A Few Letters and Speeches of the Late Civil War by August Belmont (DNC Chairman)

Secretary af the Treasury, Washington, D. C.

New York, June 18, 1861.

My Dear Sir,—I have the pleasure of handing you inclosed copies of the decrees of the Emperor Napoleon, and of the report of his Minister of Finance, relative to the last national loan of five hundred millions of francs, issued during the last Crimean war.

You will see, thereby, that the subscription was open in all the departments of France for a fortnight at 92 per cent. for 4½ per cent. stock, and 65 25/100 per cent. for 3 per cent. stock, which was about one to one and three-quarters per cent. lower than the stock was quoted on that day in Paris, say 93 per cent. for the 4½ per cent., and 67 25/100 per cent. for the three per cent. Rentes.

The subscription amounted to two billion one hundred and seventyfive million francs, that is to say, more than four times as much as was required; and the amount required was more than filled up by subscriptions of under five hundred francs, Rentes, say about twelve to fifteen thousand francs capital, so that the large subscribers got nothing.

This loan was issued in the midst of the Crimean war, and nine months only after a similar loan of two hundred and fifty millions, which had been taken in the same proportions. You will also see that a sinking fund is attached to this loan.

If our brave army is, as I trust and hope, victorious in its engagements with the rebels in Virginia, there will be no difficulty in negotiating large amounts of Federal stock here and in Europe.

The elastic-energy of the American people makes them desirous to get quickly through their troubles, and I have no doubt that a vigorous prosecution of the war, and a consequent demand for larger appropriations, will be well received by the people.

My last letter from Paris states : “All uneasiness of hostilities in Europe during the present year appear to have disappeared. Our bank is amply supplied with bullion, and the subscription, which has just closed, to an issue of two hundred and forty million francs railway bonds, has so enormously exceeded the amount as to prove to excess that there is plenty of money here which seeks suitable investments.”

Paris.

New York, June 18, 1861.

As far as it lies in my power, I shall continue to give you the most accurate information of the march of events here. I have already expressed to you, repeatedly, my conviction, that unless aided by the moral support of France and England the Southern rebellion has no chance of success, and must be completely overcome.

General Scott is perfectly confident that by next spring he will have conquered a peace. My short visit to Washington, and the interviews which I had there with the different members of the administration, convince me more and more that the government is determined to carry on the war with the utmost vigor. From what Mr. Seward told me, it would seem that France will act jointly with England in its policy during the present war. I regret this for the reasons which I have already given to you.

England has, by her unfriendly position, lost the good-will of our people and government, who both look, more than ever now, to their old ally, France, and to the sympathy of the Emperor.

The time for his mediation may sooner or later come, and great commercial advantages can be secured by France by holding, for the present, at least, aloof.

It is stated that your government will allow the Southern privateers to run in for supplies, and remain with their prizes twenty-four hours in the French ports. This is very much to be regretted, and I hope, still, that the great powers of Europe will accept the adhesion of our government to the declarations of the Congress of Paris annulling privateering. All the maritime powers would then have outlawed that barbarous mode of warfare, and the ports of France would, of course, remain closed to Jeff. Davis’s privateers.

One of them was captured a few days ago by the United States brig Perry, and her crew are now in irons on board the United States steamer Minnesota. They will be tried as pirates, and if not hung, undoubtedly sentenced to hard labor.

The evacuation of Harper’s Ferry, which was, at first, construed into an attempted attack upon Washington, seems to have been forced upon the rebel troops, who were afraid of having their retreat cut off. They will now concentrate at Manassas Junction, hoping, probably, to get General Scott to attack them there, in the strong intrenchments which they have constructed. That veteran hero is, however, too wise to be led into such a mistake. He knows that they are short of provisions, that the place does not give them a sufficient supply of water, and that, consequently, they will soon be obliged to fall back toward Richmond.

In the mean while the divisions under Generals McClellan and Patterson will come down from the West and Northwest and outflank them, unless they retreat. General Scott is confident of being in Richmond by the end of July.

During my short visit to Washington I saw a good many of our officers and soldiers. The most excellent spirit pervades our whole army. Our troops in Virginia behave with exemplary order, and are gaining the good-will of the inhabitants by the respect they show for all public and private property. Their conduct stands in beautiful contrast with that of the secession troops, who have destroyed about two million dollars’ worth of property around Harper’s Ferry, and who compel the Virginia farmers to sell them provisions against valueless paper of the Confederacy. This state of things ought soon to produce a healthy reaction in the sentiments of the Virginia people.

The election for Members of Congress in Maryland has resulted in the defeat of the whole secession ticket by handsome majorities, yet that State was claimed as hostile to the Union.

London

New York, June 18, 1861

While I was in Washington I had a two hours’ interview with our Secretary of State. Mr. Seward is clear in the position which he has taken with reference to the rebellion and the attitude into which the recognition of the Southern Confederacy, by any European government, will place the United States.

In that position the people will uphold our government at all hazards. There is no irritation of feeling on the part of the intelligent portion of our people against England, our papers, with one or two exceptions, treat the question very dispassionately, but there is a firm and unalterable determination not to allow a separation of this Union, whatever blood and treasure it may cost to conquer a peace and a reconstruction of the Confederacy.

To The Hon. W. H. Seward,

Washington, D. C.

New York, June 6, 1861

My Dear Sir,—In your last kind letter, you requested me to inform you, from time to time, of the phases of public opinion in Europe, as they may come to my knowledge. I shall do so with pleasure, but hope that you will excuse my request if I beg you to consider my communications as strictly confidential.

The letters received by last steamer from England are any thing but satisfactory. The cotton interest seems to have gained so complete an ascendency over every other consideration, that the anti-slavery feeling is entirely pushed into the background.

I fear that the British cabinet is seriously contemplating the recognition of the Southern Confederacy, and what is worse is the almost certainty that France will act in concert with England.

If you will not take it amiss, I will make bold enough to give you, as my candid opinion, that the Morrill tariff has had as much to do with the unfortunate state of feeling in Europe as any other circumstance.

England and France are compelled to keep their army and navy on the most extensive war footing, both mistrusting each other. In order to obtain the enormous sums required for such a state of things, both governments must bring every sacrifice of principle rather than see their commercial and manufacturing interests endangered. Our tariff and our blockade strike a mortal blow to both, and as we cannot, of course, give up the latter, it is certainly worthy the serious consideration of our government and people to see whether sound policy does not dictate the modification of tlje first. Apart from the change of public feeling which a return to free-trade principles would produce in England and France, I think that we absolutely require it in order to increase our revenue, which, under the present system, must continue to be very low. The only interest, in my opinion, for which the plea of protection can be advanced with any degree of justice, is our iron interest, and that can be sufficiently done by a specific duty.

For the rest there ought, in my opinion, to be an average duty of fifteen per cent., and coffee and tea might be taken from the free list.

The government will very soon require a new loan, probably not less than thirty or forty millions, and I confess, candidly, that I do not see any chance for the negotiation of it in Europe, unless the chances of an increased revenue are secured by such a measure.

Before the war can be brought to a satisfactory termination we shall require from fifty to one hundred millions of dollars at least, and I think it will be absolutely necessary to look to the European money market for at least a portion of that amount.

By a reduction of our tariff to fifteen per cent., we take away a very great inducement for France and England to force our blockade and to recognize the South. They evidently expect now, not only to get their supply of cotton, but also to export their produce and manufactures into the Southern ports, to be from there smuggled into the West and North.

With a duty of fifteen per cent., the South cannot defray her expenses of a war, even if the blockade should not exist, and will be obliged to have recourse to an export duty on cotton and tobacco, and nothing will bring out a Union feeling so soon as that, among the influential planting interest.

Excuse the freedom of the expression of my views—they are based upon the best information I can command, abroad and at home, and they are dictated by a sincere devotion to my government.

To The Right Hon. Lord DUNFERMLINE,

House of Lords, London.

New York, June 3, 1861

My Dear Lord Dunfermline,—The friendly relations which have existed during several years between us, and which I shall always cherish among the bright recollections of my sojourn at the Hague, induce me to address you this letter, for which I crave your kind and favorable consideration.

The unfortunate position into which a few reckless and selfish politicians, aided by the weakness of our late national administration, have thrown this country, is at this moment directing the serious attention of the British government and people toward us. Knowing your warm and active sympathy, and that of your noble and influential family, for the cause of constitutional liberty, I am sure that you are among those who watch with intense interest the phases of the dark drama which is now enacting on this continent, between the United States, struggling for their national existence, and a rebellious faction, attempting to overthrow our free institutions, in order to plant slavery on the whole American continent.

From the tenor of the English press, and the debates in Parliament, I am inclined to believe that there exists a serious misapprehension in the minds of your government and people in regard to the nature of the Southern rebellion, and the chances of its success.

If you allow me, I will give you my views on the present position of affairs here, in as short a space as the form of a letter, and my desire not to bore you with a lengthy epistle, will permit. I may claim that these views, however erroneous and imperfect they may prove, have at least the merit of fairness and impartiality. My politics have always been opposed to the party now in power, the advent of which has been used by the leaders of the Southern conspiracy as a watchword for an overthrow of our government. I was, and am, opposed to an useless agitation of the slavery question, and any infringement of the Constitutional rights of the South, under a fair and liberal construction, and am equally hostile to the anti-free-trade proclivities of the present administration.

You are doubtless aware that the so-called Republican (anti-slavery) party which is now in power, was first able to claim the position of a national party in 1854, in consequence of the daily increasing aggressions and demands of the pro-slavery oligarchy, which had gained the control of the executive and legislature of the Federal government. The dastardly assault upon Senator Sumner, from Massachusetts, provoked as it undoubtedly was by the violent language of that senator, and the fraud and violence with which the pro-slavery party attempted to force a slavery constitution upon the new State of Kansas, drove hundreds of thousands throughout the North into the ranks of the new party.

In 1856 that party, for the first time, put a candidate for the Presidency in nomination, upon the avowed doctrine of preventing the extension of slavery to our western Territories. Mr. Fremont was then defeated by Mr. Buchanan, who enjoyed the confidence of a very large majority of the conservative and influential portion of the country, and in whose sagacity, experience, and familiarity with public affairs, everybody hoped for a strong government, and for the suppression of the seditious cry of disunion which had been raised by the political leaders of the South ever since the formation of the Republican party.

In these expectations the country was sadly disappointed. Mr. Buchanan threw himself from the very outset into the arms of the very men who are now the rebel leaders of the South. His cabinet, chosen under such influences, sympathized, with one single exception, and was in secret league with the conspirators, giving them during the last four years ample time, means, and influence, in order to prepare their treasonable machinations.

The Secretary of War, convicted since his retirement of actual treason and fraud, had placed all the Federal forts in the South, and an immense quantity of arms, within their reach, so that when the time had come for them to throw down the mask they were enabled to give to their movement an appearance of strength and probability of success, which evidently has deceived public opinion in England.

Upon the first outbreak of secession, and when it was confined to the cotton States, there was also a large party at the North which was in favor of compromise measures, in order to bring the seceding States back to their allegiance. When these failed against the uncompromising attitude of the extremists South and North, they even went so far as to advocate a peaceable separation of the cotton States, convinced that the latter, when once out of the Union, would soon discover how fearfully they had been deceived by their selfish and designing leaders, and that they would be but too glad after a year or so to return into the confederacy.

The attack against Fort Sumter, the treachery of Virginia and North Carolina, and the conduct of Jeff. Davis, have, however, since then, produced a revolution in the public mind of the North, of the strength, intensity, and unanimity of which it would be impossible for me to convey to you even the faintest idea.

The people of the North see now revealed to them, in all their horrid nakedness, the treasonable schemes of the slavery oligarchy, who, while pretending to battle for their threatened Constitutional rights, have dragged the country to this fearful condition, for no other purpose but to insure to themselves the continuance of that power which they have wielded for the last forty years, and to fasten slavery, as a political element, upon this country. The North feels that to admit the right of secession claimed by the revolted States, would be forever to renounce our existence as a nation, and that a peaceful separation of fifteen slave States on one side, and seventeen free States on the other, divided only by an imaginary geographical line, must soon be followed by war and strife, however much treaties and diplomacy might attempt to prevent it. Besides, can it be expected that the powerful North and Northwest, with a hardy and industrious population of twenty-one millions of freemen, would quietly relinquish the mouth of the Mississippi, and all the seaports, from the Chesapeake to the Rio Grande, into the possession of a foreign nation, ruled by unscrupulous and reckless politicians, who, for the sake of their odious domestic institution, and upon the strength of their cotton monopoly, would disregard and violate treaty-stipulations, whenever it would suit their convenience.

With a due appreciation of these considerations, it cannot be doubted that no sacrifice will be too great for the people of the North in support of their government, and the maintenance of the integrity of their country. We are all united, while we know that in Virginia, Tennessee, and Alabama, a very considerable portion of the inhabitants are openly in favor of the Union, and we have good reason to suppose that a very numerous minority in the other cotton States, with the exception, perhaps, of South Carolina, is opposed to secession.

The contest must end in the victory of the government, but I fear that the position of neutrality taken by your government, which raises the rebels to the dignity of belligerents, will give them a moral support only calculated to prolong the war and its horrors.

We had hoped for the active sympathy and support of the British government and people, in our struggle against the spread of the institution of slavery, and against a rebellion, which, by the confession and boast of its leaders, is based upon that institution as its principal element of power.

We could not, of course, expect a direct interference of your government in our intestine quarrel, but we thought that, as they had heretofore done in the case of Greece, Italy, and Spain, the British people would be allowed to follow their noble instincts for freedom and constitutional liberty, and that the anti-slavery cause, which had always been so warmly advocated in England, would now find means, money, and men, in its dark hour of trial, to assist us against the most unjustifiable and criminal rebellion which has ever disgraced the annals of history.

These hopes have been most sadly disappointed by the proclamation of the Queen, declaring strict neutrality between the government of the United States and a portion of its citizens in rebellion against that government. It has, however, in no way lessened the determination of the United North to fight for the restoration of the integrity of their government to the last man. With the preponderance of men and resources which we possess over the South, the final result can only be a question of time; but if the British government desires, as it undoubtedly must, to see the length and horrors of this fratricidal war diminished, its true policy must be to avoid any thing which in the remotest way can give aid and comfort to the seceded States.

Our government has given, by one of the first acts of the new administration, its consent to the first article of the declaration of the Paris Conference on the right of neutrals, abolishing privateers. With its consent, all the maritime powers of the world have now united in declaring privateering piracy, and I hope sincerely that this progress in civilization and humanity will be secured by the acceptance of the consent of my government, notwithstanding that we were somewhat slow in making up our mind.

I trust, also, that the restrictions imposed by the Queen’s proclamation, by which British merchant-vessels are prohibited from carrying arms and munitions of war to either of the belligerents, may be repealed.

The Southern ports being blockaded by our navy, this restriction results of course to the direct advantage of the rebels, and prevents, moreover, your shipowners and manufacturers from realizing a legitimate profit by the manufacturing and carrying of English arms to our ports.

During the Crimean war, notwithstanding the strict neutrality of our government, our merchant-ships and steamers were chartered by the English and French authorities, for the carrying of troops and arms to the Crimea, and large numbers of arms were manufactured here, and sent in American vessels to England.

Our government did not interfere with its ship-owners and manufacturers in the lawful pursuit of their trade, and as the Russian ports were then in the same position as our Southern ports are at present, the neutral course of the United States resulted to the advantage of the allies.

I hope, my dear Lord Dunfermline, that you will excuse this very lengthy epistle, and I trust that your powerful influence will be exerted in favor of the cause of right, justice, and freedom. Your position in the House of Lords, and your intimate relations with Lord John Russell, give a peculiar weight to any steps you may feel induced to take in this important question.

The cordial good feeling of our people for Great Britain, and their deepfelt love and respect for the Queen, will be very much strengthened by an evidence of sympathy on the part of the British nation and government for our cause, which is that of justice and humanity.

If you have sufficient leisure left to let me hear from you, I shall be much gratified, and if I can learn from you that I have not in vain advocated the cause of my country, it will be a source of pride and happiness to me.

To The Hon. W. H. SEWARD,

Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.

New York, May 29, 1861

My Dear Sir,—I am extremely obliged to you for the very kind and flattering manner with which you speak of a letter of mine to Baron Rothschild, of which a copy had been handed to you by Mr. Weed.

The Baron is a very intimate friend of Lord John Russell, both representing the city of London in Parliament, and he is on equally friendly relations with Lord Palmerston.

I know that his personal views and sympathies have been, and are, still, with the North, and I have no doubt but what he will communicate my views to his ministerial friends.

As you have given a favorable consideration to my views on the unfriendly attitude assumed by the British Crown, I beg to hand you the inclosed copy of another letter which I wrote yesterday to Baron Rothschild on the proclamation of the Queen, and which I hope you will find leisure to peruse.

To Baron LIONEL de ROTHSCHILD, M.P.,

London.

New York, May 28

Dear Baron,—Since my letter by the Africa steamer we have received the proclamation of the Queen, commanding a strict neutrality to her subjects in the struggle in which the government of the United States is now engaged against a portion of its citizens, now in rebellion against their constituted authorities.

It would be difficult for me to convey to you an idea of the general feeling of disappointment and irritation produced in this country, by this manifesto of the British government, by which a few revolted States are placed, in their relations with Great Britain, upon the same footing as the government of the United States.

People naturally compare the position which England takes now against us, to her stand during the Carlist war in Spain. The rebellion in the South has not the same chances of success as there existed certainly at one time for the cause of the Spanish pretender. Yet it certainly never occurred to the British crown for one moment to acknowledge Don Carlos in the light of a belligerent. On the contrary, we saw a British legion, armed and equipped in England, and commanded by an English general officer, fight for the cause of the constitutional and rightful sovereignty.

When Hungary, some years later, made an heroic effort to reconquer her nationality and independence, England did not cease to consider her as a revolted province, although the sympathies of the majority of the English people were on the side of the rebels, and though nothing but the powerful intervention of Russia prevented a success of that revolution.

Recently, again, on the other hand, we have seen men and arms equipped by British subjects, leave the English ports to assist the cause of Italian independence under Garibaldi.

The people of the United States had certainly a right to hope and expect the same support in their struggle for their national existence against the unjust and unwarrantable revolt of an unprincipled oligarchy, based upon the most odious domestic institution, and against which no government has heretofore taken so decided a stand as Great Britain herself.

If not an actual violation of international law, it must certainly be considered an act of extreme unfriendliness on the part of any government to place itself on a footing of neutrality between a power with which it entertains intimate diplomatic and commercial relations, and a revolted portion of that nation, unrecognized by any civilized government, and having so far in no way shown any evidence that it will be able to maintain the position which it has assumed against its legitimate government.

I fear that the very cordial good-feeling which, notwithstanding the delicate questions arising, from time to time, between the two governments, has pervaded all classes of our people toward the British nation, and of which, as well as of their deep-felt veneration for the Queen, they have given such a unanimous and striking evidence on the occasion of the laying of the Atlantic telegraph cable, and the recent visit of the Prince of Wales, will make room to sentiments of bitter resentment and animosity if the British government should persist in its present attitude.

Even upon the point of strict neutrality the proclamation goes further than international law and comity would seem to require. While the prohibition of equipment and enlistment of armaments and troops by British subjects in British ports is a measure of neutrality, it is certainly stretching the point to prevent British merchant vessels from carrying arms, military stores, etc., etc., to our ports or those of the Confederate States. The ports of the latter being blockaded by our navy, this restriction is entirely aimed against us, and is, therefore, an actual assistance to the rebels.

During the Crimean war, notwithstanding the strict neutrality of our government, which forbade enlistments, etc., etc., our vessels carried troops, arms, and military stores from English and French ports into the Crimea. The American ship-owners did this at their own peril in case of capture by Russian vessels of war, but our government did not prohibit it, notwithstanding that, as in the present case, it only was done to the advantage of one of the belligerent parties, Russia being blockaded then as the South is now.

MAY 15, 1861.

Colonel Blenker And Gentlemen Of  The First Regiment Of Rifles,— I have the honor to present this stand of colors to your regiment. It is the flag which for three-quarters of a century has been hailed in every quarter of the inhabited globe as the emblem of Constitutional liberty, and the beacon of hope to the oppressed of all nations.

In rushing with generous ardor to the rescue of our flag, you have given to your fellow-citizens a most gratifying proof of the patriotism and the devotion of our German population to the land of their adoption and choice. A large number of you have fled from oppression and tyranny in the Old World, after having in vain shed your blood for the liberties of your country on many a hardfought battle-field in Hungary and Germany.

You have found on these hospitable shores protection, freedom, and loving hearts, and in offering now the sacrifice of your lives on the altar of your adopted country you pay a debt of gratitude for the blessings vouchsafed to you under our liberal institutions.

Our most fervent prayers follow you to the path of duty and honor which you have chosen. May the Almighty, who has thus far showered His choicest blessings upon our cherished Union, protect her brave defenders. May He watch over you in the hour of danger, and may He grant you to return in safety to your homes and firesides after every star in this bright constellation shall have been restored, to abide with its sisters in union and peace to the end of time.