The last message of
President Davis was generally published by the
English papers.
It produced a decided impression — seems to have given
John Bull some reason for revising his conduct during the war. The London
Post--organ of the
Palmerston Cabinet — treats it in an editorial article, in which the writer deprecates its condemnation of the policy of
England and
France.
It is so interesting and significant that we give it entire:
‘
The elaborate and comprehensive review which, in his message to Congress.
President Davis has taken of the foreign and domestic relations of the Southern Confederacy during the past two years, must command the admiration of every one.
It is, in truth, a remarkable document.
With a terseness, with a vigor, but, at the same time, with a calmness which not even the sincere conviction of having been unjustly treated by the great Powers of
Europe can for one instant disturb, the
Chief Magistrate of the infant Republic relates the trials and vicissitudes which overshadow its fortunes, the obstacles which were cast in its path by the power of its foes, and by the apathy of strangers, and the constancy and patience with which those trials and vicissitudes were borns, and the indomitable courage and perseverance by which those obstacles were overcome.
We may disprove of much that is contained in this State document.
We may deny the justness of many of the inferences which are drawn, but we cannot refuse to accord to those who prepared it the merit of having advanced their impeachment of
European neutrality with temper and fairness, and of having supported their charges with a consummate ability, which will doubtless carry conviction to the minds of many.
’
The Governments of
Great Britain and
France, being those especially interested in the
American war, took the initiative in all action respecting that contest; and
Mr. Davis does not err when he says that "by some understanding express or tacit,
Europe had decided" to allow them to do so.
Great Britain and
France are perfectly willing to take the responsibility of the course they adopted, and which they, by their example, recommended to the other
European powers.
The first objection taken to their policy by the
Southern President is that they refused to treat the
Confederacy as an independent Government. "If we were independent States the refusal to entertain with us the same international intercourse as was maintained with our enemy was unjust and injurious in its effects, whatever may have been the motive which prompted it." It is, in fact, on the contingency with which this extract begins, and the meaning which is to be given to the word "Independent." that the whole question turns.
It will not be necessary to follow sir,
Davis through the precedents and the arguments by which he demonstrates that, in entering into the
American Confederation the several States comparing it did not part with their sovereign rights.
We agree with him to the fullest and have always been of the opinion that could be justified both by the letter and the spirit of the
American Constitution.
But although each several State in
America may be sovereign and independent it by no means follows that it is entitled at any time, under any circumstances, to demand from foreign powers the recognition of that independence.
Before entering into that Confederation which has now been so roughly dissolved, the several States composing it might, if they had so pleased, have demanded recognition and established diplomatic intercourse with other independent powers.
They did not do so. They voluntarily waived their rights, and created a Confederate Government, whose recognition, as representing all, was acknowledged by all. The time came when certain of the States thought proper to retire from the Confederation, and to demand the recognition of their independence, whilst simultaneously the Confederate Government denied their right to secede and proceeded to enforce submission by force of arms.
At this juncture what course was indicated to neutral States by international law?
Foreign Powers know the Confederation as an independent Power duly accredited; but they did not know that the States composing it were independent, because they had never demanded recognition as such, and they could not constitute themselves the interpreters of that Constitution which gave the Confederation a distained existence.
They were consequently obliged to treat the seceded States in the same manner as a nation in revolt against the constituted authority, and patiently wait till they had established their claims to recognition by proving that they were able to maintain their independence.
Nor are objections taken to the neutrality of the
European Powers in respect to the closing of their ports against prizes taken by either belligerent, and their refusal to treat the blockade as non-effective, better founded.
Absolute neutrality on the part of foreign Powers has proved more hurtful to the
South than to the
North; but if so, it is an accident over which they possess no control.
If the navy of the
North can find "no hostile commerce on the ocean" It is not because this blockade, which is condemned as ineffective, prevents the
Confederate merchantmen leaving port.
If
England is now supporting by charity some hundreds of thousands of her manufacturing population, is it not because a blockade is maintained which, in its inefficiency, can only be compared by the
Southern President to those declared by the decrees of
Berlin in 1806, and the
British Orders in Council in 1807?
The time will come when the Southern Confederacy will do the maritime powers of
Europe justice.
She has now passed through a fiery ordeal, and has established, on grounds far stronger than any based on the fine drawn interpretations of constitutional law, her claims to that recognition of independence which must speedily be accorded to her.
The recognition of the Southern Confederacy in the spring of 1862, by the
European Powers never would have prevented the present war; on the contrary, we believe it would have envenomed it still more, and precluded any subsequent attempt at mediation.
On this point the
European Powers have a clear conscience.
The war has been terrible, the carnage has been unprecedented; but let us hope that he evils which it has occasioned may not be altogether unproductive of good if the blockade, which is decried by the
Southern President, has been productive of no other results, it has at least developed to a wonderful extent the industrial resources of his country.
