John M. Forbes & William H. Aspinwall to Salmon P. Chase, April 18, 1863

London, April 18,1863.

SIR, — We beg leave to inform you that we have obtained a loan of £500,000, for the period of six months, from Messrs. Baring Brothers & Co., on the deposit of $4,000,000 of the 5-20 bonds handed us, and with the understanding that, in case of the issuing of letters of marque to cruise against British vessels, they shall have a right to claim a prompt reimbursement of their advance, by sale or otherwise, as you may elect. The existing agitation of the public mind, both in and out of Parliament, rendered this condition a sine quâ non, and we may safely express our doubt if any other house would have undertaken to make the loan; certainly none on terms so liberal. . . .

We wait impatiently the promised official statement of funded and floating debt, amount of currency notes, etc., and also of revenue from imports and from internal sources; they are much needed to remove the almost incredible misapprehensions which have been produced by false or undefined newspaper articles. . . .

Your obedient servants,

W. H. Aspinwall,

J. M. Forbes.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 41-2

John M. Forbes & William H. Aspinwall to Gideon Welles, April 18, 1863

London, April 18,1863.

SIR, — . . . By availing of the consuls' service we avoid drawing upon ourselves the observation which would perhaps defeat our object, and we also avail of the arrangements and experiments which both these gentlemen have made. Mr. Dudley, having a vice-consul, will be able to leave his post, in case of need, upon this business; and we have assured him that you will not only make any explanations regarding such absence which may hereafter be required by the Secretary of State, but will also fully appreciate his zeal. . . .

To offer to buy the ironclads without success, would only be to stimulate the builders to greater activity, and even to building new ones in the expectation of finding a market for them from one party or the other. . . . We call your attention to the inclosed article by Professor Goldwin Smith. . . . We understand that Professor Smith is a high authority, and we presume he is writing entirely of “his own motion,” and in the interests of his own country. Could we find a sound legal writer to lay open to the people of England the consequences to their own commerce hereafter, and also, though a more delicate point, the danger to it now, through a war with us, and to do it entirely from an English point of view, we think the value of the ironclads, the Southerner, and other dangerous vessels, would decline rapidly. We shall carefully consider this and other points before acting. . . .

Respectfully yours,

W. H. Aspinwall,

J. M. Forbes.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 40-1

John M. Forbes to Mrs. N. J. Senior, June 27, 1863

New Lodge, Windsor Forest, 27 June, 1863.

My Dear Mrs. Senior, — I cannot thank you too much for your most welcome note, and for its result in a line just received from your brother promising to be in on Monday, and to see me.

Your warm sympathy touches a chord that seldom vibrates. I had thought myself proof against cold or heat, and that I was entirely indifferent to English opinions and feelings, which I found so generally against us. Like the traveler in the fable, I can stand the pelting of the storm, but your sunshine draws off my cloak, and makes me aware that I am open to its cheering influence; and I tell it you that you may know how much good you can do to others.

I venture to send you three cards, one of myself, one of my daughter Mary, the wife of Lieut.-Colonel Russell, and one of my son, W. H. F. The last was north of Washington, on the Potomac, not far from the crossing place where the raid we hear of to-day occurred. If you read in the papers of some disaster or success to the Second Massachusetts Cavalry, you may look with more interest upon the faces of those who have such a deep concern in its fortunes. My only strong belief is that you may hear of misfortune there, but not of dishonor.

I shall now hear nothing more from them for the next two anxious weeks, and shall then, if all goes well, try to visit the camp.

I shall keep your note to read on the sea, and to show, perhaps, to my young soldier.

Most truly and gratefully yours,

J. M. Forbes.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 38-9

John M. Forbes, writing from London, after June 9, 1863

Among my London acquaintances was Mr. Edward Ellis, a member of Parliament himself, and, I think, with one or two sons also in that body. He was a friend and adherent of Palmerston, and, having a pecuniary interest in land on this side, was supposed to be very well posted about American affairs. It was just at the time the controversy was going on about the letter-bag of a steamer; it had been seized with the vessel, carrying a cargo of munitions of war, nominally to Mexico, but undoubtedly intended for the Texan rebels. The bag must have contained proof of this, but, being under the seals of the British post-office, was claimed by the British minister as sacred, and the dispute was going on as to what should be done with it; the condemnation of the vessel and cargo, amounting to a very large sum, depending a great deal upon the result. I was dining at Mr. Ellis's, and while we were standing before the fire, waiting for dinner to be announced, two or three of the younger members of Parliament came in and announced the “good news” that the letter-bags had been given up without being opened, which removed the danger of a rupture in the friendly relations between the United States and Great Britain. This was all very polite, Mr. Adams being present, and, as usual, silent. I could not help, however, saying a word to this effect: “I am very glad you like the news; but I hope you will remember one thing, that you are making a precedent which, in the long future, we intend to follow. You are now ready to introduce all possible privileges for neutrals in the carrying trade, but in the long run Great Britain is at war ten years while we are likely to be one; and whatever precedent you set now, we shall hold you to.”

*~*~*~*

Among the notable men that I met was an Hon. Mr. Berkeley, a queer little old man, who was known in Parliament as “single speech Berkeley,” and who every year brought up some radical proposition which was good-naturedly received and passed over, out of regard for his aristocratic connections and influence. I sat next him at a dinner given me by Captain Blakely, the gunmaker, and, with the usual reserve which I had to maintain in that hostile atmosphere, I said very little except upon general subjects; but as we were putting on our coats before going off, little Mr. Berkeley shook hands with me very warmly and said, “I hope you understand that I am entirely with you in your fight to put down the slaveholders.”

*~*~*~*

General Forbes was a very good-looking, middle-aged man at that time, and was very polite to me, taking me down to Aldershot to see a review of the British volunteers. We lunched with the mess, and then went to the field, where there was a great display of troops, and where I saw many celebrities of the Crimean war and the Indian mutiny. The review wound up with a sham fight, in the midst of which I had to start by cab to catch the train back to London to keep an engagement in the evening. The cabman at first refused to cross the field of battle, but under bribe or threat I managed to get him down to run the gauntlet of the advancing line, going between them and their objective point with the horse on the jump and the whole line apparently firing at us. It had all the effect of a real battle, — except the lead.

*~*~*~*

One project which we thought of at this time might have turned into great results if the Mexicans had had any minister or recognized agent in London. They were at open war with France, and it occurred to us that, if they would do towards France exactly what the rebel cruisers were doing against us, we should bring the European powers to a realizing sense of their misdeeds towards us. We discussed the question, and thought of lending to Mexico a few thousand dollars out of our resources to enable them to fit out cruisers in English ports to go into the Channel and destroy French ships, and to return to British ports to coal and recruit and get ready for other depredations; in fact repeating what was being done in British neutral ports against the United States. If some morning a Mexican cruiser had put into Plymouth after destroying a lot of French ships, the replies of the British Foreign Secretary to a powerful, warlike nation like France would have been very different from what they were saying to us, hampered as we were with our internal war; and, if they had treated France as they did us, war would have been the consequence in about twenty-four hours. But there was no Mexican minister or agent, and we could do nothing.

*~*~*~*

We were surprised at the house by being decorated in most wonderful crape round our hats, a heavy silk scarfs reaching almost to our feet, which were put over us by one of the servants, as we were to play the part of chief mourners. After the religious ceremonies at the house, we were ushered into carriages decorated in the same wonderful manner, and slowly drove through the streets, guarded by a lot of mutes in deep black, carrying halberds or poles behind the hearse. It looked as if they were guarding us to prevent our escape, as they walked along beside the carriage. After a dreary ride we came to the suburban cemetery and then left the carriages and surveyed the scene. The hearse was the principal object, being drawn by black horses and having tall, black plumes on each side. As we were waiting for it to come up, Mr. B., who was sincerely attached to his wife, but had a sense of humor, could not forbear a sort of apology, saying that he had tried to have it as private and inconspicuous as possible, but it was impossible to get away from the conventionality and pomp of a London funeral: he wished that the hearse could be transported to America and put at the head of the Union army; he was sure the rebels would be routed at once by its appearance! After a short service at the grave, Mr. Baring and I jumped into his cab, throwing off our insignia of mourning, which must have formed a valuable perquisite, — there being silk enough to make a cassock of, — and were soon driving rapidly to London.

*~*~*~*

During our stay in London we went to hear Mr. Cobden's great speech in the Commons. The House of Commons is a very different affair from our House of Representatives; indeed, it looks, at first sight, much more like one of our large committee rooms at the Capitol, or perhaps like the senate chamber there. Only a few strangers are admitted to what is called the speaker's gallery, and then only by special ticket from the speaker. When Cobden's speech was expected, considerable influence had to be used to get admittance. We learned that the speaker had in this case, when applied to, expressed fears that the two factions of Union and rebel (unrecognized) emissaries might be placed too near each other, and so we found much diplomacy had been expended in arranging seats to keep ourselves and Messrs. Mason and Slidell separated. The occasion was certainly a very memorable one, for Cobden's speech rang through Europe and America, and materially influenced the action of the English government. His manner was cold and somewhat hesitating, but he spoke with great force and sense, not mincing his phrases, against the backslidings of his countrymen; and his speech was all the more effective from his taking the stand for us, not (as Bright usually did) from an American point of view, but because he saw England's honor and interest imperiled by the short-sighted policy of Palmerston and Russell.

I think it was on the same night that Roebuck made a most malignant attack upon what he called the barbarism of the Federals in their cruel and atrocious proclamation of emancipation, “stimulating the subordinate race to make war against their superiors, and putting a premium on murder, rape, and robbery.” Monckton Milnes, the poet, whom I have since welcomed here as Lord Houghton, made a very pithy and spirited rejoinder to this diatribe, and quite won my heart.

*~*~*~*

We had come, also, prepared to do something in the way of enlightening the British public as to the real strength of the North, and the certainty of our ultimate success, but Mr. Adams thought it doubtful whether such a course would be wise; for if successful in our argument it might show the governing class in Europe that their only chance for breaking up the Union was in active interference; so that he thought it safer for them to be kept neutral by the belief that we were sure to break up.

*~*~*~*

I was requested to lead in to dinner his daughter-in-law, the wife of Mr. Nassau John Senior, who was very pleasant; but, knowing nothing about her, I refrained from talking upon any interesting subject, until she happened to say that her brother had just returned from France, and that she hoped I would see him. I then had to ask who her brother was, and found it was Tom Hughes. “Why,” said I, “he is the one man I wanted to see; I thought he was ill, and that I should go home without seeing him.” I was going to start in a few days for Liverpool, and she very warmly insisted that I should see her brother, and accordingly asked him for an appointment. When I called at his office in Old Square, Lincoln's Inn, I found my good friend Tom Hughes, genial and pleasant as he is to-day. I need hardly say that the remainder of my evening with Mrs. Senior at the dinner party was very much more delightful than at the beginning, as it was like finding a warm friend in the midst of an enemy's camp.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 31-8

John M. Forbes to Anne Howell Forbes, June 9, 1863

Steamer, June 9,1863.

At nine, through much tribulation, and feeling like an unprotected female in the streets of London, I reached Bingen, “sweetest flower of the Rhine.” Amid a shower of gutturals, I found myself alone as the train moved off, and could only respond with the sesame of “Hotel Victoria,” which, after due German delay, brought me a broad-lipped porter, who took my bag and shawl, and marched me off to the Victoria, dumb to all else. A supper, served by a half-English waiter in a hall much like our White-Mountain-tavern-dining-room, and a decent bed, kept me till 5 A. M., and then, with a cup of coffee, I started to return on my winding way by boat — a wonderful cross of the Dutch galliot, the river raft, and the steamer. I found Bingen to be the northern extremity of the Rhine Highlands, as if you had stopped just above Newburgh (Hudson), — the Rhine being the Hudson, a little variegated by robbers’ castles. Now I am as if below the Palisades (Hudson), in the flat country, having fed on the picturesque mentally, and the Rhine wine and cutlets physically, and being now at leisure from both appetites.

One or two of the sights I have seen would pay for the journey, for they carry one back to the Middle Ages here, as Kenilworth or Warwick do in England. At each bend of the river, and it bends constantly, you find a robbers’ nest commanding it, and generally some valley leading down to it. Some few of these are very beautiful: all are picturesque, whether in ruins, as most of them are, or well preserved. The most beautiful is one on the left or east bank, two hours by steamer below Bingen, — an old castle, well preserved, nestled in a valley which protects it from the east and north, hills rising above it and falling from the base of its towers to the river; hills too steep for culture, so that the castle stands embowered, perched on the hillside, with its round, minaret-looking towers and battlements. Its architectural beauty seems to me exquisite, so bright and graceful; and its surroundings set it off like a gem in the right place.

Then you come to little robber houses, covering less ground than our house, that reminded one of Christie's tower in the “Black Dwarf,” a tower and some sort of outhouse walled in. These are always in ruins; and you have every variation from this, up to the grand castle of Ehrenbreitstein, opposite Coblentz. The general style of these rascals was, however, to seize some point commanding the river, and a side valley leading to it. They all mark the bird of prey, just as the claws and sharp beak do; no ground near them for food, no trees for shelter. Sometimes it takes my glass to make out the ruin. Sometimes the rock goes up to such peaks that you need a glass to know there is not a ruined castle there. Sometimes the castle is low down, right on the river, with its battlemented walls cut through now by the railroad; more often, perched half way up on the shoulder of a hill; almost always a threat, seldom a place of home-like beauty and shelter. Rocks (limestone) often too steep for aught but the bushes which, in living green, now cover them; but wherever there is a chance to terrace, you find little nooks and vineyards.

When you come to Ehrenbreitstein, you have a noble castle, still defensible. Now we are coming to hills less steep and generally vine-covered, but still terraced. None picturesque, like the pine-clad hills of the Adirondacks. Leave out the ruins, and we have many finer sights than the Rhine; but with these, and a heart in tune, I can imagine the enthusiasm of Byron and Bulwer. I have enjoyed it, partly as a rest in the midst of my life of keen anxiety, and more for not expecting any pleasure beforehand. A couple of Germans came on board who spoke no English or French, and who kindly tried, in deep and frantic gutturals, to convey to me their appreciation of the Rhine beauties. I had to shake my head in despair, and turn to my own fountains of inspiration.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 28-30

Mrs. Fanny Kemble to John M. Forbes, before June 9, 1863

I had a long talk with Lord Clarendon on Thursday evening about American affairs, and found him, I am sorry to say, much less just in his notions upon them than that nice man, his dead brother-in-law, Cornwall Lewis, was. I sent him (Lord Clarendon) yesterday morning a fair and accurate account of the whole origin of the quarrel and present state of the struggle; but if one of our cabinet ministers has yet to learn anything upon either subject, it is a shame and a pity! That fellow, ———, the “Times’s” worthy correspondent from the South, who was a defaulter on the turf here, you know, is a nephew of Lord 's, and connected with our great people; and the wicked trumpery he writes, both privately and in the “Times,” is a fruitful source of mischief on the subject. I am happy to say that Lord Clarendon gave the “Times” its deserts for the mischievous course it has pursued towards America in its devilish “leading articles.” That paper will lose its influence, if the feeling once gains ground that it is absolutely dishonest and unprincipled, as well as the cleverest paper in the world.

Good-by. I am glad you are coming back soon; the sight of you carries me to Milton Hill, and refreshes my heart and soul.

Always affectionately yours,

Fanny Kemble.

P. S. Your former friend, formerly captain, now Admiral Charles Elliot, is brother to my friend of the colonial office, and has just been made governor of St. Helena.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 26-7

Gideon Welles to John M. Forbes, April 18, 1863

Navy Department, Washington, 18th April, 1863.

Your two favors of the 27th ult. and 1st inst. were duly received. We have been and are extra busy in consequence of results at Charleston,¹ etc., so that I seize a moment this Saturday evening to acknowledge them.

I do not believe it expedient to purchase machinery as suggested, nor do I think it advisable to buy either of the Cunarders.

If we can prevent the formidable craft which is being got up for the “Emperor of China” from getting into rebel hands, or get hold of any swift privateers which they are constructing or fitting out, the great purpose of your mission will have been accomplished. I am not over-sanguine of success in this matter, and shall not experience deep disappointment at your failure, — assisted as I know the rebels are by British neutrality as well as by British capital. There may be some fortunate contingency to aid you, but I do not rely upon it. When you left I had strong hopes that the English government might interfere to prevent the semi-piratical rovers from going abroad. Beyond any government or people on earth, it is the interest, and should be the policy, of Great Britain to maintain the police of the seas. She has so thought, and acted heretofore. If in encouraging, or acquiescing in the policy of sending abroad from her shores, these pirate steamers to prey upon the commerce of a friendly nation, we are to understand there is a change of policy, there is no country that will suffer more. With her immense commerce, and dependent colonies spread over the globe, she would be ruined by retaliatory measures. I have no doubt that it is a primary object with the rebel agents, enemies, and sympathizers, to create a misunderstanding between us and England, and hence forbearance, to its utmost limit, is with us a virtue.

On the subject of letters of marque, our views coincide, and I think will prevail, unless we shall be compelled to resist other Alabamas and Floridas, by letting loose similar vessels which may depredate on the commerce of that country, which, under the rebel flag, is devastating ours.

We have an impression that but limited means will be derived from the loan recently negotiated, yet it may for the moment give them some credit. The statement of Mr. Laird in Parliament that propositions had been made to him to build vessels for the United States is destitute of truth. Certainly nothing of the kind has ever come from me, directly or indirectly, nor from the Navy Department during my administration of its affairs; and there is no other branch of the government authorized or possessed of means to make such a proposition. All appropriations for constructing or purchasing naval vessels are by Congress confided to the Navy Department. I am therefore compelled to believe that Mr. L. states what he knew to be false to relieve himself in difficulty.

Perhaps it may be advisable to expose Mr. Laird, though of that you can best judge. Ordinarily I take little notice of false partisan statements, but an exhibition of the low moral standard of the rebel agents may not be without a beneficial influence on the British mind at this moment.

I am glad you have encouraged Mr. Dudley, our excellent and vigilant consul at Liverpool, to persevere in legal measures. . . .

. . . What we want is to prevent the rebels from getting out dangerous vessels; and if it means a necessity to buy and leave them, so be it. We would have neither you nor the government compromised by any illegal proceedings.

Our ironclad monitors proved their powers of resistance at Charleston, and for harbor defense and assault are a success. But we want chasers, — fast sailers for cruising, and must and will have them. The suggestion in regard to blockade runners, if successful, would, like almost every success, have great and general approval, but it would be attended with many difficulties. With regards to Mr. Aspinwall, and hoping to hear from you often, [etc., etc.].

_______________

¹ Probably referring to the attack on Fort Sumter, on the 7th of April, when the Union fleet under Admiral Dupont had had to retire discomfited. — Ed.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 23-6

Gustavus V. Fox to John M. Forbes, April 1, 1863

Navy Department, April 1,1863.

I have your letter from near Halifax. Every steamer we capture that will carry one gun is invariably taken by the department and sent to the blockade. The Atlantic and Baltic are pretty nearly gone, boilers entirely so. The old Cunarders have not the speed. Earl Russell has written a letter to our government (received yesterday) which, in plain English, is this: “We have a right to make and sell. We are merchants; we sell to whoever will buy; you can buy as well as the South. We do not ask any questions of our purchasers. We shall not hound down our own industry. We are not responsible for anything. You can make the most of it.”

We infer from this bombshell that the government would be glad to have the South get out these ironclads, and that they will not afford us any aid. You can act accordingly. You must stop them at all hazards, as we have no defense against them. Let us have them in the United States for our own purposes, without any more nonsense, and at any price. As to guns, we have not one in the whole country fit to fire at an ironclad. If you dispose of their ironclads, we will take care of the whole Southern concern; and it depends solely upon your action in this matter; and if you have the opportunity to get them, I hope you will not wait for any elaborate instructions.

It is a question of life and death. Charleston will be attacked within ten days, and I hope we shall strengthen you with successes in other quarters. The Georgiana is disposed of.

Regards to Mr. A.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 22-3

John M. Forbes to Gideon Welles, April 1, 1863

London, April 1,1863.

. . . The rebel loan, although much of a bubble, got up by the foxes, already in the trap, who have lost their tails, and want others to follow their bright examples, is still to a certain extent a successful swindle, and it gives the enemy new life. Still I have reason to hope that it only pays off old scores, having been negotiated at 60, by takers, chiefly creditors, it is supposed, who are now swindling the green ones in their foul bargain. This gives the enemy £1,800,000 to square the score and begin a new one; but it does not prove conclusively that they can pay for their ironclads, especially the one at Glasgow, which we are taking measures to investigate. . . .

It occurs to me as within the spirit of our orders, though not the letter, in case we get a dangerous blockade runner, to put on board cargo useful to us, cover her up carefully, and send her under a sharp captain to Nassau, where she might get valuable information, and then run into the arms of our squadron, if still outside of Charleston; and perhaps bring along with her some of her Confederate friends to help her run the blockade. I throw this out for your consideration. It may be too dangerous a game to play, but might, if well played, double her value by giving us some of her infernal Confederates! The worst of it is, I fear, that it requires many to be in the secret. I write Secretary Chase upon financial matters.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 21-2

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, April 2, 1864

John M. Forbes called. After talking on one or two subjects he spoke of the National Convention and his regret that the call was so early, and asked me as one of the committee to reconsider the subject. Told him I would hear and consider anything from him, but that my mind was deliberately made up, and I thought the sooner the nomination was made, the better united we should be. He went over the usual ground, — if the summer campaign was unfortunate, etc., etc., how could we change our candidates? I answered we did not intend to be unfortunate, but if we were, I could not see how any different candidate would help the Union cause. Reverses might strengthen the Copperheads.

He then talked of the President, — his want of energy, decision, promptness, in consequence of which the country suffered. It was evident from what I gathered that Mr. Forbes wanted another candidate than Abraham Lincoln, and hence he desired delay. Forbes means well. His heart is right. He is shrewd and sagacious, but men betray their feelings and partialities unavoidably. I have no doubt he desires to have Mr. Chase a candidate, though he speaks of only Ben Butler, whom he dislikes.

Cautioned Fox to beware of yielding to the suggestions and opinions of detective Olcott, unless fully satisfied by facts in his possession. Mr. Wilson, the counsel, must advise in these matters, and nothing be done in the way of seizure and arrest but by Mr. Wilson's direction.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 2: April 1, 1864 — December 31, 1866, p. 4-5

Franklin B. Sanborn to Thomas Wentworth Higginson, March 4, 1859

March 4.

Brown was at Tabor on the 10th of February, with his stock in fine erudition, as he says in a letter to G. Smith. He also says he is ready with some new men to set his mill in operation, and seems to be coming East for that purpose. Mr. Smith proposes to raise one thousand dollars for him, and to contribute one hundred dollars himself. I think a larger sum ought to be raised; but can we raise so much as this? Brown says he thinks any one of us who talked with him might raise the sum if we should set about it; perhaps this is so, but I doubt. As a reward for what he has done, perhaps money might be raised for him. At any rate, he means to do the work, and I expect to hear of him in New York within a few weeks. Dr. Howe thinks John Forbes and some others not of our party would help the project if they knew of it.¹

_______________

1 Dr. Howe gave me the following letter at New York, Feb. 5, 1859 : —

JoHn M. FOrBES, ESQ.

Dear Sir, — If you would like to hear an honest, keen, and veteran backwoodsman disclose some plans for delivering our land from the curse of slavery, the bearer will do so. 1 think I know him well. He is of the Puritan militant order. He is an enthusiast, yet cool, keen, and cautious. He has a martyr's spirit. He will ask nothing of you but the pledge that you keep to yourself what he may say.

Faithfully yours,

S. G. Howe.

SOURCE: Franklin B. Sanborn, The Life and Letters of John Brown, p. 493

John M. Forbes to Salmon P. Chase, April 1, 1863

London, April 1, 1863.

My Dear Sir, — . . . Our consul tells me that among the developments reached in searching evidence against privateers, this one is clear, that the robbers’ object in pushing that expedient is chiefly to get us into difficulty with England! To this end their efforts are directed here far more than to the mere injury of our commerce. We must not play their game for them by issuing letters of marque. . . .

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 21

Diary of Gideon Welles: Tuesday, May 12, 1863

We have information that Stonewall Jackson, one of the best generals in the Rebel, and, in some respects, perhaps in either, service, is dead. One cannot but lament the death of such a man, in such a cause too. He was fanatically earnest, and a Christian but bigoted soldier.

A Mr. Prentiss has presented a long document to the President for the relief of certain parties who owned the John Gilpin, a vessel loaded with cotton, and captured and condemned as good prize. There has been a good deal of outside engineering in this case. Chase thought if the parties were loyal it was a hard case. I said all such losses were hard, and asked whether it was hardest for the wealthy, loyal owners, who undertook to run the blockade with their cotton, or the brave and loyal sailors who made the capture and were by law entitled to the avails, to be deprived. I requested him to say which of these parties should be the losers. He did not answer. I added this was another of those cases that belonged to the courts exclusively, with which the Executive ought not to interfere. All finally acquiesced in this view.

This case has once before been pressed upon the President. Senator Foot of Vermont appeared with Mr. Prentiss, and the President then sent for me to ascertain its merits. I believe I fully satisfied him at that time, but his sympathies have again been appealed to by one side.

Mr. Seward came to my house last evening and read a confidential dispatch from Earl Russell to Lord Lyons, relative to threatened difficulties with England and the unpleasant condition of affairs between the two countries. He asked if anything could be done with Wilkes, whom he has hitherto favored, but against whom the Englishmen, without any sufficient cause, are highly incensed. I told him he might be transferred to the Pacific, which is as honorable but a less active command; that he had favored Wilkes, who was not one of the most comfortable officers for the Navy Department. I was free to say, however, I had seen nothing in his conduct thus far, in his present command, towards the English deserving of censure, and that the irritation and prejudice against him were unworthy, yet under the peculiar condition of things, it would perhaps be well to make this concession. I read to him an extract from a confidential letter of J. M. Forbes, now in England, a most earnest and sincere Union man, urging that W. should be withdrawn, and quoting the private remarks of Mr. Cobden to that effect. I had read the same extract to the President last Friday evening, Mr. Sumner being present. He (Sumner) remarked it was singular, but that he had called on the President to read to him a letter which he had just received from the Duke of Argyle, in which he advised that very change. This letter Sumner has since read to me. It is replete with good sense and good feeling.

I have to-day taken preliminary steps to transfer Wilkes and to give Bell command in the West Indies. It will not surprise me if this, besides angering Wilkes, gives public discontent. His strange course in taking Slidell and Mason from the Trent was popular, and is remembered with gratitude by the people, who are not aware his work was but half done, and that, by not bringing in the Trent as prize, he put himself and the country in the wrong. Seward at first approved the course of Wilkes in capturing Slidell and Mason, and added to my embarrassment in so disposing of the question as not to create discontent by rebuking Wilkes for what the country approved. But when, under British menace, Seward changed his position, he took my position, and the country gave him great credit for what was really my act and the undoubted law of the case. My letter congratulating Wilkes on the capture of the Rebel enemies was particularly guarded and warned him and naval officers against a similar offense. The letter was acceptable to all parties, — the Administration, the country, and even Wilkes was contented.

It is best under the circumstances that Wilkes should be withdrawn from the West Indies, where he was sent by Seward's special request, unless, as he says, we are ready for a war with England. I sometimes think that is not the worst alternative, she behaves so badly.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 297-9

John M. Forbes to Salmon P. Chase, March 31, 1863

London, March 31,1863.

. . . I am glad, however, to find in some quarters a theory, that while the government here, and their special pleader, the Attorney-General, have so defended themselves against claims for damages, and also against criticism in the Alabama case, by all sorts of special pleading and sophistry, they are not going to lay themselves open to the same charge again.

If they will only do better with the vessels now fitting out against us, we must try to forgive their past sins, for the time. I am trying to hunt up some evidence that this theory is well founded, and, if confirmed, I will write by next mail.

If we can only tide over the time until we occupy Charleston, Savannah, Mobile, and the mouth of the Rio Grande, we shall avert the complication of another war upon our hands, — now the last hope of the rebels. . . .

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 20

John M. Forbes to Governor John A. Andrew, May 20, 1863

London, May 20, 1863.

My Dear Governor, — I have your long and interesting letter of Tuesday, May 5, with hopeful views of Hooker's battle. God grant they may have been realized, though his situation seemed critical at last accounts. I have just had Mr. Bright to breakfast, and have since seen Cobden. I tell them both that either a great success or a great disaster will stir up our people, and if they hear to-morrow that Hooker is driven back, it will only mean that it will bring out our people. Like the pine-tree, it may be said of the North: —

“The firmer it roots him,

The harder it blows.”

I only wish I were at home to do my share there, if the news is black; but my work here is but half done, and I can only give you my good wishes and my children.

How you would like John Bright! He is a man after your own pattern, — genial, warm-hearted, frank. I am busy just now trying to see the Quakers, and to bring them up to the mark of doing something for peace, by petitioning for the suppression of ironclads and other Confederate pirates. Cobden is confident the ironclads will not be allowed to go out, and they have certainly checked up the work upon them. I think the case looks better, but still the calm seems to me too uncertain to trust to. I would avail of it to prepare for the possible storm. I note what you say of guns. I hope you observe in the prices sent you the very extravagant ones are for all steel, which are deemed unnecessary. The Russians take iron spindles and steel jackets. I fear our army and navy are a little too much governed by those most excellent riders of their hobbies, — Rodman and Dahlgren, for whom I have the greatest possible respect; but you must not forget that to pierce an ironclad you need velocity of shot, which cannot be had with your cast-iron guns; they will not stand the powder. Sumter drove off our ironclads with Blakely guns and round steel shot. Benzon and I, as I wrote you before, have gone in for two ten-and-three-quarter, and one nine-inch gun, cast-iron spindle, steel jacket, which will cost £1000, £1000, and £750, more or less. If you decide not to have them, I hope you will say so, and we shall try to resell them here with as little loss as possible. If only as patterns, it seems to me you ought to have them.

Yours truly,

J. M. Forbes.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 15-6

Maintenance Of Peace With America, May 26, 1863

The writer of the following letter, John M. Forbes, a well-known merchant of Boston, North America, is fully accredited as a gentleman entitled to all confidence and respect by letters from Samuel Boyd Tobey, of Providence, to Joshua Forster; Thomas Evans, of Philadelphia, to James B. Braithwaite and Richard Fry; Matthew Howland, of New Bedford, to Joshua Pease; Thomas Kimber, Jr., to Henry Pease, M. P.; and Thomas Evans to Robert Forster, etc., etc. We, the undersigned, commend the important subjects treated upon to the serious attention of our friends.

Robert Forster.

Robert Alsop.

George Sturge.

London, 26th of 5th Month, 1863.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 14

John M. Forbes to Joseph Pease, Joseph Bevan Braithwaite and Robert Forster, May 26, 1863

London, May 26,1863.

Gentlemen, — My purpose in asking introductions to Friends in this country was to bring to your attention the danger of hostile relations, and even of war, between our two kindred nations, and to beg you to apply your accustomed practical wisdom to finding means of averting the evil.

You are already aware of the serious although smaller evil which has been made public, namely:—

Swift steamers have been fitted out in your ports, manned by your own seamen, with a full knowledge of the warlike objects of the voyage, but not at first armed with cannon. Another British vessel, with guns and ammunition, and additional men, meets them on your coast, or in some neighboring port, and in a few days they commence the destruction of American ships — often laden with British property.

The Law of Nations is necessarily indefinite; but it is generally held, that no armed ship becomes a legal cruiser until she has received her commission in one of the ports of the power which authorizes her warlike proceedings; and even then, that she cannot condemn her prizes until each case has been adjudicated before a court of law. Notwithstanding the illegality of the proceedings of these cruisers, your government has not stopped their course of destruction, and they are afforded the hospitalities of your colonial ports, without which their career of mischief would soon terminate. Judging of the future by the past, and also by the information which I receive from authentic sources, there is no doubt that other similar expeditions are in course of preparation; and that from time to time the course of irritation will be continued, by which the slaveholders and their agents hope to produce a war between our country and yours. This is probably their object, rather than the mere destruction of property. Thanks to Bright, and Forster, and Cobden, and Monckton Milnes, and other noble spirits, in Parliament and out of it, a marked improvement has taken place in public opinion, which has strengthened your government in its efforts to prevent further expeditions; but the work is only half done; the danger is still great. Now we all hope that peace may, through the efforts of good and wise men on both sides of the water, be kept between us, in spite of these expeditions.

Another consideration has great weight, namely, if your government practically establish the precedent that a neutral may evade the technicalities of a Foreign Enlistment Act, and that vessels so evading the local law may at once become legal cruisers, entitled to capture enemies' property and dispose of it without adjudication, your next war after we are at peace will probably see the ocean covered with foreign-built cruisers, who will do, on a larger scale, against your rich commerce exactly what the Alabama is now doing; and will at the same time give an impetus to commerce, under our neutral flag, far greater than that with which your shipowners are now bribed. When that evil day comes, you will go to war for the protection of your commerce.

I have thus far only mentioned the lesser danger; but a far greater one threatens us.

By the inclosed copy of the intercepted correspondence of the slaveholders' government,¹ you will see the statement of their so-called Secretary of the Navy, that months ago “they had contracted for six ironclad vessels in Great Britain.”

I cannot now give you legal proof that these ships are building here, but a very little shrewd inquiry will convince you of the fact; at least two of these ironclads are building at Liverpool, one of which might be launched within a few weeks. These two ships are known to be of the most formidable character, and equal, except in size, to the best ironclads belonging to your government. If they are allowed to go to sea, we might either have our harbors obstructed, or our cities burned!

They may not take in their guns at Liverpool; but, as in other cases, a British steamer can meet them on your coast, and dispatch them fully armed upon their errand of death; having thus evaded the technicalities of your law.

Now it is plain that your nation and ours cannot live in peace if you permit such engines of destruction to be sent from your harbors against us. The law of nations and the common sense of mankind will decide that it is your business to see that your local laws are made sufficient to carry out your international obligations. We did so under Washington without any statute law; we afterwards amended our law, when in your Canadian rebellion we found it insufficient. Whatever may be thought of the maintenance of peace, under a continuance of the privateers outfitting against our commerce, if the ironclads go out against our cities, peace between us is hardly possible.

You may think that the possibility of war is a mere dream. So reasoned too many of our people, North and South, when the causes of our war were ripening. Wars come from passion and from want of forecast more often than from the interests of either party.

I have laid before you the danger; I now entreat you to apply the remedy in your own good way, but without delay.

If I have dwelt upon the material and national consideration of the subject too much, I beg you to believe that it is only because I feel that it would be unnecessary to appeal to your well-known abhorrence of any war, and especially of a war between the two nations of the earth who, when our country is once freed from the stain of slavery, ought to stand shoulder to shoulder before the world to up hold peace on earth and freedom to all men.

With great respect, your friend and servant,

J. M. Forbes.

_______________

¹ A letter referring to the Confederates having contracted for six ironclad steamers in England, urging dispatch, and speaking of “the cotton to be delivered in liquidation of these contracts.” — Ed.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 10-14

Gideon Welles to William H. Aspenwall & John M. Forbes, March 16, 1863

New York, March 16,1863.

Mem^o. Instructions from the Navy Department to Messrs. W. H. Aspinwall and J. M. Forbes.

You will receive credits from the Treasury Department, which will enable you to use for the purposes of these orders £1,000,000 sterling. This, or any part of it, you will use at your discretion, to buy any vessels, or a majority interest therein, built or building in England or elsewhere, for war purposes. Your first object will be to secure such vessels as are most likely to be used by the insurgents and to be most dangerous in their hands. Your next object will be to get such as will be most useful to us, whenever it becomes possible and expedient to get them to some home port or friendly port where we can get possession of them. If in your opinion clearly expedient, you may send such vessels to such points, but you will endeavor to avoid establishing a precedent that may embarrass our minister when urging the British government to stop the sailing of vessels belonging to the rebels.

You will note that there may be vessels building, which, without being perfectly adapted to war purposes, are still so fast and have such capacity for a moderate armament, that they threaten to become dangerous to our commerce. In such cases, you must use your best judgment as to purchasing any of them. It may in some cases be expedient to secure a majority interest or a lien upon vessels instead of buying the whole, provided you feel sure that you can thus prevent their being fitted out by the rebels.

You may also be obliged to hold your title to all the vessels by a lien. Our main object is to prevent the rebels using these vessels, rather than the expectation of getting much valuable service from the vessels at present.

You will use your discretion as to how long you will pursue this experiment, and will relinquish it whenever you think no further good likely to come of it, or when directed by the Navy Department.

You will have letters of introduction to the consuls at Liverpool and London, and will get every information from them, but will finally use your own judgment upon the merits of each case.

Gideon Welles, Secretary.

J. M. F.

W. H. A.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 5-7

Salmon P. Chase to John M. Forbes, March 14, 1863

New York, March 14, 1863.

To John M. Forbes, Boston, Mass.:

Oblige me by coming to New York, Fifth Avenue Hotel, to-night. I desire to confer with you on important business immediately. Answer.

S. P. Chase.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 4

John M. Forbes to Congressman Charles B. Sedgwick, February 16, 1863

You have piped and I have not danced; you have called and I have not come, though my trunk has been packed for ten days. Now I am busy, besides the Second Cavalry, in raising a negro regiment (see circular), also in raising a Union Club, and in various other little ways; but the Second Massachusetts and its young captain will not get off for some six weeks yet (probably), and if you think I can do any good, by coming on, towards pushing up members for any of the great measures of the session, such as I regard the Missouri bill.¹ I will come almost any day upon getting a telegram or letter from you.

_______________

¹ Abolishing slavery in Missouri and compensating loyal owners.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 2, p. 1-2