that the purpose was to permit privateers to seek for and capture or destroy the Alabama or other vessels of a like type.  He characterized this as a plan “to organize the militia of the seas by issuing letters of marque and reprisal[977].”  Neither here nor at any time did Seward or Adams allege in diplomatic correspondence any other purpose than the pursuit of Alabamas, nor is it presumable that in July, 1862, the construction plans of the Rams were sufficiently well known to the North to warrant a conclusion that the later purpose of the proposed privateering fleet was at first quite other than the alleged purpose.  Probably the Bill introduced in July, 1862, was but a hasty reaction to the sailing of the Oreto (or Florida) and to the failure of early protests in the case of the Alabama.  Moreover there had been an earlier newspaper agitation for an increase of naval power by the creation of a “militia of the seas,” though with no clear conception of definite objects to be attained.  This agitation was now renewed and reinforced and many public speeches made by a General Hiram Wallbridge, who had long advocated an organization of the mercantile marine as an asset in times of war[978].  But though introduced in the summer of 1862, the “privateering bill” was not seriously taken up until February, 1863.

In the Senate discussion of the Bill at the time of introduction, Senator Grimes, its sponsor, declared that the object was to encourage privateers to pursue British ships when, as was expected, they should “turn Confederate.”  Sumner objected that the true business of privateers was to destroy enemy commerce and that the South had no such bona fide commerce.  Grimes agreed that this was his opinion also, but explained that the administration wanted the measure passed so that it might have in its hands a power to be used if the need arose.  The general opinion of the Senate was opposed and the matter was permitted to lapse, but without definite action, so that it could at any time be called up again[979].  Six months later the progress of construction and the purpose of the rams at Liverpool were common knowledge.  On January 7, 1863, the privateering bill again came before the Senate, was referred to the committee on naval affairs, reported out, and on February 17 was passed and sent to the House of Representatives, where on March 2 it was given a third reading and passed without debate[980].  In the Senate, Grimes now clearly stated that the Bill was needed because the Confederates “are now building in England a fleet of vessels designed to break our blockade of their coast,” and that the privateers were to “assist in maintaining blockades.”  There was no thorough debate but a few perfunctory objections were raised to placing so great a power in the hands of the President, while Sumner alone appears as a consistent opponent arguing that the issue of privateers would be dangerous to the North since it might lead to an unwarranted interference with neutral commerce.  No speaker outlined the exact method by which privateers were to be used in “maintaining blockades”; the bill was passed as an “administration measure.”