At a reception, July 18, at Lady Palmerston's, he notes, however, that the Prime Minister was more civil to him than "at any time since our difficulty." "July 20. Perhaps the most curious phenomenon is to be seen in the London newspapers, which betray the profound disappointment and mortification of the aristocracy at the result. They persist in disbelieving the fact of the fall of Vicksburg." "July 21. The incredulity is yet considerable. It is the strongest proof how deep-seated is the passion in the English heart." "July 27. The London Times condescends to admit this morning, that Vicksburg is taken. Its tone, like that of the other journals, is depressed. The whole English public mourns as for a calamity." "July 28. The people here are waking from their dream."1 The Confederates in London were disheartened. "The news of the check sustained by our forces at Gettysburg," wrote the commercial agent to Benjamin, July 23, "coupled with the reported fall of Vicksburg, was so unexpected as to spread very general dismay, not only among the active sympathizers with our cause, but even among those who take merely a selfish interest in a great struggle;" and August 27 he said, “You have here, in the tremulous condition of the loan, a sufficiently accurate description of the state of public opinion." 2

1 Bright wrote Sumner, July 31: “I need not tell you with what feelings of gratification and relief I have received the news of your recent success. The debate on the foolish Roebuck proposition took place when there was much gloom over your prospects, and the friends of the 'secesh' here were rejoicing in the belief that your last hour had come. How soon are the clouds cleared away, and how great is now the despondency of those who have dishonored themselves by their hatred of your people and government! The loan [Confederate] is down near twenty per cent. in little more than a week, and is now, suspect, unsalable, and people are rubbing their eyes and wondering where the invincible South has gone to. Our pro-slavery newspapers are desperately puzzled, and the whole mass of opinion is in confusion." Pierce-Sumner Papers, MS. See the Times, July 16, 20, 21, 23, 27, Aug. 3; Daily News, July 21. The Saturday Review was impressed with the importance of the Northern victories, see Aug. 1, 8, 15; Spectator, July 25; see letter from Louis Blanc, July 25, Letters on England, second series, vol. i. p. 255.

2 Confed. Dip. Corr., MS. Adams wrote, July 30: “A panic has ..

CH. XXII.]

THE IRON-CLAD RAMS

377

In the mean time work was proceeding on the two steam iron-clad rams which the Lairds were building at Birkenhead for the Confederates. Adams was diligent in calling the attention of Earl Russell to the transaction, and in furnishing him evidence, supplied by Dudley, our consul at Liverpool, which showed the character and destination of these vessels; 1 and, should a grave contingency arise, he had for his guidance an unequivocal despatch from the Secretary of State. If more vessels which become armed cruisers get away, Seward wrote, rendering it evident that the laws of Great Britain, or their administration, or the judicial construction of them is not sufficient to insure a proper observance of neutrality, then the United States must protect themselves. Being brought to a condition of things where war is waged against them "by a portion, at least, of the British nation," the President may decide to order the navy to pursue these "pirates" into the British ports, and while perceiving the "risks and hazards" consequent on such a determination he does not think that the responsibility of war will fall upon the United States,8

In pursuance of the communications of Adams, Earl Russell, with honest intent, set affairs in train to ascertain for whom these iron-clad rams were building, with the design. of stopping them should there be, under the law, warrant for such action. While their construction was a matter of common knowledge, and while, as the Times remarked, "ninety-nine people out of a hundred believe that these steam rams are intended to carry on hostilities sooner or later against the Federals," "4 Captain Bulloch, the able

happened among the holders of the rebel loan. The feeling of regret at the course of events is very general." - Dip. Corr., 1863, part i. p. 329, see pp. 319, 336; Bright's letter of Aug. 7 to Cyrus W. Field, Harper's Magazine, May, 1896, p. 848.

1 Letters of July 11, 16, 25, Aug. 14.

2 An erroneous designation of Seward.

3 July 11, Dip. Corr., 1863, part i. p. 309.

4 Sept. 7; but the remark would have been exactly true at least a month earlier.

naval representative of the Southern Confederacy, who had contracted for these war-ships as well as for the Alabama, and had been enlightened by the seizure of the Alexandra, was managing the business astutely, with the sympathetic co-operation of the Lairds. To a report that they were for the Emperor of the French, Palmerston, in an allusion in the House of Commons, gave some credence:1 when this was shown to be without foundation,2 it was stated to the English government that they were for the viceroy of Egypt. This was in turn denied. Representations were then made to the officials who were investigating the matter, that they were owned by a firm of French merchants, and for this there was a legal basis. Fearing that they might be seized, Bulloch had in June sold the ships to a French firm who had engaged to resell them to him when they should get beyond British jurisdiction. He had no idea that the Lairds suspected that the sale was not a bona fide transfer: indeed, they wrote to the English Foreign Office that they were building the vessels for a Paris copartnery.5

Earl Russell caused all the facts which were submitted to him to be sifted with care by the Law officers of the Crown, who gave him two positive opinions nearly a month apart, that there was "no evidence capable of being presented to a

July 23, Hansard, 1272. The Duchess of Argyll wrote Sumner the same day : "As to the iron-plated ships there seems to be great difficulty at getting at the truth, but it is said that one at least is for the French.". Pierce-Sumner Papers, MS.

2 Earl Cowley at Paris to Earl Russell, Aug. 24, in answer to inquiry, Appendix to British Case at Geneva, vol. ii. p. 338, also p. 328. This will hereafter be referred to as Brit. Case, and vol. ii. will be understood. 8 By telegram from Alexandria, ibid., p. 341.

Bulloch, Secret Service of the Confederate States, vol. i. p. 400 et seq. Brit. Case, p. 355. This letter, dated Sept. 5, was received Sept. 7, after the English government had substantially arrived at the final decision and it could not of itself have affected the first determination. But I refer to it for the reason that its positive statement was quite likely communicated previously by some indirect way to Earl Russell and the Law officers of the Crown. According to legal knowledge, the statement was true, although it was not in reality.

CH. XXII.]

THE IRON-CLAD RAMS

379

Court of Justice" that the ships were intended for the Confederates, but that, on the other hand, the claim of French ownership seemed to be legally sustained: they could not, therefore, advise the Government to detain the vessels.1 Still Russell was not satisfied, and he continued his inquiries, leaving no stone unturned to arrive at the truth; but in spite of his suspicions he could not get over the palpable tokens that they belonged to a firm of Paris merchants.2 He therefore wrote Adams, September 1, that the government was advised that they could not in any way interfere with these ships, but he promised that they would maintain a careful watch, and be ready to stop them, should trustworthy evidence show any proceeding contrary to the statute. At this time he was at his country-seat in Scotland, and his letter did not reach Adams until four o'clock of September 4.4

Our minister had returned from his outing, cheered by his friendly intercourse with members of the government; 5 but on his arrival in London he was immediately confronted with the critical question of the iron-clad rams, one of which Dudley had good reason to believe would at any time go to sea." September 3 Adams wrote Russell, transmitting copies of further depositions, and averring that there were no reasonable grounds for doubt that these iron-clad rams were intended for the Confederate service; and the next day, hearing from Dudley that one of them was about to depart,8

1 Letters of July 24, Aug. 20, Brit. Case, pp. 327, 336. This was followed by a supplementary opinion of Palmer, Aug. 21 (after the consideration of more evidence), to the same purpose, p. 337.

2 Ibid., pp. 338-343.

3 Dip. Corr., 1863, part i. p. 363.

4 Ibid., p. 362; Adams's Diary.

5 “I met several of them in the course of my trip into Scotland, with whom my conversation was of the most friendly nature, though, being altogether social, it of course is not suitable to be reported. I still remain of the conviction that the disposition of the greater part of the ministry is friendly." - Adams to Seward, Sept. 3, Dip. Corr., MS.

6 Dip. Corr., 1863, part i. p. 361.

7 Ibid., p. 357.

Adams's Diary, entry Sept. 4.

1

8

he sent to the Foreign Office a "last solemn protest against the commission of such an act of hostility against a friendly nation." Soon afterwards he received Russell's note of September 1, which, he wrote in his diary, "affected me deeply. I clearly foresee that a collision must now come out of it. I must not, however, do anything to accelerate it, and yet must maintain the honor of my country with proper spirit. The issue must be properly made up before the world on its merits. The prospect is dark for poor America."2 After a night given to such reflections, "My thoughts turned strongly upon the present crisis. . . . My conclusion was that another note must be addressed to Lord Russell. So I drew one which I intended only to gain time previous to the inevitable result." This was his celebrated despatch of September 5: "My Lord," he wrote: "At this moment, when one of the iron-clad vessels is on the point of departure from this kingdom, on its hostile errand against the United States, I am honored" with yours of the 1st instant. "I trust I need not express how profound is my regret at the conclusion to which Her Majesty's Government have arrived. I can regard it no otherwise than as practically opening to the insurgents free liberty in this kingdom to execute a policy" of attacking New York, Boston, and Portland, and of breaking our blockade. "It would be superfluous in me to point out to your lordship that this is war. . . . I prefer to desist from communicating to your lordship even such portions of my existing instructions as are suited to the case, lest I should contribute to aggravate difficulties already far too serious. I therefore content myself with informing your lordship that I transmit by the present steamer a copy of your note for the consideration of my government, and shall await the more specific directions that will be contained in the reply."

4

If Russell had been in London, the tale of the iron-clad

1 Dip. Corr., 1863, part i. p. 361. Entry Sept. 5.

Dip. Corr., 1863, part i. p. 367.

2 Entry Sept. 4.

Seward of July 11, ante, p. 377.