Right Hon. Earl Russell to Charles Francis Adams, March 9, 1864

Earl Russell to Mr. Adams.

Sir: With reference to my letter of the 1st ultimo, I have now the honor to reply to your letter of the 20th of January, in which you enclose copies of papers which have come into the possession of the United States government, purporting to show that ships and cargoes intended to run the blockade have been purchased in this country on account of the so-styled confederate government. You state that this evidence furnishes another strong instance of the manner in which the insurgents habitually abuse the belligerent privileges which have been conceded to them by this country; and you say, that after such an exposure, all British subjects engaged in these violations of blockade must incur a suspicion strong enough to make them liable to be treated as enemies, and, if taken, to be reckoned as prisoners of war.

To this declaration her Majesty’s government must reply that they are not prepared, on account of the exigencies or distresses of either belligerent, to assent to the introduction, to the injury of neutral states, of any alteration in the well-established principles of international law.

You are no doubt aware, as every American jurist must be aware, that it is not competent to a belligerent government to treat as prisoners of war the subjects of neutral states taken on board vessels (not long ships-of-war of the enemy,) endeavoring or alleged to be endeavoring to break the blockade, and it would be impossible for her Majesty’s government to permit British subjects to be made exceptions to the general rules and practice of international law on this or any other subject.

I need scarcely remind you that the rights of visit and search and of blockade are belligerent rights which press with sufficient severity upon neutrals, and which, as her Majesty’s government have already had occasion to observe in their correspondence with the United States government during the war, would be intolerable without a faithful and scrupulous observance, on the part of the belligerent, of his corresponding obligations.

It is obvious that her Majesty’s government can in no way be responsible for the conduct of the confederate belligerent; and with reference to your statement that the confederates habitually abuse the privileges which have been conceded to them by Great Britain, I must beg leave to remind you that not only Great Britain, but every other neutral state, has of necessity recognized the confederates as belligerents, and has, therefore, of necessity conceded to them, not indeed “privileges,” but the same “rights” which a neutral state is bound by international law to concede to all belligerents, and which Great Britain has conceded in the present war to the United States.

Her Majesty’s government have, on previous occasions, expressed their regret that any of her Majesty’s subjects should violate the blockade, and I repeat that regret most unreservedly on the present occasion; but it must be remembered that the blockade is one of most unusual proportions; that it severely affects the welfare of no inconsiderable portion of her Majesty’s subjects, and that the penalty of confiscation and condemnation of British property, to a very large amount, has constituted, to say the least, no very inadequate punishment of the offenders. At all events you will hardly deny that, whether that punishment is or is not adequate, in the opinion of the government of the United States, it is the only penalty to which such offenders can, according to the well-known rules of international law, be made liable. If the fact be, as the papers enclosed in your note seem to show, that some ships engaged in running the blockade, but not navigable as vessels of war, are the property of the government of the Confederate States, this fact cannot, in the judgment of her Majesty’s government, furnish any justification whatever for the treatment of British subjects in a manner not warranted by international law, even if the British flag should be improperly used to disguise the character of such vessels.

If, indeed, British subjects were found on board vessels belonging to the confederate government, and were not merely passengers, but were employed in connexion with the vessel and cargo in circumstances which rendered it practically impossible that they should be ignorant of the ownership of the vessels, her Majesty’s government do not say that there might not be a prima facie ground for treating such persons as prisoners of war; but the case now in controversy is that of British subjects engaged as seamen on board of vessels ostensibly British, and which they have had every reason to suppose to be really and bona fide such; and her Majesty’s government must insist that the United States government would be without warrant in treating such persons as enemies merely on the ground of the discovery, and more on the mere suspicion, without any proof applicable to the particular case, of a concealed interest of the confederate government in such vessel.

With respect to the charge preferred against Lieutenant Rooke, her Majesty’s government fail to perceive that the facts alleged would have amounted to a participation by that officer in any warlike service or operation on the part of the Confederate States. Her Majesty’s government will not fail to take the proper steps against any officer, bearing her Majesty’s commission, who shall be proved to have illegally contravened her Majesty’s orders to all her subjects to observe a strict neutrality during the present deplorable war; but in Lieutenant Rooke’s case it does not appear that, on further inquiry, the United States authorities were disposed to view the proceedings of that young officer as anything more than the result of inconsiderate thoughtlessness, and I was happy to learn, by a recent mail, that Lieutenant Rooke had been released from confinement.

I shall only further observe, with reference to the alleged intentions of a certain iron-ship builder named James Ash, and of a firm called Stringer, Pembroke & Co., to build steamers for the confederate belligerents, that you must be well aware of the determination of her Majesty’s government to put in force, to the utmost of their power, the provisions of the foreign enlistment act against every British subject who shall violate those provisions, and as to whose offence her Majesty’s government may be able to obtain legal and proper evidence, but without such evidence it is impossible for her Majesty’s government to act against the persons or property of British subjects.

I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant,