This text is part of:
[165]
effect in both countries, and defended Earl Russell.
He wrote in an excellent spirit, rejoicing in our recent successes, saying: ‘Pray continue to write as freely as ever, and as you see I am now doing.
I take all you say, never forgetting from whom it comes, and always trying to see matters as they may justly seem to you.’
Cobden questioned, in a friendly and temperate way, the wisdom of the Address,—particularly in its effect in making England appear in a worse light than France,1 and in its omission to bring prominently forward the alliance in sentiment between the American people and the English masses, led by the intellect and moral and religious worth of the kingdom.
A few English friends, and only a few, were not disturbed by the speech,—as T. B. Potter, who thought it ‘glorious,’ and Prof. F. W. Newman, who associated it as ‘an historical memorial side by side with the proclamation of freedom,’ promotive of peace, and by a timely warning stimulating the British Cabinet to stop the sailing of the Confederate armed steamers from English ports.
Notwithstanding the irritation which the Address produced in England, as well among the friends of our cause as among its enemies, its permanent effect was to open the eyes of the British people to our case, and to put the government in fear of future difficulty if unfriendly demonstrations were continued, and Confederate war-ships built in England were allowed to leave her ports.
Already, before his Address, but without Sumner's knowledge at the time, the Cabinet had shown itself affected by the military results at Vicksburg and Gettysburg.2 On September 8, two days before Sumner spoke, Earl Russell, who had refused a week before to interfere, announced to Mr. Adams that instructions had been issued to prevent the departure of the two Confederate rams from Liverpool.3 This was the turning-point in the course of the Cabinet.
Adams wrote to Seward, October 16, that ‘the government has within the past week adopted measures ’
1 W. E. Forster made the same criticism in a letter, October 13, 1863. Forster's ‘Life,’ by T. Wemyss Reed, vol. i. pp. 360, 561.
2 Bright wrote to Sumner, September 11: ‘You will hear by this mail that the ironclad steam rams are detained by the government; I believe there is no doubt of this. I suppose the changed position of your affairs has helped our foreign office to the decision they have come to. Lord Russell has just made a short speech at Dundee, and he has said nothing foolish, which shows that there is an opening of the eyes among our statesmen as to the prospects of your war.’
3 If Sumner had known of this change of action, the tone of some parts of his Address might have been different. Cobden wrote to him: ‘You were, I suspect, speaking under the impression that the iron-clad rams would be allowed to leave.’
Cambridge, MA. Press of John Wilson and Son. 1877.
Tufts University provided support for entering this text.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.