Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward.
Sir: I have to acknowledge the reception of despatches from the department numbered from 277 to 284, both inclusive, with the single exception of No. 281, which has not come to hand.
The despatch No. 284, dated the 30th of June, was of service to me, as explaining the reasons of the movements of General McClellan, which would otherwise have been enveloped in mystery. But the speed of the telegraph now so far outstrips the progress of written communications that I had already received intelligence of the events down to the 7th instant, which more completely absorbed my attention. The conclusion which I draw from the whole is, that General McClellan has been thrown back in his work for an indefinite period, and that at the latest date he remained on the defensive rather than in the attitude of an assailant.
It is my duty to state that this impression is by no means the common one here. Generally regarded as decisive of the whole struggle, the news has had the effect, which you doubtless will have conjectured beforehand, of stimulating a manifestation of the feeling which has only been suppressed under the course of our preceding successes. I think last week I wrote to you mentioning the rumor that some demonstration might be made in Parliament on Friday night, and promising to send you a report of it should it take place. So slight seemed the promise of success at that instant that it turned out that Mr. Lindsay, the father of the original proposition [Page 137] upon which debate was to take place, had neglected to put it on the paper, and hence there was no subject to discuss. To remedy this defect, Lord Vane Tempest gave notice of a new motion, which contemplated nothing less than direct intervention in our quarrel by peaceable means or otherwise. Although this gentleman is the son-in-law of the Duke of Newcastle, his position in the House of Commons is not such as to give rise to much anxiety for his demonstration. Such was the state of things on Saturday and Sunday. But the later news of the present week has very considerably changed it.
Yesterday Mr. Lindsay took courage, and announced the resumption of his purpose. He first modified his motion so as to embrace both the points of recognition and intervention, incorporating into it even the significant word “otherwise,” borrowed from that of Lord Tempest. To-day I learn that he has seen the effect of that course, and has so changed his language as to embrace only the idea of mediation in conjunction with other powers, and that of pledging Parliament to sustain the ministry in any policy they might think proper to pursue. I do not quote the phraseology, because it may yet undergo alterations, and you wilt be sure to see it in its final shape, as it will come up for discussion to-morrow night. It is now understood that Mr. Lindsay proposes to press his question to a division, and it is thought that a sufficient number of members favor it to sustain the intention. I do not think it is countenanced by the ministry or by the more influential members of the opposition. But it is a good deal nursed by the rank and file of the latter, and by a portion of the ministerialists. With these explanations you will be able to form your judgment of the prospect before us. For the rest I shall take measures to be well informed of the precise temper of the House through some person present at the debate, and shall endeavor to send you a report of it by the steamer of Saturday.
I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,
Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.