previous next

The latest from Europe.
dates to the 24th January.

From the New York Herald, of the 6th, we select the following highly interesting extracts:

The American Crisis.

Mr. Massey, member of Parliament, had delivered a speech before his constituents at Salford, England, in which he advocated that the Europe in Powers should interfere to close the struggle between the North and the South by recognizing the Confederate States and breaking the blockade of the Southern States.

The Manchester Guardian argues in a somewhat similar strain, and as regards the cotton supply, it says:

‘ It is a question how far, in this district, the prevailing distress is due to the civil war in America, and whether it is not as much attributable to our production is to a mere dearth of cotton. ’ The factory statistics of Manchester show that the shortening of the hours of labor in the factories is gradually extending, and in the course of a week or two the movement was expected to become much more general and extensive.

It was represented that Charleston was well defended, and that between that city and Savannah Gen. Lee has about 40,000 troops under his command.

The question of European intervention in the civil war in America is being much more freely canvassed, the proceedings at Charleston and the alleged general inefficiency of the blockade being the excuses put forth for such a step.

The Liverpool Post emphatically declares that the civil war must be stopped by mediation, if possible; by force, if necessary.

The London News continues, boldly to denounce the idea of recognizing the South, and says that it is time the country should utter its voice against it in unmistakable tones.

The London Globe argues that the maritime Powers cannot be expected to respect the blockade unless it be really effective.

Lord Elgin was about to leave for India. He promised the deputation on the cotton question to do his best to encourage its growth.

The London Times. (city article,) of the 24th ult., says that an uneasy feeling prevails. The avoidance of complications in connection with American affairs cannot be permanently anticipated, and the feeling will probably in crease, until the meeting of the French Chamber on Monday, at which some indication of the policy to be adopted by France, England, or Europe generally, seems to be looked for.

The city article of the London Herald says the accounts from America are of a most desponding character, the commercial situation of New York being unparalleled.

The feeling in France.

The Paris correspondent of the London Morning Post says:

‘ It is not true, as some journals represent, that the French Government has taken any steps to bring about a reconciliation between the North and the South.

The French steam dispatch boat Forfort, at Cherbourg, had received orders to be ready to sail for North America on a special mission.

A London letter in the Paris Patric asserts that the British Government will protest against the measure for declaring the Southern ports closed against foreign commerce.

The London Times congratulates Europe that the military force of France now bids fair to shrink to reasonable limits. Let it be once understood that France has no desire to disturb the tranquility of her neighbors, and the industry of Central Europe will boot up and flourish with a vigor not to be surpassed in the New World.

It is reported that the initiative in proclaiming the blockade of the Southern ports inefficient will be taken by France.

The belief gains ground that the French Government will consider that the proofs of the fictitious character of the blockade have long been too complete and numerous to render it possible to be passed over without danger to those public and national rights, the quiet maintenance of which depends on a firm regard to precedents.

The Stone blockade.

The London Times continues its denunciations of the stone blockade, and asserts that the project of the British Government against Boulogne in 1804 was a far different thing, having been designed to shut in a hostile fleet.

The London Morning Post says that matters in America are evidently approaching a situation in which the de facto government of the South may claim consideration in Europe.

Some journals say that if, in spite of the remonstrances against it, other Southern ports are served like Charleston, England and France will have nothing left for them to do but to interfere.

It was stated that the French Minister at Washington had been furnished with the formal disapprobation of the French Government at the conduct of the United States Government in choking up Charleston harbor with stone, and that he would join Lord Lyons in protesting against the act.

The French Government journals, of the 24th ult., continue to make the worst of the Charleston blockade.

Lord John Russell and the Liverpool Shipowners.

The following correspondence has passed between the Liverpool Shipowners' Association and the Foreign Office:

Shipowners' Association,

Liverpool Jan. 13, 1862.

My Lord:
It has come to the knowledge of the Liverpool Shipowners' Association, through the public prints, that the Federal Government of the United States have sunk a stone squadron in the main channel of Charleston harbor. This proceeding cannot fail seriously and permanently to injure the entrance to that harbor. The Association fears that unless strong representations and remonstrances are promptly made, a similar course may be immediately followed in the case of the other harbors of the Confederate States. The Association does not think it necessary to dwell at length on the importance of this question, as affecting the general interests of commerce, but feels called upon, representing an important interest, to address your lordship on the subject. I am, therefore, instructed by the Association respectfully to press this matter on your lordship's earnest consideration.

I have the honor to be, my lord, your lordship's most obedient, humble servant.

Francis A. Clint, Chairman.
To the Bright Hon. Earl Russell, Foreign Office, London.

Lord John Russell's reply.

Foreign Office, Jan. 15.
I am directed by Earl Russell to acknowledge the receipt of a letter which on behalf of the Liverpool Shipowners' Association, you addressed to him on the 13th instant, calling his attention to the course which the Federal Government of the United States have adopted for closing the main channel of Charleston harbor by sinking there vessels laden with stone, and expressing the fear of the Association that unless strong representations and remonstrances are promptly made a similar course may be immediately followed in the case of the other harbors of the Confederate States.

I am to request that you will state to the Liverpool Shipowners' Association that the attention of her Majesty's Government was at once attracted by the rumors which obtained currency some weeks ago of such a course as that to which you refer being contemplated by the Government of the United States; and on the 20th of December her Majesty's Minister at Washington was informed of the view taken of it by her Majesty's Government.

Lord Lyons was told that such a cruel plan would seem to imply despair of the restoration of the Union, the professed object of the war; for it never could be the wish of the United States government to destroy cities from which their own country was to derive a portion of its riches and prosperity. Such a plan could only be adopted as a measure of revenge and of irremediable injury against an enemy.

Lord Lyons was further told that even as a scheme of embittered and sanguinary war such a measure would not be justifiable. It would be a plot against the commerce of all maritime nations, and against the free intercourse of the Southern States of America with the civilized world. Lord Lyons was desired to speak in this sense to Mr. Seward, who, it was hoped, would disavow the illegal project.

Now, however, that the project seems to have been carried into effect at Charleston, Lord Lyons will be instructed to make a further representation to Mr. Seward, with a view to prevent similar acts of destruction in other ports. I am, sir, your most obedient servant.

E. Hammond.
F. A. Clint, Esq., &c.

The blockade on the Stock Exchange.

[From the London Times (City Article), Jan. 22.] The English funds in the face of the increasing case in the discount market om of gold to the bank continue with a heavy tendency.

The fact that, if France or any other Power should demand the concurrence of England in disavowing the inefficient blockade of the Southern ports by the Federal fleet, it would be difficult to find a logical plea for refusal is apparently the main consideration that induces the public to look cautiously at future contingencies. The evidence seems complete that, if the present nominal blockade is to be respected, the provision of the Treaty of Paris that a blockade shall not be recognized unless it be real must be looked upon as cancelled; and an impression prevails that this result would be distasteful to all statesmen who recognize the claims of commerce and civilization.

The meeting of the French Chambers on the 16th inst., and of the English Parliament on the 6th of February, may be followed by some important declaration on the subject. The initiative is thought likely to be taken by France, since the effects of the cotton dearth are more severe upon that country than upon Great Britain, where a great compensation is found in the impulse given to India. At the same time it is seen that this country, can have little inducement to forego joining in an imperative enforcement of legal principles, as the popular and almost universal cry in the Federal States seems now to be that every advantage which can be gained, whether from success at home or from the forbearance of foreign nations, is to be hailed as a means of hastening the time when the Trent affair can be ‘"avenged."’ Still, not withstanding this consideration, the feeling here would be in favor of leaving the Washington politicians to work their own way through their anarchy and bankruptcy undisturbed by foreign reclamations, if it were possible to do so without a sacrifice of principle.

A Charleston vessel in the Mersey.

[From the London Times, Jan. 23.] The schooner West Indian arrived in the river Mersey on Monday with the Confederate flag flying at the masthead, she being the property of a Southern merchant and planter, and having succeeded in evading the Northern blockade of the port of Charleston.

She left Charleston on the evening of the 24th of December, and proceeded out to sea without seeing anything of the Federal blockading squadron.

Before the West Indian sailed from Charleston the stone fleet had been sunk but she passed safely through the eleven-feet channel, one of those left open. According to the statements of those interested in this vessel, the people of Charleston felt no alarm as to the consequences of the stone fleet; but, on the contrary, they believe the effect would simply be to deepen the now comparatively shallow channels.

The West India, a schooner of 141 tons bur then, has brought a full cargo of spirits of turpentine. She is commanded by Captain Foote, and has also brought to England the owner. This gentleman asserts that all the cotton plantations on the seaboard between Savannah and Charleston have been destroyed by the planters, and that at Port Royal, where the Federalists alleged they have gathered a considerable amount of cotton, the cotton secured consists really of only that left by the planters, who did not consider it worth removal. In the Southern States, the want of tea, coffee, sugar, and leather, was said to be severely felt, and these articles were reported to realize very large prices.

The owner, who was in Richmond, the capital of the Confederate States, about three months ago, states there was a growing belief that there would speedily be a determination on the part of the French and British Governments to raise the blockade of the Southern ports.

The Sumter at Gibraltar — another American prize burned — Desertion of some of the rebels in Spain.

The privateer Sumter having been ordered from Cadiz, reached Gibraltar on the 19th of Jan. During her passage she burned the American bark Neapolitan, from Messina for Boston, with fruits. She also captured the bark Investigator, of Searsport, for New port, with ore, but subsequently allowed her to proceed.

Six of the Sumter's crew deserted at Cadiz, and made their submission to the American Consult. The captain of the Sumter claimed them as deserters, but the Spanish officials declined to give them up.

It is reported from Algiers that a prolonged cannonade had been heard off that coast, and a vessel was subsequently sighted, believed to be the pirate Sumter. It was supposed she had sunk her adversary.

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 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 (2)
John Russell (2)
Francis A. Clint (2)
Stone (1)
Earl Russell (1)
Paris (1)
Massey (1)
Lee (1)
E. Hammond (1)
Foote (1)
Chairman (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.
24th (2)
June, 2 AD (1)
January 13th, 1862 AD (1)
1804 AD (1)
December 24th (1)
December 20th (1)
January 24th (1)
January 23rd (1)
January 22nd (1)
January 19th (1)
January 15th (1)
16th (1)
13th (1)
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: