Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

the honour of England if her protest were raised against it. He moved for papers on the subject.

The motion was seconded by Mr. Gregory, who said he thought the House was perfectly justified in commenting upon a proclamation repugnant to decency, civilization, and humanity, -an out rage at once wicked, inexcusable, and useless, and asked Lord Palmerston whether the Government proposed to do what the Emperor of the French would do-protest against this outrage. Lord Palmerston was quite prepared to say that no man could have read that proclamation without a feeling of the deepest indignation a proclamation to a proclamation to which he did not scruple to attach the epithet of infamous. Englishmen must blush to think that it came from a man of the Anglo-Saxon race, a man who was a soldier, and had raised himself to the rank of General. With regard to the course the Government would take on the subject, this was matter for consideration.

[ocr errors]

Shortly afterwards, Lord Palmerston, in reply to Mr. Hopwood, stated his opinion that any interference in the American civil war would only serve to aggravate the sufferings of those now enduring privations in consequence of its effects in this country. The Governments of both England and France would gladly embrace a favourable opportunity for me diation, but at present, while both sides were animated with the most vehement resentment against each other, he feared that no proposal of the kind would meet with a favourable reception from either side.

The subject of mediation in the American quarrel, for which it was considered by some persons in England that the time had now arrived, was brought, in a formal shape, before the House of Commons by Mr. Lindsay on the 18th July, and underwent a full discussion. The introduction of the subject at all at this season was indeed thought inexpedient, and attempts were made by several members, especially by Mr. J. Ewart, Mr. Clay, and Mr. Monsell, to induce Mr. Lindsay to abstain from entering on the question, or at all events to postpone his motion until the House should be better informed as to the facts of the case. Mr. Lindsay, however, declined to adopt this advice, and the debate took place. The Resolution which he proposed was as follows:

[ocr errors]

That, in the opinion of this House, the States which have seceded from the Union of the Republic of the United States have so long maintained themselves under a separate and established Government, and have given such proof of their determination and ability to support their independence, that the propriety of offering mediation, with the view of terminating hostilities between the contending parties, is worthy of the serious and immediate attention of Her Majesty's Government." Adverting to the spirit shown by the press of the Northern States towards this country, he expressed his hope that that press did not reflect the real feelings of the people, and his conviction that the opinion of the British House of Commons could not fail to have a salutary effect. In considering the origin of the present struggle, he showed

that the dissatisfaction of the Southern States with the Federal Union was not of recent date; that for a quarter of a century they had had grievances, and complained of the oppressive taxation of the North. He dwelt upon the offensive manner in which the appeals for justice and the prayers for relief of five millions and a-half of people had been received by the Government of Washington, which had precipitated the war. He denied that slavery had anything to do with its causes; the main cause was, that the Southern States had been slowly losing their influence in the Lower House of Representatives, and their people, whose interests were bound up with free trade, found that practically they had no voice in taxation, and that the tariffs were framed in the interest of the Northern States, which pursued a policy of protection. The Southern States had, therefore, a double ground of complaint; the taxation was not levied upon the principles of the Constitution; practically, it was taxation with out representation; and the taxes were levied for the benefit of particular States of the Union. The end of the war, he believed, must be separation; a reunion was hopeless, and, if so, it behoved England to offer her mediation, and to ask the Northern States to consider the great distress which the people of this country were enduring through this unhappy war. Mr. Lindsay read letters from Unionists in America acknowledging the hope lessness of the contest, and pleading for the mediation of England.

Mr. Taylor, who had given notice of an amendment to Mr. Lindsay's motion, affirming that "it is desirable that this country should continue to maintain the strictest neutrality in the civil war unhappily existing in the Republic of the United States," said he thought Mr. Lindsay had not acted prudently in disregarding the suggestion of Mr. Clay, to forbear to move his Resolution, which would, he believed, add to the bitterness of the feeling in America. He complained that a portion of the press of this country had not acted fairly towards the Northern States. The Resolution meant the recognition of the Southern States and intervention by force, which was another word for war with America. He had never heard, he said, such tremendous issues so raised. The reasons which Mr. Lindsay had assigned for the war were fallacious. It was no casual strife; it had been inevitable for years; it was the Nemesis of that system of slavery which condemned to chattelism millions of human beings. The Northern States had endeavoured to postpone this crisis by discreditable compromises; but there was at length a sacrifice they could not make. He implored the House not to adopt the Resolution.

Lord A. V. Tempest, who had given notice of a Resolution"That it is the duty of Her Majesty's Government to endeavour, either by itself or in combination with other European Powers, by mediation or otherwise, to bring to a termination the existing contest in America"-said he thought the House should not separate without expressing an opinion

[ocr errors]

upon the subject of this war. He urged the interference of this country on the grounds of humanity, and of its responsibilities and duties. Laying out of view the hostility and insult evinced by the North towards England, and putting aside the motive of interest, and even moral responsibility, he thought the people of the South, who had courageously maintained their independence for sixteen months, claimed the sympathy of this country and of Europe. Mediation, however, he thought, would be worthless, unless backed by ulterior mea

sures.

Mr. W. Forster contended that there was nothing in the present aspect of affairs to justify the intervention of the Government. There was no chance of the offer being accepted, even if it were made by the British Government, in the present conjuncture of American affairs. Even if it was thought desirable to make an offer of mediation, it should be done quietly by the Government, and the less it was discussed or talked about the better. Although hon. members had professed to discuss the matter in a friendly spirit, yet threats had been held out of more than mediation, and the knowledge that such language had been held would increase the feeling against this country in the North, and thus tend to prevent the very object of the motion. Any offer of intervention on our part just now would be taken as an indication that we presumed upon the weakness of the North, and made an offer that, under other circumstances, we should not have ventured upon. The hon. member

contended that slavery was the cause of the war, and expressed his conviction that the war would end in the extermination of slavery, though he did not see the exact way in which that would be effected. He thanked the Government for having, under pressing temptations, preserved this country from any responsibility for the war, and he hoped that they would persevere in that policy. The way in which Mr. Lindsay had put his motion rendered it unnecessary for him to move the Amendment of which he had given notice, and he should therefore content himself with giving a negative.

Mr. Whiteside observed that, although this question was difficult and delicate, that was no reason why the House of Commons should not express an opinion upon it; to shrink from doing so would be a cowardly proceeding on our part, and he thought Mr. Lindsay had deserved well of the country in giving the Government an opportunity of making their sentiments known. Considering the distinctions between the Southern and Northern States, the fact of Secession was not surprising. The assertion that slavery was the true cause of the war was contradicted by the denunciation in the North of those who made this assertion. If there was an opposition of interests between the Northern and Southern States, why should they not be recommended to separate quietly? If the quarrel was, as had been stated, deeprooted, the malignant hatred mutual, when would they be reconciled? When would other States be entitled to interfere? It was

not proposed to interfere, as Mr. Forster supposed, by force, but in the spirit of the Resolution. If it was possible to check the waste of human life, it was criminal calmly to stand by. The interference proposed by the Resolution, he argued, was perfectly compatible with neutrality. Recognition was a mere acknowledgment of a de facto Government-nothing more; and no ground of war, as he showed on the authority of Sir James Mackintosh, and by reference to analogous cases. In all these cases the question, he observed, was one of time and of events; and, in his opinion, the time had come when, upon the principles of international law, the Southern States, which had so long maintained their independence, might be recognized, without giving just ground of war or umbrage to the North.

Mr. Gregory contended that though the war was, as Lord Russell had said, for independence on one side, it was not for empire, but for revenge on the other, in pursuit of which object every other consideration had been lost sight of by the North, and he insisted that we had a perfect right to endeavour to put a stop to such a state of things. Recognition he considered to be clearly involved in the Resolution of Mr. Lindsay, and he added other instances to those cited by Mr. Whiteside, to prove that it was the policy of this country and the practice of the United States to recognize de facto Governments. He enumerated the titles which the Confederate States had established to recognition,-in the long maintenance of their independence, in the power to

carry on their government, as well as in their commercial policy, and the stringent provisions they had enacted against the slave trade, the real encouragers of which traffic, he maintained, had been in the North. Those who hated slavery in their hearts. must be mad, he said, to suppose that the reconstruction of the Union would be favourable to their views. The slavery pretext was a gross imposture attempted to be palmed upon public credulity. The question had been asked,- If the House adopted the Resolution, and mediation was offered and refused, what should next be done? He did not think it would be refused; but if it were, should we recognize the Southern States, it would most probably produce war; but he believed if we acted in conjunction with other States, we should hear nothing of war, and meanwhile the impulse would arise from within.

Mr. Seymour Fitzgerald said, that if the original motion were pressed, he should feel bound to vote for it. He was convinced, that if Government would only. undertake the task of initiating mediation, the other Powers of Europe would acquiesce, and they would have the satisfaction of knowing that they had been the instrument of restoring peace to one hemisphere, and prosperity to the suffering people of another.

Lord Palmerston said, the subject was one of the highest importance, and of the most delicate character. He regretted that Mr. Lindsay had brought this question under discussion in the present state of things. He hoped the House would leave this matter

in the hands of the Government. The Resolution pointed to mediation and acknowledgment. He agreed, that if the independence of a people was firmly and per manently established, they were entitled to be acknowledged as a Government de facto, and that it would be no just cause of war or of offence. But the cases cited were totally different from the present. Practically, we should not be justified in assuming that the independence of the South had been permanently established. There was no example of such a contest as that now going on. Up to this time, the Government, it was admitted, had pursued a wise and prudent course, and the House had better leave them to judge of the fittest occasion and opportunity to proffer their friendly offices, which they should rejoice to do, but which could only be done by presenting themselves as impartial parties.

The question of cotton supply from other than American sources was one which, at this time, engaged the anxious attention of the English public. The terrible risk of depending for a supply of this great staple of our industry upon a single market, from which we were at any time liable to be cut off by war, or other contingencies, was fully appreciated, and the obstinate character which the civil war had now assumed, seemed to exclude the hope of a speedy replenishment of the raw material so urgently required. Under these circumstances, men's thoughts were turned in all directions, from which it seemed, in any degree probable, that a substitute for American cotton might be procured. India was thought to offer the most hopeful field for

this purpose, though it was evident that much remained to be done, both in improving the culture and management of that plant, and in facilitating the means of its transport, before that country could furnish in sufficient quantity the article required.

With a view of stimulating the Government to lend all the aid in their power to the efforts made to further the production of cotton in the East Indies, Mr. J. B. Smith, on the 19th of June, called the attention of the House of Commons, to the obstacles existing in that country to the growth of cotton, and the importance to India and to our own people of their removal. We were living now, he observed, in a cotton famine, which to a large class in this country was a famine of food, and the prospect of a supply from America was small. The only other country which could supply cotton in any quantity was India. The Indian cotton, however, was considered inferior to the American, which was attributed to the state of the Indian mind. He detailed some of the efforts made to overcome the prejudices of the cultivators, and especially the results of the experiments of Mr. Shaw, in Dharwar, which proved that India was capable of growing cotton equal to ordinary Orleans, and this cotton formed the bulk of the raw material used in the manufactures of this country. He then adverted to the obstacles which impeded this branch of agriculture in India-the rudeness of implements, the necessity of works of irrigation, the poverty of the ryots, and their dependence upon the soucars, or native

« ForrigeFortsett »