FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169  
170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   >>   >|  
o documents revealing such a purpose. While it may seem a reasonable speculation it does not appear to be borne out by the new British materials cited later in this chapter.] [Footnote 266: C.F. Adams, "Seward and The Declaration of Paris" _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proceedings_, XLVI, pp. 23-81.] [Footnote 267: _Ibid._, p. 57. The quotation is from a despatch by Lyons of Dec. 6, 1861; but this is inexact language. It is true that Seward had refused to receive officially this despatch, but he had read and considered it in private. Hence he knew _privately_ the facts of Russell's proposal and that Lyons had no instructions to negotiate. The incident of this despatch has been treated by me in Chapter IV, where I regard Seward's refusal to receive officially the despatch as primarily a refusal to be notified of Great Britain's proclamation of neutrality. Bancroft treats this incident as primarily a clever refusal by Seward to be approached officially by Lyons and Mercier in a joint representation, thus blocking a plan of joint action. (Bancroft, _Seward_, II, p. 181.) I agree with C.F. Adams that the only effect of this, so far as the negotiation is concerned was that "Seward, by what has always, for some reason not at once apparent, passed for a very astute proceeding, caused a transfer of the whole negotiation from Washington to London and Paris." ("Seward and the Declaration of Paris," p. 50.)] [Footnote 268: _Ibid._, p. 51.] [Footnote 269: _Ibid._, p. 64.] [Footnote 270: _Ibid._, p. 60.] [Footnote 271: _Ibid._, p. 58.] [Footnote 272: Bancroft says June 8. But see _ante_, p. 130.] [Footnote 273: _Parliamentary Papers, 1862, Lords_, Vol. XXV. "Correspondence respecting International Maritime Law." No. 1. It was with reference to this that Palmerston, on May 5, wrote to Russell: "If any step were thought advisable, perhaps the best mode of our feeling our way would be to communicate confidentially with the South by the men who have come over here from thence, and with the North by Dallas, who is about to return in a few days. Dallas, it is true, is not a political friend of Lincoln, but on the contrary rather leans to the South; but still he might be an organ, if it should be deemed prudent to take any step." (Palmerston MS.)] [Footnote 274: Hansard, 3rd. Ser., Vol. CLXII, p. 1763.] [Footnote 275: _Ibid._, pp. 1830-34.] [Footnote 276: This instruction never got into the printed Parliamentary papers, nor did
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169  
170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
Footnote
 

Seward

 

despatch

 
refusal
 
Bancroft
 
officially
 

incident

 

Russell

 

receive

 

Dallas


Parliamentary
 
negotiation
 

Palmerston

 

primarily

 

Declaration

 

reference

 

Maritime

 

Hansard

 

thought

 

advisable


International
 

Correspondence

 

Papers

 
respecting
 

instruction

 
return
 
contrary
 

Lincoln

 

political

 

friend


feeling

 

communicate

 
deemed
 
prudent
 

papers

 
printed
 

confidentially

 

quotation

 

inexact

 

Proceedings


language

 

refused

 
proposal
 

instructions

 
privately
 
considered
 

private

 

reasonable

 
speculation
 

purpose