Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward.
[Extract.]
London, August 16, 1861.
Sir: I have read with great attention the contents of your despatch, No. 42, dated the 21st July, and shall avail myself of the argument upon the next occasion of an interview with Lord Russell. But I have not thought it necessary to solicit one, for the reason that the government here does not appear to contemplate any change of position, so long as the blockade shall be kept up.
In the last conference which I had with his lordship, I took occasion towards the close of it to intimate to him that he must not infer, from my not having entered into discussion of the merits of the question, that I gave any assent to the position taken by him about the right of a government to close its own ports, when held by forcible possession of persons resisting its authority. On the contrary, I desired to reserve for my government the treatment of it as an open question whenever it should take any practical shape.
In the meantime I had every reason to believe that it was the design of the President to persevere in the blockade, and to that end that the necessary forces were in constant process of accumulation. This course, being understood to be one against which his lordship had signified an intention not to raise any objection, I did not think it worth while now to go further. [Page 128] At the time of this interview no mention had been made of the precise form of the legislation contemplated by Congress. We received more precise intelligence on this side of the water a few days before the prorogation of Parliament. On the very last day for transacting business the subject was brought up in the House of Commons on a question addressed to Lord Palmerston by Mr. Wyld. His lordship’s answer has doubtless attracted your attention long ere this. He considered the law as merely giving a discretionary power. But if carried into practice he construed it as putting an end to the blockade. So that, whether under blockade or under a levy of duties, foreign nations would have a rule to go by. His reply was, however, rather specious than solid, for it did not touch the difficulty presented by the fourth section, nor that involved in a possible levy of a double set of duties, one by the government on ship-board, and another by the insurgents on land. I am inclined to believe that serious objection would be made here in either of these contingencies. For this reason I do not deem it expedient to stir the matter until the necessity for it shall become positive. Believing the government to be on the whole favorably disposed towards us, and also that it is of great importance to avoid all complications of the present struggle which would practically benefit the insurgents, I shall delay to open any sources of controversy which I think may be avoided until especially instructed to do otherwise.
* * * * * * * * *
I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,
Hon. William H. Seward,
Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.