Diary of Henry Greville: June 28, 1861

London, Friday.—Bethell took the oaths yesterday and assumes the title of Westbury.

The Sultan is dead, and is succeeded by his brother, who is said to be a man of much energy, and very superior in all ways to his brother.

The Emperor Napoleon has recognised the King of Italy, but has made it to be understood that this 'recognition is not to be taken as an approval of the past policy of the Cabinet of Turin, or as an encouragement of enterprises of a nature to endanger the peace of Europe.' The French troops will occupy Rome as long as the interests which brought France there are not covered by guarantees. Ricasoli, in replying to this note, says, 'Our wish is to restore Rome to Italy without depriving the Church of any of its grandeur, or the Pope of his independence.' In the meantime His Holiness is ill, and his death may perhaps simplify matters.

There was a Drawing-room yesterday at which the Crown Princess and Prince of Prussia were present.

I have a letter from Fanny Kemble, who says the violence of the language against this country in consequence of our neutral attitude exceeds all bounds, and the nonsense talked upon the subject is quite incredible.

I went last night to Verdi's new opera, 'Un Ballo in Maschera,' which is dramatic and effective.

SOURCE: Alice Countess of Stratford, Leaves from the Diary of Henry Greville: 1857-1861, p. 385-6

Diary of Henry Greville: Tuesday, February 5, 1861

Yesterday the Emperor Napoleon opened his Parliament with one of those fine harangues we are now become accustomed to, and which may mean anything or nothing. The upshot of this speech is, that he will not go to war unless it happens to suit his purpose to do so. This is enveloped in fine blarney and plausibility, but is not calculated to remove the general distrust prevailing.

To-day the Queen opened Parliament. It was cold and gloomy, but the crowds in the streets were greater than I ever saw them.

The speech states that our foreign relations are amicable, and expresses the hope that the moderation of the Great Powers will prevent any interruption of the general peace. There is a paragraph upon American affairs, and great concern is expressed at the events which are so likely to affect the happiness and welfare of a people closely allied to us by descent, and closely connected with us by the most intimate and friendly relations. The interest felt by the Queen in the well-being of the United States is all the greater from the kind and cordial reception given by them to the Prince of Wales during his recent visit to the continent of America.

These are the salient points of the speech—a much simpler and more plain-spoken affair than that of our dear ally.

SOURCE: Alice Countess of Stratford, Leaves from the Diary of Henry Greville: 1857-1861, p. 346-7

Diary of Henry Greville: Saturday, April 20, 1861

There was an interesting debate last night in the House of Lords, brought on by Lord Ellenborough, on the Roman question, in which Clarendon and Lord Derby also took part. He asked whether our Government was engaged in any correspondence with the object of reconciling the spiritual independence of the See of Rome with the exercise of temporal sovereignty by the King of Italy within the Roman territory. He thought Rome was the fitting capital of a united Italy, and that the occupation by the French of that city precluded that unity. He then discussed the Venetian question, and though he admitted the right of Austria to maintain herself in Italy, by virtue of the Congress of Vienna, he considered the time was come when she should reconcile herself with the Italian people. Holding these views, however, he deprecated the interference of the Italians in Hungary. Lord Wodehouse replied that we were not in any correspondence on the Roman question, and that Her Majesty's Government considered it was neither becoming nor desirable for a Protestant country to take the initiative in the matter. The whole question depended upon the withdrawal of the French troops from Rome, and Her Majesty's Government had not disguised their opinion that it was desirable those troops should be withdrawn.

Clarendon thought Rome the proper capital, and believed the Emperor Napoleon to be sincerely desirous of withdrawing his troops whenever it would be safe for him to do so-both as regarded the Pope and his own position in France, where popular opinion was in favour of their remaining. Derby said much the same thing, but expressed his opinion that it would have been far better to establish a northern and southern kingdom of Italy, in which case Rome would have lain between the two countries and the solution of the difficulty would have been easy. As, however, there was only one kingdom, the desire to have Rome for their capital was quite natural; but it was a desire that created the greatest embarrassment.

Dined at Chorley's, met Mr. Brookfield, Holman Hunt the painter, and others, who talked much of Fechter and with great enthusiasm.

Bad news from America-Civil War imminent.

SOURCE: Alice Countess of Stratford, Leaves from the Diary of Henry Greville: 1857-1861, p. 369-70

Diary of John Beauchamp Jones: January 30, 1865

Bright and beautiful, but quite cold; skating in the basin, etc.

The departure of the commissioners has produced much speculation.

The enemy's fleet has gone, it is supposed to Sherman at Charleston.

No doubt the Government of the United States imagines the "rebellion" in articulo mortis, and supposes the reconstruction of the Union a very practicable thing, and the men selected as our commissioners may confirm the belief. They can do nothing, of course, if independence is the ultimatum given them.

Among the rumors now current, it is stated that the French Minister at Washington has demanded his passports. Mr. Lincoln's message, in December, certainly gave Napoleon grounds for a quarrel by ignoring his empire erected in Mexico.

Mr. Seddon still awaits his successor. He has removed Col. and Lieut -Col. Ruffin from office.

Mr. Bruce, M. C. from Kentucky, and brother-in-law to Mr. Seddon, is named as Commissary-General.

The President has vetoed another bill, granting the privilege to soldiers to receive papers free of postage, and the Senate has passed it again by a two-thirds vote. Thus the breach widens.

Some of our sensible men have strong hopes of peace immediately, on terms of alliance against European powers, and commercial advantages to the United States. I hope for even this for the sake of repose and independence, if we come off with honor. We owe nothing to any of the European governments. What has Blair been running backward and forward so often for between the two Presidents? Has it not been clearly stated that independence alone will content us? Blair must have understood this, and made it known to his President. Then what else but independence, on some terms, could be the basis for further conference? I believe our people would, for the sake of independence, agree to an alliance offensive and defensive with the United States, and agree to furnish an army of volunteers in the event of a war with France or England. The President has stigmatized the affected neutrality of those powers in one of his annual messages. Still, such a treaty would be unpopular after a term of peace with the United States. If the United States be upon the eve of war with France and England, or either of them, our commissioners abroad will soon have proposals from those governments, which would be accepted, if the United States did not act speedily.

SOURCE: John Beauchamp Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary at the Confederate States Capital, Volume 2, p. 403-4

Major-General Benjamin F. Butler to the Mayor and Gentlemen of the City Council of New Orleans, May 16, 1862

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE GULF,                  

New Orleans, May 16, 1862.

To the Mayor and Gentlemen of the City Council of New Orleans:

In the report of your official action, published in the Bee of the 16th instant, I find the following extracted resolution, with the action of part of your body thereon, viz:

The following preamble and resolution, offered by Mr. Stith, were read twice and adopted; the rules being suspended, were on motion sent to the assistant board. YEAS: Mr. De Labarre, Forstall, Huekins, Rodin, and Stith—5.

Whereas it has come to the knowledge of this council that for the first time in the history of this city a large fleet of the navy of France is about to visit New Orleans, of which fleet the Catina, now in our port, is the pioneer; this council bearing in grateful remembrance the many ties of amity and good feeling which unite the people of this city with those of France, to whose paternal protection New Orleans owes its foundation and early prosperity, and to whom it is especially grateful for the jealousy with which in the cession of the State it guaranteed all the rights of property, person, and religious freedom of its citizens: Be it

Resolved, That the freedom and hospitality of the city be tendered, through the commander of the Catina, to the French naval fleet during its sojourn in our port; and that a committee of five of this council be appointed, together with the mayor, to make such tender and such other arrangements as may be necessary to give effect to the same.

Messrs. Stith and Forstall were appointed on the committee mentioned in the foregoing resolution.

This action is an insult as well to the United States as to the friendly, powerful, and progressive nation toward whose officers it is directed. The offer of the freedom of a captured city by the captives would merit letters-patent for its novelty were there not doubts of its usefulness as an invention. The tender of its hospitalities by a government to which police duties and sanitary regulations only are intrusted is simply an invitation to the calaboose or the hospital. The United States authorities are the only ones here capable of dealing with amicable or unamicable nations, and will see to it that such acts of courtesy or assistance are extended to any armed vessel of the Emperor of France as shall testify the national, traditional, and hereditary feelings of grateful remembrance with which the United States Government and people appreciate the early aid of France and her many acts of friendly regard shown upon so many national and fitting occasions.

The action of the city council in this behalf must be reversed.

BENJ. F. BUTLER,              

Major-General, Commanding.

SOURCE: The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series I, Volume 15 (Serial No. 21), p. 427

Amedée Couturie to Major-General Benjamin F. Butler, May 16, 1862

NEW ORLEANS, May 16, 1862.

Maj. Gen. B. F. BUTLER, U.S. Army,

Commanding Department of the Gulf, at New Orleans:

SIR: Your official communication of the 14th instant I have received, and transmitted literal copies thereof to my Government through the usual channels.

In reading it I cannot but think that you have misunderstood the communication which I had the honor of addressing you on the 10th instant, and to which it purports to be an answer.

My communication recited a series of outrages upon my person, the dignity of consulate office, and of the flag of the Government which I have the honor of representing in this city; and informed you that as those acts would be brought to the knowledge of my Government I desired to know whether they were performed with your sanction or by your order. It has pleased you to say that so far as you can judge I have merited the treatment I have received, even if a little rough. I am therefore to infer that the acts brought to your notice received your sanction.

I shall leave it with my Government to direct my future course in consequence of those acts and to pronounce the use which I have made of my consular flag, and in the meanwhile I have to inform you that I have placed the interests of the subjects of His Majesty the King of the Netherlands, heretofore in my charge, under the charge and keeping of the consul of His Majesty the Emperor of the French in New Orleans. But I must be permitted, referring to my only intercourse with your subordinate and with yourself, to insist upon the fact that none of the property covered by my consular flag was claimed by me as my private property, and that I have never admitted anything in reference thereto.

You will find herewith inclosed a copy of an additional statement of facts, subsequent to my first communication, which statement has also been transmitted to my Government. You will perceive that the property which was removed from my consular office by the armed forces under your command, except the title papers and other objects specified in said additional statement of facts, had been received by me as a deposit from Mr. Edmund J. Forstall, a highly respectable citizen and merchant of New Orleans, for many years known as the agent of the banking-house of Hope & Co., of Amsterdam, for whom he was acting in the premises.

Such being the truth of the facts in reference to said property as represented to, and as believed and acted upon by me, I must and do hereby protest against the removal from my consular office of property belonging to and placed there for account of subjects of His Majesty the King of the Netherlands, against the acts of violence which preceded and the display of force which accompanied such removal, and against the violation of the privileges and immunities with which by the law of nations and the treaties of the United States I was invested in my official character.

I have the honor to be, respectfully, your obedient servant,

AM. COUTURIE,                 

Consul of the Netherlands.

SOURCE: The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series III, Volume 2 (Serial No. 123), p. 122-3

Diary of John Beauchamp Jones: November 25, 1863

We have an unintelligible dispatch from Gen. Bragg, saying he had, yesterday, a prolonged contest with the enemy for the possession of Lookout Mountain, during which one of his divisions suffered severely, and that the manoeuvring of the hostile army was for position. This was the purport, and the language, as well as I remember. There is no indication of the probable result—no intimation whether the position was gained. But the belief is general that Bragg will retreat, and that the enemy may, if he will, penetrate the heart of the South! To us it seems as if Bragg has been in a fog ever since the battle of the 20th of September. He refused to permit ——— to move on the enemy's left for nearly two months, and finally consented to it when the enemy had been reinforced by 20,000 from Meade, and by Sherman's army from Memphis, of 20,000, just when he could not spare a large detachment! In other words, lying inert before a defeated army, when concentrated; and dispersing his forces when the enemy was reinforced and concentrated! If disaster ensues, the government will suffer the terrible consequences, for it assumed the responsibility of retaining him in command when the whole country (as the press says) demanded his removal.

From letters received the last few days at the department, I perceive that the agents of the government are impressing everywhere—horses, wagons, hogs, cattle, grain, potatoes, etc. etc.—leaving the farmers only enough for their own subsistence. This will insure subsistence for the army, and I hope it will be a death-blow to speculation, as government pays less than one-fourth the prices demanded in market. Let the government next sell to non-producers, and every man of fighting age will repair to the field, and perhaps the invader may be driven back.

We have the speech of the French Emperor, which gives us no encouragement, but foreshadows war with Russia, and perhaps a general war in Europe.

We have rain again. This may drive the armies in Virginia into winter quarters, as the roads will be impracticable for artillery.

The next battle will be terrific; not many men on either side will be easily taken prisoners, as exchanges have ceased.

Dr. Powell brought us a bushel of meal to-day, and some persimmons.

SOURCE: John Beauchamp Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary at the Confederate States Capital, Volume 2, p. 104-5

George S. Denison to Salmon P. Chase, November 29, 1862

(Private)

New Orleans, November 29th, 1862.

Dear Sir: — I thank you for your kind letter of the 14th inst. Whenever it is deemed expedient to put another in the place now occupied by me, I should like to be made Surveyor, as you suggest.

Naturally it will be a little painful to occupy the second place in this Custom House where I have so long been first — which I cannot help regarding as, in some sort, created by myself in the midst of great difficulties and in the face of many obstacles — now that the great labor is done and the road is becoming smooth and easy. But that is of little moment and the President and yourself are the only proper judges of what is desirable and expedient.

I cannot recompense your constant kindness to me, except by endeavoring to deserve its continuance.

Now that it seems definitely settled that an old resident of New Orleans is to be made Collector, I can, with propriety, speak to you without reserve upon this, as I always have on all other subjects. In the organization and management of the Custom House, such satisfaction has been given here, that, I have no doubt, I could have secured the appointment of Collector for myself, had I employed the usual arts of office-seekers. Such a course would have been unworthy of myself and a betrayal of the confidence you placed in me — and therefore when prominent Union men offered to use their influence in my favor, their offers were declined.

Mr. Bullitt is an old resident of this City, and is well known here as an honest and kind gentleman — thoroughly loyal — and possessing pleasant social qualities. I have, however, frequently heard Union men express two objections to his appointment, of which the first was that he possessed hardly ordinary business capacity.

The second objection is as follows. Soon after the capture of the City, a few noble men undertook to arouse and organize the Union sentiment. Among these were Mr. Flanders, Judge Heistand, Judge Howell, Mr. Fernandez and others. It was not then a pleasant thing to be a Union man, nor a leader in such an undertaking. Their families were slighted and themselves isolated. They persevered — called meetings, made speeches — organized Union associations — Union home guards, etc. These men have borne the heat and burden of the day and have redeemed this City. The result of their efforts was apparent the other night at the great Union meeting at St. Charles Theater,¹ when the thousands of members of the numerous associations were cheering Abraham Lincoln and Gen. Butler. All this time Mr. Bullitt, instead of being here to help, was in Washington looking after the loaves and fishes — and found them. For thus, Mr. Bullitt's appointment is not popular. Mr. Bouligny has also been much blamed for pursuing the same course.

In the Union movement in this City I am sorry to say that Mr. Randell Hunt and Mr. Roselius have stood aloof — especially the former. On the other hand Mr. Durant, Mr. Flanders and Mr. Rozier have done all that men could do. Mr. Durant and Mr. Rosier [Rozier] are both natives of this State, and are regarded as two of the best lawyers in Louisiana. If Senators are appointed by Gov. Shepley, Mr. Durant will probably be one, and perhaps Mr. Rozier the other.

The election of Representatives to Congress occurs on the third December. Two will be elected — one from each of the two Congressional Districts in our possession. The 1st. Dist. includes the lower half of the City and the country on this side of the River down to the Gulf. The 2nd. Dist. includes the upper half of the City and the country above and the Lafourche. In this 2nd. Dist. the candidates are Mr. Durell, Dr. Cottman and Judge Morgan. I believe they are all good men, but I can form no opinion as to the probable results of the election.

In the lower (1st. Con. Dist.) the candidates are Mr. Bouligny and Mr. Flanders. Mr. Bouligny will have the whole Creole vote and but little more. This creole population is valuable only for their votes. They are half disloyal, but took the oath to avoid confiscation. They feel but little attachment to the Government, somewhat more to the Southern Confederacy — but most of all, to Napoleon III. Unfortunately this population is large in Bouligny's District.

Mr. Flanders is the candidate of the Union Association. He did not want to run but it was urged upon him. Politically Mr. F. is an Abolitionist, but not of the blood-thirsty kind. I hope for his election. The whole real Union sentiment is in his favor. If he goes to Washington, he will let a little daylight into the darkened minds of Pro-slavery Democrats.

As an evidence of the progress of ideas I mention a remarkable resolution passed unanimously by the Union Association recently, in the lower part of the City — which was to the effect — that all loyal men, of proper age, who had taken the oath of allegiance — should be allowed to vote at this coming election. This meant negroes. Members of the Association said that a black man, who was carrying a musket for the Gov't. deserved to vote — much more than secessionists who had sworn allegiance to save their property. It seems to me, that this is too much in advance of the times. The virtuous Seymour and Van Buren have a good deal to say about Radicals. What would they say of the Union men of the South? I will inform you of the result of the election, as soon as possible after it is decided.

The expedition to the salt works (spoken of in my last) failed. The Gunboats could not get up the Bayou, and the troops could not pass through the swamps. They will have to be taken from New Iberia.

The affairs of the Dep't. of the Gulf, are managed with entire honesty, so far as I can perceive. At any rate no trade of any kind with the enemy is permitted. The pressure for permission to renew the trade, has been very great. One man offerred me $50,000 cash, for permission to take salt across the Lake. A sack of salt was worth here $1.25 — across the Lake, $60. to $100. A thousand sacks would be worth $60,000, with which cotton could be bought for 10 cts. per pound and brought here and sold for 60 cts. So that one cargo would be a great fortune. Another man wanted to bring here several thousand bales cotton, but must take back stores. He would give me one fourth of all the cotton brought hither, and there were many other cases — but they make these offers with such skill that it is impossible to get any legal hold on them. I don't know how many offers would have been made, if I had been suspected to be of easy virtue. People here think if a man has a chance to make money, however dishonorably — that he will avail himself of it, of course. I again express the hope that no trade of any kind, with the enemy, will be authorized from Washington.

_______________

¹ On November 14 Military Governor Shepley issued a call for the election of members of Congress on December 3. This Union meeting was held on the 15th of November.

SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. Chase, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 333-6

Francis Lieber to Judge Thayer, March 23, 1864

New York, March 23, 1864.

. . . If you will pardon a purely conversational letter, I would take the liberty of asking you whether there is any truth in the statement that the question whether our Cabinet ministers ought to have a right to sit in either house, as the French ministers had under Louis Philippe, is assuming a somewhat practical character? I believe that a truly representative government requires that ministers should be on the spot, to be questioned and to defend the cabinet. You will remember the state of things at one period under General Jackson. Indeed, I think that in our system, in which the President is for four years as unassailable as a hereditary monarch, the presence of ministers in Congress is imperatively necessary. The English, who can change the administration by a vote of the Commons, are in this respect more republican. Mr. Clay, with whom I corresponded on the subject, was in favor of ministers having a seat. The topic ought to be gravely considered, and a thorough report should be made. Are you aware that Napoleon III., who has always pronounced himself strongly and officially against the responsibility of ministers as an impediment to good ruling (he means, of course, centralism), pointed on one occasion to the United States, where “the ministers are entirely amenable to the President and simply his servants, and where, nevertheless, a republic exists.” A Bonaparte inherently hates representative liberty.

SOURCE: Thomas Sergeant Perry, Editor, The Life and Letters of Francis Lieber, p. 344

John M. Forbes to Senator William P. Fessenden, February 13, 1862

Willard's Hotel, Washington,

February 13, 1862.

Mr. Gray has gone home not very well and rather discouraged. I gave him your message. . . .

Suppose the stain of bad faith hurts the eight hundred and fifty millions of bonds five per cent. by discrediting it at home, and keeping out of our reach the great reservoirs of European capital (which in my opinion is a very small estimate of the pecuniary damage), the nation loses by the operation five per cent. on eight hundred and fifty millions, say $42,500,000.

But this low and mean view of the case only discloses a small part of its mischief. We shall have the stain and irritation of repudiation of the many millions due to foreigners which we promised in specie and are to pay in paper, and if we are not successful during the few weeks for which time we purchase ease by this expedient, we may in consequence of it find such obstacles to our next financial move (beyond the one hundred and fifty millions) that the legal tender clause may terminate the war, a consummation which some of the bankers and others advocating it will not weep for!

I must say I shall consider it our financial Bull Run.

With our strong constitution we may get over this astounding quackery, but it is a trial I hope we may be spared.

On the other hand with Napoleon holding back from interference, with England reacting in our favor, with the navy pushing the war into the interior, and with Stanton waking up the army, and putting out a declaration of Independence of the Satanic Press, it only needs good Anglo-Saxon pluck in this the very pinch of the game of finance, to put us on firm ground.

The Senate bill, with the legal tender struck out, and with a good tax bill, will do this as surely as there is a sun in heaven.

I hope to get off this afternoon, having done my best against the monsters.

SOURCE: Sarah Forbes Hughes, Letters and Recollections of John Murray Forbes, Volume 1, p. 279-81

Diary of Mary Boykin Chesnut: August 13, 1861

Hon. Robert Barnwell says, “The Mercury's influence began this opposition to Jeff Davis before he had time to do wrong. They were offended, not with him so much as with the man who was put into what they considered Barnwell Rhett's rightful place. The latter had howled nullification and secession so long that when he found his ideas taken up by all the Confederate world, he felt he had a vested right to leadership.”

Jordan, Beauregard's aide, still writes to Mr. Chesnut that the mortality among the raw troops in that camp is fearful. Everybody seems to be doing all they can. Think of the British sick and wounded away off in the Crimea. Our people are only a half-day's journey by rail from Richmond. With a grateful heart I record the fact of reconciliation with the Wigfalls. They dined at the President's yesterday and the little Wigfall girls stayed all night.

Seward is fêting the outsiders, the cousin of the Emperor, Napoleon III., and Russell, of the omnipotent London Times.

SOURCE: Mary Boykin Chesnut, Edited by Isabella D. Martin and Myrta Lockett Avary, A Diary From Dixie, p. 104

Twenty five American trotters . . .

. . . says the Journal de Havre, have arrived at that port which were purchased for the imperial stables.  Prince Napoleon has selected five of them for his stud and five for the King of Italy.

– Published in The Burlington Weekly Hawk-Eye, Burlington, Iowa, Saturday, February 1, 1862, p. 2

The year 1861 was unlucky to the crowned heads . . .

. . . as Napoleon truly observed in his New Year’s day speech.  Prussia buried a King, the effete Sultan of Turkey sank into the grave, the Emperor of China was struck down, Portugal lost a youthful and noble sovereign.  The future historian of 1861 will not, as we hope, esteem it beneath his dignity to include a line of obituary for the dusky sovereigns of Dahomey and Madagascar.  An assassin’s had strove to take the life of the New King of Prussia and a crack brained Athenian enthusiast made an attempt of a similar nature upon the Queen of Greece.

– Published in The Burlington Weekly Hawk-Eye, Burlington, Iowa, Saturday, February 8, 1862, p. 2

Possibility of a Civil War in Germany

From the foreign papers it appears that the condition of affairs throughout the great Germanic Confederation, is, in many respects similar to that which existed here previous to the first act of Secession by a southern State.  The Confederation, which has a common Diet or Assembly, has heretofore consisted of the greater Teutonic Powers – Austria, Prussia, Bavaria, Saxony, Baden Baden, and some thirty-two inferior Dukedoms and Electorates – all, of course, monarchical in their form of government, and therefore, differing materially from the American States, but all represented in the Central Legislature, and all in some degree constitutional since 1849, and far more independent than the members of this Confederacy – each and all being free to make peace or war, within certain limits, uncontrolled by the Sister States.

This Band or League did not include other than the German possessions of Austria, and hence it was that in her struggles with the Hungarian and Italian rebellions, the latter Power has stood alone.  The frantic efforts made by the Viennese Cabinet to involve Prussia and all Germany in an alliance with her against Napoleon and Victor Emanuel during the recent memorable conflict in Northern Italy, must still dwell in the recollection of every reader.  Now Prussia and the group of states near to her have lately been distinguished from Austria and her Allies in Southern Germany, by progressive views and rapid improvements in consonance with the spirit of the age.  This advance has awakened the jealous apprehensions of all reactionary cabinets adhering to the old so-called “Wurzburg” Alliance and adroitly and secretly winning Saxony over to her views, Austria has put forward that power in the person of her minister of Foreign Affairs, Baron Von Buest, as a catspaw to propose the reconstruction of the Confederation in such a shape as to admit all of the Austrian Empire into it.  This proposition had already been ripened and approved by the Wurzburg Confederates, before Prussia was informed of it.  Then, suddenly, notes identical in meaning were sent in to her by Austria and all her accomplices proposing the new form, and inviting Prussia to join them, i. e., treating her as though she and her adherents, Baden, Saxe, Coburg, and a few other smaller States were out of the Confederation, or had seceded from it.  To yield would have been to recognize the supremacy of Austria, which will have a majority in the New Diet – to remain out is to invite the hostility of the coalition.  Hence the crisis!  Prussia, with dignity, declines the recognition of this new Wurzburg scheme, and is now menaced on all sides by the adherents of Austria.  The National Verein, an organization of the people extending throughout Germany, calls upon the Prussian King to throw himself into the arms of the progressive party, who have gained substantial victories in the elections and in the Prussian Chamber of Deputies.  As it was, civil war impends; but if Prussia goes with the Verein, the next steamer may bring us news of a Revolution. –{New York Sun.

– Published in The Burlington Weekly Hawk-Eye, Burlington, Iowa, Saturday, March 22, 1862, p. 3

A Democratic Prince – Exciting Scene In The French Senate

The liberal and even democratic tendencies of the Prince Napoleon are well known, but never has he given his views so unmistakably as in a debate in the French Senate on the 25th ult.  The debate was on the address to the emperor, and the remarks of the prince cause intense excitement among the nobles.  He said:

“I hope France will never be sorry for having surrounded my family with honors.  In any case, my spirit will be with my descendants no longer than they continue to deserve the love and confidence of this great nation.  This is how the emperor understood the hereditary succession.  And what happened subsequently?  When, after immense disasters, a ray of light seemed to break on France, and the emperor returned from the Isle of Elba, to overthrow the government of the Restoration, we know in what eloquent words he threw himself upon the nation, and identified himself with its interest, its honor, its glory.  And what cries did he hear as he advanced from the Mediterranean to Paris, carried on the arms of the people and the army?  “Down with the nobles!”  “Down with the emigrants!”  “Down with the traitors!”

The latter word “traitres” was generally mistaken for “Pretres,” and immense confusion immediately followed.  Some of the senators made taunting remarks, and some called the prince to order.  The prince refused to hear the call to order, however, and proceeded:

“Do you pretend to deprive me of the right to continue my speech?  I neither approve or disapprove; I cite the testimony of many historians.  In my opinion, the empire signifies the destruction of the treaties of 1815, within the limits of the force and the interest of France; it is the maintenance of the grand unity of Italy, in future our indispensable ally.  At home it is that order which has no more ardent defender than myself, combined with wise and serious liberties, foremost among them the liberty of the press; it is popular instruction diffused without limits, but not given by religious congregations; it is the well-being of the masses; it is the destruction of the bigotry of the middle ages which some would impose on us.”  And in reply to some remarks of the Marquis de la Rochsjacquelin, he continued: “For my part I say boldly that I have no fear for a government which is rooted in the hearts of the people; and while it remains true to the principles of nationalities abroad, and to the liberal and popular sentiment at home.  It may defy all, even the agitation of the clergy.  I tell the Marquis that our principles are different.  Neither of us is ashamed of his origin.  Our antecedents, our families are different. – Whereas his honorable ancestors fell on the battle fields of civil war under French arms, our fathers fell at Waterloo under English bullets.”

This again caused an immense sensation, and the Senate was adjourned in an uproar.  These remarks of the Prince Napoleon are significant and are regarded with joy by the French liberals.  Occupying the position he does, the prince must be considered as expressing to some degree at least the views of the emperor, and it is clear the latter is not unmindful or forgetful of the source from whence he received his power – the people.  And it is equally certain that the pampered aristocracy and the lazy church dignitaries are not henceforth to be the controlling element in French politics.  The general opinion at Paris is that the tendency of the debate what to consolidate the alliance between the government and the liberal or republican party.  The London Times the stickler for the divine rights of kings, and the intense admirer of hunkerism, especially English hunkerism, ridicules the whole debate, and Prince Napoleon in particular, as was to be expected.  It also takes the occasion to give a thrust at the United States, and thus compares the scene in the French Senate to a debate in Congress:

“The debate in the French Senate, of which we have given a summary, resembles the worst displays at Washington during the last days of the Union.  If we put ultramontanes and liberals for slaverymen and freesoilers, and the French language for that spoken in America, there is no need of further substitutions.  The spirit is the same, the antipathies and the personal vanity are the same, and, in spite of the precise and somewhat stilted style of French disputation, the coarseness and vindictiveness are exactly the same.  Indeed the formality of the expression in the case of French orators makes the hearty vulgarity of their treatment of each other the more incongruous.  It is like a street fight between to cabmen in kid gloves?” – {Springfield Republican.

– Published in The Burlington Weekly Hawk-Eye, Burlington, Iowa, Saturday, March 22, 1862, p. 1

Foreign News

(CONCLUDED.)

The smith laborers in Liverpool were making demonstrations but had been promptly dispersed by the police.

The Opinion Nationale says that a reactive movement is being reorganized at Trieste.  They will embark simultaneously at several points on the Neapolitan territory.

Treiste, Feb. 27. – The garrison of Tripoly is following the example of the garrison at Nappa and revolted.

Aloina and Aurom are preparing to return to Greece.

The number of insurgents will soon be considerably increased.

The insurrection is considered important as it might influence an alarming state of things in Turkey.

The iron-plated frigate, Warrior has arrived at Plymouth and it is reported that there is no leakage as first reported.

London, Feb. 28. – The Paris correspondent of the times says that the excitement consequent upon Prince Napoleon’s speech is increasing.

– Published in The Burlington Weekly Hawk-Eye, Burlington, Iowa, Saturday, March 15, 1862, p. 3

Trouble Brewing in Europe

If all the ages of the times do not fail, there is a crisis approaching in European affairs, that will require the whole attention of the transatlantic powers, and which will probably leave us at leisure to settle our own difficulties in our own way.  The financial embarrassments of all the European nations, with, perhaps, the exception of England, are among the least threatening of the dangers which are imminent.  In Russia, the Serfs are dissatisfied with the law which makes them free, because it makes them pay for their freedom, and the nobility are sour because the Serfs have been freed at all.  And the much abused inhabitants of Poland and Finland are ever on the alert to take advantage of every pre-occupation of the Government to strike another blow to their independence.  In Germany also there are evidences of coming trouble.  Hungary is awaiting the march of events in Italy, and the moment Garibaldi attempts his long cherished enterprise of wresting Venitia from the dominion of Austria, Hungary will rise en masse to throw off the same yoke.  Secret societies exist in every town, and secret agents are traveling over the country, warning the inhabitants to be ready for the emergency.  A similar state of things is noticeable in the Turkish Provinces of Montenegro and Herzegovina, which are giving the Sultan much trouble.  The recent assertion of Prussia, too, that she considers “the German Confederation as an international and not a federal part of Prussia,” has irritated Austria and thrown the little German principalities into an interesting flutter of excitement, presaging trouble in that quarter.

But the Italian question is the most dangerous and complicated of the whole, and is daily growing more difficult of solution.  Garibaldi has just written a letter intimating that he intends to commence operations for the recovery of Venitia early in the spring, and Austria is taking active measures to resist the attack.  The Bourbons are adding new fuel to the flame of the Neapolitan rebellion, and fresh hostilities are momentarily expected in Naples and Sicily.  The Pope continues to hold on doggedly to his temporal power in spite of the warning of France, and the recent and numerous exhibitions of popular feelings on the subject in the Italian cities, shows that he is daily becoming more unpopular.  If Napoleon should withdraw his forces from Rome, as he threatens to do, the Pope is in a fair way to lose not only his temporal but his spiritual authority as well.  Verily, coming events in Europe cast their shadows before.  At this late day we hardly need the repeated assertions of neutrality in our affairs on the part of England and France.  Matters at home promise to furnish abundant scope for the exercise of all the diplomatic skill of the European nations, if indeed a general appeal to arms is not necessary.  The scales which hold the “balance of power,” never at an exact equipoise, now seem more likely to be put of equilibrium than ever before.  It will require time to get things right again, and meanwhile our little difficulties will be settled up.  In view of the troubles abroad, and the signs of returning peace at home, there is no good reason why we should be further haunted by the ghost of “European intervention.”

– Published in The Burlington Weekly Hawk-Eye, Burlington, Iowa, Saturday, March 8, 1862, p. 2

Napoleon, probably suffering an infliction of . . .

. . . diabetes or perhaps indigestion, has snubbed Queen Victoria, and to balance the account, Lord Palmerston has given Napoleon a pretty smart knock on the knuckles.  It happened this wise –

Acting under instructions of course, Lord Cowley, British Minister at Paris, had an audience with Napoleon, in which he intimated that, if his Imperial Majesty had any purpose of visiting London during the Great Exhibition, Queen Victoria desired to place Buckingham Palace at his disposal, though she could not even for him, deviate from her resolve not to receive strangers during her first year of widowhood.  In the matter of this communication surely all was friendly and well meaning.  Perhaps Lord Cowley’s manner made it less pleasant.  At any rate the on dit is that Napoleon, having heard Lord Cowley out, curtly answered that he did not intend visiting London, and, with a short bow, turned on his heel and stalked out of the room, leaving the poor wretch of an Ambassador very much astonished and considerably incensed.  Next day the Moniteur had a paragraph stating, rather contemptuously, that there was no foundation for the report that the Emperor intended to honor London with his presence.  This was the cause, the story runs, of Palmerston’s making such a decided speech, just before Parliament adjourned, in favor of the whole of Italy, the popedom included, being under the scepter of Victor Emmanuel.  Napoleon alone has stood in the way, since the war of 1859, of this unity of Italy being affected – Palmerston, if this be true, has cleverly paid off Napoleon’s want of manners.

– Published in The Burlington Weekly Hawk-Eye, Burlington, Iowa, Saturday, May 31, 1862, p. 1