Sir Edward Odo Russell to Richard Lyons, 1st Viscount Lyons, March 27, 1863

Earl Russell to Lord Lyons.

My Lord: Mr. Adams having asked for an interview, I bad along conversation with hiui yesterday at the Foreign Office. He read me a dispatch of Mr. Seward on the subject of the Alabama and Oreto. In this dispatch, which was not unfriendly in its tone, Mr. Seward complains of the depredations on American commerce committed by vessels fitted out in British ports, and manned, for the most part, by British sailors. He alludes to the strong feeling excited in the United States by the destruction of her trading vessels and their cargoes. He repeats the complaint common in America, that England is at war with the United States, while the United States were not at war with England. He expresses his hope that Great Britain, in execution of her own laws, will put an end to the fitting out of such vessels to prey on the commerce of a friendly nation. I said that the phrase that England was at war with America, but America was not at war with England, was rather a figure of rhetoric than a true description of facts. That the facts were that two vessels, the Oreto and the Alabama, had eluded the operation of the Foreign-Enlistment Act, and had, against the will and purpose of the British Government, made war upon American commerce in the American seas. That the fitting out of the Alabama, the operation against which the Foreign-Enlistment Act was especially directed, was carried on in Portuguese waters at a great distance from any British port. That the most stringent orders had been given long ago to watch the proceedings of those who might be suspected of fitting out vessels of war for Confederate purposes. That if there were six vessels, as it was alleged, fitting out in British ports for such purposes, let evidence be forthcoming, and the Government would not hesitate to stop the vessels, and to bring the offenders before a court of justice. That Mr. Adams was no doubt aware that the Government must proceed according to the regular process of law and upon sworn testimony.

Mr. Adams, on the other hand, dwelt on the novelty and enormity of this species of warfare. He said that if a belligerent could fit out in the ports of a neutral swift armed vessels to prey upon the commerce of its adversary, the commerce of that belligerent must be destroyed, and a new and terrible element of warfare would be introduced. He was sure that England would not suffer such conduct on the part of France, nor France on the part of England. He should be sorry to see letters of marque issued by the President; but there might be no better resource than such a measure.

I said I would at once suggest a better measure. Mr. Seward had said to Lord Lyons that the crews of privateers had this advantage—that they reaped the whole benefit of the prizes they took, whereas the crews of men-of-war were entitled to only half the value of the prizes they took. Let the President, I said, offer a higher reward for the capture of the Alabama and Oreto to the crews of men-of-war than even the entire value of those vessels. Let him offer double their value as a gratuity, and thus confine his action to officers and men of the United States Navy, over whom he could keep a control, and who were amenable to the laws which govern an honorable profession. But what could Mr. Adams ask of the British Government? What was his proposal?

Mr. Adams said there was one thing which might be easily done. It was supposed the British Government were indifferent to these notorious violations of their own laws. Let them declare their condemnation of all such infractions of law.

With respect to the law itself, Mr. Adams said either it was sufficient for the purposes of neutrality, and then let the British Government enforce it, or it was insufficient, and then let the British Government apply to Parliament to amend it.

I said that the Cabinet were of opinion that the law was sufficient, but that legal evidence could not always be procured that the British Government had done everything in its power to execute the law; but I admitted that the cases of the Alabama and Oreto were a scandal, and in some degree a reproach to our laws. Still, I said it was my belief that if all the assistance given to the Federals by British subjects and British munitions of war were weighed against similar aid given to the Confederates, the balance would be greatly in favor of the Federals.

Mr. Adams totally denied this proposition. But above all, he said, there is a manifest conspiracy in this country, of which the Confederate loan is an additional proof, to produce a state of exasperation in America, and thus bring on a war with Great Britain, with a view to aid the Confederate cause, and secure a monopoly of the trade of the Southern States, whose independence these conspirators hoped to establish by these illegal and unjust measures. He had worked to the best of his power for peace, but it had become a most difficult task.

Mr. Adams fully deserves the character of having always labored for peace between our two nations, nor, I trust, will his efforts and those of the two Governments fail of success.

I am, &c.,