The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1861-06-19
British Neutrality and the Breakers
Ahead.

British Neutrality and the breakers
| Ahead.
The news from Europe by the last arrivals
is well calculated to open the eyes of the Anne
ricsn people. 1t had been too hastily assumed
that England meditated no hostility against us,
because she had given way upon one point of
the privateering question. She said she would
not admit the privateers Of either of the
belligerents into her ports. She could
hardly refuse to do that after agreeing
with the other great Powers Of Europe to
abolish privateering as between each other
and after asking our government to ac-
| cede to the terms Of the treaty Of Paris. Be-
! sides, il she contemplated war with u.s. it would
| be her game to commit our government now
| against privateering which would render the
United States helpless against her on the ocean
and enable her to ruin our commerce on every
sea. We hope, therefore, that the administration
| at Washington will now, if 1t has not already
done so, propose to England to abolish the cap
ture Of the private property Of an enemy even
by public vessels at sea- as 1t has long been abol
ished on land. This will test her sincerity. If
she does not intend to break the peace with us
she can have no objection. II she means war,
she will certainly refuse to do it. As to the other
| Powers of Europe, we hold their assurances of
friendship to be made in good faith But there
is reason to doubt the professions of the British
| government, and we ought to be prepared for
the worst. Her prohibition against privateers
entering her ports was calculated to lull us into
q false security. She has not yet abandoned
! the claim that British sailors captured by us in
Southern privateers are not pirates, and must
not be hanged She may raise point Of in
ternational law there when we least expect it,
perhaps in the case of the crew of the Savannah,
if any of them should happen to be British sub
jects. Not content with putting An established
legitimate government on the same footing
with freebooters in the matter of priva.eering,
she declares she will not permit our public
ships of-war to take prizes into her ports.
This is the shadow cast before by coming
events. Where the shoe will pinch most, and
where Great Britain will be most likely to make
her stand, is in the case of the blockade. As
| yet the cotton crop is not ready, and she isnow
still; but it will be ready by the lst of October.
If she cannot get cotton then, or is not likely to
get it coon, it is very far from impossible or
even improbable that she will pick quarrel
with our government. Meantime she will have
assembled her ships-of-war along our seaboard,
and if we should not be better prepared then
than we are now, our ports, our shipping and
our commerce would be at her mercy.
The course of the British government in this
conflict is wholly unjustiiable. Were the
present war between the American govern
ment and Mexico, or any other independent
government, the case would be different. But
1t is a war to put down rebellion in the United
States, and no external Power has right to
interfere. Any interference is an act Of hos
tility-a cause of war. Lord Lyons, the British
Ambassador, and Lord John Russell, have both
interfered. The English Minister at Washing
ton has furnished the erroneous information on
which the English Minister at home acted
ana the act Of Lord John Russell recognizing
the Southern confederacy as belligerent was
incipient covert hostility, a quasi act of war,
which is now followed up by an insulting
declaration that our cruisers with prizes will
be excluded from British ports. II satisfac
tory explanation is not given or if any further
| CNSlt dCto Vi Dprtuey VCH'uASu, pu tlc
President would have right to dis Mss
Lord Lyons and to issue a proclamation,
declaring that war existed; and, farther
the Chief Magistrate might retaliate aud COM
mence war by Selling all the British ship
ping in our harbors. the war with Mexico
is case in point. The Mexican General
bad inaugurs.ed hostilities, and General lay
lor crossed the Rio Grande from Texas into
Mexico. and commenced war before 1t was de-
clared by Congress. The act was approved by
Congress and by the nation, and General Tay.
ler was elected next President There Can
be no doubt that Cong ess would fully sus
tain Mr. Lincoln should he adopt similar
course What would be the consequence?
While war with England cannot make oui
condition any woree than it is-as We ar.
already at war, and it b Sin for penny, in fol
| a pound"-on the other hand it would be mos
destructive to her Interests. 1t would u.
terly ruin her. Ba1 as her position would b,
without cotton, she would be ten times wors,
f If she went to war with us to obtain it. Sh,
would not only not succeed, but would los
all her trade with her best customer, and he
commerce would be driven from every re,
Instead of four or FIVE millions Of her popula
! tien being deprived Of employment for lsc|
, of a supply of cotton there would be tsl
. millions beggared by war with the Unite'
States
The position Of England is peculiar. Sh
wants cotton, which she can ONLY get here He
aristocracy would rejoice that this republi
faii.ccji, and they would care nothing for on
: difficulties if they were not affected themselvs
:, If they could only get cotton they would b
glad that the American people cut each other
throats till doomsday. The tories, or COZ