were declared free men; and further declaring that all rebels should be shot if found within the Union lines with arms in their hands. This proclamation of General Fremont was in advance of the policy of the administration and assumed prerogatives which only belonged to the President. The wisdom of this measure at the time was considered by many of the loyal citizens of the loyal States of doubtful utility in Missouri, while it affected the success and progress of the loyalty of all the border States. The President felt that General Fremont had assumed grave and improper responsibilities in taking so important a step and measure without notice or consultation with the administration. The President, as soon as he received and read the proclamation, wrote to the General, September 2, saying, that there were two points in it which gave him anxiety, and which did not meet with his approval. The first was, that no man must be shot under the proclamation without first having the President's consent. The second was the paragraph liberating slaves. The President ordered that this should be so modified as to conform with the provisions contained in an Act of Congress entitled "An Act to confiscate property used for insurrectionary purposes, approved August 6, 1861," and that said Act should be published with his order. The appointment of General Fremont and his management of military affairs in Missouri did not prove a popular or a successful one. While there was a large field open for military operations against the rebels and the enemies of the Union, he had quarrels and dissensions with the friends of the administration. His quarrel and difficulty with Colonel F. T. Blair, and the charges and countercharges between the principals and their friends was the subject of much newspaper comment, as it alienated friends and tended to prevent harmony in the Union party. The President refused to espouse the cause of either party in the general quarrel, and he became satisfied that the interests of the Union cause in Missouri, as well as those of the country at large would be subserved by the removal of the General, which took place in October, 1861, when he was superceded by General Hunter, whose term of service was brief, and who in turn was relieved by General Halleck. The removal of General Fremont from his command of the Western department was at the time the cause of much discontent and complaint by the anti-slavery men in Missouri, and much unfriendly criticism by the radical anti-slavery citizens in the free States.

The conservative policy of the President relative to slavery in the border slave States during the first two years of the rebellion was not popular with the ultra Republicans in the loyal States. But as the war went on and the rebellion progressed, the wisdom of his policy became more apparent and the results following therefrom were disastrous to the rebel confederacy.

In the border States of Maryland, Kentucky and Missouri were many citizens who were loyal to the Union and friendly to the administration, a still larger number whose sympathies were with the South, but their political and pecuniary interests still held them to the Union, and a third party who, in principle and action, favored the rebellion. Those States were still represented in the National Legislature, and it was the policy of the President to pursue that course towards those States which should not abate their loyalty to the Union, and which would destroy all hope and expectation of the rebels that those States would ever join their confederacy. This prudential policy of the President and the good results that followed became more apparent as the war progressed, and its effects were felt and seen in the more decided utterances of fidelity and loyalty to the Union, and in their sending many regiments of loyal soldiers to the front to battle for the Union. There was a gradual growth of that tone of public sentiment and feeling which was more in concert and harmony with the measures of the administration in relation to slavery, and the results of this policy finally terminated in the abolition of slavery in the States of Maryland and Missouri by their own citizens before the close of the war.

CHAPTER XXIII.

GENERAL SCOTT RETIRES FROM ACTIVE SERVICE-THE TRENT AFFAIR.

The appointment of General McClellan to the command of the army of the Potomac left General Rosecrans to complete the Union work in Western Virginia (which General McClellan in his report said was accomplished), which was effected during the months of August and September. The army of the Potomac was rapidly increasing in numbers, and was being made efficient in organization and discipline. At this time General McClellan's popularity with the army was unbounded, and the country had the utmost confidence in his ultimate success. On the 29th of August, General Butler, from Fortress Monroe, acting with a naval force, took possession of Hatteras Inlet with the rebel forts therein. On the 21st of October occurred the disasterous battle of Ball's Bluff. It was a sad failure; the killed, wounded, captured and drowned were eleven hundred. Here Senator Baker, the President's friend and freedom's champion, fell. The country mourned in sorrow and anger. General McClellan, in his report of the disaster, said “that situated as the troops were-cut off alike from retreat and reinforcements, one thousand seven hundred men against five thousand, the issue could not have been otherwise." The country wanted to know, and the people inquired why, with an immense army within a few miles, were the Union troops left or placed where reinforcements and retreats were alike impossible for their relief. This sad affair at Ball's Bluff and the inactivity manifested in the army of the Potomac did not appear well to General Scott, and he had daily experience that his position was becoming unpleasant under the existing management of military affairs. He therefore on the 1st of November, in a letter to the President, desired on account of physical infirmaties, to be relieved from all active duties. In an answer by the President to the General, granting his request, Mr. Lincoln added: "The American people will hear with sadness and deep emotion that General Scott has withdrawn from the active control of the army. The President and the unanimous Cabinet express their own and the nation's sympathy in his personal affliction, and

their profound sense of the important public services rendered by him to his country during his long and brilliant career, among which ever will be gratefully distinguished his faithful devotion to the Constitution, the Union and the flag when assailed by parricidal rebellion." The President and his entire Cabinet waited upon him at his residence, and then with his Secretaries around him, the President read his letter. It stirred the old General's heart as it never had been moved before. It seemed to him to be the finishing up in brightness and grandeur a life-a long life spent in faithful service and devotion to his country, its Constitution and its laws. The old General replied: "This honor overwhelms me. It over pays all the services I have attempted to render my country. If I had any claim before they are all obliterated by this expression of approval by the President, with the unanimous support of the Cabinet. I know the President and this Cabinet well. I know that the country has placed its interests in this trying crisis in safe keeping. Their councils are wise. Their labors are untiring as they are loyal, and theirs is the right one.

Thus the hero of Lundy's Lane and Chapultepec, after half a century spent in the service of his country, leading its armies to victory, went into retirement and rest with the approbation of his Government and the gratitude of the people for his eminent services rendered, the more meritorious for his loyalty and devotion to the Union in her hour of peril and need. Born in the South, a son of the Old Dominion, he had chivalric notions of Virginia's institution and greatness; but when he came to choose between union and disunion, loyalty or disloyalty, he laid all State, friends, and sectional feelings at the shrine of liberty, on the altar of freedom, and he lived to see treason punished, loyalty rewarded and the success and safety of that Government he so loyally supported.

During the month of November South Carolina was invaded and a brilliant naval victory was achieved in Port Royal harbor. Generals Grant and McClernard attacked a rebel camp in Missouri, capturing twelve guns, baggage, horses and many prisoners. General W. T. Sherman was sent to Kentucky and held that State against the rebels under General Williams. He was afterwards transferred to the army of Tennessee, and General Buell took Sherman's command in Kentucky.

On the 12th of October, 1861, the steamer Theodora steamed out of Charleston harbor with two notorious rebels on board, James M. Mason and John Slidell, embassadors to England and France. Their object was to obtain from those Governments the recognition of the Southern Confederacy. They proceeded to Cuba to take passage on the British mail steamer Trent. Captain Wilkes, of the United States frigate San Jacinto, had been advised of the proceedings of the commissioners, and on the second day out from

Havana the Trent was hailed from the San Jacinto by a shot across her bow. Two officers and marines from the San Jacinto boarded the Trent, and soon found Messrs. Mason and Slidell and their secretaries, and by force, against the protest of the officers of the Trent, took them to the San Jacinto, when they were brought to the United States and incarcerated in Fort Warren in Boston harbor. This event produced in both countries at the time intense excitement. The Englishmen, always sensitive to any interference with their coveted claims as "" mistress of the seas," were roused to indignation at this insult, as they claimed it was, to their Government and flag. The rebels looked upon the event as a special manifestation of Providence in their favor. To the loyal citizens of the Union the news was most cheering. They greeted the event with joy and exultation, and lauded and commended the action of Captain Wilkes. It was well that we had a Government at Washington calm, dignified and intelligent, and in the cool, deliberate conduct of its actions, entirely free from being affected by any sudden or misdirected passions of the people. The Fresident, as well as Secretary Seward, were well aware that the seizure was a grave matter; that it would be considered by the British Government as an affront to the national honor, and that reparation would be demanded. Secretary Seward immediately communicated to Mr. Adams, our Minister at the Court of St. James, a statement of the case, with the assurance that Captain Wilkes had acted without instructions and that our Government was prepared to discuss the matter in a friendly spirit as soon as the position of the British Government should be made known. On the 13th of November Earl Russell wrote to the British Minister at Washington, Lord Lyons, giving his understanding of the case, and saying "that his Government was willing to believe that the naval officer was not acting in compliance with any instructions from his Government, and that the United States would of its own motion release the commissioners and make an apology." The Earl, very soon after dispatching his note of November 30, seemed to have somewhat changed his policy, for in a subsequent note he instructed Lord Lyons to wait 'seven days after having made his demand for reparation, and in case no answer should be given, or any other answer than a full compliance with the terms of the demand, at the end of that time he should leave Washington with the archives of the legation and repair to London.

On the 26th of December, Secretary Seward, by direction of the President, sent a reply to this dispatch to Lord Lyons, in which the entire question and subject was reviewed at length, and with consummate skill and ability. The Government decided and declared that the detention of the vessel and the removal from her of the emissaries of the rebel confederacy was justifiable by the laws of war and the practice and precedents of the British Government;