on account of their long friendship, to write a letter to Hon. S. R. Mallory, secretary of the navy, if he knew him, or if not, to R. M. T. Hunter, or any other influential person who could help his son toward the place he sought. It stated that he stood a very fair chance then for an office in the marine corps, but that he would like the letter to be general, so as to apply either to the army or navy, as he had letters recommending him to either, and that Colonel Harvey very kindly offered to join Captain Beale in such a letter. As to himself, the writer said, it was hardly necessary to say anything. Captain Beale knew that he had always been a State-rights democrat, and was for many years chairman of the Democratic Association of Fredericksburg, and also that he had been in many local offices-such as mayor, British vice-consul, &c., and more than that he should leave him to say. He stated that Mr. Hunter and Captain Minor, stationed in Richmond, would introduce his son to the president, &c., and kindly offered to use their influence on the spot.

This testimony constitutes the case against the said Peter Goolrick. It is therein shown that he was an early applicant for favor from the so-called confederate government to his family, relying for the success of his application upon his and their zeal, and useful services in the rebel cause, and upon his favorable standing at home and with the British government, as shown by his having held the office of mayor and British vice-consul; that he had travelled under the favor and safeguard of the confederate military authorities, and, in order thereto, had subscribed the oath of allegiance to their pretended government; that he was in manifestly confidential correspondence on the subject of the rebel fortunes in arms, with one White, at Richmond, more distinguished for the virulence of his treason than for his intelligence; that he had in his possession during the first half of June last past, the remnants of important and necessary stores for the sustenance and use of the rebel army, and that from the beginning of the rebellion he hath been an active partisan of its evil interests; that since the outbreak of rebel hostilities he hath furnished storage for the ammunition and supplies of their forces, receiving and delivering such supplies to suit their convenience, and that since his premises have been within the lines of the national troops he hath continued, stealthily, such services, and delivery of property and supplies to the rebel forces, thus displaying himself in the character, not only of a traitor, but of a spy.

From which facts it is obvious that the examination of said Goolrick's premises, the seizure of property found thereon, and the arrest of his person, were justifiable and necessary acts of military precaution, and that his exemption from the penalty of a military execution is solely attributable to the leniency with which the government of the United States deals with treason; and that his restoration to liberty, and the exercise of his functions, at the instance of the British minister, proceeds exclusively from the comity and respect with which it is the habit of our government to treat every request or suggestion of that friendly power.

But the statements of Goolrick himself are not to be disregarded. It is due to him to examine whether there are any material discrepancies between the facts as above set forth, and his own assumptions of what was the truth in the premises. Moreover, we have no information in relation to one branch of the inquiry, viz: the one thousand barrels of flour, except from Goolrick himself. He made a statement, which he verified by solemn oath, to the effect that he is a naturalized citizen of the United States, of Irish birth; has resided in Fredericksburg forty-five years, and acted as British vice-consul about nine years; that he views himself as neutral in the war, neither belonging to the Union party nor the confederates, so called; that he has never sworn allegiance to the Confederate States, though there is a certificate to that effect on the back of a pass that was given to him, yet no oath was then administered to him; that he has rendered no service to the Confederate States; has restrained many British subjects from

joining the rebel forces; has never aided, procured, or advised any of his own sons to join the rebel forces; has three sons in the rebel army-two of them, Charles T. Goolrick, a lawyer of Fredericksburg, and Robert E. Goolrick, a minor, were forced into the service; the other, Doctor Peter Goolrick, jr., is understood to be a surgeon in the Wise legion, but when, where, or why he joined the service deponent does not know; that he has never received for the rebel military forces, any arms, ammunition, commissary stores, or other property or supplies, nor had in possession any such property and delivered to them; and he further states that about the third of May last he received an invoice of one thousand barrels of flour from James Gemmill, of Richmond, whom he had never before seen nor heard of, authenticated by the British consul at Richmond, and described as branded "Fredericksburg extra superfine flour," and said to be stowed in two warehouses in Fredericksburg owned, respectively, by John B. Alexander and Charles S. Scott; and on the fifth of May said Gemmill took him to where the flour was stored, and delivered the flour to him as his agent, before witnesses, and gave him a writing instructing him what to do with the flour, which was neither to sell nor offer it for sale until August or September next; and he further states that afterwards, by order of General J. F. Reynolds, of the United States forces, six hundred and thirty-three (633) barrels of the said flour were taken from his possession in said warehouses at different times, and converted to the use of the United States, and that he has no knowledge where the said flour came from, nor who had owned it previously to its acquisition by said Gemmill; and he further says that the confederate army took possession of an empty cellar of his and stored property there, and took it away, putting in and taking out from time to time; and when they left, they left some property there, principally tents, which facts he reported to the headquarters of the United States forces when they took possession, and broke open the lock and delivered the property to the United States forces. That there were also three trunks and a box placed in his possession-one trunk and a box by Charles T. Goolrick, and two trunks by a lady of Fredericksburg, Mrs. Neall-the contents whereof he knew nothing, which were taken from him by the military authorities of the United States.

The said statement was made voluntarily by said Goolrick, and was averred by him to be a full and true statement, without reservation, of all the facts within his knowledge touching the subjects whereof I was commissioned to inquire. On comparing this statement with the other testimony above set forth, the following points of difference become prominently manifest:

He is proved by direct testimony and by unanimous report to be a strong and open secessionist and rebel, while he represents himself as neutral.

He is proved by his known signature, remaining among the papers, to have subscribed the oath of allegiance to the pretended government of the rebels, while he denies having taken any such oath, on the quibble that no oath was administered to him. He is proved to have rendered active, zealous, and effective personal service to the rebels, in receiving, repacking, and transferring their supplies from within our lines, which he denies.

He is proved by his own letter, remaining in the War Department, to have used great exertion to procure a situation in the rebel service for his son, Charles T. Goolrick, while he denies having aided, procured, or advised his entering such service, and alleges that he was forced into the same.

He is proved to have received arms, ammunition, commissary stores, and other property and supplies for the rebel military forces, and stored the same and delivered it to them, which he denies; but at the conclusion of his statement he says the "confederate army took possession of an empty cellar of his and stored property there," &c.; and also says that he reported what property they left to our forces, and delivered the same to them-of which report and delivery we have no knowledge from our military authorities.

It is submitted that the most partial view of the said Goolrick's statement, which can be deemed admissible, does not in any degree favorably modify the conclusions which are inevitable from the whole body of the testimony, that he has acted the part of a traitor and a spy.

In regard to the flour we are wholly confined, as yet, to Goolrick's statement. General Reynolds who, it is said, ordered the seizure of the flour, with the officers who executed his orders, and his entire command, has been transferred to another field of duty, and they are not now accessible for any explanation. From Goolrick's statement it appears that on the third of May, which was Saturday, a total stranger, representing himself to be one James Gemmill, of Richmond, a British subject, brought and delivered to him an invoice of one thousand barrels of flour, authenticated with great formality by the British consul at Richmond; and that on the fifth of May, which was Monday, said Gem mill took him to the storehouses where the said flour was stored and delivered the said flour to him as his agent, before witnesses, together with written instructions what to do with the same, which were neither to sell nor offer it for sale till August or September next. That afterwards, by order of General Reynolds, six hundred and thirty-three barrels of said flour were taken and converted to public use, and that he, Goolrick, did not know where the said flour came from, or who had previously owned it.

The unprecedented character of this transaction justly subjects it to jealous scrutiny. It is not usual to surround honest transfers of property, or the creation of a bona fide agency, with such elaborate evidences of validity. We have no information upon what facts General Reynolds acted. He may have had proof that the flour was placed in store by the rebel military authorities, as a portion of their regular supply. But if he had only the knowledge furnished by Goolrick, and that the same contained in his present statement, that this quantity of flour was placed in the hands of a man not accustomed to deal in such property, with the observance of unusual formalities, with the unaccountable instructions to hold it for several months, and past another harvest, whatever might be the state of the market; that this was done with manifest haste at the moment when the national forces were approaching the town, and with laborious effort to secure for the flour the protection of the British flag, as British property, when it was notorious that all that was requisite to secure for it the most ample safeguards from waste or plunder, was that it should be known as private property, and not the property of the pretended government of the rebels; these facts would have warranted the seizure of the flour and its appropriation to public use as rebel military stores. At any rate, the badges of fraud flaunt so showily around the transaction that Goolrick must not deem it a hardship if the government require him to clothe his title in other garments before consenting to make him restitution.

It is submitted that, before admitting this claim, the time of Goolrick's agency, at least, should be suffered to expire, and that investigation at the locality should again become practicable by the return of the inhabitants, and their resumption of the pursuits of peace, and that inquiry should also be extended to Richmond, and Mr. James Gemmill be made to appear in person, and show himself an actual British subject, and that the said flour was, in good faith, his property, lawfully held, and not being used nor intended to be used for purposes treason able against this government.

Respectfully submitted.

The SECRETARY OF STATE.

FRANCIS H. RUGGLES.

Mr. Seward to Mr. Stuart.

[Informal.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, July 23, 1862.

SIR: The papers which accompanied your note to this department, of the 1st instant, marked "informal," have been taken into deliberate consideration. They relate to restrictions on the export from New York to Nassau of articles from England by steamers, and particularly to those by the China, British Queen, and to the case of the schooner William H. Clear, and to the relanding of drugs and surgical instruments shipped by a British firm in New York for Nassau. Having referred these papers to the Secretary of the Treasury, explanations upon the subject have been received from him, the substance of which will be made known to her Majesty's government through Mr. Adams, the United States minister at London. It is not to be doubted that these explanations will show the necessity of the restrictions referred to for protecting the rights of the United States with reference to transit trade through ports within their jurisdiction.

I am,

sir, your obedient servant,

Hon. WILLIAM STUART, &c., &c., &c.

WILLIAM H. SEWARD.

Mr. Stuart to Mr. Seward.

WASHINGTON, August 1, 1862.

SIR: Lord Lyons addressed various despatches to Earl Russell, in the month of May and in the beginning of June last, relative to the restrictions placed upon the export trade of the United States, and more especially upon that from New York to the Bahamas, in consequence of the instructions given by the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States to refuse clearances to vessels laden with contraband of war, or other specified articles, as well as to vessels which are believed to be, in fact, bound to confederate ports, or which are laden with merchandise of whatever description, when there appears to be imminent danger of the cargoes coming into the possession of the so-styled confederates. I have consequently been instructed to state to you that her Majesty's gov ernment, after considering these despatches, in communication with the law advisers of the crown, are of opinion that it is competent for the United States, as a belligerent power, to protect itself, within its own ports and territory, by refusing clearances to vessels laden with contraband of war or other specified articles, as well as to vessels which are believed to be bound to confederate ports, and that so long as such precautions are adopted equally and indifferently in all cases, without reference to the nationality or origin of any particular vessel or goods, they do not afford any just ground of complaint.

But her Majesty's government are unable to understand how the refusal of clearances to vessels laden with ordinary merchandise can be justified upon the mere assumption of some "imminent danger of the cargoes coming into the possession of the insurgents," unless, indeed, there be reasonable ground for alleging and believing that some confederate port is the true destination of such vessels or of their cargoes. Under so vague and indefinite a pretext as that of "imminent danger of the cargoes coming into the possession of the insurgents," any kind and amount of arbitrary restriction upon British trade might be introduced and practiced.

With reference to the measures that appear to have been taken by the United States government as to the trade with the Bahama islands, her Majesty's government consider that a distinction ought to be made between shipments of coal and other articles ancipitis usus, the export of which may have been prohibited as contraband by general orders of the United States government, to any place within certain geographical limits, and shipments to the Bahamas, or any other part of the British dominions, of provisions and other articles of innocent use, not prohibited or made contraband by any such general order. The prohibition of the former class of shipments is public and general, and it falls equally upon the shipping and commerce of all nations, and may be justified on the ground of the exigencies of a belligerent.

Her Majesty's government cannot, however, so regard the interference of the New York custom-house with the ordinary exports to the Bahamas of dry goods, plain and printed cotton fabrics, &c., shoes, medical drugs, flour, and provisions. Trade between the United States and the Bahamas is regulated by the treaty of 1815, between the United States and Great Britain, the stipulations of that treaty having been extended to the Bahamas in 1830 by the mutual acts of both governments. By the proclamation of President Jackson, dated the 5th of October, 1830, pursuant to the act of Congress of the 29th May, 1850, it was expressly declared to be lawful for Britishi vessels from the Bahamas to import into the United States and to export therefrom any articles which might be imported or exported in vessels of the United States. This engagement is still in force, and any prohibition of or interference with exports of ordinary commodities, not contraband of war, from New York to the Bahamas, in British vessels, is plainly inconsistent with that engagement.

Her Majesty's government cannot, therefore, in the absence of any evidence that the articles in question were destined for the so-styled Confederate States, pass unnoticed the general restriction which had been imposed on their export from New York to the Bahamas, and I have accordingly been instructed to address this representation to you upon the subject.

I avail myself of this occasion to renew to you the assurances of my highest consideration.

Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, &c., &c., &c.

W. STUART.

Mr. Seward to Mr. Stuart.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Washington, August 18, 1862.

SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 1st instant, in which, under the instructions of her Britannic Majesty's government, a representation is made to me on the subject of clearances of vessels and cargoes from New York to the Bahamas.

No time was lost in submitting your note to the Secretary of the Treasury, who referred it to the collector of the customs at New York for explanation. I now have the honor to enclose to you a copy of that officer's report on the subject, and to state that as his proceedings therein set forth appear to have been in strict conformity with the instructions of the Treasury Department, his conduct has accordingly been approved by that department.

I, however, give you the collector's reply for the better information of your government as to the exigencies which have rendered the proceedings complained of necessary in a crisis of great public danger. The exclusive order is applied to the island of Nassau only, because there is no complaint of abuse of neutrality laws elsewhere, and not at all invidiously, or because it is a British possession. The restriction is a measure adopted for the public safety,