George Coppell to Major-General Benjamin F. Butler, May 13, 1862

BRITISH CONSULATE,                 

New Orleans, May 13, 1862.

Maj. Gen. BENJAMIN F. BUTLER, U.S. Army,

Commanding Department of the Gulf, New Orleans:

SIR: In answering your communication of date of the 11th instant it is my intention to confine myself to a correction of errors in your statement of facts.

The "British Guard" was organized under the general call for service from all residents within the ages which give legal exemption, and as the least obnoxious form in which, as neutrals, they could comply with the requisition. The privileges asked for them, and with some difficulty obtained, limited their service to the lines around the city proper.

From the time it was ascertained that a portion of the U.S. fleet had passed the forts until its arrival before the city, the public mind was disturbed by apprehended violence at home, and the city authorities called upon the foreign brigades, of which the "British Guard" formed part, to suppress any such attempt. Their services were from that moment those of an armed police, which were by yourself and Commodore Farragut gratefully acknowledged.

After several fatiguing days and nights passed in the fulfillment of these duties, between the hours of 2 and 3 a.m. (not 11, as you have it) the Guard left their stations and returned to their armory to deposit their arms, considering that their mission was at an end and that they were no longer wanted. Their existence as an organized body had virtually ceased. One, or it may be two, officers were in the armory, returning with the rest. No meeting was either called or held; there was no voting beyond the few, not exceeding fifteen, with whom the measure originated; no formal announcement of the proposal to dispose of the arms was ever exhibited.

Some of the members left the armory ignorant of any such proposition, though there, when in desultory conversation, among others, it was made and agreed to. It was the resolution of the moment, hardly to be characterized as a deliberate act, and the impulse which prompted it, [it] seems to me, can be reasonably referred to feelings which would actuate men whose friends and former companions [were] with the forces to which the arms are asserted to have been forwarded.

The number of muskets did not exceed thirty-nine, if all were sent, for I am assured that there never was the number you have given (sixty) in the armory.

These facts are verified by all who can speak from personal participation in the whole of parts of them.

The British Guard comprises gentlemen who have large responsibilities intrusted to their charge, and whose absence from the city would result in irreparable injury to the interests confided to their care, and whose word may be received with every confidence as vouchers for the verity of the above statement. The injustice of an order which includes those parties to the act and those who were not requires no explanation on my part. I have before observed that it is not my wish or intention to justify the act; my object is to explain its real import and to diminish the importance which, unexplained, it bears upon its face by stripping it of features which do not properly belong to it.

With reference to that part of your communication which has relation to myself, I would merely add that I furnish in proof of my official capacity letters addressed to me and signed by Earl Russell and Lord Lyons, which, as part of my official register, I must request may be returned to me, and that I am not aware that my accountability for the manner in which I may have fulfilled my duties extend beyond the source from which that authority emanated, and to which your letter will of course be forwarded in all its crudity.

In conclusion, I would say that Mr. Burrowes, to whom I shall exhibit my last communication before sending it, now says that he did tell you that the arms were intended for General Beauregard, but that he could not, from his own knowledge, state whether they were actually forwarded.

Referring to my last communication, I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,

GEORGE COPPELL,                       

Her Britannic Majesty's Acting Consul.

SOURCE: The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series III, Volume 2 (Serial No. 123), p. 127-8

John Russell to Charles Francis Adams, September 8, 1863

Foreign Office, September 8, 1863.

Lord Russell presents his compliments to Mr. Adams, and has the honor to inform him that instructions have been issued which will prevent the departure of the two iron-clad vessels from Liverpool.

SOURCE: Message of the President of the United States and Accompanying Documents, to both Houses of Congress at the Commencement of the First Session of the 38th Congress, Part 1: Papers Relating to the Foreign Affairs, p. 419

Charles Francis Adams to John Russell, September 5, 1863

Legation Of The United States,   

London, September 5, 1863.

My Lord: At this moment, when one of the iron-clad vessels is on the point of departure from this kingdom, on its hostile errand against the United States, I am honored with the reply of your lordship to my notes of the 11th, 16th and 25th of July, and of the 14th of August. I trust 1 need not express bow profound is my regret at the conclusion to which her Majesty's government have arrived. I can regard it no otherwise than as practically opening to the insurgents free liberty in this kingdom to execute a policy described in one of their late publications in the following language:

“In the present state of the harbor defences of New York, Boston, Portland, and smaller northern cities, such a vessel as the Warrior would have little difficulty in entering any of these ports and inflicting a vital blow upon the enemy. The destruction of Boston alone would be worth a hundred victories in the field. It would bring such a terror to the 'blue-noses,' as to cause them to wish eagerly for peace, despite their overweening love of gain which has been so freely administered to since the opening of this war. Vessels of the Warrior class would promptly raise the blockade of our ports, and would even, in this respect, confer advantages which would soon repay the cost of their construction.”

It would be superfluous in me to point out to your lordship that this is war. No matter what may be the theory adopted of neutrality in a struggle, when this process is carried on in the manner indicated, from a territory and with the aid of the subjects of a third party, that third party to all intents and purposes ceases to be neutral. Neither is it necessary to show, that any- government which suffers it to be done fails in enforcing the essential conditions of international amity towards the country against whom the hostility is directed. In my belief it is impossible that any nation, retaining a proper degree of self-respect, could tamely submit to a continuance of relations so utterly deficient in reciprocity. I have no idea that Great Britain would do so for a moment.

After a careful examination of the full instructions with which I have been furnished, in preparation for such an emergency, I deem it inexpedient for me to attempt any recurrence to arguments for effective interposition in the present case[.]  Under these circumstances, I prefer to desist from communicating to your lordship even such further portions of my existing instructions as are suited to the case, lest I should contribute to aggravate difficulties already far too serious. I therefore content myself with informing your lordship that I transmit, by the present steamer, a copy of your note for the consideration of my government, and shall await the more specific directions that will be contained in the reply.

I seize this opportunity to pray permission of your lordship to correct a clerical error inadvertently made in my note of the 3d instant, in inserting the date of two notes of mine as having received the express approbation of my government. The intention was to specify only one, that of the 11th of July. The correction is not material, excepting as it conforms more strictly to the truth.

I pray your lordship to accept the assurances of the highest consideration with which I have the honor to be, my lord, your most obedient servant,

CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS.

Right Honorable Earl Russell, &c., &c., &c.

SOURCE: Message of the President of the United States and Accompanying Documents, to both Houses of Congress at the Commencement of the First Session of the 38th Congress, Part 1: Papers Relating to the Foreign Affairs, p. 418-9

Charles Francis Adams to John M. Forbes, September 7, 1863

London, 7 September, 1863.

I have been taking a little vacation in Scotland, which must account to you for my failure earlier to notice yours of the 4th ulto.

We are now all in a fever about Mr. Laird's ironclads, one of which is on the point of departure, and the other launched and getting ready, with double gangs of workmen at it night and day. The question now is, will government interfere; and it must be settled in a day or two at furthest. I have done all in my power to inspire them with a just sense of the responsibility they may incur from permitting so gross a breach of neutrality. If, however, they fail to act, you may perhaps soon see one of the vessels, with your glass from Milton Hill, steaming up to Boston, as the Richmond paper threatened. She will stand a cannonade, unless the harbor be obstructed. It will be for Governor Andrew to be on the watch the moment the news of her departure reaches America. She will be delayed a little by the necessity of taking her armament at some other point.

Of course, if all this takes place, I shall be prepared to make my bow to our friends in London, as soon as the papers can be made out. . . .

P. S. 9 September. Since writing this the government has decided to stop the vessels.

Yours truly,

C. F. A.¹

_______________

¹ On the 5th of September Mr. Adams wrote to Lord Russell: “At this moment, when one of the ironclad vessels is on the point of departure from this kingdom on its hostile errand against the United States, it would be superfluous for me to point out to your lordship that This Is War.”

The answer (Sept. 8) was: “Instructions have been issued which will prevent the departure of these two ironclad vessels from Liverpool.”

Still the decision of the British government was but a postponement, for Mr. Adams wrote (Sept. 17): “The departure of the rams seems to be uncertain.” This was confirmed by what he heard from Lord Russell (Sept. 25), that “the departure of the rams is under consideration.” Draper's American Civil War, vol. iii, pp. 171,172.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 56-7