Mr. Seward to Mr. Pike.
Washington, October 17, 1861.
Sir: Your despatch of the 25th of September, No. 18, has been received. It is accompanied by a note which was addressed to you by Baron Van Zuylen, on the 17th day of September last, on the subject of the admission of the pirate steamer Sumter into the port of Curaçoa.
I reproduce the account of that transaction, which was made by this government a subject of complaint to the government of the Netherlands. The steamer Sumter hove in sight of the port of Curaçoa on the evening of the 15th of July, and fired a gun for the pilot, who immediately took to sea. On his reaching the pirate vessel she hoisted what is called the confederate flag, and the same being unknown in that port, the pilot told the captain that he had to report to the governor before taking the vessel into port. [Page 381] The pilot having made this report, the governor replied to the captain that, according to orders from the supreme government, he could not admit privateers into the port, nor their prizes, but in the case of distress, and therefore the steamer could not be admitted before her character was perfectly known.
In reply to this message the captain of the steamer remained outside of the port until the next morning, when he sent a despatch to the governor, by an officer, stating that his vessel being a duly commissioned man-of-war of the Confederate States, he desired to enter the port for a few days. The colonial court assembled the same evening, and, on the ground of the declaration and assurance of the privateer captain that the vessel is not a privateer, it was decided that she should enter the port, and she entered accordingly.
The consul of the United States thereupon informed the governor, by a note, that the steamer was, by the laws and express declaration of the United States, a pirate, and that on her way from New Orleans to Curaçoa she had taken and sent for sale to the Spanish island of Cuba several American merchant vessels, and on these grounds he asked upon what pretext and conditions the unlawful steamer had obtained admittance into Curaçoa.
The governor answered that, according to the orders received from the supreme government, neither privateers nor their prizes are to be allowed admittance to the ports or bays of this colony, save only in cases of distress. But that this prohibition does not extend to vessels-of-war, and that the Sumter being a man-of-war, according to the rules of nations, could not be repelled from that port.
The piratical vessel was then supplied, at Curaçoa, with 120 tons of coals, and departed at her own time and pleasure. On receiving this information you were instructed to call the attention of the government of the Netherlands to the proceeding of the governor of Curaçoa, and to ask that the proceedings, if correctly reported, might be disavowed, and that the governor might be made to feel the displeasure of his government.
You performed this duty in due season by addressing a proper note to Baron Van Zuylen. On the 2d of September he acknowledged your note, and promised you an early reply on the merits of the subject.
On the 17th of September he communicated this reply to you in the note which is now before me.
I encounter a difficulty in giving you instructions for your reply to that paper, because, first, since the correspondence was opened, a similar case of violation of our national rights has occurred in the hospitalities extended to the same piratical vessel in the Dutch port of Pernambuco, and has been made a subject of similar complaint, which, as yet, so far as I am advised, remains unanswered; and, secondly, the note of Baron Van Zuylen promises that special instructions shall be speedily given to the colonial authorities of the Netherlands in regard to conduct in cases similar to those which have induced the existing complaints. I cannot, of course, forsee how far those instructions, yet unknown to me, may modify the position assumed by the minister of foreign affairs in the paper under consideration.
Under these circumstances, I must be content with setting forth, for the information of the government of the Netherlands, just what the United States claim and expect in regard to the matter in debate.
They have asked for an explanation of the case, presented by the admission of the Sumter by the governor of Curaçoa, if one can be satisfactorily given; and if not, then for a disavowal of that officer’s proceedings, attended by a justly deserved rebuke.
These demands have been made, not from irritation or any sensibility [Page 382] of national pride, but to make it sure that henceforth any piratical vessel fitted out by or under the agency of disloyal American citizens, and cruising in pursuit of merchant vessels of the United States, shall not be admitted into either the continental or the colonial ports of the Netherlands under any pretext whatever. If that assurance cannot be obtained in some way, we must provide for the protection of our rights in some other way. Thus, the subject is one of a purely practical character; it neither requires nor admits of debate or argument on the part of the United States. If what is thus desired shall be obtained by the United States in any way, they will be satisfied; if it fails to be obtained through the disinclination of the government of the Netherlands, its proceedings in this respect will be deemed unfriendly and injurious to the United States. The United States being thus disposed to treat the subject in a practical way, they are not tenacious about the manner or form in which the due respect to their rights is manifested by the government of the Netherlands, and still less about the considerations or arguments upon which that government regulates its own conduct in the matter. They regard the whole insurrection in this country as ephemeral; indeed, they believe that the attempt at piracy under the name of privateering, made by the insurgents, has already well nigh failed. While, therefore, they insist that shelter shall not be afforded to the pirates by nations in friendship with the United States, they, at the same time, are not unwilling to avoid grave debates concerning their rights that might survive the existing controversy. It remains only to say in this connexion that the course which the United States are pursuing in their complaints to the government of the Netherlands is not peculiar, but it is the same which has been and which will be pursued towards any other maritime power on the occurrence of similar grievances.
With these remarks, I proceed to notice Baron Van Zuylen’s communication. You will reply to him that the United States unreservedly claim to determine for themselves absolutely the character of the Sumter, she being a vessel fitted out, owned, armed, sailed, and directed by American citizens who owe allegiance to the United States, and who neither have nor can, in their piratical purposes and pursuits, have or claim any political authority from any lawful source whatever.
The United States regard the vessel as piratical, and the persons by whom she is manned and navigated as pirates.
The United States, therefore, cannot admit that the Sumter is a ship-of-war or a privateer, and so entitled to any privileges whatever, in either of those characters, in the port of Curaçoa; nor can they debate any such subject with the government of the Netherlands. This will be all that you will need to say in reply to the whole of Baron Von Zuylen’s note, except that portion of it which states, rather by way of argument than of assertion, that according to the information received from the governor of Curaçoa, (by the government of the Netherlands,) the Sumter was actually in distress, and that funtionary, therefore, could not refuse to allow the said vessel to enter the port.
If this position shall be actually assumed by the government of the Netherlands, two questions will arise: first, whether the fact that the Sumter was in distress was true, or a belief of the truth of that fact was the real ground upon which she was admitted by the colonial governor into the port of Curaçoa; secondly, how far a piratical vessel, roving over the seas in pursuit of peaceful commercial vessels of the United States, and fleeing before their naval pursuit, but falling into distress herself, is entitled to charity at the hands of a State, friendly to the nation upon whose commerce her depredations are directed.
It would hence be idle to occupy ourselves with a discussion of these [Page 383] questions until we know that the government of the Netherlands determines to stand upon the main position from which they are derived.
You will therefore ask the Baron Van Zuylen for an explicit statement on this subject.
I cannot but hope, however, that the government of the Netherlands will come to the conclusion that it is wisest and best, in view of the relations of the two countries, to give such directions to its agents as will render further prosecution of this discussion unnecessary, while it will prevent similar injuries in future to our national dignity and honor. Should it determine otherwise, and not be able to place the conduct of the governor general at Curaçoa in a better light than it has already done, it will become necessary to consider what means we can take to protect, in the ports of the Netherlands, national rights which cannot be surrendered or compromised.
I am, sir, your obedient servant,
James S. Pike, Esq., &c., &c., &c.