Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams, May 21, 1861

Mr. Seward to Mr.
Adams.

Sir: This government considers that our
relations in Europe have reached a crisis, in which it is necessary for
it to take a decided stand, on which not only its immediate measures, but its ultimate and
permanent policy can be determined and defined. At the same time it
neither means to menace Great Britain nor to wound the susceptibilities
of that or any other European nation. That policy is developed in this
paper.

The paper itself is not to be read or shown to the British secretary of
state, nor are any of its positions to be prematurely, unnecessarily, or
indiscreetly made known. But its spirit will be your guide. You will
keep back nothing when the time arrives for its being said with dignity,
propriety, and effect, and you will all the while be careful to say
nothing that will be incongruous or inconsistent with the views which it
contains.

Mr. Dallas, in a brief despatch of May 2, (No. 333,) tells us that Lord
John Russell recently requested an interview with him on account of the
solicitude which his lordship felt concerning the effect of certain
measures represented as likely to be adopted by the President. In that
conversation the British secretary told Mr. Dallas that the three
representatives of the southern confederacy were then in London, that
Lord John Russell had not yet seen them, but that he was not unwilling
to see them unofficially. He further informed Mr. Dallas that an
understanding exists between the British and French governments which
would lead both to take one and the same course as to recognition. His
lordship then referred to the rumor of a meditated blockade by us of
southern ports, and a discontinuance of them as ports of entry. Mr.
Dallas answered that he knew nothing on those topics, and therefore
could say nothing. He added that you were expected to arrive in two
weeks. Upon this statement Lord John Russell acquiesced in the
expediency of waiting for the full knowledge you were, expected to
bring.

Mr. Dallas transmitted to us some newspaper reports of ministeríal
explanations made in Parliament.

You will base no proceedings on parliamentary debates further than to
seek explanations, when necessary, and communicate them to this
department.

The President regrets that Mr. Dallas did not protest against the
proposed unofficial intercourse between the British government and the
missionaries of the insurgents. It is due, however, to Mr. Dallas to say
that our instructions had been given only to you and not to him, and
that his loyalty and fidelity, too rare in these times, are
appreciated.

Intercourse of any kind with the so-called commissioners is liable to be
construed as a recognition of the authority which appointed them. Such
intercourse would be none the less hurtful to us for being called
unofficial, and it might be even more injurious, because we should have
no means of knowing what points might be resolved by it. Moreover,
unofficial intercourse is useless and meaningless if it is not expected
to ripen into official intercourse and direct recognition. It is left
doubtful here whether the proposed unofficial intercourse has yet
actually begun. Your own antecedent instructions are deemed explicit
enough, and it is hoped that you have not misunderstood them. You will,
in any event, desist from all intercourse whatever, unofficial as well
as official, with the British government, so long as it shall continue
intercourse of either kind with the domestic enemies of this country.
When intercourse shall have been arrested for this cause, you will
communicate with this department and receive further directions.

Lord John Russell has informed us of an understanding between the British
and French governments that they will act together in regard to our
affairs. This communication, however, loses something of its value from
the circumstance that the communication was withheld until after
knowledge of the fact had been acquired by us from other sources. We
know also another fact that has not yet been officially communicated to
us, namely: That other European states are apprized by France and
England of their agreement, and
are expected to concur with or follow them in whatever measures they
adopt on the subject of recognition. The United States have been
impartial and just in all their conduct towards the several nations of
Europe. They will not complain, however, of the combination now
announced by the two leading powers, although they think they had a
right to expect a more independent, if not a more friendly course, from
each of them. You will take no notice of that or any other alliance.
Whenever the European governments shall see fit to communicate directly
with us, we shall be, as heretofore, frank and explicit in our
reply.

As to the blockade, you will say that by our own laws and the laws of
nature, and the laws of nations, this government has a clear right to
suppress insurrection. An exclusion of commerce from national ports
which have been seized by insurgents, in the equitable form of blockade,
is a proper means to that end. You will not insist that our blockade is
to be respected, if it be not maintained by a competent force; but
passing by that question as not now a practical or at least an urgent
one, you will add that the blockade is now, and it will continue to be,
so maintained, and therefore we expect it to be respected by Great
Britain. You will add that we have already revoked the exequatur of a
Russian consul who had enlisted in the military service of the
insurgents, and we shall dismiss or demand the recall of every foreign
agent, consular or diplomatic, who shall either disobey the federal laws
or disown the federal authority.

As to the recognition of the so-called Southern Confederacy, it is not to
be made a subject of technical definition. It is, of course, direct
recognition to publish an acknowledgment of the sovereignty and
independence of a new power. It is direct recognition to receive its
embassadors, ministers, agents or commissioners, officially. A
concession of belligerent rights is liable to be construed as a
recognition of them. No one of these proceedings will pass unquestioned
by the United States in this case.

Hitherto, recognition has been moved only on the assumption that the
so-called Confederate States are de facto a
self-sustaining power. Now, after long forbearance, designed to sooth
discontent and avert the need of civil war, the land and naval forces of
the United States have been put in motion to repress insurrection. The
true character of the pretended new State is at once revealed. It is
seen to be a power existing in pronunciamento only. It has never won a
field. It has obtained no forts that were not virtually betrayed into
its hands or seized in breach of trust. It commands not a single port on
the coast nor any highway out from its pretended capital by land. Under
these circumstances, Great Britain is called upon to intervene and give
it body and independence by resisting our measures of suppression.
British recognition would be British intervention, to create within our
territory a hostile State by overthrowing this republic itself.

* * * * * * * *

As to the treatment of privateers in the insurgent service, you will say
that this is a question exclusively our own. We treat them as pirates.
They are our own citizens, or persons employed by our citizens, preying
on the commerce of our country. If Great Britain shall choose to
recognize them as lawful belligerents, and give them shelter from our
pursuit and punishment, the laws of nations afford an adequate and
proper remedy.

Happily, however, her Britannic Majesty’s government can avoid all these
difficulties. It invited us in 1856 to accede to the declaration of the
congress of Paris, of which body Great Britain was herself a member,
abolishing privateering everywhere in all cases and forever. You already
have our authority to propose to her our accession to that declaration.
If she refuse it, it can only be because she is willing to become the
patron of privateering when aimed at our devastation.

These positions are not elaborately defended now, because to vindicate
them would imply a possibility of our waiving them.

We are not insensible of the grave importance of this occasion. We see
how, upon the result of the debate in which we are engaged, a war may
ensue between the United States and one, two, or even more European
nations. War in any case is as exceptional from the habits as it is
revolting from the sentiments of the American people. But if it come it
will be fully seen that it results from the action of Great Britain, not
our own; that Great Britain will have decided to fraternize with our
domestic enemy either without waiting to hear from you our remonstrances
and our warnings, or after having heard them. War in defence of national
life is not immoral, and war in defence of independence is an inevitable
part of the discipline of nations.

The dispute will be between the European and the American branches of the
British race. All who belong to that race will especially deprecate it,
as they ought. It may well be believed that men of every race and
kindred will deplore it. A war not unlike it between the same parties
occurred at the close of the last century. Europe atoned by forty years
of suffering for the error that Great Britain committed in provoking
that contest. If that nation shall now repeat the same great error, the
social convulsions which will follow may not be so long, but they will
be more general. When they shall have ceased, it will, we think, be
seen, whatever may have been the fortunes of other nations, that it is
not the United States that will have come out of them with its precious
Constitution altered, or its honestly obtained dominions in any degree
abridged. Great Britain has but to wait a few months, and all her
present inconveniences will cease with all our own troubles. If she take
a different course she will calculate for herself the ultimate, as well
as the immediate consequences, and will consider what position she will
hold when she shall have forever lost the sympathies and affections of
the only nation on whose sympathies and affections she has a natural
claim. In making that calculation she will do well to remember that in
the controversy she proposes to open we shall be actuated by neither
pride, nor passion, nor cupidity, nor ambition; but we shall stand
simply oh the principle of self preservation, and that our cause will
involve the independence of nations and the rights of human nature.

I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant,