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
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 .
’
