The editor of the Courrier des Etats Unis assumes that nothing has
occurred to change the relative position of parties since this
announcement to me by Mr. Drouyn de l’Huys, communicated in my despatch
of 30th of July, 1863. Assuming that the reprint of this editorial in
the Moniteur is even a quasi adoption of the views there expressed, you
will find that the whole is richly worth a perusal.
Hon. William H. Seward
Secretary of State, &c., &c.,
&c.
[Translation.]
AMERICA.
We read in the Courrier des Etats Unis:
France and the United States: To sum up,
some two months ago the diplomatic correspondence exchanged during
the year 1863 between Paris and Washington, by reproducing the
clearness, of a policy of entire reserve and forbearance on the part
of France on the American question, which is found written in every
line therein, we added that people should not, on this account,
flatter themselves to have seen the end of the alarms of
intervention, nor the rumors of a near approaching recognition of
the south by Napoleon.
This foresight did not call for a great effort of the prophetic mind,
and the realization thereof had not made itself to be awaited for.
Once already, during the last month, we have had to notice pretended
news of negotiations entered upon between Richmond and Paris, to
bring about the simultaneous recognition of the confederate
government on the one part, and of the Mexican empire on the other.
More recently the department of State was obliged to give an
official denial to certain assertions, which had reference to
serious disagreements between France and the United States
respecting the vessels being built for account of the south in one
or two French ports. For some days past the newsmongers have again
got to work and state with more certainty than ever that the cabinet
of the Tuileries is upon the eve of recognizing Mr. Jefferson
Davis.
During the past three years we have for more than twenty times been
obliged to oppose this same bugbear, and as often has the event
demonstrated its entire inanity. With a journalism less exclusively
preoccupied with showing up without scruple and without examination
the feeling of the day; with a public more accustomed to discuss
matters of itself, and not to follow almost mechanically the bent
which the press chooses to give it, this theme would at this day be
worn out to the end of the tether, and should only raise a smile.
Doubtless such is the case among a certain class of enlightened and
observing minds, but the mass of the people continues to take for
ready money all that is served up to it. We must, therefore, at the
risk of tedious repetitions, oppose a new denial to each new
assertion which is produced, since people lose sight incessantly of
the teachings of the past.
We now, then, again repeat the assertion already so often given in
this same place, upon the attitude and intentions of France
respecting the American question.
This attitude and these intentions remain such as they have been
since the first day of the war; such as they have constantly
revealed themselves in the diplomatic correspondence of the last
three years.
In order to leave the present view (thought) of the imperial
government, one need only read over again the despatch of the 30th
of July, 1863, in which Mr. Dayton relates an interview which he had
just had with Mr. Drouyn de l’Huys, in relation to rumors similar to
those which we relate to-day.
The American diplomat then wrote:
“I have called his attention to the fact that the papers of our
country were commenting very much at this time upon the attitude
taken by the Emperor, and his intentions respecting the recognition
of the independence of the south.
“I asked him besides, categorically, what was the policy of the
Emperor towards the south. You will observe that in this manner I
approached my subject, without saying that formal instructions from
my government enjoined upon me to interrogate France upon these
questions.
[Page 63]
“In reply to my question upon the policy of the Emperor towards the
south, he said to me that he had none; that he awaited events. You
will remember, doubtless, that I have told you heretofore that in my
opinion such was the case.”
This very clear declaration of the minister of foreign affairs of
France, corroborated by the personal conviction expressed by Mr.
Dayton, leaves not room for the shadow of a doubt as to what were,
some eight months ago, the views and the line of conduct of the
cabinet of the Tuileries. It goes at the same time beyond the period
at which it was. In saying that the imperial government limited
itself to await events, Mr. Drouyn de l’Huys indicated formally that
a a new situation could alone bring about any change in this
expectant attitude. But nothing of the kind has occurred since then.
The relative position of the belligerent parties is to-day exactly
what it was at the end of the month of July last France has,
therefore, had no reason to modify her policy of expectancy. To
suppose that she has done so, is to impute to her a gratuitous
inconsistency, contrary to all her usages, still more contrary to
the line of conduct from which she has not swerved a single moment
in the American question.
The impartial historian, who will be called upon at a later day to
judge of the international view of that civil war, will have, in
fact, to acknowledge that, in the midst of the imaginary shifts
which newsmongers and the public anxiety have imputed to it, the
imperial government has never deviated from the part (rôle) which it laid out for itself at the
commencement of the contest. If it had had only the tenth part of
the after-thoughts of intervention which have been ascribed to it,
assuredly neither interest nor opportunity has been wanting to it.
Our suffering commerce; the prospect of the advantages of every sort
with which the south is ready to repay its official recognition; the
complication and the turn, both unexpected, of the Mexican question;
the declared and unjustifiable ill will of the press of the north;
the limits assigned by Mr. Seward to the termination of the contest
and ten times overrun; the regular working and the undeniable
vitality of the confederate government—here are more motives and
more pretexts than the United States themselves have often asked in
order to give their moral support to revolutionary movements. The
fact that France has not been willing to avail herself of them,
though the favorable moments have not been wanting to her, should at
least shield her from idle imputation to which her whole conduct
gives the lie, and which become offensive by dint of reproduction
without cause of existence.
The only two acts through which the cabinet of the Tuileries has
momentarily deviated from its part of a simple spectator, are the
proposition made in November, 1862, to England and Russia to offer
the good offices of a joint mediation to the federal government;
then the despatch of the 9th January, 1863, in which it suggested
the possibility of conferences between the two belligerent parties,
without on that account suspending the progress of hostilities.
Writers who are interested in perverting the facts, or who are led
astray by a false national pride, have affected to see in his double
proceeding an offensive intermeddling. The good sense of the public
has already in part done justice to this singular appreciation; as
time lapses it will acknowledge the more and more all the true good
will and sympathy which this attempt contained for the Union, made,
besides, with so much delicacy and reserve. Perhaps even the future
will reveal that, if it had obtained the concurrence of the cabinets
of St. Petersburgh and London, the idea of France might not have
been either so fruitless or so badly received at Washington, as it
was by remaining in the state of an isolated initiative. That which
is now undeniable, under all circumstances, is, that while seeking
to make the belligerent parties enter into the path of negotiation,
the imperial government has tried the only effort which has been
made during three years to conciliate the north and south, with the
end of reconstructing the former state of things. Whilst all the
other powers witnessed, unmoved and indifferent, if not secretly
content, the contest in which the
[Page 64]
greatness of America is gradually sinking
itself, France alone has attempted to open the door to a
reconciliation. Taking this for granted, in order to impute to her
incessantly malevolent intentions, is a singular reasoning, while at
the same time it is an act of blind ingratitude. If the ear has been
closed to her friendly voice, let her not at least be reproached
because, at an hour which she had powerful reasons for believing
propitious, she had desired to point out the path to safety.
France “awaits events;” this is the part which has been assigned her.
She does not think of changing, and the newsmongers who seek to
circulate the contrary would do well to ponder over this phrase,
which we borrow again from a despatch from Mr. Dayton.
“If the press of the United States could be made to understand the
evil which it does us abroad by exaggerating and commenting upon
these kind of rumors I am persuaded that it would exercise more
reserve.”
