Latest from Europe.
Seward's Rejection of French mediation — the Confederate loan — the revolution in Poland, &c.The steamer Australasian, Capt. Cook which sailed from Liverpool at 3 P. M., on the 28th of February, and from Queenstown the 1st of March, arrived at New York Friday evening, bringing two days later news. The British Government had fixed the amount of its claim from the Brazilian Government, on account of the wreck of the bark Prince of Wales, at £3,200. The amount for which reprisals were made at Rio was said to be £6,525. There is consequently a reduction of one half the amount for which payment was required by the British ultimatum. Mr. Seward's dispatch, rejecting the Emperor Napoleon's last proposition, attracts considerable comment: ‘ The London Times asserts that Mr. Seward. If not, preternaturally right, is incomprehensibly wrong; and after quoting and commenting on Mr. Seward's view of the position of affairs in its article, concludes as follows: ‘"We must allow that this picture of affairs is consistent — consistent, that is with all that Mr. Seward has written from the beginning. It is the very story, without change or omission, which we have had backed with his note of hand at 'ninety days date,' and renewed any number of times during the last two years. It is consistent enough, so far, beyond a doubt. Whether it has any consistency with facts or truth is a question which we had much rather leave to be decided by events than argue with Mr. Seward at present."’ ’ The London Morning Post is very bitter upon the letter, and looks upon it as mere "buncombe." It says: ‘ "Perhaps Mr. Seward expects to gain in Washington, amongst certain classes, a little political capital, and in exchange for that is indifferent about the contempt he must insure in Europe.--Still omenating, as this document does, from the Federal Cabinet, it is truly incredible that that body should have suck so low as to endorse as its own, in the face of the world, so much arrant falsehood and absurd nonsense." ’ The London Morning Star, praises the dispatch, thinks it unanswerable, and shows that henceforth not even the mildest form of interference can have the least hope of acceptance. The Paris Pays, Feb. 26th, says: ‘ "The Cabinet of Washington has replied to the proposition of mediation made by France. Mr. Seward considers it impossible to open immediate negotiations for peace. According to the Cabinet of Washington a more practicable means would be for duties from the dissentient States to come to Congress, where projects of arrangement could be discussed, and if adopted submitted to the sanction of a National Convention. The London correspondent of the Manchester Guardian learns that the Confederate loan has been all freely taken on the continent, and that England will have no more of it than it can get from foreign markets. The revolution in Poland is progressing. The Russians have been beaten by Langleloiez, near Malagorzee, after an engagement which lasted five hours. Malagorzee is in ruins. The attitude of the various Governments on the Polish question had undergone no change. At Paris, on the 26th, writes the correspondent of the London Times. "The rumors were quite colour de rose --such as that the Emperor of Russia had written to the Emperor Napoleon, offering to submit to his arbitrament both the question of Poland and the convention of Prussia. Meantime it is as remarkable as strange that the whole of the Paris papers should be so energetic in their reprobation of Russia, as well of Prussia, that the official journal itself should continue to give correspondence about Poland not unfavorable to the insurgents, and that the Government should tolerate if not encourage, a public subscription for the Polish cause. These are things not likely to put either the Czar or his royal accomplice in good humor with France." ’ The Paris correspondent of the London Advertiser has heard that the French Government had forbidden the subscriptions for the wounded Poles.--There were some attempts to get up a public manifestation on the Place de la Bastile, on the anniversary of the 24th of February, but it was quickly suppressed by the police, and no arrests were made. An important debate on the attitude of Prussia had taken place in the Prussian Chamber of Deputies. Herr Von Sybel presented the report of the committee appointed to inquire into the proposition that the Government should be requested to maintain neutrality in the Polish Insurrection, and disarm fugitives from both belligerent parties entering upon Prussian territory. Herr Von Sybel said that the Government could only choose between lamentable retreat and inconceivable danger. The Chamber should solemnly disavow the policy of the Government. Graff Von Eusonburg stated, in the name of the Government, that the insurgents arrested near Thorn had not been given up to Russia but sent back across the frontier. The measures taken by the Government had contributed to lessen the insurrection. The statement that Prussian troops had entered upon Russian territory, near Golleb, was without foundation. Herr Von Bizmark said that the Government had not been able to state its view, upon this important question. The proposition is sympathetic with the insurrection, and the rumors current concerning the convention between Prussia and Russia are mythical. The Chamber must not form conjectures as to the purport of the convention from the refusal or the Ministry to communicate its contents. The convention stipulates expressly that the consent of the respective Governments is requisite upon each occasion of Russian or Prussian troops passing their own frontiers. The Government has not concluded any stipulations with Russia to which the expressions used by Lord Russell in the House of Lords were applicable. Count Bernstoff was not acquainted with the text of the convention when questioned about it by Earl Russell. The Government has nothing to retreat.--This will become evident as soon as the text of the treaty shall have been made known. Other speakers followed, and the policy of the Government was vehemently attacked. The Mayor of Liverpool, on the 26th ult., gave a grand banquet, at the Town Hall, to the commanders of the relief ships George Griswold, Achilles, and Hope. The guests numbered about seventy, and included the American Consul at Liverpool, Mr. Dudley, the Mayor of Manchester, Sir William Brown, barts, and most of the leading American merchants in Liverpool. The Mayor of Liverpool, in appropriate terms, proposed a toast to the commanders of the several ships, as representatives of the generous donors of the relief and Captains Lant and Galleghe, made feeling responses. The Mayor also proposed a toast to the "Representa- tive of the United States in Liverpool," and Consul Dudley responded, asserting, in the course of his speech that it was the earnest desire of the Government and people of the United States to cultivate the most amicable relations with England.--The banquet went off with great eclat. The Princess Alexandra started from Copenhagen on the 26th of February, on route for London, and an imposing spectacle was presented. Energetic efforts were being made to give the greatest effect to her triumphal passage through London. The civic authorities and the Government officials who direct the proceedings, were at loggerheads as to the part which the former are to play in the ceremony, and it is stated that if the Corporation of London are not permitted to lead the procession, they will not take any part in it, and will stop the preparations which they are making.--The civic authorities, after some negotiations with the Government, carried their point and were to lead the procession. The bulletins from Malta, of Prince Alfred's health, continue satisfactory, and it was intended that the Prince should return to England as soon as he was able, to be present at his brother's wedding.
