James R, Partridge to Hamilton Fish, November 1, 1871

No. 50. Mr. Partridge to Mr. Fish.

Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your Nos. 11, 12, and 13.

Tour No. 12 informs me that the report of the Brazilian minister of foreign affairs, which is declared in Mr. Wright’s dispatch No. 185 to have been sent to the Department, has not been received.

I have now sent in the dispatch bag, addressed to the Department and forwarded by the consulate, which will go by the steamer Merrimac on the 26th instant to New York, the “relatorio” or report of the Brazilian minister of foreign affairs, presented to the legislative general assembly on the 12th May, 1871. The pages (532 to 580 inclusive) which are framed in red ink contain the documents relating to foreign property in Paraguay, which was declared by French and Italian claimants to be theirs, and to have been plundered or sacked by officers and others of the Brazilian army. At page 564 will be found (No. 193) the note addressed to the Italian legation here, in relation to the claim of Chapperon, the Italian consul in Paraguay. On the following page (565) is the “memorandum” annexed to the foregoing note, a translation of which is stated upon the legation record here to have been inclosed in Mr. Wright’s No. 185. I presume that translation reached the Department, but to avoid possibility of mistake I have caused to be made out, and now inclose, another translation of that “memorandum,” and of the preceding note also. I think that I ought to add that the general impression here, arising from these statements and proofs, especially from the documents annexed to the memorandum, (a list of which is at page 579, translation page 55,) demonstrates very clearly that these two claims, French and Italian, were grossly exaggerated, if not, in greater part, fabricated. Chapperon was from all accounts a tool in the hands of Lopez; and who actually stood by and saw several of his countrymen shot by order of Lopez, without any (apparent) intervention by him on their behalf. It also appears that he exacted payment from his countrymen and others for the storage and shelter, in his consulate, of goods belonging to them.

It also appears that he refused to surrender, before the sack, many valuables so left with him; and he was assassinated, it is said, by some of his own countrymen in Buenos Ayres, in revenge for his desertion of their interests confided to his charge, and for not interfering on behalf of the lives of others, (their relatives,) who were sacrificed by Lopez. I have had a conversation with Baron Cavalchini, the Italian envoy here, in relation to this matter. He maintains that there was a robbery of many goods and valuables by Brazilian officers and soldiers, at the moment of occupation; that the “termos” (or reports by Brazilian officers to their commander-in-chief) of merchandise, jewels, and money, found in various houses at that time, were lists of such goods, &c, only as were left after such sack, or as were found in such houses as had not been broken into and robbed. He also stated to me, in the same confidential conversation, that it was his belief, and which he thought supported by many incidents, that Chapperon was assassinated not by Italians, but by Brazilians, and officers of their army, against whom he could have given or procured very damaging testimony in relation to the sack at the moment of occupation.

I am, &c.