Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams, February 11, 1862

Mr. Seward to Mr.
Adams.

Sir: It is represented to us that equally in
Great Britain and in France the cause of the Union is prejudiced by the
assumption that the government which maintains it is favorable or at
least not unfavorable to the perpetuation of slavery. This incident is
one of the most curious and instructive ones which has occurred in the
course of this controversy:

The administration was elected and came into its trust upon the ground of
its declared opposition to the extension of slavery. The party of
slavery, for this reason, arrayed itself against, not only the
administration, but the Union itself, and inaugurated a civil war for
the overthrow of the Union and the establishment of an exclusive
slaveholding confederacy.

Without surrendering the political principle, we meet them in the
battlefield and in defence of the Union. The contest for life absorbs
all the interest that had existed, growing out of the previous conflict
of ideas. But what must be the effect? If the confederacy prevails,
slavery will have a constitutional, legitimate, and acknowledged state,
devoted to itself as the paramount object of the national existence. If
the Union prevails, the government will be administered by a majority
hostile to the fortification and perpetuation of slavery. Slavery in the
slaveholding States will there be left in the care of the people of
those States just as it was left at the organization of the government
in all of the States except Massachusetts. It might admit of doubt
whether it would not have been able to recover its former strength had
the slaveholding States acquiesced in the election and avoided civil
war. But what ground is there to fear such a renewal of strength after
having been defeated in arms against the Union ?

What is the operation of the war? We have entered Virginia, and already
five thousand slaves, emancipated simply by the appearance of our
forces, are upon the hands of the federal government there. We have
landed on the coast of South Carolina, and already nine thousand
similarly emancipated slaves hang upon our camps.

Although the war has not been waged against slavery, yet the army acts
immediately as an emancipating crusade. To proclaim the crusade is
unnecessary, and it would even be inexpedient, because it would deprive
us of the needful and legitimate support of the friends of the Union who
are not opposed to slavery, but who prefer Union without slavery to
disunion with slavery.

Does France or does Great Britain want to see a social revolution here,
with all its horrors, like
the slave revolution in San Domingo? Are these powers sure that the
country or the world is ripe for such a revolution, so that it must
certainly be successful? What, if inaugurating such a revolution,
slavery, protesting against its ferocity and inhumanity, should prove
the victor ?

Who says this administration is false to human freedom? Does it not
acknowledge the citizenship as well as the manhood of men without
respect to color ?

Has it not made effective arrangements with Great Britain to suppress the
slave trade on the coast of Africa? Has it not brought into life the
federal laws against the African slave trade, and is it not executing
their severest penalties? Besides, is it not an object worthy of
practical men to confine slavery within existing bounds, instead of
suffering it to be spread over the whole unoccupied portion of this vast
continent ?

Is it not favoring emancipation in the federal District, to be
accomplished at the government cost, and without individual injustice or
oppression ?

Does it not receive all who come into the federal camps to offer their
services to the Union, and hold and protect them against disloyal
claimants? Does it not favor the recognition of Hayti and Liberia ?

The tale that Mr. Cameron was required to give up his place because of
his decided opposition to slavery is without foundation; that
distinguished gentleman resigned his place only because he could be
useful in a diplomatic situation, while the gentleman appointed his
successor, it was expected, would be more efficient in administration.
His successor has no more sympathy with slavery than Mr. Cameron. These
facts and thoughts are communicated to you confidentially for such use
in detail as may be practicable, but not to be formally presented in the
usual way to the government to which you are accredited.

I am, sir, your obedient servant,