I was present at the old Lighthouse, Green Point, on Wednesday afternoon, at 2 P.M., and saw the Alabama capture the American barque Sea Bride, and I agree with the above statement as far as the position of the vessels and their distance from sh.o.r.e.

I may also remark that I called the attention of Colonel Bisset and the lighthouse keeper Hopson to the distance of the vessels at the time of the capture, as it was probable we should be called upon to give our evidence respecting the affair, and we took a note of the time it occurred.

Statement of John Roe.

I was yesterday, the 5th day of August, 1863, returning from a whale chase in Hunt's Bay, when I first saw the barque Sea Bride standing from the westward on to the land. I came on to Table Bay, and when off Camps Bay I saw the smoke of the Alabama some distance from the westward of Robben Island. When I reached the Green Point Lighthouse the steamer was standing up towards the barque, which was about five miles and a half to the westward of Green Point, and about four and half from the western point of Robben Island. This was their position (being near each other at the time) when the gun was fired.

Statement of Signalman at the Lion's Rump Telegraph Station.

On Wednesday last, the 5th day of August, 1863, I sighted the barque Sea Bride about seven o'clock in the morning, about fifteen or twenty miles off the land, standing into Table Bay from the south-west. There was a light breeze blowing from the north-west, which continued until after midday. About midday I sighted the Alabama screw steamer standing from due north towards Table Bay, intending, as it appeared to me, to take the pa.s.sage between Robben Island and the Blueberg Beach. She was then between fifteen and eighteen miles off the land.

After sighting the steamer, I hoisted the demand for the barque, when she hoisted the American flag, which I reported to the Port Office, the barque then being about eight miles off the land from Irville Point. No sooner had the barque hoisted the American flag than the steamer turned sharp round in the direction of and towards the barque. The steamer appeared at that time to have been about twelve miles off the land from Irville Point, and about four or five miles outside of Robben Island, and about seven miles from the barque.

The steamer then came up to and alongside of the barque, when the latter was good four miles off the land at or near the old Lighthouse, and five miles off the Island. The steamer, after firing a gun, stopped the further progress of the barque, several boats were sent to her, and after that the barque stood out to sea again, and the Alabama steamed into Table Bay.

Captain Forsyth to Sir P. Wodehouse. August 6, 1863.

In compliance with the request conveyed to me by your Excellency, I have the honor to report that I have obtained from Captain Semmes a statement of the positions of the Confederate States steamer Alabama and the American barque Sea Bride, when the latter was captured yesterday afternoon.

Captain Semmes a.s.serts that at the time of his capturing the Sea Bride, Green Point Lighthouse bore from the Alabama south-east about six or six and a half miles.

This statement is borne out by the evidence of Captain Wilson, Port Captain of Table Bay, who has a.s.sured me that at the time of the Sea Bride being captured, he was off Green Point in the port boat, and that only the top of the Alabama's hull was visible.

I am of opinion, if Captain Wilson could only see that portion of the hull of the Alabama, she must have been about the distance from the sh.o.r.e which is stated by Captain Semmes, and I have therefore come to the conclusion that the barque Sea Bride was beyond the limits a.s.signed when she was captured by the Alabama.

Rear-Admiral Sir B. Walker to the Secretary to the Admiralty. September 17, 1863.

With reference to my letters dated respectively the 19th and 31st ultimo, relative to the Confederate States ship of war Alabama, and the prizes captured by her, I beg to inclose, for their Lordships' information, the copy of a statement forwarded to me by the Collector of Customs at Cape Town, wherein it is represented that the Tuscaloosa and Sea Bride had visited Ichaboe, which is a dependency of this Colony.

2. Since the receipt of the above-mentioned doc.u.ment, the Alabama arrived at this anchorage (the 16th instant), and when Captain Semmes waited on me, I acquainted him with the report, requesting he would inform me if it was true. I was glad to learn from him that it was not so. He frankly explained that the prize Sea Bride in the first place had put into Saldanha Bay through stress of weather, and on being joined there by the Tuscaloosa, both vessels proceeded to Angra Pequena, on the West Coast of Africa, where he subsequently joined them in the Alabama, and there sold the Sea Bride and her cargo to an English subject who resides at Cape Town. The Tuscaloosa had landed some wool at Angra Pequena and received ballast, but, he states, is still in commission as a tender. It will, therefore, be seen how erroneous is the accompanying report. I have no reason to doubt Captain Semmes' explanation; but he seems to be fully alive to the instructions of Her Majesty's Government, and appears to be most anxious not to commit any breach of neutrality.

3. The Alabama has returned to this port for coal, some provisions, and to repair her condensing apparatus.

4. From conversation with Captain Semmes, I find that he has been off this Cape for the last five days, and as the Vanderbilt left this on the night of the 11th instant, it is surprising they did not see each other.

The Duke of Newcastle to Sir P. Wodehouse. November 4, 1863.

I have received your despatch of the 19th August last, submitting for my consideration various questions arising out of the proceedings at the Cape of Good Hope of the Confederate vessels Georgia, Alabama, and her reputed tender, the Tuscaloosa.

I will now proceed to convey to you the views of Her Majesty's Government on these questions.

The capture of the Sea Bride, by the Alabama, is stated to have been effected beyond the distance of three miles from the sh.o.r.e-which distance must be accepted as the limit of territorial jurisdiction, according to the present rule of international law upon that subject. It appears, however, that the prize, very soon after her capture, was brought within the distance of two miles from the sh.o.r.e; and as this is contrary to Her Majesty's orders, it might have afforded just grounds (if the apology of Captain Semmes for this improper act, which he ascribed to inadvertence, had not been accepted by you) for the interference of the colonial authorities upon the principles which I am about to explain.

With respect to the Alabama herself, it is clear that neither you nor any other authority at the Cape could exercise any jurisdiction over her; and that, whatever may have been her previous history, you were bound to treat her as a ship of war belonging to a belligerent Power.

With regard to the vessel called the Tuscaloosa, I am advised that this vessel did not lose the character of a prize captured by the Alabama, merely because she was, at the time of her being brought within British waters, armed with two small rifled guns, in charge of an officer, and manned with a crew of ten men from the Alabama, and used as a tender to that vessel under the authority of Captain Semmes.

It would appear that the Tuscaloosa is a barque of 500 tons, captured by the Alabama, off the coast of Brazil, on the 21st of June last, and brought into Simon's Bay on or before the 7th of August, with her original cargo of wool (itself, as well as the vessel, prize) still on board, and with nothing to give her a warlike character (so far as is stated in the papers before me), except the circ.u.mstances already noticed.

Whether, in the case of a vessel duly commissioned as a ship of war, after being made prize by a belligerent Government, without being first brought infra praesidia, or condemned by a court of prize, the character of prize, within the meaning of Her Majesty's orders, would or would not be merged in that of a national ship of war, I am not called upon to explain. It is enough to say that the citation from Mr. Wheaton's book by your attorney-general does not appear to me to have any direct bearing upon the question.

Connected with this subject is the question as to the cargoes of captured vessels, which is alluded to at the end of your despatch. On this point I have to instruct you that Her Majesty's orders apply as much to prize cargoes of every kind which may be brought by any armed ships or privateers of either belligerent into British waters as to the captured vessels themselves. They do not, however, apply to any articles which may have formed part of any such cargoes, if brought within British jurisdiction, not by armed ships or privateers of either belligerent, but by other persons who may have acquired or may claim property in them by reason of any dealings with the captors.

I think it right to observe that the third reason alleged by the attorney-general for his opinion a.s.sumes (though the fact had not been made the subject of any inquiry) that "no means existed for determining whether the ship had or had not been judicially condemned in a court of competent jurisdiction," and the proposition that, "admitting her to have been captured by a ship of war of the Confederate States, she was ent.i.tled to refer Her Majesty's Government, in case of any dispute, to the court of her States in order to satisfy it as to her real character." This a.s.sumption, however, is not consistent with Her Majesty's undoubted right to determine within her own territory whether her own orders, made in vindication of her own neutrality, have been violated or not.

The question remains what course ought to have been taken by the authorities of the Cape-

1st. In order to ascertain whether this vessel was, as alleged by the United States Consul, an uncondemned prize brought within British waters in violation of Her Majesty's neutrality; and

2dly. What ought to have been done if such had appeared to be really the fact.

I think that the allegations of the United States Consul ought to have been brought to the knowledge of Captain Semmes while the Tuscaloosa was still within British waters, and that he should have been requested to state whether he did or did not admit the facts to be as alleged. He should also have been called upon (unless the facts were admitted) to produce the Tuscaloosa's papers. If the result of these inquiries had been to prove that the vessel was really an uncondemned prize, brought into British waters in violation of Her Majesty's orders made for the purpose of maintaining her neutrality, I consider that the mode of proceeding in such circ.u.mstances, most consistent with Her Majesty's dignity, and most proper for the vindication of her territorial rights, would have been to prohibit the exercise of any further control over the Tuscaloosa by the captors, and to retain that vessel under Her Majesty's control and jurisdiction until properly reclaimed by her original owners.

Sir P. Wodehouse to the Duke of Newcastle. December 19, 1863.

I have had the honour to receive your Grace's despatch of the 4th ultimo, from which I regret to learn that the course taken here relative to the Confederate war steamer Alabama and her prizes has not in some respects given satisfaction to Her Majesty's Government.

I must only beg your Grace to believe that no pains were spared by the late Acting Attorney-General or by myself to shape our course in what we believed to be conformity with the orders of Her Majesty's Government and the rules of international law, as far as we could ascertain and interpret them.

Mr. Denyssen has been so constantly engaged with professional business since the arrival of the mail that I have been prevented from discussing with him the contents of your despatch; but I think it right, nevertheless, to take advantage of the first opportunity for representing to your Grace the state of uncertainty in which I am placed by the receipt of this communication, and for soliciting such further explanations as may prevent my again falling into error on these matters. In so doing I trust you will be prepared to make allowance for the difficulties which must arise out of this peculiar contest, in respect of which both parties stand on a footing of equality as belligerents, while only one of them is recognized as a nation.

In the first place, I infer that I have given cause for dissatisfaction in not having more actively resented the fact that the Sea Bride, on the day after her capture, was brought a short distance within British waters.

Your Grace demurs to my having accepted Captain Semmes' apology for this improper act, which he ascribed to inadvertence. You will pardon my noticing that the fact of the act having been done through inadvertence was established by the United States Consul himself, one of whose witnesses stated, "the officer in command of the barque came on deck about that time, and stamping his foot as if chagrined to find her so near the land, ordered her further off, which was done immediately."

I confess that on such evidence of such a fact I did not consider myself warranted in requiring the commander of Her Majesty's ship Valorous to take possession of the Alabama's prize.

The questions involved in the treatment of the Tuscaloosa are far more important and more embarra.s.sing; and first let me state, with reference to the suggestion that Captain Semmes should have been required to admit or deny the allegations of the United States Consul, that no such proceeding was required. There was not the slightest mystery or concealment of the circ.u.mstances under which the Tuscaloosa had come into, and then was in possession of the Confederates. The facts were not disputed. We were required to declare what was her actual status under those facts. We had recourse to Wheaton, the best authority on International Law within our reach-an authority of the nation with whom the question had arisen-an authority which the British Secretary for Foreign Affairs had recently been quoting in debates on American questions in the House of Lords.

Your Grace intimates that the citation from this authority by the Acting Attorney-General does not appear to have any direct bearing upon the question.

You will a.s.suredly believe that it is not from any want of respect for your opinion, but solely from a desire to avoid future error, that I confess my inability to understand this intimation, or, in the absence of instructions on that head, to see in what direction I am to look for the law bearing on the subject.

The paragraph cited made no distinction between a vessel with cargo and a vessel without cargo; and your Grace leaves me in ignorance whether her character would have been changed if Captain Semmes had got rid of the cargo before claiming for her admission as a ship of war. Certainly, acts had been done by him which, according to Wheaton, const.i.tuted a "setting forth as a vessel of war."

Your Grace likewise states, "Whether in the case of a vessel duly commissioned as a ship of war, after being made prize by a belligerent Government without being first brought infra praesidia, or condemned by a Court of Prize, the character of prize, within the meaning of Her Majesty's orders, would or would not be merged in a national ship of war, I am not called upon to explain."

I feel myself forced to ask for further advice on this point, on which it is quite possible I may be called upon to take an active part. I have already, in error apparently, admitted a Confederate prize as a ship of war. The chief authority on International Law, in which it is in my power to refer, is Wheaton, who apparently draws no distinction between ships of war and other ships when found in the position of prizes; and I wish your Grace to be aware that within the last few days the commander of a United States ship of war observed to me that if it were his good fortune to capture the Alabama, he should convert her into a Federal cruiser.

I trust your Grace will see how desirable it is that I should be fully informed of the views of Her Majesty's Government on these points, and that I shall be favoured with a reply to this despatch at your earliest convenience.

Rear-Admiral Sir B. Walker to the Secretary to the Admiralty. January 5, 1864.

I request you will be pleased to acquaint my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty that the barque called the Tuscaloosa, under the flag of the Confederate States of North America (referred to in my letter of the 19th of August last), termed a tender to the Alabama, returned to this anchorage on the 26th ultimo from cruising off the coast of Brazil.

2. In order to ascertain the real character of this vessel, I directed the boarding officer from my flag-ship to put the questions, as per inclosure No. 1, to the officer in command, Lieutenant Low, of the Alabama; and having satisfied myself from his answers that the vessel was still an uncondemned prize captured by the Alabama under the name of the Conrad, of Philadelphia, I communicated the circ.u.mstances to the Governor of this Colony, who, concurring in opinion with me that she ought to be retained under Her Majesty's control and jurisdiction until reclaimed by her proper owners, for violation of Pier Majesty's orders for the maintenance of her neutrality, I caused the so-called Tuscaloosa to be taken possession of; informing Lieutenant Low, at the same time, of the reason for doing so.

3. Lieutenant Low has entered a written protest against the seizure of the vessel, a copy of which, together with the reply of the Governor, I inclose for their Lordships' information, as well as a copy of all the correspondence which has pa.s.sed on this subject.

4. Lieutenant Low having informed me that he expects the Alabama shortly to arrive at this place, I have allowed him and his crew to remain on board the Conrad for the present; but should the Alabama not make her appearance I have acquainted him that I will grant him and his officers (probably only one besides himself) a pa.s.sage to England in one of the packets. The crew he wishes to discharge if there is no opportunity of their rejoining the Alabama.