To James Madison from Isaac Chauncey, 30 December 1806
From Isaac Chauncey
Canton 30th December 1806
Sir,
On the evening of the 19th Inst I had the mortifycation to be brought too and boarded by an officer from H.B.M Ship Phaéton laying at Cheumpee near the Boca Tigris who after examineing my papers and mens protections he took with him a seaman by the Name of William Bryant who entered with me in July last at New York as an american Citizen but by some accident lost his protection. I remonstrated with the officer as to the propriety of takeing men from me within the Harbour of a Neutral, he told me that he was only executeing his orders. I therefor thought it most prudent to submit to what I could not prevent, and to write to the Captain of the Phaéton1 and to the Consul2 on the subject and when the buisness was properly represented I had no doubt but my man would be restored to me. However I was deceived in my conjecture for you will perceive by Captains Wood’s answer to my letter that the man was recognised as a British subject.3 I should not have submited tamely to search and detention within the waters of a Neutral had it not been for the interest of my Employer’s for if captain Wood had thought proper to take six instead of one man the ship must have lain at Whampoa untill accident could have suplyed the deficiencey of the crew.
I enclose for your information copy’s of my letters to Captain Wood and Mr. Carrington together with Captain Wood’s answer. I have the honour to be Very Respectfully Sir Your Obt H Servt
Isaac Chauncey
Master of the Ship Beaver of New York
RC and enclosures (DNA: RG 59, CD, Canton, vol. 1). For enclosures, see nn. 1–3.
1. Chauncey enclosed a copy of his 20 December 1806 letter to John Wood (2 pp.). In it Chauncey claimed that Bryant was on his ship’s muster role as a U.S. citizen but that “in a state of intoxication” prior to leaving the United States, Bryant had lost his papers “and was not sufficiently himself befor he was sent onboard to reflect that another [protection] was necessary.” Rather than litigating the legality of seizing a neutral vessel in the waters of a neutral nation, Chauncey complained that the loss of a single crew member on an Asian voyage “is most sensibly felt” and appealed to British officers’ desire to “cultivate harmony” with peaceful nations in requesting Bryant’s return. A second copy of this letter, marked “(No 6),” is filed at DNA: RG 59, Misc. Duplicate Consular and Diplomatic Correspondence, 1791–1906.
2. Chauncey enclosed a copy of his 20 December 1806 letter to Edward Carrington (2 pp.). In it Chauncey requested that Carrington, as U.S. consul and commercial agent at Canton, “demand” that Bryant be returned to Chauncey’s ship and repeated the argument that a belligerent nation could not stop and search neutral vessels in the waters of neutral nations.
3. Chauncey enclosed a copy of a 26 December 1806 letter he had received from Wood (1 p.) in which Wood stated that Bryant “was recognized the moment he came on board by a Townsman from Ayr in Scotland which he does not deny.” Wood further stated that Bryant had deserted the slave ship George at Charleston, South Carolina, in May 1806. Given these circumstances, Wood declared that it was “Intirely out of [his] power” to release Bryant.