with "the most heroic fortitude and patience," he said that they would offer mediation if there were a chance of success.1

By July 11 it was known in London that McClellan had met with serious reverses before Richmond and had been forced to retreat to the James River. Those who sympathized with the South to the extent of desiring that their government might openly aid the Confederacy were full of glee at the turn affairs had taken, while the main body of the aristocracy and middle class, who opposed intervention of any sort, also showed evident satisfaction. What encouragement could be given the South through speeches, through leaders in the press, and through social influence, they gave with an open hand; yet an analysis of the different expressions discovers a warm sympathy with the South only in those who had plainly a fellow-feeling for the aristocracy across the sea, for deep in the hearts of those who were unbiassed by the traditions of their order lay a secret distrust of their own arguments and a perception of the truth that the South was fighting to preserve slavery. Rather was the moving spirit one of hostility to the North, and perhaps it was not so much hostility as it was irritation that the United States should seem to be so blind to the interests of civilization. Before McClellan's defeat was known, the Times had spoken of "this insensate and degenerate people," 2 and the tenor of its preaching was, "The war can only end in one way. Why not accept the facts and let the South begone?" When the misfortune of the Union army was learned, the leaders in the Times glowed with impatience and remonstrance against the continuance of a hopeless struggle. Englishmen will probably never realize how these words stung the Northern people in their time of trouble. Nothing illustrates better the power

1 Hansard, 543, 1214.

2 July 9.

8 Thus paraphrased by the Spectator, July 12.

"The Russian minister said they [the English] had no sensibility

CH. XVII.]

THE TIMES

83

of a journal than the utterances of the "Thunderer," which irritated Americans more than any speech of Palmerston, any despatch of Earl Russell, and I think I may safely add any violation of Great Britain's neutrality. Let one imagine how different would have been the feeling between the two English-speaking nations had the ability and influence of this newspaper been on the side of the North!2

The majority of English voters for whom the Times was alike the oracle and the organ had a fit representative in the Prime Minister Palmerston, who seemed to have some sort of political relations with the editor of the journal. The Times

themselves, and hence could not understand it in others. He thought well of Lord Palmerston because he could depend on what he said. 'Mais cet homme a la peau dure comme un rhinocère.'"-Diary of Charles Francis Adams, entry June 13. With rare generosity Mr. Charles F. Adams allowed me to use his father's diary in manuscript and to print the extracts from it in this chapter and in chap. xxii. In some measure they will show its value to me; but the careful reading of the diary has given me, moreover, an understanding of English sentiment and the course of the English government which I could have obtained in no other way.

1 "The Times, which is aware that its articles weigh, in America more heavily than despatches, writes every now and then as if it wanted war." The Spectator, July 12.

2 "During the whole reign of the Ten-pounders - i. e. from 1832 to 1867the Times affected the governing opinion almost too deeply. At one period which lasted years, it was hardly possible to pass a law of which the Times disapproved. It was most difficult to appoint any man whom the Times condemned to great office, while the man to whom the Times pointed as one who ought to rise, as a rule did rise, sometimes very fast indeed." - The Spectator, Nov. 10, 1894.

"The Times, existing as an organ of the common, satisfied, well-to-do Englishman, and for as much play of mind as may suit its being that."Matthew Arnold, Essay on the Function of Criticism (1865). See, also, Kinglake's Invasion of the Crimea (London, 1888), vol. ii. p. 232 et seq.

8 After making a note of a conversation between Palmerston, Delane, the principal editor of the Times, and himself, Adams writes: "Delane was evidently sounding in order to guide his paper by ministerial policy. I have always attributed the obvious ill will to us visible in the Times, the Post, and the Globe to the disposition of the premier. Without committing himself or the government to any one of them, it is quite notorious that he conciliates their good will by suffering them to conjecture his wishes." - Entry in Diary, May 10.

did not favor mediation or intervention on the part of Great Britain alone, and so argued in its leader of July 18. On this day, long looked forward to by the active friends of the South, took place, in the House of Commons, the debate on Lindsay's resolution that the government ought seriously to consider the propriety of offering to mediate between the United States and the Southern Confederacy. Four speakers supported the motion; two opposed it, one of whom was William E. Forster. Lord Palmerston closed the debate in expressing the hope that the House would be content to leave the matter in the hands of the government. Lindsay thereupon withdrew his motion. Nevertheless, after McClellan's defeat the inimical feeling towards the North increased rapidly. The distress in the cotton-manufacturing districts was sore, and it was natural that the English governing classes desired the most speedy possible settlement of the American difficulty. It would be shallow to find fault with them for thinking the North would fail in its effort to conquer the South, since the

1 Hansard, 511 et seq.

2 "The shadow of the American calamity is creeping with a slow but steady advance over the shining wealth of our cotton districts and threatening it with a temporary but total eclipse. Little by little the darkness grows; first one town and then another is swallowed up in the gloom of universal pauperism; the want is urgent, and the prevalent idleness is at least as menacing as the want; young women in large numbers are thrown upon public charity without proper accommodation by night, and with no proper avocation by day; young men accustomed to the constant strain of mechanical exertion are suddenly left to the undesirable companionship of their own restless minds. The rates are becoming so heavy that in some places 50 per cent. of the expected returns have to be remitted on the ground of poverty; the benevolence of the most opulent is stretched, and that of the generous is over-taxed; and yet we have an autumn and winter of probably deepening gloom before us." - Spectator, July 19.

"The cotton famine is altogether the saddest thing that has befallen this country for many a year. There have been gloomy times enough before this. We have seen Ireland perishing from actual starvation, and England half ruined from commercial distress. War and rebellion have taken their turn among the troubles from which a great nation can scarcely expect to be long free. But in the worst of our calamities there has seldom been so pitiable a sight as the manufacturing districts present at this moment.". Saturday Review, July 26.

CH. XVII.]

THE ALABAMA

85

opinion of our friends was the same. The working people still desired the North to fight it out.2

The most culpable act of negligence is yet to be recorded. As early as June 23 Adams called the attention of Earl Russell to a "more powerful war steamer" than the Florida which was being completed at Liverpool and which was nearly ready for departure. This ship became on her second christening the Alabama. Adams asked that she be prevented from sailing unless the fact should be established that her purpose was not inimical to the United States. The communication was referred to the proper department, and in the course of business reached Liverpool, where the sympathy of the community with the Confederate States was notorious. The surveyor of the port, who undoubtedly suspected for whom the ship-of-war was intended, took care to shut his eyes to any condemning evidence, and made a colorless statement which was submitted by the Commissioners of Customs in London to their solicitor, and was adjudged by him to be sufficient ground for advising against her seizure. The commissioners in their communication to the Lords of the Treasury concurred in the opinion of their legal adviser, but

1 "The last news from your side has created regret among your friends and pleasure among your enemies. I am grieved at it. . . . I do not lose faith in your cause, but I wish I had less reason to feel anxious about you.” - Bright to Sumner, July 12. "There is an all but unanimous belief that you cannot subject the South to the Union. . . . I feel quite convinced that unless cotton comes in considerable quantities before the end of the year, the governments of Europe will be knocking at your door." - Cobden to Sumner, July 11. "We have just heard of the apparent defeat of your army before Richmond. At least, such is the construction put on the telegraphic news here. Will it only excite the government the more to more determined efforts or will it tend to induce a disposition to concede a separation? We are all speculating."- Duke of Argyll to Sumner, July 12. "I cannot believe in there being any Union party in the South, and if not, can the continuance of the war be justified ?" Duchess of Argyll to Sumner, July 12. All these from Pierce-Sumner Papers, MS.

2 On this subject in general see the Times, July 14, 16, 18, 21, 22; the Daily News, July 11, 16, 22, 29; the Spectator, July 12, 19, Aug. 2; Saturday Review, July 12, 19, 26, Aug. 2, 9; Adams's letters to Seward and his diary for July.

3 Part ii. p. 180.

said that "the officers at Liverpool will keep a strict watch on the vessel." All these papers came to Earl Russell, who, on the advice of the Attorney-General and SolicitorGeneral, suggested to Adams that the United States consul at Liverpool (Dudley) be instructed to submit to the collector of the port any evidence that confirmed his suspicion. Adams and Dudley were indefatigable, and July 9 Dudley addressed to the collector a letter which no impartial man could have read without being convinced that the vessel in question was designed for the Southern Confederacy. The greater part of his statements, writes Chief Justice Cockburn in his opinion dissenting from the award of the Geneva Tribunal, "could not have been made available in an English Court."3 But the moral evidence was complete, and needed only time and opportunity to convert it into legal proof. It is not surprising that in the analysis of the historical laboratory the result reached is that the collector, the solicitor, and the Commissioners of Customs knew in their hearts that the Alabama was intended for the Confederate government, secretly wished that she might get away, and since they had not strictly a legal case against her persuaded themselves that they were performing their official duty. Chief Justice Cockburn, who puts the best face possible upon the action of the English authorities, intimates that at this juncture these officials should have addressed an inquiry to the Messrs. Laird, demanding for whom this warship was designed. "If it had been," he adds, "the high character of these gentlemen would doubtless have insured either a refusal to answer or a truthful answer. The former would have helped materially to establish a case against the

1 Part i. p. 36.

2 This was the opinion signed June 30: “If the representation made by Mr. Adams is in accordance with the facts, the building and equipment of the steamer is a manifest violation of the Foreign Enlistment act, and steps ought to be taken to put that act in force and to prevent the vessel from going to sea." Part i. p. 36; see also Earl Selborne, Memorials, vol. ii. p. 421.

8 Part ii. p. 183.