Chapter XIV: Roebuck's Motion (2)
If relations with the North were now to be so "frank and cordial," there was, indeed, little remaining hope possible to English friends of the South. Bright wrote to Sumner: "Neutrality is agreed upon by all, and I hope a more fair and friendly neutrality than we have seen during the past two years[1122]." George Thompson, at Exeter Hall, lauding Henry Ward Beecher for his speech there, commented on the many crowded open public meetings in favour of the North as compared with the two pro-Southern ones in London, slimly and privately attended[1123]. Jefferson Davis, in addressing the Confederate Congress, December 7, was bitter upon the "unfair and deceptive conduct" of England[1124]. Adams, by mid-December, 1863, was sure that previous British confidence in the ultimate success of the South was rapidly declining[1125].
Such utterances, if well founded, might well have portended the cessation of further Southern effort in England. That a renewal of activity soon occurred was due largely to a sudden shift in the military situation in America and to the realization that the heretofore largely negative support given to the Southern cause must be replaced by organized and persistent effort. Grant's victorious progress in the West had been checked by the disaster to Rosencrans at Chicamauga, September 18, and Grant's army forced to retrace its steps to recover Chattanooga. It was not until November 24 that the South was compelled to release its grip upon that city. Meanwhile in the East, Lee, fallen back to his old lines before Richmond, presented a still impregnable front to Northern advance. No sudden collapse, such as had been expected, followed the Southern defeats at Vicksburg and Gettysburg. Again the contest presented the appearance of a drawn battle. Small wonder then that McHenry, confident in his statistics, should now declare that at last cotton was to become in truth King[1126], and count much upon the effect of the arguments advanced in his recently published book[1127]. Small wonder that Southern friends should hurry the organization of the "Southern Independence Association." Seeking a specific point of attack and again hoping for Tory support they first fixed their attention on the new trial of the _Alexandra_, on appeal from the decision by the Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer. On December 4, Lindsay wrote to Mason that he had daily been "journeying to town" with the "old Chief Baron" and was confident the Government would again be defeated--in which case it would be very open to attack for the seizure of the Rams also. Nevertheless he was emphatic in his caution to Mason not to place too high a hope on any change in Government policy or on any expectation that the Tories would replace Palmerston[1128].
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 1041: Trollope, _North America_, I, p. 124.]
[Footnote 1042: Mason Papers. Spence to Mason, Jan. 3, 1863. Liverpool.]
[Footnote 1043: The _Index_, Jan. 29, 1863, p. 217. The active agent in control of the _Index_ was Henry Hotze, who, in addition to managing this journal, used secret service funds of the Confederacy to secure the support of writers in the London press. He was in close touch with all the Southern agents sent to Europe at various times, but appears never to have been fully trusted by either Mason or Slidell. In 1912-13 I made notes from various materials originating with Hotze, these being then in the possession of Mr. Charles Francis Adams. These materials were (1) a letter and cash book marked "C.S.A. Commercial Agency, London"; (2) a copy despatch book, January 6, 1862, to December 31, 1864; (3) a copy letter-book of drafts of "private" letters, May 28, 1864, to June 16, 1865. All these materials were secured by Mr. Adams from Professor J.F. Jameson, who had received them from Henry Vignaud. Since Mr. Adams' death in 1915 no trace of these Hotze materials has been found. My references, then, to "Hotze Papers," must rest on my notes, and transcripts of many letters, taken in 1912-13. Describing his activities to Benjamin, Hotze stated that in addition to maintaining the _Index_, he furnished news items and _editorials_ to various London papers, had seven paid writers on these papers, and was a pretty constant distributor of "boxes of cigars imported from Havana ... American whiskey and other articles." He added: "It is, of course, out of the question to give vouchers." (Hotze Papers MS. Letter Book. Hotze to Benjamin, No. 19, March 14, 1863.) In Hotze's cash book one of his regular payees was Percy Gregg who afterwards wrote a history of the Confederacy. Hotze complained that he could get no "paid writer" on the _Times_.]
[Footnote 1044: See _ante_, Ch. XI.]
[Footnote 1045: Lyons Papers, Feb. 14, 1863.]
[Footnote 1046: Mason Papers, March 18, 1863.]
[Footnote 1047: Pickett Papers. Slidell to Benjamin, No. 34, May 3, 1863. This despatch is omitted by Richardson.]
[Footnote 1048: Schwab, _The Confederate States of America_ gives the best analysis and history of Southern financing.]
[Footnote 1049: It is possible that a few were disposed of to contractors in payment for materials.]
[Footnote 1050: Mason Papers. Mason to Slidell, Sept. 27, 1862.]
[Footnote 1051: _Ibid._, Slidell to Mason, Oct. 2, 1862.]
[Footnote 1052: Slidell's daughter was engaged to be married to Erlanger's son.]
[Footnote 1053: Slidell himself wrote: "I should not have gone so far in recommending these propositions ... had I not the best reason to believe that even in anticipation of its acceptance the very strongest influence will be enlisted in our favour." (Richardson, II, p. 340. To Benjamin, Oct. 28, 1862.)]
[Footnote 1054: Schwab, _The Confederate States of America_, pp. 30-31. Schwab is in error in stating that Erlanger himself went to Richmond, since it appears from Slidell's letters that he was in constant contact with Erlanger in Paris during the time the "agents" were in Richmond.]
[Footnote 1055: Richardson, II, 399-401, Jan. 15, 1863.]
[Footnote 1056: _Ibid_, p. 420. Mason to Benjamin, Feb. 5, 1863.]
[Footnote 1057: Mason Papers, Jan. 23, 1863.]
[Footnote 1058: _Ibid._, Slidell to Mason, Feb. 15, 1863.]
[Footnote 1059: _Ibid._, Slidell to Mason, Feb. 23, 1863, and Mason to Slidell, Feb. 24, 1863.]
[Footnote 1060: Schwab, p. 33.]
[Footnote 1061: _Ibid._, p. 33. In France permission to advertise the loan was at first refused, but this was changed by the intervention of the Emperor.]
[Footnote 1062: Richardson, II, p. 457. To Benjamin, March 21, 1863.]
[Footnote 1063: Mason's _Mason_, p. 401. To Benjamin, March 30, 1863.]
[Footnote 1064: MS. Thesis, by Walter M. Case, for M.A. degree at Stanford University: _James M. Mason--Confederate Diplomat_ (1915). I am much indebted to Mr. Case's Chapter V: "Mason and Confederate Finance."]
[Footnote 1065: No evidence has been found to support this. Is not the real reason for the change to be found in British Governmental intentions known or suspected? March 27 was the day of the Parliamentary debate seemingly antagonistic to the North: while March 31, on the other hand, the _Alexandra_ case was referred to the Law Officers, and April 4 they recommend her seizure, which was done on April 5. It is to be presumed that rumours of this seeming face-about by the Government had not failed to reach the bond market.]
[Footnote 1066: Mason Papers. Mason to Slidell, April 3, 1863.]
[Footnote 1067: _Ibid._, Spence to Mason, May 9, 1863. This letter was written a month after the event at Mason's request for an exact statement of what had occurred.]
[Footnote 1068: _Ibid._]
[Footnote 1069: Schwab, pp. 39-44. Schwab believes that Erlanger & Company "are certainly open to the grave suspicion of having themselves been large holders of the bonds in question, especially in view of the presumably large amount of lapsed subscriptions, and of having quietly unloaded them on the unsuspecting Confederate agents when the market showed signs of collapsing" (p. 35). Schwab did not have access to Spence's report which gives further ground for this suspicion.]
[Footnote 1070: A newspaper item that Northern ships had run by Vicksburg sent it down; Lee's advance into Pennsylvania caused a recovery; his retreat from Gettysburg brought it so low as thirty per cent. discount.]
[Footnote 1071: After the war was over Bigelow secured possession of and published an alleged list of important subscribers to the loan in which appeared the name of Gladstone. He repeated this accusation--a serious one if true, since Gladstone was a Cabinet member--in his _Retrospections_ (I, p. 620), and the story has found place in many writings (e.g., G.P. Putnam, _Memoirs_, p. 213). Gladstone's emphatic denial, calling the story a "mischievous forgery," appears in Morley, _Gladstone_, II, p. 83.]
[Footnote 1072: Hansard, 3rd Ser., CLXX, pp. 776-838.]
[Footnote 1073: See _ante_, p. 155.]
[Footnote 1074: The _Index_, May 28, 1863, pp. 72-3.]
[Footnote 1075: The _Times_, June 1, 1863.]
[Footnote 1076: The _Index_, June 4, 1863.]
[Footnote 1077: Chesney, _Military View of Recent Campaigns in Maryland and Virginia_, London, 1863.]
[Footnote 1078: _Army and Navy Gazette_, June 6, 1863.]
[Footnote 1079: Lyons Papers, May 30, 1863.]
[Footnote 1080: Callahan, _Diplomatic History of the Southern Confederacy_, p. 184. Callahan's Chapter VIII, "The Crisis in England" is misnamed, for Roebuck's motion and the whole plan of "bringing in the Tories" never had a chance of succeeding, as, indeed, Callahan himself notes. His detailed examination of the incident has unfortunately misled some historians who have derived from his work the idea that the critical period of British policy towards America was Midsummer, 1863, whereas it occurred, in fact, in October-November, 1862 (e.g., Schmidt, "Wheat and Cotton during the Civil War," pp. 413 _seq_. Schmidt's thesis is largely dependent on placing the critical period in 1863).]
[Footnote 1081: Mason Papers. To Slidell.]
[Footnote 1082: Callahan, pp. 184-5.]
[Footnote 1083: _Ibid._, p. 186. To Benjamin.]
[Footnote 1084: Mason Papers. Mason to Slidell, June 27, 1863. Mason wrote: "The question of veracity is raised."]
[Footnote 1085: _Ibid._, Slidell to Mason, June 29, 1863.]
[Footnote 1086: _Ibid._, To Slidell.]
[Footnote 1087: _Ibid._, To Mason. "Monday eve." (June 29, 1863.)]
[Footnote 1088: Callahan, 186; and Hansard, 3rd Ser., CLXXI, p. 1719.]
[Footnote 1089: Punch's favourite cartoon of Roebuck was of a terrier labelled "Tear 'em," worrying and snarling at his enemies.]
[Footnote 1090: Bright and Lindsay had, in fact, long been warm friends. They disagreed on the Civil War, but this did not destroy their friendship.]
[Footnote 1091: Hansard, 3rd. Ser., CLXXI, pp. 1771-1842, for debate of June 30. Roebuck's egotism was later related by Lamar, then in London on his way to Russia as representative of the South. A few days before the debate Lamar met Roebuck at Lindsay's house and asked Roebuck whether he expected Bright to take part in the debate. "No, sir," said Roebuck sententiously, "Bright and I have met before. It was the old story--the story of the swordfish and the whale! No, sir! Mr. Bright will not cross swords with me again." Lamar attended the debate and saw Roebuck given by Bright the "most deliberate and tremendous pounding I ever witnessed." (_Education of Henry Adams_, pp. 161-2.)]
[Footnote 1092: Mason Papers. To Slidell, July 1, 1863.]
[Footnote 1093: July 1, 1863.]
[Footnote 1094: July 4, 1863.]
[Footnote 1095: Hansard, 3rd. Ser., CLXXII, pp. 67-73.]
[Footnote 1096: Mason Papers. To Mason, July 4, 1863. In fact Disraeli, throughout the Civil War, favoured strict neutrality, not agreeing with many of his Tory colleagues. He at times expressed himself privately as believing the Union would not be restored but was wise enough to refrain from such comment publicly. (Monypenny, _Disraeli_, IV, p. 328.)]
[Footnote 1097: Hansard, 3rd. Ser., CLXXII, p. 252.]
[Footnote 1098: _The Index_ felt it necessary to combat this, and on July 9 published a "letter from Paris" stating such criticisms to be negligible as emanating wholly from minority and opposition papers. "All the sympathies of the French Government have, from the outset, been with the South, and this, quite independently of other reasons, dictated the line which the opposition press has consistently followed; the Orleanist _Debats_, Republican _Siècle_, The Palais Royal _Opinion_, all join in the halloo against the South."]
[Footnote 1099: Palmerston MS. July 9, 1863.]
[Footnote 1100: Hansard, 3rd Ser., CLXXII, 554 _seq_., July 10, 1863.]
[Footnote 1101: In the same issue appeared a letter from the New York correspondent of the _Times_, containing a similar prediction but in much stronger terms. For the last half of the war the _Times_ was badly served by this correspondent who invariably reported the situation from an extreme anti-Northern point of view. This was Charles Mackay who served the _Times_ in New York from March, 1862, to December, 1865. (Mackay, _Forty Years' Recollections_, II, p. 412.) Possibly he had strict instructions. During this same week Lyons, writing privately to Russell, minimized the "scare" about Lee's advance. He reported that Mercier had ordered up a war-ship to take him away if Washington should fall. Lyons cannily decided such a step for himself inadvisable, since it would irritate Seward and in case the unexpected happened he could no doubt get passage on Mercier's ship. When news came of the Southern defeat at Gettysburg and of Grant's capture of Vicksburg, Lyons thought the complete collapse of the Confederacy an imminent possibility. Leslie Stephen is a witness to the close relations of Seward and Lyons at this time. He visited Washington about a month after Gettysburg and met Seward, being received with much cordiality as a _verbal_ champion in England of the North. (He had as yet published no signed articles on the war.) In this conversation he was amused that Seward spoke of the friendly services of "Monkton Mill," as a publicist on political economy. (Maitland, _Leslie Stephen_, p. 120.)]
[Footnote 1102: In this issue a letter from the New York correspondent, dated July 1, declared that all of the North except New England, would welcome Lee's triumph: "... he and Mr. Jefferson Davis might ride in triumph up Broadway, amid the acclamations of a more enthusiastic multitude than ever assembled on the Continent of America." The New York city which soon after indulged in the "draft riots" might give some ground for such writing, but it was far fetched, nevertheless--and New York was not the North.]
[Footnote 1103: Hansard, 3rd Ser., CLXXII, 661 _seq_. Ever afterwards Roebuck was insistent in expressions of dislike and fear of America. At a banquet to him in Sheffield in 1869 he delivered his "political testament": "Beware of Trades Unions; beware of Ireland; beware of America." (Leader, _Autobiography and Letters of Roebuck_, p. 330.)]
[Footnote 1104: May 31, 1864, Lindsay proposed to introduce another recognition motion, but on July 25 complained he had had no chance to make it, and asked Palmerston if the Government was not going to act. The reply was a brief negative.]
[Footnote 1105: The _Times_, July 18, 1863.]
[Footnote 1106: The power of the _Times_ in influencing public opinion through its news columns was very great. At the time it stood far in the lead in its foreign correspondence and the information printed necessarily was that absorbed by the great majority of the British public. Writing on January 23, 1863, of the mis-information spread about America by the _Times_, Goldwin Smith asserted: "I think I never felt so much as in this matter the enormous power which the _Times_ has, not from the quality of its writing, which of late has been rather poor, but from its exclusive command of publicity and its exclusive access to a vast number of minds. The _ignorance_ in which it has been able to keep a great part of the public is astounding." (To E.S. Beesly. Haultain, _Correspondence of Goldwin Smith_, p. 11.)]
[Footnote 1107: _The Index_, July 23, 1863, p. 200. The italics are mine. The implication is that a day customarily celebrated as one of rejoicing has now become one for gloom. No _Englishman_ would be likely to regard July 4 as a day of rejoicing.]
[Footnote 1108: Mason Papers. To Mason, July 25, 1863.]
[Footnote 1109: _U.S. Diplomatic Correspondence_, 1863, Pt. I, p. 329. Adams to Seward, July 30, 1863.]
[Footnote 1110: Mason, _Mason_, p. 449.]
[Footnote 1111: Sept. 4, 1863. The _Times_ was now printing American correspondence sharply in contrast to that which preceded Gettysburg when the exhaustion and financial difficulties of the North were dilated upon. Now, letters from Chicago, dated August 30, declared that, to the writer's astonishment, the West gave every evidence that the war had fostered rather than checked, prosperity. (Sept. 15, 1863.).]
[Footnote 1112: Mason Papers. Mason to Slidell, Sept. 14 and 15, 1863. Slidell to Mason, Sept. 16, 1863.]
[Footnote 1113: McRea wrote to Hotze, September 17, 1863, that in his opinion Slidell and Hotze were the only Southern agents of value diplomatically in Europe (Hotze Correspondence). He thought all others would soon be recalled. Slidell, himself, even in his letter to Mason, had the questionable taste of drawing a rosy picture of his own and his family's intimate social intercourse with the Emperor and the Empress.]
[Footnote 1114: Sept. 23, 1863.]
[Footnote 1115: e.g., _Manchester Guardian_, Sept. 23, 1863, quoted in _The Index_, Sept. 24, p. 343.]
[Footnote 1116: Mason's _Mason_, p. 456.]
[Footnote 1117: Russell Papers. To Russell, Oct. 26, 1863.]
[Footnote 1118: _Ibid._, Lyons wrote after receiving a copy of a despatch sent by Russell to Grey, in France, dated October 10, 1863.]
[Footnote 1119: F.O., Am., 896. No. 788. Confidential. Lyons to Russell, Nov. 3, 1863. "It seems, in fact, to be certain that at the commencement of a war with Great Britain, the relative positions of the United States and its adversary would be very nearly the reverse of what they would have been if a war had broken out three or even two years ago. Of the two Powers, the United States would now be the better prepared for the struggle--the coasts of the United States would present few points open to attack--while the means of assailing suddenly our own ports in the neighbourhood of this country, and especially Bermuda and the Bahamas, would be in immediate readiness. Three years ago Great Britain might at the commencement of a war have thrown a larger number of trained troops into the British Provinces on the continent than could have been immediately sent by the United States to invade those provinces. It seems no exaggeration to say that the United States could now without difficulty send an Army exceeding in number, by five to one, any force which Great Britain would be likely to place there."]
[Footnote 1120: _Ibid._, Private. Lyons to Russell, Nov. 3, 1863.]
[Footnote 1121: Lyons Papers. To Lyons.]
[Footnote 1122: Rhodes, IV, p. 393. Nov. 20, 1863.]
[Footnote 1123: _The Liberator_, Nov. 27, 1863. I have not dwelt upon Beecher's tour of England and Scotland in 1863, because its influence in "winning England" seems to me absurdly over-estimated. He was a gifted public orator and knew how to "handle" his audiences, but the majority in each audience was friendly to him, and there was no such "crisis of opinion" in 1863 as has frequently been stated in order to exalt Beecher's services.]
[Footnote 1124: Dodd, _Jefferson Davis_, p. 319. The words are Dodd's.]
[Footnote 1125: State Department, Eng., Vol. 84, No. 557. Adams to Seward, Dec. 17, 1863.]
[Footnote 1126: Hotze Correspondence. McHenry to Hotze, Dec. 1, 1863.]
[Footnote 1127: McHenry, _The Cotton Trade_, London, 1863. The preface in the form of a long letter to W.H. Gregory is dated August 31, 1863. For a comprehensive note on McHenry see C.F. Adams in Mass. Hist. Soc. _Proceedings_, March, 1914, Vol. XLVII, 279 _seq_.]
[Footnote 1128: Mason Papers.]
Comments
Log in to leave a comment.
Great Britain and the American Civil WarChapter XIV: Roebuck's Motion (2)
0%13 min left in chapter