The Sun.
London, England, 1862-03-11 00:00:00

THE : SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING; HARCII 11, '1862,

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE. 4

I MPERIA.

Closinq
Price.

'Paid.

Business done

TATTERSALLW—YESTERDAY.
LIVERPOOL STEEPLECHASE.
6to 1 agst Huntsman (taken)
8 to 1 agst Jealousy (taken)
14 to 1 agst Playman (taken)
14 to 1 agst Anatis (taken)
16 to 1 agst Harry (t .ken)
20 to 1 agat Romeo (taken)
20 to 1 agat Brunette (taken)
25 to 1 agst Thomastown (taken)
25 to 1 agat Bridegroom (taken)
25 to 1 agst Tattler (taken)
33 to 1 agst Willoughby (taken)
66 to 1 agst O'Connell (taken)
66 to 1 agst Cannibal (taken)

72 75
1001 1011
61 61d

8k 8
5

BETTING AT MANCHESTER—MONDAY.
There was not much done on the Spring Cup, although
several animals were supported to small amounts. For the
Grand National Steeple Chase, Huntsman retains his posi-
tion, although 7 to 1 was offered. Thomastown, from a
report of his non-arrival, went to 25 to 1 (taken and of-
fered) ; but, at the close, the highest offer was 16 to 1. The
Dane had friends to-day at 100 to 6, while Anatis was
friendless ; Jealousy, Playman, Bucephalus, and Romeo
were each very fairly supported. Old Calabar, from the
betting, appears to have had a bad night's rest ; 6 to 1 was
laid against him for the Two Thousand Guineas, and 100
to 6 for the Derby ; but a very small amount cf support
stopped his downward progress, and, at the close, 5 to 1 for
one event, and 100 to 7 for the other, were the highest
offers. Closing prices :

LIVERPOOL SPRING CUP.
6to 1 agst Costa (taken)
7to 1 agst Haddingtoti (taken)
7to 1 agst My Mary (taken)
Bto 1 agst Shropshire (taken)
Bto 1 agst Sir William (taken)
Bto 1 agst Petra (taken and offered)

TYRO STAKES.
3to lon the field (offered)
GRAND NATIONAL STEEPLECHASE.
7to 1 agst Huntsman (taken and offered)
10 to 1 agst Jealousy (taken)
12 to 1 agst Playman (taken and offered)
16 to 1 agst Bucephalus (taken)
16 to 1 agst Thoma.stown (offered)
16 to 1 agst The Dane (taken)
20 to 1 agst Tattler (taken)
20 to 1 agst Romeo (taken)
20 to 1 agst Anatis (offered)
20 to 1 agst Xanthus (offered)
25 to 1 agst Harry (taken)
25 to 1 agst Bridegroom (offered)
40 to 1 agst Willoughby (taken)

TWO THOUSAND GUINEAS.
sto 1 agst The Marquis (taken)
sto 1 agst Oli Calabar (offered, 6to 1 taken)

THE DERBY.
9to lon the field (offered)
14 to 1 bar one (offered)
45 to 1 agst Neptunus (taken)
50 to 1 agst Nottingham (taken)

WIMBLEDON, CHEAP, AND KINGSTON VO-
LUNTEER AND HUNT RACES.
These races were held yesterday in West Barnes Park,
and caused a large number of persons to assemble, includ•
ing a number of volunteer officers. W. Paxton, Esq., and
E. F. Rayne, Esq., were the stewards; Lieut. Allen was
clerk of the course ; and A. Heathcote, Esq., of Durdans
Park, Epsom, the judge.

The Trial Cup ; the winner to be sold by auction ; selling
allowances. About three-quarters of a mile.
(Mr. Hipwell) 1
34M
rr IR] raryyn'es Ny eel
y(5(4114)6)1,2 sit 2 7s
tl b7lb
.. (Mr. Nlilitburne) 2
Mr. Bailey's Billy the Norman (£2O), 12st (Owner) S
The following also ran :—Lady's Maid, Tommy Bounce,
Strawberry Jam, Otranto, Lot 84, Countess, Surprise, and
Wiakworth.
Betting-3 to lon the field.
The winner made the running all the way, and won by
half a length ; two lengths separating the second and third.
The winner was not sold.
The Hunters' Stakes of 2 sous each, with-a:claret jug added
About two miles and a half, over hurdles.
Mr. Reynolds's Lottery, (£10), 12st (Owner) 1
Mr. C. M. Baker's Bandy Legs (£4O), 12st 71b (Owner) 0
..... (Mr. O'Farrell) 0
MrließttainYgn—e'B Harry
6to4ontootsterly3,st3 to 1 each agst Bandy Legs
and Harry.
The latter bolted at the start ; Bandy Legs finished at
the half distance, and the winner finished at his leisure,
and was sold for 20 guineas.
The Farmers' Plate, given by the gentlemen of Mr. Heath-
cote's Hunt and the Morden Harriers. About two miles
over hurdles.
Mr. Urry's Nancy (£4O), 12st 71b (A. Balchin) 1
Mr. Rayne's The Lark (£4O), 12st 71b (Owner) 2
The following also ran :—Paddy, Sailor, Constance, and
Limeriek.
Betting-3 to 1 agst Constance and:Sailor, 4to 1 agst
Nancy.
Won easily; the second was the only other that walked
past the post. Sailor fell. The winner was not sold.
The Volunteer Hurdle Race Cup. About two miles.
Mr. Hurman's Lottery (£2O), 12st (Owner) 1
Mr. Barter's Inder (£2O), 12st (Owner) 2
The following also ran :—Fun, Ruth, and Lady's Maid.
Betting-6 to 4on the field.
Won by 40 lengths ; only the first two passed the post.
Ruth threw her rider and bolted.
A Scm IT Race for a Silver Cup, two miles, was won by
Lard George ; Chippenham second. 11 started.
A match for £25 aside, one mile and a half, was won by
Mr. Barter's Ruth, 12st 71b, beating Mr. Reynolds's
Countess, 12st,

[AVVERTISEMSITT.I
Mr. Thomas Senn begs to inform his friends that he has
commenced business for a gentleman. T. S. can be seen
daily, in Upper St. Martin's-lace, from 10 till 3, and 6
till 9.

,lAMINT.

which they had to consider. The first was, whether there
was sufficientauthority for instituting it. Lord Stowell
says that a blockade must be the act of a sovereign autho-
rity. This was the act of the President of the United
States, who oe the 19 h of April issued a pro-
clamation declaring that the blockade was about to
begin, •nd that act was followed by armed ships
of the United States, blockading the several ports, and
warning vessels off the coasts. Therefore there can be
no question as to the authority by which the blockade
exists. Then, with regard to the means which the Presi-
dent, as the organ of the Government of the United States,
has employed, of course at first they were very deficient,
but I think that these papers and everything we have heard
show that the Government of the United States has been
most desirous so to augment their squadron and so to em-
ploy their ships that there might be a sufficient force to es-
tablish an effective blockade. It was a matter of great im-
portance to them—a vital point of their policy, and therefore
one cannot doubt that they would use every means in their
power. As early:as the 15th of July, when complaints were
made in the New York newspapers that the blockading
squadron was not sufficient, I find that they had then 34
men-of-war, of 56,000 tons, with 726 guns, and 10,118 men.
That shows that they had made great efforts to establish an
effective blockade. It might be said, again, at the coin..
mencenient that the blockade was too extensive, and that it
was impossible that so extensive a blockade should really
be efficient ; but we must recollect that we ourselves in our
American m ar instituted a blockade of 2,000 miles of coast,
and the difference between 2,000 miles and 3,000 miles is not
so great as to authorise us to make any objection to the
blockade on that account. But in a blockade of 3,000 miles
of coast, although it is such a blockade as we ourselves
should have established, and such as the law of nations re-
cognises, with several large ports and many small ones to
watch, there were sure to be many irregularities in the con-
duct of it. Yet we find, generally speaking, that there has
been an intention to station ships off the different ports, and
that ships have been stationed there. Thus the blockade I
of Charleston was effective on the 11th of May by the ship
Niagara; Pensacola was blockaded on the 13th of May;
the blockade of the Mississippi was effective on the 26th or
27th of May, and Savannah was blockaded on the 28th of
May, each port with a sufficient number of ships for the
purpose. The noble lord said that the blockade of Charles.
ton was interrupted on some day in May; but he himself
read a letter in which it is stated that the blockade was
renewed by another ship on the sth of June. There was
also an account of another ship being added on some day in
July or August, and there is no reason to suppose that there
had been no ships of war before that port, and the whole
question which arises is as to the, interruption of the blockade
between the 15th or 23d of May and the 4th of June. If any
ship had been taken at that time into a prize court it might
well have been argued by the owners that there was'an in-
terruption, and that no blockade existed; but that does not
affect the general question of the blockade of the Southein
coast of America. And let it be remembered, above all,
that if there were an ineffectual blockade the last place in
which we should hear of it would be in the American prize
courts. When a merchant vessel had been taken into one
of those courts it would be quite competent for the owners
to plead that there was no effective blockade and that, there-
fore, the vessel not having broken it, could not be legally
condemned. No one will say that there are not judges in
America quite competent to decide questions of international
law—judges who have inherited the precepts and doctrines
of such men as Chancellor Kent and Justice Story—quite
competent to pronounce judgment according to law, and
who, I believe, would not have departed from the law in their
decisions in. such oases. But Ido not find that there has
been any real discussion in the prize courts of America, ex-
cept, perhaps, in one or two instances with respect to the
efficiency of the blockade. I must confess to the noble lord
that the many instances which are given by Consul Bunch
and others of vessels which have run the blockade induce me
to consider the whole of this question with a view to decid-
ing what the course of the Government should be. But, in
saying that many vessels have run the blockade, I think
there is great exaggeration, and there is great misapprehen-
sion when lists of vessels are given which are, in fact, vessels
belonging to the Southern ports, which run out of creaks
and creep through shallow waters in order to reach another
port on the same coast. These are mostly small vessels of
from 50 to 350 tons, and it is stated in one of these letters
that they cannot be regarded as vessels of such size and im-
portance as to argue that the blockade was inefficient which
allowed them to escape. Your lordships know very well
that in 1806 the Government of this country announced a
blockade extending from Brest to Dunkirk, but during that
and other blockades which we instituted on the French coast
there were many coasting vessels which went from one port
of France to another entirely escaping the blockade. But
would that have justified either America or any other neu-
tral Power in saying " This blockade is ineffective, and we
will not acknowledge it, and we require you to give up the
vessels which you have seized for breach of blockade ?" It
certainly would not have justified such a course. But there
is another consideration, Has the Southein coast had a
free and uninterrupted communication with Europe? Have
your lordships heard that cotton has arrived in its usual
quantities here, and that the manufactures of Great Britain
and France have arrived freely at the ports of the States
which are now in a state of civil war F On the contrary,
the intelligence which we have received shows that there
has bean no such uninterrupted intercourse, but that great
inconvenience has been suffered by the inhabitants of these
Southern States, owing to the existence of that blockade,
which is said to be ineffective. On the question of the effi •
ciency of the blockade it was desirable to consult the law
officers of the Crown ; and after having done so I wrote the
despatch to Lord Lyons, stating that :
" Her Majesty's Government however are of opinion that,
assuming that the blockade is duly notified, and also that
a number of ships is stationed and remains at the entrance
of a port sufficient really to prevent access to it or to create
an evident danger of entering or leaving it, and that these
ships do not voluntarily permit ingress or egress, the fact
that various ships may have successfully escaped through
it will not of itself prevent the blockade from being an effec-
tive one by international law."
This was the deliberate opinion of her Majesty's Govern-
ment on the subject. I cannot give the papers to which
the noble lord refers, on the very ground on which he asks
for them. He says, perhaps there may be papers that may
show the blockade he thinks ineffective may really have
been effective. There are no such papers ; there are no
papers that can make the case stronger for the Government
than those which have been given; the Government is
willing to leave your lordships to judge the case from the
whole effect of the papers that have been already printed.
As to any representations from the Government of France
that it considered the blockade ineffective, I must state that
no such communication has ever been made to her Majesty's
Government. The noble lord has asked whether the Go-
vernment of the Southern States acknowledges the 2d and
4th Articles of the Declaration of Paris. It has declared
that it does acknowledge them, We have entered into no
engagement with that Government. It is our duty to see
that the Declaration of Paris is agreed to independently of
any such engagement ; that it is our duty with regard to all
neutral nations, and with regard to the peace of the world.
I should have been very s ,rry to be forced by circumstances
to come to a different conclusion. It would have been a
great misfortune if, owing to circumstances, we should
have thought ourselves oblige to take a course in such a
quarrel that would have made us become partisans either of
the North or South. (Hear.) It was my object and the ob-
ject of every member of her Majesty's Government from
the very beginning of the conflict to watch the course of
events, with the determination to act in an impartial spirit
and preserve a strict neutrality between the two Powers.
Sometimes our course, as when we acknowledged the
Southern States as belligerents, may have been considered
as
other
n
hand, when forbidding privateers to Carry their prizes into
as having an injurious effect on the North. Oth
it may have been considered to have had
any British port,
an effect unfavourable to the South. But we did not con-
sider the tendency of these ants. We only considered whe-
ther they were just in themselves, and becoming the cha-
racter of this country. If wo had been obliged to take part
either with one side or the other, it would have been a mis-
fortune and calamity for the world, and for the people of
America especially. I have lately received an interesting ac-
count given by a person sent by the Federal Government to
superintend the negroes on some plantations on certain points
in the South. He describes the condition of these negroes,
their readiness to work, their usefulness, their peaceable and
generally good disposition. He says, though he did every-
thing he could to remove the effect of false and calumnious
assertions against the Federal Government and President
Lincoln, yet he cautiously abstained from any incitement
to the slaves to rise against their owners. But if, by any
misfortune, it had become necessary to vindicate our honour,
if we had been obliged to take part in this war, any hope of
seeing an end to the system of slavery by peaceable means
would have vanished. In that case the North would have
proclaimed a general emancipation of the slaves, and though
it is our earnest wish that the sin and stain of slavery should
cease, yet there is nothing we should regard
horror than the devastation, the burnings, the murders, and
r
population of 4,000,000 slaves with greate
that, in the
pill age among a
name of liberty to the negro, might have been perpetrated._
(Hear.) We trust that when this contest ends it will end
in such a way as to leave the emancipation of the negro
possible to be effected by gradual slid peaceable means, and
that the slaves of America may in time take their place as
free labourers without loss of life or destruction of the pro-
perty of their masters. It is not owing to those masters
that slavery now exists in the Southern States of America.
It is an inheritance they derives from this country. (Hear,
hear.) Having taken this neutral course, I trust within
three months, or perhaps sooner, we may see the end of this
civil war; and I hope it may end in a manner consistent
with the welfare and happiness of both parties, and a renewal
feelings between North and South. If so, they
peaceable separation into two States that
mo of tyh
ce onl
sdet
t o a
might both be powerful —inhabited by men with very dif-
ferent education, perhaps with very different natures,
but who may have before them a career of prosperity for
centuries to come. If this should be the case I should re-
joice above all that during the contest we have done no.
thing to aggravate it, and that while we have constantly
pursued a firm course it has at the same time been a course
of conciliation. (Hoar, hear.)
Lord STRATHEDEN then withdrew his motion,
TRANSFER OF LAND.

HOUSE OF LORDS—YeSTERDAY.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at five o'clock.

ROYAL COMMISSION.
The Royal Assent was given by commislfion to the Con-
solidated Fund Bill.

The Royal Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor,
Lord Cranworth, and Earl St. Germans.
SHOOTING LICENCES.
The Earl of MALMESBURY said on Thursday next
he should call the attention of the house to a circular
which had been sent round to all those who held shooting
licenses, and which was said to have the approval of the
Chief Commissioners of Woods and Forests.
THE PRESS IN FIEDMONT.
The Marquis of NORMANBY said he was compelled to
postpone the motion which stood on the paper for Fridsy
until Monday next, owing to the non-arrival of certain in-
formation which he had expected.

THE REVISED CODE.
The Earl of DERBY presented petitions against the
Revised Code.
THE SOUTHERN BLOCKADE.
Lord STRATHEDEN (who has elected to use the title
of Campbell) rose to call attention to the blockade of
the ports of the Confederate States of America, and to
move an address for copies of any correspondence upon the
subject which might have taken place since the date of
the papers which had been laid before Parliament. The
noble and learned lord said the object of the motion is not to
impugn the conduct of the Government or to show that the
blockade ought before now to have been opened, or that
now some measure in that direction should be taken, but
to establish that the attitude in which we stand with one
of the belligerents suspends, if it does not violate neutrality,
and that some further action is required in order to restore
the neutrality we aim at. The belligerent in question is
the Southern or insurrectionary power, and our attitude
towards it arises out of a transaction very easy to recal, and
a despatch with which the world is perfectly familiar, that
of the Foreign Secretary to Lord Lyons, dated Feb-
ruary 15th. The transaction was an appeal on our
part to the Government of Richmond, through our
consul at Charleston, to accept the principles of public
law laid down at Paris in 1856. The whole narrative ap-
pears in paper No. 3of the series on America. The nego-
tiator .with the Government of Richmond was not our con-
sul in person, but a gentleman of South Carolina, whom he
chose to representhim. It was clearly open to the Govern-
ment of Richmond to decline the proposition, not upon its
merits, but on the ground that they could not hold inter-
course with the agent of a power which had not yet recog•
nized the place they claimed in the society of nations. Such
a refusal might have easily been made on grounds of policy,
as well as grounds of dignity, because if they consented to
negotiate with countries which denied their claim to recog-
nition they might seem in the eyes of some to compromise
their right to urge,or at least to reduce their power of extort-
ing it. And it is well known that, among the leading men of
Richmond, there was a difference of opinion on the conduct
which became them. However, not only did they consent
to hear our negotiator, but they determined to embrace his
proposition. On the 13th of August last year the Presi-
dent of the Southern Congress signed the resolution which
that Congress had arrived at, accepting all the rules laid
down at Paris in 1856, except that which relates to priva-
teering, and which we had not asked them to adopt. But
the President was not so weak as to refrain from telling our
negotiator that he looked for something in return for the
concession he was making, and that the return he hoped
for was a rigorous adherence, on our part, to the principles
we had laid down as to blockades. We gained our point on
such an understanding. So much for the transaction with
the Government of Richmond. We now come to the des-
patch of the 15th of January, in which the Foreign Secre-
tary, so far as the papers show, in reply to no question, in
obedience to no demand, and in fear of no emergency,
volunteers hie approbation of the blockade as carried on at
Wilmington and Charleston. It is perfectly notorious to
all by whom these papers have been studied that at Wil-
mington and Charleston the blockade has been less effective
than at any other portion of the seaboard from the north of
Virginia to the extremity of Texas. The effect of the
despatch therefore is to relieve the Government of Wash-
ington from the necessity to maintain at any part a higher
or stricter type than that which Wilmington and Charleston
have illustrated. Wherever it exceeds that type which the
Foreign Secretary has selected for encouragement they are
at liberty to weaken and abate it. It is unnecessary to
prove its inefficiency at other ports, since its state aik
these two has been accepted as the standard. How
far is such a measure, upon our part, consistent with the
engagements we incurred in August to the Government of
Richmond. It should never be forgotten that our Govern-
ment were not forced to choose between the opposite alter •
natives of raising the blockade or of giving it in its weakest
points a conspicuous and irrevocable sanction. They
might, in a despatch so public and momentous, have sanc-
tioned not its weak points, but its strong ones, if any such
could be discovered ; they might at least have gone
on without a pointed declaration, and only so far
recognised it as they had during tho autumn. On
what ground were they required to blazon a mani-
festo in its favour, whioh must offend and startle
one of the belligerents who had a right to look to a very diffe-
rent conduct from us, who had a right at least to hope that,
when we quitted silence, it would not be for language in-
consistent with our pledges to him. How can it be shown
that this uncalled-for manifesto does not violate neutrality
by a departure from the principles which we urged upon the
Government of Richmond, and should have urged in vain,
had it been thought that we were ready to abandon
them. It can be shown, in one way only, viz., by
disproving the evidence which this book presents on
Wilmington and Charleston. Happily the witness to
be heard is that very Consul whom the Govern-
ment urged to negotiate with the Southern Power
on the point which I referred to, whose previous character
is shown by the appointment to so delicate a trust, and
whose fitness to receive it was proved by the rapid and suc-
cessful close to which he brought the business. The juris-
diction of Mr. Bunch extended over both these harbours—
one of them in North, the other in South Carolina. It is
not necessary to rely on the evidence which the Southern
envoys have adduced. It is not necessary to rely upon the
circumstance that the harbour of Charleston has been bar-
barously chocked up, which would not have happened
could access to it have been otherwise prevented. It is
not necessary to rely upon the circumstance that now ships
may be insured at fifteen per cent. between Liverpool
and Charleston, whereas fifty per cent. would be required,
as shipowners inform us, in a really adequate blockade.
Our consul had no motive for leaning one way or the other,
although the Northern Government have now deprived
him of his office by taking away his ex equatur. In support
of this view the noble lord then read copious extracts from
the despatches in question. The noble lord, in continuation.
said—Such was the blockade at these ports in which it has
received so unlooked for, and so astonishing a
sanction. But does it, therefore, follow, that the con-
duct of the Government is open to exception. On
the contrary, it only follows that further correspon-
dence is required to throw some light wholly wanting
now upon the reasons which directed them. Further papers
may show that they were forced to make a declaration on
these particular localities by an embarrassment which
could-not be disposed of, or an inquiry which could not be
I adjourned. They may show us that the French Govern-
ment had already acted in this manner, and that it was
necessary to keep up our concert upon American affairs.
They may show us that further evidence was in possession
of the Government to rebut that of our naval officers and
consuls. They may show us that an explanation has been
offered to the Government of Richmond with which we have
communicated and may communicate again, calculated to
remove the sting from a proceeding which must appear to
them so adverse. But if no further information is extended,
the irresistible conclusion will present itself that we ow? a
debt to one of the belligerents which ought to be dis-
charged, although not by raising the blockade, a course
after their despatch impossible for Government. If no
further information is extended until that debt has been
discharged in one form or another, neutrality may be upon
the lips of official men, but has lost its place among their
counsels.
Lord ABINGER said he had not anticipated such an
easy solution of the Trent difficulty, and attributing it, as
he did, to the conduct of her Majesty's Government, he could
not forbear expressing his opinion that the prudence,dignityi
and conciliation which they had displayed deserved the ap •
probation of all classes in this country. (Hear.) He did not
advocate the raising of the blockade, because he thought that
under existing circumstances it would be quite unpardon-
able, and would inevitably bring about collisions between
our ships of war and the cruisers of the United States. He
so highly approved the policy of non-interference that he
should be sorry to see any system inaugurated which would
lead to any difficulty in adhering to it. At the same time,
he confessed that his sympathies were with a gallant people
struggling for independence. He admitted that the Northern
States were superior in men, material, and treasure, and he
did not undervalue the importance of their recent suc-
cesses, but he believed, notwithstanding, that the subju-
gation of the South was an impossibility. (Hear, hear.)
The determination of the Southern States to maintain their
independence must be admitted by all, and when once that
was the case it was time to consider whether a recognition
of their independence was not a measure which we ought to
take to save bloodshed, and to put an end to the war. He
hoped that some independent member would make a motion
to that effect, or, failing that, t'. at the subject would be taken
up by some noble lord on that side of the house.
Earl RUSSELL—I quite admit the right of the noble lord
to call into question the conduct of the Government with
respect to the blockade, nor, indeed, should I complain if any
noble lord were to call into question the whole of their con-
duct with respect to the unfortunate differences which have
taken place in America, for I am convinced not only that
that policy is founded on reason end can be justified by
argument, but also that it is generally approved by the
country. (Hear, bear.) With respect to this particular
question of the blockade,--:and I shall not detain your
lordships by entering into any other-Tit was, of course, a
matter of serious consideration with her Majesty's GOTTA-
merit from time to time in what manner they should act.
There are various questions connected with a blockade

The Transfer of Real Estate Bill was read a second time.
The Exchequer-bills Bill was read a second time.
Their lordships then. tAjournocl,