The following letter, which appeared in the papers at the time,
was written in the hope of preventing any action under the law
of Congress authorizing letters of marque.
WASHINGTON, March 17, 1863.
MY DEAR SIR,--In the freedom of that conversation which I had
with you as we drove to the Capitol recently, allow me for a
moment to speak again on the question which interested us then.…
I confess that I am anxious that the issuing of letters of marque
should be avoided, not merely because it will give us a bad name
without commensurate good, nor because it will be a departure
from the early and often declared policy of our Government,
which has not hesitated, by the pen of Benjamin Franklin and
John Quincy Adams, to denounce privateering as an “enormity,”
but because it does not meet, in a practical way, the precise
necessity of this time. People who advocate it are obviously
misled by the experience of another generation, when we were at
war with a nation whose commerce was a temptation and a reward
to private enterprise. The case is so different now that the old
agency is entirely inapplicable.
The privateer cruises for booty, which is in lieu of rations
and pay to officers and men, and of hire and compensation to
owners. But if the booty does not exist, or if it is in such
inconsiderable quantity as to afford small chance of valuable
prize, evidently you must find some other system of compensation;
as this cannot be, you must abandon the idea of private
enterprise stimulated and sustained by booty. An agency must be
found applicable to the present case, precisely as in machinery a
force is found best calculated to do the required work.
Now our present business is to help the Government capture
the Alabama and her piratical comrades, and also to catch
blockade-runners. But a letter of marque is not proper for
this purpose, nor will the chance of booty be the best way to
stimulate and sustain the cruiser, while, on the other hand, it
is obvious that such a ship, invested with the belligerent right
of search, in the quest of booty, will be tempted to exercise it
on neutral commerce, and thus become the occasion of contention
and strife with foreign powers.
Privateers have never been remarkable for the caution or reserve
with which they employ belligerent rights. I would not exaggerate
the troubles that might ensue; but when I think of these
sea-rovers, with license to overhaul neutral ships and to inflict
upon them visitation and search, I feel how much evil may ensue
compared with the good. You would not threaten a whole street in
order to catch a few robbers who had sought shelter in some of
its recesses, nor would you burn down your house, according to
the amusing story of Charles Lamb, in order to roast a pig.
It seems to be only according to common prudence, that private
enterprise, if enlisted now, should be regulated by the object
in view. To this end, it is not necessary that it should assume
a form calculated to awaken solicitude. The way is simple. If
citizens are willing to unite in efforts of the Government, let
them place their ships at its disposal, to be commissioned as
national ships, and let the Government, on its part, offer bounty
and prize money, in addition to pay and rations, for the capture
of the Alabama and her piratical comrades. The motive power will
thus be adapted to the object, while our country will be saved
from all chance of additional complication, and also from the
stigma of reviving a policy which civilization condemns.
The argument of economy is sometimes pressed. But it is poor
economy to employ an agency which in its very nature is
inapplicable. Besides, I doubt if any success reasonably expected
from such ships, called by the French _corsaires_, will be a
compensation for the bad name they will give us, and the bad
passions they will engender.
I hope I do not take too great a liberty in sending you this
sequel to our conversation. At all events, you will be pleased
to accept my best wishes, and believe me, my dear Sir, with much
regard,
Very faithfully yours,