Charles Francis Adams to William Hitter, Esq., Acting Secretary of State, Washington, D. C, June 2, 1865

Mr. Adams to Mr. Hunter

Sir: I have just returned from a brief interview with Lord Russell, and beg leave to report the substance of it.

I read to him the substance of your despatch (No. 1,400) of the 15th of May. With reference to the first remark contained in it, I interposed the observation that, so far as my experience went, I had not perceived in his lordship the impatience referred to; but I presumed it would nevertheless be agreeable to him to know that the matter was engaging the attention of my government. After I had gone through with it, his lordship simply remarked, that inasmuch as the British government had recognized the validity of the closing of the ports of which we were in possession, there was no disposition to be impatient in respect to any proceedings which we might deem it advisable to adopt in our progress to restoration. There have been some complaints of hardship from British subjects in Charleston; but these were an unavoidable consequence of the peculiar state of affairs, which he presumed would be but temporary. He trusted that the government would be able in due course of time to bring matters back to their ordinary state.

I then added that I had received another despatch relating to the arrival of the Stonewall at Nassau, and the general question of belligerent rights; but considering that the matter must have been already communicated to him through a letter which had been addressed to Sir Frederick Bruce, and, further, that I held it to be substantially settled by his answer to my note transmitting a copy of the President’s proclamation, I should not trouble him by reading it.

His lordship observed that he had learned through Lord Cowley that Mr. Bigelow, our minister at Paris, had communicated to M. Drouyn de L’huys a despatch on this subject. He asked if I had any of the same kind. I replied that I did not know of any special one to Mr. Bigelow, and I had not, myself, anything more than I had already mentioned. He said the matter had been occupying the attention of both governments, and, on their own part, they had come to a conclusion. The substance of it was to recognize the war at an end, and from the same date to refuse to receive any vessel of the insurgents within British ports. With regard to such vessels as might happen to be in any port prior to the declaration, if in process of disarmament for sale and transfer to neutral parties, that would be permitted without any guarantee of security on leaving the port. If, on the other hand, the vessel should be armed, it would be required to depart in twenty-four hours under the rule.

I remarked that, being without authority, I could only express my own opinion of this proceeding; but I could not help thinking it would be perfectly satisfactory. The subject had seemed to me so near to settling itself, that I had not felt any anxiety of late about it. There were but two vessels left on the ocean, the Shenandoah and the Stonewall. I had strong reason to believe they had already been disposed of by persons in this country who were undertaking to dispose of the assets of the bankrupt concern. Indeed, it had been intimated to me that they had been already ordered to repair to this kingdom. If they should not reach here prior to the issue of the proposed declaration, did I understand his lordship right in saying admission would be refused them? His lordship took up a document which was before him, and read me a passage of it precisely to that effect. Whereupon I remarked that I was satisfied. It might be that my government would desire to pursue these miserable vessels further, as it would have a clear right to do; but, in my mind, nothing that they could do would weigh a feather more upon the general result, which was now made certain.

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