Imágenes de página

31st August, 1863. ...... St. Thomas. 16th September, 1863....St. Thomas. 16th October, 1863. . St. Thomas.

As she therefore never went in pursuit of the Alabama, the whole of the claim on her account is inadmissible, amounting to $177,972.66.


With reference to the Postscript to the Admiralty Report, it now appears, as before stated, that the Sacramento was at Lisbon on the 29th June, 1863, and must therefore on that day, if not before, either there or at some other European port, have heard of the fate of the Alabama. The (hypothetically) admissible claim on her account would consequently be subject to a further abatement of at least fourteen days, and would stand thus: Amount originally considered hypothetically admissible by the Admiralty Committee..

$112, 295 22 Abatement suggested by the Postscript to the Report.

6,535 70 Further abatement now suggested ...

8,318 18 Amount that may now be considered hypothetically admissible.... 97,441 34


Until the middle of 1863 the Wyoming was the only United States vessel of war in the East Indies, including China and Japan, (the Jamestown sailing-sloop, sent to re-inforce her, being at the Cape on the 14th March.)? When the orders of the 26th January, 1863, were sent, as well as when they would have reached her headquarters, Macao, she had to perform the whole of the duties of this extensive station; and, in fact, in July of that year, the Wyoming attacked the batteries of Simonosaki, in consequence of an outrage upon an American ship;2 hence, it would appear, she was not able to put the orders to proceed to the Straits of Sunda to watch for the Alabama into execution until the 25th Septem. ber, 1863. She was at Singapore on 1st December, having been near the Straits of Sunda when the Alabama passed through, early in November, and where she had been for some time on the lookout for the Alabama.

After leaving Singapore she went to Rhio, where she remained long enough to receive a ball from the Dutch, and give one in return; and yet the Alabama had been burning ships almost within sight of her.3

She was at Labuan between 15th and 18th December,4 56 in search of the Alabama,” and it is probable, judging from the dates, that she had a fair wind up the China Seas, that she called at Manila after leaving Labuan, and was repaired at the royal dock-yard at Cavite, as she was not at Hong-Kong until the 9th February.5 Here she must have heard of the visit of the Alabama to Singapore; that she had left on the 23d December, going to the westward, and that she was off Malacca on Christmas Day. Now, the commander of the Wyoming must either, on the 9th February,

(a) Have given up the pursuit, or, (what amounts to the same thing, so far as any claim against Great Britain is concerned,)

Appendix to British Case, vol. v, p. 228.
2 United States Navy Report, December, 1863, pp. 558, 561.
3 Semmes's Adventures Afloat, p. 708.
4 Appendix to British Case, vol. v, p. 232.
5 Ibid., p. 230.



(0) Have considered that he had fulfilled his orders; for, instead of going to the south ward, he re-appeared at Hong-Kong on the 9th March. At this time he probably received his further orders of the “21st November, 1863, to continue cruising until news of the destruction of the Alabama should reach her, then to return to the United States;" as in little over nine weeks (16th May) she was at Table Bay, and her passage down the China Sea being against the southwest monsoon, she must have proceeded immediately on receipt of these further orders; but whatever chance there may have been, had she proceeded in February and not then practically have given up the pursuit, in March she had none. Indeed, it is abundantly clear that the Wyoming did not, when she arrived at the Cape, regard herself as in pursuit of the Alabama, but as simply homeward bound; since otherwise she would have followed the Confederate cruiser to Europe, which was known to be her destination. On the 28th April Mr. Adams (writing from London) informed Mr. Seward that the Alabama was reported at Cape Town and about to come to France, information which he doubtless received from the United States Consul at the Cape; who would also, without doubt, have imparted it to the commander of the Wyoming on his arrival there in May; but instead of following up the Alabama until he heard of her destruction, (which, at all events, might have given a color to this part of the claim, which covers the cost of the passage of the ship from her station, China, to the United States,) he, notwithstanding his positive orders to that effect, appears to have made the best of his way to the United States.

It would thus seem that the period for which a claim could be made for this ship could not extend beyond the 9th February, 1864, when she practically abandoned the pursuit of the Alabama, and consequently the amount hypothetically admissible would stand thus: Amount considered by the Admiralty Committee to be hypothetically admissible

$202, 662 62 Proportion now shown to be inadmissiblo.

110, 363 14

Amount that may now be considered as hypothetically admissible.....

92, 299 48


There are two or three noticeable and curious features connected with this claim :

1. The United States Minister at Japan seems to have had no expectation that the Wyoming would have quitted the station when she did; her doing so caused him great embarrassment.*

2. During the period for which claims are made against Great Britain, British men-of-war were assisting the Wyoming's consort (a sailing vessel) on the station, and receiving the tbanks of the United States Government; for instance:

When the Jamestown, the consort herself, was ashore near Yeddo in October, 1863;

When the Encounter took an American consular prisoner from Japan to Shanghai in January, 1864;

Her Majesty's steamer Perseus assisting the Annerican bark Maryland, ashore in Japan, &c.5


Appendix to British Case, vol. v, p. 223.
2 Ibid., p. 228.
3 Diplomatic Correspondence, 1864–5, Part I, p. 641.

Diplomatic Correspondence, 1864–5, Part III, pp. 447, 493, 517.
5 Ibid., Part I, p. 310 ; Part II, p. 197; Pat III, p. 592.



From these premises the following results are deducible:

(a.) That on the 1st December, 1862, only two suitable vessels were in the actual pursuit of the Alabama.

(b.) That on the following December the two were reduced to one. (c.) That when she was sunk, there were only three, including the Kearsarge.

(d.) That there were never more than three effective vessels in search of the Alabama at any one time.

(e.) That during the months of February, March, and April, 1863, there was no effective vessel in pursuit.

(f.) That the average number of United States vessels in pursuit, while the Alabama was pursuing her career, was less than two.

(9.) That the United States Navy was increased from 400 to 600 vessels during this period; a considerable proportion of which were suitable vessels.

(h.) That on the 1st December, 1862, no vessels were in pursuit of the Florida.

(i.) That on the 7th December, 1863, no vessels were in pursuit of the Florida.

(j.) That on the 7th October, 1864, when captured at Bahia, two vessels were in pursuit of her, exclusive of the Wachusset.

(k.) That no United States cruiser was seut in special pursuit of the Georgia.

(l.) Nor of the Shenandoah.

(m.) That the claim for the conditional arbitration considered admissible (upon the hypothesis explained in the Admiralty Report) on account of the Alabama should be accordingly further abated by.

$536, 104 21 (n.) On account of the Florida

32, 736 29 (0.) On account of the Sumter, (see Connecticut, p. 83) - 26, 651 00

p.) And the hypothetically admissible amounts so corrected would stand thus: For the four Confederates in Class I...

$940, 460 24 For the Alabama only.

891, 580 82 For the Florida only

48, 879 42 P. S.-With reference to the note on page 351 as to the cruise of the Vanderbilt, it would appear from announcements in the New York Herald during the months of November and December, 1862, and January, 1863, that this vessel was at least 20 days in ports of the United States during those months. The following are the dates of her arrival and departure: Sailed from New York Norember 6, 1862; returned November 30. Sailed again December 11, and returned to Fortress Monroe January 17, 1863, from whence she did not sail again till after the 28th of the same month, when she left with the Weehawken monitor in tow. This suggests a still further abatement of $30,000 in the claim for this vessel, reducing the total amount, hypothetically considered admissible for arbitration on account of the Alabama, to $861,580.82, and that for the four vessels Class I to $910,460.24.

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors][ocr errors]
« AnteriorContinuar »