UNITED STATES CORRESPONDENCE IN RELATION TO MEXICAN AFFAIRS.
The Minister of Foreign Affairs to M. Geoffroy, chargé d’affaires at Washington
Sir: The United States chargé d’affaires has made the communication of which you gave me notice. Without formal instructions from his government, (so he said,) Mr. Bigelow read me Mr. Seward’s despatch, the substance of which I will now give.
The people of the United States, said the Secretary of State, have now but one thought, from which no consideration can divert them, namely, the reconstruction of the Union. To effect this they are resolved to make every sacrifice, to recoil from no obstacle, and to triumph over every resistance.
They desire that the crisis through which they are now passing may not affect their relations with foreign states; but their sentiments towards them will chiefly be inspired by the dispositions they are supposed to have towards us in present circumstances. Sympathizing with those they think favorable to the end they wish to attain, the people, by the natural effect of the contest they are sustaining, are inclined to feel considerable irritation against those who encourage their adversaries, or who provoke by their wishes a result contrary to that which they are contending for at the price of so many sacrifices. Now it is generally believed in the United States, rightly or wrongly, that the French government would consider a definitive separation of the American Union into two distinct confederations as the most desirable consequence of the present war.
With the present state of mind in America, this opinion upon the tendencies of the French government might change the feelings of friendship so long entertained for France, and imbitter the relations between the two countries. The federal government, though not amenable to popular impressions, is obliged to regard them, and would be pleased to see the French cabinet take an occasion to manifest their sentiments towards the American Union; a manifestation of that nature would help to direct or reform the opinion, and prevent it from being perverted by thoughtless prejudices.
I told the United States chargé d’affaires that we might be excused from replying to suppositions that had nothing to justify them, and to which we are conscious of having furnished no pretext. I added, however, that I would have no hesitation to enter into frank explanations with the federal government of the attitude observed by us since the beginning of the American crisis, and to manifest once more our desire that no misunderstanding or equivocation should subsist between us. It is not necessary for France to recall the part she took at the founding of the great American republic. Still faithful to her sympathies, she has had the pleasure to see her interests accord with her sentiments in the continued development of the commercial relations of the two countries; and it is with sincere regret she has regarded the terrible conflict that endangered a state whose prosperity and grandeur she has always desired.
It is superfluous to say that we have remained absolute strangers to the circumstances, altogether internal, that have brought about the separation of the north and south, in the centre of the Union; but we may mention that we have not ceased to deplore the events that have been the consequence; that we had always expressed ourselves in regard to it in the most explicit manner, under all circumstances, even declaring ourselves ready to interpose our good offices if they should at any time be thought necessary to the success of an attempt at reconciliation.
Facts, however, strike everybody with incontrovertible authority. The war broke out, over an extensive territory, between the two factions of the Union, and has sustained an equilibrium for four years, kept up by large regular armies obeying constituted governments. It was impossible for foreign powers not to recognize the parties engaged in such a conflict as belligerents, and to grant them such characters allowed by the law of nations.
[Page 691]The government of the Emperor could not then hesitate to proclaim his consequent duty of strict neutrality. Held responsible for his deeds, he abstained from every resolution tending to prejudge the issue of a struggle to be decided by the force of arms and the will of God.
It was not his place to say, without meddling in affairs that concerned the people of the United States alone, what should be the terms of reconciliation, the object we so ardently desired. Without expressing any opinion on the subject, he has continued to maintain diplomatic relations with the federal government, and abstained from all official intercourse with the power existing in Richmond. The government of the Emperor has therefore conformed in all its acts to a strict and loyal observance of its declarations of neutrality by giving a friendly character to its attitude towards the Union.
We do not doubt but the good sense of the American people, laying aside the passions of the struggle they are maintaining, will do justice to our intentions and our conduct towards them. It is the duty of the government to enlighten the people as much as possible, and direct their judgment. We, too, must beware of false impressions, and defend public opinion against ill-founded suggestions. While it is represented in the United States that France advocates disunion, it is repeated in Europe that the United States are only waiting for the end of their civil war to pounce upon Mexico and tear down a flag, the accidental vicinity of which, it seems to us, ought to inspire different sentiments in those who are now defending the work of the founders of the American republic. We reject such suppositions; we expect a complete reciprocity of amicable proceedings from the cabinet at Washington, and a similar observance of the rules of neutrality. We are pleased with the assurances that Mr. Seward has given us on that point. The exalted intelligence of that great statesman protects him, we are sure, from the prepossessions and prejudices that events in Mexico may have excited in some minds. We trust that these false impressions will disappear before a more calm and sound consideration of the true interests of the American people.
We went to Mexico to obtain redress and satisfaction for grievous wrongs, denying from the first, as we have always done since on all occasions, every intention of a settlement or of territorial acquisition. Our intervention has permitted reconstruction in that country, on conditions much more favorable than the former governments to the development of its social life and prosperity. We presume there is nothing in that to alarm the United States, and therefore we refuse to believe the designs attributed to them. Whatever may be the result of this struggle in the United States, we think the best employment the States of North America can make of their forces and available resources will be to repair the ravages of war. We cannot believe they are thinking of using them in an expensive and unjust war against a country that has never given them cause of complaint—in a war, in fact, (and we say it now because we do not wish to repeat it,) in which circumstances will force the United States to meet and oppose a power that was once their ancient ally.
We reject, then, these suppositions, condemned by our reason. We hope that the resolutions of the cabinet at Washington in regard to the Mexican government will continue to confirm our confidence in their wisdom. As we are neutral in the politico-military struggle in the United States, we expect their neutrality in our affairs in Mexico. As we will help to dissipate the doubts that exist in America in regard to our sentiments towards the United States, we would be pleased to see the federal government give us grounds to enlighten European opinion in regard to the intentions attributed to it by prejudiced minds.
Accept the assurances, &c.,