Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1863-11-10
l.pVaruD Kuqulrer.
Ei TYLER " AELEGRE.
SATURDAY MORNING, NOV. :, 1868
FOREIGN CONSULS AND COMMIS-
SIONERS.

In G-prc$SlnT satisfaction IT the GismlSsa:
O: the British Consuls from this Ccnfederaey,
and the withdrawal of Mr. Mason from
London, we certainly supposed that the step
woull le speedily followed hv tho like action
towards the consuls If other Powers, and the
commissioners {. France, Russia, e. With
GU, this general action. there is 4 Giscrimina
ton, an Indication c:. resentment az sinst one
European Government, beyond all the rest
In this discrmination-no: in the dismissal
or withdrawal itself-.here IS offence. If the
order had been universal, for crnsuls Of all
nations which DO not recognize our independ.
ence. then there could have been no ground OF
c2m2lain- the proceeding would have been
avoTeil7 OF the general principle that 1t does
No: comport with the dignity Of the Confede>
raey % continue in an attitude oS solicitation,
or 60 on 70 offer Gratuitous c5urtesics and fa>
cilities, within our borders, to governments
which have 50 long delayed that official re-
cosnition Of our sovereignty, to which we
We're entitled more than two years ago.
It's true that the Government of England
had shown itself more unfriendly than that OF
France and was notoriously the obstacle to
joint rec1ynition: 50 that the arguments for
acessa.;or, os all that quasi diplomatic inter
course were drawn mainly from the manifest
hostility and insolent denial of common right,
shaHn in the coaducs of English statesmen
Ar; especially of Earl Russell. 1e:, the lead
;nc and Governing re ason for putting an end
u car iE,p,r;unate attitude towards foreign
powers, aprl:ci to France aswell as to Erg-
Land; arw in the various articles which have
APPEARED in the Enquirer. at least, on this
7ez"l question, there never was word in
favor of drawing this inyidious and unmean-
in: ti>tnction. On the contrary, VIC repeat
eiIr urged the withdrawal both Of Mr.. Mason
All of Mr.. S!ide!i, and the dismissal of all
foreigners claiming t, be consuls-put!inS 1t
always On the oac broad ground that, as for
sign nat;ans 30 no. recocuize us, it does not
become US 10 recognize them. For this Is, in
iar; the only tcnable ground: tho alleged
m:-con!uc: vI certain English, "Consnls" aud
Acting Consuls," upon which Mr.. Benjamin
50 much enlarged, was not the gist of cur
complaint; it was only symphonic conSe-
qnsnee naturally flown: fram the anomalous
situation in which we hai SO long allowed our
selves :" ,und-of allowing persons 70 act as
"toa>Ul, mere who derived their authority from
the public enemy. Eve-, Mr.. Fuilarton's ad
= E,fI .,,l, IN ri
a, q civil war;" in other words n rebellion
a7i 50 TO refuse t, serve in il, and throw down
their arms if called on to servc-evcn this out
r9gepus prctension, as we observed at the
time, was justified by the action Of cur Secre>
tar7 Of State, in approving and recognizing"
as consul O person who derived his authority
from the government atsWash;ngton. For
Eaast,n claimed to be acting CONSUL" hay
in been appointed to that Office by aretlring
c)nsul at Savannah, who had himself taken
his .rsquasur from the Washington govern
msn,. Mcdiately or Immediately, there MIR
Faarton derived all his charaater as consul
Q: acting consul. from the government of our
enemies; and in t!Ia. character he was zap
proved and recognized" by our authorities
NJ. Fallarton, thsn, was perfectly right
Finding that our government still acknowl-
eissi a title in the Washington government
10 authorize consuls to act in our ports, he
sonll No otherwise than conclude that we ware
Stirring up u rebellion and q civil war; he
was justified in knowing no government here
but Mr.. Linco.n's; AMI discharged his duty
IN &iTsins British subjects 20 take no part in
our "rc5cllion." We repeat, that tho alleged
m!sbshav;or of the English eonsuls was no
nl*5ehayjor al all: and that to rest our case
injust:ica:;oa Of their dismissal, upon that
s'olnl was both undigniied and disingcnu-
GUS
besides, what becomes of the withdrawal of
III. Mason? The conduct Of the Consuls
was 10 god reason for that measure. IF it
DC sal! thG: Lord Russell, also misbehaved
himself to our Commissiorer-would not sd
mi: nm to audiences, nor treat him with due
!'Spect-whie the Emperor of the French
naS invited Mr.. Slidcll 10 breakfast, and the
empress honorei him with long conversation
al! this is n be accounted for by the g-eater
SoH'eness Of French uaages and character
->Nains has come of il; n9s one step has been
"Aeh by the French, amy more than by the
English, towards our official recognition
hungry Confed"ra,es derive 40 nourishmlrt
',''n Mr.. Siidell's breakfasts; neither do,
,'"- markcl ccndcsrens;vn Of tho charm''
'''' O." = -" y mr,'h NJ .hi~ d,s.a &c
5..r :; ....s ..~.-.r.
-. - Il. ,i4> AID ,..sm.-s..s u