with her hands in a moment the fruit of so much effort and sacrifice. It would not be patriotism, it would not be dignity, it would be an act of madness and of suicide. successes of the Federal arms announced the commencement of great retaliations. The war was carried from the environs of Washington to the very heart of South Carolina. There remained for them no other important resources but those which might arise during the winter of the discontent of our industrial centres. And now, suddenly, the situation is changed, their recognition becomes possible, the blockade is threatened, and the United States expose themselves to be turned away from the South in order to face a more formidable adversary. WHY THE PRISONERS SHOULD BE RELEASED. If the Trent violated the rules of neutrality, it is not less certain that other rules have been violated. The duty of marine officers limits itself to search ships, and, if necessary, to arrest them, in order to conduct them before a prize court. They should not exercise the office of judge. In substituting the arrest of persons for the seizure In truth, what has Mr. Jefferson Davis of the ship, and a military act for an arrest given you that you should render him such before a tribunal, Captain Wilkes has given a service? cause for the well-grounded protests of England, at the same time that he has left the way open, thank Heaven, for measures of reparation which the United States can adopt. I know very well that the indignation would not have been any less in Liverpool and London if the Trent had been arrested and carried before American judges. Perhaps even this correct and regular proceeding would have wounded more deeply than that of which England complains. It is permitted to question, with General Scott, "if the offence would have been smaller if it had been greater." But this is not the practical question, the only one now important. The question is, to get out of the embarrassment, and the error committed by the commander of the San Jacinto furnishes a reasonable means of consenting to the release of the prisoners. THE EXCITEMENT IN ENGLAND. Let us now turn to England and say the truth to her also. As long as the affair of the Trent is not treated by itself, and coolly, as long as they lend their ears there to falsehoods invented by passion, which envenom the questions, which exclude conciliatory efforts and pacific hopes, they will labor actively there to ruin all that England had gloriously built up here below. It is impossible to exaggerate the consequences, fatal to liberty in all shapes, embodied in such a policy. At first it was supposed that Captain Wilkes had acted from instructions, and that the Government of Mr. Lincoln had proposed expressly to seize the Southern commissioners on board of an English vessel. Now, it is found that Captain Wilkes, who was returning from Africa, had no instructions of Far from being a humiliation for the Gov-any sort. He acted, according to his own ernment at Washington, this act of wisdom expression, at his own risk and peril, like a would be one of the best titles to glory. It true Yankee. would prove that moral force was not wanting to it, that it is a slander to represent it to us as the slave of a vile democracy, incapable of resisting the outcries of the street, and of accepting, for the safety of the country, an hour of unpopularity. Let the American Government believe us, its true friends, that in arresting Messrs. Mason and Slidell it has done more for the cause of the South than Price or Beauregard could have done in gaining two great victories on the Potomac and in Missouri. Messrs. Mason and Slidell are a hundred times more dangerous under the bolts of Fort Warren than in the streets of Paris or London. That which their diplomacy would surely not have obtained in many months, Captain Wilkes has procured for them in an hour. What rejoicing there must be in the camp of the partisans of the South! They were beginning to despair. Recognition, that only chance of the defenders of slavery, seemed further off than ever. The recent a It was then supposed that the Government of Mr. Lincoln had conceived the ingenious plan (these things are gravely expressed and find people to believe them) of seeking himself à rupture with the English. It was necessary to have new enemies! He hoped in this way to re-unite with his actual adversaries! He was going to give up fighting them, and seek for a compensation in the conquest of Canada! I have followed as attentively as any one the march of events in America. I have read the American papers. I have received letters. I have studied documents, and among others, the famous circular of Mr. Seward. I have seen there more than one sign of discontent caused by the unsympathetic attitude of England. I have seen also symptoms of the fear, natural enough, that the intervention of Europe in Mexico excites in the minds of men attached to the Monroe doctrine, but as to these incredible plans, I have never discovered the slightest trace of them. I may add, that a very noticeable return towards friendly relations with England was manifested, since the latter has shown herself more friendly towards America. If there is one quality which we cannot refuse to recognize in the Government of Mr. Lincoln, it is precisely its moderation and good sense. It has not raised itself very high, it has avoided (too much, in my opinion) laying down those principles, and pronouncing those words which create lively sympathies and make the conscience of the human race vibrate in unison. Say that it is a little prosaic, a little ventre-à-terre; do not say that it is extravagant, and that England has nothing better to do than to attack us, in order not to be attacked first. In order to support, as well for good as for evil, a fiction which has run its course too long, another thing has been invented. Mr. Lincoln's Government is exhausted; despairing of conquering the South it wishes to bring about a diversion at any price. Those who hold such language have not heard, doubtless, of the expedition to Beaufort, nor of the evacuation of Missouri by the Confederates, nor of the victory recently gained in Kentucky. They do not know that the United States have accomplished this wonder, of putting half a million of men under arms, that acts of indiscipline have almost ceased, and that the volunteers for three years have everywhere replaced the volunteers for three months. They do not know that the finances of the country are prosperous, and that Mr. Chase, the Secretary of the Treasury, has negotiated, on favorable conditions, the last part of the loan. I recommend to them to read the last letters of Mr. Russell, the correspondent of the Times; they will there see what an impartial witness thinks of the respective chances of the North and the South. Yet, before the intervention of the San Jacinto (this involuntary ally of the South, to which the inhabitants of Charleston ought to vote swords of honor), the situation of the United States presented itself under the most favorable aspects. Since then it has changed, I confess. in a useful negotiation? I do not doubt but that the noble overtures in which General Scott has taken the initiative will be avowed by Mr. Lincoln. To enlarge the actual question, and educe from it an international progress, an emancipation of the commerce of the world, this would be a little better, it seems to me, than cutting each other's throats, and in the full nineteenth century assuring the triumph of the most disgraceful revolt which ever broke out in this world, the rebellion for slavery. England and America, these two great countries are worthy of giving to the world the spectacle of a generous and fruitful understanding, in which will be melted and swallowed up in some sort a deplorable quarrel. Who does not see that mingled with the promulgation of a more liberal regulation of the right of search, the satisfaction exacted from the United States would take a new character, and would have a much better chance of being accorded! THE QUESTION OF RIGHT. Let us now look nearer, at the question of right. It was not useless to disembarrass it at first of secondary questions, which prevent us from seeing it, and above all, seeing it as it is. They seem to have had a fear in England of facing the question of right. There is no way of escape they have not tried, to avoid this serious examination. Have they not gone so far as to oppose to the United States, that, considering the Southern States as revolted, and refusing them the character of belligerents, they should not exercise the right of search, which is reserved to belligerents? From this point of view, it is added, Messrs. Mason and Slidell would only be refugee rebels under the British flag; and what country is there which consents to deliver up political refugees? The answer is simple. No one more than England has recognized in this circumstance the character of belligerents, which is contested in her name. Besides, the blockade of the South is admitted by her, and by the other powers. Now there is no more a blockade than a right of search, except in a state of war. There is another evasion. The United States have always contended against the right of search; they have exercised it unwillingly. England has always exercised the right of search; she would unwillingly contend against it. Let us be frank; rights of this nature are always odious to those who are subjected to them, and always clear to those who profit by them. Alas! this is not the only case where change of situation operates a change in the points of view. Let us take the human heart as it is, and not exact, under penalty of war, that the Americans, engaged in one of the most terrible social crises (and one of the most glorious, too) of which history makes mention, should hesitate to seize a weapon which has been used against them, and which they in turn feel the necessity of using. In neglecting to use it, they would be wanting, perhaps, in their duties towards themselves, and towards the noble cause which they represent. There is in fine a last means more simple, of putting aside a troublesome examination. What is the use, it is exclaimed on all sides, of insisting upon precedents? This is not an affair of lawyers. It seems to me, however, that Great Britain began by questioning her crown-lawyers, and made peace or war depend upon their decision. It would be, indeed, too convenient to deny the precedents we have ourselves created, and to say to those who would act as we have not ceased to act: "I do not admit that we should be imitated. That which I practised formerly, I authorize no one to practise to-day. I have not warned you of it, but you ought to have guessed it, and, for not having guessed it, you shall have war:" 66 THE PRECEDENTS. The commander of the Trent saw coming to him men whom their characters as commissioners from the South marked for his attention. He knew what uneasiness and anxiety existed at the North in relation to this mission and to the despatches whose contents excited grave suspicions. There had been talk, exaggerated doubtless, of a proposition of protectorate, and of other offers designed to gain at any price the support of one or of several maritime powers. The enthusiastic reception which the society of Havana, hostile to the United States, and passionately in love with slavery, had given to Messrs. Mason and Slidell, left no doubts as to the exceptional gravity of the hostile mission with which they were charged. It was just a case where it would be said that messengers and messages of this sort ought to sail under their own flag, and that neutrals are not warranted in facilitating their mission in any way. In such grave circumstances, and with such a responsibility, commanders of packetboats should not take refuge behind their innocence, and argue that the Consul of the United States did not take the trouble to warn them. I should like to know what reception would be found in England for the neutral who should take it upon himself to say, "I thought I had the power to transport hostile despatches, and those provided The precedents preserve all their value. with them, because the English Consul did What are they? not come and warn me not to do it." Sir William Scott is right in saying that in charging one's self with the carrying of despatches one ceases to be neutral and be comes an enemy. This is evident, especially in the present conflict. As the serious chances of the South are all in Europe, as it would not be in rebellion if it had not counted upon Europe-as it would lay down its arms to-morrow if it could be convinced that never, for cotton, nor for anything else, will Europe give it support-it results that the despatches which were going from the South to Europe (neutral Europe) went far beyond, in military importance, the sending of soldiers or provisions. THE COMMANDER OF THE TRENT. WAS THE BRITISH FLAG INSULTED? Now, to finish with the question of right, shall I say some words upon what may be called the commonplace rhetoric and declamation of the subject? There has been very plain talk about the insult to the flag. It is said that the deck of an English vessel is the very soil of the country. The rights of Britannic hospitality have been invoked, and it is asked if it can consent to see its guests carried off. Such language does not fail unfortunately to excite implacable passions. But what is there behind these phrases? The flag is not insulted, when the search is exercised according to the law of nations. The deck of an English vessel of but a belligerent is authorized to seize it, if it transports men employed for the profit of the enemy, officers for example. The rights of hospitality find their limits in the duties of neutrality; and the vessel that pretends to protect its guests at any price, when they are employed in war, would commit a simple bad action. This being the case, what ought the com-commerce may be the deck of the country, mander of the steamer Trent to do? I do not attack his intentions; he acted very innocently; but if this excuse of ignorance of the law is available for him, I think it also available for Captain Wilkes, and it would be unjust to treat with great rigor a first difficulty, which evidently has surprised everybody, and has not found anywhere a very complete understanding of the conditions of the right of search. In short, there is wrong on both sides, and if a difference needed discussion and inter pretation, even for the sake of arbitration, it is this. Europe, too, attentive to what is passing, and desirous of avoiding war, will not understand, be sure of it, that the question should be settled in a rough way, so as to make hostilities almost unavoidable. If the captain had seized the vessel instead of the commissioners, and if the vessel had been duly condemned by an American tribunal, the proceeding would have been one of an irreproachable regularity. This being so, by the confession of the English themselves, who would believe that out of such a quarrel about ways of proceeding, would spring a rupture forever fatal. England has interrogated her lawyers -America has interrogated hers. Do conflicts, where the national honor is really engaged, allow of consultation of this sort? Do we ever ask lawyers and judges if the country is insulted or attacked, when it is really insulted or attacked? REPARATIONS. Whatever may be said in England, the first condition of a demand for reparation is to render reparation possible. There must be time, there must be patience which does not stop before the first difficulty, nor take as definitive the first refusal. There must be prudent management, which harmonizes so well with dignity, where we are the strongest, and which avoid making the form of satisfaction gratuitously wounding, and consequently almost inadmissible. It is clear that if an exacting claim is thought sufficient to be made known at Washington, if eight days are given, if (I wish to anticipate everything, even the impossible and the absurd) the release of the prisoners is not only claimed, but their transport upon an American vessel, charged with dragging across the sea its repentant flag, if no easier way is accepted, if they are deaf to mediation, it is clear that Mr. Lincoln will have need of a superhuman courage, in order to grant what is claimed in this way. This superhuman courage, I desire it, I ask for it; in displaying it, he will have deserved well of America and of humanity. But I have little hope of such wonders, and I don't believe that in serious affairs it is well to exact miracles. The English have been full of condescension and of forbearance for America when she was strong. If they have the misfortune to show neither condescension nor forbearance for America when she is weak, they authorize suppositions more fatal for their honor than is the grave error (but easily reparable with good-will on both :sides) which Captain Wilkes has committed. I have a right to use this language to them, for I am one of the number of those who love England. From my first speech on the tribune, and on this very question of the right of search, I exposed myself to much animosity by defending her. Later, in the Pritchard affair, I did not draw back. Even in my retirement it has rarely happened that I have taken up my pen without rendering homage to a country and to a government which are not popular with us. So I am authorized to hope my words will have some weight. Nothing is more antipathetic to me than a gross and ignorant Anglophobia. But England should know all the sides of this dispute in which she is engaged. It has a European face. It is not a discussion between two powers; a third, the first of all, public opinion, has also a word to say. It is for peace, and will not let it be sacrificed for an error easily reparable, and which people are disposed to magnify. Public opinion energetically repudiates the cause of the South, which is the cause of slavery. (The speeches of Mr. Stephens, Vice-President of the South, has made a creed of it.) In hearing this enormous fact, of England recognizing the Confederation expressly founded to maintain, glorify, and extend slavery, public opinion will utter itself in one of those explosions of anger beside which the indignation meetings of Liverpool will make a poor figure, believe me. England for a year has maintained her neutrality in the New World, and she has acted well in this, for the cotton interests might have dictated another policy. Yet, if she has been neutral, she has not been sympathetic. CONCLUSIONS. This immense social revolution, commenced by the election of Mr. Lincoln, which has written upon its banner "No Slavery Extension," and which engages itself thus in the way towards abolition, this generous revolution, and which deserves encouragement, has met only with distrust and hostility in England. On other points, and while still remaining neutral, England knows very well how to lend to the causes which she loves her moral support, the support of journals, parliamentary speeches and public meetings. Here, no such thing. I know not what fatal misunderstanding has compressed the generous sentiments which here should have sprung up. From the beginning the principal English papers, and especially those which are thought to express the thought of Lord Palmerston, have not ceased to proclaim aloud that the South had the right to secede; that the separation was without remedy; that it was good and conformable to the desires of the English. Many times the recognition of the South has, accord that which is demanded of her, and been presented as an act which we must expect and be prepared for. From all which, if care is not taken, there is this result, that in the excessive eagerness with which the Trent affair was seized, in the peremptory terms of reclamation, in the form adopted to render reparation difficult, we see the intention of arriving at the ends which England proposes: to effect the recognition, to suppress the blockade, to obtain cotton, and procure an America cut to pieces, replacing the too powerful republic of the United States. Liverpool has this time given the signal, Lancashire urges on to the rupture. Behind the national honor there may be something else. Take care! We must not think that, that is to say, that must not be. And that will be, if you declare the question exhausted at the very moment when public opinion begins to give attention to it; if you exact a reparation without admitting an explanation, if, in fine, you reject in advance all idea of negotiation, of mediation, or arbitration. War, instead of negotiation, mediation, or arbitration, war, after the first word, for a question which has been laid before lawyers and which admits certainly of several interpretations equally sincere: war at any price -this does not belong to our times. That which I say here, others will charge themselves with saying on the other side of the Channel. There have already been, there will be, liberal and Christian voices who will not fear to protest against the entrainements of passion. Until now we have heard only .the factory-bells; other sounds must be heard. The great party which is abolishing slavery and battling against the slave trade, has been the principal title of honor of contemporary England-this great party is not dead, I think." As to America, her friends await with an anxiety I should in vain endeavor to portray, the decision to which she will come. Never was a graver question laid before any government. The whole future is contained in it. If she is enough mistress of herself to to admit a reparation, though an extreme one, of the fault committed in her name, she will have the approbation and the esteem of all hearts which are in their right places. Her vessel, the vessel which will carry back the commissioners, we will hail it with acclamations on our shores, and it will see that the United States, in yielding much, will be neither humiliated nor injured by it. Ah! the affair might be so easily settled with a little good-will on both sides! There are on both sides men so worthy of effecting a reconciliation, to the glory of our times, and for the happiness of humanity! There are on both sides nations so well fitted to understand and like each other! Must we then despair of progress and of the spirit of peace? Must we see with our eyes English vessels engaged in assuring the success of the champions of slavery? Must we veil our heads in our mantles? For myself, I have not concluded that Captain Wilkes was right in acting as he did. I conclude merely that it is not a case for hanging, and that in seizing the commissioners and their papers, without arresting the ship and turning it from its course, he perhaps yielded-let us be just towards everybody-to the desire of not exposing to serious inconvenience the steamer and the passengers. Let us say that he had an unlucky hand, since his courtesy on this point has become the blackest of his misdeeds. In truth, in order to see in the affair of the Trent all that England has seen, we must begin by supposing that the United States, who have already, it seems to me, a sufficiently heavy business on hand, felt the temptation of bringing on a quarrel besides with England. Hypotheses of this sort will be received only by those who feel an insurmountable necessity of praising the message of Mr. Jefferson Davis, and of extending their hand to this brave South, who has suci cause to complain of the North, and whe has such a good cause to defend! AGENOR DE GASPARIN. INFLUENCE OF THE MIND ON THE BODY. | greatest skill, perhaps, often lies in the infusing -I remember an ingenious physician, who told of hopes, and inducing some composure and me, in the fanatic times, he found most of his tranquillity of mind before they enter upon the patients so disturbed by troubles of conscience, be the first endeavor of the patient too; without other operations of their art: and this ought to that he was forced to play the divine with them, which all other medicines may lose their virtue. before he could begin the physician, whose-Sir William Temple, on Health and Long Life. |