Joáo Silviera de Souza to Senhor General James Watson Webb, Envoy Extraordinary and, July 9, 1868

Senhor de Souza to Mr. Webb.

The undersigned councilor to his Majesty the Emperor, minister and secretary of state for foreign affairs, has the honor of acknowledging the receipt of the note which, under date of the 1st instant, was addressed to him by General James Watson Webb, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary for the United States.

In that note, General Webb communicates the following:

That he received, on the date above, an official dispatch from Rear-Admiral Davis, commanding the United States squadron in the Southern Atlantic Ocean, informing him that the American steamer Wasp, sent by him to Asuncion for the purpose of bringing away from there the Hon. Mr. Washburn, United States minister, and his family, had been prevented from ascending to that city, as her commander was ordered to by the said rear-admiral, in compliance with instructions received from the Secretary of the Navy, at the request of the Hon. Mr. Seward, Secretary of State for the United States; that, in consequence of such a grave disregard of the rights of the United States, the commander of the steamer referred to, after repeated requests for permission to pass the war lines of the allies, returned to Montevideo, declaring to the commander of the American squadron that he had not been enabled to fulfill his mission, as the refusal he had received from the general commander-in-chief of the allied forces was peremptory; that such extraordinary and unjustifiable proceeding on the part of the general commander-in-chief of those forces, the Marquis of Caxias, is in direct opposition to the rights of the United States; and, in view of what was agreed upon in August, 1866, between General Webb and the Brazilian government, is an outrage upon the honor and sovereignty of those States, which demands the prompt and severe censuring of the offender; that when, in 1861, the foreign minister for Brazil justified the conduct of the President of Maranhao in relation to the Sumter, the Secretary of State for the United States declared that that conduct and the approbation of it was intolerable. General Webb, in consequence, received orders to request that steps should be taken in reference to that occurrence by which the President of Maranhao should be made aware of his Majesty’s displeasure; that the act of the Marquis of Caxias is very much more offensive to the honor and sovereignty of the United States than that of the President had been, because he knew perfectly well that in August, 1866, Brazil was formally advised that the United States would not allow such a violation of its sovereign rights, and that Brazil reconsidered and revoked the offensive act; therefore, that the Marquis of Caxias was fully conscious that he was gravely offending the honor and sovereignty of the United States by refusing.

General Webb, therefore, to conclude, requests that the Marquis of Caxias be promptly and peremptorily censured for his unfriendly and extraordinary proceedings; and as his unwarrantable interference in the matter has already occasioned a delay of at least four months in freeing the United States minister and his family from their embarrassing and probably dangerous position, he strenuously urges upon the Brazilian government that, without any unnecessary delay, orders may be issued for the removing of all hindrance to the passage of the United States vessel Wasp through the allied posts, and that General Webb be informed without delay also that those obstacles have ceased to exist, so that he may be enabled to communicate to the commander of the American Southern Atlantic squadron that he will not encounter, in the discharge of his duties to his country and to humanity, any further impediment, from any of the Brazilian authorities.

In reply to General Webb’s note, the undersigned has the honor of calling his special attention to the following: The Marquis of Caxias could not recognize Lieutenant Kirkland, a subaltern of the United States navy, in command of the Wasp, as a competent person to make a direct request for permission for that vessel to pass the war lines of their very legal and effective blockade of the Paraguay river, which he only did towards the end of May, and not four months ago, as by so doing the blockade would have been broken.

In refusing that permission, the Marquis of Caxias did not ignore any right whatever of the United States, nor did he in any way wish to offend, as he did not, its honor or its sovereignty. On the contrary, he thereby maintained an unquestionable right of sovereignty on the part of the allies in the occupation of the waters and territories of that river, where they are at present.

To have broken through that blockade in the manner which was and is requested— that is, that the Wasp should pass through the war lines of the allies and their military positions into the heart of the enemy’s territory which is blockaded, serious disarrangement in the operations of the war, at the very moment, too, when important and perhaps decisive movements were impending—would have been the disregarding of a right of the belligerents which has never been questioned—would have diminished and weakened the sovereignty of a friendly power without the least justification, besides subjecting it and its allies to difficulties in the speedy termination of a war in which their honor is compromised.

It is further added that the refusal of the Marquis of Caxias was not peremptory, as General Webb supposes. The Marquis de Caxias’s objections to the way in which Lieutenant Kirkland proposed to aid Minister Washburn to withdraw from Paraguay, were accompanied by an exposition of the very weighty reasons he had for so doing, and at the same time offered him, with the greatest cordiality and deference, the choice of either of two means of arriving at the same result without producing any of the evil consequences which would result to the allies from the admission of the proposal made by him in the name of that minister.

Those reasonable means, which would have reconciled, in a most dignified and effective manner, the rights of the allies with the wishes of both Messrs. Washburn and Kirkland, were rejected by those gentlemen, who continue to insist in exacting a permission offensive to the sovereign rights of the said allies.

One of the least of the inconveniences which would happen through satisfying the request of Lieutenant Kirkland and Mr. Washburn would evidently be the nullification of the whole of the blockade established in Paraguay by the allies, who would be laying themselves open to the reception of similar exactions from any other nation which might, under any pretext, demand a like privilege for its ships.

So true is this, and so worthy of consideration in view of the consequences, on the part of friendly powers, that Admiral Godon himself, in 1866, when the passage of Mr. Washburn to Paraguay was in treaty, was the first to admit, merely begging in his request for the permitting of the passage up the river to Asuncion of the said Minister Washburn, that it should be done in any way which would harmonize with the dignity of the United States and have been most convenient to Brazil and its allies, further desiring that Mr. Washburn might be helped forward to his destination either by land or by water, without placing any obstacle in his way.

This is just what the Marquis de Caxias desired to effect in the present instance, had he not been denied the option.

General Webb alludes in his note to orders received by Rear-Admiral Davis from the Secretary of the Navy, at the request of the Hon. Mr. Seward, Secretary of State for the United States, for the purpose of assisting Mr. Washburn to withdraw from Paraguay.

The undersigned begs leave, however, to impress upon General Webb that the text of those orders cannot but be subject to an intelligent analysis.

If a nation cannot, in equity or justice, issue orders contrary to the rights or sovereignty of another, those to which General Webb refers were without doubt accompanied by some clause which would cause the execution of them to be carried out in a way not to offend those rights or that sovereignty, and having that in view, to enter into some arrangement both expedient and honorable with the nations interested in the matter. Otherwise it would be an outrage, and in the present instance an unwarranted one, since Brazil and its allies proposed and offered to realize a reasonable manner of enabling Mr. Washburn to retire from Paraguay, to which the undersigned has already alluded.

General Webb argues that the decision of the Marquis de Caxias is in direct contradiction to the agreement entered into in August, 1866, between himself and the imperial government, and that the said marquis seriously offended the honor and sovereignty of the United States, being perfectly aware at the time that he was doing so.

This view of the matter on the part of General Webb is unfounded. Not only are the benevolent and friendly intentions of Brazil towards the United States evident in this case, but also that the refusal of the marquis had nothing in it which was, or could be, offensive to the honor or sovereignty of those States, but on the contrary was the vindication of the legitimate right of the allies so to act.

Putting aside these no doubt convincing considerations to General Webb, it remains for the undersigned to demonstrate to the general that the agreement of 1866, which he invokes, cannot properly be applied to this case.

In the first place, the imperial government never consented, except under protest, to the passing of the Shamokin through the war lines of the allied powers for the purpose of carrying Mr. Washburn beyond them, and that protest, really made against his passage by the Brazilian admiral when that steamer was on its way to Curupaiti, proves that Brazil did not admit the fact as a right.

In the second place, even had Brazil and its allies, for reasons worthy of attention at that time and at that place, judged it expedient to waive some of their rights as belligerents in favor of a friendly power, now, perhaps, they may be influenced by different motives; and indeed they have other and weightier ones, which prevent them from conceding now what they did then; further, the present request is not of the same nature of the one then advanced, since at that time the terms of that petition were more acceptable.

Finally, the very circumstances of the war are very different now from what they were then; the military movements and operations were not then so active as they are now, heing about to terminate.

General Webb mentions the case of 1861, to ask that the conduct of the Marquis de Caxiasin the present shall be censured and peremptorily disapproved of, as he requested that that of the president of Maranhao should be in relation to the Sumter case: but as that affair does not bear an exact relation to this one, the undersigned declines entering into any discussion whatever upon the subject.

To conclude, the imperial government does not consider that the proceedings of the Marquis of Caxias in this transaction are at all open to censure, but that, on the contrary, they merit its approbation; firstly, from the fact that his refusal was in perfect conformity to the rights and sovereignty of the allies; and, secondly, from the circumstance that though it was not in his power to concede the permission as requested by Messieurs Kirkland and Washburn, he did offer and place at their command, with the heartiest good will, the proper means for the safe and convenient conveyance of the American minister from Paraguay.

The undersigned hopes that General Webb, conscious of the justice of the reasons given and of the serious inconveniences that would have happened to the cause of the allies from the upward passage along the river to Tibicuari (center of the enemy’s operations) of the Wasp, under present circumstances, and from her remaining there in communication with that enemy, without restriction as to the time or manner, will, without hesitation, conform his wishes to that decision, and accept either of the ways proposed for the departure from Paraguay of Mr. Washburn, and, in pursuance of such acceptance, transmit to Rear-Admiral Davis the necessary directions for the effecting of it. Meanwhile the imperial government will have no objection to accept any other alternative which may be suggested as equally effective and honorable by General Webb, provided that it be not the one already discussed, or a similar one, but that its conditions be such as to place no difficulties in the way of its acceptance by its allies at the river Plata, nor interfere with any plan they have or may conceive for the consummation of the desired end.

By these steps the imperial government endeavors to prove how great is its desire to, without injury or offense to its rights and sovereignty, or those of its allies, arrive at an early, and, to the United States, satisfactory termination of the question.

The undersigned repeats, &c., &c., &c.