Diary of Gideon Welles: Tuesday, January 19, 1864

At the Cabinet to-day the President read letters from certain Louisiana planters and from General Banks and others, urging the admission of cotton within our lines. He also read the rough draft of a letter prepared by himself, designating New Orleans and Baton Rouge as depots for cotton to be brought thither, sold for “greenbacks,” etc., etc. It had been submitted to Chase and Stanton previously, who both indorsed and perhaps advised, if they did not first suggest, it. Seward and Blair thought it might operate well. Stanton said General Grant was opposed to action in his command, but as Banks favored it, he thought it might be well to let the matter go forward as the President proposed. I suggested that the effect would be good to open the whole country west of the Mississippi above New Orleans. But the President said it might disturb General Grant.

The present demonstration of factious grumblers and interested knaves against the Navy Department is alleged want of speed in our boats. Mr. Fox, Isherwood, and others are not able to submit to this abuse with as much composure as myself, and to stop their clamor Fox desires to challenge the Chamber of Commerce to a trial of speed. I told him that nothing would be made by it. If we were to have a trial and they were beaten, they would at once abuse the Navy Department for wasting time and money in boat-racing. Governor Dennison was present and thought the effect of a race would on the whole be well. The Naval Committee are detaining the Eutaw here, and that boat might be used. Somewhat reluctantly and doubtingly I assented to his writing a letter to G. W. Blunt, who I suspect first proposed it.

Have a strange letter from C. B. Sedgwick, who is under pay, revising the Navy laws, but spends much of his time in advocating suspicious claims from scheming contractors. He advises, with some tact and ability, an abandonment of the trials now in progress in Philadelphia for malfeasance.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 511-2

Diary of Gideon Welles: Monday, January 18, 1864

A batch of letters has been sent us from the provost marshal, disclosing a mass of fraud and intrigue on the part of a set of assuming men that is as amusing as reckless. General Haupt, Naval Constructor Griffiths, Gwyn[?] of the Treasury, Hamilton Norris, and others figure in the affair. About a year since General H. published a series of questions for the improvement and progress of the Navy Department, which he and his associates appeared inclined to take into their keeping. This correspondence brings to light the secret intrigues of these scoundrels.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 511

Diary of Gideon Welles: Monday, January 11, 1864

Mr. Seward sent to me at my house on Saturday evening a voluminous bundle of dispatches, which had been placed in his hands by Lord Lyons, relative to the case of the Chesapeake, and desired me after reading them to interchange views in regard to the course to be pursued.

The documents were, first, sundry papers from a Mrs. Henry of Halifax, complaining that her husband and a brother had gone on board the Chesapeake on the 15th of December, and she apprehended they were detained. The owner and captain of the schooner Intendant, which was in [Sambro Harbor] when the American gunboat Ella and Annie took possession of that vessel, says he saw them on board and did not see them leave. He further avers that when the Ella and Annie appeared off the harbor, the Chesapeake raised the American flag union down, and he with his vessel ran a few hundred yards further up the harbor; that the boats of the Ella and Annie after taking possession of the Chesapeake, boarded the Intendant, took some trunks that had been brought from the C. and a man, Wade, who had been secreted, etc., etc. The other papers related to the capture of the Chesapeake, her surrender to the Colonial authorities, etc., much as we have in the newspapers.

It is evident the first papers, relating to the Henrys and the schooner, were thrust into the foreground for a purpose, and are a matter which should have no connection with the act of piracy.

I called on the Secretary of State this morning and told him the case required no hasty action on his part. That it had gone into the Admiralty Court, which was all very well if the British authorities had anything to do in the premises. My advice is to wait, and not be drawn into any premature action.

Mr. Blair, the elder, and Governor Dennison of Ohio called on me last evening. The chief talk related to Presidential matters, current events, and proceedings in Congress. They were both at the President's to-day, and it seems some conversation took place in regard to Senator Hale's strange course towards the Navy Department, he being Chairman of the Committee. The President said it was to him unaccountable except in one way, and that did no credit to Hale's integrity. It was unpleasant to think a Senator made use of his place to spite a Department because it would not permit him to use its patronage for his private benefit.

Both Mr. Blair and Governor Dennison were pretty full of the Presidency, and I apprehend they had a shadow of doubt in regard to my opinions and preferences, and yet I know not why they should have had. The subject is one on which I cared to exhibit no intense partisanship, and I may misjudge the tone of public sentiment, but my convictions are and have been that it is best to reelect the President, and if I mistake not this is the public opinion. On this question, while not forward to announce my views, I have had no concealment.

I am inclined to believe that there have been whispered misrepresentations from sly intriguers in regard to me that have given some anxiety to Blair and Dennison. The conduct of Dixon has been singular in some respects, and he has a willing tool in Brandegee.¹ . . .

_______________

¹ Augustus Brandegee, a Member of Congress from Connecticut.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 508-9

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, January 9, 1864

Grimes tells me that the reports in last evening's papers are meagre and perverted, doing no justice to the Navy Department as it stood before the Senate, nor to the debate of yesterday. He says Hale was entirely used up, and had not a single friend in the Senate. Senator Clark, Hale's colleague, came to see me; says he has privately admonished Hale of the injury he was doing the country, as well as bringing ruin upon himself, by his strange course. I am, personally, not sorry that Hale makes this exhibition of his vicious mind and tendencies. Utterly indifferent to the rights and feelings of others, holding a position of power and yet not of responsibility, he has slandered and defamed the good more than the bad, and delighted to show his immensity and ability from his place to abuse.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 507-8

Diary of Gideon Welles: Tuesday, January 6, 1864

A patent lawyer named Dickerson prepared and published what he calls a plea or argument in a case before the court in Washington that is a tissue of the vilest misrepresentations and fabrications that could well be gathered together, if I may judge from such parts as I have seen. I do not see the New York Herald, in which it was published and paid for. The great object appears to have been a reckless assault on Isherwood, Engineer-in-Chief, but the Department is also in every way assailed. Of course the partisan press in opposition take up and indorse as truth these attacks, and vicious men in Congress of the opposition and equally vicious persons of the Administration side adopt and reëcho these slanders. It is pitiable to witness this morbid love of slander and defamation. That there may have been errors I cannot doubt, but not in the matter charged by Dickerson.

I think Isherwood has exerted himself to discharge his duty, and serve the government and country. His errors and faults — for he cannot be exempt — I shall be glad to have detected and corrected, but the abuse bestowed is wholly unjustifiable and inexcusable. As he is connected with the Navy Department, any accusation against him, or any one connected with the Department, furnishes the factious, like J. P. Hale, an opportunity to vent their spite and malignity by giving it all the importance and notoriety they can impart. I hear of Hale and H. Winter Davis and one or two others cavilling and exerting themselves to bear down upon the Engineer-in-Chief. There is an evident wish that he should be considered and treated as a rogue and a dishonest man, unless he can prove himself otherwise. Truth is not wanted, unless it is against him and the Department.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 504-5

Gideon Welles to William H. Seward, August 26, 1863

Navy Department,

26 Aug. 1863.

Sir,

I have had the honor to receive your communication of the 4th Ins't. & 14th Ins't., in relation to the case of the British schooner "Mont Blanc," captured by the U. S. Steamer “Octorara,” Commander Collins, and released by the Prize Court at Key West.

In your letter of the 4th Ins't., which gives a summary of the correspondence in relation to this case, you refer to the order of the prize court, in which “it is declared that the cause of the U. S. against the schooner ‘Mont Blanc’ and cargo, having come on to be heard, it is ordered by consent of all the parties interested that the vessel and cargo be released to the claimant for the benefit of whom it may concern; that there was probable cause for the capture and detention of the vessel and that each party pay his own costs.”

And in the same letter you state that “so far as relates to damages, the ground was expressly taken in the correspondence with Lord Lyons that the master and owner had waived damages by accepting the decree and restitution of his vessel. But there still remained a party and rights which the prize court did not foreclose. That party was the Government of Great Britain, and its claim was one for redress for injuries to its sovereignty and dignity by a violation of her territory. No prize court of our country can try and decide a National claim of this sort."

Your letter of the 14th Ins't. encloses a copy of a note from Lord Lyons, in which he says that on being informed by you that directions to proceed to the assessment of damages in this case would be given to Rear Admiral Bailey, he would on his part take care that proper directions should be sent to Mr. Vice Consul Butterfield and that he, Lord Lyons, is waiting for this information before taking any further steps.

It appears, therefore, that this Depar't is expected to give directions for the assessment of damages in a case where it has repeatedly stated it would be improper for the Department to interfere, where the Judicial tribunal, which had cognizance, had decided that no damages are due, and where it is admitted that the master and owner have renounced all claim to damages.

The Department has been placed in this unfortunate and somewhat anomalous position, partly by its own fault in too readily acquiescing in the proffered reparation by the State Department, and an arrangement that had been made by that Department with Her Majesty's representative, to ascertain and agree upon the damages to be paid, and to consider and dispose of the whole subject.

In consequence of the representations communicated in your letter of the 7th of May, the Department has conveyed to the Commander of the Octorara the Executive censure for doing what the Court has decided he was excusable in doing. Although in this case of the “Mont Blanc,” as on repeated occasions, the impropriety of interfering in matters of prize, which belong legitimately to the courts, was freely expressed, yet under the urgent appeals that were made, an assurance that the amount was small, and the case could be more speedily and satisfactorily disposed of, by referring it to some person at or near Key West to consider and dispose of the whole subject without an appeal to the Court, the Department, without fully considering the effect, and the legal power to afford reparation, was induced, in accordance with your request that some suitable person should be designated to take part in a conference as to damages, to name Acting Rear Admiral Bailey, for it knew no other in that locality unconnected with the Court.

No instructions, however, have yet been given Acting Rear Admiral Bailey, and the case, as it now stands, is such that the Department doubts its power to give the instructions which seem to be required and expected. The powers of the Department are limited by law, and I am aware of no law which authorizes it to decide what you represent as a political claim only to be tried and adjudicated by the two Governments concerned, — “a national claim of this sort.” The authority of the Department extends only to legal, individual claims, in cases where it is clearly responsible in law for the acts of its agents. But in this case the law, or the tribunal which had authority to expound and administer the law, has exonerated the agent of the Department from any responsibility. It is admitted that there is no claim in law — only a political claim: no individual claim, but “a national claim.”

In such a case the Depar't would be perplexed in attempting to assess the damages, or in instructing others how to assess them. If it admits in this case that the legal renunciation of damages was of no effect, and that the claimant retained a legal claim for damages, it must make the same admission in every case, and ignore a well settled rule of admiralty and international law.

If it undertakes to estimate a pecuniary equivalent for an aggression upon the dignity of a foreign government, its action might seem offensive, while it had every disposition to avoid giving offense. An apology for an injury to “sovereignty and dignity” may be more or less earnest, but how can such injuries be estimated in dollars and cents, or pounds, shillings and pence? It is to be presumed that the British Government does not desire the claim to be considered in this light.

It may be said the amount of damages in this case would be the amount which the Court at Key West would have awarded, had its decision been what a foreign government claims would have been righteous. But the Department cannot assent to this, for it has no authority to repudiate or set aside the decision of a Court of the United States. That can be done only by a Superior Court or by Congress. It is the duty of this Department to respect and obey the decisions of the Courts of the United States.

It is said that the decree “did not foreclose” the rights of the Government of Great Britain to claim redress in this case. In one sense — to a certain extent — this is true. The decision of the highest court in the land would not be conclusive on a foreign government. But if a claimant voluntarily renounces his claim, or right to appeal, can his government claim that justice has been denied him? Does not ordinary comity “foreclose” any government from taking it for granted that it cannot obtain justice from the tribunals of another, until it has at least made the attempt? In this case of the “Mont Blanc” there was an appeal open to the Supreme Court of the United States. Had it been taken, the result might possibly have been that the decree of the lower court would have been set aside and the case remanded with directions to grant ample damages; or, on the other hand, the decree of the lower court might have been confirmed, for reasons so clear and convincing that the claimant himself would have acquiesced, and his government have been foreclosed by its own sense of justice.

Viewing the matter in this light, it appears to me that the right of the British Government to claim damages in this particular case has been foreclosed, not by the decision of the Prize Court at Key West, but by the acquiescence of the claimants in that decision. The question of damages for injuries to “sovereignty and dignity” is one which this Department has no authority to investigate or settle, and should pecuniary amends be required, it has no fund at its disposal to which the disbursement could be charged.

Acting Rear Admiral Bailey having been designated as a suitable person to confer on the subject of damages, before it was known that the Court had adjudicated the case, I have the honor to enclose herewith a copy of the order which has been sent to that officer, directing him to attend to the duty, should it be further prosecuted, whenever he shall receive instructions from the Secretary of State in the premises.

Very respectfully,

Gideon Welles,

Secty. of Navy.

Hon. Wm. H. Seward,

Secty. of State.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 423-6

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, August 24, 1863

Our advices from Charleston show progress, though slow. The monitors perform well their part. Few casualties have occurred. We hear of a sad one to-day however, in the death of George Rodgers,¹ one of the noblest spirits in the service. It is sad that among so many he, who has perhaps no superior in the best qualities of the man, the sailor, and the officer, should have been the victim. The President called on me in some anxiety this morning, and was relieved when he learned it was not John Rodgers of Atlantic fame. But without disparagement to bold John, no braver, purer spirit than gallant, generous, Christian George could have been sacrificed, and I so said to the President.

Am annoyed and vexed by a letter from Seward in relation to the Mont Blanc. As usual, he has been meddlesome and has inconsiderately, I ought to say heedlessly and unwittingly, done a silly thing. Finding himself in difficulty, he tries to shift his errors on to the Navy Department. He assumes to talk wise without knowledge and to exercise authority without power.

The history of this case exemplifies the management of Mr. Seward. Collins in the captured the Mont Blanc on her way to Port Royal. The capture took place near Sand Key, a shoal or spit of land over which the English claim jurisdiction. I question their right to assume that these shoals, or Cays, belong to England, and that her jurisdiction extends a marine league from each, most of them being uninhabited, barren spots lying off our coast and used to annoy and injure us. I suggested the propriety of denying, or refusing to recognize, the British claim or title to the uninhabited spots; that the opportunity should not pass unimproved to bring the subject to an issue. But Mr. Seward flinched before Lord Lyons, and alarmed the President by representing that I raised new issues, and without investigating the merits of the case of the Mont Blanc, which was in the courts, he hastened to concede to the English not only jurisdiction, but an apology and damages. It was one of those cases alluded to by Sir Vernon Harcourt, when he admonished his government that “the fear was not that Americans would yield too little, but that England would take too much.” Seward yielded everything, — so much as to embarrass Lord Lyons, who anticipated no such humiliation and concession on our part, and therefore asked time. The subject hung along without being disposed of. Seward, being occasionally pushed by Lord Lyons, would come to me. I therefore wrote him on the 31st of July a letter which drew from him a singular communication of the 4th inst., to which I have prepared a reply that will be likely to remain unanswered.

_______________

1 Commander George Washington Rodgers, who was killed in the attack on Fort Wagner, August 17, 1863.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 415-7

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, August 15, 1863

Certain persons in Boston have an innate conviction that they can improve the administration of the Navy Department. They are never united among themselves as to how this is to be effected, but all are fond of criticism. They always claim that they expected this thing would fail or that would succeed after the event occurred. I must do them the justice to say, however, that with all their grumbling and faultfinding they have generally given me a fair support. In special cases, where I have been lectured, I have invariably found there was an axe to grind, a purpose to be accomplished. Some one, or more, important personage has had suggestions to make, and for a consideration — never omitting that — would consent to help along the work of putting down the Rebellion. These have been the captious ones.

A man by the name of Weld has written a long letter to Governor Andrew. He wants the Governor to aid the Navy Department by writing to the President to form a Naval Board in Massachusetts, with authority to build vessels, fast steamers, such as Massachusetts can build, steamers which will capture or destroy the Alabama, and allow the Massachusetts Board to commission the officers. If there is no appropriation, says good Mr. Weld, take the necessary funds from the Secret Service money. Mr. Weld informs Governor Andrew he is ready to be employed. Governor Andrew indorses over the letter. He also indorses Mr. Weld, who is, he says, one of the most eminent shipbuilders in Massachusetts, and he (Governor A.) is ready to cooperate with Mr. Weld in his patriotic suggestions, etc., etc., etc. This is Boston all over. I have had it from the beginning and periodically. The Welds, etc., from the commencement of hostilities, have prompted and promised almost anything, only requiring the Government to give them power and foot the bills.

I had to-day a very full and interesting account of the campaign and fall of Vicksburg from General F. P. Blair, who has done good service in the field and in politics also. He was a fearless pioneer in the great cause of the Union and breasted the storm in stormy Missouri with a bold front. Of the factions and feuds in St. Louis I pretend to no accurate knowledge, and am no partisan of or for either. Frank is as bold in words as in deeds, fearless in his utterances as in his fights; is uncalculating, — impolitic, it would be said, — rash, without doubt, but sincere and patriotic to the core. I detect in his conversation to-day a determination to free himself from personal and local complications, and if possible to reconcile differences. It is honorable on his part, but I apprehend he has materials to deal with that he cannot master.

G. W. Blunt came to see me. Ridicules Barney and all the government officials in New York but Wakeman. Says old General Wool made himself ridiculous in the mob difficulties. Calls him a weak old man. If weak, it is from age, for there is no one more patriotic. At eighty he was not the proper man to quell an outbreak. Blunt and others are sore over the removal of General Harvey Brown. He is earnest to have the draft go forward, but says it will be followed by incendiarism. It may be so. Blunt is ardent, impulsive, earnest, and one-sided.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 404-6

Diary of Gideon Welles: Monday, July 27, 1863

Had a strange letter from Senator John P. Hale, protesting against the appointment of Commodore Van Brunt to the command of the Portsmouth Navy Yard, because he and V. B. are not on friendly terms. He wishes me to become a party to a personal controversy and to do injustice to an officer for the reason that he and that officer are not in cordial relations. The pretensions and arrogance of Senators become amazing, and this man, or Senator, would carry his private personal disagreement into public official actions. Such are his ideas of propriety and Senatorial privilege and power that he would not only prostitute public duty to gratify his private resentment, but he would have the Department debased into an instrument to minister to his enmities.

I have never thought of appointing Van Brunt to that yard, but had I intended it, this protest could in no wise prevent or influence me. With more propriety, I could request the Senate not to make Hale Chairman of the Naval Committee, for in the entire period of my administration of the Navy Department, I have never received aid, encouragement, or assistance of any kind whatever from the Chairman of the Naval Committee of the Senate, but constant, pointed opposition, embarrassment, and petty annoyance, of which this hostility to Van Brunt is a specimen. But I have not, and shall not, ask the Senate to remove this nuisance out of their way and out of my way. They have witnessed his conduct and know his worthlessness in a business point of view; they know what is due to the country and to themselves, as well as to the Navy Department.

The Mexican Republic has been extinguished and an empire has risen on its ruins. But for this wicked rebellion in our country this calamity would not have occurred. Torn by factions, down-trodden by a scheming and designing priesthood, ignorant and vicious, the Mexicans are incapable of good government, and unable to enjoy rational freedom. But I don't expect an improvement of their condition under the sway of a ruler imposed upon them by Louis Napoleon.

The last arrivals bring us some inklings of the reception of the news that has begun to get across the Atlantic of our military operations. John Bull is unwilling to relinquish the hope of our national dismemberment. There is, on the part of the aristocracy of Great Britain, malignant and disgraceful hatred of our government and people. In every way that they could, and dare, they have sneakingly aided the Rebels. The tone of their journals shows a reluctance to believe that we have overcome the Rebels, or that we are secure in preserving the Union. The Battle of Gettysburg they will not admit to have been disastrous to Lee, and they represent it as of little importance compared with Vicksburg and Port Hudson, which they do not believe can be taken. Palmerston and Louis Napoleon are as much our enemies as Jeff Davis.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 384-5

John A. Andrew to Gideon Welles, July 16, 1863

Commonwealth Of Massachusetts,

Executive Department, Boston, July 16, 1863.

Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your communication of the 11th instant, in reply to mine of the 1st. I should have answered you at once, but have been prevented from doing so until to-day by absorbing engagements arising from the outbreak here on the 14th instant.

I regret that any expression of mine should be regarded by you as unjust, and as the statement in question is not at all material to the substance of the letter I desire that it may be considered as withdrawn, but with the explanation that it was made upon the authority of municipal officers and citizens of Gloucester, the shipping of which town more than any other was affected by the Tacony, and that it was based by them upon the assurances of their own shipmasters that, after the Tacony first made her appearance in the neighborhood of the Vineyard Sound, four days passed, during which she burned numerous vessels, before Federal cruisers made their appearance there in pursuit of her. I am glad now to be able, on the authority of the Department, to assure my informants that, during these four days, more than twenty vessels of war, of which no less than fourteen were steamers, were engaged in one direction or another in such pursuit. It was not at all my intention to deny that any of these vessels had been sent out after the Tacony, for as to that the sources of information were not open to me. What I was, however, on the authority of intelligent shipmasters of Gloucester, induced to believe and to say was that no such armed vessels were sent along this coast for its protection until after the Tacony had swept the Vineyard Sound. But any discussion on this point is immaterial to the purpose of my letter of the 1st instant. It would be profitless to continue it. I am glad to infer from your statement of the great number of vessels sent in pursuit of the Tacony that some of them must have been chasing her near the Vineyard Sound during the four days in question, in which she captured and burned the Gloucester fishermen, and that therefore the Gloucester people were probably mistaken in their statements to me, and I beg that my remark may be considered as withdrawn.

The purpose of my letter of the 1st instant was to do my duty to the State over which I preside, by urging upon the Navy Department hereafter to guard against such raids as that of the Tacony by stationing armed vessels along this coast, and particularly within easy reach of the Vineyard Sound. My fruitless request in that behalf last February, at the time when the Alabama was reported as in this neighborhood, is perhaps within your recollection. I was then refused. Later in the year the effort was renewed by me, and I was assured on May 2 that, expressly for the protection of this coast, a fast cruiser should be stationed here always prepared for service. If the knowledge that cruisers are now along the coast is likely to prevent a repetition of such outrages as that of the Tacony, surely the same means, if they had been seasonably adopted, would have deterred the Tacony from appearing here at all. But I have no knowledge that during the six weeks which passed between the date of May 2 and the date of the appearance of the Tacony in Vineyard Sound, any fast cruiser was placed here according to the Department's assurance on the former date.

Believe me, sir, that I am deeply sensible of the difficulties as well as of the duties of the Navy Department. It is certainly a difficult duty to guard the Northern coast in addition to blockading the Southern coast, but certainly also the Department has the ability successfully to accomplish it and to prevent the recurrence of a day when, for fear of rebel cruisers, insurance shall be at the rate of 4½ per cent for freight from Philadelphia to Boston.

I beg in conclusion to forward to you copies of communications I have received from the selectmen of Provincetown while I have been writing this letter, and I have the honor to remain,

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

John A. Andrew,

Governor of Massachusetts.

Hon. Gideon Welles,

Secretary of the Navy.

[Enclosure.]

The inhabitants of Provincetown are extremely anxious for a vessel to be sent to Provincetown for the protection of that harbor, as it is very much exposed to rebel invasion, they having already threatened to burn the town. It being at the extreme end of Cape Cod, the harbor is large and commodious, easy of access, sufficient depth of water for any vessel; consequently, it at times has 300 or 400 sail of vessels there at one time; and should a pirate or privateer enter he could destroy the shipping, village, the Race light, [Long] Point light, and Highland light, as we have no means of defense whatever. Our harbor is generally known, as there are many fishermen belonging to British provinces sailing from our town, and have previously sailed from there, who may now be on board of those piratical vessels already to pilot them in. They have an inducement to do so, as we have a steam packet plying between Provincetown and Boston; also a bank from which they might demand $200,000, more or less.

We therefore pray some vessel of sufficient capacity to repel any rebel invasion may be sent to our harbor as early as possible, to give us protection, until some other means are adopted for our protection, by fortification or otherwise. And not only ours, but for the numerous vessels seeking shelter in that harbor from other places. The harbor is considered to be the key of Massachusetts Bay, and one of the best in the United States.

We also pray for 150 or 200 muskets, with the necessary equipment, that we may be prepared to meet any equal foe that may attempt to land on the back of our town; also two artillery pieces on carriages and ammunition sufficient for the same.

John Nickerson,

Robert Soper,

Committee from Provincetotm.

SOURCE: Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebelion, Series I, Volume 2, p. 347-8

John A. Andrew to Gideon Welles, July 1, 1863

Commonwealth Of Massachusetts,

Executive Department, Boston, July 1, 1863.

Sir: I am receiving representations daily, both oral and written, from towns and cities along the Massachusetts coast, setting forth their defenseless condition, concerning which the recent exploits of the Tacony have caused additional apprehension.

A swift war steamer stationed at Provincetown would, in my opinion, be the most effectual means under existing circumstances to promote their security. Without such a guard for the coast, a rebel vessel, manned by as daring a crew as that of the Tacony, might burn half the towns along Cape Cod, and might even lay, for a few hours such ports as Salem, Marblehead, Beverly, Gloucester, Rockport, and Newburyport, under contribution, none of which are defended by a single gun. Such a steamer as the Alabama or the Florida could, I believe, do this without so great risk as such an enterprise ought to involve. The ignorance of the rebels as to our defenseless condition is our most effectual protection in the absence of action by the Navy Department. For the present moment the Navy has cruisers all along this coast, but they are only temporarily here, and were not sent until the Tacony had rioted along the Vineyard Sound for four days. The presence of a swift war steamer at Provincetown, or in its neighborhood, guarding from that position both the mouths of Massachusetts Bay and of the Vineyard Sound, would probably have prevented the Tacony from venturing here at all.

I have had the honor previously to address this same request to the Department. I beg you to believe that it is only my clear sense of its importance which induces me to urge it again upon your consideration.

I have the honor to remain, sir, obediently, yours,

John A. Andrew,

Governor of Massachusetts.

Hon. Gideon Welles,

Secretary of the Navy.

SOURCE: Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebelion, Series I, Volume 2, p. 340

Diary of Gideon Welles: Sunday, June 21, 1863

I have three telegrams from Dr. Whelan to-day, all of the same tenor. The last, at 4 p.m., says Admiral Foote continues much the same, — insensible and slowly sinking. Dahlgren, who left New York yesterday, says the case is hopeless, that Foote told him it was the last of this world and he was prepared for the event.

We have pretty authentic reports of a protracted fight at Aldie. The War Department is not communicative, and I apprehend for the reason that it is not better advised than the rest of us, as yet. A train of ambulances passed this evening, going, I doubt not, for the wounded.

The Richmond papers speak of the capture of the steamer Fingal by our ironclads. This is important, and I am inclined to credit it. John Rodgers has written his family that he was in Nassau Sound, having been ordered there to watch the Fingal. The Richmond report corresponds with this, and states she was captured after a fight of thirty minutes with the monitors.

I had to-day a full and unreserved talk with Dahlgren. Told him it was now evident Foote could not go on the service to which he was ordered, — at all events, if he survived, not for the present; I should therefore designate him to relieve Du Pont. This would, to some extent, involve the selection of a new staff, for it was not likely that Foote's confidants were his confidants. [I remarked] that not unlikely some of the elder officers who had seen great sea service would feel disinclined to remain on the station under him; that in giving him this command I was consulting the wishes of the President; that to supersede Du Pont, under any circumstances, involved some risk and responsibility to both the Department and the recipient; that he could not be unaware his promotion had caused some discontent, and that it would not be lessened by this command. If any of his seniors in past times desired to be transferred, they must be permitted to do so, without prejudice.

I stated that this appointment was a specialty, imposed upon the Department by Admiral Foote's affliction when on his way to assume these duties; that this interruption made prompt action necessary; that he had sought the privilege of leading in the assault on Sumter under Du Pont; that I had proposed him as an assistant and second to Foote; that he was to go for a particular purpose, and his absence from the Bureau would therefore be temporary. In the mean time, Commander Wise, the assistant who had been associated with him, could take charge of and go forward with the ordnance duties as well as, and perhaps better than, any one else. To all this he assented, but expressed a strong wish that a new appointment might be made, and he entirely relieved from the Bureau. I replied that I could not for a moment think of relieving him of charge of the ordnance, nor ought he to ask, or be willing, to relinquish it; that was his place, to which he had been educated and for which he had aptitude, and it was my wish he should retain his position as Chief of the Ordnance Bureau during my connection with the Department.

As related to any demonstration on Charleston, should any be made, he was to consider himself clothed with full powers, and to prescribe details, communicating at all times and without reserve to the Department; to let me have not only all the good news but any bad news, and to tell me frankly at any time of embarrassments, change of views, or difficulties of any kind.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 336-8

Diary of Gideon Welles: Wednesday, June 3, 1863

Wrote Du Pont that Foote would relieve him. I think he anticipates it and perhaps wants it to take place. He makes no suggestions, gives no advice, presents no opinion, says he will obey orders. He is evidently uneasy, — it appears to me as much dissatisfied with himself as any one. Everything shows he is a disappointed man, afflicted with his own infirmities. I perceive he is preparing for a controversy with the Department, — laying out the ground, getting his officers committed, — and he has besides strong friends in Congress and elsewhere. He has been well and kindly treated by the Department. I have the name and blame of favoring him by some of the best officers, and have borne with his aberrations passively.

The arrest of Vallandigham and the order to suppress the circulation of the Chicago Times in his military district issued by General Burnside have created much feeling. It should not be otherwise. The proceedings were arbitrary and injudicious. It gives bad men the right of questions, an advantage of which they avail themselves. Good men, who wish to support the Administration, find it difficult to defend these acts. They are Burnside's, unprompted, I think, by any member of the Administration, and yet the responsibility is here unless they are disavowed and B. called to an account, which cannot be done. The President — and I think every member of the Cabinet—regrets what has been done, but as to the measures which should now be taken there are probably differences.

The constitutional rights of the parties injured are undoubtedly infringed upon. It is claimed, however, that the Constitution, laws, and authorities are assailed with a view to their destruction by the Rebels, with whom V. and the Chicago Times are in sympathy and concert. The efforts of the Rebels are directed to the overthrow of the government, and V. and his associates unite with them in waging war against the constituted authorities. Should the government, and those who are called to legally administer it, be sustained, or should those who are striving to destroy both? There are many important and difficult problems to solve, growing out of the present condition of affairs. Where is the constitutional right to interdict trade between citizens, to blockade the ports, to seize private property, to dispossess and occupy the houses of the in habitants, etc., etc.? In peaceful times there would be no right to do these things; it may be said there would be no necessity. Unfortunately the peaceful operations of the Constitution have been interrupted, obstructed, and are still obstructed. A state of war exists; violent and forcible measures are resorted to in order to resist and destroy the government, which have begotten violent and forcible measures to vindicate and restore its peaceful operation. Vallandigham and the Chicago Times claim all the benefits, guarantees, and protection of the government which they are assisting the Rebels to destroy. Without the courage and manliness to go over to the public enemy, to whom they give, so far as they dare, aid and comfort, they remain here to promote discontent and disaffection.

While I have no sympathy for those who are, in their hearts, as unprincipled traitors as Jefferson Davis, I lament that our military officers should, without absolute necessity, disregard those great principles on which our government and institutions rest.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 320-2

Diary of Gideon Welles: Thursday, May 21, 1863

Had an early call from the President, who brought a communication from Tassara to Seward, complaining of violation of neutral rights by a small pilot-boat, having a gun mounted amidships and believed to be an American vessel, which was annoying Spanish and other neutral vessels off the coast of Cuba. The President expressed doubts whether it was one of our vessels, but I told him I was inclined to believe it was, and that I had last week written Mr. Seward concerning the same craft in answer to Lord Lyons, who complained of outrage on the British schooner Dream, but I had also written Admiral Bailey on the subject. I read my letter to the President. He spoke of an unpleasant rumor concerning Grant, but on canvassing the subject we concluded it must be groundless, originating probably in the fact that he does not retain but has evacuated Jackson, after destroying the enemy's stores.

It is pretty evident that Senator John P. Hale, Chairman of the Naval Committee of the Senate, is occupying his time in the vacation in preparing for an attack on the Navy Department. He has a scheme for a tract of land with many angles, belonging to a friend, which land he has procured from Congress authority for the Secretary to purchase, but the Secretary does not want the land in that shape. It is a “job,” and the object of this special legislative permission to buy, palpable. Hale called on me, and has written me, and I am given to understand, if I do not enter into his scheme, — make this purchase, — I am to encounter continued and persistent opposition from him.

Hale has also sent me a letter of eight closely written pages, full of disinterested, patriotic, and devoted loyalty, protesting against my detailing Commodore Van Brunt to be one of a board on a requisition from the War Department for a naval officer. Van Brunt has committed no wrong, is accused of none, but Hale doesn't like him. I replied in half a page. I will not waste time on a man like Hale.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 307-8

Diary of Gideon Welles: Tuesday, April 28, 1863

Nothing at Cabinet, Seward and Chase absent. The President engaged in selecting provost marshals.

Sumner called this evening at the Department. Was much discomfited with an interview which he had last evening with the President. The latter was just filing a paper as Sumner went in. After a few moments Sumner took two slips from his pocket, — one cut from the Boston Transcript, the other from the Chicago Tribune, each taking strong ground against surrendering the Peterhoff mail. The President, after reading them, opened the paper he had just filed and read to Sumner his letter addressed to the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Navy. He told Sumner he had received the replies and just concluded reading mine. After some comments on them he said to Sumner, “I will not show these papers to you now; perhaps I never shall.” A conversation then took place which greatly mortified and chagrined Sumner, who declares the President is very ignorant or very deceptive. The President, he says, is horrified, or appeared to be, with the idea of a war with England, which he assumed depended on this question. He was confident we should have war with England if we presumed to open their mail bags, or break their seals or locks. They would not submit to it, and we were in no condition to plunge into a foreign war on a subject of so little importance in comparison with the terrible consequences which must follow our act. Of this idea of a war with England, Sumner could not dispossess him by argument, or by showing its absurdity. Whether it was real or affected ignorance, Sumner was not satisfied.

I have no doubts of the President's sincerity, and so told Sumner. But he has been imposed upon, humbugged, by a man in whom he confides. His confidence has been abused; he does not — frankly confesses he does not — comprehend the principles involved nor the question itself. Seward does not intend he shall comprehend it. While attempting to look into it, the Secretary of State is daily, and almost hourly, wailing in his ears the calamities of a war with England which he is striving to prevent. The President is thus led away from the real question, and will probably decide it, not on its merits, but on this false issue, raised by the man who is the author of the difficulty.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 286-7

Diary of Gideon Welles: Friday, April 17, 1863

No reports from Charleston. Am in hopes that side issues and by-play on the Mississippi are about over and that there will be some concentrated action. Porter should go below Vicksburg and not remain above, thereby detaining Farragut, who is below, from great and responsible duties at New Orleans and on the Gulf. The weak and sensitive feeling of being outranked and made subordinate in command should never influence an officer in such an emergency. Porter has great vanity and great jealousy but knows his duty, and I am surprised he does not perform it. Wrote him a fortnight since a letter which he cannot misunderstand, and which will not, I hope, wound his pride.

But little was before the Cabinet, which of late can hardly be called a council. Each Department conducts and manages its own affairs, informing the President to the extent it pleases. Seward encourages this state of things. He has less active duties than others, and watches and waits on the President daily, and gathers from him the doings of his associates and often influences indirectly and not always advantageously their measures and movements, while he communicates very little, especially of that which he does not wish them to know.

Blair walked over with me from the White House to the Navy Department, and I showed him the correspondence which had taken place respecting captured mails. Understanding Seward thoroughly, as he does, he detected the sly management by which Seward first got himself in difficulty and is now striving to get out of it. My course he pronounced correct, and he declared that the President must not be entrapped into any false step to extricate Seward, who, he says, is the least of a statesman and knows less of public law and of administrative duties than any man who ever held a seat in the Cabinet. This is a strong statement, but not so overstated as would be generally supposed. I have been surprised to find him so unpractical, so erratic, so little acquainted with the books, — he has told me more than once that he never opened them, that he was too old to study. He has, with all his bustle and activity, but little application; relies on Hunter and his clerk, Smith, perhaps Gushing also, to sustain him and hunt up his authorities; commits himself, as in the case of the mails, without knowing what he is about.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 274-5

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, April 4, 1863

Had a message from the President, who wished to see me and also Assistant Secretary Fox. Found the matter in hand to be the Prussian adventurer Sybert, who was anxious his vessel should be taken into the naval service. The President said Seward was extremely anxious this should be done and had sent Sybert to him. I inquired if he had seen Sybert. He replied that he had and that the man was now in the audience room. He learned from Seward and Sybert that he (Sybert) had a vessel of one hundred tons into which he would put a screw, if authorized, would go on blockade, and would do more than the whole squadron of naval vessels. I asked the President if he gave credit to the promises of this man, whom Mr. Seward had sent to me as coming from responsible parties, though I knew none of them, had seen or heard of none but this adventurer himself. [I told him] that he had first applied to me and I would not trust or be troubled with him after a slight examination, but that I had sent him to Seward, who was then pushing forward his regulations for letters of marque, to which he knew I was opposed; and the result was Mr. Seward wanted me to take his first case, and had asked that the Assistant Secretary, Fox, should be present with Sybert. After a little further conversation, the President, instead of sending Sybert back to Seward, said he would turn him over to the Navy Department to be disposed of. This ends Mr. Seward's first application, and probably it will be the last. Knowing my views, he had gone to the President with his protégé, and knowing my views but in the hope he might have some encouragement from Fox, had requested the President to consult with Fox as well as myself. I know not that he requested me to be excluded on account of my opposition, but he requested that the Assistant Secretary should be consulted. And Fox assures me he has never swerved from my views on this subject. It is a specimen of Seward's management.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 261

Diary of Gideon Welles: April 2, 1863

Had a call last evening and again to-day from Senator Sumner. Our conversation was chiefly on our foreign relations, the unfortunate condition of public affairs, the inexcusable attitude of England, and the question of letters of marque. On the latter subject he is much dissatisfied with Mr. Seward. He informs me that he was opposed to the passage of the law at the late session, and is, I am glad to see, quite sensitive on the subject. I thought the law well enough as a precautionary measure, a warning to the mischievous spirits abroad, an authorization to the President in case of necessity, and especially as a weapon to coerce England into propriety. The power granted was extraordinary and to be used with discretion, but Mr. Seward, having obtained the authority, is disposed to exercise it. The merchants having been loud and profuse in their complaints and promises, he has taken it for granted that they would at once avail themselves of the law, and make a rush in a random search for a couple of lean and hungry wolves that are abroad, which would be difficult to catch and valueless when caught. I have questioned whether he could beguile merchants into such an investment, and he begins to feel uneasy that none have come forward as he expected.

In a letter which I commenced some days since and finished Saturday night, I put upon paper some of the suggestions, views, and doubts I have from time to time expressed in our discussions. This letter I gave out to be copied, and it was on my table for signature when I returned yesterday from Cabinet council. The English news was such that I laid it aside unsigned, and it was lying on the table when Sumner came in. He stated, among other things, he had been to the State Department and that Seward had given him the substance of the last dispatches. He asked if I had seen them. I answered that I had, and was so disgusted with them that I had laid by a letter which I had prepared in opposition to the current feeling which prevailed on the subject of letters of marque. He wished to read it, and after doing so complimented the letter with emphasis, and begged I would sign and send it.

Informed Admiral Foote that the Secretary of State desired he should go to New York in the service of the State Department, on the subject of letters of marque. He expressed his readiness to obey orders, but asked the object of detailing him. I gave him an outline of proceedings and what appeared to be the purpose of Mr. Seward, which was not very clear, or could not be plainly stated. No doubt he believes it will give importance to the Secretary of State to have a naval officer of the standing of Foote attached to the State Department and acting under its orders.

The President called at my house this evening, chiefly to see the letter which I had prepared concerning letters of marque. Senator Sumner had gone directly from the Navy Department to him, and so made known his gratification at my views and the manner in which I had stated them that the curiosity of the President was excited and he desired to read the letter. I informed him that the last thing I did before leaving the Department was to sign and send it to the Secretary of State; that I perhaps should not have done it, though, as he (the President) was aware, I had differed with him and others on this subject and looked upon it as a dangerous step, but since reading the last English dispatches, I was less opposed to the measure than I had been.

The opportunity being favorable and he disposed to converse and apparently interested in my remarks, I took occasion to enlarge upon the topic more fully than I had done in our Cabinet discussions. I started out with the proposition that to issue letters of marque would in all probability involve us in a war with England. [I said] that I had so viewed this question from the beginning, though he and Mr. Seward had not; that I was not prepared to deny that it might not be best for us to move promptly with that object in view, though it had not yet been urged or stated; but that if we were to resort to letters of marque we should do it understandingly and with all the consequences before us. The idea that private parties would send out armed ships to capture the Alabama and one, possibly two, other rovers of the Rebels was too absurd to be thought of for a moment. If privateers were fitted out for any purpose it would be to capture neutral vessels intended to run the blockade or supposed to be in that service. It was not difficult for us to foresee that such a power in private hands would degenerate into an abuse for which this Government would be held responsible. The Rebels have no commerce to invite private enterprise. So far as the Rebels were concerned, therefore, I had been opposed to committing the Government to the measure. But the disclosures recently made had given a different aspect to the question. There was little doubt the British Government and British capital were encouraging the rebellion; that that Government intended to interpose no obstacle to prevent the sending out of privateers from British ports to depredate upon our commerce; that these privateers, though sailing under the Confederate flag, would be the property of British merchants; that the rich plunder would repay the lawless English adventurer, knowing he had the sanction of his Government; that this combination of British capital with Rebel malignity and desperation would despoil our commerce and drive it from the seas. Our countrymen would not quietly submit to these wrongs and outrages, and allow Englishmen to make war upon us in disguise under the Rebel flag. We ought, therefore, to have an immediate and distinct understanding with the English Government. It should be informed in terms that could not be mistaken or misunderstood that if this policy was persisted in we should in self-defense be under the necessity of resorting to reprisals. In this view the law which authorized letters of marque had appeared to me proper, and might be made useful as a menace and admonition to England; and I repeated what I had said to the Secretary of State in reply to a remark of his that we must make more extensive naval operations against the Rebels by issuing letters of marque to annoy them, — that letters of marque, instead of annoying them, destitute as they were of commerce, would aid them, for that step would involve war with England. If the Secretary of State would be less yielding and more decisive in asserting our rights with that power, it would, I thought, be better for the country.

I then opened on the subject generally. England is taking advantage of our misfortunes and would press upon us just as far as we would bear to be pressed. She rejoiced in our dissensions and desired the dismemberment of the Union. With this rebellion on our hands we were in no condition for a war with her, and it was because we were in this condition that she was arrogant and presuming. A higher and more decisive tone towards her will secure a different policy on her part. A war with England would be a serious calamity to us, but scarcely less serious to her. She cannot afford a maritime conflict with us, even in our troubles, nor will she. We can live within ourselves if worse comes to worse. Our territory is compact, facing both oceans, and in latitudes which furnish us in abundance without foreign aid all the necessaries and most of the luxuries of life; but England has a colonial system which was once her strength, but is her weakness in these days and with such a people as our countrymen to contend with. Her colonies are scattered over the globe. We could, with our public and private armed ships, interrupt and destroy her communication with her dependencies, her colonies, on which she is as dependent for prosperity as they on her.

I was therefore in favor of meeting her face to face, asking only what is right but submitting to nothing that is wrong.

If the late dispatches are to be taken as the policy she intends to pursue, it means war, and if war is to come it looks to me as of a magnitude greater than the world has ever experienced, — as if it would eventuate in the upheaval of nations, the overthrow of governments and dynasties. The sympathies of the mass of mankind would be with us rather than with the decaying dynasties and the old effete governments. Not unlikely the conflict thus commenced would kindle the torch of civil war throughout Christendom, and even nations beyond. I desired no such conflict in my day, and therefore hoped and believed the policy and tone of England might be modified, but it would require energy, resolution, and a firm determination on our part to effect it.

The President listened, for I did most of the talking, as he evidently wished, and showed much interest and accord in what I said. He assented consequently to most that I uttered and controverted nothing. It was evident I suggested some ideas that had not before occurred to him, and I am not without hope that the tone of our foreign affairs, particularly with England, may be different.

The President spoke, as he always has done with me, doubtingly of Porter's schemes on the Mississippi, or rather the side movements to the Yazoo on the east and Red River on the west. Said the long delay of Du Pont, his constant call for more ships, more ironclads, was like McClellan calling for more regiments. Thought the two men were alike, and said he was prepared for a repulse at Charleston.

[The letter referred to above was signed and sent with date of March 31.]

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 251-9

Diary of Gideon Welles: Thursday, March 17, 1863

Returned last evening from strictly confidential visit to New York.

Some discussion in Cabinet-meeting to-day on letters of marque. Seward and Chase are both strong advocates of the measure. Am surprised that Chase should favor it, for he must be sensible of the consequences. He has, I think, committed himself somewhat hastily to some of the indignant but inconsiderate men in the shipping interest who are sufferers. Seward has no knowledge on the subject, nor any conception of the effect of letting loose these depredators under government sanction. There is such a general feeling against the English, who are conniving with and aiding the Rebels, that privateering is becoming popular with the Administration and country. Statesmen who should check and restrain the excited, erring popular current are carried along with it. I suggested some doubts of the expediency of the proposed proceedings, and the principles involved. In the first place I queried whether Congress could depute legislative power to the Executive, as was assumed. I asked Seward if he had any money to pay the promised bounties, and if he was of opinion there could be fines and criminal punishment inflicted by Executive regulations merely. Seward said he had no money; knew not whether there was any appropriation from which funds could be taken; if not, he must pledge the Government. This I opposed, and no one sustained Seward or expressed an opinion on the subject. As regarded penal inflictions, fines, criminal punishment by regulation he had no doubt whatever, should not hesitate in the least. I could admit no such power on the part of the Executive. My doubts and suggestions, I perceived, set others thinking. Chase became silent.

These notions in regard to privateers and letters of marque, though crude, erroneous, and fraught with evil, have been maturing for some time, and I do not mistake in placing much of the mischief to the State Department, which would be irresponsible for Navy transgressions. The Times of New York and the Chronicle of this city and papers of that particular phase of partyism, which never [act] without prompting from a certain quarter, have been writing up the matter and getting the public mind excited. The Chronicle pronounces the privateers to be a volunteer navy like volunteer forces on land. The Times mixes up letters of marque with the Navy Department, which it blames for delaying to issue the necessary authority, innocently unaware that it is a subject pertaining to that Department of the Government whose head it would never intentionally injure.

Conflicting accounts concerning Farragut's command on the lower Mississippi. The Rebel accounts state he passed Port Hudson with his vessel, the others being driven back, with the exception of the steamer Mississippi, which all say was grounded and blown up. Our account represents that all the fleet passed up except the Mississippi.

The accounts from Porter, above Vicksburg, are not satisfactory. He is fertile in expedients, some of which are costly without adequate results. His dispatches are full of verbosity of promises, and the mail which brings them also brings ludicrous letters and caricatures to Heap, a clerk who is his brother-in-law, filled with laughable and burlesque accounts of amusing and ridiculous proceedings. These may be excusable as a means of amusement to keep up his spirits and those of his men, but I should be glad to witness, or hear of something more substantial and of energies employed in what is really useful. Porter has capabilities and I am expecting much of him, but he is by no means an Admiral Foote.

The progress of the squadron and troops at Charleston is slow and unsatisfactory. I apprehend the defenses are being strengthened much faster than the assailants. Du Pont has attacked Fort McAllister and satisfied himself that the turret vessels are strong and capable of great endurance, but at the same time he doubtless made the Rebels aware of these facts.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 247-9

Diary of Gideon Welles: Tuesday, March 10, 1863

I saw last evening a communication from the State Department inclosing several pages of regulations for letters of marque. The subject was to-day before the Cabinet, and there is a stronger disposition for the policy than I expected. I told the President I had given the proposed regulations but a cursory examination. The subject was therefore postponed to our Friday meeting, with an understanding that I should in the mean time examine them and report if they were objectionable. On looking over the sections, I find they are a transcript of the laws of 1812 and 1813, which the Secretary of State has embodied in a series of regulations which he proposes to issue. The old laws of half a century ago have expired. It is not pretended they have vitality. But the Secretary of State legislates by regulations. I am not favorably impressed with the law or the regulations, nor with the idea of sending out privateers against a couple of piratical cruisers, even if there are private parties fools enough to go on that hunt, which he says there are, but I doubt. The law undertakes to delegate legislative power to the President, which is in itself wrong. But the subject is, I fear, a foregone conclusion. Both Seward and Chase favor it, and the commercial community is greatly exasperated against the robbers. If the subject goes forward, S. will turn the whole labor and responsibility over to the Navy Department.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 246-7