Charles Francis Adams to William H. Seward, September 8, 1863

Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward.

Sir: At the last moment on Saturday I sent you a despatch by the ordinary mail, containing a copy of Lord Russell’s note to me of the 4th instant, just then put into my hands, signifying that the decision of the government, announced in his previous note of the 1st instant, had, under the effect of my notes of the 3d instant, and former dates, been subjected to a reconsideration. It is proper now to add, that just before the reception of this I had prepared and despatched another one in reply to the previous note of the 1st instant, which I then supposed to be final. A copy of this, which there was no time to make on Saturday, I now transmit. I need not say, that had I known of the latter course of the government in season, I should have held it back. Feeling as I do the heavy responsibility that must devolve upon me in the conduct of this critical transaction, it is not my disposition to say or do the least thing that may add to the difficulties inevitably growing out of it between the countries. * * * * Considering the grave nature of the issue, I have thought it wiser not to give any handle to the pretence that resort to intimidation had been attempted. At the same time, I have endeavored to convey, in its full sense, what I believe to be the feeling excited in both the government and people of the United States, by the extraordinary and unjustifiable violations of neutrality continually permitted in this kingdom, of which the latest is the crowning instance

In regard to the allegations made in the public prints, to which the crown lawyers seem to have been disposed to attach consequence, of possible ownership of these vessels either by France or Egypt, I ought, perhaps, to have mentioned, that on application through Mr. Dayton, in Paris, and to Mr. Musums, the Turkish ambassador at this court, I had obtained satisfactory evidence of their falsehood.

Since commencing this despatch I have received a note from Lord Russell, a copy of which, as also of my reply, is transmitted. I had been somewhat prepared for the intelligence it conveys by the appearance in the Post of this morning of an article bearing an official aspect, to the same effect. Under the peculiar circumstances attending the case, and the heavy responsibility which the ministry has assumed in taking this course, I trust I may be pardoned for suggesting the expediency of as much caution and forbearance as possible in the treatment of the subject in America.

I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,

Mr. Adams to Earl Russell.

My Lord: At this moment, when one of the iron-clad vessels is on the point of departure from this kingdom, on its hostile errand against the United States, I am honored with the reply of your lordship to my notes of the 11th, 16th and 25th of July, and of the 14th of August. I trust I need not express how profound is my regret at the conclusion to which her Majesty’s government have arrived. I can regard it no otherwise than as practically opening to the insurgents free liberty in this kingdom to execute a policy described in one of their late publications in the following language:

“In the present state of the harbor defences of New York, Boston, Portland, and smaller northern cities, such a vessel as the Warrior would have little difficulty in entering any of these ports and inflicting a vital blow upon the enemy. The destruction of Boston alone would be worth a hundred victories in the field. It would bring such a terror to the ‘blue-noses,’ as to cause them to wish eagerly for peace, despite their overweening love of gain which has been so freely administered to since the opening of this war. Vessels of the Warrior class would promptly raise the blockade of our ports, and would even, in this respect, confer advantages which would soon repay the cost of their construction.”

It would be superfluous in me to point out to your lordship that this is war. No matter what may be the theory adopted of neutrality in a struggle, when this process is carried on in the manner indicated, from a territory and with the aid of the subjects of a. third party, that third party to all intents and purposes ceases to be neutral. Neither is it necessary to show, that any government which suffers it to be done fails in enforcing the essential conditions of international amity towards the country against whom the hostility is directed. In my belief it is impossible that any nation, retaining a proper degree of self-respect, could tamely submit to a continuance of relations so utterly deficient in reciprocity. I have no idea that Great Britain would do so for a moment.

After a careful examination of the full instructions with which I have been furnished, in preparation for such an emergency, I deem it inexpedient for me to attempt any recurrence to arguments for effective interposition in the present case Under these circumstances, I prefer to desist from communicating to your lordship even such further portions of my existing instructions as are suited to the case, lest I should contribute to aggravate difficulties already far too serious. I therefore content myself with informing your lordship that I transmit, by the present steamer, a copy of your note for the consideration of my government, and shall await the more specific directions that will be contained in the reply.

I seize this opportunity to pray permission of your lordship to correct a clerical error inadvertently made in my note of the 3d instant, in inserting the date of two notes of mine as having received the express approbation of my government. The intention was to specify only one, that of the 11th of July. The correction is not material, excepting as it conforms more strictly to the truth.

I pray your lordship to accept the assurances of the highest consideration with which I have the honor to be, my lord, your most obedient servant,

Mr. Adams to Earl Russell.

My Lord: I have the honor to acknowledge the reception of your lordship’s note of yesterday, announcing the determination of her Majesty’s government to prevent the departure of the war vessels now fitting out at Liverpool. I shall take great pleasure in transmitting a copy for the information of my government.

I have the honor to be, my lord, your most obedient servant,

Earl Russell to Mr. Adams.

Lord Russell presents his compliments to Mr. Adams, and has the honor to inform him that instructions have been issued which will prevent the departure of the two iron-clad vessels from Liverpool.

El Toussoun and El Monassir.

“The first exploit of these two vessels of war, which have now almost arrived at completion in Mr. Laird’s building yard, will be to run the home blockade of legal difficulties before they are allowed to proceed on their destined career, whatever that may be. Whether they can successfully navigate the channel beset with shoals and rocks through which the Alexandra was steered remains to be seen. There is now, we believe, little doubt that, under the terms of the foreign enlistment act, they are to be detained by government. The allegation against them is that they are fitted out for the purpose of carrying on hostilities against the United States. On the other hand, it is contended that they were built by order of a French house for the late Pasha of Egypt, who gave the firm a commission for the coinage of a large sum of money in France, and for the construction of two steam-rams in England. The money was duly coined and received in Egypt. The vessels were in course of construction when the Pasha died, and his successor repudiated that part of the contract. What the French house intends to do with them is not known. The accusation is, that they are destined for war with a friendly power. They will consequently be detained, and a court of law will determine whether, under the terms of the foreign enlistment act, the detention is legal, or whether the owners can recover them from the hands of the government.”