A DIPLOMATIST EDITOR.
IN every country in the world, be its form of government what it may, place is the reward of power, and the executive must conciliate its supporters with the good things in its gift. In England a Ministry must have effective speakers in the House of Commons, and this necessity, as Macaulay said, nearly made Sheridan, who could not work a HUM in long division, into a Chancellor of the Exchequer. In the 'United States the Executive is independent of Congress, but it is the creature of the quadrennial Presidential election, and as the power of electing a President is in the hands of the masses, it follows that the support of persons who can in- fluence the masses must be secured. Now there are two principal methods of influencing the masses in all countries— oratory and the press—and consequently there are two classes of his supporters for whom every in-coming President must provide, namely, the stump orators and the newspaper editors. Among the most important of the latter class of the sup- porters of Mr. Lincoln in 1860 was General J. Watson Webb, who, however, owes his position as Minister of the *United States at Rio not to the rank which he had earned by arduous service in the militia of his native state, but to the fact that he was editor of the New York Daily Courier and Inquirer. Such good service had he done in this capacity that he won the great diplomatic prize, and came as Ambassador to Lon- don, where, however, it soon became obvious that he was not the right man in the right place, and his own Government transferred his energies to Brazil. Probably this incident did not operate so as to prepossess General J. Watson Webb in favour of this country. If he did not suit England, so much the worse for England, and for four long years the wrath of this Yankee Achilles has been suspended over our devoted heads. Indeed when we reflect what terrible woes' accord- ing to Mr. Kinglake, the anger of Sir Stratford Canning brought on Russia we feel as if we had just escaped a great danger. Fortunately, however, this aggrieved diplomatist was not only a general but an editor' and he has not invaded Ireland, but simply in the form of a despatch written a lead- ing article.
So far as General J. Watson Webb is concerned the matter might very well end here. His personal opinion on the con- duct of the British Government is of no importance, and if the leaders in his newspaper are written with as little sense, knowledge, and pertinence as this last composition we can only say that its subscribers are very much to be pitied. But we believe that the sort of notions which General J. Watson Webb has published for the amusement of mankind are rather popular among the people of the States, and as it is not everybody who knows how they make diplomatists, there may be people even in England who fancy that an Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary is of necessity an authority on international difficulties. But even if this were so it would be impossible to attach any weight to the extraordinary disquisition which General Webb has composed. It is altogether obiter dictum. An ambassador may speak with authority on questions which arise between his own country and that to which lie is accre- dited, because on those he is presumed to deliver a message which has been entrusted to him. But when he assumes to discuss general topics he is plainly speaking merely his own personal opinions, which are entitled to no official weight whatever. As to the course which Mr. Lincoln will adopt with reference to the treacherous outrage committed by Cap- tain Collins, we are bound to presume that General Webb speaks with authority until he is disavowed. But when he inserts into a despatch an essay on the right of neutral nations to acknow- ledge the existence of a rebellious Government, and still more when he presumes to censure the conduct of neutral Powers to which he is not accredited, he is simply guilty of an im- pertinence. There is a difference between the functions of an envoy and an editor.
General Webb's statements are not, however, merelyimperti- nent, they are erroneous. He says about fifty times that the Florida was a "pirate." She is certainly nothing of the sort in an international point of view. A pirate is a vessel which preys on the commerce of mankind—not of any one particular nation. The American Courts themselves have so decided,— as indeed it was impossible to avoid doing,—with reference to a vessel belonging to the revolted province of Texas. The Confederate vessels which attack only the ships of the States may be amenable to the municipal law of the States, but what have neutrals to do with that ? And the taunt is not only untrue, but irrelevant, for if the Florida had been a paste Captain Collins had no right to seize her in neutral territory. Would General Webb allow that a ship of war of any friendly nation may follow even a pirate into the harbour of Boston or New York ?
His next proposition is that the recognition of the Confe- derates as belligerents was a cans UM. In one sense of course this is true, because anything and everything is a cams bell. If we had thought that the acquisition of Savoy by France made her so powerful as to endanger our safety we should have had a right to go to war. But in the only sense in which the term cams belli has any definite meaning, the re- cognition of rebels who have an organized government as a belligerent power is not a cans belli. It violates no right of the government rebelled against, as the recognition of the rebels' independence would. It is simply the acknowledgment of a palpable fact, not an assertion of the propriety or legality of that fact. But then we did not exercise that "comity and forbearance which the United States have always extended towards others." This is the most wonderful assertion. Why, the United States have never been tired of asserting their determination to recognize any rebellion whatever,—to make themselves in no possible way the judges between governments and their subjects. How did they act in the case of Texas? How, above all, did they act in the case of Hungary ? Hungary is an inland State with which they could by no possibility be brought into contact, and they were the only Power which acknowledged her. On the other hand, neutrals were obliged to make up their minds at once as to the attitude which they would adopt towards the Confederates, because it was obvious that the rebellion of half the States with an enormous sea- board would bring them into immediate contact with neutral nations. This is the reason why England recognized the Confederates as belligerents fifteen days after the news of the commencement of hostilities reached her, and not "her leading press," as General Webb elegantly says, nor "the speeches of many of her statesmen," who, by the bye, were all out of office.
That when we recognized the existence of a war we should put both sides on an equality is mere matter of course. If we had not done so we should have declared war on the Confederates, and we do not understand that Mr. Lincoln at all desires European interference. As for " inquiry " into "the merits of the quarrel," will General Webb tell us how we were to make it ? Whom were we to ask? Who made us judges in the matter ? Who would abide by our decision ? Even in a newspaperarticle this sort of thing would be more trifling. Any people who were not inflamed almost to madness by civil strife would see that neutrals could not have acted differently, and when General Webb says that by so acting they have "degraded the Government of the -United States to the level" of Mr. Davis and his brother slaveholders, we can only reply that we are surprised that he should think his Government can be degraded so easily. Mr. Lincoln will hardly thank him for the admission.
General Webb, however, is a military man, and he tells us that if neutrals had not recognized the Confederates "the rebellion would have terminated in a single campaign." We suppose, then, that the assertion of neutral Powers that they meant to treat both sides alike made General MacDowell lose the battle of Bull Run. Really one stands aghast at such a proposition as this, even from a diplomatic militia General. It reminds one of thepoet in "Rejected Addresses," who charged Napoleon Bonaparte with filling the butchers' shops with large blue flies. And the absurdity of the matter is that if England had not recognized the Confederates they would have been infinitely better off than they are. There would have been no war, and therefore there could have been no right of search, which is the mere creature of a state of war. Our merchant ships laden with contraband could have crossed the ocean unchallenged. As there would have been no right of search, so also there could have been no right of blockade. It is true that Congress might have passed a law closing the Southern ports, but their municipal law could have no opera- tion on the high seas, and as they were not in possession of the ports, and indeed are not in possession of all of them now, they could not have touched a neutral ship till she came within three miles of the shore. How many of our clippers who had got within three miles of the Confederate ports would the United States cruisers have succeeded in stopping ? The fact is that so far from having hindered their operations, the course - which the British Government took was the only one whic could have enabled them to carry on the war at all. The notion in Europe has always been that the basins a diplomatist was to smooth over difficulties and cloth, s of dis- agreeable truths in pleasant words. General Webb is, if this be true, the enfant terrible of diplomacy. Not only has he gone out of his way to write a string of irrelevant insults to Eng- land, saying that he wished that if Captain Collins must violate a neutral harbour he would violate an English one, but he takes care to make his apology more wounding to Brazil and all other neutrals even than to us. If we wanted the manliness to recognize the Confederates as a nation, so did they. But at least we were "smart"—we wanted to protract the rebellion—we wanted to get American commerce into our hands—and have succeeded. They were " led " into it by us— they were mere dupes whom we made use of. How very soothing this must be to the Brazilians ! How exquisite is this flattery to a people like the French, for instance ! If Mr. Lincoln had many such peacemakers among his envoys how foreign. nations would love him to be sure ! And the best of the joke is that General Webb is doing all this, as he tells us himself, quite on his own authority. He has no instructions, and indeed could have none. Well might Talleyrand say, " Above all things, no zeal !" General Webb has taken care that Mr. Lincoln shall disavow somebody, for if be does not do that necessary justice on Captain Collins he must now disavow General Webb. Indeed he will not impossibly enjoy that privilege with regard to both of them, for if the British Government should think it worth its while to ask an expla- nation of the General's "slashing article" he cannot very well avoid apologizing for it. There is one point, however, on which we heartily sympa- thize with General Webb, and that is in the opinion he has formed as to the duty of the United States. Captain Collins's lawlessness is not only a "source of unfeigned grief and t.f very sincere regret" to him, but he " feels authorized" to assure the Brazilian Government that "every reparation which honour and justice may demand will be most frankly tendered—more frankly and more promptly than if the same act had been committed by an American cruiser in the waters of the most powerful maritime nations of the world." This is as it should be. Every people should feel that the weaker the State they wrong the greater is the disgrace, and we could wish that our own Governments had always felt on the subject as General X. Watson Webb does. Indeed this senti- ment is so grateful to us that we heartily forgive him his dis- like to England. Besides, habit ,is very strong, and corres- ponding with Mr. Seward is, we should fancy, rather dull work—the Secretary of State is so very didactic. This de- epatch may be regarded as one of General Webb's melting days.. Having the pen in his hand and no instructions, he fancied himself back again in his office and addressing an enlightened public. One thing we should like to know—who got the despatch first ? Mr. Seward or the General's successor in the old office of the Courier?
Previous page
