Daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1859-1865, 1863-11-14
hat this had not been done With th e privi-

1uAF InlahAd a0ttbeen done with th e priv
~ Of assent of the American GoVernmel
; who were prepared, on the statement
IEngiand's wishes, to settle this matter am
cabiy. The letter being confidential, N
: Adams scFupulOusly avoided speaking Z
IL; but il leaked ont, iiaSertheless, th
there had been u communiestien from Il
American GoVeTnment 60 ths Euglish, hI
J everybody was asking Wtqt was It's natur
This cowmunicatfon having been read,
think on the 18th of December, Il won
2 be about the 2bth that the London Pos
which is supposed 10. be a semi official Of
gan, declared that there had. been a cou
munication, but that it had nothing to d
with the Trent atfair-and whereas it Wa
a communication expressly on that, an
nothing else. To this hour that paper ha
never explained nor retracted that mali
ciops and deliberate falsehood ICheers.
But even before that message came, an
before the British 'GoyeynmenEshad hear
| what we had to suy, OrdeEs nad Issncd tina
/ Britishe troops should repair to Canada
and the navy and dock yards were pu
upon double labor. England has neve
shown want of promptness and pluck; buf
| ], believe, you can find no other case il
English history in which misunderstood
ing between two ships of two nations ha!
been treated with similar Precipitancy.-
As to what took place on the other side,
am alleged to have been all wrong when
said the American Government showed
instant disposition to make rep0ration, he.
cause on the other hand, we heaped honorr
on Capt. Wilkes all through the natiou.-
When we thought we were right, we did;
but after we found ont by the disposition ol
our own Government that we were wrong,
can you point me an instance in which we
undertook TO traverse the decision by show
ing attention to Capt. Wilkes? As to
whether we did not use all possible speed,
let us see what were the facts. Mr.. Sew.
ard wrote to the English Government say
ing we were prepared to settle the matter
satisfactorily and awaiting the English
demands. Many say we ought not to have
waited, but given up the men Instantly.
But there were two doctrines as to the
rights Of Governments over contraband of
war in neutral vessels. a.t-A ~
From 1907, certainly till 1918, and !
know not how much longer, the British
doctrine was that you had right to con-
denim neutral vessel without bringing
her into a prize Court. That was the
British practice down to within a few
years. 1 think the last recognized case-I
won't undertaketo say it Is tho last case
American doctrine, when they took BFe-
men vessel and condemned her in 40 Eng.
lish Court because she was bringing the
crew of a wrecked Russian vessel from Ja-
pan home. That is the first instance I
know of acting on American doctrine by
The English Government or navy. Now,
when Mr.. Seward wrote to Mr.. Adams he
itood here: Here is the old British doc
rine, which they have nevergivensup tech.
lically, and here is the American. Which
hens 10 the BPitish1 (l0gtfHmtnt going TO |
akei II their own, We have committed |
lo.ofEence. II our doctrine, evidently We |
must WAIT for 5ssastn =" tn@He tuF tuesF wv 49, |
election. ask you, then, was there uotR
courteous and just reason for waiting till
he overture should come from the English |
3ovsfnmsht, instead Of from ours, asst
What should be done in the case Of these
nenH eGhebrs.1 all these facts are per-
'ectly known to our people, and ask you
1ot TO renew this old question, but to uns
lerstand that if you had been Americans,
7ou would have felt as they felt. Hear,
1ear.l Although We were much surprised
when Mr.. Seward issued his decision, il
concluded us from that moment. do not
any newspaper in that land OF
remember no assembly In
that land of popular assemblies; nor any
pulpit, nor any private conversation, nor an
that ever spoke against the de-
cision of our Government. [Oheers.l To
be sure; we had been mistaken, and we had
to turn face about instantly. 1t is not
very easy thing for nation to turn about.
Hear We had assumed this question
was goIng to be settled on British prsCe-
dents. Mr. Seward said-"No, theyprefer
it on our precedents so it shall be-" And
81
should be, no matter whatit required MS to
unsay or undo. LChecrs.] 70 .,.s...
,s THE FISCAL QUESTION IN AMERICA!
4 Well, gentlemen, am informed that
have been utterly destroyed by several pa
pers Elaughter; and find it difficult 70
be able with propriety, when | hear that u 4
ought not, tOrbs going on performing the
of life [Laughter am told
that 1 have been destroyed, body. soul,
honor and reputation on account OF mis-;
statements in E inburgh l cannot tell
which paper has destroyed me, aud would
not, If could. 1t is said that my state
ments as to the fiscalequestiOn in ArheEiea
we're totally at vartance with facts MY
venerable and talented friend, DR.. Massle,
is present Echeefs1 and I speak as before
one who knows.the truth; ard although
nave never TIL LuIS LuOEutuB SSoH Aat4t @4eJ
l sec him thousand years hereafter -
Though /, of course, know nothiPg Of his
opinions, while know he is an honest
man, and know what an honest man must
say in respect 10 certain points, say he
will not rebuke me for saying there never
was a time of such material or moral
prosperity as in the Northt-at this time
sBnfdened as we are with war, there never
lwas.a time when husbandry was carried
ON with more alscrity or success, when ev-
cry conceivable form Of productive indus
try, and manufacturing through It's whole
range was more taxed BY demand. It is
not as as it was in Manchester just before
this war. when you had manufactured far
beyond the consumption Of your custom.
ers. It issnUt speculative. There never
was time1When monetary affairs were 50
easy, and think so healthy, notWithstand-
ing the contrary opiuion of the editor OF
The Tr,aas RIo6ev. ARTICLE. You say we