Great Britain and the American Civil War Part 24

[Footnote 519: F.O., Am., Vol. 756.]

[Footnote 520: F.O., France, Vol. 1395. No. 967. Cowley to Russell, Aug.

8, 1861.]

[Footnote 521: Russell Papers. Lyons to Russell.]

[Footnote 522: _Parliamentary Papers_, 1862, _Lords_, Vol. XXV.

"Correspondence on Civil War in the United States." No. 68. Lyons to Russell, July 20, 1861. Enclosed was a copy of the six lines of Thouvenel's "instruction" to Mercier, dated July 4, the very brevity of which shows that this was in fact no instruction at all, but merely a comment by Thouvenel to Mercier.]

[Footnote 523: Russell Papers. Lyons to Russell, July 30, 1861.]

[Footnote 524: _Ibid._, Lyons to Russell, August 1, 1861.]

[Footnote 525: _Parliamentary Papers_, 1862, _Lords_, Vol. XXV.

"Correspondence on Civil War in the United States." No. 81. Lyons to Russell, Aug. 12, 1861.]

[Footnote 526: Russell Papers. Lyons to Russell. Private. Aug. 13, 1861.]

[Footnote 527: _Ibid._, Russell Papers.]

[Footnote 528: _Parliamentary Papers_, 1862, _Lords_, Vol. XXV.

"Correspondence on Civil War in the United States." No. 83.]

[Footnote 529: Lyons thought this possible. Russell Papers. Lyons to Russell. Private. July 20, 1861.]

[Footnote 530: Lyons Papers. Russell to Lyons. Private. Aug. 16, 1861.

And again he wrote the next day, "To prevent smuggling over 3,000 miles of coast and 1,500 miles of land frontier seems to me impossible"

(_Ibid._, Aug. 17, 1861). Russell had received some two weeks earlier, a letter from Bunch at Charleston, urging that England make no objection to the blockade in order that the South might be taught the lesson that "King Cotton," was not, after all, powerful enough to compel British recognition and support. He stated that Southerners, angry at the failure to secure recognition, were loudly proclaiming that they both could and would humble and embarra.s.s Great Britain (F.O., Am., Vol. 781.

No. 82. Bunch to Russell, July 8, 1861). Bunch wrote on July 23 that the South planned to hold back its cotton until Great Britain and France raised the blockade (_Ibid._, No. 87). Bunch was now impressed with Southern determination.]

[Footnote 531: The seven ports were Norfolk (Virginia), Wilmington (North Carolina), Charleston (South Carolina), Savannah (Georgia), Mobile (Alabama), New Orleans (Louisiana), and Galveston (Texas).]

[Footnote 532: The first important reference to the blockade after mid-August, 1861, is in an order to Bunch, conveyed through Lyons, not to give advice to British merchants in Charleston as to blockade runners that had gotten into port having any "right" to go out again (F.O., Am., Vol. 757. No. 402. Russell to Lyons, Nov. 8, 1861).]

[Footnote 533: _Parliamentary Papers_, 1862, _Lords_, Vol. XXV.

"Correspondence on Civil War in the United States." No. 125. Lyons to Russell, Nov. 25, 1861. Received Dec. 9.]

[Footnote 534: Russell Papers. Lyons to Russell, Nov. 29, 1861.]

[Footnote 535: _Parliamentary Papers_, 1862, _Lords_, Vol. XXV.

"Correspondence on Civil War in the United States." No. 127.]

[Footnote 536: _Ibid._, No. 126. Lyons to Russell, Nov. 29, 1861.

Received Dec. 12.]

[Footnote 537: _Punch_, Feb. 1, 1862.]

[Footnote 538: _Parliamentary Papers_, 1862, _Lords_, Vol. XXV.

"Correspondence on Civil War in the United States." No. 141.]

[Footnote 539: _Ibid._, No. 142. Jan. 15, 1861.]

[Footnote 540: _Ibid._, No. 143.]

[Footnote 541: James, _W. W. Story_, II, p. 111, Jan. 21, 1862.]

[Footnote 542: _Parliamentary Papers_, 1862, _Lords_, Vol. XXV.

"Correspondence on Civil War in the United States." No. 153. Lyons to Russell, Jan. 14, 1862. Received Jan. 27.]

[Footnote 543: _Ibid., Lords_, Vol. XXV. "Despatch from Lord Lyons respecting the Obstruction of the Southern Harbours." Lyons to Russell, Feb. 11, 1862. Received Feb. 24.]

[Footnote 544: Thompson and Wainwright, _Confidential Correspondence of G.V. Fox, a.s.sistant Secretary of the Navy_, 1861-65, I, p. 79. Du Pont to Fox, Dec. 16, 1861. Hereafter cited as _Fox, Confid. Corresp_. This letter shows clearly also that the Navy had no thought of a _permanent_ obstruction.]

[Footnote 545: _Vide_ Arnold, _Friendship's Garland_.]

[Footnote 546: Thouvenel, _Le Secret de l'Empereur_, II, 249. Thouvenel could mistakenly write to Mercier on March 13, 1862. "Nous ne voulons pas cependant imposer une forme de gouvernement aux Mexicains..."]

[Footnote 547: Russell Papers. Cowley to Russell. Private. Jan. 17, 1862. On this same date Thouvenel, writing to Flahault in London, hoped England would feel that she had a common interest with France in preventing Mexico from falling under the yoke of Americans either "unis ou secedes." (Thouvenel, _Le Secret de l'Empereur_, II, 226).]

[Footnote 548: _Ibid._, Jan. 24, 1862.]

[Footnote 549: _Ibid._, March 6, 1862.]

[Footnote 550: F.O., Am., Vol. 825. No. 146. Lyons to Russell, Feb. 28, 1862. The fact that Slidell arrived in France just as Napoleon's plans for Mexico took clearer form has been made the ground for a.s.sumptions that he immediately gave a.s.surance of Southern acquiescence and encouraged Napoleon to go forward. I have found no good evidence of this--rather the contrary. The whole plan was clear to Cowley by mid-January before Slidell reached Paris, and Slidell's own correspondence shows no early push on Mexico. The Confederate agents'

correspondence, both official and private, will be much used later in this work and here requires explanation. But four historical works of importance deal with it extensively, (1) Richardson, _Messages and Papers of the Confederacy_, 2 vols., 1905, purports to include the despatches of Mason and Slidell to Richmond, but is very unsatisfactory.

Important despatches are missing, and elisions sometimes occur without indication. (2) Virginia Mason, _The Public Life and Diplomatic Correspondence of James M. Mason_, 1906, contains most of Mason's despatches, including some not given by Richardson. The author also used the _Mason Papers_ (see below). (3) Callahan, _The Diplomatic History of the Southern Confederacy_, 1901, is the most complete and authoritative work on Southern diplomacy yet published. He used the collection known as the "Pickett Papers," for official despatches, supplementing these when gaps occurred by a study of the _Mason Papers_, but his work, narrative in form, permits no extended printing of doc.u.ments. (4) L.M.

Sears, _A Confederate Diplomat at the Court of Napoleon III_. (Am. Hist.

Rev. Jan., 1921), is a study drawn from Slidell's private letters in the _Mason Papers_. The Mason Papers exist in eight folios or packages in the Ma.n.u.script Division of the Library of Congress, and in addition there is one bound volume of Mason's despatches to Richmond. These contain the private correspondence of Mason and Slidell while in Europe.

Slidell's letters are originals. Mason's letters are copies in Slidell's hand-writing, made apparently at Mason's request and sent to him in May, 1865. A complete typed copy of this correspondence was taken by me in 1913, but this has not hitherto been used save in a ma.n.u.script Master's degree thesis by Walter M. Case, "James M. Mason, Confederate Diplomat,"

Stanford University, 1915, and for a few citations by C. F. Adams, _A Crisis in Downing Street_ (Ma.s.s. Hist. Soc. _Proceedings_, May, 1914).

The Mason Papers also contain many letters from Mason's English friends, Spence, Lindsay, Gregory and others.]

[Footnote 551: Russell Papers. To Russell. Lyons thought France also included in these demonstrations.]

[Footnote 552: _A Cycle of Adams' Letters_, I, 113. Henry Adams to Charles Francis Adams, Jr., Feb. 14, 1862.]

[Footnote 553: _Ibid._, p. 115. To his son, Feb. 21, 1862.]

[Footnote 554: Lyons Papers. March 1, 1862.]

[Footnote 555: _A Cycle of Adams' Letters_, I, 123. To his son.]

[Footnote 556: Palmerston MS. Feb. 9, 1862.]

[Footnote 557: Bernard, p. 245. The author agrees with Russell but adds that Great Britain, in the early stages of the blockade, was indulgent to the North, and rightly so considering the difficulties of inst.i.tuting it.]

[Footnote 558: He wrote to Mason on February 10, 1863, that he saw "no reason to qualify the language employed in my despatch to Lord Lyons of the 15th of February last." (Bernard, p. 293).]

[Footnote 559: Richardson, _Messages and Papers of the Confederacy_, II, p. 155. Yancey and Mann to Hunter, Jan. 27, 1862.]