The present attempt to dissolve the American union : a British aristocratic plot

"*

^

, « • • , *>-.

K** 4^^*^ ^^^ ^y^^/ ^^^\ ^'^^Z J''^^^ '-^1^

%.^"

"^ <"?> ^ * • « o » .0 '^ • ' ■• v^^ *^ • ■ » A^

0 -^ '•-

vv

r^^'. -- -'"^ '^^^«- •■%„,

*^^/
>' 4.*^% V

%.**

THE

PRESENT ATTEMPT

TO

DISSOLVE THE AMERICAN UNION,

% iritisi] Aristocratic f lot.

BY

B.

NEW YORK :
PRINTED FOR THE AUTHOR

JOHN F. TROW, 50 GKEENE STREET.

1862.

VA

^r^^

s^

PREFATORY REMARKS.

The first of this series of papers, it will be observed, and that
which prompted all the rest, was published in Harpcrh Wceldy
in Dec. 1860. It was not an anonymous paper, but its state-
ments were vouched for by a responsible name, Sidney E.
Morse, Esq., the originator of the Religious Newspaper, and for
many years the distinguished and indefatigable editor of the
New York Observer. The flippant and personally disparaging
notice, in the New York Trihune, of Mr. Morse's narrative of
the important facts which came under his own cognizance,
aroused the indignation of many persons, the writer of these
papers among the rest, and having coincident facts from his own
observation and research, he deemed it to be his duty as a pa-
triot, to bring them forward at this time, not merely for the pur-
pose of defending Mr. Morse from the ungenerous attacks made
upon him by the Tribune, but for the more important purpose
of drawing public attention to what he believes to be the main
political cause of our national troubles. The writer docs not
mean to say that to British Intrigues are due all the excitement
and ill blood which are now so sadly dominant in the country, for
there was a predisposition, doubtless, in many inflvxential Ameri-
can minds, favorably adapted to the action of these intrigues,
furnishing indeed the basis of, and inviting, this action ; but he

does intend to say that Britisli politicians have adroitly taken
advantage of this state of feeling, and by artfully and assiduously
increasing the excitement, have used it to accomplish their great
measure of State policy, the severance of ihe United States.

In all that relates to African Slavery, G-reat Britain has ever
taken a most prominent part, long before the era of our national
independence. Every measure of that Government, whether in
favor of slavery or against slavery, has been enacted by her,
directly or indirectly, for the promotion of her own material
interests, and chiefly to increase or maintain the power of her
oligarchy. At different periods of her history, she has taken
directly opposite sides of the great moral question of the slave
trade, changing her opinion to suit the selfish interest of her rul-
ing class.

When Sir John Hawkins, in 1561, first engrafted upon Eng-
lish commerce the African slave trade, boasting that in providing
his first slave cargo, he burnt a city of 8,000 inhabitants that he
might capture 250 of them for slaves to freight his vessel, Eng-
lish public sentiment, so far from being shocked, not only ac-
quiesced in the deed, but Queen Elizabeth herself openly pro-
tected, and shared in the profits of the next expedition, the
success of which opened the way to England for a continued
slave commerce of immense profits for 240 years. It was
another English queen at a later date. Queen Anne, who gave
directions to the Colonial Governor of New York " to take care
that the Almighty be dtvoutly and duly served, according to the
rites of the Church of England, and to give all possible encour-
agement to trade and traders, particularly to the Royal Afri-
can Company of England,'''' which company was expressly
enjoined by the queen, " to take special care that the colony
should always have a constant and sufficient supply of merchant-
able negroes at moderate rates.^^ That a marvellous change has
occurred in English sentiment since those days, is sufiiciently
notorious.

It is not necessary to atti-ibute to the many excellent and
truly philanthropic men who originated and consummated the
abolition of the slave trade, any other than a sentiment of the
highest philanthropy in the measures they set on foot to suppress
this odious trade, for it was not the mere emigration or transpor-
tation of Africans to America, nor their condition of slavery,
that constituted the odiousness of the system, so much as the
brutal and inhuman and reckless manner in which it was carried
on by Englishmen, that roused the indignation of the people of
Great Britain. It was natural that in the storm of popular
indignation which arose from the disgusting manner in which
this trade was conducted, an indignation which at length per-
vaded the kingdom, very nice discrimination would not be
made by the popular mind between that part of the system
embraced in the simple transportation and emigration of men
and women, and the cruelties unjustly and outrageously perpe-
trated by the conductors of that trade.

It was natural that the masses of the population should con-
found both emigration, and the mode of conducting it, in one indis-
criminate category, and affix to the simple emigration and trans-
portation of Africans, and their original condition of slavery, the
character which belonged only to the abuses of the system. It was
not the slavery of the African, but the " Jiorrors of the middle
passage,'''' in other words, the savage barbarity of the British com-
mercial marine, that, in the days of Wilberforce and Buxton and
their philanthropic associates, stirred the minds of the British
people to abolish the slave trade. These philanthropists made a
just and proper distinction, wholly lost sight of by the fiery fixnatics
of this day, between the slave trade and the system of slavery.
The former, through the brutality of the English traders, had
become so notoriously odious, so disgustingly hateful, from the
unrestrained abuses of more than two centuries, that it at length
became an easy matter to excite the community to measures
for its abatement; while the latter, the system of slavery, was

regarded in a very undefined degree as an evil which it was
hoped might eventually in some way be abandoned. Yet imme-
diate emancipation was strongly and firmly opposed even by
Mr. Wilberforce and his associates, and distinctly proscribed
by them as a measure instigated, not by the friends, but by the
enemies of the slave trade abolition, for the purpose of defeating
that abolition.

Nor is it necessary to include in this censure, which Ameri-
cans must pass upon the guilty authors of this intrigue in
Grreat Britain to divide our Union, the masses of the English
people, or even the majority of the aristocracy, who may pos-
sibly be ignorant of the settled purpose of the Exeter Hall or
Staiford House portion of the latter class, who for their own
selfish ends may be more active and prominent in the intrigue ;
and even if cognizant of the intrigue of certain aristocratic
coteries, may be induced silently to acquiesce, without critically
scrutinizing the moral aspects of the intrigue, since its po-
litical purpose on the whole is favorable to the power of their
caste. Selfishness evinced in the individual is condemned as
a mean and unworthy passion, but diffused through a mass, be-
ginning with the smaller, and gradually increasing to larger
associations, a family, a state or a nation, it passes in its moral
aspect from being considered a low passion, to take the com-
plexion even of a virtue. Hence bodies of men do acts, and
encourage measures, of which, in their individual position, they
would be heartily ashamed. No one who has studied the clan-
nish character of the British aristocracy can have failed to ob-
serve that the strength, the well-being, the security of its caste,
has to it the force of a moral law, and the conscience of its mem-
bers is as sensitive to any infraction of its stability, as the
individual conscience is to a law of Grod. Hence all the intrigues
to sow divisions among other nations, where by such acts it is
possible to add to the power and stability of their caste, however
base and profligate and atrocious, are pursued without a single

conscientious self-reproacli. Tlie fleet of a friendly neighbor,
confidingly lying dismantled in its own harbor, is ruthlessly and
insultingly seized on the plea that self-protection required the
act. Commanding points throughout the world are seized on
any plausible pretext, in order that the British maritime suprem-
acy, directly and intimately connected with the power of the
aristocracy, may be secured and extended. India is to be sub-
dued that its wealth may be controlled and be poured into the lap
of the aristocracy, to sustain its life and feed its power. China
is invaded for the same purpose. Intrigues to foment divisions
between rival parties are rife throughout India, and Britain takes
part with that party, utterly reckless of its moral merits, which
best promises her the control of both. The local and humane laws
of these countries are superciliously set at naught by her, and the
nauseous drug that stupefies and kills its millions per annum,
the drug benevolently forbidden by the more conservative and
more truly humane, though heathen Chinaman, is forced upon
a population that would, but for British cupidity, reject it with
loathing ; but the law of self-preservation and well-being utters
its commands, and the Chinese are condemned to a slow and
idiotic death, that the coffers of the British aristocracy may be
filled with these wages of iniquity.

But Britain boasts of her Christian civilization, and indeed
were it not that the salt of a genuine Christianity, mixed indeed
with much of human infirmity, truly permeates enough of her
population to stay the doom of Sodom, we might expect to see
that doom executed any moment. If, while individual sins re-
ceive their punishment in a future life, national sins are punished
in this life, the largest charity cannot but see in a not far distant
future, a terrible retribution for that guilty Government.

B.

THE PRESENT ATTEMPT TO DISSOLVE THE AMERICAN
UNION, A BRITISH ARISTOCRATIC PLOT.

The following important letter was written by Sidney E.
Morse, Esq., and published (Dec., 1860) in Harper's Weekly.
The writer is well known as a gentleman of intelligence and in-
tegrity, and just now this letter has a fearful significance.
When it was published, more than a year ago, the anti-slavery
press ridiculed it and sneered at it ; but just now, perhaps, their
eyes are sufficiently opened to see what tools they have been in
the hands of the British aristocracy : —

A A^EW BEIIIXD THE CURTAIN".

In the Fall of 1853 the writer met in Paris the late Mr. Aaron
Leggett, formerly a wealthy merchant in this city, and a member
of the Society of Friends. We conversed frequently on the jDoliti-
cal prospects of our country as affected by the agitation of the
slavery question. Mr. L. said that, when he was a young man,
he was an active and zealous member of a Manumission society,
and that he continued to cherish in after life a very compassion-
ate feeling for the poor negroes. At the time of the general
emancipation of the slaves in the British West Indies, Mr. Leg-
gett's business called him to the city of Mexico, and while resid-
ing there he met Deputy Commissary-General Wilson, of the
British army, an agent appointed by the British Government to
make the financial arrangements connected with the payment to
the West India slaveholders of their portion of the £20,000,000
voted by the British Parliament as a compensation for the forced
sacrifice of their property.

Mr. Leggett said that, when he learned Mr. Wilson's errand,

10

lie took occasion, while he was sitting with him one day after
dinner, to express his admiration of the British Government and
the British people, for that noble act, the vote of £20,000,000
sterling, to procure liberty for 800,000 negroes ! He gave full
utterance to his feelings, and almost exhausted the vocabulary of
eulogy to find the commendatory epithets which he applied to
England and Englishmen.

" Ml". Wilson did not seem to sympathize with me," said Mr.
L., "and when I had finished, he turned to me and said, ^ Do
you thinh, Mr. Leggett. that this emancipation of the negroes
will prove to he a tvise measure ? ' "

'• Certainly, I replied," said Mr. L. " How can it be other-
wise ? "

" The cool heads in England," said Mr. Wilson, " do not
think that it will be beneficial in its effects on the interests of
the people cither in its colonies or in the mother country. Nor
do I think so. We think that the freed negroes loill do very
little work; and that the West India Colonics, as to their com-
mercial value to the mother country, tvill he ruined^

Mr. Leggett had been carried away with representations of
the enthusiastic friends of emancipation — that free labor was
more productive than slave labor ; that when the negroes were
free they would receive wages, and that this would stimulate
them to raise sugar and coflec in greater quantities ; that com-
merce would feel the benefit of the new impulse to agriculture;
that lands would rise in value ; that the income of the planters
would be increased, &c. ; and his ardor was at first cooled by
Mr. Wilson's gloomy view of the case.

" After a little reflection, however," said Mr. L., " I con-
tinued my eulogy of the British Grovernment and the British
people ; and I went now further than before in the expressions
of my admiration, but I went on a new tack. I said that the
enemies of Englishmen, and of their Grovernment, were accus-
tomed to represent them as always governed by mercenary con-
siderations, and too willing to sacrifice justice, humanity, and all
the virtues, to the lust of gain ; but here was a case in which the
cool heads that directed the action of the Grovernment deliberate-
ly burdened their country with an immense debt, not to open new
fields of wealth, but in full prospect of destroying the commercial

11

value of their West India colonies, and of iraiDOverishing the peo-
ple there, and the proprietors in England — and all from a hu-
mane feeling, and a high sense of justice — a high sense of what is
due to poor, helpless, down-trodden negro slaves. It was the
noblest act recorded in history ! I knew of no parallel to it any-
where."

" When I had finished," added Mr. L., " Mr. W. again turn-
ed to me, and said : ' J/r. Leggett^ do you really believe that the
men tcho control the action of the British Government were led
hy such motives as you ascribe to them, to sacrifice the com-
mercial interests of their country .? ' "

" I replied," said Mr. L., " that if the men who controlled
the action of the British Government really believed that the
abolition of slavery in the British West Indies would end in the
commercial ruin of the islands, I could not conceive of any
other motive for their conduct than the noble one which I had
assigned."

"Well, Mr. Leggett," said Mr. W., "you may believe this,
but I do not. I believe that the action of the British Govern-
ment is made to promote, as far as possible, the interests of
the English aristocracy."

Mr. L. then asked, " What interest of the English aristocracy
will be promoted by the ruin of the British West India islands ? "
Mr. Wilson said that the abolition of slavery in the British
colonies would naturally ci'eate an enthusiastic anti-slavery senti-
ment in England and America, and that in America this Avould
in process of time excite a hostility between the free States and
the slave States, which would end in a dissolution of the Ameri-
can Union, and the consequent failure of the grand experiment
of democratic government ; and the ruin of Democracy in Amer-
ica would be the perpetuation of aristocracy in England. I
do not undertake to give the language of Mr. Leggett, but the
following paraphrase conveys, in my own language, the impres-
sion made upon my mind of the course of reasoning by which Mr.
W. came to his conclusion :

" The English aristocracy have ruled England for ages.
Their position is more enviable than that of any similar class in
any other country on the globe. They rule the wealthiest em-
pire in the world. Their landed estates embrace a large portion

12

of all the lands in the kingdom ; and these estates are entailed
in their families. The House of Lords is composed exclusively
of the aristocracy ; and they have such influence in the elections
that the members of the House of Commons are to a great ex-
tent the near relatives of the Lords. Offices of honor and power,
and sinecure offices Avith large incomes, in the church, the army,
the navy, the colonies, at foreign courts, and in all the departments
of home government, are in their gift, and can be bestowed at
their pleasure upon their relatives and friends. They have in-
herited these privileges from their ancestors, and their great aim,
their ruling desire, is to retain them in their families, and to
transmit them to their posterity. Their control of the public
press, and of all the fountains of popular opinion and sentiment
in England, has enabled them to impress the minds of the great
body of the middle classes there with the belief that the English
aristocracy, with its powers and privileges, is essential to the
prosperity and glory of the English nation.

" Recently, however, this belief has been seriously shaken by
the success of Democratic institutions in America. Englishmen
are getting now to be well acquainted with America ; and they
see there a people of the same race with themselves, speaking the
same lano-uage, reading the same books, holding the same religious
opinions, loving the same pursuits ; in short, like themselves in
every respect except that they have no aristocracy ; and yet, un-
der their Democratic institutions, x\.raericans are advancing even
more rapidly than Englishmen, in commerce and the arts, in the
diffusion of knowledge among the people, in population, wealth,
and all the elements of national greatness ; and intelligent men
of the middle classes in England are beginning to think that
aristocracy, with its heavy taxation for the support of sinecure
offices, may not be so essential as they have heretofore supposed
to the prosperity of England ; and that the English people would,
perhaps, make more rapid progress if they should throw off this
burden, by Republicanizing or Americanizing their institutions.
The ereat danger to the English aristocracy lies in this idea in
the minds of the English people ; for if it should take root and
spread, it might end in a revolution in which they would lose all
their privileges. Hence they study every thing in America and
in England with the deepest interest in its bearings on this
matter.

13

" The English aristocracy know that the English people are
a liberty-loving, a liberty-vaunting people. They savr with what
ease numerously-signed petitions for the abolition of slavery could
be obtained in districts, and among classes, where was ?zo interest
to check the current of the popular feeling. They knew that
they could have found no difficulty in disposing of such petitions
in Parliament loithout grantinrj them, for they could have con-
tinued to receive them respectfully, and postpone action upon
them endlessly, if their interest had required it. But after a
time they, doubtless, reasoned with themselves thus :

" What will be the effect of encouraging and finally granting
these petitions ? If slavery shall be abolished in the British
colonies, by compensating slaveholders for their losses, nobody in
England will then have any interest in opposing the wildest and
most enthusiastic expressions of anti-slavery sentiment. Eng-
lishmen will then love to refer with pride and boasting to the
large sum sacrificed by their Government, with their concurrence,
on the altar of liberty, justice, and humanity. They will then
look to America, and they will see slavery still there, for South-
ern slaveholders in America, of course, will never ruin themselves
and their country by imitating Great Britain in abolishing it.
Englishmen can then be easily excited, on account of American
slavery, to look down with scoi-n upon Americans and American
institutions ; and if any popular orator, or writer, in England
shall propose to deprive the aristocracy of their powers and
privileges, and to fortify his argument shall refer to the pros-
perity of America under democratic institutions, he will be met
with this scorn and defeated in his purpose.

" This will be the effect in England of the abolition of slavery
in the British colonies ; but the most important effect will be the
effect in America. America is divided almost equally between
free States and slave States — between States in which the negroes
are so few that no harm results from their emancipation, and
States in which slavery is so deeply rooted that it cannot be
safely abolished without ruin to all classes of the population. In
the free States a fierce anti-slavery sentiment, a bitter hatred of
slavery and slaveholders can be excited almost as easily as in
England, and in process of time, by constantly fanning the flame,
such a hostility can be kindled between the people of the two

14

great sections that it will lead to the destruction of the American
Union, and the failure of the grand experiment of democratic
government by men of the Anglo-Saxon race. And this failure
of democracy in America will be a new lease, and a long lease, to
the English aristocracy of their powers and privileges. In short,
Mr. Leggett, I believe that the English aristocracy lent their
influence to the aholitioji of slavery in the British colonies that
they may use it as a wedge for the division of the Aynerican
Union.

" They did it to promote their own interest^ to perpetuate their
own privileges, hy the destruction of the Union and the pros-
perity of Democratic America ; and to secure their object, they
care no more for a debt of £20,000,000 sterling and the com-
mercial ruin of the British West India Islands, than for the
ashes of that cigar you are smoking^

In the above sketch, I repeat, T do not profess to give the
language of Mr. L., but have endeavored, in my own language,
to convey the impression made upon ray mind of the course of
reasoning by which Mr. W. came to his conclusion. The words
in italics, however, are very nearly the words used by Mr.
Leggett,

What struck me as particularly noteworthy in Mr. Leggett's
narrative was, that before the experiment of negro emancipation
i7i the British West Indies had been fully tried, and while the
friends and supporters of the measure professed to believe that
its effects would be happy upon those immediately connected with
it, both in the islands and in England, an agent of the British
Government, toho must have had uncommon opportunities for
forming a sound judgment in the case, expresses his belvf that
they ivho controlled the action of the Government knew, ivhen
they gave their sanction to the measure, that there ivas every
reason to expect that it would be calamitous to the negroes, to
the planters, and to the British people, and knew, too, that they
could easily have prevented it, but that they still su2)ported and
encouraged it, because it ivould promote the interest of the Eng-
lish aristocracy, by enabling them to excite in the free States
of America stwh an anti-slavery feeliny as ivould lead to a divi-
sion of the American Union and the destruction of the great
Democratic Bepublic.

15

A constant attendance at the meetings of religious and
philanthropic societies, and especially of anti-slavery meetings,
during a residence of four years in London, thoroughly satisfied
me that anti-slavery meetings and excitements are got up in Eng-
land, not for the purpose of a removal or an amelioration of the
evils of slavery in any part of the world, but chiefly, if not ex-
clusively, with a view to keep up in the hearts of the English
people a hatred of the people and institutions of America.

And as to our own country, all who are acquainted with the
history of the anti-slavery movement here, know that, prior to the
abolition of slavery in the British colonies, the American anti-
slavery sentiment was eminently kind, considerate, rational, and
Christian ; that it had already happily effected the gradual abo-
lition of slavery in all the Northern States, and was at the time
very active in the border Slave States, especially among the
slaveholders, who, after individually emancipating scores of
thousands of their own slaves, united with each other in anti-
slavery societies to promote the gradual, but eventually total, abo-
lition of slavery by law in their respective States, with fair pros-
pects of success in Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky, and
Missouri, and with some hope even in North Carolina and Ten-
nessee— the emancipation of the slaves in most of these States to
go hand in hand with their removal to other lands. It is also
well known, that immediately after the abolition of slavery in the
British colonies, anti-slavery societies of a totally different charac-
ter wei-e formed in New England, and that these societies were
based on the principles of bitter hatred to all slaveholders, and a
fierce denunciation of the measures which had been framed with
great consideration and wisdom by Southern slaveholders, for the
welfare of their slaves, and the elevation of the negro race. It is
known that the supporters of these New England anti-slavery
societies established newspapers, and issued tracts, employed lec-
turers, and devised plans, evidently intended to irritate Southern
men, and provoke to acts which would irritate Northern men, and
provoke retaliatory acts, and thus by continued angry action and
reaction, ripen a hostility between the North and the South, which
would naturally end in a dissolution of the American Union.
This system of hostility has been kept up now for twenty-five
years, and, with what effect, let the present state of the country
answer.

16

How much of the large amount of money expended by Amer-
ican Abolitioinsts in support of this organized system of hostility
to the Constitution of the United States, has been contributed in
England, we know not, but we do know that, while conservative
Americans have often been publicly and wantonly insulted in
England in connection with the slavery question, and without
apology, where apology was due, from members of the aristocracy,
other Americans, whose chief claim to notice was the zeal and
success with which they had attacked a fundamental law of their
country and promoted bitter strife between the people of its two
great sections, have been invited to the homes of the English
nobility, flattered, honored, and encouraged on their return to
America to renew their wai'fai-e upon the people and institutions
of the South. These facts are readily explained on the theory
of Deputy Commissary-Greneral Wilson, that the aim of the Eng-
lish aristocracy is to perpetuate their own power and privileges
by destroyitg the great American Democratic Republic, and
they cannot, we think, be satisfactorily ex23lained on any other
theory.

Sidney E. Morse.

For the, Journal of Commerce.

IS THE DISSOLUTION OF THE UNION THE CON-
SUMMATION OF A WELL DEVISED BRITISH
PLOT?

Messrs. Editors: — Many think so; and there is more evi-
dence of the truth of an aflBrmative answer to this pregnant ques-
tion than superficial observers are probably aware.

If calm, sober, thinking men, north and south, would but care-
fully consider whether they have not been the dupes of a subtle
foreign intrigue, it would seem that a great change in their recip-
rocal feelings might be the result. There is evidence if they will
but search for it, and well weigh it, to make very palpable how
gradually and artfully these designs have for years been in pro-
gress, till the end aimed at is at length accomplished : the Union
is divided, and civil war begun.

Many of your readers will have doubtless perused an article in
narper''s Weekly of Dec. 15, 1860, written by Sidney E. Morse,
Esq., late editor of the Observer., giving some singular facts on

17

this very subject, -winch drew forth a disparaging article in the
Tribune, pronouncing the revelations there made " a hoax." In
that article Mr. Morse gives, under his own name, a statement of
a conversation in Paris with a gentleman, the late Aaron Leggett,
Esq., well known in this community, not long since deceased, a
gentleman of great benevolence of heart, but, like most of his creed
of the " Society of Friends," carried away in his views on slavery
by a mistaken philanthropy. Mr. Leggett gives clearly and con-
sistently to Mr. Morse the conversations he had held with a dis-
tinguished British official in Mexico, Deputy Commissary-G-eneral
Wilson, a gentleman who, from his position, would not be likely
to misrepresent the opinions of his principals, nor would Mr. Leg-
gett, who was an enthusiast on the subject of abolishing slavery,
be likely to mis-state to Mr. Morse the uttered sentiments of a
British officer, whose revelations naturally roused his own patriot-
ism in antagonism to his cherished philanthropic design, and brought
them in conflict with each other. There are in the circumstances
of the case, therefore, nothing which can create a suspicion of dis-
honesty in any of the parties concerned, but on the contrary,
every thing which entitles their statements to be received as true.
If doubt be raised in the minds of any, the cause is not in the
statement of Mr. Morse, nor in the statement of Mr. Leggett ;
it must rest solely in the statement of General Wilson, and the
probabilities of the truth of his views and reasoning will receive
confirmation or refutation from other sources. The subject is of
too much importance to be dismissed with a sneer or indecent
personalities.

Whether the fierce and reckless sectional strife that has been
kept up for five and twenty years throughout our land, is the
natural result of our own professed progress in enlightenment, or
has been fanned and fed by foreign intrigue for deep political
ends, is surely a question not to be lightly treated. It certainly
concerns us to know whether we are not at this moment the vic-
tims of a deeply-laid foreign scheme, for the quenching of a light
which, however unconsciously to ourselves, is revealing to the
European people, as we have believed, the unsound parts of their
governmental systems.

Are, indeed, the revelations of Commissary-General Wilson
so chimerical ? Have there been no other indications that the
2

18

British Government has not merely indirectly fed the slavery
agitation in this countr}-, but has zealously, persistently, and di-
rectly encouraged it in every possible way ? Need we more than
allude to the mission of a Member of Parliament, who, as an
abolition lecturer, filled the country for a season with excitement,
and strengthened, if he did not initiate, the wicked system of
crimination and abuse of our Southern brethren ? Were there
no indications of foreign complicity in the John Brown raid ? *
Who was Colonel Forbes? What did the Stafford House junto
mean in their ovations to Mrs. Beecher Stowe ? Was there no
political object in this movement, and in the subscriptions raised
to operate against slavery in this country ? Why is America on
this subject to this hour insulted in the persons of any of her
citizens who visit England in all circles under the influence of
this aristocratic clique in Britain ? Why the marked favor
shown in the same circles to the most violent and unprincipled
abolitionists who visit them from this side of the water ? There
is a political purpose at the bottom of all this, and Gen. Wilson
does not stand alone in revealing what it is.

Vie have come into possession of an article from the highest
source, published in London some time since, which very distinctly
states the political object which is to be attained by the British
Government through the persistent agitation of the slavery ques-
tion in Great Britain and the United States, and as it is directly
confirmatory, from an independent source, of Gen. Wilson's reve-
lations, we will copy it, premising, that it will be remembered
that a lady traveller from Britain, holding one of the highest
positions in the Queen's household, the Hon. Amelia Murray,
lady in waiting to Her Majesty, visited the United States in the

* A very calm and carefully prepared article by a Eeporter of the JS'ew
York Herald, who visited Canada for the purpose of ascertaining the condi-
tion of the colored population in Canada, thus states, previous to the
secession of South Carolina: " I conversed with a prominent abolitionist in
Chatham (Canada) holding a public position of trust and honor, who told
me that the first suggestion of the Harper's Ferry attack was made to
Brown by British abolitionists in Chatham, and who assured me that he him-
self subscribed money to aid Brown in raising men for the service in Ohio
and elsewhere in the States. That he and his associates looked with expec-
tation and hope to the day, not far distant, when a disriiplion of the Union
would take place."

19

year 1854, travelling extensively at the South as well as the North.
She examined the condition of African slavery at the South, and
on her return to England, she published her letters, in which she
honestly gives her convictions that American Slavery had been
wholly misconceived and misunderstood by the Stafford House
junto, since, from her own experience in the United States, she
was persuaded that the actual status of slavery there had been
grossly misrepresented. Much excitement was created at Court
by Miss Murray's letters, and she was at once dismissed from her
position near the Queen. This act on the part of the Queen's
advisers created a feeling of indignation in certain quarters, and
Miss Murray had many sympathizers as one persecuted for
honest opinion's sake, and for telling the truth. This state of
feeling made it necessary to give some explanation to the public,
and the following article was published in the London AthencBum
of January 26th, 185G, at page 107, bearing intrinsic evidence of
its emanation from a source near the throne :

"A paragraph is passing round the papers in which the names of the
Queen and her lady-in-waiting, the Hon. Miss Murray, are introduced, con-
taining some statements which are not quite true. Miss Murray, whose
efforts in behalf of ragged schools, female emigration, and other' philan-
thropic movements, have been zealous and constant, has lately been in the
United States.

" While there she wrote a number of pleasant and graphic letters to her
friends in London, chiefly to Lady Byron.

'* These letters she has published, as the reader will see in our review col-
umns, under the title of 'Letters from the United States, Cuba, and Canada.'

" In the course of her travels in the South Miss Murray's views of the
Slavery question began to change, and at the end of fifteen months' expe-
rience of America, she felt convinced that Stafibrd House had closed its
eyes to one side of the question. This change of view Miss Murray com-
municated to the Queen, who replied to her lady-in-waiting, if we are rightly
informed, by some very wise and womanly counsels. Unhappily, the royal
letter missed its object, and before Miss ilurray had the advantage of read-
ing her august friend's advice, she had pledged herself not to observe that
discreet silence on a most intricate and vexed problem, which is necessary
in persons holding public situations.

"Miss Murray has the courage of her opinions ; but as she chose to
take a part in a discussion that evert/ da;/ threatened to rend the Union, her
retirement from the Queen's household follows naturally. These are the
simple facts. There was no intention to dedicate the book to Her Majesty.
Her Majesty never saw the proof-sheets.

20

"We cannot suppose that the Queen meant to rebuke Miss Murray, as
the paragraph makes her, for forming an honest opinion.

" Miss Murray's retirement from the Court must be assigned to a polit-
ical, not a personal, motive. We see notiiing in it save what is creditable
alike to sovereign and subject."

This extract from a London journal of the highest character
is no ordinary newspaper paragraph. It bears internal evidence
of its origin directly from head-quarters, and must have the
■weight of a quasi- official document.

It is not possible to mistake its meaning nor its significant
bearing upon the long-settled purpose of Great Britain, in fanning
the flame of this diabolical Abolition frenzy both in Britain and
America. A great measure of State policy is directly named,
which its inaugurators guard with the utmost jealousy. It is a
measure which must be carried through reckless of truth. Ilo-
mance, exaggeration, falsehood, are all pressed into the service
of this Stafford House scheme, and truth of course must not flash
its fatal light upon these Satanic workings. Miss Murray, in her
honesty, dared to tell the truth, so she must be taunted with the
" courage of her opinion." She must be d(?posed from her posi-
tion near the Queen lest the truth might fatally reach the ears
of her truth-loving sovereign ; her letters are to be ignored in the
same number of the Atheuseum by the shallow disparagement of
a sycophantic critic, and all this lest Stafibrd House should be
thwarted in its plan of " rending the Unions

The writer uses a cautious phraseology to salve over the act
of dismissal of Miss Murray, an act that was beginning to excite
remarks in the English journals, remarks threatening to compro-
mise even the Queen herself. It was a delicate task to defend
Her Majesty from imputations of an arbitrary harshness in dis-
charging Miss Murray, and at the same time to avoid denouncing
her lady-in-waiting in such terms as not to arouse public sympathy
in her behalf as one 2:)ersecuted for opinion's sake. It must be done
in a way to satisfy all parties. The writer has adroitly accom-
plished this part of his task, but it has been at the expense of
disclosing the secret of the Stafford House camarilla.

The unpardonable sin of Miss Murray — the crime for which
she was summarily discharged from the service of the Queen, was
the venturing to hint, in the expressive language of the Atheuge-

21

urn, that " Stafford House had shut its eyes to one side of the
question" of slavery abolition, and so she bad interfered to thwart
the State policy that was being pursued of " rending the Union,"
which project was on the point of consummation — a consumma-
tion even then looked for " every day." Can any one doubt, if
Miss Murray had been weak and dishonest enough to have added
fresh slanders against Southern society, professedly from her own
observation, that she would have been rebuked and dismissed, for
" not observing a discreet silence on this most intricate and
vexed problem " ?

And now in view of these facts, is it not time that the scales
should drop from the eyes of our people throughout the land,
that they comprehend the reality of the fatal trap into which they
are hurrying in their blindness ?

We beseech them, by all the sacred memories of the past, to
pause now before the door has been irretrievably shut down, and
this foreign intrigue actually consummated, and calmly reflect
whither they are going. Is patriotism wholly dead? have we
been indeed left to the just punishment of our national sins, and
given over to the rule of passionate, obstinate, furious demagogues?

Where are the people ? why do they sleep when incendiaries
have fired the house ? Why has it been that the denouement of
this plot of foreign intrigue should be necessary to wake us to a
sense of its actual existence ?

We have been accustomed to boast that foreign arms could
not subjugate us, and while a united people, (united not by force
but by mutual respect and affection,) our boast (under God) is
true. Nor will any foreign power attempt it upon a united peo-
ple, but " divide et impera,^^ the favorite artifice of despots, dis-
carded to-day by glorious Italy, is practised upon with success
here, (with shame be it spoken,) and America in her madness
succumbs.

A few more steps urged on by the wicked fanaticism of the day ,
and Ichahod may be written across the blue field of our national
standard, and then — no eye but God's can foresee the future.
" Carthago deUnda est,''^ will be the ecstatic shout of Stafford
House, and our light is quenched forever. B.

Since the above was written, (more than 7iine months ago,)

22

we have noticed the recent remarks of a distinguished member
of the British aristocracy, who does not hesitate to avow the very
design which has been charged upon the British Government ; and
when we consider that this member of the House of Peers, the
Earl of Shaftesbury, one of the Stafford House clique, the Presi-
dent of the British and Foreign Bible Society, is the same noble-
man who presided at the meeting of British Abolitionists in
London in July last, convened to pi-esent a piece of plate to the
notorious Dr. Clieever for his efficient labors in fanning the abo-
lition excitement in this country, and thus directly contributing
to the consummation of thisnoiv nvoived political design of Great
Britain, " of rending ihe Union,'''' it would seem that further
proof was not needed.

The Earl of Shaftesbury is reported to have said to a gentle-
man conversing with him on American affairs :

" I, in common with almost every English statesman, sin-
cerely desire the rupture of the American Union. It has been
the policy of England to brook no rivalry, especially in the direc-
tion of her own greatness. We justly fear the commerical and
political rivalry of the United States. With a population of thirty
millions, they will soon, if not checked, overshadow Great Brit-
ain, We cannot look upon such a monstrous growth without
apprehension."*

True words ! my lord, you have epitomized with great preci-
sion and conciseness the inner political workings of the British
aristocratic mind for many long years. As a political end, the
destruction of a rival, this end to be attained regardless of any
other principle, moral or political, than the material glory of
England, or rather, of the British aristocracy, " the rupture of
the American Union" was a measure wisely adapted to that end,
and the means adi'oitly chosen to destroy your trans- Atlantic
rival ; but while we accord wisdom in the choice of means for
destroying us, to those who are jealous of our growing strength,
what shall we say of you, countrymen. North and South, who find
yourselves caught in this foreign snare ? If shame can lead
to repentance, if it can calm the raging of this horrible fratricidal
war, and lead each section to lay down its arms under the in-
fluence of a common indignation, against a common enemy, who

* See Xote A at the end of tlie pamphlet.

23

has deceived us both, we may yet attain to union, and to strength
again, better guarded than ever heretofore, against the wiles of for-
eign duplicity. Shall it be done ?

For the Journal of Commerce.

THE DISSOLUTION OF THE UNION THE OBJECT
OF BRITISH INTRIGUES.

In my communication published in j-our journal of January
13th, I gave your readers evidence which I considered conclusive,
that the dissolution of ilie Union was the consummation of a
well-devised plot by Great Britain, through the agitation of the
slavery question. I well know that such an announcement startled
many minds, and some incredulity has been manifested, notwith-
standing the strength of the evidence of its truth. If further
evidence is needed, let me now adduce it from the antecedents
of British policy. There are official documents in the department
of State deposited there fifty years ago, which every citizen would
do well to review. The subject of British intrigues was made
the occasion of a special Message by President Madison on the
9th of March, 1812, three months before the declaration of war.
Your readers desirous of seeing these documents iu full will find
them in Benton's " Abridgment of the Debates of Congress,"
vol. iv., from page 506 onward.

It seems that in the year 1809, an emissary of the British
Governmeat, John Henry, a gentleman of education and address,
was sent to Boston under the sanction of the Governor-General of
Canada, Sir James Craig, sustained by the Home Government, by
Lord Liverpool, Robert Peel, Sir George Prevost and others,
for the purpose of taking advantage of the high party excitement
between Federalists and Democrats at that time, for the purpose
(in the language of President Madison) " of fomenting disaffec-
tion," and '' destroying the Union " and " forming the eastern
part thereof into a political connection with Great Britain."
Although his mission was unsuccessful, because, as he himself
stated, " he found it an impopular topic," his letters demonstrate
with a clearness which cannot be questioned, the settled intent
of the British Government, at that early day, to divide the Union ,
as a measure deemed of ^the greatest importance and advantage

24

to British interests. His correspondence shows that he faithfully
carried out his instructions, but as success did not attend his
efforts, the promised reward (a lucrative oSice) was withheld from
him. Piqued at receiving the cold shoulder from the British
ofl&cials whom he had served, he sought his revenge by revealing
the plot to our Government, putting into the hands of the Secre-
tary of State his correspondence with the British Government.
With the character of the whole transaction — with its morality
or immorality ; with Henry's motives for betraying the confidence
reposed in him ; with its success or ill success, or with its impli-
cations upon any persons or parties of that date, we have now
nothing to do ; they are all matters which may be left out of
consideration, as they do not affect the reality of the one great
fact which these documents establish. This great fact stands
out clear and prominent, that Great Britain did at that day em-
ploy an emissary to foment disaffection in the country, and this
for the purpose of dividing the Union. A few extracts from
Henry's lettei-s will demonstrate this fact beyond dispute. On
his way to Boston, writing from Burlington, Vt., Feb. 14, 1809,
Henry says : " In what mode this resistance (to the Administra-
tion) will first show itself is probably not yet determined upon ;
and may, in some measure, depend upon the reliance that the
leading men may place upon assurances of support from his
Majesty'' s representatives in Canada ; and as I shall be on the
spot to tender this, whenever the moment arrives that it can he
done with effect, there is no doubt that all their measures may
be made subordinate to the intentions of his Majesty's Govern-
ment. Great pains are taken by the men of talent and intelli-
gence to confirm the fears of the common people, as to the con-
currence of the Southern Democrats in the projects of France ;
and every thing tends to encourage the helif that the Dissolu-
tion of the Confederacy loill he accelerated by the spirit which
now actuates both political parties."

In a letter dated Boston, March 7, 1809, Henry says : " What
permanent connection between Great Britain and this section of
the Bepublic would grow out of a civil commotion, such as might
be expected, no person is prepared to describe ; but it seems that
a strict alliance must result of necessity. At present the oppo-
sition party confine their calculations merely to resistance, and I

25

can assure you that, at this moment, they do not freely entertain
the project of with dr (living the Eadern States from the Union,
finding it a very unpopular topic ; although a course of events,
such as I have already mentioned, would inevitahl;/ j^roduce an
incurable alienation of the New England from the Southern
States.^''

Again, in a letter dated Boston, March 9, 1809 : " The Gov-
ernment of the United States would probably complain, and Bona-
parte become peremptory ; but even that would only tend to
render the opposition in the Northern States more resolute, and
accelerate the dissolution of the Confederacy.''''

In a letter dated Boston, March 13, 1809, he says: " Bona-
parte, whose passions are too hot for delay, will probably compel
this Government to decide which of the two great belligerents is
to be its enemy. To bring about a separation of the States, v.n-
der distinct and separate Governments, is an affair of more un-
certainty, and, however desirable, cannot be effected but by a

SERIES OF ACTS AND A LONG-CONTINUED POLICY TENDING TO IRRITATE

THE Southern and conciliate the Northern people. The for-
mer are agricultural, the latter a commercial people. The mode
of cherishing and depressing either is too obvious to require illus-
tration. This, I am aioare, is an object of much interest in
Great Bi-itain, as it would forever secure the integrity of his
Majesty's possessions on this continent, and mahe the two Gov-
ernments, or whatever number the present confederacy might
form into, as tnucli subject to the influence of Great Britain as
her colonies can be rendered. But it is an object only to be at-
tained "h J si 010 arid circumspect p7^og7'essio7i, and requires /or
its con.summation more attention to the affairs which agitate and
excite parties in this country, thayi Great Britain has yet be-
stowed upon it. I laiiient the repeal of the embargo, because it
teas calculated to accelerate the progress of these States towards
a revolution that would have put an end to the only republic
that remains to prove that a government founded on political
equality can exist in a season of trial and difficulty, or is calcu-
lated to insure either security or happiness to a people."

In a letter, March 29, 1809, he says:

" It should, therefore, be the pecidiar care of Great Britain
to foster divisions between the North and the South, and by sue-

26

ceecling in this, she may carry into effect her own projects in
Eurojoe, with a total disregard of the Democrats of this country."

On May 5th, 1809, he commences his letter thus :

" Although the recent changes that have occurred quiet all
apprehensions of war, and conseq^uently lessen all hope of a sep-
aration of the States,'''' &c.

Enough has been quoted to substantiate the fact that the
deliberate design of Great Britain fifty years ago was to foment
divisions between the two geographical sections of the country, in
order to effect a special purpose, and that purpose the dissolution
of the Union.

If it be asked how was the development of this plot received
by the Government ? a quotation or two from the speeches in
Congress upon this topic will show.

Mr. Gholson, of Virginia, said : " This communication,"
from the President, " demonstrated as matter of fact, what had
heretofore remained only sj^eculation and conjecture, that the
British Government has long meditated the separatiox of
THESE States ; and what is more, that they have actually attempted
the execution of this wicked design, and have endeavored to con-
vert our own citizens into traitor s^

Mr. Troup, of Georgia, said : " The documents have a most
important bearing. They establish the fact that a foreign Govern-
ment, on the eve of hostility with us, has for some time past em-
ployed an agent to foment division among us ; and another fact,
which, considered in connection with other circumstances, is of
great importance. They show the deep-rooted hostility of this
foreign Power to our Republican Government and liberties —
a hostility ivhich could stop at nothing short of a dismejibeioiext

OF THE COUNTRY."

Mr. Fisk, of Vermont, said : " Why, sir, can gentlemen
seriously doubt the truth of the facts stated by this Mr. Henry,
when they have it from the highest authority that the former
British Minister, Mr. Erskine, while here, at this very time, was
in the same business this Henry was sent to perform ? " Mr. Fisk
then quotes an official letter from Mr. Erskine to his Government,
dated Feb. 15, 1S09 : " The ultimate consequences of such dif-
ferences and jealousies, arising between the Eastern and Southern
States, would inevitably tend to a dissolution of the Union, which

27

Las been for some iime talked of, and has of late, as I have heard,
been seriously contemplated by many of the leading people of the
Eastern division."

Mr. Macon, the veteran statesman of North Carolina, said :
" Nothing can be more true than that these papers do proA'e that
Great Britain has not yet ceased her attempts to disturb the
peace of this nation." " As to this man, he is just such an one
as the British usually employ for these purposes ; he is one of
their own agents." " The question is, Has he told the truth ?
I verily believe he has. I understood enough of the papers, as
read, to know that he was the Agent of the British Government,
sent here to sow dissension, and that was enough for me. So long
as we are governed by interest, mutual wants, or common sense,
so long shall v:e continue tmited. We are placed in such a
situation that we ought to love each other, and we alicays should,
did not mad passions sometimes run away with us." " We
supply each other's wants ; we ought never to dream of separation.
And when these messengers of hell are sent here shall we not
look at them ? "

No comment can present the fact in a stronger light, that
Great Britain seriously determined, by fomenting dissensions in
the country, to dissolve the Union of the States, at that date of
our history. Foiled in her attempts then, and with the same,
if not a greater interest to consummate the same project, is it
reasonable to suppose she has abandoned it, or is it not much
more reasonable to conclude that she will attempt to compass her
ends by other means ? It is the maxim of a profound statesman
of the last age — Lord Shelburn — that " in politics none must
have a power joined to an interest to do mischief, whatever be
the purity of their original intentions." We may adopt the
maxim with profit, and leave out altogether the qualification of
" purity of original intentions." The subject is prolific of thought,
and is commended to the reflection of every truly American heart
from Maine to the llio Grande. B.

The " disclaimer " referred to in the following communication,
is disposed of by our correspondent B., to whom we have shown
the article, as our readers will perceive in the present number of
our journal. — Editor Journal of Commerce.

28

For the Journal of Commerce.

BRITISH INTRIGUES TO DISSOLVE THE UNION.

Messrs. Editors : — Your correspondent B. in your issue of 3d
inst. has given certain extracts from the correspondence and dis-
closures of Capt. John Henry, in 1809, to show that the British
Government at that time vrere intent on separating the United
States. So far as this dishonorable man is concerned, it only shows
that he was desirous of such an issue to secure to himself the re-
wards of a spy. Your correspondent in fairness ought to have stated
that the British Government through its Minister at Washington
promptly disavowed any complicity in the transaction. On the
11th of March the British Minister, Mr. Foster, sent to the Sec-
retary of State the following disclaimer, which was transmitted
to Congress by Mr. Madison two days after, and thus settled the
matter.

Wasiiixgton, March 11, 1812.
The undersigned, his Britannic Majesty's Envoy Extraordi-
nary and Minister Plenipotentiary to the United States, has read
in the jDublic papers of this city, with the deepest concern, the
Message sent by the President of the United States to Congress
on the 9th instant, and the documents which accompanied it. In
the utter ignorance of the undersigned as to all the circumstances
alluded to in those documents he can only disclaim most sol-
emnly, on his own part, the having had any knowledge whatever
of the existence of such a mission or of such transactions as the
communication of Mr. Henry refers to, and express his convic-
tion that from what he knows of those branches of his Majesty's
Government with which he is in the habit of having intercourse,
no countenance whatever was given by them to any schemes
hostile to the internal tranquillity of the United States. The
undersigned, however, cannot but trust that the American Gov-
ernment and the Congress of the United States will take into
consider.'ition the character of the individual who has made the
commuuieation in question, and will suspend any further judg-
ment on its merits until the circumstances shall have been made
known to his Majesty's Government. The undersigned requests
the Secretary of State to accept the assurances of his highest
consideration. [Signed] Augustus J. Foster.

Respectfully,

ANGLICUS.

29

For the Joiirnal of Commerce.

THE DISSOLUTION OF THE UNION, A PLOT OF
THE BRITISH ARISTOCRACY.

Messrs. Editors : — The facts given in my last commuuica-
tioD, demonstrating from official records that the attempt was
made by Great Britain in LS09 to foment divisions between the
North and South, confessedly for the purpose of Dissolving the
Union, ought to be sufficient to lead the reflecting in the country
deeply to ponder the question whether we are not now the dupes
of another and more successful intrigue from the same quarter.
I am much obliged to your correspondent Ancjlicus for alluding
to the pretended disclaimer of the British Government through
its Minister, for he will see that irrefutable evidence is herein
brought forward of the complicity of the British Government in
that disgraceful intrigue to rend our Union. One only attempt
to gainsay the facts of Henry's disclosures has ever been made,
and this will need but a moment's attention to show its futility.
The British Minister, Mr. Foster, as Anglicus has shown, did send
to the Secretary of State on the 11th of March, 1812, a Disclaimer,
in consequence of the Message of the President, of March 9th,
accompanying Henry's disclosures. Were this, indeed, an official
denial of the British Government of any participation in these
disgraceful intrigues, the character of the whole transaction
would have been essentially modified. But how stands the
case ? It is not a disclaimer of the charge against the British
Government. It is a meagre document of a few lines, merely dis-
claiming " on his own part having had any hnoicledge ivhatever
of the existence of such a mission, and expressing his conviction
that from what he knows of those branches of his Majesty's
Govei-iunent with ivhom he is in the habit of having inter-
course, no countenance was given by them to any schemes hostile
to the internal tranquillity of the LTnited States;" and then he
" asks a suspension of judgment of its merits until the circum-
stances shall have been made known to his Majesty's Govern-
ment." This is all that has ever been said officially by way of
explanation on the part of the British Government, from that
day to this. That Mr. Foster did not personally know of such
a mission may well be conceded without affecting the truth of
Ml'. Henry's disclosures one iota, or disproving the complicity of

30

the Britisli Government in tliem ; and as to the suspension of
judgment recpested, till explanation should be given by his
Majesty's Government, that explanation has never been made to
this hour. We shall presently see what course " his Majesty's
Government " pursued when the subject was brought to their
notice.

But how was this matter viewed by President Madison and
the Committee of Foreign Relations ? If this disclaimer had
any weight with them, their subsequent action will certainly
show it.

Five days after the disclaimer, to wit, on March 16th, the re-
port of the Committee of Foreign Relations, to whom was re-
ferred the President's Message of 9th of 3Iarch, Avith these dis-
closures of Henry, contains the following remarks : — " It may be
satisfactory to the House to be informed that the original papers,
with the evidences relating to them in possession of the Execu-
tive, were submitted to their examination, and were such as ful-
ly to satisfy the Committee of their genuineness.'''' And again :
" The transaction disclosed by the President's Message presents
to the mind of the Committee conclusive evidence that the Brit-
ish Government^ at a period of peace, and during the most
friendly professions., have been delihcraiely and perfidiously
pursuing measures to divide these States, and to involve our
citizens in all the guilt of treason and the horrors of a civil war
— a proceeding, which at all times and among all nations, has
been considered as one of the 7nost aggravated character, and
which ought to he regarded by us loith the deepest abhorrence.''''

It is worthy of notice that these very intrigues, to divide the
Union, were set forth by the President in his Message to Con-
gress, of June 1st, 1812, among the ^'injuries afid indignities''"'
which demanded the declaration of war with Great Britain in
1812; the President says: " It has since come 'i?2fo proof, that
at the very moment when the public Minister was holding the
language of friendship, and inspiring confidence in the sincerity
of the negotiation with which he was charged, a secret agent of
his Government tvas employed in intrigues, having for their
object a subversion of our Government, and a dismemberment of
OTJR iiAprv Union."

Subsequently, the Committee of Foreign Relations, (of which

31

Mr. Callioun was Chairman,) to which Committee this Message
was referred, thus adverts to these intrigues : — " Your Commit-
tee would be much gratified if they could close here the detail of
British wrong ; but it is their duty to recite another act of still
greater malignity than any of those which have already been
brought to your view. The attempt to dismember our Union,
and overthrow our excellent Constitution by a secret mission,
the object of which was to foment discontent and excite insur-
rection against the constituted authorities and laws of the nation,
as lately disclosed hy the agent employed in it, affords full proof
that thei-e is no bounds to the hostility of the British Govern-
ment towards the United States ; no act hoivever unjustifiable,
which it ivould not commit to accomplish their ruin. This at-
tempt excites the greater horror, from the consideration that it
was made while the United States and Great Britain were at
peace, and an amicable negotiation was depending between them
for the accommodation of their differences."

The Committee, after saying " they feel no hesitation in ad-
vising resistance by force," close their report with these words :
" Your Committee recommend an immediate appeal to arms ;"
Congress accepted this report, and the Bill declaring war against
Great Britain was passed.

In compliance with the request of the British Blinister that
we " suspend judgment until the circumstances shall have been
made known to his Majesty's Government," and for the satisfac-
tion of your correspondent Anglicus, let us glance a moment at
the proceedings of the British Government, when this subject of
Henry's disclosures reached England.

On May 5, 1812, Lord Holhiud, in the House of Lords, gave
notice of a motion to call fur the correspondence in relation to
this Intrigue. If the Government is innocent, there can be no
reason for withholding the correspondence ; if guilty, we look for
a strenuous effort to suppress inquiry. Instead of seconding the
call, there was so much fluttering in the Ministerial ranks that
it became at once evident that a tender spot was touched. The
Ministry vigorously opposed the motion under various trifling
pretexts, while they gave a feeble disclaimer of participation in
Henry's mission, endeavoring to throw the obloquy of the trans-
action upon the late Governor-General of Canada, Sir James

32

Craig, wlio bad then but recently deceased. Lord Darnley con-
tended that such disclaimer on the part of Government was not
satisfactory ; he said : " He could not but remember that this re-
nunciation of all participation rested solely upon their assertion,
■while presumptive evidence ivas very strong against themy

Lord Lauderdale said, in view of what the Ministers had ad-
vanced, " what security had the United States that there was not
another Captain Henry pursuing a similar conduct in that country
at this moment ? "

Lord Holland closed the debate ; he said : " His whole object
in making the motion was to refute the charge brought against
the English Grovernment if it could be done, and if not, to punish
those with whom the guilt lay; hut in refusing all inquiry,
they were giving the world no answer to that charge. They
might say in that house it was partly false and partly true, but
such allegation tvas no solemn and authentic disavowal to Amer-
ica or to Europe, and it remained, therefore, unrefuted." The
House then divided ; 27 voted in favor of producing the corre-
spondence, and 73 voted against its production, leaving a majority
of 46 in favor of the ministerial attempt to hush up the matter.
Every one can make his own inference on this result. B.

For the Journal of Commerce.

THE DISSOLUTION OF THE UNION THE OBJECT
OF BRITISH INTRIGUES.

Messrs. Editors : — I think I have shown beyond dispute in
my former communications that one of the causes distinctly set
forth by the President and by Congress for the declaration of war
between Great Britain and the United States in 1812 was this dis-
honorable attempt on the part of the former Government, through
its secret agents, to foment divisions and create irritations, between
the Northern and Southern sections of the country, and this for
the express purpose of dismembering the Union. Great Britain
was directly charged with this attempt by the United States Gov-
ernment, and the suppression of all inquiry on the subject in the
British Parliament, when the Ministry of that day were called
upon by Lord Holland in the House of Peers to clear themselves
from that charge, stamps forever the fact that to this day, (to
use the words of Lord Holland,) " the charge remains unrefutedP

33

With this charge, then, fully admitted and established, it becomes
a matter of importance to us to inquire, 1st. Whether the re-
sults of that war were calculated to lessen or to increase the de-
sire for the consummation of the British Aristocratic conspiracy
against this country ? Policy would naturally dictate both de-
lay and caution in any measures to carry out their aim of " rend"
ing the Union" which might excite jealousy or suspicion on our
part, but assuredly, the naval prowess of the Union, so strikingly
prominent and so firmly established, by that contest, was a marked
feature in the history of the war not calculated to allay the fears
or the jealousies of that jealous maritime power. Is it unreason-
able to suppose that the unscrupulous leaders of that proud aris-
tocracy were fully aware of the causes of the failure of the con-
spiracy which they had intrusted to Henry's management ? They
must have become aware from the disclosures he made to them
that the party differences of Federalists and Democrats, so
acrimoniously contested at that period, were not of a sufficiently
Sectional or profound a character to accomplish their policy of
dividing the Union, Each of these political parties, into which
the whole country was divided, had their adherents both at the
North and at the South ; their party differences had reference to
common, not to sectional interests, and consequently a geographi-
cal or sectional division on the basis of those party differences
was simply impracticable. And 2d. Were not the wise sugges-
tions of Captain Henry — suggestions the result of his experience
in his endeavors to promote their wishes — worthy of their serious
consideration ? He distinctly suggests to them a course iox future
operations, which we also would do well to consider, when he says
to them, " To bring about a separatio?i of the States, under dis-
tinct and independent governments, however desirable, cannot be
effected but hi/ a series of acts and a long-continued policy
tending to irritate the Southern and conciliate the Northern
people; " and again, " it is an object only to he attained hy slow
and circumspect progression^

In view of these suggestions of their agent, is it not worth
while to ioquire whether there are any indications of an adoption
by this same jealous power of the policy thus suggested to them ?

A general investing a fortress which he is intent on capturing,
does not ordinarily retire because of a single rej)ulse from an im-

3

34

practicable point, especially when his spies have discovered and
reported to him a vulnerable point requiring only a slower and
more circumspect sapping and mining.

It is, however, of little comparative importance to know
whether the subsequent action of the Aristocracy to " rend the
Union," was, or was not, a consequence of these sagacious sug-
gestions of their emissary. It is of far more importance to ascer-
tain whether a policy in exact and palpable accord with his sug-
gestions has, or has not, for some fifty years, been in operation.

Let it be kept in mind that the main characteristic of that
policy recommended as most likely to bring about " a separation
of the States, " is " a policy tending to irritate the Southern
and conciliate the Northern peopled Now, on searching the
records of our history for the basis of such a policy, a sectional
subject of such an irritating character as shall answer this pur-
pose, is there one which could be found by the managers of the
intrigue, better adapted to create irritation of the South, than
the subject of African slavery ?

It was a profound remark of an eminent British statesman,
that "in a concern so full of duplicity as politics, ^possibility is
to be regarded with as much jealousy as certainty, for caution
will be late when opportunity for using caution is at an end."
Let us then look in the direction whence this possibility, not to
say certainty, may be discovered.

Not to distract by bringing to light many strong and coinci-
dent indications of the inauguration of this policy, which from
the nature of the enterprise would be artfully covered up, we
come at once upon an historic fact strikingly similar to Captain
Henry's intrigue of 1809.

In the year 1835 there came to this country an Englishman
well fitted by nature and education to inaugurate the policy of
irritation. This man was George Thompson. He was an
adept in the popular phrases of our own demagogues, possessed
of that sort of eloquence which charms a certain class of shallow
but excitable minds, well versed in the vocabulary of denuncia-
tion, personally prescriptive ; he could talk glibly of freedom of
discussion and equal rights, and fulminate bloodthirsty curses
against slaveholders. He came under the cover of the Anti-
Slavery Societies of Gi-eat Britain recommended to the Garrison

35

breed of Abolitionists. The Aiuericau Anti-Slavery Society had
only two years before his advent to this country laid down the
new, unscriptural, and disastrous dogma that " all Slavery is
sin," thus giving a lever of great power for just such an emissary
as had been sent to take advantage of the dreadful mistake. So
recently had the untenable dogma been in operation when Thomp-
son arrived, that the Anti-Slavery Societies of New England
•were not yet wrought up to the degree of fanatic zeal, which in
this sad hour has culminated in our times in bloodshed and
crime ; the mass of members were yet unprepared for fully car-
rying out their new and fatal programme. The false Christian
and moral philosophy of the day had not yet sufficiently imbued
their minds, or the minds of the comnuxnity at large, with the
principles of a plausible but really shallow humanitarianism, and
so the bold doctrines of this foreign emissary grated harshly even
on their ears. "When he addressed them in Boston, such was his
impudent and intemperate language that there were cries of " we
want to hear no foreigners lecture us," " he has issued nothing
but one tissue of falsehoods against the South," and even or.o of
the delegates to the meeting from the Baptists of England was so
disgusted with Thompson's denunciations, that " he rose to ex-
press his regret at the course of remark in which he had in-
dulged." The meeting was excited, and for the most part
indignant. Wherever Thompson went throughout the country,
the same scenes followed ; the staple of his public speeches was
denunciation of the South and slaveholders ; he adhered strictly
to the programme of " irritating the Southern people /" and this
end was attained by the intentional notoriety which his ultraism
gained for all that he said. He visited Theological Seminaries,
and conversed with their students to indoctrinate them in his pro-
gramme of irritation. The more ultra the doctrine the more
excitement. And so to a student at Andover he distinctly de-
clares that the kind of moral iustruction which ought to be en-
joyed by the slaves, was, " that every slave should be taught
TO CUT HIS master's THROAT." When this was published, the
excitement was so great as to endanger his safety, and he did not
hesitate to deny that he had said it. The issue of that denial
was the production of irrefragable proof of his having said it, and
also of his prevarication. He became so obnoxious to the con-

36

servative part of the community that it was feared that violence
would be committed upon him. The Boston Atlas in Oct., 1835,
says of Tliompson : " We deprecate all attempts at violence
against this individual, but we think that he has severely tried
the patience of our fellow-citizens, and done full enough to dis-
turb the peace and good order of the community. How much
longer can we bear and forbear ? A mountebank who in the ex-
ercise of his vocation should produce similar infractions of the
peace would be taken up as a vagrant, or abated as a nuisance."
About the same time, a riot in Boston was attempted in conse-
quence of Thompson's proceedings, and was not dispersed, al-
though the Mayor assured the mob that Thompson was not in the
city. He had fled into the country and concealed himself, while
his friend Garrison was seized and led about the streets with a
baiter around his neck.

All this was making capital for Mr. Thompson's principals on
the other side of the water ; the irritating i3art of the process
was in successful operation.

We need not follow the course of this emissary in the United
States further than to add a convincing proof of his success,
in conjunction with his abolition associates, in " irritatinrj the
Southern people,''^ by circulating tracts of an irritating and in-
cendiary character at the South.

President Jackson, in his message to Congress of Dec. 7,
1835, says: — " I must also invite your attention to the painful
excitements in the South, by attempts to circulate through the
mails inflammatory a^Dpeals addressed to the passions of the slaves,
in prints and in various sorts of publications, calculated to stimu-
late them to insurrection, and to produce all the horrors of a ser-
VI I o Tn 1* '' iff 7p *F % » ♦

"It is fortunate for the country that the good sense, the
generous feeling, and the deep-rooted attachment of the people of
the non-slaveholding States to the Union, and their fellow-citizens
of the same blood in the South, have given so strong and impres-
sive a tone to the sentiments entertained against the proceedings
of the misguided persons who have engaged in these unconstitu-
tional and wicked attempts, and especially against the emis-
saries FKOJi FOREIGN PARTS who have dared to interfere in this
matter, as to authorize the hope that those attempts will no

37

longer be persisted in. * * * I would, therefore, call tlie
special attention of Congress to tlie subject, and respectfully sug-
gest the propriety of passing such a law as will prohibit, under
severe penalties, the circulation in the Southern States, through
the mail, of incendiary publications intended to instigate the
slaves to insurrection."

Captain Henry's efforts, in his similar but abortive effort for
dismemhering the Union in 1809, were to have been rewarded by
a Judgeship in Canada ; this we learn incidentally from the De-
bates in Parliament. The British Government must doubtless
have felt strongly chagrined at \\\q faux pas they had committed
in Henry's case in not fulfilling their promises to him, and so
driving him, in revenge, to divulge the whole plot to the United
States Government. They were not likely to commit the same
error twice, in their persistent efforts to " foment divisions " in
the United States. The reward given to Mr. George Thompson
for his efforts to irritate the Southern people, are not among the
items recorded in the expenses of the Government, but the reward
was nevertheless soon manifest.

In Nov., 1835, Thompson had returned to England. Let us
glance a moment at his reception there. The President's Mes-
sage, in which, though not named, Thompson was as clearly desig-
nated as if he had been, must have reached England about a month
after Thompson's return. If Thompson's conduct in the United
States was so repulsive, and so notorious as to be made the sub-
ject of a paragraph in the President's Message, it could scarcely
have escaped the notice of the political community of Great
Britain, and some explanation ought to have been given to the
United States. Mr. Thompson, on the contrary, at once steps
into the political arena, and we find him a contestant for a seat
in Parliament from the Tower Hamlets. We know the influence
that secures a seat in the Commons. Had Mr. Thompson's no-
torious course of outrage on the feelings of at least one whole
section of this country and nine-tenths of the other section, been
distasteful or obnoxious to the Aristocracy of Gi-eat Britain, it
would have been next to impossible that he could have been
elected. Nevertheless he was elected. Captain Henry stipulated
for a Judgeship in Canada, and being refused, betrays the Con-
spirators. It amounts quite to demonstration that Thompson's

38

price was a seat in Parliament ; lie performed his foreign service
to the satisfaction of his principals ; for the Southern people
M^ere roused to intense indignation ; and he returned home to
receive his reward, an M. P. affixed to his otherwise obscure
name.

Whether the demonstration we have given, that we are the
dupes of a long-concocted and skilfully planned intrigue of the
British aristocracy, will have any effect to allay our irritated sec-
tional feeling, and thus dissolve the diabolical spell which keeps
us from Union, is more than can. now be predicted. There is
food here for reflection, deep, dispassionate, serious reflection.

B.

NOTE A.

The expressions attributed to Lord Shaftesbury, on p. 2'2, have
in substance been lately denied by that nobleman in the following note
to Mr. Weed :

"Febeitart 20, 1862.
" Dear Me. Weed : * * * * Be so good as to read the en-
closed letter to me from Philadelphia, and then return it to me. It is
one, and a sample, of many that I receive on the same subject. My
reply is uniform : I have made no such speeches, attended no meeting,
and have neither said nor thought any thing so foolish and mischievous
as the contents of that paragraph.

" Your faithful servant,

" SHAFTESBrRT."

This denial embraces several particulars, and is fruitful in impor-
tant suggestions. I have no vrish to deprive the noble Earl of any
benefit he may personally derive from his pronouncing the sentiments
attributed to him, in his alleged conversation with an American gen-
tleman, foolish, etc. They were eminently so in every aspect, and,
however ambiguous in the intended application of the term " foolish,"
whether folly was attributable to the idea that the aristocracy desired
the dismemberment of the American Union, or, what is more in con-
sonance with reason, atti'ibutable to the imprudent avoical of this well-
known sentiment of that aristocracy, folly, in the sense of a violation
of moral precepts, is clearly stamped on both categories.

But Lord Shaftesbury distinctly and unqualifiedly asserts that he has
attended no meeting. Is the account, then, of the meeting held in
London on the 24th of July, 1861, at which meeting Lord Shaftesbury
is reported to have presided, and which was convened to present to the
notorious Dr. Cheever a piece of plate, a fiction ? "Was it not the ex-
press purpose of that meeting to strengthen the hands and encourage
the hearts of the fanatics on this side of the water, whose unchristian,

40

misguided zeal, and infidel ravings, for some thirty years, have at length
produced their natural and long-predicted fruits, to wit, a savage, re-
lentless, bloody, fratricidal war ? It is a melancholy sight to see a
nobleman of such prominence as Lord Shaftesbury, carried away by
the sophistry which prevails around him, lending the influence of his
name and position to fan the flame of civil war in a Christian country
among Christian brethren. He was chairman of the meeting, and is
represented to have said, among other things, that " Englishmen had
so great an idea of individual liberty^ that it never entered into their
minds to argue the question ; and any man expressing a doubt on the
subject would be looked upon as a fool or a beast." Let us look at
this plausible sophism of individual liberty, extraordinary as coming
from a leading member of the English aristocracy. If individual lib-
erty, under any and all circumstances, (for this is the unqualified asser-
tion,) is a right so certainly true and good, it ought to be capable of
clear demonstration ; arguing the question can do it no harm ; it should
be fixed on the basis of sound reason and Scripture, and thus should
not fear discussion ; above all, it should be so carefully stated as not to
be liable to perversion and abuse, through any misunderstanding of its
exact import, when practically applied. As stated by Lord Shaftes-
bury, we understand him to accept without qualification the doctrine
of the American Declaration of Independence, as construed by the
fanaticism of the daj', that every individual man has "an inalienable
right to liberty ;" and he affirms that tl)is is a doctrine now so well
established in the English mind, that no argument on the subject pro
or con would be listened to, and that any one " expressing any doubt
on the subject would be esteemed a fool or a beast." This is strong
language, nor ought we to doubt that Lord Shaftesbury spoke the con-
scientious convictions of his mind. But at the risk of being placed in
the unenviable categories of a fool or a beast, I will venture to doubt
the soundness of this sweeping, unqualified axiom, and also to say that
the noble Earl himself will shrink from the logical results of his ill-
considered postulate. And first: Do reason and common sense sanc-
tion the allowance of unqualified individual liberty to every human
lieing ? Is the child allowed unrestricted liberty ? To uphold the
axiom, as it is asserted, iti its unqualified integrity, the reply must be,
yes. Is his Lordship prepared to say, yes? I will not believe that he
will so unqualifiedly take this position, but, as a rational man, particu-
larly in its logical consequences to his caste, will say that a child's lib-
erty is of course restrained ; that every child that comes into the
world is, and must of necessity be, under restraint ; that, instead of
being born into liberty, he is born into slavery. It is, in fact, a rule
without an exception. Slavery^ the subjection of one's will to tlic

41

will of another, since the fall of man, is the rule, and not liberty. I
speak of a fact so notorious that the " fool and beast " alone will ignore
it. This great fact, that slavery since the fall is the normal condition
of all mankind, lies at the basis of all government, and is I'ecognized
in the laws of every civilized nation on the globe. If the law restrains
a child's liberty, and forbids his doing certain acts, until he is of age,
is he not a slave to the extent of his privation of liberty until he is of
age ? At the age of twenty-one he is, in common universal parlance,
free ; what, then, was he previous to becoming of age?

The noble Lord will not deny the facts. What say reason and
common sense as to the moral character of the facts? Is it right or
is it not, that the individual should be uniformly restrained of his lib-
erty until he is of mature age ? I must believe that Lord Shaftesbury
is not prepared to abrogate the human laws that impose restraint upon
minors, and for the reason that his own benevolent instincts recognize
a benevolent necessity for this restraint; it is benevolence to the child
to restrain his liberty, and benevolence to society in order to protect
the community against the inexperienced, heedless, or corrupt acts of
an inferior portion of its members. Reason and the universal opinion
and action of mankind sanction this restraint ; and when we bring the
whole matter to the test of the supreme arbiter of moral controversy,
the Bible, the reason for restraint is set forth in such a clear light that
none but an infidel will ignore its decisions. Quotations from the Bi-
ble to sustain the authority and benevolence of restraint upon children,
are certainly superfluous to the President of the British and Foreign
Bible Society.

The simple fact, that the Bible not merely sanctions but enjoins
subjection to authority, would of itself be sufficient to compel our as-
sent, even if the reason of the demand were not apparent ; but in this
case the reason is obvious at a glance. Man, since the fall, is a corrupt
and selfish being, sensual, devoid of holiness, low and debased in his
appetites, and by nature fit only for destruction, and, aside from God's
merciful interference, hopelessly lost. Can such beings live together
in society, with their discordant, repellant propensities and fierce de-
sires, in unregulated, perpetual antagonism? To unassisted human
reason a benevolent solution of this question seems impossible. But
God's wisdom in the great plan of redeeming fixUen man has devised
and ordained government.^ or the rule of the superior ovqv the inferior,
as one of his benevolent means for accomplishing that great end, and
has given a code divinely regulated to prevent the abuse of power,
while its use is made a means of the greatest good. He has placed
man, wherever born, under some system of tutelage, from the cradle
to the grave ; he has established a disciplinary scheme to train man,
by physical restraint, to obedience and submission to law, and to the

42

more elevated control of spiritual restraints, and thus, by a system of
redemption devised in the councils of heaven, in which the end is
man's salvation from the slavery of sin, man's terrestrial slavery is
made one of the wisely-appointed means for giving him celestial and
eternal liberty ; not the grovelling, earth-born, earth-bounded liberty
claimed as an inalienable right, but the glorious spiritual liberty of the
sons of God.

54 ir

.-m-v \./ .•i'xlf/?^-, %/ :^; \/ ..^

'*^

. V v. «

-.5 o.

.0^

^^•n^

A^^.

A^ ^ "'• aT ..

'0^

'- ^o .**\t^:>^_ .p^.c^^^^^o .4?'\oj^.%^<e,