The south-western. [volume] (Shreveport, La.) 1852-1870, 1864-01-13

which the ConfederacY is Justly entitled, or even
to prolong the continuance Of hostiljties on this
side Of the Atlantic, If the policy Of either could
be promoted by the postponement OF peace
Each, too, thus became possessed OF great lntfu-
ence in so shaping the general exercise ofneutral
rights in Europe, as to render them subservlent
to the purpose Of aiding one of the belhgerentS
! to the detriment Of the other. I referred, at
your last session, to some Of the leading points
in the course pursued by protessed neutrals,
which betrayed partizan leaning to the side OF
| our enemies, but events have since occurred
which induce me to renew the subject in greater
| detail than was then deemed necessary. In call
ing to your attention the action of those govern
ments, / shall refer to the documents appended
| to president Lncoln's message, and to their own
/ correspondence, as disclosing the true nature OF
their policy, and the motives which guided it.
| To this course no exception can be taken, mas
much as our attention has been invited to those
sources of information by their official pubhca-
! ton.
| In May 1861, the government Of her Britannia
majesty informed our enemies that it had not
allowed any other than an intermediate position
on the part OF the Southern States" and assured
them "that the symPathles fthis country Great
| Brtain) were rather with the north than with the
! south"
On the 1st day of June. 1861, the British gov
ernment interdicted the use ofits ports ito armed
ships and priyateers, both Of the United States
and the so-called Confederate States" with their
prizes The secretary Of State Of the United
States fully appreciated the character and mo-
tive Of this interdcton, when he observed to
| lord Lyons, who communicated it, "that this
measure, and that OF the same character which
had been adopted by France, would probably
prove death blow to southern priyateering
| On the 18th of June, 1861, the United States
ministers III London informed her majesty's sec
retary for foreign affairs that the fact Of having
| held interviews with the commissioners Of this
government had given great dissatisfaction" !"
and that protraction of this relation would be
viewed by the United States saS hostile in spirit
and to require some corresponding action ac-
cordipgly." In response to this intimation, her
maiesty's secretary assured the minister that
! che had no expectations of seeing them any
more"
BY proclamation, issued on the 10th and 9th
/ April, 1851, president Lincoln proclaimed the
! blockade of the entire coast Of the Corlfederacy
! extending from the Potomac to the Rio Grande,
/ embracing, according to the returns Of the Unit
ed States coast surycJ coast line Of three thou
sand FIVE hundred and forty nine statute miles,
on which the number OF rivers, bays, harbors,
/ inlets, sounds and passes is one hundred and
eighty-nine. The navy possessed by the United
States for enforcing this blockade was stated In
the reports communicated by president Lincbln
to the congress of th4 United States to consist Of
! "a vessels Of all classes in commission, Of which
half were in distant seas. The absurdty of ilhe
pretensiOn Of such blockade, in the face Of the
authoritative declaration of the maritime rights
of neutrals made at Paris in 1856, was so garing
that the attempt was regarded as an experiment
on the forbearance Of neutral powers which they
would promptly resist This conclusion wasills-
tilted BY the fact that the governments of France
and Great Britain determined that it was neces-
sary for their interests to obtain from both bel-
gerentS securities concerning the proper treat
ment OF neutrals." In the instructions which
| "confded the negotiation on this natter to the
British consul at Charleston, he was informed
that "thc most perfect accord on this question
exists between her majesty's government and
the government Of the emperor Of the French"
and these instructions were accompanied by
copy Of the dispatch Of the British foreign Office
Of the l7th May, 1851, stating that there was no
difference Of opinion between Great Britain and
the United States as to the validity Of the prnci
pies enunciated in the fourth article Of the deca
ration of Paris in reference to blockades. Your
predecessors Of the provisional congress had
therefore, no difficulty ii prociaiming, nor I il
approving, the resolutions which abandoned in
favor Of Great Britain and France our right to
capture enenys property when covered by the
flags OF those powers The securities" desired
by those governments were understood by us to
be required from bOth beliigerents. Neutrals
were exposed on our part to the exercise Of the-I
5eiilgeTent right of capturing their vessels when
conveying the property Of our enemies. They
were exposed on tie part of the United States
70 interruption il their unquestioned right Of
trading with US b. the declaration Of the paper
blockade above referred to- We had no reason
to doubt the good faith Of the proposal made to
US, nor to suspect that we were to be the only |
parties bound by its acceptance. 1t is true, the
Instructors of the neutral powers informed their
agents that it was essential under present cir
cumstauces that they should act with great eau
hon ID order to avoid raising the question Of the
/
the understanding on the subject did not assume /
Tor that reason the shape Of formal convention.
But i was not deemed just by ali to decline the /
on this ground, as little more than /
ninety Gays had elapsed since the arrival Of cur
commissioners in Europe, and neutral nations
wore fairly entitled to Q reasonable delay i'll act
lag Oh a subject Of so much impurtance and
which, from their point Of view, presented diti-
cuties that we perhaps ditl not appreciate. Ger
tain 1t is that the action Of this government on
the occasion was IN faithful performance Of It's
own engagements and such as 10 Cutltl9 it to eX-
oect on the part of those VINO sought in their
own interests mutual understanding, the most
adherence to their Own promises.
feel constrained TO iuforn y0a that in this expac-
ation We have been disappointed, and that no.
only nave the governments Whcb entered into
heSe arrangements yielded to the prohibition
against commerce with u.s. which has been die
ated BY the Unted States in defiance Of the law
If nations, but that this concession OF their neu
raj rights to our dotrment has on more than one
occasion been claimed III intercourse with our
as ar evidence Of friendly feeling to-
wards tbem. 4 few extracts frori the CORES
,ondence other majestys chief secretary ofState
or foreign affairs viii suffice to show marked en-
ouragement to the United States TO perserere (
n its paper blockade, and unmstakabIe intima- !
ions that her Inaiesty's government would not {
ontest its validity.
On the 21st Of Nay, 1855, earl Russell pointed Z
at to the United States minister IN London, that
the blockade might no doubt be made effective, Z
onsidering the small number of harbors on the g
outhern coast, even though the extent Of 1900 6
liles were coDprehended ii terms offhat block 5
de"
On tie lAth Of January, 1852, her majesty's :