The War Department was fully aware that it was entirely my province to regulate the movements of the blockade-runners, and, to avoid difficulty, directed me explicitly to sustain the claims of the Navy. Not the slightest difficulty could have occurred had either of the naval authorities present made me acquainted with the wishes of the Secretary of the Navy or specified the vessel they wished detained. They did neither, but proceeded to act entirely independent of and contrary to my authority. On the evening of the 8th instant I received a note from Mr. Andrea, consignee of the Hansa (marked Numbers 1, accompanying papers), stating that Flag Officer Lynch and ordered his vessel under the guns of the North Carolina, that he declined to obey, and desired me to take her in charge. This was the first intimation I received from any quarter whatever relative to the Hansa. I accordingly wrote paper Numbers 2 to the naval commander, referring Mr. Andrea's note for explanation, and adding that I had sent a guard on board the Hansa with orders to permit no one to approach without proper authority, an order very frequently given in my command. Before an answer was returned I had received information that the Navy had actually seized the ship, weighed her anchor, and carried her down the stream to the anchorage of the North Carolina and placed a marine guard upon her. I then received late at night the reply of the naval commandant to my note Numbers 2 (see Numbers 3). No other document than this is wanting to fix the whole blame of the affair, by which I mean the unwarrantable usurpation of the military authority by this officer as unaccountable, as uncalled for. My action in regard to the Alice, but two days previous, should have convinced the naval authorities of what I would do in the premises had they informed me of their wishes, and of which no doubt Mr. Peters would have informed me but for the very premature action of the naval commandant. He knew well the etiquette and the authority. He knew also that I would not permit interference, but feeling secure that he could plead the orders of the Secretary of the Navy, orders which I am sure the honorable Secretary could never have intended for execution in the mode pursued, he commenced at once to violate authority and right by seizing the ship. The ship had not even cleared for sea; had not applied for a pilot permit; had not asked for the authority from headquarters, without which no vessel is allowed to leave the town even, much less go to sea. If he did not know this he ought to have known it. The orders relative to the port have been published for months in the daily papers.

He seized the ship. The honorable Secretary of the Navy does not appear to have ordered this. He says he "did not interfere as long as he lay at the wharf," but only when she hauled out into the stream. There are two remarks to be made here:

First. How long did he have the orders of which he speaks, but of which he never informed me until after he had used force? Had then been any desire on his part to avoid a collision some information would have been given me; but-

Second. Why seize the vessel because she was hauled out? She had simply left the wharf to make room for another vessel.

The remark about "slipping away" is simply absurd, and no one better knows it than Flat Officer Lynch.

He concludes his note by threatening me with his whole force in execution of his orders, "but hopes I will do nothing to interrupt the harmony that ought to prevail between the two branches of the service;" this after deliberately usurping my functions. He could