New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1865-05-05

eraces carrying on war against each other
The assault on Sumter was April II; its sur
render on the 14th, and LyonsS dispatch an
nouncng that the President had "only resolved
to adopt coercive measures against the South
not had begun to employ them-waS dated
on the 18th and received in London April 81
inst sir days thereafter the British ministry
announced in Parliament its determination 10
recognize the Southern Confederacy! In a
word:
England FASTENED TO raise the Confederates
to the OF gerent power under the Pretens
of existing state OF war, when as yet oh an Isui
rcctonary blow had been struck at Fort Sumter, ana
no more than six days had elapsed within whieu TUE
American Government could decide whether the lnsur
rccton would need suppression by arms, ana nheh as
yd that Gorernment lad not put the first soldier tno ne
FIELD nor frsd the first gun t0rGrd such snRTtSsio"'
If special object be sought for this unprece-
denied haste in doing an unfrendly act toward
La friendly government it may be found in the
declarations and admissions Of that remarkable
debate in the House of Lords on the 10th May,
1861, three nights after the proclamation had
appeared. Take the two following quotations
together. Lord Derby said:
"The Northern States must not be allowed to enter
tain the opinion that they at liberty so TO STRAIN te
law To convert pryateering into piracy ana Visit IL
with DEATH The punishment under such circumstances
OF persons entitled to Her Majesty's protection woula
not be viewed with Indifference, but would receive tho
most serious consideration by this county"
Whom did Lord Derby mean by persons en-
titled to her Mojesty's protection ?" An answer
is found in the following passage from Lord
Chelmsford CEx-Lord Chancellor);
He should wish to know nom his noble and
learned friend trotd Bronghiml whether he meant
10 contend that # English ship were commissioned
by those States Uhe COnledcrate) and fitted out as
pfiyaieer against the Federal Government. her crew
would. under such circumstances, be guilty oil piracy
British subject. 80 engaged would no DOUBT
be answornble to the laws Of their country for an
nfractiOn Of he Foreign Enlistment act. but II was
perfectly clear on principles OF international law th
they would not be liable 10 be treated as pirates
II he might add the Southern C0nfederdcy had not been
rccogni,fd bp as az BsLgrenf pouer be agreed with
his noble aud learned friend that any EH4lhman aiding
em By fuag ont priraieer against The tederaI Goc"h
ment r0ld be guilty gPWsey"
In the face Of which, " Ilistorcns" has the
audacity to declare that if England had not
recognized the bcllgercncy Of the Rebellion,
Mr.. Laird might have furnished the Rebels with
fir, hundy,d Alabamas, and We should have had
10 ground of complaint. But Lord Chancellor
Chelmsford, who, We suppose, will be considered
nearly as good authority as lllstoncus," de-
clares that Laird, bit for the QHeeHs Pr0eiGma'
1 ton, nerer copld hare built The alabama u'thom
becoming guilty Of piracy. In other WORDS the
Alabama and the millions Of property she de-
stroyed were the direct fruit Of a declaration OF
neutrality" That proclamation covered
piracy with the shield of law. That alone
opened the ship-yards Of Liverpool to the agents
Of the Rebellion, and kept open every English
port as a harbor of refuge and repair for the
Alabama so long as she hoated. That proca-
nation lighted the fires that for months illu-
mined every sea with burning American mer-
|chantmen. Yet Earl Russell and Ilistoricus'
cannot conceive how any American should be
so bigoted as TO consider ii an uniriendly act, or
as anything but a necessary means Of protection
to English commerce
But to return to the main pont-the proof is
conclusive that Earl Russell actually issued the
neutrality proclamation Influenced by the con-
viciion that the United States Government was
broken up. -Four years having shown his mis-
take, be aud bis coadjutor now set up spurious
defense that the proclamation was based upon
the establishment of blockade by Us. And
the great importance Of this change OF base APP
pears from the inquiry OF Mr.. Bright: SIS there
not consciousness in your heart of hearts
that you have not behaved generously toward
your neghbor l"--and from the apprehension
II ,l,a Ia. u hon col
be called to account for his conduct
at the beginning OF the war, and that
in order to justify II at all he must
put it upon a ground which did not exist
in his own mind at the time, and which in fact
did not exist at all. For Mr.. Bemis pro-
ceeds 10 show that what Earl Russell
now refers to as proclamation OF blockade
was only proclamation declaring an intent to|
establish blockade that the blockade was not
in fact established till the 3Oth Of April; and
that, of course its existence could not have
been known in. England on the 9th OF May. |
when the announcement of the purpose tot
the Conicderacy was first made
by ministers in Parliament llistoricus, /
indeed, asserts that the Presidents proclamation
of blockade showed an existing state of war.
Quoting the words of the Qneen's proclamation, |
"whereas hostilties have unhappily commenced
between the Government Of the United States
of America and certain States" he charac- |
terizes this as ga statement precisely mi
accordance with the proclamation OF President
Lincoln, nhch had ISSUED these nords previously,
for which astounding assertion he gets pulyer-
lied thus by Mr.. Bemis:
rl..a oo,lh ~ hn q Orosser innccnracY not TO