I am glad, also, to learn that you anticipated my instructions in asking of Earl Russell explanations of the license allowed to underwriters in Liverpool and London to insure British vessels engaged in violating the blockade. Your remarks in alluding to that subject are sagacious and just. It will, indeed, be well to have, in the end, a record of the unfriendly demonstrations and proceedings of the British government and people towards the United States during their present social disturbance.

I confess, however, that, for my own part, I have not even thought of connecting these unkindnesses into a series for ultimate review. Impertinence, injustice, dictation, and violence abroad are naturally provoked by divisions which produce imbecility at home, and they are a part of the discipline by which generous, but erring nations, are brought back to unity, harmony, independence, and self-respect.

Besides, I have not failed to see that every wrong this country has been called to endure at the hands of any foreign power has been a natural, if not a logical, consequence of the first grave error which that power committed in conceding to an insurrection, which would otherwise have been. ephemeral, the rights of a public belligerent. It has seemed, therefore, to be wise, as well as more dignified, to urge the retrogression upon that false step, rather than to elaborate complaints of the injuries which have followed it.

I shall not, in any case, be willing to assume as true the public interpreta tion of the proceedings of the government which imputes their origin to a sentiment of hostility on the part of the British people. Such a sentiment would be so unworthy of a great nation, and so fatal to all hopes of concert between that nation and our own in advancing the interests of freedom, civilization, and humanity, that I prefer to find the cause of any injustice of which we have to complain in a failure of the British government itself to understand the true character and condition of the unhappy civil strife in which we are engaged.

Earl Russell, in the House of Lords, in the debate to which you have alluded, expressed the belief that this country is large enough for two independent nations, and the hope that this government will assent to a peaceful separation from the insurrectionary States. A very brief sojourn among us, with an observation of our mountains, rivers, and coasts, and some study of our social condition and habits, would be sufficient to satisfy him, on the contrary, that the country is not too large for one such people as this, and that it is and must always be too small for two distinct nations until the people shall have become so demoralized by faction that they are ready to enter the course which leads through continued subdivision to ultimate anarchy. All the British speculations assume that the political elements which have been. brought into antagonism here are equal in vigor and endurance. Nothing, however, is more certain than that freedom and slavery are very unequal in these qualities, and that when these diverse elements are eliminated, the former from the cause of sedition, and the latter from the cause of the government, then the government must prevail, sustained as it is by the co-operating sentiments of loyalty, of national pride, interest, ambition, and the permanent love of peace.

These opinions were early communicated to the British government, so far as it was proper to express them in correspondence with a foreign state. That government seems to have acted upon different convictions. The time has probably come for the practical determination of the great issue which has thus been joined. Although the past seventy years of the life of the United States were years of prosperity, yet an unhappy alienation prevailed during all that time between them and Great Britain. I see the United States now resuming their accustomed career by a renewal of the principles

on which their existence depends. I doubt not that their future progress will be even more prosperous than the past. Let it be our endeavor to extirpate the seeds of animosity and cultivate relations of friendship with a nation that, however perversely it may seem to act for a time, can really have no interest or ambition permanently conflicting with our own.

I am, sir, your obedient servant,

CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq., &c., &c., &c.

WILLIAM H. SEWARD.

Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams.

No. 220.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, April 2, 1862.

SIR: The reports we receive from China show that the insurrection there is becoming very formidable, and they leave it doubtful whether the British and French forces now in China are adequate to secure the inviolability of the persons and property of the subjects and citizens of the western powers dwelling in the commercial cities of that Empire. It is a matter of deep regret to us that our troubles at home render it hazardous to withdraw a part of our great land and naval forces from operating here, and send them to China to co-operate with the forces of the allies there. As you are well aware, the continuance of the insurrection in the United States is due to the attitudes of Great Britain and France towards our country. It would seem to be desirable for those two states to have our co-operation in China in preserving a commerce of vast importance to them as well as to ourselves. That co-operation we could give if we were relieved from the necessity for maintaining a blockade and siege of our southern ports. Moreover, the question may well be asked, Where is this tendency to insurrection, which Great Britain and France seem to us to be practically, although unintentionally, fostering, to end? It breaks out in the Levant; it grows flagrant on the China coasts; it even lifts up its head in France. Is it not the interest

of all great maritime states to repress, or at least to discourage it? The President does not expect you to make any special or formal suggestion of these views to the British government, but it seems to him that you may properly use them, incidentally, with advantage in your intercourse with the British government and British society.

I am, sir, your obedient servant,

CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq., &C., &c., &c.

WILLIAM H. SEWARD.

Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward.

No. 140.]

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
London, April 3, 1862.

SIR: I have to acknowledge the reception of despatches from the department, numbered 209, 210, and 211. They make particular reference only to one subject, the revocation by Great Britain of her recognition of the insurgents as a belligerent. I have already in my despatch, No. 135, of the 27th of March, submitted my views on the expediency of pressing the subject at this time. After consultation with some of our friends, I still adhere

to the opinion. A few weeks more of news like that we have received for some time back may dispose of it without further difficulty. On the other hand, a contrary current would subject us to needless mortification in a refusal. There is no change worthy of note in the state of affairs here. The late naval action in Hampton roads has made a great sensation, and is regarded as likely to work a complete change in the policy of this country in fortifications and the naval marine. You will not fail to observe the notice already taken of it in Parliament. The subject is to be resumed to-morrow night. The opinion of the military and naval efficiency of the United States has undergone an astonishing change within the last month.

I transinit herewith a copy of Lord Russell's note to me of the 27th, in reply to mine of the 25th of March, on the subject of the gunboat Oreto and the agency of British subjects in supplying aid to the rebels. The Oreto has sailed from Liverpool.

I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,

Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD,

CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS.

Secretary of the Navy, Washington, D. C.

Earl Russell to Mr. Adams.

FOREIGN OFFICE, March 27, 1862.

SIR: Upon receiving your letter of the 25th instant I immediately directed that the treasury and customs department should be requested to take such steps as may be necessary to ascertain whether the Oreto is equipped for the purpose of making war on the United States; and if that fact can be proved, to detain the vessel.

The charge that nearly all the assistance now obtained from abroad by persons still in arms against the government of the United States, and which enables them to continue the struggle, comes from Great Britain and its dependencies, is somewhat vague. I believe the greater part of the arms and ammunition sent from this country to America during the struggle has gone to the United States.

I agree with you in the statement that the duty of nations in amity with each other is not to suffer their good faith to be violated by ill-disposed persons within their borders, merely from the inefficiency of their prohibitory policy. But it is, at the same time, a duty not to punish persons on suspicion, without any proof of their evil intent. It is not the custom of this country to deprive any person of liberty or property without evidence of some offence. If such evidence can be obtained, the laws are sufficient to prevent the accomplishment of their evil designs against friendly nations. You have not yourself hitherto furnished me with evidence that any vessel has received a hostile or warlike equipment in British waters, which has been afterwards used against the United States. The care that was taken to prevent the warlike equipment of the Nashville, in British waters, must be familiar to your recollection.

With regard to co-operation with the policy of the United States in respect to the blockade, I must remind you that Great Britain has abstained, as far as possible, from complaints of the irregularity of the blockade which has been instituted.

Her Majesty's government have been mindful of the suddenness of the danger with which the United States were threatened; of the inadequacy of the naval force then at the disposal of the government, and of the great

difficulty of blockading a coast of three thousand miles. But beyond forbearance and a liberal interpretation of the law of nations in favor of the United States her Majesty's government cannot go. If by co-operation with the policy of the United States is meant either taking part in the civil war still raging, or imposing restraints on the Queen's subjects unknown to international law, I cannot undertake that her Majesty's government will adopt either of those courses. It would be an unheard-of measure to prohibit merchants from sending ships to sea destined to the southern ports. Should such ships attempt to violate the blockade, capture and condemnation are the proper penalty of such attempts. No authority can be found for any other.

But while these attempts are made on the one side, the United States government have willingly received in the ranks of their army British subjects, who violate the Queen's proclamation, in order to serve against the confederates. Nay, the law of the United States, by which parents can prevent the enlistment of their sons, being minors, has been set aside, to the prejudice of British subjects, the fathers and mothers of thoughtless lads of sixteen or seventeen years of age.

These evils are perhaps inseparable from the unhappy contest now carried on in America. I can only trust it may have a speedy termination, suitable to the reputation of the United States, and conducive to the future happiness of all the inhabitants of a country so lately prosperous and united.

I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant,

CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq., &c., &c., &c.

RUSSELL.

Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams.

No. 224.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, April 3, 1862.

SIR: Your despatch of the 7th of March (No. 128) was received Every new instance of running the blockade excites equally surprise and impatience. The escape of the Nashville from Beaufort was especially provoking. I can account for the deficiency of steam vessels there only upon the ground that they were wanted for the emergency then expected at Norfolk. The late achievement of the Merrimack in Hampton roads at first perplexed and alarmed all our naval agents and officers. They have, however, made preparations for her coming out again, and they express entire confidence in their ability to master her. Meantime the blockade is actually becoming a siege, which we trust will soon result in occupation of the insurrectionary ports.

I am, sir, your obedient servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq., &c., &c., &c.

WILLIAM H. SEWARD.

Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams.

No. 225.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, April 4, 1862.

SIR: I regret to be obliged to revert to a subject upon which I have already written to you more than once with deep concern, namely, the fitting out of vessels of war in England for the service of the insurgents.

The report now comes to us that one or two iron-clad vessels for that service are ready in England, and that Captain Bullock is there with men to bring them to our shores.

It is notorious that while the government of Great Britain have formally departed from the friendly relations which existed between the two countries before the insurrection began, and have assumed an attitude of neutrality between the belligerents and this government, British subjects have become aiders and abettors of the insurrection in every possible way, and that the arms, ammunition, and military stores of the insurgents are constantly shipped from British ports, and those who bring them are provided in every form with directions and facilities for entering our country in violation of our blockade.

This government entertains no more doubt of the stability of this federal Union than her Majesty's government do of the stability of the union of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Under such circumstances, the question arises whether the government of Great Britain are actually indifferent upon the subject of the relations which must exist between the two countries. Are they willing that, so long as the insurgents shall be able to protract a hopeless warfare against the peace and happiness of the American people, they shall avail themselves of the aid and sympathy of a sordid class of persons in the British islands, to whom the disturbance of lawful commerce and the subversion of all honest interests of either country are of no value when weighed against their own gains from a hostile and unlawful trade?

The President does not believe that the British government are consciously tolerating the injurious practices of which I have complained. But I am instructed to ask you once more to bring these complaints to the notice of Earl Russell, in the hope that the time may have at last come when British subjects, deliberately and wickedly engaged as abettors in the existing warfare against the government, may be subjected to some restraint, or at least be made to feel her Majesty's severe displeasure. The President would not be content without doing all that lies in his power to arrest a growing discontent on the part of the American people, fast ripening into an alienation which would perplex and embarrass the two nations for an indefinite period, I am, sir, your obedient servant,

CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq., &c., &c., &c.

WILLIAM H. SEWARD.

Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams.

No. 226.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, April 8, 1862.

SIR: Your despatch of March 20, No. 132, is before me. It brings information of no occurrence requiring especial instructions. On the other hand, I find nothing important to add now, when the mail is closing, to the facts and suggestions contained in my despatches previously written. Our armies, held everywhere in the leash, are at the point of being let loose. Important transactions must occur within a few days. It is the part of wisdom to be neither sanguine of success nor disturbed with apprehensions of failure. If the tide of military 'success shall continue to flow full and strong, we can consent to wait the reluctant but inevitable return of maritime nations to the fraternal positions they abandoned when