Chap. VII. regard to the participation of the subjects of Great Britain in the impending conflict. This was all that was contemplated in the Queen's Proclamation, It was designed to show the purport of existing laws, and to explain to British subjects their liabilities in case they should engage in the war," At a subsequent interview Mr. Adams, in obedience, as he conceived, to the instructions of his Government, stated his objections over again : "I descanted upon the irritation produced in America by the Queen's Proclamation, upon the construction almost universally given to it, as designed to aid the insurgents by raising them to the rank of a belligerent State, and upon the very decided tone taken by the President in my despatches in case any such design was really entertained. I added, that from my own observation of what had since occurred here, I had not been able to convince myself of the existence of such a design. "I ventured to repeat my regret that the Proclamation had been so hastily issued, and adverted to the fact that it seemed contrary to the agreement said to have been proposed by Mr. Dallas and concurred in by his Lordship, to postpone all action until I should arrive, possessed with all the views of the new administration. But still, though I felt that much mischief had ensued in the creation of prejudices in the United States, not now easy to be eradicated, I was not myself disposed in any part of my conduct to aggravate the evil. My views had been much modified by opportunities of more extended conversation with persons of weight in Great Britain, by the improved tone of the press, by subsequent explanations in Parliament, by the prohibition of all attempts to introduce prizes into British ports, and, lastly, by the unequivocal expression of sentiment in the case of Mr, Gregory when the time came for him to press his motion of recognition. I trusted that nothing new might occur to change the current again, for nothing was so unfortunate as the effect of a recurrence of reciprocal irritations, however trifling, between countries, in breaking up the good understanding which it was always desirable to preserve. "His Lordship agreed to this, but remarked that he could not but think the complaint of the Proclamation, though natural enough perhaps at this moment, was really ill-founded. He went over the ground once more which he occupied in the former interview-the necessity of doing something to relieve the officers of their ships from the responsibility of treating these persons as pirates if they met them on the seas. For his part, he could not believe the United States would persevere in the idea of hanging them, for it was not in consonance with their well-known character. But what would be their own situation if they should be found practising upon a harsher system than the Americans them- Chap. VII. selves ? “Here was a very large territory-a number of States-and people counted by millions, who were in a state of actual war. The fact was undeniable, and the embarrassment unavoidable. Under such circumstances, the Law Officers of the Crown advised the policy which had been adopted. It was designed only as a preventive to immediate evils. The United States should not have thought hard of it. They meant to be entirely neutral. "I replied that we asked no more than that. We desired no assistance. Our objection to this act was, that it was practically not an act of neutrality. It had depressed the spirits of the friends of the Government. It had raised the courage of the insurgents. We construed it as adverse, because we could not see the necessity of such immediate haste. These people were not a navigating people. They had not a ship on the ocean. They had made no prizes, so far as I knew, excepting such as they had caught by surprises. Even now, I could not learn that they had fitted out anything more than a few old steamboats, utterly unable to make any cruise on the ocean, and scarcely strong enough to bear a cannon of any calibre. But it was useless to go over this any more. The thing was now done. All that we could hope was that the later explanations would counteract the worst effects that we had reason to apprehend from it; and, at any rate, there was one compensation, the act had released the Government of the United States from responsibility for any misdeeds of the rebels towards Great Britain. If any of their people should capture or maltreat a British vessel on the ocean, the reclamation must be made only upon those who had authorized the wrong. The United States would not be liable." 1 On the 21st June, Mr. Adams reports the impression which had been created in this country by the news that the Proclamation had excited feelings of irritation in the United States. Everybody was surprised at itor, as Mr. Adams preferred to say, everybody "affected" to be surprised at it. And to those who have read the foregoing narrative, this emotion will probably appear extremely natural. "Whilst people of all classes unite in declaring that such a measure was unavoidable, they are equally earnest in disavowing any inferences of want of good-will which may have been drawn from it. They affect to consider our complaints as very unreasonable. I am now earnestly assured on all sides 1 Mr. Adams to Mr. Sward, 14th June, 1861. Chap. VII. that the sympathy with the Government of the United States is general; that the indignation felt in America is not founded on reason; that the British desire only to be perfectly neutral, giving no aid nor comfort to the insurgents. I believe that this sentiment is now growing to be universal. It inspires Her Majesty's Ministers, and is not without effect on the Opposition. Neither party would be so bold as to declare its sympathy with a cause based on the extension of slavery, for that would at once draw upon itself the indignation of the great body of the people." He believed at the same time that the growth of an active sympathy with the United States would much depend on the success of their arms. As to the popular feeling in America, he expressed to Lord John Russell a few days afterwards his confidence that it "would subside the moment all the later action on this side was known. There was a single drawback remaining-the despatch of reinforcements to Canada.' "He" (Lord J. Russell) "said, that was a mere precaution against times of trouble." 2 I have referred particularly to these passages because, occurring very soon after the issue of the Proclamation, they show in what light it was regarded at the time by the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on the one hand, and on the other by a Minister of so much sense and moderation, yet so thoroughly imbued with the views of his own Government, as Mr. Adams. The Proclamation frequently appeared as a subject of complaint-generally entangled with other subjects of complaint in the later correspondence between the two Governments: by degrees it took the shape of a substantial grievance: at last it towered into a grievance of prodigious magnitude. I do not propose to pursue the course of the controversy. What is material to this history is the general attitude assumed with respect 1 Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward, 21st June, 1861. to this question by the Government of the United Chap. VII. States. Mr. Seward's earlier despatches to the Legations in Paris and London are clear and explicit enough, and were probably a faithful expression of popular sentiment in the United States. On the 21st May he wrote to Mr. Adams to suspend all intercourse, official and unofficial, with the British Government, if it should have any communication whatever with the agents of the Confederacy—an order which Mr. Adams seems to have had the prudence to disobey. A concession of belligerent rights to the revolted States "would not pass unquestioned." As to Confederate privateers, “this is a question exclusively our own. We treat them as pirates." "If Great Britain shall choose to recognize them as lawful belligerents and give them shelter from our pursuit and punishment, the laws of nations afford an adequate remedy."1 On the 28th, Mr. Dayton was told that "the United States cannot for a moment allow the French Government to rest under the delusive belief that they will be content to have the Confederate States recognized as a belligerent Power by States with which this nation was at amity. No concert of action among foreign States so recognizing the insurgents can reconcile the United States to such a proceeding, whatever may be the consequences of resistance."2 On the 15th June, Lord Lyons and M. Mercier, the French Minister at Washington, had an interview with the Secretary of State, at which they proposed to read to him instructions which they had received from their respective Courts. Mr. Seward, having informed himself of the substance of these instructions, declined to hear them, and communicated the reasons of his refusal to the American Ministers at London and Paris. Of the British instructions he wrote: 1 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams, 21st May, 1861. Chap. VII. "That paper purports to contain a decision at which the British Government has arrived, to the effect that this country is divided into two belligerent parties, of which this Government represents one, and that Great Britain assumes the attitude of a neutral between them. "This Government could not, consistently with a just regard for the sovereignty of the United States, permit itself to debate these novel and extraordinary positions with the Government of Her Britannic Majesty; much less can we consent that that Government shall announce to us a decision derogating from that sovereignty, at which it has arrived without previously conferring with us upon the question. The United States are still solely and exclusively sovereign within the territories they have lawfully acquired and long possessed, as they have always been. They are living under the obligations of the laws of nations, and of Treaties. with Great Britain, just the same now as heretofore; they are, of course, the friend of Great Britain, and they insist that Great Britain shall remain their friend now just as she has hitherto been. Great Britain, by virtue of these relations, is a stranger to parties and sections in this country, whether they are loyal to the United States or not, and Great Britain can neither rightfully qualify the sovereignty of the United States, nor concede, nor recognize any rights, or interest, or power of any party, State, or section, in contravention to the unbroken sovereignty of the Federal Union. What is now seen in this country is the occur rence, by no means peculiar, but frequent in all countries, more frequent even in Great Britain than here, of an armed insurrection engaged in attempting to overthrow the regularly constituted and established Government. There is, of course, the employment of force by the Government to suppress the insurrection, as every other Government necessarily employs force in such cases. But these incidents by no means constitute a state of war impairing the sovereignty of the Government, creating belligerent sections, and entitling foreign States to intervene or to act as neutrals between them, or in any other way to cast off their lawful obligations to the nation thus for the moment disturbed. Any other principle than this would be to resolve Government everywhere into a thing of accident and caprice, and ultimately all human society into a state of perpetual war.” 1 To Mr. Dayton : "It is erroneous, so far as foreign nations are concerned, to suppose that any war exists in the United States. Certainly there cannot be two belligerent Powers where there is no war. There is here, as there has always been, one political power, namely, the United States of America, competent to make war and peace, and conduct commerce and alliances with all foreign nations. There is none other, either in fact, or recognized by foreign nations. There is, indeed, an armed sedition seeking 1 Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams, 19th June, 1861. |