previous next


European news.

From the New York Times and Herald we take the following intelligence:


[Correspondence of the London Herald.]

Tuesday, Jan. 21. Paris,
I am informed that the French Government, following the example of England, has sent an energetic note to Washington, protesting agains; the vindictive blocking up of Charleston harbor. The Debate, which continues to exhibit its predilection for the North, makes a remark on this subject which, it must be admitted, is not without weight: ‘ "How is it, if the harbor be blocked up, that the Southern man-of-war Elia Worley contrived to run the blockade after the sinking of the 'stone fleet?'"’ As to the blockade itself, I hear on reliable authority that should it be broken by England; France will avail herself of the opening for the purposes of trade, but that the Cabinet of the Tuilleries is determined not to take the ‘"initiative"’ of any such measure.


Tone of the Paris journals.

The Paris press continues to excite irritation against the United States. Some journals even declare openly in favor of intervention. The tone of this discussion, the energetic terms employed by Lord Russell in his response to the merchants of Liverpool, justify only too well the apprehensions of the Americans, and entirely authorize the opinion that England is determined at all risks, even at the cost of war, to procure the re-opening of the Southern ports, and the free exportation of cotton.

Several foreign journals announce that France will support the reclamations addressed by Lord Russell to the Cabinet of Washington in every form, even to an appeal to arms, if that be necessary.


A Federal opinion.

The New York Herald says: ‘"Now we can understand somewhat the suggestion of the London Times to 'let France interfere if she likes.' It is a nice game between England and France. Each evidently is afraid to trust the other as a follower in a war against the United States, and each is thus manipulating and manœuvring to get the other first involved in this imbroglio. In this thing may lie our safety; but so strong are the designs and the desires of the British aristocracy to break up this Union of ours, that the British Government may still be entrapped into the experiment to serve the European designs of Napoleon.’

The alleged inefficiency of our Southern blockade, with raw cotton as high as sixty cents a pound in Liverpool, and with English goods commanding eight and ten times their peace prices is our revolted States, and especially our stone fleet blockade of Charleston harbor, will form the next casus belli against us.


Another opinion — France has not Favored armed intervention.

The Paris correspondent of the Baltimore American writes thus from Paris, Jan. 17, 1862:

‘ We may look for lively proceedings upon the opening of the British Parliament, and possibly the French Chambers, also. In England two questions of interest to our country will be brought: forward immediately — to wit, the expediency of recognizing the Southern Confederacy, and a searching investigation of the conduct of the Ministry in carrying on, at a vast expense, preparations for war with the United States, after receiving assurances from Mr. Seward that Captain Wilkes had acted without orders, and that the Government of President Lincoln was desirous to maintain the most friendly relations with Great Britain. There will also be some inquiry into the reasons which induced Lord Palmerston, through his organ, the London Morning Post, to deny the existence of conciliatory intelligence from America, on the subject of the Trent incident, two days after the communication of Mr. Seward's note.

As regards France, it is proper that our people should prepare to hear of manifestations of, discontent at the delays of the war, and the impossibility of procuring cotton. The English journals are boldly asserting that France has been, fro several months past, urging upon Great Britain to join her in recognizing the Southern Confederacy and disregarding the blockade. It is not true that the Emperor's Government has taken any such initiation. If any negotiations have been commenced on the subject, they certainly originated not in Paris, but in London; and the Emperor has, from the outset, expressed his hope that the rebellion would be speedily suppressed. The distress in the manufacturing districts of France is, however, very great, and the murmurs of mercantile and laboring classes grow louder and louder every day. It is by many erroneously supposed that the closing of the Southern ports is the cessation of commerce, and that if they were reopened prosperity would return. Few reflect that the real American customers of France were the twenty millions of the North, and that, so long as the people of the loyal States suspend their orders, the looms of Lyons and St. Erienne must remain comparatively idle.


English Feeling for the South--an abolitionist's Views.

The London correspondent of the New York Times writes the following interesting letter, under date of the 22d January:

‘ In one month from this day, certainly in less than two months, the independence of the Southern Confederacy will be recognized by the Governments of France and England, and these Governments will but register the voice of the people, so far as that voice can be distinguished. The pressure is too strong to be resisted. Interest and policy alike compel this recognition, and it will be accompanied by the opening of the blockade of the Southern ports. If you intend to resist, you cannot be too speedy in your preparations. The fortifications of New York harbor must be mounted with the heaviest artillery, and the rafts recommended by the Mayor should be got in readiness. Mr. Stevens's battery may not be seaworthy, but it can surely be anchored in the Narrows, and Col. Colt will undoubtedly be too happy to cover the whole bottom of the channel with submarine batteries.

Will you resist? In a word, will there be war? If not, the humiliation of our country will be complete. If you fight, it will be with tremendous odds and against appalling difficulties. There was a time when the State of New York alone could have taken Canada, and when her disaffected people would have gladly raised the Stars and Stripes. That time, I believe, has passed.--For ten years the Canadians have had no cause of complaint against their Government and institutions, and the British Empire has nowhere a more loyal people. Irishmen, in Canada as elsewhere, deplore the condition of their native land, and on this account they have no love for the British Government; but Irishmen everywhere have the instinct of loyalty. In the North, they fight for the Government at Washington; in the South, for the Governments of the States to which they belong and the Confederacy. Constituting two-thirds of the rank and file of the British army, they fight bravely for a Government which for the last three centuries has oppressed and plundered their native land. They will do the same in Canada, where they have few causes for dissatisfaction, and enjoy rights they could not have in Ireland.

But how will it be in Ireland? There is no manner of doubt that the great mass of the Irish people are disloyal; but there is no way in which such disloyalty can find effective action. Gulliver bound was not more powerless. Ireland is bound, disarmed, and paralyzed. America is too far off to give her any aid. Ten thousand men safely landed on her shores, with an hundred thousand stand of arms, might raise a formidable rebellion, but the end would be all the same. --Suppose the country conquered, and held for three months, it would yet be surrounded and reduced. Ireland has nothing to hope from America — too distant, and with too small a naval force. And all this time, you observe, it is America must aid Ireland, for Ireland cannot help America. There is but one Power in the world that can give independence to Ireland, and that is France, and it is convenient for France, just now, to act with England.

No, America has no hope beyond herself. Even Russia, her most likely and reliable ally, deerts her in this juncture. The Czar advises her to make peace with the South, and peace means dismemberment of her great empire. So far as I can see, America must either retire from her present contest, defeated and humiliated, or she must enter upon one of the most terrible struggles which the history of mankind may ever record.--I see no other way. No concessions, however humble, will be of any avail. Mr. Seward may abandon every point of international law asserted in the dispatch in which he surrendered the rebel Commissioners; Mr. Welles may order the stone fleet to be taken out of the mouth of the Charleston harbor, and put a stop to all similar enterprises; the President may order an exchange of prisoners, and conduct military operations according to the rules of civilized warfare; you may do every possible thing to concilliate the powers of Europe, but all will not avail. The Confederate Government will be

acknowledged if it be in existence three months longer, and the Southern ports will be opened.

I will give you a little sample of English feeling about America. I spent the evening, a few nights ago, at the house of a wealthy clergyman of the Established Church, vicar of a rich and fashionable West-end parish.--The first thing that saluted my astonished gaze when I entered his study, was the Confederate flag flying from the arms of a statuette. On the walls were elegantly framed portraits of Jeff. Davis, Mr. Slidell, and other Confederate statesmen. On the library-table lay the insulting caricatures of Punch. This was English neutrality. When the Tuscarora and Nashville were spoken of, it was very plain to see that the latter was the favorite. My host was perfectly frank in his conversation. ‘ "We can't interfere, you know,"’ said he, ‘"without some pretext. --But we are all glad, of course, to see the American Republic tumbling in pieces. For twenty years the English Republicans, and Chartists, and Reformers, have been dinning us with the success of the American Government. Now they are answered. We did not like to see a great Power growing up alongside our North American possessions, and are glad to see it split up — the more pieces the better."’

‘"But do you want war?"’ I asked.

‘"Certainly not. No Englishman wants war. War means taxes. I don't want an increase of the income tax. War goes straight to our pockets. War with an Englishman is either a question of pride or pelf. If it becomes necessary to open the blockade, we shall do it, but not from any philanthropic notions."’

‘"And the slavery question?"’

‘"Whatever sympathy the English have ever had for the North has been on account of slavery; but as the Government and Constitution are pledged to the maintenance where it exists, they do not see that the success of the North will promote abolition; so they care very little about it. As a moral and religious question, the abolition sympathy is with the free States, but politically, Englishmen are more inclined to favor the South; conservatives, because they are glad to see the Democratic system discredited, and a dangerous power broken up, and radicals, because they think the South has as good a right to choose its own Government now as the colonies had eighty years ago."’

This was the substance of the conversation, and I believe this reverend gentleman spoke the sentiments of most of his moderately conservative countrymen. Even among the most zealous Abolitionists I have met here, I do not find any great sympathy with Northern efforts to preserve the Union. They have heard that Union denounced for years, by their own, and by American Abolition crators, as a compact to uphold slavery. They see no sense in fighting for a Constitution which they have always understood to be a ‘"covenant with hell."’ If you will throw the Constitution overboard, with all its engagements and compromises in behalf of slavery, and fight on the John Brown platform for the destruction of slavery, pure and simple, there will be no lack of Abolition sympathy. But this will not help you with the Government or the governing classes.--The Abolition sentiment of England and France has never hindered the purchase of one pound of slave-grown cotton, or rice, or sugar, and tobacco.


Recognition.

In the New York Herald, of the 8th, we find a letter from its London correspondent, in which it is authoritatively announced that England and France have finally agreed to apply the public law of Europe to our cis-Atlantic affairs. The recognition of the South by these Powers will be followed by results which will amply compensate for the Roanoke disaster.--Norfolk Day Book.

Creative Commons License
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.

hide Places (automatically extracted)
hide People (automatically extracted)
Sort people alphabetically, as they appear on the page, by frequency
Click on a person to search for him/her in this document.
Seward (3)
Ireland (3)
Wilkes (1)
Welles (1)
Washington (1)
Slidell (1)
Paris (1)
Napoleon (1)
Lyons (1)
Old Abe Lincoln (1)
Gulliver (1)
England (1)
Jefferson Davis (1)
Colt (1)
hide Dates (automatically extracted)
Sort dates alphabetically, as they appear on the page, by frequency
Click on a date to search for it in this document.
January 17th, 1862 AD (1)
January 22nd (1)
January 21st (1)
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: