Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward
Sir: At an interview which I had with Lord Stanley at the foreign office, on Tuesday last, I presented to him the letter for him transmitted with your despatch, No. 2070, of the 7th of October. I also read to him the substance of your despatch, No. 2059, of the 25th of September, to which he listened with great attention. He remarked that nothing could be more friendly and full of genuine sympathy than the tone of it. He should be glad to have a copy of the latter part of it to communicate the very language to the friends of Sir Frederick Bruce, who would, he doubted not, fully appreciate the nature of the testimony. I let him have it, as a matter of course.
I seized the occasion to allude to the rumor of the appointment of a successor. He said at once that he had offered the place to Mr. Thornton, a person whom he had every reason to believe likely to prove satisfactory. Then, as if having in his mind the objections made in the Times, he remarked that a selection might indeed have been made from the community at large, but the objection to that course grew out of an understanding long established with those persons who were willing to enter the diplomatic service as a profession, that they would be entitled to promotion under all but very exceptional circumstances. I observed that no systematic service could well be maintained without some such inducement. His lordship then went on to say that he considered the post as one of the most important in the service. On first coming into office it had been his wish to raise it to the rank of an embassy, but on further consideration of the difficulties in the way of introducing a solitary distinction at Washington, and for other reasons, he had abandoned the idea. It was, however, now placed on a direct line of promotion to an ambassador’s post, which made it more an object of ambition. I observed that the proposal of an ambassador would, I thought, be somewhat embarrassing to us, as our established system rested on a different footing. There was really no difference in the duties to be performed. The only question involved was one in the order of precedence on public occasions and at court. Some time or other, perhaps, hereafter, if our people should get their pride up about yielding precedence to the representatives of the other great powers, they might change the nominal grade to establish equality, but it would probably be a good while yet before the idea would come to them. Meanwhile it was as well not to disturb it.
I then again, in connection with the loss of Sir F. Bruce, threw out a suggestion as to its probable effect upon the question yet pending between the two countries. His lordship took it up by saying that there really was little difficulty in coming to a settlement so far as the merits of the question itself were concerned. He was well convinced that the country would be perfectly ready to acquiesce in any decision that might be made even though it were adverse. But he intimated that the point of pride about leaving the right of recognition in any doubt was so great that it could not be so treated. He said this was the universal sentiment, as a proof of which he intimated that he had sounded even our best friend, Mr. Bright, and found that he felt like everybody else about it. I infer from what he said that the answer will be an acceptance of your proposal to adopt his language, but guarded by a caveat on that point.
I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,
Hon, William H. Seward, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.