I demand, however, the release of my ship; and if this demand be not promptly complied with, I hereby formally protest against her seizure, especially under the very peculiar circumstances of the case.

Mr. Bawson to Lieutenant Low, C.S.N.  December 29, 1863.

I am directed by the Governor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of yesterday’s date protesting against the seizure of the Tuscaloosa, whose character you represent to be the same as when, in August last, she was admitted into the port of Simon’s Bay, and I am to acquaint you in reply that a full report was submitted to Her Majesty’s Government of all that took place on the first visit of the Tuscaloosa, and that the seizure has now been made in conformity with the opinion expressed by them on that report.

Your protest will of course be transmitted for their consideration.

Rear-Admiral Sir B. Walker to Sir P. Wodehouse.  December 29, 1863.

Lieutenant Low, the officer belonging to the Confederate States ship of war Alabama, late in charge of the barque called the Tuscaloosa (properly the Conrad of Philadelphia), having sent me a copy of the protest which he has forwarded to your Excellency against the detention of that vessel, I think it right to inclose for your information the copy of my letter to Lieutenant Low[18] explaining the circumstances under which the so-called Tuscaloosa is detained.

[Footnote 18:  This letter is not given in the Blue Book.]

Sir P. Wodehouse to the Duke of Newcastle.  January 11, 1864.

I very much regret having to acquaint your Grace that the Confederate prize vessel the Tuscaloosa has again entered Simon’s Bay, and that the Naval Commander-in-chief and myself have come to the conclusion that, in obedience to the orders transmitted to his Excellency by the Admiralty, and to me by your Grace’s despatch of the 4th November last, it was our duty to take possession of the vessel, and to hold her until properly claimed by her original owners.  The Admiral, therefore, sent an officer with a party of men from the flag-ship to take charge of her, and to deliver to her commander a letter in explanation of the act.  Copies of his protest, addressed to me, and of my reply, are inclosed.  He not unnaturally complains of having been now seized, after he had on the previous occasion been recognised as a ship of war.  But this is manifestly nothing more than the inevitable result of the overruling by Her Majesty’s Government of the conclusion arrived at on the previous occasion by its subordinate officer.

The Consul for the United States, on being informed of what had taken place, intimated his inability to take charge of the ship on account of the owners, and expressed a desire that it should remain in our charge until he was put in possession of the requisite authority.  Accordingly, after taking the opinion of the Attorney-General, it was arranged that the vessel should remain in the charge of Sir Baldwin Walker.