Mr. Pruyn to Mr Seward.
Sir: I have read with great care your dispatch No. 14, dated August 22, 1868, in reply to mine (No. 21) of August 6. 1868, giving an account of a request made to the French minister to detain a French ship of war then at La Guayra. I am much obliged for the statement of the policy of the government which you are pleased to give, and shall endeavor, in every way possible, to conform my course of action to it. In all conferences with other foreign agents I have distinctly stated that I had no power to act definitively in the name of my government, or to bind, in any way, my government by my action. I have expressed a willingness to consult with my colleagues, and to use such influence as my position gave me, both with my own government and that of Venezuela, to further all legitimate ends within the limits of my official duties.
I do not find, in the printed instructions to diplomatic agents, any statement directing the “representatives of the United States in foreign countries to refrain from formal consultations or conferences with the representatives of other foreign countries.”
The only agreement I have made with other foreign diplomatic agents was an agreement to recommend a certain plan of paying foreign claims to this government, and, if they accepted it, to recommend the same to [Page 975] my government. I do not understand your instructions to go so far as to prohibit such a course of action on my part as the last mentioned; but I shall, in future, exercise great caution, and endeavor to follow the spirit of your directions.
As you state, in speaking of the request made to the French minister to detain his ship of war at La Guayra, that the circumstances under which the proceeding above referred to had taken place are entirely unknown to the department, I will now give you all the information in my possession on the subject.
The Bruzual government at Puerto Cabello issued a declaration of blockade of La Guayra and the coast, dated June 27, 1868. No attempt was made to enforce this blockade until July 11, on the morning of which day the following war vessels, manned by the partisans of Bruzual, appeared off La Guayra, viz., the steamer Bolivar, and the goleta Mariscal, without giving notice of the blockade to any person.
They remained before La Guayra until the evening of the 15th of July, when they left and returned to Puerto Cabello, having captured, during their stay, only two small coasting vessels. The blockade was not resumed until August 5th, when it only lasted two or three days, during which time, I believe, no captures were made by the Bruzual blockading war steamer, the Maparari, which was obliged to return to Puerto Cabello, to aid the hard-pressed partisans there, who were forced to abandon that city on August 15th.
The legality of the blockade, carried out in the manner above mentioned, was seriously questioned. In inclosure No. 10, dispatch No. 7, may be found a translation of the decree of General Bruzual, declaring the blockade. It is asserted that the 4th article of that decree is in violation of the 19th article of the treaty between the United States and Venezuela of September 20, 1854.
During July and August, several of the foreign representatives here, including myself, endeavored to obtain the presence of war vessels of their respective nations in the waters of Venezuela. None were successful except those of France and Denmark; a French man-of-war visited La Guayra early in August, and a Danish one about the middle of the same month. During the stay of the French vessel at La Guayra occurred the blockade beginning August 5th. This government and the foreign representatives here, doubting its legality, the policy related in dispatch No. 21 was followed. I felt most anxious that there should be an independent, powerful, and reliable witness to watch the proceedings of the blockading force, because vessels from the United States were likely to approach the port of La Guayra.
You will be pleased to notice that I sent to the French minister a separate dispatch from this legation, for a copy of which see inclosure No. 1. There was no joint note sent him by the foreign representatives. If he had granted the request, and had detained the French ship of war, I should have looked upon it merely as an act of international courtesy and good will, in no way compromising the independence or dignity of the governments whose representatives had asked the favor.
I shall be glad to receive any further comments you may be pleased to make upon the transaction explained in this dispatch and described in dispatch No. 21.
I have the honor to remain, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.