HL Deb 18 March 1864 vol 174 cc295-300
THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE

rose to ask a question of the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, of which he had given private notice. In a recent debate his noble Friend read to their Lordships a letter addressed by Captain Winslow, the Commander of the United States steamer Kearsarge, to the American Consul at Queenstown, which was to the following effect:— A party of the men, either by the connivance of the crew or otherwise, were concealed on board this vessel on the night of her departure from Queenstown. These men, I learn, were in expectation of being enlisted in the service of the United States, after the Kearsarge had proceeded to sea; but found their mistake. To have turned them ashore at Brest would have been to expose them to temptation to enlist on board the Florida. I therefore determined to leave them at Queenstown as soon as it was practical. You will please notify Admiral Jones, as I informed him that no enlistment should be made at Queenstown. I have, therefore, sent on shore this party that no charge of subterfuge may be alleged against me. When these men were brought back and landed at Queenstown, they were indicted for having enlisted in this very ship, the captain of which, by saying that "they found their mistake," distinctly implied that they did not enlist. Sworn depositions were taken, in which it was stated that when they landed in France, they were told that if they liked to enlist they might do so, and that all but one accepted the offer. The Attorney General for Ireland thought it necessary to prosecute, and upon those depositions they were indicted for having so enlisted. At the trial the men saw that the evidence was too strong against them, and they every one of them pleaded guilty to the very offence to show that they could not have committed which the noble Earl read that letter—and concluded by saying, "I do not know that the captain could have acted otherwise than he did." What said the Judge who tried these persons? Referring to the leniency which he was about to show, he said that he pitied these men very much, and wished that he had before him those who were more guilty than the prisoners. And that there might be no mistake as to who those were, he said, "unfortunately that can not be done, because it is known that the vessel had proceeded to sea,"—clearly showing that the persons who entrapped and induced the men to enlist were the officers of the ship or persons connected with it. More than that, it was stated in the sworn informations that when the party first went on board the Kearsarge in Queens-town, there was a person there who was said to be representing the American Consul. It appeared to him that this was a most serious proceeding. When his noble Friend heard of the transaction, he applied to Mr. Adams, and it was from that Minister that he had received the letter which his noble Friend had read to their Lordships. He had no doubt that Mr. Adams placed implicit reliance in the veracity of the gentleman who wrote it. There might be some circumstances of which he was ignorant, which might explain the circumstances, but he thought that an explanation was due to the House, to which his noble Friend had read the letter, to the United States' Government, to the United States' navy, and to the character of Captain Winslow, There were other circumstances connected with, the late trial to which he wished to call attention. The prisoners having pleaded guilty, the Attorney General for the Crown very naturally and properly stated that there was no wish to press for a severe sentence, and the Judge bound the men over in recognizances of £20 to appear when called upon. Let the House see how the Americans treated an analogous case, in which a British subject was charged—not with enlisting men directly into a regiment, or on board a ship, but with merely "retaining and hiring a British subject to go into British territory in order that he might enter the service of the British Crown." One Wagner was charged with retaining and hiring Abraham Cook, who there was no doubt was a British subject, to go beyond the limits of the United States to enlist into the service of his own country, and the case having been heard and the prisoner convicted, the Judge sentenced him to imprisonment for two years and a fine of 100 dollars. His noble Friend the Secretary for Foreign Affairs had lately told the House that the Government had for some time been aware that enlistment for the Federal army was going on in Ireland, and that remonstrances on the subject had been addressed to the American Minister. But if that enlistment were going on against the wishes of the Government, why was it that the offenders were not punished? It was said, indeed, that no evidence on the subject could be procured. It appeared from the statement which had been made by the responsible officer of the Crown—the Attorney General—on the occasion of the trial to which he had adverted, that the law on the subject in Ireland had never been made known to the people, and that they were in total ignorance of the provisions of the Foreign Enlistment Act as set forth in the Queen's Proclamation. The Attorney General said, "I take this occasion to announce to the people what are the provisions of the Act;" and the Judge added that considering the prisoners were ignorant of the law, he was disposed to let them off easy. Now, everybody who had lived for any time in Ireland knew that there was not a proclamation issued offering a reward of £5, which was not stuck up at every police barrack throughout the country, and yet the Government, which professed to be so anxious to prevent recruiting for the Federal service, left, according to the Attorney General, the people of Ire land for two and a half years in entire ignorance of the law and proclamation on the subject. He begged leave to move for a copy of the information on which the indictment in the case of certain persons for enlisting for the Federal service was founded, for the matter was a very serious one, and the House ought to be placed in possession of all the requisite details with respect to it.

EARL RUSSELL

said, that so far as the Government were concerned, he did not think his noble Friend had any reason to complain. Constant statements were made to the effect, that the people in Ireland were being recruited for the Federal service, and that the offending parties were not prosecuted. But in the instance to which the noble Marquess alluded, certain persons were taken on board a ship of war of the United States, who were afterwards landed and had been proceeded against by the Government; nor did his noble Friend seem to find any fault either with the Attorney General who prosecuted, or with the Judge. The noble Marquess, however, called upon him to explain the letter of the commander of the Federal vessel denying the enlistment. He (Earl Russell) would only say that it was that very day that he had learnt that the men had pleaded guilty, and that it was not likely he should have received any fresh communication from that officer on the subject. He found, at the same time, in the papers which had just been presented, that there was not only the letter from which his noble Friend had quoted, but one from Lieutenant Commander Thornton to Captain Winslow, in which he said — I beg leave to state, in accordance with your request, that on or about the 3rd of November, 1863, several men from Queenstown came on board of this ship as applicants for enlistment in the naval service of the United States. In the absence of yourself, and of any definite instructions in regard to such applications, I told the men that if they were physically qualified for enlistment they might remain on board until your return, when you would decide. Upon your return your instructions were not to enlist them; they were accordingly sent out of the ship. How it was that the lieutenant commander had acted upon those instructions, and that notwithstanding these men were said to have been enlisted, he could not explain. It was very proper that the United States' Minister should be informed of the circumstances of the case, and that he should be asked to account for them. For his own part, he could only say that in his opinion, when a captain in the United States' naval service and a lieutenant serving under him alleged certain facts to have occurred, the Government were not to blame if they did not at once declare that they did not believe a word of the statement, and that those gentlemen must be telling falsehoods. With respect to the general question, that sufficient pains were not taken to make the law known in Ireland, he should simply assure the House that so far as the Foreign Office were concerned, they had not only some time ago directed papers containing extracts from the Foreign Enlistment Act to be circulated, but had again repeated the instruction last autumn. The Irish Government had, of course, its own method of making those announcements public, and he would only say that he recollected the late Mr. O'Connell having once observed—it having been stated that come officer of the Government had put a notice in the Dublin Gazette—that there was no such sure way of keeping the matter secret. The Irish Government had, no doubt, taken those steps which they deemed proper in the present instance.

THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE

said, it was quite evident that the men had been enlisted, and he was surprised that the noble Earl should be deceived by such transparent falsehoods as those which had been put forward. It was not true that the men were sent on shore at once, for they were taken to Brest, and it was not till after the lapse of thirty-six hours, the American Minister having probably telegraphed to the captain meanwhile not to trifle about these men, that they were taken back to Cork, where they were landed in the uniform of the United States' navy. He would, under these circumstances, ask the noble Earl whether he believed the captain's story? He should like to know what the noble Duke at the head of the Admiralty would think if any captain in our service were to tell him that fifteen men had got on board his ship, and that he had not found out that they were there until he had been at sea three or four days? The fact was that the United States' captain had in the present instance either stated what was a transparent falsehood, or else he was not fit for his post, and did not know how to command a ship. He would ask their Lordships to contrast the noble Earl's satisfaction with the explanation of the American captain on the subject with the manner in which he had received the assurances of the Messrs. Laird and other British merchants, who had pledged their honour not to send a vessel which had been seized by the Government to sea without a week's notice, and yet who had their promises disbelieved. The fact, however, was, that any transparent falsehood seemed to be a sufficient excuse for a particular line of conduct when it came from the Federal Government.

EARL RUSSELL

said, that the reports both of the captain and the lieutenant of the Kearsarge stated that the ship put to sea on the night of the 5th November, 1863; it was blowing hard and very stormy, and on the following day it was found that several were strangers on board, and on inquiring it was found that they had come on board at Queenstown in the hope of being enlisted. They were landed at Brest, but afterwards re-embarked, and were landed at Queenstown in the pilot boat. This was the statement of the captain and the lieutenant, and he confessed he did not see the discrepancy to which the noble Earl that had just spoken had referred.

THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE

then moved an Address for Copies of the Informations and Depositions upon which an Indictment was framed against certain Persons for having enlisted on board the United States Ship of War Kearsarge, and of the Indictment to which those Persons pleaded Guilty at the last Assizes for the County of Cork.

Motion agreed to.