66

66

success, sometimes one party prevailing, and then "the other. In some of the provinces the success of "the revolutionists appears to have given to their cause more stability than in others. All that your 66 government had a right to claim of the United "States was, that they should not interfere in the " contest, or promote, by any active service, the success of the revolution, admitting that they con"tinued to overlook the injuries received from Spain, "and remained at peace. This right was common to "the colonists. With equal justice might they claim "that we would not interfere to their disadvantage; "that our ports should remain open to both parties,

66

66

as they were before the commencement of the "struggle; that our laws regulating commerce with "foreign nations should not be changed to their injury. "On these principles the United States have acted." (Mr. Monroe to the Chevalier de Onis, January 19, 1816.)

On the 10th of June 1816, Mr. Monroe forwarded to the Chevalier de Onis a copy of a report from M. Dick, attorney of the United States for the district of Louisiana, dated March 1, 1816, denying the Chevalier's allegations of the open enlistment of men and equipment of expeditions to serve against Spain. "A regard to truth makes it necessary to

66

say that what is alleged respecting the arming and "fitting out of vessels within the waters of Louisiana, "to be employed in the service of the revolutionary "Governments against the subjects or property of the

King of Spain, is unfounded. At no period since "the commencement of the struggle between the "Spanish colonies and the mother country have "vessels to be employed in the service of the colonies "been permitted to fit out and arm or to augment their "force at New Orleans or elsewhere within the State "of Louisiana.

"On the contrary, it is notorious that at no one "point of duty have the civil and military authorities "of the United States directed more strenuously, or it " is believed, more successfully, their attention than to "the discovering and suppression of all attempts to vio"late the laws in these respects. Attempts to violate "them by fitting out and arming and by augmenting "the force of vessels, have no doubt been frequent, but "certainly in no instance successful, except where con"ducted under circumstances of concealment that "eluded discovery and almost suspicion, or where "carried on at some remote point of the coast beyond "the reach of detection or discovery. In every "instance where it was known that these illegal acts

were attempting, or where it was afterwards dis"covered that they had been committed, the persons "engaged, as far as they were known, have been prose"cuted, while the vessels fitted out, or attempted to "be fitted out, have been seized and libelled under "the Act of the 5th of June 1794; and when cap"tures have been made by vessels thus fitted out and

66

armed, or in which their force was augmented or "increased within our waters, where the property "taken was brought within our jurisdiction, or even "found upon the high seas by our cruizers and brought in, it has been restored to the original Spanish owners, and, in some instances, damages "awarded against the captors."

Mr. Dick appended a list showing that during the year 1815 seven persons had been prosecuted and six vessels libelled under the Act of 1796 (of which three were condemned) and prizes restored to the Spanish claimants in nine cases.

It does not appear, however, that the measures adopted by the officers of the United States Government, referred to by Mr. Dick, were efficacious in preventing violations of the Foreign Enlistment Act

66

66

State

to the satisfaction of the Spanish Minister, for on the British 2d of January 1817, he addressed a further represen- Papers, r tation to the Secretary of State : "The mischiefs v. p. resulting from the toleration of the armament of "privateers in the ports of this Union, and of bringing "into them, with impunity, the plunder made by these "privateers on the Spanish trade, for the purpose of "distributing it amongst those merchants who have "no scruple in engaging in these piracies, have arisen "to such a height that I should be wanting in my "duty if I omitted to call your attention again to this very important subject. It is notorious that although "the speculative system of fitting out privateers, and "putting them under a foreign flag, one disavowed by "all nations, for the purpose of destroying the Spanish commerce, has been more or less pursued in all the "ports of the Union, it is more especially in those of "New Orleans and Baltimore, where the greatest "violations of the respect due to a friendly nation, " and, if I may say so, of that due to themselves, have "been committed; whole squadrons of pirates having "been out from thence, in violation of the solemn "treaty existing between the two nations, and bringing back to them the fruits of their piracies, without

Five more notes from M. de Onis followed State principally complaining of the captures effected by the "Independencia del Sud" and "Altravida"(see case of "Santissima Trinidad," ) and the asylum afforded to those vessels as well as to the "Congress," "Mongore," and other privateers in American ports.

On the 22d of April the acting Secretary of State inquired whether M. de Onis had power to conclude a treaty, as, if not, it was "deemed improper to Ibid, p. 3. entertain discussions of the kind invited by" his late notes.

M. de Onis continued his representations in eight bid, pp. 3 more notes, in one of which addressed to Mr. J. Q. Adams, dated the 2d of November 1817, he says, "It American "is very disagreeable to me to have to repeat to you, State "sir, what unfortunately I have been several times Papers, vol. "under the necessity of submitting to the President through the medium of your predecessors; namely, "that the Act of Congress of the 3d of March 1817, "has in nowise lessened the abuses by which the laws "are evaded, and render entirely illusory the laud"able purposes for which they were enacted. From "the greater part of the ports of these states, there "frequently sail a considerable number of vessels, "with the premeditated intention of attacking the "Spanish commerce, which carry their armament "concealed in the hold. It rarely happens that they can be arrested, inasmuch as the collectors of cus66 toms say that they have not at their disposition the "naval force necessary to effect it; on the other hand, "armed vessels, under the flag of the insurgents, "enter into the ports of the Union, and not only supply themselves with all necesssaries, but also considerably increase the means they already have "of destroying the trade of Spain, as has recently "been the case at New York, whereby the (so-called) "privateers of His Majesty's revolted provinces, "which are in reality nothing more than pirates, manned by the scum of all countries, enjoy greater privileges than the vessels of independent powers." In May 1818, M. de Onis, referring to a French expedition prepared at Philadelphia under General

M. de Onis to Mr. Adams, October 24, 1818. State Papers, vol. V. p. 265.

Ibid, pp. 267-277.

British State

Lallemand, and which was supposed to be intended to operate against Mexico, stated to Mr. Adams "I "would have considered myself dispensed from the "necessity of again pressing this subject on your

66

attention, if it had appeared possible for me to "restrain these armaments by the employment of "judicial means, but unfortunately the Act of Congress of the 20th of April last, for preserving "neutrality with foreign nations, and others already "in force although highly judicious, are easily eluded; "and although these practices are public and "notorious throughout the whole Union, His "Majesty's consuls advise me that through a deficiency "of evidence they cannot be restrained by a regular application of the law. (The Chevalier de Onis to Mr. Adams, May 7, 1818).

66

66

66

On the 9th of June 1818 M. de Onis represented that there were then at Baltimore four privateers, the Independencia del Sud," the Mongore," the Republicano," and the "Alerta," three of which were notoriously fitted out there, and the fourth was a schooner captured from Spanish owners. All these vessels were commanded by Americans, and manned, with scarcely an exception, by American crews that, however clear the facts might be to everybody, it was in vain to seek evidence to prove them, as "a great "portion of the commercial people of Baltimore being interested in the cases which produce my "present reclamations, no one is willing to come "forward and offer testimony against what is termed "the general interest."

M. de Onis continued his complaints during the summer of 1818, and called attention particularly to the purchase and equipment of two privateers at New York. Mr. Adams at length replied as follows::

"I have received your letters of the 27th ultimo and 5th instant, with their respective inclosures, all of which have been laid before the President. With regard to the two vessels alleged to have been equipped at New York, for the purpose of cruizing under the flag of Buenos Ayres, against Spanish subjects, the result of the examination which has taken place before a Judge of the Supreme Court of the United States has doubtless convinced you that no prosecution commenced by the Government of the United States against the persons charged with a violation of their laws and their neutrality could have been necessary or useful to you, no transgression of the law having been proved against them.

*

*

*

*

*

"I am further instructed by the President to assure you of the satisfaction with which he has seen, in the last paragraph of your letter, your expectation of being speedily enabled to make proposals containing the bases of a treaty which may adjust, to mutual satisfaction, all the existing differences between our two nations, and his earnest hope that this expectation, in the fulfilment of which this Government have confided, and adopted measures corresponding with it, may be realized at an early day."

Negotiations were shortly afterwards set on foot for the conclusion of a treaty between the two countries, for the settlement of the differences which had so long existed between them, and among the proposals put forward by the Spanish Government were a mutual renunciation of "all claims for damages or "injuries which they themselves or their respective "subjects or citizens may have suffered," and the adoption of such laws or measures as might be required" to remedy and cut up by the roots, the abuses "which, contrary to the law of nations, and contrary "to what is expressly stipulated in the treaty of 1795, "above cited, daily occur in some ports of this union, "in consequence of the vague and arbitrary inter"pretation which it seems the measures until now "adopted are susceptible of, and by which means the "law is eluded."-(Mr. Adams to the Chevalier de Onis, October 24, 1818.)

The United States Government assented to the mutual renunciation of claims, but refused the other Papers, vol. proposal, as they considered there was no occasion for any new laws or declarations. "Of the many com

vi. p. 281.

Papers, vol.

plaints which you have addressed to this Govern"ment in relation to alleged transactions in our "ports, the deficiency has been, not in the meaning 66 or interpretation of the treaty, but in the proof of "the facts which you have stated, or which have "been reported to you, to bring the cases of complaint "within the scope of the stipulations of the treaty." (Mr. Adams to M. de Onis, October 31, 1818. To this the Spanish Minister rejoined :— "Whatever may be the forecast, wisdom, and justice British conspicuous in the laws of the United States, it is State universally notorious that a system of pillage and vi. p. 285. aggression has been organized in several ports of the Union against the vessels and property of the Spanish nation; and it is equally so, that all the legal suits hitherto instituted by His Catholic Majesty's Consuls, in the courts of their respective districts, for its prevention, or the recovery of the property, when brought into this country, have been, and still are, completely unavailing. The artifices and evasions by means of which the letter of the law has, on these occasions, been constantly eluded, are sufficiently known, and even the combination of interests, in persons who are well known, amongst whom are some holding public offices. With a view to afford you, and the President, more complete demonstration of the abuses, aggressions, and piracies alluded to, I inclose you correct lists, extracted from authentic documents deposited in the archives of this Legation, exhibiting the number of privateers or pirates fitted out in the United States against Spain, and of the prizes brought by them into the Union, as well as of those sent to other ports, together with the result of the claims made by the Spanish Consuls, in the Courts of this country. Among them you will find the case of two armed ships, the "Horatio " and "Curiazo," built at New York, and detained by His Majesty's Consul there, on the ground of their having on board 30 pieces of cannon concealed, with their carriages, and a crew of 160 men. On which occasion it was pretended that it could not be proved that these guns were not an article of commerce, and they finally put to sea without them, the extraordinary number of officers and crew passing for passengers. The number of privateers, or pirates, fitted out or protected in the ports of this Republic, as well as of the Spanish prizes made by them, far exceeds that contained in the within lists; but I only lay before your Government those of which I have certain and satisfactory proofs. The right of Spain to an adequate indemnity for all the spoliations committed by these privateers, or pirates, on the Crown and subjects of His Catholic Majesty, is undeniable; but I now submit it to your Government, only to point out the extreme necessity of putting an end to these continued acts of hostility and depredation, and of cutting short these enormous and flagrant abuses and evils, by the adoption of such effectual precautions and remedies as will put it out of the power of cupidity or ingenuity to defeat or elude them. In vain should we endeavour amicably to settle and accommodate all existing differences, and thus establish peace and good understanding between the two nations, if the practice of these abuses, and the course of these hostilities and piracies on the commerce and navigation of Spain, should, as heretofore, continue uninterrupted in the United States."-(The Chevalier de Onis to Mr. Adams, November 16, 1818.)

The Secretary of State in reply expressed the State readiness of his Government to continue the nego- vi. p. 291. Papers, vol. tiations, provided the Spanish Minister would consent to waive a certain portion of his proposition (relating to the transactions in Florida, and the western boundary): but added, that if he did not feel at liberty to proceed with the negotiations on those terms, he (Mr. Adams) was ready to exchange with him the ratifications of the Convention of 1802. (Mr. Adams to M. de Onis, November 30, 1818.)

On the 22nd of February, 1819, a treaty of Amity, Settlement, and Limits, was concluded at Washington, between the United States of America and his Catholic

Majesty, and the following is a statement of the claims which each party consented to renounce :

State Papers, vol. viii. p. 530.

Executive

House of

Article IX." The two High Contracting Parties animated with the most earnest desire of conciliation, and with the object of putting an end to all the differences which have existed between them, and of confirming the good understanding which they wish to be for ever maintained between them reciprocally, renounce all claim for damages or injuries which they themselves, as well as their respective citizens and subjects, may have suffered until the time of signing this Treaty.

"The Renunciation of the United States will extend,

"1. To all the injuries mentioned in the Convention of 11th August 1802.

"2. To all claims on account of prizes made by French privateers and condemned by French Consuls within the territory and jurisdiction of Spain.

"3. To all claims of indemnities on account of the suspension of the right of deposit at New Orleans in 1802.

"4. To all claims of citizens of the United States upon the Spanish Government, statements of which, soliciting the interposition of the Government of the United States, have been presented to the Department of State or to the Minister of the United States in Spain since the date of the Convention of 1802, and until the signature of this Treaty.

"The Renunciation of His Catholic Majesty extends,

"1. To all the injuries mentioned in the Convention of 11th August 1802.

"2. To the sums which His Catholic Majesty advanced for the return of Captain Pike from the Provincias Internas.

"To all injuries caused by the expedition of Miranda, which was fitted out and equipped at New York.

"To all claims of Spanish subjects upon the Government of the United States, arising from unlawful seizures at sea or within the ports and territorial jurisdiction of the United States.

Finally, to all the claims of subjects of His Catholic Majesty upon the Government of the United States, in which the interposition of His Catholic Majesty has been solicited before the date of this Treaty, and since the date of the Convention of 1802, or which may have been made to the Department of Foreign Affairs of His Majesty or to his Minister in the United States.

"And the High Contracting Parties respectively renounce all claim to indemnities for any of the recent events or transactions of their respective commanders and officers in the Floridas.

"The United States will cause satisfaction to be made for the injuries, if any, which by process of law shall be established to have been suffered by the Spanish officers and individual Spanish inhabitants by the late operations of the American army in Florida.”

This treaty concludes the published correspondence respecting the Spanish claims.

The correspondence between Portugal and the United States will be found in a convenient shape for reference in the Appendix to the "Alabama" papers re-published by Messrs. Longmans, Green & Co. in 1867.

It was laid before Congress on the 4th of February Documents, 1852, together with the correspondence relating to Representa- the claims of United States citizens in Portugal tives, No. 53, arising out of the case of the "General Armstrong."

#2d Congress, 1st Session.

See also British State Papers, vol. 222. The following is the succinct account of this correspondence given in Lord Russell's note to Mr. Adams of the 30th of August 1865 (Parliamentary Paper, North America, No. 1, 1866, p. 26).

"The correspondence to which I refer began in December 1816, and closed with a letter of the Portuguese Minister in November 1850. It cannot be pretended that the reclamations of a friendly Power extending over 34 years did not receive the gravest attention of the American Government.

"In his first letter the Portuguese Envoy at Washington complains that Mr. Taylor, of Baltimore, an

American citizen, had directed Captain Fish, of the 'Romp,' an American ship, to cruize as privateer under the insurgent colours of Buenos Ayres against the subjects of Portugal.

6

6

"He adds, "The 18th of last month (November) the frigate 'Clifton,' Captain Davis, armed with 32 guns of various calibres, and a crew of 200 men, sailed from Baltimore for Buenos Ayres. This ship anchored below that port, where it has remained for about a fortnight or more waiting for the American ship 'Independence of the South,' armed with 16 guns, and for the ships Romp, Tachahoe,' Montezuma,' and Spanker,' and two others newly constructed, which were fitting with great activity and which had not yet got names. All were to sail together to cruize in the Eastern and Western Seas of South America, under the insurgent colours of Buenos Ayres. No doubt can be entertained of their instructions being the same as those of Captain Fish, and that they will act hostilely against Portuguese ships.'

"The Portuguese Envoy, Joseph Correa de Serra, prays for an amendment of the law of the United States with a view to render it more efficient in such cases. A law having been passed by Congress for this purpose, the Portuguese Envoy, in May 1817, requests that the President will desire the United States' officers on the outposts to use greater vigilance.

"In March 1818 he complains that three Portuguese ships have been captured by privateers fitted in the United States, manned by American crews, and commanded by American captains, though under insurgent colours.'

"In October of the same year the Portuguese Envoy complains that a Portuguese prize is fitting in the Patuxent to cruize against Portuguese commerce.

"In November of the same year the Portuguese Minister states to Mr. Adams that, obliged by his duty to inquire into the nature of the armed ships that had of late insulted the flag of his sovereign, and committed incalculable depredations on the property of his subjects, he had found, to his sorrow, multiplied proofs that many of them were owned by citizens of the United States, and had been fitted in the ports of the Union, He goes on to complain of the difficulties in the way of prosecutions, but compliments the President on his 'honourable earnestness.'

"In December of the same year the Portuguese Minister complains of the armed vessel'Irresistible,' which had been committing 'depredations and unwarrantable outrages on the coast of Brazil.' He says, it is proved by depositions that John Daniels, the commander of the ship, is an American, and all the crew are Americans. He prays that, if the ship should come into an American port, means may be taken to bring the said captain and crew within reach of the laws made to punish such scandalous proceedings.

"In March 1819 M. Correa de Serra states, as Minister of his Sovereign, that Artigas, whose flag is frequently waving in the port of Baltimore, and which is carried by Portuguese prizes in the ports of the Union, has been expelled far from the countries which could afford him the power of navigating, and has not a foot length of sea-shore in South America where he can show himself. He prays that the Artigan flag may be declared illegal.

"In November 1819, after expressing his gratitude for the proceedings of the Executive, the same Minister complains that the evil is rather increasing. He is in possession of a list of fifty Portuguese ships. almost all richly laden, some of them East Indiamen, which had been captured during a period of profound peace. One city alone on the coast of the United States had twenty-six armed ships which preyed on Portuguese commerce, and a week ago three armed ships of this kind were in that port waiting for a favourable occasion for sailing on a cruize.'

"In June 1820, the Portuguese Minister complains that a Portuguese prize had been sold by auction at Baltimore to Captain Chase (a notorious privateersman), and was to be immediately fitted out as a privateer to cruize against the Portuguese Indiamen.

"In July of the same year, the Portuguese Minister sends a list of "the names and value of nineteen Portuguese ships and their cargoes, taken by private armed ships, fitted in the ports of the Union, by citizens of those States." His Sovereign wishes the affair to be treated with that candour and conciliating dignified spirit which becomes two Powers who feel a mutual esteem, and have a proper sense of their moral integrity. In this spirit I have the honour to propose to this Government to appoint Commissioners on their side, with full powers to confer and agree with His Majesty's Ministers on what reason and justice demand.'

"In December 1820 the Chevalier Amado Grehon transmitted to Mr. Adams a copy of twelve claims, with the value of the ships, desiring him to add them to the list furnished by the Chevalier Correa de Serra.

"In April 1822 the same Minister repeats the proposal made in July 1820, of having recourse to Commissaries chosen by both Governments for the purpose of arranging the indemnities justly due to Portuguese citizens for the damage which they have sustained by reason of piracies supported by the capital, and the means of citizens of the United States; an essential condition which, in this way repairing the past, secures also the future.'

"On the 25th of May 1850, the Chargé d'Affaires of Portugal writing to the Secretary of State of the United States declares, 'The undersigned is authorized to come to an understanding with the new Secretary of State upon the subject, and to submit the voluminous documents and papers in his pos'session to the joint examination and decision of the 'Commissioners or Arbitrators appointed by the 'American Government on the one part, and the Undersigned on behalf of Her Majesty's Govern'ment on the other,' &c.

"Having thus related the complaints of the Portugese Government during the years which elapsed from 1816 to 1822, and from 1822 to 1850, I will now give from the organs of the United States the answers which that Government gave to these solemn and reiterated complaints.

"In March 1817, the Secretary of State transmitted to the Portuguese Minister at Washington an Act of Congress passed on the 3rd of that month to preserve more effectually the neutral relations of the United States. On the 14th of March 1818, in answer to a letter complaining of the capture of three Portuguese ships by privateers, Mr. Adams says:

The Government of the United States having used all the means in its power to prevent the fitting out and arming of vessels in their ports to cruize against any nation with whom they are at peace, and having faithfully carried into execution the laws enacted to preserve inviolate the neutral and pacific obligations of this Union, cannot consider itself bound to indemnify individual foreigners for losses by captures, over which the United States have neither control nor jurisdiction. For such events no nation can in principle, nor does in practice, hold itself responsible. A decisive reason for this, if there were no other, is the inability to provide a tribunal before which the facts can be proved.

"The documents to which you refer must of course be ex parte statements, which in Portugal or in Brazil, as well as in this country, could only serve as a foundation for actions in damages, or for the prosecution and trial of the persons supposed to have committed the depredations and outrages alleged in them. Should the parties come within the jurisdiction of the United States, there are Courts of Admiralty competent to ascertain the facts upon litigation between them, to punish the outrages which may be duly proved, and to restore the property to its rightful owners should it also be brought within our jurisdiction, and found, upon judicial inquiry, to have been taken in the manner represented by your letter. By the universal law of nations the obligations of the American Government extend no further.'

"The Secretary of State in subsequent letters promises to prosecute in the United States' Courts

persons chargeable with a violation of the laws of the United States in fitting out and arming a vessel within the United States for the purpose of cruizing against the subjects of the Queen of Portugal.

"To the proposal to appoint Commissioners made in July 1820, the United States' Secretary of State, on the 30th of September of the same year, replies as follows:-

The proposal contained in your note of the 16th of July last has been considered by the President of the United States with all the deliberation due to the friendly relations subsisting between the United States and Portugal, and with the disposition to manifest the undeviating principle of justice by which this Government is animated in its intercourse with all foreign Governments, and particularly with yours. I am directed by him to inform you that the appointment of Commissioners to confer and agree with the Ministers of His Most Faithful Majesty upon the subject to which your letter relates, would not be consistent either with the Constitution of the United States, nor with any practice usual among civilized

nations.'

"He proceeds to say :

"If any Portuguese subject has suffered wrong by the act of any citizen of the United States, within their jurisdiction, it is before those tribunals that the remedy is to be sought and obtained. For any acts of citizens of the United States, committed out of their jurisdiction and beyond their control, the Government of the United States is not responsible.

"To the war in South America, to which Portugal has for several years been a party, the duty and the policy of the United States has been to observe a perfect and impartial neutrality.'

"The same reply is again given to Chevalier Amado Grehon in a letter dated the 30th of April 1822 :

"I am at the same time directed to state, that the proposition of the Chevalier Correa de Serra, in his note of the 16th of July 1820, for the appointment of Commissaries chosen by both Governments to arrange indemnities claimed by Portuguese citizens for damages stated by them to have been sustained by reason of piracies supported by the capital and means of citizens of the United States, cannot be acceded to. It is a principle well known and well understood that no nation is responsible to another for the acts of its citizens, committed without its jurisdiction and out of the reach of its control.'

"The policy of the United States is further explained in a despatch of Mr. Secretary Adams to General Dearborn dated the 25th of June 1822. It is there set forth that in the critical state of the relations of the two countries, it is necessary to employ the agency of a person fully qualified to represent the interests of the United States. It is affirmed that whenever Portuguese captured vessels have been brought within the jurisdiction of the United States, decrees of restitution have been pronounced.

6

"In referring, however, to the list of captures and the demand of a joint Commission to determine and assess the damages to be paid by the United States, the former refusal was thus repeated: As there was no precedent for the appointment of such a Com'mission under such circumstances, and as not a single capture had been alleged for which the United States were justly responsible, this proposal was of course denied; and nothing further was heard upon the subject until the 1st of April last, ' when a note was received from the present Chargé 'd'Affaires of Portugal, leading to a correspondence, copies of which are now furnished you.'

6

"The correspondence seems not to have been resumed till 1850, when, as has been shown, the demand for a Commission was repeated.

"The Secretary of State of the United States thereupon gave this summary and final answer, dated May 30, 1850:

"The undersigned is surprised at the re-appearance of these absolute reclamations, accompanied by the renewal of the ancient proposition to appoint a joint Commission to determine and assess damages, a

Annual Register, 1850.

Memoir of

Lopez in the

New York Herald, quoted in the Chronicle of the of Sep

..nber, 1851.

proposition which was rejected at the time upon substantial grounds; and without the Minister's assurance to that effect, the Undersigned would not have supposed it credible that Portugal seriously cherished any intention to revive them. In reply, therefore, to the note which the Minister of Her Most Faithful Majesty has presented in the name of his Government, the Undersigned must now, by the President's order, inform him that he declines reopening the proffered discussion."

"This despatch is signed 'John M. Clayton.'

"A long and able despatch of the Portuguese Minister at Washington, recapulating all the grievances of Portugal, dated November 7, 1850, does not appear to have received an answer.'

After the close of the war between Spain and Portugal Brazil and the South American provinces the Foreign Enlistment Act seems not to have been called into requisition in any prominent case until 1848, when the United States prohibited a ship of war purchased for the German fleet during the war with Denmark from sailing from New York except under the bond required by the Act of 1818.

In 1850 a remarkable instance was afforded of the manner in which the Foreign Enlistment Act could openly be defied, when the sympathies of the American people were in favour of the offenders, in the expedition against Cuba under Lopez.

Lopez had been for some time preparing an expedition for the invasion of Cuba, and on the 7th of May 1850, left New Orleans in a steamer with about 500 men, accompanied by two other vessels, and on the 17th landed at Cardenas, a small town on the northwest side of the island. Lopez occupied the town; but shortly afterwards troops arrived from Havana, and he was compelled to re-embark, and escaped to Savannah.

On the 27th of May, Lopez was arrested (see Judge Bett's charge in the "Times" of the 13th of June, 1850), but "no delay being granted by the district "judge to procure evidence against him, he was dis"charged, amid the cheers of a large crowd. On the "15th of July, forty-two of the country prisoners

(passengers) were liberated by the Spanish autho"rities and were taken to Pensacola by the United "States ship Albany.' Ten of them were retained "for trial. On the 21st of July the grand jury of "the United States' District Court at New Orleans "found a true bill against Lopez and fifteen others, "for violating the Act of 1818. The Government "failed in making out its case against one or two of "the parties, and finally abandoned the prosecution." Undeterred by the failure of the first expedition, December 1, Lopez at once set to work to organize another, in which he was "countenanced, aided, and joined by "citizens of the United States."

President's

message

1851. Annual Register, 1851.

"Very

"early in the morning of the 3rd of August 1851, a "steamer called the 'Pampero' departed from New New Orleans for Cuba, having on board upwards "of 400 armed men, with evident intentions to make war upon the authorities of that island." The United States Government having received intelligence that such designs were entertained, had issued a proclamation warning American citizens of their unlawful character, and had also given instructions to the proper officers of the United States. However, in spite of these measures, the steamer in which the filibusters were embarked "left New Orleans

66

66

the Cuban authorities, and further expeditions projected. The Spanish Government, however, released and sent back to the United States, a number of prisoners who complained bitterly of having been deceived by Lopez by exaggerated accounts of the condition of affairs in Cuba; and the public feeling in the United States gradually cooled down without any more attempts being made against the Island.

In 1855 the "Maury was detained at New York on the information of Her Majesty's Consul that she was intended for a Russian privateer. The evidence, however, failed, and Sir Joseph Crampton, Her Majesty's Minister, withdrawing the charge against her, the "Maury sailed and nothing more was heard of the matter. It was supposed that she really was intended for a privateer to act in the China seas, but that the Peace of 1856 prevented her from being thus used.

The expeditions of Miranda in 1806, and of Lopez in 1850 and 1851 were rivalled in flagrant violation of the Foreign Enlistment Act by the proceedings of Walker, and the Central American filibusters in 1857, 1858, 1859.

The disturbed state of the Central American Republics, especially Nicaragua rendered them a tempting prey to such adventurers and in November 1857 it was notorious that Walker was fitting out a filibustering expedition.

On the 10th of that month he was arrested at New Orleans, and held to bail in $2,000 (about 4007.) to appear on the 11th for examination, on a charge of infringing the Act of 1818. On the morning of the 11th, however, he embarked with 300 unarmed followers for Mobile, where the party were met by a steamer called the " Fashion," with 50 recruits on board, and set sail, as was supposed for central America. The United States Government gave orders for them to be pursued, and Commodore Paulding succeeded in arresting Walker.

In reporting these occurrences, Lord Napier, then Parliament Her Majesty's Minister at Washington States, "I ary Paper correspond. "believe that the President and General Cass sin- ence respect ing Central "cerely deprecate and regret the present attempt to "invade the peace of Central America." (Lord Napier to the Earl of Clarendon, Nov. 16, 1857.)

America

1856-60. Presented 1860, page 67.

It does not appear whether Walker was brought to trial for this offence, but if so the proceedings could not have been very efficacious, as in the following year he renewed his preparations for an expedition on a larger scale, and on the 30th of October 1858, President Buchanan issued a proclamation: "Whereas Ibid p. 136. "information has reached me, from sources which I "cannot disregard, that certain persons, in violation of "the Neutrality Laws of the United States, are "making a third attempt to set on foot a military expedition within their territory against Nicaragua, a foreign State with which they are at peace.' "From these circumstances the inference is "irresistible that persons engaged in this expedition "will leave the United States with hostile purposes "against Nicaragua. They cannot, under the guise "which they have assumed that they are peaceful "emigrants, conceal their real intentions, and espe"cially when they know, in advance, that their landing will be resisted, and can only be accom"plished by an overpowering force. This expedient was successfully resorted to previous to the last "expedition, and the vessel in which those composing it were conveyed to Nicaragua obtained a "clearance from the collector of the port of Mobile.

66

66

66

Although, after a careful examination, no arms or "munitions of war were discovered, yet, when they "arrived in Nicaragua, they were found to be armed "and equipped and immediately commenced hostilities.

"The leaders of former illegal expeditions of the same character have openly expressed their inten"tion to renew hostilities against Nicaragua. One of "them, who has already been twice expelled from "Nicaragua, has invited, through the public news

papers, American citizens to emigrate to that republic, and has designated Mobile as the place of "rendezvous and departure, and San Juan del Norte