Part 5 (1/2)

[Footnote 65: _Ibid._, No. 6. Russell to Lyons, December 26, 1860.]

[Footnote 66: _Ibid._, Russell to Lyons, No. 9, January 5, 1861, and No.

17, February 20, 1861.]

[Footnote 67: _Parliamentary Papers_, 1861, _Lords_, Vol. XVIII.

Correspondence with U.S. Government respecting suspension of Federal Customs House at the Port of Charleston. Nos. 1 and 3.]

[Footnote 68: Lyons Papers. Lyons to Bunch, December 12, 1860.]

[Footnote 69: _Ibid._, The same day official instructions were sent permitting Bunch to remain at Charleston, but directing him, if asked to recognize South Carolina, to refer the matter to England. F.O., Am., Vol. 754, No. 6. Russell to Lyons, January 10, 1861.]

[Footnote 70: Lyons Papers. Russell to Lyons, January 22, 1861.]

[Footnote 71: This view was not shared by Lyons' colleagues at Was.h.i.+ngton. The Russian Minister, Stoeckl, early declared the Union permanently destroyed, and regretting the fact, yet hoped the North would soon accept the inevitable and seek close co-operation with the South in commerce and in foreign relations. This view was repeated by him many times and most emphatically as late as the first month of 1863.

(Russian Archives, Stoeckl to F.O., January 29-February 10, 1863. No.

342.) It was not until September, 1863, that Stoeckl ventured to hope for a Northern reconquest of the South. I am indebted to Dr. Frank A.

Golder, of Stanford University, for the use of his notes and transcripts covering all of the Russian diplomatic correspondence with the United States, 1860-1865. In the occasional use made of this material the English translation is mine.]

[Footnote 72: Stoeckl reported that at a dinner with Lyons, at which he, Mercier and Seward were the guests, Seward had a.s.serted that if Civil War came all foreign commerce with the South would be interrupted. To this Lyons protested that England could not get along without cotton and that she would secure it in one way or another. Seward made no reply.

(_Ibid._, March 25-April 9, 1861, No. 810.)]

[Footnote 73: _Economist_, January 12, 1861.]

[Footnote 74: _Ibid._, February 23, 1861.]

[Footnote 75: _London Press_, March 23, 1861. Cited in Littell's _Living Age_, Vol. LXIX, p. 438.]

[Footnote 76: Before Adams' selection as Minister to England was decided upon, Sumner's Ma.s.sachusetts friends were urging him for the place.

Longfellow was active in this interest. _H.W. Longfellow_, by Samuel Longfellow, Vol. II, pp. 412-13.]

[Footnote 77: John Bright later declared ”his conviction that the leading journal had not published one fair, honourable, or friendly article toward the States since Lincoln's accession to office.” Dasent, _Life of Delane_, Vol. II, p. 38. The time is approximately correct, but the s.h.i.+ft in policy began earlier, when it came to be feared that the North would not submit to peaceable secession.]

[Footnote 78: Bigelow, _Retrospections_, Vol. I, pp. 344-45.]

[Footnote 79: See _ante_, p. 40.]

[Footnote 80: _Economist_, March 2, 1861.]

[Footnote 81: _Spectator_, March 16, 1861.]

[Footnote 82: Lyons Papers.]

[Footnote 83: Hansard, 3rd. Ser., CLXI, p. 814. February 22, 1861.

William E. Forster was of Quaker descent and had early taken part in public meetings called to express humanitarian sentiment. From 1850 on he was an acceptable public speaker in all matters liberal, as free trade, social reform, and anti-slavery. Elected to Parliament in 1859 and again in 1861 from Bradford, where he was engaged in business as a woollen manufacturer, he sought, after the fas.h.i.+on of new Members, a cause to represent and found it in champions.h.i.+p of the North. Having great native ability, as shown by his later distinguished career, it was the good fortune of the United States thus to enlist so eager a champion. Forster and John Bright were the two leading ”friends of the North” in Parliament. The latter already had established reputation, but was more influential out of Parliament than in it. Forster, with a reputation to make, showed skill in debate, and soon achieved prestige for himself and his American cause. Henry Adams, son and private secretary of the American Minister to England, once told the writer that he regarded Forster's services as, on the whole, the most valuable rendered by any Englishman to the North.]

[Footnote 84: F.O., Am., Vol. 780, No. 30.]