Mr. Everett to Mr. Upshur.

[Extracts.]

LONDON, September 14, 1843.

I received some time ago a note from Lord Aberdeen, which I now transmit you, making a tender of a certain sum as compensation to the owners of the " Tigris" and the "Seamew." I have abstained from replying to this note, in the expectation of receiving some communications either from Messrs. Brookhouse & Hunt, or from the department at their instance, which would guide me as to the answer to be given. I sent to Messrs. Brookhouse & Hunt, on the 19th July, a letter from Mr. John Hillard, a respectable American merchant here, whom I employed to examine the claim, in connexion with Mr. Rothery, the solicitor of the British treasury. In that letter Mr. Hillard makes a statement of the amount which Mr. Rothery was willing to allow on the several items, and which is the same now officially tendered by Lord Aberdeen. It fell far below the sums claimed by Messrs. Brookhouse & Hunt, and they informed me by the steamer of the 19th August that they declined to accept it.

If it is possible to have copies of the papers prepared in season to accompany this despatch, I will forward you the letters of Mr. Hillard, which contain the final results of the investigation carried on by himself and Mr. Rothery, and will assist you in judging how far the various items of claim brought forward by Messrs. Brookhouse & Hunt can with propriety be insisted on by the government of the United States.

FOREIGN OFFICE, August 28, 1843. The undersigned, her Majesty's principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, has the honor to inform Mr. Everett, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States, that he has received from her Majesty's treasury two reports from Mr. Rothery, the gentleman appointed by her Majesty's government to investigate and settle, with Mr. Everett, or such gentleman as might be deputed by Mr. Everett, the claims preferred by the owners of the American vessels "Tigris" and "Seamew," on account of the detention of those vessels by her Majesty's cruisers "Waterwitch" and "Persian," respectively.

Mr. Rothery, giving an account of the result of his conferences with Mr. Hillard, the gentleman deputed by Mr. Everett for this service, states that he had agreed with that gentleman that the amount to be paid by her Majesty's government as compensation in the case of the "Tigris," is twelve hundred and six pounds nineteen shillings and three pence (£1,206 19s. 3d.) sterling; and in the case of the "Seamew" is fourteen hundred and fifty-two pounds nineteen shillings (£1,452 19s.) sterling. The undersigned has accordingly requested the lords of her Majesty's treasury to liquidate this claim, and he has now to inform Mr. Everett that their lordships have directed the paymaster of civil services to pay the

above mentioned sums to any person whom Mr. Everett shall authorize to receive the same on account of the owners of the vessels in question. The undersigned, &c.

EDWARD EVERETT, Esq., &c. &c. &.c.

Mr. Upshur to Mr. Everett.

ABERDEEN.

[Extract.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, October 10, 1843.

I transmit to you herewith the copy of a letter addressed to this department on the 26th ultimo, by Messrs. Brookhouse & Hunt, relating to their claim against the British government in the cases of the "Tigris " and "Seamew," together with a transcript of my note, under date of the 29th of the same month, in reply to their communication.

Mr. Everett to Mr. Upshur.

[Extracts.]

LONDON, November 9, 1843.

In your despatch No. 55, you direct me to renew the claim for compensation in the case of the "Douglas," and to press for a speedy determination of it.

Whilst preparing to execute your instructions in this respect, it occurred to me that Lord Aberdeen had last spring expressed great satisfaction to me at having received information from Mr. Fox that this case would not further be pressed; and, generally, that claims of this kind would not be urged in cases where the vessels detained by British cruisers were engaged in the slave trade.

I thought it necessary to ascertain whether my recollection was correct, and I found it to be so. Lord Aberdeen had received information at the time, from Mr. Fox, that Mr. Webster had informed him that the claim would not be pressed. I transmit an extract from the despatch of Mr. Fox, in which this information was conveyed to the British government.

There is, as you observe, considerable doubt whether the voyage was illegal, though I think there is great reason to believe that the vessel was chartered for an adventure directly connected with the slave trade.

I understand you to consider that the public wrong done to the flag of the United States is sufficiently repaired by the acknowledgment already made by Lord Aberdeen, that the detention of the "Douglas" was not warranted by the law of nations. With respect to the private injury suf fered by the owner of the vessel, although the eventual consequences of the detention are represented by him as very serious, they are, in some respects, of a nature for which no pecuniary atonement can be made—

such as the sickness and death of some of the ship's company, occasioned, as is alleged, by the detention of the vessel eight days at sea. I am not sure that the only item of compensation which would probably be allowed in the settlement of the case by a committee of accounts in Congress would not be demurrage for the time lost in consequence of the eight days' detention.

It may deserve consideration whether it is expedient, after the intimation made by Mr. Webster, and bearing in mind that the vessel was conveying a company of slave factors and their associates to the place of their traffic, with a cargo consigned to one of them, to urge upon this government a claim of that character.

A different course might be necessary, if there were reason to apprehend a recurrence of similar cases; but the detention, you will recollect, took place under circumstances which have long ceased to exist. The instructions given to the British cruisers, under which the "Douglas” and other American vessels were detained and searched, were modified even in the time of Lord Palmerston; and since the accession of the present ministry, the most positive orders have been given in no case to interfere with American vessels.

The subject, however, is one exclusively for the President's consideration.

[Enclosure.]

Extract from a despatch from Mr. Fox of April 27, 1843.

In the course of the conversation Mr. Webster informed me, incidentally, that, in pursuance of the course he is determined to follow, no further demand for compensation will be made in the case of the American ship"Douglas," which has formed the subject of correspondence between the two governments, both through the United States legation in London, and recently through her Majesty's legation at Washington.

Mr. Everett to Mr. Upshur.

[Extract.]

LONDON, November 17, 1843.

I received, on the 6th instant, your despatch No. 63, with the letter of Messrs. Brookhouse & Hunt and your reply enclosed. I immediately addressed a note to Lord Aberdeen on the subject of the claim for the "Tigris" and "Seamew," rectifying the erroneous statement of Mr. Rothery, that Mr. Hillard had agreed to accept the sum which he (Mr. Rothery) was willing to report to this government as compensation to be made to the owners of those vessels for the loss suffered in consequence of their detention, and giving Lord Aberdeen to understand that, without accepting or rejecting the sum tendered, the government of the United States would expect that the matter should be left open for the production of further evidence. I transmit a copy of my note.

[Enclosure.]

46 GROSVENOR PLACE, November 13, 1843.

The undersigned, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States of America, has the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the note addressed to him on the 28th of August by the Earl of Aberdeen, her Majesty's principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. In this note, Lord Aberdeen acquaints the undersigned that he has received from her Majesty's treasury two reports from Mr. Rothery, the gentleman appointed by her Majesty's government to investigate and settle with the undersigned, or such gentleman as might be deputed by him, the claims preferred by the owners of the "Tigris" and "Seamew," on account of the detention of those vessels by her Majesty's cruisers "Waterwitch" and "Persian," respectively.

Lord Aberdeen informs the undersigned that Mr. Rothery, in giving an account of the result of his conferences with Mr. Hillard, the gentleman deputed by the undersigned for this service, states that he had agreed with that gentleman that the amount to be paid by her Majesty's government, as compensation in the case of the "Tigris," is twelve hundred and six pounds nineteen shillings and three pence (£1,206 19s. 3d.) sterling; and, in the case of the "Seamew," is fourteen hundred and fiftytwo pounds and nineteen shillings (£1,452 19s.) sterling; and Lord Aberdeen further makes known to the undersigned that he had accordingly requested the lords of her Majesty's treasury to liquidate this claim, and that their lordships had directed the paymaster of civil services to pay the above mentioned sums to any person authorized by the undersigned to receive the same on account of the owners of the vessels in question. The undersigned, in reply to the note of the Earl of Aberdeen, has the honor to state that Mr. Hillard was deputed to confer with Mr. Rothery, in order to the settlement of the claims of the owners of the "Tigris" and "Seamew;" but that he was not authorized to compromise those claims by accepting, on behalf of the owners, or of the government of the United States, any sum less than the full amount of the claims. The undersigned himself is not clothed with this power, and could not, of course, confer it on Mr. Hillard. No intimation was given by the undersigned to Mr. Rothery, in acquainting that gentleman that Mr. Hillard was deputed to confer with him, that he was authorized to compromise the claims; and Mr. Hillard has informed the undersigned that, from their first interview, he gave Mr. Rothery distinctly to understand that he was not authorized to make any settlement of the question. Accordingly, Mr. Hillard was not invited by Mr. Rothery to sign his report.

After Mr. Rothery had drawn up his report, and before submitting it to the Lords Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury, that gentleman waited upon the undersigned and requested him to unite with himself (Mr. Rothery) in signing the said report. This the undersigned declined to do, assigning, among other reasons, for his refusal, that he had sent to the owners of the "Tigris" and "Seamew" a statement of the objections taken by Mr. Rothery to some items in their claims, in order to give them an opportunity, if possible, to furnish further evidence, or to urge additional arguments in support of the items objected to. The undersigned urged upon Mr. Rothery the propriety of waiting till these owners could be heard from in reply, and the unfairness of hastening to make a report

without allowing a little further time for so reasonable a purpose, when so much time, greatly to the injury of the claimants, had been lost by the omission of the treasury, for several months, to give effect to the Earl of Aberdeen's notification that her Majesty's government had determined to compensate the owners of the " Tigris" and "Seamew." The undersigned supposed that Mr. Rothery left him satisfied with the justice of these observations. Lord Aberdeen may perhaps recollect that the undersigned had the honor of mentioning most of these facts in an interview with his lordship at the Foreign Office, he believes on the 14th August.

The undersigned lost no time in transmitting Lord Aberdeen's letter of the 28th August to Washington; and the owners of the "Tigris" and "Seamew," having informed the Secretary of State that they had sent to the coast of Africa for further evidence in support of some portions of their claims objected to by Mr. Rothery, the undersigned has been instructed to make known this circumstance to the Earl of Aberdeen, and to express the wish, should any such evidence be received, that it may be taken into due consideration. Till the owners of the "Tigris" and "Seamew" have had this opportunity of doing justice to their claims, it will not be in the power of the government of the United States to come to a decision whether the amount of compensation tendered by her Majesty's government, in Lord Aberdeen's letter of the 28th August, ought to be declined or accepted.

The undersigned, &c.

With reference to the case of the "Douglas," you will, in consequence of the assurance said to have been given by Mr. Webster to Mr. Fox, refrain from urging that claim upon the British government, until further instructions are given to you upon the subject.

Mr. Everett to Mr. Nelson.

[Extract.]

LONDON, April 15, 1844.

SIR: On the 29th of May last I received a despatch from the department, numbered 42, transmitting an account of an outrage alleged to have been committed upon an American vessel called the "Rhoderick Dhu,” on the coast of Africa, on the 4th of January preceding. On the 5th of June I addressed a note to Lord Aberdeen representing the case, and requesting that it should be inquired into. In the answer from the Foreign Office,