Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams
Sir: Your despatch of the 10th of February, No. 874, has been received. The President is by no means surprised at the phase which our affairs have assumed in Europe. It does not even excite wonder here that, in London as [Page 191] well as in Paris, we are expected, immediately upon the end of our civil conflict, to begin a course of retaliatory, foreign wars. I do not deny that these apprehensions find some ground of support in the angry tone of our press. It would evince equally a want of national sensibility and of national spirit, if the American press should fail to resent the insult and contumely which the press of Great Britain has so incessantly hurled against us during our four years of struggle and affliction. European statesmen have failed to accept—European politicians have studiously refused to hear our explanations of our position in regard to foreign powers. Notwithstanding our continual protests, they have persisted in derogating us from our place, equal with their own, a sa sovereign power in the family of nations, and, so far as they have been able, they have levelled us to the plane of the insurgents. Undercover of neutrality, subjects protected by the government of Great Britain have lavishly contributed material support to the insurgents, and employed every moral engine to aid them in overthrowing the government of the United States. European politicians do not now mistake in supposing that the people of the United States are indulging a profound sense of injury. It would not be unnatural if that sense of injury should impel the nation, as soon as its hands shall once more be free, to demand redress. Demands for redress are very apt to culminate in schemes of conquest. This, however, is not the policy of the President. He deems conquests unnecessary, demoralizing, and injurious to the republic, as he deems revenge and retaliation unworthy the character of a great nation. The sentiments and policy of this government remain unchanged. Every word of peace and good will to foreign states that we have heretofore spoken, and which has been interpreted as the language of policy or of fear, is now spoken as freely as before, when we think that all our dangers are virtually passed. The President does not for a moment think of sending armies or navies with such a purpose or upon such motives as have been indicated into Canada, or the West Indies, or Mexico. There is, however, one necessity that is laid upon him, which he would not be allowed to put aside, if he should desire. He was committed at the beginning of his present term of administration to retake and occupy all the places, posts and forts which the insurgents had then taken, or afterwards should take away from the government, and thus to restore the national authority throughout the Union. He will be committed at the beginning of his next term to every lawful effort that shall tend to restore the national prestige and influence abroad, just as they stood before this unhappy civil war began. Always confidently anticipating the triumph of the Union, and, therefore, always foreseeing the difficulties and embarrassments of our relations with the maritime powers, which must exist if the end of the civil war should find their injurious policy unchanged, we have, in season, and, our defamers say, out of season, appealed to the maritime states, and especially to Great Britain, to rescind in due time such of their proclamations, orders and decrees as derogate from our national sovereignty over all territory and over all the citizens of the United States. Incredulity in regard to our ultimate success has indeed seemed to induce Great Britain to reject these appeals, and now the end of our war is likely to find us face to face with that nation in a very disturbed state of relations. British subjects are still sending forth piratical vessels to destroy our commerce and harass us in our seaports, and these vessels are regarded by her Britannic Majesty’s government as lawful ships-of-war. I annex a copy of a telegram just received from Halifax, which shows the dangers of this sort against which we have to guard. Our ships-of-war are excluded from British ports, while our own ports are unreservedly open to theirs. In this unfortunate situation of affairs we shall exert ourselves not less diligently than we have done heretofore to preserve peace between the two countries. We ought not, however, to be expected to do it without conciliation, or at least some show of good will on the other side. Canada is one of the points where the peace of the two countries is immediately exposed. Judge Smith yesterday adjourned the case of the St. Albans raiders eight days, and [Page 192] thus lie has again rendered it impossible for us to modify our restrictive measures in regard to that province. There is reason to hope, however, that, if not the judiciary, the executive authorities of Canada will soon take such proceedings as will reassure the border sentiment. In that case the President will hasten to manifest a renewed sense of security and of liberality towards that important province.
Beyond Canada, however, the prospect of reconciliation is clouded. The neutrality law and the Queen’s proclamation seem to us to be little better than dead letters in the courts of Great Britain and in the docks of Liverpool and Glasgow. The Rappahannock, at Calais, is a receiving ship for recruiting agents residing and operating at Liverpool. The Shenandoah is afloat, committing new depredations near the Cape of Good Hope; and then almost daily we hear of a new pirate clandestinely built, armed, manned, and equipped, and despatched from Liverpool. Even Annan’s French ram, evading French and Danish laws, employs the services of a British steamer and British merchants to effect its unlawful armament. Can any English statesman expect that the people of the United States will endure an unprincipled maritime war at the hands of any people without resort to self-defence? Shall the governments of the two countries suffer them to drift in conflict? Must the extinguishment of slavery in the United States, an object so dear to both nations, be atoned for by a deadly war between them? Certainly such a consequence is unnecessary. It would be criminal.
I will suggest what I think may avert the danger. Great Britain, I think, must now know, what hitherto she has so strangely doubted, namely, that to the Americans the Union is the one chief dominating object of thought and affection. If they are angry with Great Britain, it is because they believe, with how much reason it is unnecessary here to say, that the British nation has desired and sought the overthrow of the Union. If now Great Britain is satisfied that this cherished object of American affection is entirely safe—safe equally against domestic treason and against foreign intervention, then let her manifest in some way her contentment with that established fact. I do not say that this, shall be demonstratively or even formally done. It may be done incidentally, and even as of chance. Let British ministers, hereafter, instead of speaking of us as a nation that is, or ought, or must be divided into two nations, speak of us as they rightly expect us to speak of Great Britain, as a sovereign state, whose integrity we recognize, and of whose elements and factions we, as neighbor and friend, neither know nor care to know anything. I think the Queen of England is as popular in the United States to-day as she is among her own subjects. We refuse to understand her allusions to us in her late speech to Parliament as ungenerous or unfriendly. Why cannot British statesmen be as generous to the United States as their sovereign? Then let the vexatious restrictions upon our intercourse with British ports be removed; and let it be shown that the flag of the United States is as welcome in British ports as the British flag is in our own. Let justice not stumble on her coasts, but pursue British subjects on the decks of British vessels who violate her laws, and arrest them, if need be, on the high seas, under whatever flag they shall simulate in carrying on their piratical warfare against an unoffending friendly power. Great Britain knows, I think, how unexacting we are, and therefore she knows how easily we can reciprocate peace with peace, and even, if it is desired, friendship with friendship. This done, we shall be able to confer calmly upon such claims and questions as remain to be adjusted in a spirit of friendship and good will.
I do not require you to submit this despatch to Earl Russell; you may, however, show any part or the whole of it to him if, upon being informed of its character, he shall wish to see it.
I am, sir, your obedient servant,
Charles Francis Adams, Esq.,&c., &c., &c.