoir si cette supposition est fondée, et le Gouvernement de l'Empereur a dû, dès lors, examiner aussi la question que soulevait l'enlèvement des deux passagers du Trent. Le désir de contribuer à prévenir un conflit, imminent peut-être, entre deux Puissances pour lesquelles il est animé de sentiments également amicaux, et le devoir de maintenir, à l'effet de mettre les droits de son propre pavillon à l'abri de toute atteinte, certaines principes essentiels à la sécurité des neutres, l'ont, après mûre réflexion, convaincu qu'il ne pouvait en cette circonstance rester complètement silencieux.

"Si, à notre grand regret, le Cabinet à Washington était disposé à approuver la conduite du Commandant du San Jacinto, ce serait en considérant MM. Mason et Slidell comme des ennemis, ou en ne voyant en eux que des rébelles. Dans l'un comme dans l'autre cas, il y aurait un oubli extrèmement fâcheux de principes sur lesquels nous avions toujours trouvé les Etats Unis d'accord avec nous.

"A quel titre, en effet, le croiseur Américain aurait-il, dans le

1 Lord Lyons to Earl Russell, 19th December, 1861.

premier cas, arrêté MM. Mason et Slidell? Les Etats Unis ont admis Chap. IX. avec nous, dans les Traités conclus entre les deux pays, que la liberté du pavillon s'étendait aux personnes trouvées à bord, fussent-elles ennemies de l'une des deux parties, à moins qu'il ne s'agit de gens de guerre actuellement au service de l'ennemi. MM. Mason et Slidell étaient donc, en vertu de ce principe que nous n'avons jamais rencontré de difficulté à faire insérer dans nos Traités d'Amitié et de Commerce, parfaitement libres sous le pavillon neutre de l'Angleterre. On ne prétendra pas, sans doute, qu'ils pouvaient être considérés comme contrebande de guerre. Ce qui constitue la contrebande de guerre n'est pas encore, il est vrai, précisément fixé, les limites n'en sont pas absolument les mêmes pour toutes les Puissances. Mais, en ce qui se rapporte aux personnes, les stipulations spéciales qu'on rencontre dans les Traités concernant les gens de guerre définissent nettement le caractère de celles qui peuvent être saisies par les belligérants. Or, il n'est pas besoin de démontrer que MM. Mason et Slidell ne sauraient être assimilés aux personnes de cette catégorie. Il ne resterait, dès lors, d'invoquer, pour expliquer leur capture, que ce prétexte qu'ils étaient porteurs de dépêches officielles de l'ennemi. Or, c'est ici le moment de rappeler une circonstance qui domine toute cette affaire et qui rend injustifiable la conduite du croiseur Américain. Le Trent n'avait pas pour destination un port appartenant à l'un des belligérants. portait en pays neutre sa cargaison et ses passagers, et c'était de plus dans un port neutre qu'il les avait pris. S'il était admissible que, dans de telles conditions, le pavillon neutre ne couvrit pas complètement les personnes et les marchandises qu'il transporte, son immunité ne serait plus qu'un vain mot: à chaque instant, le commerce et la navigation des Puissances tierces aurait à souffrir de leurs rapports innocents ou même indirects avec l'un ou l'autre des belligérants. Ces derniers ne se trouveraient plus seulement en droit d'exiger du neutre une entière impartialité, de lui interdire toute immixtion aux actes d'hostilité; ils apporteraient à sa liberté de commerce et de navigation des restrictions dont le droit international moderne s'est refusé d'admettre la légitimité. On en reviendrait, en un mot, à des pratiques vexatoires contre lesquelles, à d'autres époques, aucune Puissance n'a plus vivement protesté que les Etats Unis.

Il

"Si le Cabinet de Washington ne voulait voir dans les deux personnes arrêtés que des rébelles qu'il est toujours en droit de saisir, la question, pour se placer sur un autre terrain, n'en saurait être résolu davantage dans un sens favorable à la conduite du Commandant du San Jacinto. Il y aurait, en pareil cas, méconnaissance du principe qui fait d'un navire une portion du territoire de la nation dont il porte le pavillon, et violation de l'immunité qui s'oppose à ce qu'un Souverain étranger y exerce par conséquent sa juridiction. Il n'est pas nécessaire, sans doute, de rappeler l'énergie avec laquelle, en toute occasion, le Gouvernement des Etats Unis a défendu cette immunité et le droit d'asile qui en est la conséquence.