Diary of William Howard Russell: April 8, 1861

How it does rain! Last night there were torrents of water in the streets literally a foot deep. It still runs in muddy whirling streams through the channels, and the rain is falling incessantly from a dull leaden sky. The air is warm and clammy. There are all kind of rumors abroad, and the barbers' shops shook with “shaves” this morning. Sumter, of course, was the main topic. Some reported that the President had promised the Southern Commissioners, through their friend Mr. Campbell, Judge of the Supreme Court, not to use force in respect to Pickens or Sumter. I wrote to Mr. Seward, to ask him if he could enable me to make any definite statement on these important matters. The Southerners are alarmed at the accounts they have received of great activity and preparations in the Brooklyn and Boston navy yards, and declare that “treachery” is meant. I find myself quite incapable of comprehending their position.How can the United States Government be guilty of  “treachery” toward subjects of States which are preparing to assert their independence, unless that Government has been guilty of falsehood or admitted the justice of the decision to which the States had arrived?

As soon as I had finished my letters, I drove over to the Smithsonian Institute, and was most kindly received by Professor Henry, who took me through the library and museum, and introduced me to Professor Baird, who is great in natural history, and more particularly in ornithology. I promised the professors some skins of Himalayan pheasants, as an addition to the collection. In the library we were presented to two very fine and lively rock snakes, or pythons, I believe, some six feet long or more, which moved about with much grace and agility, putting out their forked tongues and hissing sharply when seized by the hand or menaced with a stick. I was told that some persons doubted if serpents hissed; I can answer for it that rock snakes do most audibly. They are not venomous, but their teeth are sharp and needle like. The eye is bright and glistening; the red forked tongue, when protruded, has a rapid vibratory motion, as if it were moved by the muscles which produce the quivering hissing noise. I was much interested by Professor Henry's remarks on the large map of the continent of North America in his study: he pointed out the climatic conditions which determined the use, profits, and necessity of slave labor, and argued that the vast increase of population anticipated in the valley of the Mississippi, and the prophecies of imperial greatness attached to it, were fallacious. He seems to be of opinion that most of the good land of America is already cultivated, and that the crops which it produces tend to exhaust it, so as to compel the cultivators eventually to let it go fallow or to use manure. The fact is, that the influence of the great mountain-chain in the west, which intercepts all the rain on the Pacific side, causes an immense extent of country between the eastern slope of the chain and the Mississippi, as well as the district west of Minnesota, to be perfectly dry and uninhabitable; and, as far as we know, it is as worthless as a moor, except for the pasturage of wild cattle and the like.

On returning to my hotel, I found a note from Mr. Seward, asking me to visit him at nine o'clock. On going to his house, I was shown to the drawing-room, and found there only the Secretary of State, his son, and Mrs. Seward. I made a parti carré for a friendly rubber of whist, and Mr. Seward, who was my partner, talked as he played, so that the score of the game was not favorable. But his talk was very interesting. “All the preparations of which you hear mean this only. The Government, finding the property of the State and Federal forts neglected and left without protection, are determined to take steps to relieve them from that neglect, and to protect them. But we are determined in doing so to make no aggression. The President's inaugural clearly shadows out our policy. We will not go beyond it — we have no intention of doing so — nor will we withdraw from it.” After a time Mr. Seward put down his cards, and told his son to go for a portfolio which he would find in a drawer of his table. Mrs. Seward lighted the drop light of the gas, and on her husband's return with the paper left the room. The Secretary then lit his cigar, gave one to me, and proceeded to read slowly and with marked emphasis, a very long, strong, and able despatch, which he told me was to be read by Mr. Adams, the American Minister in London, to Lord John Russell. It struck me that the tone of the paper was hostile, that there was an undercurrent of menace through it, and that it contained insinuations that Great Britain would interfere to split up the Republic, if she could, and was pleased at the prospect of the dangers which threatened it.

At all the stronger passages Mr. Seward raised his voice, and made a pause at their conclusion as if to challenge remark or approval. At length I could not help saying, that the despatch would, no doubt, have an excellent effect when it came to light in Congress, and that the Americans would think highly of the writer; but I ventured to express an opinion that it would not be quite so acceptable to the Government and people of Great Britain. This Mr. Seward, as an American statesman, had a right to make but a secondary consideration. By affecting to regard Secession as a mere political heresy which can be easily confuted, and by forbidding foreign countries alluding to it, Mr. Seward thinks he can establish the supremacy of his own Government, and at the same time gratify the vanity of the people. Even war with us may not be out of the list of those means which would be available for re-fusing the broken union into a mass once more. However, the Secretary is quite confident in what he calls “reaction.” “When the Southern States,” he says, “see that we mean them no wrong — that we intend no violence to persons, rights, or things — that the Federal Government seeks only to fulfil obligations imposed on it in respect to the national property, they will see their mistake, and one after another they will come back into the union.” Mr. Seward anticipates this process will at once begin, and that Secession will all be done and over in three months — at least, so he says. It was after midnight ere our conversation was over, much of which of course I cannot mention in these pages.

SOURCE: William Howard Russell, My Diary North and South, p. 68-71

John Lothrop Motley to Anna Lothrop Motley, September 22, 1861

East Sheen, September 22, 1861.

My Dearest Mother: I am writing you a little note again. I can do no more until such time as we shall be settled at Vienna. We came down here last evening to spend Sunday with your old friends Mr. and Mrs. Bates. He is the same excellent, kindly old gentleman he always was, and is as stanch an American and as firm a believer in the ultimate success of our cause as if he had never left Boston.

. . . I have lost no time since I have been in England, for almost every day I have had interesting conversations with men connected with the government or engaged in public affairs.

There will be no foreign interference, certainly none from England, unless we be utterly defeated in our present struggle. We spent a few days with our friends the De Greys in Yorkshire. During my visit I went up to the north of Scotland to pass a couple of days with Lord John Russell at Abergeldie. It is an old Scotch castle, which formerly belonged to a family of Gordon of Abergeldie. The country is wild and pretty about it, with mountains clothed in purple heather all round, the Dee winding its way through a pleasant valley, and the misty heights of Lochnagar, sung by Byron in his younger days, crowning the scene whenever the clouds permit that famous summit to be visible.

I was received with the greatest kindness. There were no visitors at the house, for both Lord and Lady Russell are the most domestic people in the world, and are glad to escape from the great whirl of London society as much as they can. In the afternoons we went with the children out in the woods, making fires, boiling a kettle, and making tea al fresco with water from the Dee, which, by the way, is rather coffee-colored, and ascending hills to get peeps of the prospects.

Most of my time, however, was spent in long and full conversations tete-a-tete with Lord John (it is impossible to call him by his new title of Earl Russell).

The cotton-manufacturers are straining every nerve to supply themselves with cotton from India and other sources. But it seems rather a desperate attempt to break up the Southern monopoly, however galling it is to them.

I can only repeat, everything depends upon ourselves, upon what we do. There are a few papers, like the “Daily News,” the “Star,” and the “Spectator,” which sustain our cause with cordiality, vigor, and talent.

The real secret of the exultation which manifests itself in the “Times” and other organs over our troubles and disasters is their hatred not to America so much as to democracy in England. We shall be let alone long enough for us to put down this mutiny if we are ever going to do it. And I firmly believe it will be done in a reasonable time, and I tell everybody here that the great Republic will rise from the conflict stronger than ever, and will live to plague them many a long year.

. . . We shall probably remain another week in London, for I have not yet seen Lord Palmerston, whom I am most anxious to have some talk with, and he is expected to-morrow in London. While I was stopping with Lord John, the queen sent to intimate that she would be pleased if I would make a visit at Balmoral, which is their Highland home, about one and a half miles from Abergeldie. Accordingly, Lord John went over with me in his carriage. We were received entirely without ceremony by the Prince Consort (we were all dressed in the plainest morning costumes), who conversed very pleasantly with us, and I must say there was never more got out of the weather than we managed to extract from it on this occasion. After we had been talking some twenty minutes the door opened, and her Majesty, in a plain black gown, walked quietly into the room, and I was presented with the least possible ceremony by the Prince Consort. I had never seen her before, but the little photographs in every shop-window of Boston or London give you an exact representation of her.

They are so faithful that I do not feel that I know her appearance now better than I did before. Her voice is very agreeable and her smile pleasant. She received me very politely, said something friendly about my works, and then alluded with interest to the great pleasure which the Prince of Wales had experienced in his visit to America.

The Prince Consort spoke with great animation on the same subject. There is not much more to be said in regard to the interview. I thought that the sending for me was intended as a compliment to the United States, and a mark of respect to one of its representatives.

Most affectionately your son,

J. L. M.

SOURCE: George William Curtis, editor, The Correspondence of John Lothrop Motley in Two Volumes, Library Edition, Volume 2, p. 204-7

John Lothrop Motley to Anna Lothrop Motley, September 5, 1861

Wharfside, Yorkshire,

September 5, 1861.

My Dearest Mother: I have but time to write you a brief note. When I get to Vienna I mean to be a good correspondent. Until that time I shall be very much hurried. My voyage was a singularly pleasant one — no bad weather, smooth seas, and fair winds, the whole way. We reached Liverpool in exactly eleven days. I was obliged to stop all Sunday in that not very fascinating city. I parted from Mackintosh that evening, who went to Tenby in Pembrokeshire, and from Mr. Blake, who was to stop a few days in Liverpool. I found by telegram that Mary and Lily were staying with Mr. Monckton Millies in Yorkshire, so I went there, after passing one day in London. I afterward dined with the Adamses.

I do not think there is any present intention here of interfering with our blockade, or any wish, which is the same thing, of going to war in order to establish the Southern Confederacy and get their cotton crop. I think they will try to rub on through next year, unless the cotton famine should be very great, and the consequent disturbances very alarming.

I passed one day at Fryston Hall, Milnes's beautiful place in Yorkshire, where I had a delightful meeting with Mary and Lily. I have not yet seen dear little Susie, who is at Cromer with her governess, and you may be sure that I missed the dear face of my precious Mary. I hope she is enjoying herself, and that you will be as fond of her as you used to be. It was too bad that we should have missed each other by a single day.

We have been spending two or three days since leaving Fryston with Mr. Forster, M. P. for Bradford, a gentleman whom you have often heard me speak of as the warmest and most intelligent friend that America possesses in England. It is very agreeable for me to combine business with pleasure in my visit to him. He was to answer Gregory, the champion of the South, and will do so when the question of Southern recognition comes up, and my conversations with him have been very satisfactory. He disbelieves in any attempt to break the blockade, provided it is efficient.

We go to-morrow to our friends the De Greys for a week's visit. Lord de Grey is a warm friend of the North. During that week I expect to run up to Scotland for a day's visit to Lord John Russell. We shall then go to London.

I shall write another little note very soon. God bless you and preserve your health, my dearest mother. Give my love to my father and to my little Mary, and to all the family great and small.

Ever your affectionate son,

J. L. M.

SOURCE: George William Curtis, editor, The Correspondence of John Lothrop Motley in Two Volumes, Library Edition, Volume 2, p. 202-4

The Duke of Argyll to Mary Benjamin Motley, August 20, 1861

Inveraray, August 20, 1861.

My Dear Mrs. Motley: Many thanks for the inclosed. You need not apologize for sending me letters containing details. All that I have seen in your husband's letters tends to increase our warm esteem and regard for him. I was sure he would feel the Manassas affair very keenly, and we feel much for him. It seems certain that the defeat was made far worse by the exaggeration of the press, though Russell's account in the "Times" is so far confirmatory of the papers. But Russell never reached the real front of the Federal line, and consequently saw nothing of the troops that behaved well.

I think your husband's argument against Lord Russell's advice (at least as that advice is quoted) is excellent. It does seem probable that to have allowed secession without a fight would have led to the complete disintegration of the Northern States.

I fear you have now before you a long war. It is clear that a regular trained army must be formed before the subjugation of the South can be rendered possible, and I confess I am not so hopeful of the result as I once was.

You may set Mr. Motley's mind at rest, I think, as regards any possibility of our interfering — provided, of course, the contest is carried on with a due regard to the law of nations and the rights of neutrals. But we have been in some alarm lest the government were about to adopt measures which that law does not recognize. I hope that danger also has passed away.

May I ask you to direct the inclosed letter to your husband?

I am, my dear Mrs. Motley,

Yours very sincerely,

Argyll.

SOURCE: George William Curtis, editor, The Correspondence of John Lothrop Motley in Two Volumes, Library Edition, Volume 2, p. 200-1

Edward Everett to Charles Francis Adams Sr., August 20, 1861

BosToN, 20 August, 1861.

MY DEAR SIR, - I had great pleasure in receiving your letter of the 26th July, and in your favorable opinion of my oration, which has also been kindly spoken of here.¹

You informed me some time ago that Lord John – no longer Lord John² — had read you a part of my letter to him of the 29th of May. I have thought you might like to see his answer, of which I accordingly send you a copy. I also venture to place under cover to you my reply to him, unsealed, should you be inclined to read it. You will be pleased before sending it, to seal it with some indifferent seal. I do not think I can add anything, as to the progress of the war, beyond what the papers will tell you. The Secretary of the Treasury has made satisfactory arrangements for the great loan. The Boston banks take at once ten millions. Some significant remarks were made at a meeting of the Presidents of our Banks, by Mr. Wm. Gray, to the effect that the country desires a united and efficient cabinet; and Mr. Gray, W. T. Andrews and another gentleman were chosen a committee to make this suggestion formally to the President. It was supposed to be aimed at General Cameron and Mr. Welles. A rather unpleasant impression was produced on the public mind yesterday, by the call of the Secretary of War, to have all the volunteers, accepted either by the Department or the State Governments, hastened on to Washington, with or without equipments and arms.

We are so unaccustomed to war, that every little incident, and especially every reverse tells upon the public mind, far beyond its importance, and the pulse of the community rises and falls, like the mercury in the thermometer.

Our newspapers are filled with the absurdest suggestions, about the unfriendly interference of England and France. But I am confident, that before the next crops of cotton and tobacco are ready for shipment, the Southern Ports will be so effectually blockaded, as to put any such interference out of the question. . . .

EDWARD EVERETT.

_______________

¹ Probably the address on “The Questions of the Day,” delivered in New York, July 4, 1861, and printed in Orations and Speeches, IV. 345.

² Lord John Russell had been raised to the peerage, as Earl Russell, in July, 1861, the preceding month.

SOURCE: Massachusetts Historical Society, Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, Volume 45: October 1911 – June 1912, November 1911 Meeting, p. 76-7

Lord John Russell to Edward Everett, July 12, 1861

PEMBROKE LODGE, July 12, 1861.

MY DEAR MR. EVERETT, – I have hitherto delayed answering your letter of the 28th of May, in hopes that a better feeling, and I must say a juster feeling towards us might spring up in the United States. I am not sure that this is the case, but I am told there has been a lull. In the interval before a fresh storm arises, I will write a few lines as to our position. I shall say little as to yours; I respect the unanimous feeling of the North, and still more the resolution not to permit the extension of slavery which led to the election of President Lincoln. But with regard to our own course, I must say something more. There were according to your account 8 millions of freemen in the Slave States. Of these millions upwards of five have been for sometime in open revolt against the President and Congress of the United States. It is not our practice to treat five millions of freemen as pirates, and to hang their sailors if they stop our merchantmen. But unless we meant to treat them as pirates and to hang them we could not deny them belligerent rights. This is what you and we did in the case of the South American Colonies of Spain. Your own President and Courts of Law decided this question in the case of Venezuela. Your press has studiously confused the case by calling the allowance of belligerent rights by the name of recognition. But you must well know the difference. It seems to me however that you have expected us to discourage the South. How this was to be done, except by waging war against them I am at a loss to imagine. I must confess likewise that I can see no good likely to arise from the present contest. If on the 4th of March you had allowed the Confederate States to go out from among you, you could have prevented the extension of Slavery and confined it to the slaveholding States. But if I understand your Constitution aright you cannot do more in case of successful war, if you have to adhere to its provisions and to keep faith with those states and parts of states where slavery still exists which have not quitted the Union.

I regret the Morrill Tariff and hope it will be repealed. But the exclusion of our manufactures from your markets was surely an odd way of conciliating our good will.

I thank you for your condolence on the death of my brother. It is a grievous loss to me, after half a century of brotherly affection. I remain,

Yours faithfully,

J. RUSSELL.

SOURCE: Massachusetts Historical Society, Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, Volume 45: October 1911 – June 1912, November 1911 Meeting, p. 77-8

John Lothrop Motley to Mary Benjamin Motley, Monday, July 28, 1861

Nahant, July 28, 1861.

My Dearest Mary: I have not written to Forster, because I have taken it for granted that he sees my letters to you, and I could only write the same facts and the same conclusions to other correspondents. Nevertheless, I wish very much to write a line to him and to Milnes, and especially to Lord de Grey, and shall certainly do so within a very short time. I was delighted to hear of young Ridley's triumphs, and sincerely sympathize in the joy of Lord and Lady Wensleydale, to whom pray give my kindest remembrance and congratulations. I am very much obliged to Lord John Russell for his kindness in sending me a copy of his note to Mr. Everett. I have thought very often of writing myself to Lord John, and have abstained because I knew that his time was so thoroughly occupied as to leave him little leisure for unofficial correspondence, and because I knew also that his despatches from Washington and his conversations with Mr. Adams must place him entirely in possession of all the facts of this great argument, and I have not the vanity to suppose that any commentary which I could make would alter the conclusion of a mind so powerful and experienced as his.

“If on the 4th of March,” he says to Mr. Everett, “you had allowed the Confederate States to go out from among you, you could have prevented the extension of slavery and confined it to the slave-holding States.” But, unfortunately, had this permission been given, there would have been no “you” left. The existence of this government consists in its unity. Once admit the principle of secession, and it has ceased to be; there is no authority then left either to prevent the extension of slavery, or to protect the life or property of a single individual on our share of the continent. Permit the destruction of the great law which has been supreme ever since we were a nation, and any other law may be violated at will. We have no government but this one, since we were dependent and then insurgent colonies. Take away that, and you take away our all. This is not merely the most logical of theories, but the most unquestionable of facts. This great struggle is one between law and anarchy. The slaveholders mutiny against all government on this continent, because it has been irrevocably decided no further to extend slavery. Peaceful acquiescence in the withdrawal of the seven cotton States would have been followed by the secession of the remaining eight slave States, and probably by the border free States. Pennsylvania would have set up for itself. There would probably have been an attempt at a Western Confederacy, and the city of New York had already announced its intention of organizing itself into a free town, and was studying the constitutions of Frankfort and Hamburg.

In short, we had our choice to submit at once to dismemberment and national extinction at the command of the slavery oligarchy which has governed us for forty years, or to fight for our life. The war forced upon us by the slaveholders has at last been accepted, and it is amazing to me that its inevitable character and the absolute justice of our cause do not carry conviction to every unprejudiced mind. Those, of course, who believe with the Confederates that slavery is a blessing, and the most fitting corner-stone of a political edifice, will sympathize with their cause. But those who believe it to be a curse should, I think, sympathize with us, who, while circumscribing its limits and dethroning it as a political power, are endeavoring to maintain the empire of the American Constitution and the English common law over this great continent. This movement in which we now engage, and which Jefferson Davis thinks so ridiculous, is to me one of the most noble spectacles which I remember in history. Twenty millions of people have turned out as a great posse comitatus to enforce the laws over a mob of two or three millions, — not more, — led on by two or three dozen accomplished, daring, and reckless desperados. This is the way history will record this transaction, be the issue what it may; and if we had been so base as to consent to our national death without striking a blow, our epitaph would have been more inglorious than I hope it may prove to be.

Don't be too much cast down about Bull Run. In a military point of view it is of no very great significance. We have lost, perhaps, at the utmost, 1000 men, 2000 muskets, and a dozen cannon or so. There was a panic, it is true, and we feel ashamed, awfully mortified; but our men had fought four or five hours without flinching, against concealed batteries, at the cannon's mouth, under a blazing July Virginia sun, taking battery after battery, till they were exhausted with thirst, and their tongues were hanging out of their mouths. It was physically impossible for these advanced troops to fight longer, and the reserves were never brought up. So far I only say what is undisputed. The blame for the transaction cannot be fairly assigned till we get official accounts. As for the affair itself, the defeat was a foregone conclusion. If you read again the earlier part of my last letter, you will see that I anticipated, as did we all, that the grand attack on Manassas was to be made with McClellan's column, Patterson's and McDowell's combined. This would have given about 125,000 men. Instead of this, McDowell's advance with some 50,000 men, not onethird part of which were engaged, while the rebels had 100,000 within immediate reach of the scene of action. You will also see by the revelations made in Congress and in the New York “Times” that this has been purely a politician's battle. It is in a political point of view, not a military, that the recent disaster is most deplorable. The rebellion has of course gained credit by this repulse of our troops.

As for the Civil War, nothing could have averted it. It is the result of the forty years' aggression of the slavery power. Lincoln's election was a vote by a majority of every free State that slavery should go no further, and then the South dissolved the Union. Suppose we had acknowledged the Confederacy, there would have been war all the same. Whether we are called two confederacies or one, the question of slavery in the Territories has got to be settled by war, and so has the possession of the Mississippi and the Gulf of Mexico. Even on the impossible theory that the United States continued to exist as a government after submitting without a struggle to dismemberment, still it would be obliged to fight for the rights of its four or five million of tonnage to navigate American waters.

In brief, the period has arrived for us, as it has often arrived for other commonwealths in history, when we must fight for national existence, or agree to be extinguished peaceably. I am not very desponding, although the present is gloomy. Perhaps the day will come ere long when we shall all of us, not absolutely incapacitated by age or sickness, be obliged to shoulder our rifles as privates in the ranks. At present there seems no lack of men. The reverse of last Sunday has excited the enthusiasm afresh, and the government receives new regiments faster than it can provide for them. As I am not fit to be an officer, being utterly without military talent or training, and as it is now decided that such responsible offices shall not be conferred except upon those who can bear an examination by competent military authorities, I am obliged to regret my want of early education in the only pursuit which is now useful. As to going abroad and immersing myself again in the sixteenth century, it is simply an impossibility. I can think of nothing but American affairs, and should be almost ashamed if it were otherwise.

A grim winter is before us. Gather your rosebuds while you may, is my advice to you, and engage your passages not before October. But having said this, I give you carte blanche, and let me know your decision when made. The war is to be a long one. We have no idea of giving in, and no doubt of ultimate triumph. Our disaster is nothing; our disgrace is great, and it must be long before it can be retrieved, because General Scott will now be free to pursue the deliberate plan which he had marked out when he was compelled by outside pressure to precipitate his raw levies against an overwhelming superiority of rebels in a fortified position.

A few days ago I went over to Quincy by appointment to dine with old Mr. Quincy. The dinner was very pleasant. Edmund was there, and very agreeable, with Professor Gould, and Mr. Waterston, and the ladies. The old gentleman, now in his ninetieth year, is straight as an arrow, with thirty-two beautiful teeth, every one his own, and was as genial and cordial as possible. He talked most agreeably on all the topics of the day, and after dinner discussed the political question in all its bearings with much acumen and with plenty of interesting historical reminiscences. He was much pleased with the messages I delivered to him from Lord Lyndhurst, and desired in return that I should transmit his most cordial and respectful regards. Please add mine to his, as well as to Lady Lyndhurst. when you have the privilege of seeing them. I was very sorry not to be able to accept young Mr. Adams's offered hospitality, but I had made arrangements to return to Nahant that night. Pray give my best regards to Mr. and Mrs. Adams. Last Saturday I went to Cambridge and visited Longfellow. He was in bed, with both hands tied up; but his burns are recovering, and his face will not be scarred, and he will not lose the use of either hand. He was serene and resigned, but dreaded going down-stairs into the desolate house. His children were going in and out of the room. He spoke of his wife, and narrated the whole tragedy very gently, and without any paroxysms of grief, although it was obvious that he felt himself a changed man. Holmes came in. We talked of general matters, and Longfellow was interested to listen to and speak of the news of the day and of the all-absorbing topic of the war.

The weather has been almost cloudless for the seven weeks that I have been at home — one blaze of sunshine. But the drought is getting to be alarming. It has hardly rained a drop since the first week in June. Fortunately, the charm seems now broken, and to-day there have been some refreshing showers, with a prospect of more. I dined on Saturday with Holmes. He is as charming, witty, and sympathetic as ever. I wish I could send you something better than this, but unless I should go to Washington again I don't see what I can write now that is worth reading. To-morrow I dine here with Wharton, who is unchanged, and desires his remembrances to you; and next day I dine with Lowell at Cambridge, where I hope to find Hawthorne, Holmes, and others. . . .

P. S.  Tell Tom Brown, with my kindest regards, that every one is reading him here with delight, and the dedication is especially grateful to our feelings. The Boston edition (I wish he had the copyright) has an uncommonly good likeness of him.

As for Wadsworth, I heard from several sources of his energy and pluck. Wharton has been in my room since I began this note. He had a letter from his sister, in which she says John Vennes, a servant (an Englishman) of theirs, who enlisted in the Sixty-ninth New York, had written to say that his master was the bravest of the brave, and that he was very proud of him as he saw him without his hat, and revolver in hand, riding about and encouraging the troops at the last moment to make a stand. I had a letter from Colonel Gordon the other day. He is at Harper's Ferry, and not at all discouraged by the results of the battle, in which of course he had no part. He says: “Our late check, it seems to me, is almost a victory. From seven to four did our brave troops face that deadly fire of artillery and infantry delivered from breastworks and hidden embrasures. Over and over again did they roll back the greatly outnumbering columns of the enemy, until at last, when a foolish panic seized them, they left the enemy in such a condition that he could not pursue them more than a mile and a half; so that one entire battery, which they might have had for the taking, was left all night on the field and finally returned to us again. Many such victories would depopulate the South, and from the victors there is no sound of joy. In Charleston, Virginia, at Harper's Ferry, and at Martinsburg they mourn the loss of many of their sons. Fewer in numbers, we were more than their match, and will meet them again.'”

In estimating the importance of this affair as to its bearings on the future, it should, I think, be never forgotten that the panic, whatever was its mysterious cause, was not the result of any overpowering onset of the enemy. It did not begin with the troops engaged.

Here we are not discouraged. The three months' men are nearly all of them going back again. Congress has voted 500,000 men and 5,000,000 of dollars; has put on an income tax of three per cent., besides raising twenty or thirty millions extra on tea, coffee, sugar, and other hitherto untaxed articles; and government securities are now as high in the market as they were before the late battle. . . .

J. L. M.

SOURCE: George William Curtis, editor, The Correspondence of John Lothrop Motley in Two Volumes, Library Edition, Volume 2, p. 191-8

Colonel Charles Russell Lowell to Josephine Shaw, June 17, 1863

Camp Brightwood, June 17, 1863.

I wonder whether I shall ever be able to repay Cousin John in any way for his many kindnesses and for the many pleasant days and evenings I have passed at Milton and Naushon. Do you know that after Chancellorsville he wrote that he had more than half a mind to come home at once to help raise a new army, and, if necessary, to take a musket himself.¹ Perhaps one of these days I may have a chance to do something to gratify him. I wonder whether my theories about self-culture, &c., would ever have been modified so much, whether I should ever have seen what a necessary failure they lead to, had it not been for this war: now I feel every day more and more that a man has no right to himself at all, that indeed he can do nothing useful unless he recognize this clearly: nothing has helped me to see this last truth more than watching Mr. Forbes, — I think he is one of the most unselfish workers I ever knew of: it is painful here to see how sadly personal motives interfere with most of our officers' usefulness. After the war, how much there will be to do, —  and how little opportunity a fellow in the field has to prepare himself for the sort of doing that will be required: it makes me quite sad sometimes; but then I think of Cousin John and remember how much he always manages to do in every direction without any previous preparation, simply by pitching in honestly and entirely, — and I reflect that the great secret of doing, after all, is in seeing what is to be done. You know I’ll not be rash; but I wish I could feel as sure of doing my duty elsewhere as I am of doing it on the field of battle, — that is so little part of an officer's and patriot's duty now.

We are still at our old camp, and with less prospect of an immediate move than there was three days ago. Did I tell you poor Ruksh had been sent to a hospital in town, — to be turned out to pasture if he lives. I am going to town to pick out a Government horse to take his place as well as maybe.

_______________

¹ The subject of this letter's just praise was Mr. John Murray Forbes. He was not “Cousin John” to Lowell, but the bond of friendship and trust was so strong between the men that, as he was Miss Shaw's kinsman, Lowell liked to take advantage of the kinship, before his marriage should entitle him to it. Mr. Forbes was at this time in England, a private citizen sent by his government on a mission of vital importance. I copy from his Reminiscences, privately printed, the same story I have heard from his own lips: —

“All through the early months of 1863 the alarm in regard to the Laird ironclads had been increasing until, one Saturday morning in March, I received a telegram from Secretary Chase of the Treasury asking me to meet him the next morning, Sunday, in New York, where Secretary Welles of the Navy would also be. I was half ill, but could not refuse, and so met the two Secretaries and W. H. Aspinwall at the Fifth Avenue Hotel, as requested. They wished Aspinwall and me to go at once to England, and see what could be done in the way of selling United States bonds, and stopping the outfit of Confederate cruisers, and especially ironclads. We agreed to go, and we were asked to draw our own instructions, which we did, making them very general in their terms, the main features being a very wide discretion and the unrestricted use of ten million of 5-20s then just being prepared for issue to the public on this side, but not yet countersigned. It was thought necessary that I should embark by the Cunard steamer of Wednesday from Boston, and that Aspinwall should follow with the bonds in a week. I returned home that night, packed up my baggage, left my business, and started, as arranged on Wednesday, the 18th of March.  . . . Aspinwall agreed to bring one of his old steamship captains as an expert, to help us in our examination of the British shipyards, then reported to be swarming with the outfitting Rebel cruisers.” Mr. Forbes went to the Barings “and suggested, as a first want, that they should put at my disposal £500,000, for which they were to have perhaps $4,000,000 of 5-20S as security.” This required consideration. Mr. Joshua Bates, of the firm, “was the best of Americans, and he was always for the strongest measures. His consultation with Mr. Baring resulted in their handing me a bank-book with £500,000 at my credit, subject to cash draft; and so, when Aspinwall arrived, a week later, our finances were all right, and he deposited the 5-20S in Baring's vaults, part as security for the money, and the rest subject to our orders.” Mr. Forbes used every effort to show the English where “their sympathy was due, and that, as neutral, it was their duty to stop the sailing of the ironclads known to be built for the Confederacy.” The Society of Friends and the Peace Society were friendly, but cold; and, bad as things were, he wrote, “Bright, Cobden, W. E. Forster, the Duke of Argyle, and a few others were with us heartily and took bold ground in our cause; but, generally speaking, the aristocracy and the trading classes were solid against us. Gladstone . . . had not found out the merits of our cause, and Lord John Russell, called a liberal member of the Cabinet, was with official insolence sneering, even in a public speech, at what he called ‘the once United States.’” Mr. Forbes worked hard to quicken the sympathies of the Society of Friends. His coming was welcomed by our brave minister, Charles Francis Adams, whose task had become indeed anxious and heavy. The work of selling the 5-20s in England and on the Continent was pushed, the purchase of the most threatening ironclads, which had been contemplated, proved impracticable. Then Mr. Adams took the final step. On the 5th of September he wrote to Lord Russell: “At this moment, when one of the ironclad vessels is on the point of departure from this kingdom on a hostile errand against the United States, it would be superfluous for me to point out to your lordship that this is war.”

The answer (Sept. 8) was: “Instructions have been issued which will prevent the departure of these two ironclad vessels from Liverpool.”

SOURCE: Edward Waldo Emerson, Life and Letters of Charles Russell Lowell, p. 258-60, 424-6

Diary of Mary Boykin Chesnut: March 7, 1862

Mrs. Middleton was dolorous indeed. General Lee had warned the planters about Combahee, etc., that they must take care of themselves now; he could not do it. Confederate soldiers had committed some outrages on the plantations and officers had punished them promptly. She poured contempt upon Yancey's letter to Lord Russell.¹ It was the letter of a shopkeeper, not in the style of a statesman at all.

We called to see Mary McDuffie.² She asked Mary Preston what Doctor Boykin had said of her husband as we came along in the train. She heard it was something very complimentary. Mary P. tried to remember, and to repeat it all, to the joy of the other Mary, who liked to hear nice things about her husband.

Mary was amazed to hear of the list of applicants for promotion. One delicate-minded person accompanied his demand for advancement by a request for a written description of the Manassas battle; he had heard Colonel Chesnut give such a brilliant account of it in Governor Cobb's room.

The Merrimac³ business has come like a gleam of lightning illumining a dark scene. Our sky is black and lowering.

The Judge saw his little daughter at my window and he came up. He was very smooth and kind. It was really a delightful visit; not a disagreeable word was spoken. He abused no one whatever, for he never once spoke of any one but himself, and himself he praised without stint. He did not look at me once, though he spoke very kindly to me.

_______________

¹ Lord Russell was Foreign Secretary under the Palmerston administration of 1859 to 1865.

² Mary McDuffie was the second wife of Wade Hampton.

³ The Merrimac was formerly a 40-gun screw frigate of the United States Navy. In April, 1861, when the Norfolk Navy-yard was abandoned by the United States she was sunk. Her hull was afterward raised by the Confederates and she was reconstructed on new plans, and renamed the Virginia. On March 2, 1862, she destroyed the Congress, a sailing-ship of 50 guns, and the Cumberland, a sailing-ship of 30 guns, at Newport News. On March 7th she attacked the Minnesota, but was met by the Monitor and defeated in a memorable engagement. Many features of modern battle-ships have been derived from the Merrimac and Monitor.

SOURCE: Mary Boykin Chesnut, Edited by Isabella D. Martin and Myrta Lockett Avary, A Diary From Dixie, p. 136-7

John Lothrop Motley to Anna Lothrop Motley, February 9, 1861

31 Hertford Street,

February 9, 1861.

My Dearest Mother:  . . . I wrote you a long letter of eight pages yesterday, and then tossed it into the fire, because I found I had been talking of nothing but American politics. Although this is a subject which, as you may suppose, occupies my mind almost exclusively for the time being, yet you have enough of it at home. As before this letter reaches you it will perhaps be decided whether there is to be civil war, peaceable dissolution, or a patch-up, it is idle for me to express any opinions on the subject. I do little else but read American newspapers, and we wait with extreme anxiety to know whether the pro-slavery party will be able to break up the whole compact at its own caprice, to seize Washington and prevent by force of arms the inauguration of Lincoln. That event must necessarily be followed by civil war, I should think. Otherwise I suppose it may be avoided. But whatever be the result, it is now proved beyond all possibility of dispute that we never have had a government, and that the much eulogized Constitution of the United States never was a constitution at all, for the triumphant secession of the Southern States shows that we have only had a league or treaty among two or three dozen petty sovereignties, each of them insignificant in itself, but each having the power to break up the whole compact at its own caprice. Whether the separation takes place now, or whether there is a patch-up, there is no escaping the conclusion that a government proved to be incapable of protecting its own property and the honor of its own flag is no government at all and may fall to pieces at any moment. The pretense of a people governing itself, without the need of central force and a powerful army, is an exploded fallacy which can never be revived. If there is a compromise now, which seems possible enough, because the Northern States are likely to give way, as they invariably have done, to the bluster of the South, it will perhaps be the North which will next try the secession dodge, when we find ourselves engaged in a war with Spain for the possession of Cuba, or with England on account of the reopened African slave-trade, either of which events is in the immediate future.

But I find myself getting constantly into this maelstrom of American politics and must break off short.

I send you by this mail the London “Times” of the 7th of February. You will find there (in the parliamentary reports) a very interesting speech of Lord John Russell; but it will be the more interesting to you because it contains a very handsome compliment to me, and one that is very gratifying. I have not sent you the different papers in which my book has been reviewed, excepting three consecutive “Times,” which contain a long article. I suppose that “Littell's Living Age” reprints most of these notices. And the “Edinburgh,” “Quarterly,” and “Westminster Reviews” (in each of whose January numbers the work has been reviewed) are, I know, immediately reprinted. If you will let me know, however, what notices you have seen, I will send you the others in case you care for them.

We are going on rather quietly. We made pleasant country visits at Sidney Herbert's, Lord Palmerston's, Lady Stanhope's, Lord Ashburton's; but now the country season is pretty well over, Parliament opened, and the London season begun. I am hard at work in the State Paper Office every day, but it will be a good while before I can get to writing again.

I am most affectionately your son,

J. L. M.

SOURCE: George William Curtis, editor, The Correspondence of John Lothrop Motley in Two Volumes, Library Edition, Volume 2, p. 110-2

The Rebel Commissioners’ Appeal to England to Break the Blockade

From the English Blue-book.

MESSRS. YANCEY, ROST AND MANN TO EARL RUSSELL – (RECEIVED NOV. 30.)

London, Nov. 30, 1861

The undersigned have been instructed by the President of the Confederate States to communicate to Her Britannic Majesty’s Government copies of the list of vessels which have arrived and departed from the various ports of the confederate states since the proclamation of a blockade of those ports, up to the 20th of August last, by which it will be seen that up to that time more than 400 vessels had arrived and departed unmolested.

Since the date of these Reports, other and most important violations of the blockade are known to have occurred. The undersigned will instance a few of the most prominent and well-known:

The British steamer Bermuda went into the port of Savannah from Falmouth, England, on the 28th of September, and left that port for Havre on the 1st instant.

The Confederate States steamer Theodora left Charleston on or about the 1st of October, put to sea, and returned on the same day.

The same steamer Left Charleston on the 11th of October for Havana, proceeded to that port, took in cargo, and entered the port of Savannah about the 20th of the same month.

The Confederate ship Helen left the port of Charleston on the 2d of November, and arrived at Liverpool on the 25th inst.

Three ships, with cargoes, arrived from Havana in the Confederate port of Savannah, about the 24th of October.

On the 26th of October, the Confederate States steamer Nashville, left the port of Charleston, and arrived at Southampton on the 21st inst.

It was declared by the five Great European Powers, and the Conference of Paris, that “blockades, to be binding, must be effective – this is, maintained by a force sufficient really to prevent access to the enemy’s coast;” a principle long before sanctioned by the leading publicists, and now acknowledged by all civilized nations. When these resolutions were communicated to the Government of the United States, though that relating to privateers was rejected, (without a modification,) the principle there applied to blockades was unequivocally affirmed. On the 13th of August last, the Government of the Confederate States acknowledged the same principle, in its full extent by a Declaration of its Congress.

The undersigned confidently submit that the annexed list of vessels that have arrived at and cleared from the ports of the confederate States since the blockade was proclaimed by the Government of the United States, is conclusive evidence that this blockade has not been effective, and is therefore not binding.

May not the government of the Confederate States, then, fairly suggest that the five great powers owe it to their own consistency, to the rule of conduct so formally laid down for their guidance, and to the commercial world (so deeply interested), to make good their declaration, so solemnly and publicly made? Prepositions of such gravity, and emanating from sources so high, may fairly be considered as affecting the general business relations of human society, and as controlling, in a great degree, the calculations and arrangements of nations, so far as they are concerned in the rules thus laid down. Men have a right to presume that a law thus proclaimed will be universally maintained by those who have the power to do so, and who have taken it upon themselves to watch over its execution; nor will any suppose that particular States or cases would be exempted from the operation under the influence of partiality or favor. If, therefore, we can prove the blockade to have been ineffectual, we perhaps have a right to expect that the nations assenting to this Declaration of the Conference at Paris will not consider it to be binding. We are fortified in this expectation, not only by their own declarations, but by the nature of the interests affected by the blockade. So far, at least, it has been proved that the only certain and sufficient source of cotton supply has been found in the Confederate States. It is probably that there are more people without than within the Confederate States who derive their means of living from the various uses which are made of this important staple. A war, therefore, which shuts up this great source of supply from the general uses of mankind is directed as much against those who transport and manufacture cotton as against those who produce the raw material. Innocent parties who are thus affected my well insist that a right whose exercise operates so unfavorably on them shall only be used within the strictest limits of public law. Would it not be a movement more in consonance with the spirit of the age to insist that, among the many efficient means of waging war, this one should be excepted in deference to the general interests of mankind, so many of whom depend for their means of living upon a ready and easy access to the greatest and cheapest cotton market of the world? If for the general benefit of commerce, some of its great routes have been neutralized, so as to be unaffected by the chances of war, might not another interest of a greater and more world wide importance, claim at least so much consideration as to demand the benefit of every presumption in favor of its protection against all the chances of war save those which arise under the strictest rules of public war?

The undersigned submit to Her Majesty’s Government that a real neutrality calls for a rigid observance of international and municipal law in their application to both belligerents, and that a relaxation of the principles of public law in favor of one of the parties violating them, can be nothing more nor less than an injury done to that extent to the other side. Any considerations of sympathy for the embarrassed condition of the United States, if allowed to relax the application of those laws, must be justly considered as so much aid and comfort given to tem at the expense of the Confederate States, and the undersigned can not for a moment believe that such a policy can influence Her Majesty’s Government.

The undersigned have forborne to press these great questions upon the attention of Her Majesty’s Government with that assiduity which, perhaps, the interests of the Confederate States would have justified, knowing the great interests of Her Majesty’s Government in the preservation of friendly relations with both the belligerent Powers. They cannot but think that the facts connected with this nominal blockade, and the great interests of the neutral commerce of the world, imperatively demand that Her Majesty’s Government should take decisive action in declaring the blockade ineffective.

These views are affirmed as much in the general interests of mankind is in that of the Confederate States, who do not ask for assistance to enable them to maintain their independence against any Power which has yet assailed them.

The undersigned have been further instructed by their Government to communicate to that of Her Britannic Majesty a copy of resolutions adopted by the Congress of the Confederate States, Aug. 13, 1861. It is annexed as Inclosure [sic] No. 2.

The Undersigned, &c.
(Signed)

W. L. YANCEY,
P. H. ROST,
A. DUDLEY MANN.


EARL RUSSELL’S REPLY – COLD COMFORT.

Foreign Office, Dec. 7.

Lord RUSSELL presents his compliments to Mr. YANCEY, Mr. ROST and Mr. MANN He has had the honor to receive their letters and inclosures [sic] of the 27th and 30th of November; but in the present state of affairs he must decline to enter ino any official communication with them.

RUSSELL.

– Published in The New York Times, New York, New York, Thursday February 27, 1862

A Missouri Senator For The President’s Emancipation Policy

Senator Henderson, Of Missouri, made an excellent speech on Thursday last in support of the President’s emancipation resolution. After deprecating the disposition of some of the anti-slavery Senators to judge the border State men uncharitably, and expressing his belief that the various emancipation schemes introduced into Congress – especially Senator Sumner’s felo de se resolutions – were calculated to exasperate the Southern people and to prolong the struggle, he never the less sustained the President’s plan without qualification. He denied that it contained a threat of violent emancipation if the Border States refused to sell their slaves, such as radicals of both extremes professed to find in it, and [said:]

“This terrible revolution was brought about by Mr. Yancey and his confederates, by inflaming the Southern mind against the dangers of abolition, which they knew to be false. The drove the South to madness, to self-destruction; and in the letter of Messers. Yancey, Rost and Mann to Lord John Russell, they have erected a monument of infamy to these conspirators. They say, what all must now admit, that it was from no fear that slaves would be liberated that secession took place. The very party in power has proposed to guaranty slavery forever in the States of the South would but remain in the Union. Mr. Lincoln’s message proposes no freedom to the slave, but announces subjection of his owner to the will of the Union – in other words, to the will of the North. Even after the battle of Bull Run both branches of Congress at Washington passed resolutions that the war is only waged in order to enforce that (pro-slavery) constitution, and uphold the laws, (many of them pro-slavery,) and out of the hundred and seventy-two votes in the lower house, they received all but two, in the Senate all but one. As the army commenced its march, the commanding general issued an order that no slaves should be received into or allowed to follow the camp. Now, sir, what has been the result of this unnecessary strife upon my State. – In 1860 our slave population was 114,965, and although we stood as a peninsula in the great ocean of freesoil around us, I hazard the assertion to-day that no property was more secure in the State than slave property. It was so regarded by everybody. Our white population at the same period was upward of one million. – How is it now? I doubt whether there are fifty thousand slaves in the State. The secessionists charged that the brigade commanded by the Senator from Kansas, sitting near me, seized their slaves, and took them out of the State, and in order to retaliate, they as I learn, have taken hundreds of Union men in the state, to be delivered over to their injured friends. – In addition to this, many of the largest slave holders of the state, fearing the result of the war in the earlier stages of the rebellion hurried off their slaves to the South. Others again, waiting until they were surrounded by hostile armies, abandoned negroes and everything else for the protection of themselves, their wives and children.

“The true value of real and personal property in Missouri was in 1860, $501,214,398. Aside from the depreciation of value which no man can now estimate, and beyond the loss of slaves to which I have referred, I think it is safe to say that ten percentum of this vast amount of property has been destroyed and forever lost to the owners in consequence of this war – an amount equal to the aggregate value of all slaves in the state at the commencement of hostilities. If I were to add to this the loss occasioned to the people of the State by the utter prostration of its agricultural, commercial and manufacturing interests for the last twelve months, I might add fifty millions more to the sum already named. Looking, then, to my own State, and I speak for it alone, I am not disposed to take issue with the President in regard to the future results of the war. I regard his expression as a prophecy, and not as a threat – a prophecy that I feel will be realized if this war continues. That it shall continue until the Union be restored, I have already expressed my wish in the amendment offered. Whether you adopt it or not, the great West will never be content until every mile of the Mississippi river from Anthony’s Falls to the Gulf of Mexico shall be under the jurisdiction of our government. Let the question be settled now. But the President negatives, positively negatives the construction given in the following language: ‘Such a proposition on the part of the general government sets up no claim or right by the Federal authority to interfere with slavery within State limits, referring, as it does, the absolute control of the subject in each case to the State and its people immediately interested. It is proposed as a matter of perfectly free choice with them.’

“In this view of the matter, sir, I am perfectly willing that the proposition go before the people of my State, without at present expressing an opinion as to what course they should pursue. It is a new pledge of faith by the representatives of the people that this vexed question shall be left with the people of each state. It comes not in the spirit of arrogance demanding conformity with the views of theirs, but with humility, acknowledging if slavery be an evil, it is a sin for which we are all responsible, and for the removal of which we are willing to come with practical benevolence. It means more than all this. It intimates to the States that the nation would prefer gradual to immediate emancipation, and that the measures no pending in congress looking to such results should be suppressed by one of conciliation and good will. If this spirit had been more largely cultivated in days gone by, we would not this day be forced to witness a ruined South and a deeply depressed North. Why, sir, ninety days of this war would pay for every slave at full value, in the States of Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, Delaware and the District of Columbia. Nine months of the expenditures of this strife would have purchased all the slaves in the States named, together with those in Arkansas, Tennessee, Mississippi and Louisiana, thus preserving the peace the whole of the Mississippi to the Gulf. Less than two years of these expenditures would have paid for every slave that treads the soil of the nation. If northern men had treasured these things and learned that kind words can accomplish more than wrath, and if southern men had resolved to look upon slavery as upon other questions of moral and political economy, and both had determined to examine this as all other subjects, in calmness, and deliberation, we would have been spared the evils that now oppress us.

– Published in the Burlington Weekly Hawk-Eye, Burlington, Iowa, Saturday, April 12, 1862