The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1861-06-12
NEW Y0RE HERALD WEDNESDAY, JUNE -, 1851.

N. f., we lesru shat the English govern, nen
has decided not to allow the entrance OF p.''
vateers into any Of the ports Of Great Britain
This is important Intelligence, and, when taken
into consideration with Lord John Russells
speech in the House Of Commons, which az
peared In the HERALD Of yesterday distinctly
shows that the sentiments Of the British Cabi-
net with regard to this country have very re
Gently undergone considerable change. In
The speech to which we refer, Lord John re.
marked that Mr.. Seward had not given gene.
raj notification of q blockade, but had left 1t
to the naval officers omnanding on each sta
ton to declare the several ports block
AIDED, and when that blockade had been
instituted it was to be considered regular
From this, and the general bearing of his OBJ
servations, it is obvious that he ia little per.
picked as to the modas operandi of the federal
government in establishing the blockade; but
his disposition to recognise II when completed
and it was completed on the 10Th inst.-is dis
tincty tracesble.
This contrasts with the character Of his pre-.
vious speeches in Parliament, which, it will be
remembered, pointed, although vaguely, to-
wards the non-recognition of our blockade.
1t is evident that this change is due to the de-
cided attitude of the federal government, and
Mr.. Stewards acceptance of the Treaty OF Paris,
Of 1856, abolisbiDg privatee,ing, while there is
no doubt that the published letter OF instruc-
tons from the Secretary of State to Mr.. Day
ton had also salutary effect upon the British
mind. Previously the English government
had bean led astray by the foolish and
exparte statements Of Mr.. Russell, the cor
respondent of the London Times, in in
stance of which we refer to the letters we
quoted yesterday; the misrepresentation of
Lord Lyons, and the empty editorial specula-
tons of the leading London journal. We must
not, however, accept too hastily, or for more
than they are worth, the symptoms of change
in British policy, although the exclusion of
privateers from British ports is definite act of
an Enthusiastically friendly nature, and one
great step in the right direction.
That England, in her relations with the
United States, is exposed to no ordinary peril,
must, ere this, be obvious even to Lord John
Russell and Lord Palmerston. The latter, up
to the present time, have appeared to be
completely befogeed as to the policy which
the government of Great Britain ought to pursue
towards this country and the insurrection now
going forward, and every mail seemed only to
increase their perplexity. This may still be
the case; for not only do different opinions pre-
vail on this subject between different sections
of the British people, to wit, the aristocracy
and the middle classes, but between members
of the same Cabinet; and under these circum-
stances, there is no calculating the results which
may arise. The contention in the Cabinet
may yet lead to change of ministry, and
the disconiinuance of the supply of cotton
to revolution; and the result of that it is i'm.
possible to tell. The recognition of the South
ern privateers as belligerents was conspicu-
GUS error on the part of the Palmerston ad-
ministration; and although many members of
both houses of Parliament are opposed to it, yet
in the last debate in the House of Lords upon
the privateering question, the speakers gene
rally opposed the idea of privateers being re-
garded as pirates. If the United States be
comes, as she doubtless will become, party
to the Treaty of Paris, what then will England
say Of Southern privateers?
That widely different views are enter
tanned by members Of the British Cabi-
net on the one subject is evident from a
correspondence published short time since
in Toronto journal between the homo
government and the Governor General of
Canada, with regard to the Anderson ex-
tradition case, which not long ago excited
20 much interest By that correspondence it
WAS shown that Lord John RUSSELL in his ca
pacity Of Foreign Secretary, wrote the Cover
nor General decisive instructions to adopt
measures for delivering up, under the Ashbur-
ton treaty, the body Of the fugitive slave to
the Missouri authorities that claimed him, to be
by them tried for the crime with which he was
charged. And by the same correspondence it
also appears that few days later the Duke of
Newcastle, in his capacity Of Secretary of
State for the Colonies, wrote to the same CO.
lonial officer equally decisive instructions of q
directly opposi!e character, telling him in the
plainest and most emphatic manner that the
negro Anderson was not to be given up to tho
Om0U OtUtOp 0utuOIltlCo uuU0I MY ClT-
cumstances, and whatever might be tho
decision of the law courts in the matter. OF
course, after the receipt Of this last despatch,
the ofdcer administering the government of
Canada had to countermand whatever COM
mards he had given on the strength Of tho
drst ono, the Duke being the higher authority
of the two on such question.
It sobvious that such discrepancies of opinion
upon matters of such vital Importance as those
connected with the United States at the pro-
cent time would be likely to lead to issues Of
the most uncertain and unhappy character.
Mover, No believs, for the last half century, has
tho British government felt 30 much perplexed
upon any question ~ that which concerns the
United States. In the midst Of its indsoision
however, we hear of the powerful squadron
which England ia sen6ipQ into American Waters