listened to a very
interesting discussion, at the 'Union' club, between an English traveler
of high repute, and a warm Unionist, upon the attitude of England. The
former seemed as ardent as was the latter disputant in his abhorrence of
the Southern traitors; but he constructed a very fair argument for the
consistency of England. Taking for his first position, that foreign
nations viewed the Jeff Davis movement as a revolution, self-sustained
for nearly a year, his second was, that the most enlightened American
abolitionists, as well as the most conservative Federalist, coincided in
the belief that disunion was ultimate emancipation. Then, acquiescing in
the statement of his antagonist, that the English nation had always
reprehended American slavery, and desired its speedy overthrow, he
inquired what more inconsistency there was in the English nation
construing disunion in the same way wherein the American abolitionist
and conservative Unionist did, as the inevitable promotion of slavery's
overthrow? When it was rejoined that the canker of slavery had eaten
away many bonds of Union, and promoted secession, the English disputant
demanded whether the war aimed at rebuking slavery in a practical way,
or by strengthening it as a locally constitutional institution? When the
question was begged by the assertion that recognition of the Southern
confederacy, although granted to be of abolition tendencies, was
ungenerous and unfraternal, the position assumed was that nations, like
individuals, cherished self-love, and always sought to turn intestine
troubles among competitive powers into the channels of
home-aggrandizement; and it was asked whether, should Ireland maintain
a provisional government for nearly a year, there would not be found a
strong _party_ in the States advocating her recognition?

But Mr. Seward, in replying to Mr. Dallas in a dispatch to Mr. Adams,
dismissed all arguments of policy or consistency, and remarked: 'Her
Britannic Majesty's government is at liberty to choose whether it will
retain the friendship of this government, by refusing all aid and
comfort to its enemies, now in flagrant rebellion against it, _as we
think the treaties existing between the two countries require_, or
whether the government of her Majesty will take _the precarious benefits
of a different course_.'

So early as May 2d, the British Secretary told Mr. Dallas that _an
understanding existed between the British and French government