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,

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.”