“We receive by the last steamer from New York the report
of a speech recently delivered by a person of great
consideration in the councils of the present Government
at Washington, who maintains that the favor already given
to the Confederacy by England deserves the execration of
humanity, and supplies, if necessary, abundant cause for
war. The speaker to whom we allude is Mr. Charles Sumner,
the President of the Committee of the Senate on Foreign
Affairs. He denounced, we are told, as ‘a betrayal of
civilization,’ England’s recognition of the Confederate
States as belligerents, and her proclamation of neutrality.
_The absurd injustice of this often repeated complaint
is sufficiently shown by the simple observation, that,
in recognizing the belligerent rights of the South, we
did exactly what the Federal Government itself did_,
and has continued to do from the commencement of the
war. We did, moreover, what no power could have avoided,
without absolutely intending to take a direct part in
the subjugation of the seceding States. But Mr. Sumner
correctly appreciates the consequences of this course, as
adopted by ourselves and France, in perceiving that it
insured to the South the free exercise of all the power
of making war from its own resources which an independent
state could possess.”
The _Economist_, of London, a weekly journal, in an article
entitled “Mr. Sumner’s Speech at New York,” among many remarks
of bad temper and doubtful candor, said:--
“Mr. Charles Sumner has been delivering a speech before a
crowded audience in New York which will cause much pain
and disappointment to all friends and well-wishers of the
Federal United States. It is weak in argument, unfair and
unjust in its representations, and bitter in tone and
temper. If men of Mr. Sumner’s education and position in
America really believe the things they say and indulge
the feelings to which they give utterance, it is clearly
hopeless to attempt either to enlighten their understanding
or to allay their irritation.…
“Two other considerations will fully justify us in
describing Mr. Sumner’s address as marked by the most
distinctly unfair and unfriendly _animus_ toward this
country. The first is, that he has carefully avoided doing
the slightest justice to the strong Antislavery feeling
which prevails among us, and even insinuates a disposition
to favor the slave empire of the South.…
“Finally, what construction is to be placed upon the
remarkable circumstance, that, throughout his whole
address, while endeavoring to rouse the wrath of his
countrymen by a vicious enumeration of the supposed
offences of Great Britain, he says not a word against
France, which has participated in nearly all, and
added others of her own? He charges us with hostile
designs, because we recognized belligerent rights in the
Confederates; but he utters no word of complaint against
France, who recognized these at the same date and in the
same terms.”
Referring to Mr. Sumner’s speech, it will be seen how untrue is
the statement that he said “not a word against France”; nor is
it true that he was unjust to “the strong Antislavery feeling”
which had done so much honor to English history, although
he lamented that it was impotent to save England from fatal
concession to Rebel Slavery.
* * * * *
There was a critical spirit in the provincial press. The
Halifax _Reporter_, in Nova Scotia, said:--
“Mr. Sumner, whose judgment is evidently warped by his
abhorrence of Slavery, seems to expect that England
should look upon the North as waging the war on behalf
of human liberty. It is obvious he considers, that, in
recognizing the Confederates as belligerents, her statesmen
have exhibited a sympathy with slaveholders which is
unjustifiable.…
“Mr. Sumner is peculiarly wrathy that any portion of the
British people should have been allowed to give aid and
comfort to the Rebels by affording them supplies of various
kinds.”