constant and ardent friend of the North in the little group of Union sympathizers among the public men of England. He was a regular correspondent of Charles Sumner, chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations,1 to whom he wrote in the Trent crisis as follows: DEAR MR. SUMNER, Reform Club, London, Nov. 29, 1861 I am here for a few days, where some excitement is caused by recent incidents growing out of your unhappy troubles. . . . The Southern Commissioners have been taken from an English ship. This has made a great sensation here, and the ignorant and passionate, and "Rule Britannia" class are angry and insolent as usual.2 1 Bright's letters were read to Lincoln and Seward, and sometimes to the whole cabinet in regular session. After Lincoln's death Bright wrote in his diary: "I have had no direct communication from the late President, but my letters to Mr. Charles Sumner, as well as those from Mr. Cobden, were frequently read by him, and he sent me, through Mr. Sumner, in his own handwriting, a draft resolution which he suggested as likely to be useful if adopted at public meetings held in this country in favor of the North. It referred to the question of slavery, and the impossibility of our recognizing a new state based on the foundation of human bondage.”—G. M. Trevelyan, Life of John Bright, p. 303 (with half-tone facsimile of Lincoln's autograph draft). 2 An example of the "Rule Britannia insolence appeared in the Morning Chronicle the day before Mr. Bright wrote. "Abraham Lincoln," said the editorial, "whose accession to power was generally welcomed on this side of the Atlantic, has proved himself a feeble, confused, and little-minded mediocrity; Mr. Seward, the firebrand at his elbow, is exerting himself to provoke a quarrel with all Europe, in that spirit of senseless egotism, which induces the Americans, with their dwarf fleet and shapeless mass of incoherent squads, which they call an army, to fancy themselves the equals of France by land, and of Great Britain by sea. If the Federal States could be rid of these two mischief-makers, it might yet redeem itself in the sight of the world; but while they stagger on at the head of affairs, their only chance of fame consists in the probability that the navies of England will blow out of the water their blockading squadrons, and teach them how to respect the flag of a mightier supremacy beyond the Atlantic." - Quoted in Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings, 1911-1912, Vol. XLV, p. 147. The Ministers meet at this moment on the case. The law officers say that your war steamer might have taken the despatches or the ship itself into one of your ports for adjudication; but that to take the Commissioners was unlawful, inasmuch as it is not permitted for an officer of a ship of war finally to decide on the right of capture. That duty belongs to a regularly constituted Court. In fact you have done too little or too much. Had you taken the ship, the law would not have been broken; but having taken only the men you are in the wrong. . . . I hope our Government will take a moderate and forbearing course, and that yours will do the same. I am sure you will do what you can to smooth any irritation which may exist with you, have great power. and you I may learn something more this way, for I shall probably see some Minister later in the day, and I am to dine with Mr. Adams [United States minister to England] at seven o'clock. . . . I hope to do some service for both countries on Wednesday next. . . . ... There is a feeling among our Ministers that Mr. Seward is not so friendly in his transactions with them as they could wish. I hope this is not so. . . DEAR MR. SUMNER, Rochdale, December 5, 1861 The excitement here has been and is great, and it is fed, as usual, by newspapers whose writers seem to imagine a cause of war discovered to be something like "treasure trove." I am not informed of the nature of the dispatch of our Government beyond what appears in our Papers, and I know not how far its tone is moderate or otherwise. ... If I were Minister or President in your country, I would write the most complete answer the case is capable of, and in a friendly and courteous tone, send it to this country. I would say that if after this, your view of the case is not accepted, you are ready to refer the matter to any Sovereign, or two Sovereigns, or Governments of Europe, or to any other eligible tribunal, and to abide by the decision. . . . I think you may do this with perfect honor, and you would make it impossible for the people of England to support our Government in any hostile steps against you. In fact, I think a course so moderate and just would bring over to your side a large amount of opinion here that has been poisoned and misled by the Times and other journals since your troubles began. . . . I need not tell you, who are much better acquainted with modern history than I am, that Nations drift into wars, as we drifted into the late war with Russia [1854] often thro' the want of a resolute hand at some moment early in the quarrel. So now, a courageous stroke, not of arms but of moral action, may save you and us. I suppose the act of Captain Wilkes was not directly authorized by your Government; if so, the difficulty will be smaller. . . . It is common here to say that your Government cannot resist the mob violence with which it is surrounded. I do not believe this. . . . Your Congress is just meeting, and your Foreign Relations Committee and your Senate will have this matter in hand. If you deal with it so wisely as to put our Government in the wrong in the sight of all moderate men here, you will not only avoid the perils now menacing, but you will secure an amount of friendly sympathy here which hitherto unhappily has not been given you. . . . Don't allow temper in any of your statesmen to turn his judgment. Without foreign war I look to the restoration of your Union. Give no advantage to the enemies of your Republic here, and you will be all right again by and bye.... DEAR MR. SUMNER Rochdale, December 7, 1861 I write a few lines more for the steamer at Cork tomorrow. There is more calmness here in the public mind . . . but I fear the military and naval demonstrations of our Government point to trouble, and I am not sure that it would grieve certain parties here if any decent excuse could be found for a quarrel with you. You know the instinct of aristocracy and of powerful military services, and an ignorant people is easily led astray on questions foreign to their usual modes of thought. . . . At all hazards you must not let this matter grow to a war with England, even if you are right and we are wrong. War will be fatal to your idea of restoring the Union and we know not what may survive its evil influences. I am not now considering its effects here they may be serious enough, but I am looking alone to your great country, the hope of freedom and humanity, and I implore you not on any feeling that nothing can be conceded, and that England is arrogant and seeking a quarrel, to play the game of every enemy of your country. Nations in great crises and difficulties have often done that which in their prosperous and powerful hour they would not have done, and they have done it without humiliation or disgrace. You may disappoint your enemies by the moderation and reasonableness of your conduct, and every honest and good man in England will applaud your wisdom. Put all the fire-eaters in the wrong, and Europe will admire the sagacity of your Government. DEAR MR. SUMNER, Rochdale, January 11, 1862 Your letter of the 23d ult. reached me on the 7th of this month. It showed such evidences of anxiety on your part that it made me intensely anxious, and I was not prepared for the tidings of the following day, which announced the settlement of the question which was the main cause of immediate danger.1 I need not tell you how much I rejoice, or how much I admire the dignity and tact with which the matter has been dealt with in the despatch of your Government. The war-mongers here are baffled for the time, and I cannot but believe that a more healthy opinion is gradually extending itself on all matters connected with your great struggle. the war Sarah Morgan Dawson was the daughter of Thomas G. 95. Pen Morgan, a district judge of Louisiana. She was a girl in pictures of her late teens when the war broke out, and she kept a diary [446, 451, of the eventful days from March 9, 1862, to the end of the 1 The dispatch of the British government (see p. 417) was presented by Lord Lyons to Seward on December 19. Eight days later Seward's reply was received at the British embassy. It was a long and labored document, but the gist of it was in these few lines: "The four persons in question [Mason and Slidell, and their secretaries] are now held in military custody at Fort Warren in the State of Massachusetts. They will be cheerfully liberated. Your Lordship will please indicate a time and place for receiving them."- - Senate Executive Documents, 37th Congress, 2d session, Vol. IV, No. 8, p. 13. 464] war. On her death a few years ago at Versailles, France, her son Warrington Dawson published the diary (1913). The passages here taken from it illustrate the proud spirit of the Southern women and the trials to which they were subjected in the invasion of their homes. April 26, 1862 There is no word in the English language that can express the state in which we are and have been these last three days. Day before yesterday news came early in the morning of three of the enemy's boats passing the Forts,' and then the excitement began. It increased rapidly on hearing of the sinking of eight of our gunboats in the engagement, the capture of the Forts, and last night of the burning of the wharves and cotton in the city while the Yankees were taking possession. . . . We went this A.M. to see the cotton burning a sight never before witnessed, and probably never again to be seen. Wagons, drays, everything that could be driven or rolled, were loaded with the bales and taken a few squares back to be burned on the common. Negroes were running around, cutting them open, piling them up, and setting them afire. All were as busy as though their salvation depended on disappointing the Yankees. Later Charles sent for us to come to the river and see him fire a flat-boat loaded with the precious material for which the Yankees are risking their bodies and souls. . . . The flat-boat was piled with as many bales as it could hold without sinking. Most of them were cut open, while negroes stove in the heads of barrels of alcohol, whiskey, etc. and dashed bucketsful over the cotton. . . . The cotton floated down the Mississippi one sheet of living flame, even in the sunlight. An incredible amount of property has been destroyed today, but no one begrudges it. . . . 1 This refers to Farragut's exploit in running past the forts of Jackson and St. Philip below New Orleans, April 23, 1862 (see Muzzey, An American History, p. 446). The capture of the forts left New Orleans and the river above, as far as Port Hudson, open to Federal attack. Baton Rouge, the home of the Morgans, lay in this region, some eighty miles north of New Orleans. |