this legally fine-drawn distinction was not brought forward for final argument, or the extradition treaty might or should have suffered. By an adroit use of a technical objec tion the case was put to an end by the release of the prisoner, and everybody, except perhaps the extreme pro-slavery party, breathed more freely.

Comparatively few people in England understood that the demand for the relinquishment of Anderson as an escaped slave was made by a government controlled by Southern influence. Scarcely anybody here knew much about the working of the separate state laws in America, or the changes that would probably follow the accession to power of a strong Northern party. For some years our governments had been irritated by the overbearing tone frequently assumed by the ministers at Washington in their representations regarding England, their denunciation of English claims in Central America, and other subjects of correspondence. These things were remembered as against the government of the United States, without much distinction being made between the parties of which that government might be formed; and consequently when the representatives of the North, the antagonists of slavery, came into power, and not unreasonably looked for the sympathy and moral support of Great Britain, they had some excuse for being disappointed at finding that, on the whole, Great Britain seemed inclined to turn to them a very cold shoulder.

The truth was that half the people in England did not regard the war as one directed against slavery, but as an effort to prevent the Southern States from breaking the union. The South was the aggressor, no doubt, but there were strong surmises that it had been driven into hostilities by the same overbearing temper which had so often been displayed towards this country. Nobody seemed to reflect that these arrogant messages were sent to this country by a government favourable to Southern and not to Northern views; and as to the suppression of slavery, had not President Lincoln, in entering upon the duties of his office, said: "I have no purpose, direct or indirect, to interfere with the institution of

slavery in the United States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so." Where was there any sign of the abolition of slavery in this declaration. Even better informed people seemed to think that the best thing the North could do was to let the Southern States go, and to take their peculiar institution with them. It was a not uncommon opinion that the Union would be broken up into various territories, under distinct and independent governments, like the countries of Europe. Another impression was that the Mississippi pretty accurately divided the free from the slaveholding states. In addition to these errors, which a reasonable amount of reflection or inquiry would have corrected, there existed a notion that the people of the Northern States were rather a crafty huckstering set, with a turn for doubledealing or talent for taking advantage. The movements of the government were therefore viewed with caution, if not with suspicion, when it came to be understood that the Northern cause was represented. Certainly there was little attempt on the part of the American cabinet to propitiate opinion in England.

When it was seen that very little sympathy could be counted on from this country, the United States government showed much asperity, although their accusations and the temper which they displayed fell far short of the animosity towards England openly avowed by the people in New York and elsewhere. Very little pains were taken on either side to restrain or to suppress expressions of feeling which were as bitter as they were ill founded, and unfortunately the policy adopted by the American government tended still more to excite the expressions of dissatisfaction with which the prosecution of the war was regarded here. Of course it was a serious misfortune that the supply of cotton should have been entirely suspended, and that the mills of Lancashire and Cheshire should be idle, the manufacturing population reduced to want, and the whole of a great staple trade paralysed; but in addition to this the American legislature had adopted a system of rigid protection which by the so-called "Morrill" Tariff

Bill almost prohibited the importation of foreign goods into America.

Our trade with the Southern States, it was felt, would have been comparatively unrestricted if those states had been able to legislate for themselves. In 1860 England had sent twenty millions of exports to America, and this amount of merchandise was now to be practically excluded, or to be taxed with duties which would be prohibitory. Birmingham expected to lose £3,800,000 of her cutlery trade; South Staffordshire was in dismay. Early in March, 1861, the Times said:

"The period between the election of the new president and the surrender of office by the old is a sort of interregnum, in which it may be said all legislative and executive activity is paralysed. But, though unable to do anything for the cause of the Union, the senate and the congress have employed the interregnum to strike a second blow at the commerce, the finance, and the general prosperity of the country infinitely more fatal than any abstraction of territory or diminution of population. They employed the last weeks of what is probably the last session of the last congress of the United States of America in undoing all the progress that has been made in the direction of free-trade, and in manacling their country once more in the fetters of a protection amounting to prohibition.

In

The conduct of congress on the Tariff Bill has much changed the tone of public feeling with reference to the Secessionists, and none here, even those whose sympathies are with the Northern States, attempt to justify the course which the Protectionists in congress have pursued. In Manchester the proposed increase of duties on cotton goods in the United States is causing great attention. Newcastle it is considered that it will be impossible to do business with the United States on the terms set out in the tariff, while the business with the Southern States is described as satisfactory. In Sheffield considerable apprehension is felt as to the effect of the new tariff on the steel trade. In Wolverhampton the anticipation that the tariff has become law darkens the already gloomy prospects of the iron trade. When it is remembered that

109

all this ill-will and disruption of international ties and sympathies, which were becoming closer every day, and which America never needed more than now, is to be effected for no better object than that of protracting the sickly existence of an artificial manufacturing system raised and nurtured at the expense of the shipping and trade of the country, and by levying an odious tribute from all classes not concerned in manufactures, we cannot but wonder at the madness of democracy and its utter inability to apprehend and retain the most obvious principles of economical science. Protection was quite as much a cause of the disruption of the Union as slavery. In that respect it has done its worst; but it is destined, if we mistake not, to be the fruitful mother of other disruptions. What interest have the great agricultural Western States, for instance, in being made tributaries to the ironmasters of Pennsylvania or the cottonspinners of Lowell? They will desire, as the South have desired, a direct trade with England; and the peculiar position of Canada, with its facilities of communication by lake, river, and railway, will show them the readiest means of obtaining a direct trade by a fresh separation, possibly by an amalgamation with our own colonies.

These topics are so obvious that we forbear to insist upon them, but we beg to point out, for the comfort of our own countrymen and the warning of the government of the United States, that in attempting to exclude at one blow twenty millions of exports from their territory they have undertaken a task quite beyond their power. They may, indeed, destroy their own customs revenue; they may ruin the shipping, and cripple the commerce of the towns on the Atlantic seaboard, but they cannot prevent English manufacturers from permeating the United States from one end to the other. A glance at the map is sufficient to show this. The Southern Confederacy will, of course, desire no better than to make Charleston, Savannah, Mobile, and New Orleans dépôts of English manufactures, to be smuggled across the long and imperceptible frontier which separates them from the United States. Nay, it is quite possible that the

quent neutrality was the only proper course, and the best course for the interests of the Federal government. But our declaration of this neutrality was by implication treated as an offence throughout the long correspondence that ensued.

It required some care to prevent the controversy being distorted into an actual quarrel, for the Federals appeared to regard England as a watchful enemy, waiting to do the Union an ill-turn, or to aid in preventing its restoration. As a matter of fact the Emperor of the French, who had in his mind the illfated scheme for intervention in Mexico, all but openly recognized and sided with the South, and would have had us join him in interfering to secure the demands for a separation from the Union. Neither Lord Palmerston nor Lord John Russell would listen to such a proposal for a moment. Many "advisers" were strongly in favour of our interposing to secure the independence of the Confederacy, but the government utterly refused to entertain such a notion. They knew very well what were the motives of the Federals, and they respected them, though the sudden and complete successes which followed the first prompt action of the Confederates caused them to think, as the majority of people thought, that the South would ultimately become a separate nation.

The second call for 23,000 men for the regular army, and 18,000 seamen, was made by President Lincoln immediately after the block

ade;

but the Confederates were equally determined, and seemed for a time to be masters of the situation. Their repeated successes had the effect of increasing the number of their admirers here, and of emphasizing the feeling of distrust and indifference towards the North, which had already been augmented by the invectives which were uttered against England by the populace in New York and many of the ill-regulated recruits of the Federal army.

Much was said on the part both of the North and the South to keep public opinion here in a ferment. Both claimed to act in accordance with right and justice. Mr. Jefferson Davis stigmatized as unconstitutional the

proclamation of Mr. Lincoln calling for 70,000 volunteers, and excused his own appeal for recruits to form a Confederate army by saying to his ministry :

"Deprived of the aid of congress at the moment, I was under the necessity of confining my action to a call on the States for volunteers for the common defence. I deemed it proper further to issue a proclamation inviting application from persons disposed to aid our defence in private armed vessels on the high seas, to the end that preparations might be made for the immediate issue of letters of marque and reprisal, which you alone, under the constitution, have power to grant. I entertain no doubt you will concur with me in the opinion that, in the absence of a fleet of public vessels, it will be eminently expedient to supply their place by private armed vessels, so happily styled by the publi cists of the United States 'the militia of the sea,' and so often and justly relied on by them as an efficient and admirable instrument of defensive warfare. I earnestly recommend the immediate passage of a law authorizing me to accept the numerous proposals already received."

He then went on to denounce the proclamation of a blockade, and concluded by saying:—

"We feel that our cause is just and holy; we protest solemnly in the face of mankind that we desire peace at any sacrifice save that of honour and independence; we seek no conquest, no aggrandisement, no concession of any kind from the States with which we were lately confederated: all we ask is to be let alone; that those who never held power over us shall not now attempt our subjugation by This we will, this we must, resist to the direst extremity. The moment that this pretension is abandoned the sword will drop from our grasp, and we shall be ready to enter into treaties of amity and commerce that cannot but be mutually beneficial."

armis.

At about the same time Mr. C. M. Clay, the minister of the United States in St. Petersburg, addressed a long letter to the Times, in which he endeavoured to correct some of the erroneous impressions which he believed to be prevalent in this country.