The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1865-10-21


that Sir Frederick Bruce, the British Minister
at Washington, had asked Mr.. Seward for an
explanation Of the Fenian movement in this
country. II this be true, Sir Frederick Bruce
has undoubtedly received by this time such an
answer as would properly rebuke that piece Of
international impudence. Citizens Of the United
States, whatever their nationality, whatever
their faith. have the right to meet In larger or
smaller bodies-to organize In societies-and
to express their opinions fully and freely on
any and every subject That Is exactly what
the Fenians have done. So large . license Il
given to the expression Of opinion here that
the United States government did not interfere
with it when the threats were against It's own
sovereignty; yet now Il is asked to explain on
this topic by the representative of govern
ment that could not repress the hostile acts Of
its own citizens against U.s. England acknow-
lodged that her laws were not sufficient to en-
force o real neutrality. She would not make
any new laws; and her citizens waged actual
war against our government Now she asks
us to explain the very words of our citizens.
Certainly there has not before been any piece
of national impudence equal to this.
Sustaining the supposed course Of the Eng
lish government in asking this explanation. the
London Times claims consideration "for the
circumstances which made it impossible to
check entirely the building of Confederate
cruisers" in English ports. Very we'll. VIII
the Times also allow some consideration for
the circumstances that render 1t impossible
for our government to dictate what shah be
the speeches Of our people, or even to dictate
in what ways or how often they shall assemble
for the expression of their opinions at was
not so much" says the Times, the want Of
more stringent foreign enlistment act that
baffled our efforts as the extreme difficulty Of
applying any law that could be endured by
free and high spirited people 10 cases which SO
nearly resembled the legitimate transactions of
commerce." It was not the defect of the law,
but only that the English people were too free
and high spirited to be made subject to the
law. Well, then, suppose our people also
should prove to be high spiritedi Does Eng
land require US to do against our people for
her benefit what she would not do against her
people for our benefit Is not this giving US
credit for being better than Englandi Has
the Times recently changed its opinionf Is
not England, as Of yore, the greatest, the most
and the most virtuous Of nationss
Are we not benighted wretches and BLACKBOARD
democratsf
The Times finds some comfort In the rclec-
ton that easy as 1t is to descant on the ravages
Of the Shenandoah, "no one as yet pointed
out what form of enactment would have en-
abled the Crown to ascertain her destination
and lay an embargo on her in the dookyard."
Let US apply this reasoning to the case toward
which the Times directs It What form of
enactment will enable Us to ascertain
the destination of any given Irishman
that announces himself to be Fenianf Can
Congress make law that will define and de-
clare exactly what extravagances his exube-
rant fancy may drive him TOT Is not the case
quite as difficult for us as it was for those very
well meaning saints across the wsterf Who
has told the Times that we can lay an embargo
on any of our citizens! Ifyou cannot govern
your dockyards, can we govern the barroomf
If you cannot prevent ships constructed for
war ships, manned with English men-ofwar's
men and armed with English cannon, from
finding their way out Of your ports, how can
we prevent ford or fiery sentences from find
ing their way out Of the mouths Of our Irish
citizens, and expressing q hatred Of England
with which we fully sympathize!
The Times considers It an additional atrocity
on the part Of Fenianism that it "has not the
Of any commercial disguise or pre-
text !" and the final wickedncss- fact that
damns Fenianism more than all other facts
together-is, that IL cannot possibly be success
full that athe English hold on Ireland Is too
firm to be shaken" The morality, then, of the
Confederate loan and Of all the British
latent virtue-was that the South
en States might win. Here is national mo-
rality. Did any man ever write more pure
British than thisi At the end Of oil this the
Times puts sentence that Il intends shall be
q clincher. II cntreats tho Americans "to ask
themselves, in all honesty, what they would
feel II they were 10 hear Of volunteers muster
ing In myriads on the Canadian frontier, for in
stance, and before the eyes OF the Canadian
authorities, for the invasion Of the United
Statesr We need not excite our imaginations
to find out how we would feel in this case. We
have had the experience. We have feltit We
have seen men gather on the Canadian FROM
tier and make their preparations for months
together, perfecting plans TO fire our cities.
And we knew It 70 be done "before the eyes Of
the Canadian authorites." We have seen the
same men cross our borders, fire our cities,
plumber our banks, murder our citisens-mur-
der even the venerated FIRST man In the nation
and when they crossed the border we have
seen them screened, protected, helped away BY
those canadian authorities" And when here
and there one was brought into court Of "jus-
tice," We have seen him discharged with his