and made arrangements to coal before obtaining permission; this was of course refused, and her coaling stopped, but not until she had taken nineteen tons on board. Then hearing, doubtless, that there was coal at Angra Pequeña, her captain went there and took possession of it, saying "he must have coal," and with this supply he went to St. Helena and Bahia, where doubtless he obtained a further supply, thence to Barbados and to the United States. These facts prove: 1st. That the Vanderbilt was not fitted for the pursuit to such distant regions, where supplies of coal were limited, owing to her having no sail-power. 2d. That in addition to deviating from her orders she exhibited no haste in quitting some of the ports she touched at to carry on her pursuit. SAN JACINTO. Of this vessel's proceedings there are more full details than of those of any of the other United States cruisers, given in a letter of the Seeretary of the Navy of 30th August, 1871, Appendix to Case of the United States, vol. vi, p. 345. Semmes describes her as having a more powerful battery and double the crew, but that the Alabama had the "speed of her;" however, it may be assumed she was not an unsuitable vessel to have been sent in the pursuit; she was, as will be subsequently shown, withdrawn after being about two and one-half months on this service, and was afterward attached to the eastern blockading squadron. If the arbitrators consider that she is proved, as stated at p. 138 of the British Counter Case, to have been remiss in allowing the Alabama to escape from Martinique, a question would then arise whether any portion of the claim made in her behalf was admissible, and whether such claim (if any) could be carried beyond the date of the Alabama's escape. AUGUSTA. Nothing is known of her cruise, which only lasted ten weeks, and consequently, though she was a suitable vessel for the service, she must necessarily have performed it in a very perfunctory manner. She does not appear to have called at Bermuda or any of the British West India Islands. She was afterward employed in the North Atlantic blockading squad ron.2 DACOTAH. Also a suitable vessel; was withdrawn after but one month's service, and for the same service. NIAGARA. It may possibly be thought unnecessary to accumulate further proofs as to what was the actual employment of this ship, since the postscript to the admiralty report, and the United States official documents therein mentioned, will, it may be considered, have proved conclusively that she 1 See" Correspondence respecting the capture of the Saxon by the United States ship Vanderbilt," laid before Parliament, (North America, No. 2, 1864,) pp. 1, 7, 12. See Navy Register, 1863; also, Navy report, December, 1863, p. 56, and Synopsis of Orders. was not sent to Europe in pursuit of any of the Confederate vessels named in the United States Case, but to watch the vessels then being constructed for the Confederates in French ports. The claim, however, for this ship is so vast in amount, ($648,234,) that it is thought better, at the risk of being prolix, to give other quotations from United States sources which have been met with, and which are very pertinent to the contention that she never was engaged in pursuing the Alabama or Florida. True it is that on the 28th April, 1864, Mr. Adams informed Mr. Seward that the Alabama was "reported at Cape Town, and about to come to France;" and as the Niagara left the United States the end of the following month, it might be not unnaturally inferred that she was dispatched to Europe in consequence of these tidings, and hence that she was sent in pursuit of the Alabama; but a dispatch from Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams of the 28th May, when that of the 28th April must have been received, effectually disposes of this hypothesis. "The Niagara," Mr. Seward stated, "will go to Europe on Wednesday next. We have adopted this policy, not alone on account of the naval expeditions with which we are threatened from British ports,2 but also beeause we have not been able to procure entirely satisfactory assurances from the French Government," &c., about the vessels building at Bordeaux. * Mr. Adams had, two days before, (26th,) written to Mr. Seward to this effect: "My impression is that hereafter the base will be substantially transferred to the other side of the Channel," and he also refers to the four vessels in process of construction in France.3 Attention has been already called by the committee to the Niagara being "without orders." Mr. Harvey, the United States minister at Lisbon, writing to Mr. Seward on the 29th November, 1864, confirmed this curious and important fact in these terms: "In saying that I refer to the fact that the Niagara has been practically tied up for several months at Flushing, Antwerp, and the British colonies," (query, Channel,) "and, as is understood, waiting for orders which are to regulate her further movements." 774 Can it still, in the face of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, be seriously contended that from 30th May, 1864, to the 20th September, 1865, the Niagara "was cruising in the North Atlantic in search of the Alabama and Florida?" MONEY CLAIMS-FURTHER ABATEMENTS SUGGESTED. Where none are suggested the cruisers are not named. TUSCARORA. It has been already shown that she never went to the West Indies in pursuit of the Alabama and Florida, and consequently the amounts which were considered admissible, upon the hypothesis of the admiralty report, under the belief that she had carried out her orders, should be abated as follows: 1 Diplomatic Correspondence, 1864-'65, Part i, p. 641. Ibid., part ii., p. 60. At this time the only Confederate cruiser in a British port of the whole of those named in the United States Case was the Georgia, then dismantled, and known to be for sale; consequently, the "naval expeditions" which Mr. Seward was apprehensive of could not have consisted of any of the Confederate cruisers, which, by any possibility, could be considered to come within the purview of the treaty of Washington. 3 Ibid., Part ii, p. 29. 4 Ibid., Part iv, p. 325. Amount considered hypothetically admissible by the Committee There would still remain a sum considered hypothetically admissible, which refers to a period of six weeks before the Alabama left Liverpool, and to another of four weeks during which the Tuscarora was visiting British ports; she finally went to Cadiz on the 2d September, 1863; amounting to SAN JACINTO. $89,765 58 $32,736 29 32,736 29 65,472 58 24,293 00 Reference has already been made to a letter from the Secretary of the Navy, giving details of this ship's proceedings; but it is by no means a full report, as no mention is made of her visit to Martinique, when the Alabama escaped from her, nor does it mention the fact that after this escape the San Jacinto was no longer employed in pursuit of the Alabama, but was attached, during a part of the period for which claims are made, to the East Gulf blockading squadron. This is shown in the Navy Register, where, on the 1st January, as well as on the 1st February, 1863, she is named as attached to this squadron, though the precise date at which she was withdrawn from the pursuit is not given. If the official Navy Register needed confirmation, it would be found in a correspondence from Key West of the 15th January, 1863, published in the New York Herald of January 27, which stated that "she (the San Jacinto) comes from St. Thomas for supplies, and will, I understand, be temporarily attached to the Eastern Gulf blockading squadron." Taking, however, the date given in the Navy Register, viz, 1st January, 1863, as the date of her withdrawal from the pursuit, the claims on her account would stand thus: Amount considered hypothetically admissible by the Admiralty Committee.. Proportion now shown to be inadmissible.. Amount that may now be considered hypothetically admissible.... MOHICAN. $65,421 43 16, 183 20 49,238 23 It has been already shown why this ship should be considered to have been performing the ordinary duties on a foreign station' until the 9th May, 1863, when she left the Cape de Verdes for the Brazils, and may be assumed to have commenced her pursuit of the Alabama. She event ually arrived at Table Bay on the 11th December, 1863. Here, with out waiting to ascertain where the Alabama had gone, which she might have done (if he could not remain at the Cape) by proceeding to Bourbon or to the Mauritius, her captain, like the commander of the Vanderbilt, gave up the pursuit, and on the 19th December turned his ship's head homeward, where he arrived in April, 1864. Although a very suitable ship for the pursuit, and although when she arrived in the United States the Florida, Alabama, and Georgia were on the high seas, she was withdrawn from this special service, and was afterward employed on the North Atlantic blockading squadron. It is therefore clear, on these premises, that the (hypothetically) admissible claim on account of this ship could not extend beyond the That the Cape de Verdes was the foreign station to which the Mohican was proceeding in the performance of an ordinary duty when she called at Bermuda may be fairly inferred from her being there on the 21st December, 1862; 22d January, 1603; 20th February, 1863; 21st March, 1863; 22d April, 1863; leaving on the 9th May, 1863. for the Brazils. 2 Appendix to British Case, vol. v, p. 228. period embraced between the 9th May, 1863, when she may be considered to have commenced the pursuit, and the 19th December, when she abandoned it, the amount of which could not exceed― Amount considered by the Admiralty Committee as hypothetically admissible...... Proportion now shown to be inadmissible.... ... $258, 310 32. 151,863 76 Amount that may now be considered hypothetically admissible.... 106, 446 56 Second cruise: WACHUSETT. She was, as before stated, a suitable vessel, and her cruising-ground well chosen to intercept the Alabama when returning to Europe or again going south. Although she actually captured the Florida in Bahia, the Admiralty Committee considered itself justified, by the synopsis of her orders, in considering her as in search of the Alabama only; but, on the supposition that she was cruising near the line and making only occasional visits to Brazilian ports, it was of opinion that the claim was admissible up to the 19th September, thus allowing her three months to learn the fate of the Alabama. It turns out, however, as before stated, that the Wachusett spent a large portion of her time in port. The news of the sinking of the Alabama on the 19th June, 1864, was taken to the Brazils by the French packet which left Bordeaux on the 24th June and arrived at Rio de Janeiro on the 18th July, at which date the Wachusett must have learned the news, as she arrived at Rio de Janeiro on the 7th July, and did not leave until the 3d of the following month, when she sailed for Bahia and arrived there on the 12th August. Hence the claim on her account for the pursuit of the Alabama would cease on the 18th July. The fact of her remaining in port sixteen days after the news arrived and then going on to Bahia is a further proof that the Florida was not a special object with her. The claim on account of the Wachusett would stand thus : Amount considered hypothetically admissible [by the Admiralty Committee...... Proportion now shown to be inadmissible.. $145,936 66 38,666 98 Amount that may now be considered hypothetically admissible.... 107,269 68 RHODE ISLAND. This case is precisely the same as that of the De Soto, and although she did not happen to take as many prizes as that vessel, yet her actual positions from time to time can be sufficiently traced to prove that she never went in pursuit of the Alabama, but was continuously employed on the same kind of service as Admiral Wilkes's squadron, in the immediate vicinity of the Bahamas. In the Navy Register for 1st January, 1864, she is given as belonging to the West Indian squadron, and she was withdrawn from the service before the sinking of the Alabama, showing that her employment was not dependent on the Alabama's career or movements. The Rhode Island's positions on the following days were: 12th May, 1863... 21st-23d May, 1863. 30th May, 1863. 16th August, 1863 ..Hog Island, Bahamas. ..Cape Haytien. . Eleuthera, Bahamas. ..Latitude 270 N., longitude 76° W.,(where she captured steamer Cronstadt, value, $301,940.)1 'Appendix to British Case, vol. v, p. 225; United States Navy Report, December, 1863, pp. 557, 567; Diplomatic Correspondence, 1864-'65, part ii, pp. 412 et seq. 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. SACRAMENTO. 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 Abatement suggested by the Postscript to the Report. Amount that may now be considered hypothetically admissible.... $112, 295 22 6.535 70 8,318 18 97, 441 34 WYOMING. 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; 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 Novem ber, 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. 5 She was at Labuan between 15th and 18th December," 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. 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. |