previous next

From Europe.

Foreign opinion of affairs in America.

In the Northern papers, of June 11th, we find some garbled from English journals received by the ‘"City of Washington"’ a portion of which have already been briefly alluded to. We copy a portion.

The "Merrimac."

The London papers of May 26 contain the news of the surrender of Norfolk, and the destruction of the Merrimac. The Times is perplexed because the Merrimac died and left no sign. It says:

‘ Here is one and of the Confederate Nary. Here an end, also, to all our hopes of learning something more from the powers of the Merrimac. That celebrated iron-clad ship, which was the first to last in real battle , the value of the new inventories, has perished ingloriously. Rev. destruction is announced with an apology. She was blockaded by enemies that she dared not venture out; she was so large and so deep that she could not pursue her smaller antagonists into shallow waters. She had struck one great she had frightened the North, made New York anxious and Boston afraid and had occupied a great naval force.

’ All she was capable of doing had been done; a force she could not hope to relief was coming down upon her; so she was blown up. Such has been the fate of the Merrimac. Perhaps we shall now be allowed to know something appear about her. Europe is still curious to how she to accomplish her great achievement, and how it was she failed to repeat it; what her strength was, and what her weakness; and why it was her masters could not make profit even of her destruction. It is impossible yet to believe that all was got out of her which might have been obtained.

The Daily News says of the destruction of the Merrimac; By blowing to the Merrimac, the Confederates resign the contest at see. That vessel was virtually their fleet, her profaction having formed the only guaranty of the efficiency of the few other vessels they could dispose of in the neighborhood of the James river Of late, indeed, the with the Iron-clad Galena and Naugatuck, had so far re-established the ascendancy of the Federal on the water, even in the presence of the Merrimac, that they had began to treat the James river as their own, and use it almost as freely as the York river.

‘"The real reason for destroying the Merrimac was probably the inability on the Confederates to hold Norfolk. The abandonment of this arsenal is certainly the most important of him facts now announced. It was, no doubt, wise to give up its defence, but only just as, under special circumstances, it may be wise to cut off a right arm."’

Condition of the South

The Times says that. ‘"so far as the American waters are concerned, the conquest of the South seems almost complete; that the Confederate cause is desperate wherever guns can be floated, and that the seas and rivers are all parts of the Federal empire."’

As regards the state of affairs on land, the Times says that, ‘"with two enormous armies in the field it would be premature to say that the Confederate power is altogether broken, and their retreat upon Richmond must not be hastily judged;"’ but it adds in the same breath:

‘"The South must by this time be in need of almost every military necessity. The contest can not now be equal, and the Southerners must be almost as inferior in point of arms to their invaders as Montezuma was to Cortez. At the moment it is the whole world against the South, and the surprise should be, not that they drawn back from the coast and river banks, but that they make front at all against their well equipped invaders. This can only be done in the bitterness of their hatred and their confidence in the impossibility of their entire subjugation. "’

Reopening the ports.

The Times also says: "The President's proclamation, which opens the ports of New Orleans. Beaufort and Fort Royal, would have been more welcome here if it were not accompanied by acts of tyranny likely to drive the planters to despair, and to produce the destruction of all the cotton in stock. The conditions imposed by that proclamation must be measured and squared by the rules of international law, with which we hope they will be found to conform. But as matters are now proceeding, it would seem that neither New Orleans, Beaufort, nor Port Royal is likely to be, for some time to come of any great use to the world as a cotton port,

‘"General Butler, with his oaths of allegiance. He forced adoration of the Federal flag, his confiscations, his compulsory opening of shops and matres, his imprisonments. His punishments, and his threats of such is not the man to make a commercial port properness and to tempt down cotton bales from the interior; and New Orleans, with arrival issues of paper money, one of which is of course, not a legal tender, is not a tempting port to which to consign merchandise."’

What may Happen.

The Morning Post (Ministerial organ) has this paragraph:--‘ "If Davis and Beauregard can inflict defeat on the forces which are bearing down upon them, the independence of the South will be achieved. If, on the contrary, they are overcome, the South may be considered vanquished, but will indeed, prove but a poor prize to his conquerors.-- General Butler's proclamation of martial law already proves this. Not even the Austrians in Venice, or the Russians in Poland, ever issued more severe decrease."’

The destruction of cotton.

In the House of Commons, Sir L. Polk had given notice of his intention to call the attention of the House to the destruction of cotton at Nary Orleans and the effect it might have upon English manufactures. He should at the same time ask her Majesty's Government whether any steps would be taken for mediation between the belligerent parties.

The ship Emily St. Pierre.

The London Morning Post gives editorial prominence to the following relative to the Emily St. Pierre:

It will be remembered that an English vessel of this name recently arrived at Liverpool in charge of her master, steward and cook, who had recaptured her from an American crew.

" The American Government has now requested her surrender back to them. We understand, however, that this demand cannot be complied with, as there is no municipal law that takes cognizance of the act of these three men as an offence, or indeed, recognizes such an injury suffered by a belligerent. Had an American cruiser met the Emily St. Pierre on the high seas she might have seized her, and the fact of the rescue would have condemned her in international law. But there is no municipal law which can warrant the English Government in delivering her up to that of America, with whose request it is therefore bound to refuse compliance.

No prospect of submission,

The Times of May 28th, avers that it can see no end of the war in America, nor any indications of what that end may be, and adds:

‘"Of the submission of the South there is as little prospect as ever. The Confederates retreat before their adversaries, but it is intrepidly and with design. They destroy whatever they cannot keep and they vindicate their power at intervals by turning fiercely on their pursuers. But the Northern forces are closing in upon them — so doubt of it. It is added, that the loss of life on both sides is beginning to be felt among the families of every part of the country, and it is probable that, for extent of miscry, there has rarely in the history of the won been a struggle presenting more cruel results."’

A French view.

The Constitutionalist devotes its first three columns to a consideration of the actual state of affairs in America — The article, which is in very prominent type, is signed by M. Paulin Mmayrac. It does not deny that the capture of New Orleans is a great victory for the North, but adds:

What does this victory prove? Does it prove that the conquest of the South by the force of arms is henceforth possible? Does it change the nature of things? Does it cancel distances? And, do the hearts of men determined to make a resistance, will it engender submission to the victor? Cast a glance upon the map of that immense country; and then tell us whether, after as before the capture of New Orleans, the North, advancing deep into the South, will not meet with the same insurmountable obstacles that England had to encounter at the time of the War of Independence — distances, climate, impossibility of procuring provisions, and an energetic people defending their homes? Such is in fact, now the actual state of the question.--The South defends its firesides. The most skillful paradoxes will not succeed in changing opinion upon this point, and the truth conveyed in the recent words of Mr. Grindstone: ‘"The North is fighting for supremacy; the South is fighting for his independence,"’

Nearly the whole of the Atlantic coast the Gulf of Mexico, and the banks of the Mississippi are now in the power of the Federal. Yet, considering everything, the Confederation of the South has rather progressed than falled off since the of March, 1861, if we estimate only the power of the States in square miles. It is scarcely enclosed within its , and has trader its flag the greater position of the States which were central on the of Mr. Lincoln. Moreover, the army commanded by Beauregard, from being dispersed or weakened is increasing, strength and preparing for proximate eventualities, according to plans which certainly exist, although they have not transpired. That the by war ... than even who advise that North to light to the last without or consideration, those who urge it to establish ..... and devastation, are not aware of the they would prepare for the whole of if their councils were followed. We We never wish to see. Inspired by Chat wise and politely which at the if the war offered in mediation, we never desired that the protest of 4,000,000 of negroes. should be increased . Certainly, like our , at these as such as they do, we expire to the of the slaves, but we wish for that emancipation by the progressive and by the conciliation of interest and by the

The it has modified the nature of the struggle and advanced things in America.

Official documents reinforce to Mexico.

A number of official documents reinforce to Mexican affairs has been issued in, London. The Daily News says of them:

‘ "Please Parliamentary papers establish troop that our Government from first to last, acted with a decision for speed and consistency which can not be suppressed. On the is impossible not to see that the Virginia troops were sent to Mexico with no less a purpose then to overturn the existing Government and for another in its place.

"as the 4th of the present month Earl Russell expressed a fear that the French General anxious for the cause of of Catholic unity, why the aid of the March to the

The expense of the French expedition to Mexico are estimated as about $60,000 .

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.
Butler (2)
Beauregard (2)
L. Polk (1)
M. Paulin Mmayrac (1)
Merrimac (1)
Lincoln (1)
Grindstone (1)
Jefferson Davis (1)
Cortez (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.
November, 6 AD (1)
March, 1861 AD (1)
May 28th (1)
May 26th (1)
March (1)
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: