Part 4

The estimate of revenue for the year he took as follows: In the customs the duty on chicory would be doubled, bringing in £15,000; and the estimate of the customs was £23,585,000; excise, £19,463,000; stamps, £8,460,000. It was proposed to reduce the hawker’s licence duty for the year from £4 to £2; and to allow half-yearly licences. There was to be a change in the licensing of wine and refreshment houses, which would produce about £20,000. There was to be an alteration in the mode of licensing for the selling of spirits: that is, the wholesale dealers, by paying a duty of £3 3s. would be allowed to sell spirits retail, which would bring in about £5,000. Stamps on agreements for furnished houses for a part of the year would be only five shillings instead of _ad valorem_, as now; and house agents would have to take out a £2 licence. Stamps on foreign bills of exchange would be levied in a different manner. The revenue from taxes would be £3,050,000; income tax, £11,200,000, Post Office £3,500,000, Crown Lands £295,000, and miscellaneous £1,400,000; and the indemnity from China received in the financial year £750,000, making a total revenue of £71,823,000, being a surplus of £1,923,000, over an estimated expenditure of £69,900,000.

The Government had come to the conclusion that it would not be justified in keeping so large a balance in hand and it was proposed to apply it to the diminution of taxation. There were four articles which would at once present themselves to notice--viz., the tea and sugar duties, the tenth penny of the income tax, and the paper duty. It was proposed to remit the penny on the income tax which was imposed last year. This remission would cause a loss in the present financial year of £850,000. The rate would be 9d. in the pound on incomes above £150 a year, and 6d. in the pound on those above £100.

It was next proposed to repeal the duty on paper on October 1, making a loss of revenue in the year of about £665,000. The surplus for the year would be £408,000....

Referring to what were called the minor charges on commercial operations, he stated that the charges were about £320,000, and the Exchequer could not surrender that sum.

As to the portions of the reduced income tax and the duty on paper, the loss of which would fall on the year 1862–3, to the extent of about £800,000, that would probably be provided for by the sum payable for indemnity from China, and reductions in military estimates. It was only proposed to re-enact the income tax and tea and sugar duties for one year.

BRITAIN AND ITALIAN UNITY (1861).

=Source.=--_Leaves from the Diary of Henry Greville_, Third Series, pp. 369, 370. (Smith, Elder and Co., 15, Waterloo Place.)

_Saturday, April 20, 1861._--There was an interesting debate last night in the House of Lords, brought on by Lord Ellenborough, on the Roman question, in which Clarendon and Lord Derby also took part. He asked whether our Government was engaged in any correspondence with the object of reconciling the spiritual independence of the See of Rome with the exercise of temporal sovereignty by the King of Italy within the Roman territory. He thought Rome was the fitting capital of a united Italy, and that the occupation by the French of that city precluded that unity.

He then discussed the Venetian question, and though he admitted the right of Austria to maintain herself in Italy, by virtue of the Congress of Vienna, he considered the time was come when she should reconcile herself with the Italian people. Holding these views, however, he deprecated the interference of the Italians in Hungary. Lord Wodehouse replied that we were not in any correspondence on the Roman question, and that H.M.’s Government considered it was neither becoming nor desirable for a Protestant country to take the initiative in the matter. The whole question depended upon the withdrawal of the French troops from Rome, and H.M.’s Government had not disguised their opinion that it was desirable those troops should be withdrawn. Clarendon thought Rome the proper capital, and believed the Emperor Napoleon to be sincerely desirous of withdrawing his troops whenever it would be safe for him to do so, both as regarded the Pope and his own position in France, where popular opinion was in favour of their remaining. Derby said much the same thing, but expressed his opinion that it would have been far better to establish a Northern and Southern Kingdom of Italy, in which case Rome would have lain between the two countries and the solution of the difficulty would have been easy. As, however, there was only one kingdom, the desire to have Rome for their capital was quite natural; but it was a desire that created the greatest embarrassment.

LOSS OF THE COTTON SUPPLY (1861).

=Source.=--Ashley’s _Life of Viscount Palmerston_, vol. ii., pp. 210, 211. (Richard Bentley and Son, 1874.)

LETTER FROM LORD PALMERSTON TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE.

_June 7, 1861._

MY DEAR MILNER GIBSON.

It is wise when the weather is fine to put one’s house in wind and watertight condition against the time when foul weather may come on. The reports from our manufacturing districts are at present good; the mills are all working, and the people are in full employment. But we must expect a change towards the end of next autumn, and during the winter and the spring of next year. The civil war in America must infallibly diminish to a great degree our supply of cotton, unless, indeed, England and France should, as suggested by M. Mercier, the French Minister at Washington, compel the Northern States to let the cotton come to Europe from the South; but this would almost be tantamount to a war with the North, although not perhaps a very formidable thing for England and France combined. But even then this year’s crop must be less plentiful than that of last year. Well, then, has the Board of Trade, or has any other department of the Government, any means of procuring or of helping to procure anywhere in the wide world a subsidiary supply of cotton? As to our manufacturers themselves they will do nothing unless directed and pushed on. They are some of the most helpless and shortsighted of men. They are like the people who held out their dishes and prayed that it might rain plum-puddings. They think it is enough to open their mill-gates, and that cotton will come of its own accord. They say they have for years been looking to India as a source of supply; but their looks seem to have only the first effect of the eyes of the rattlesnake, viz., to paralyse the objects looked at, and as yet it has shown no signs of falling into their jaws. The western coast of Africa, the eastern coast of Africa, India, Australia, the Fiji Islands, Syria, and Egypt, all grow great quantities of cotton, not to mention China, and probably Japan. If active measures were taken in time to draw from these places such quantities of cotton as might be procured, some portion at least of the probable falling off of this next year might be made good, and our demand this year would make a better supply spring up for future years. I do not know whether you can do anything in this matter; but it is an important one, and deserves early attention.

Yours sincerely, PALMERSTON.

THE CASE OF THE “TRENT” (1861).

=Source.=--_Annual Register_, vol. 103; _Public Documents_, pp. 288, 289.

LETTER FROM COMMANDER WILLIAMS TO CAPTAIN PATEY.

“TRENT,” AT SEA, _November 9, 1861_.

SIR,

There devolves on me the painful duty of reporting to you a wanton act of aggression on this ship by the United States war screw-steamer _San Jacinto_, carrying a broadside of seven guns, and a shell pivot-gun of heavy calibre on the forecastle, which took place on the 8th instant, in the Bahama Channel, abreast of the Paredon lighthouse. The _Trent_ left Havana at 8 a.m. on the 7th instant, with Her Majesty’s mails for England, having on board a large freight of specie, as well as numerous passengers, amongst whom were Messrs. Mason and Slidell, the former accredited with a special mission from the Confederate States to the Government of Great Britain, and the latter to the French Government, with their respective secretaries, Messrs. McFarland and Eustis.

Shortly after noon, on the 8th, a steamer, having the appearance of a man-of-war, but not showing colours, was observed ahead, hove to; we immediately hoisted our ensign at the peak, but it was not responded to until, on nearing her, at 1.15 p.m., she fired a round shot from her pivot-gun across our bows, and showed American colours. Our engines were immediately slowed, and we were still approaching her, when she discharged a shell from her pivot-gun immediately across our bows, exploding half a cable’s length ahead of us. We then stopped, when an officer with an armed guard of marines boarded us and demanded a list of passengers, which demand being refused, the officer said that he had orders to arrest Messrs. Mason, Slidell, McFarland, and Eustis, and that he had sure information of their being passengers in the _Trent_. Declining to satisfy him whether such persons were on board or not, Mr. Slidell stepped forward, and announced that the four persons he had named were then standing before him, under British protection, and that if they were taken on board the _San Jacinto_, they must be taken _vi et armis_; the commander of the _Trent_ and myself at the same time protesting against this illegal act, this act of piracy, carried out by brute force, as we had no means of resisting the aggression, the _San Jacinto_ being at the time on our port beam, about 200 yards off, her ship’s company at quarters, ports open, and tompions out. Sufficient time being given for such necessaries as they might require being sent to them, these gentlemen were forcibly taken out of the ship, and then a further demand was made that the commander of the _Trent_ should go on board the _San Jacinto_, but as he expressed his determination not to go, unless forcibly compelled likewise, this latter demand was not carried into execution.

At 3.40 we parted company, and proceeded on our way to St. Thomas, on our arrival at which place I shall deliver to the Consul duplicates of this letter to Lord Lyons, Sir Alexander Milne, Commodore Dunlop, and the Consul-General at Havana.

I have, etc., (Signed) RICHARD WILLIAMS, _Commander, R.N._

Memorandum made by Commander Williams at the Admiralty on November 27, 1861, relative to the forcible seizure of Messrs. Slidell and Mason and their secretaries from on board the _Trent_.

On Mr. Slidell’s announcing that the four persons inquired for were then standing before Lieutenant Fairfax under British protection, and that if taken on board the _San Jacinto_ they must be taken _vi et armis_, I addressed that officer in the following terms: “In this ship I am the Representative of Her Britannic Majesty’s Government, and, in the name of that Government I protest against this illegal act--this violation of international law--this act of piracy, which you would not dare to attempt on a ship capable of resisting such aggression.” It was then that Lieutenant Fairfax waved his hand towards the _San Jacinto_, and additional force was sent. The marines were drawn up at the entry-port--bayonets fixed; and on Miss Slidell’s uttering an hysterical scream on being separated from her father--that is, on his breaking the window of his cabin, and thrusting his body through to escape from the distressing scene of forcible separation from his family, they rushed into the passage at the charge. There were upwards of sixty armed men in all, and the aforesaid gentlemen were then taken out of the ship, an armed guard on either side of each seizing them by the collar of the coat. Every inducement was held out, so far as importunate persuasion would go, to prevail on Mrs. Slidell and Mrs. Eustis to accompany their husbands, but as they did not wish their wives to be subjected to imprisonment (Lieutenant Fairfax having replied to Mrs. Slidell’s inquiry as to their disposal, if they did accompany them, that they would be sent to Washington), they remained on board the _Trent_, and came on to England in _La Plata_.

The ships getting somewhat farther apart than when the affair commenced, a boat came from the _San Jacinto_ to request us to approach nearer; to which I replied that they had the same power as ourselves, and if they wished to be nearer to us they had their own remedy.

THE AFFAIR OF THE “TRENT” (1861).

=Source.=--_Punch_, December 14, 1861. (Reprinted by special permission of the proprietors of _Punch_.)

WAITING FOR AN ANSWER.

1.

Britannia waits an answer, sad and stern, Her weapons ready, but unsheathed they lie; In her deep eye, suppressed, the lightnings burn, Still the war-signal waits her word to fly.

2.

Wrong has been done that flag whose stainless folds Have carried freedom wheresoe’er they flew: She knows sharp words fit slaves and shrewish scolds, She but bids those who can, that wrong undo.

3.

She has been patient; will be patient still. Who more than she knows war, its curse and woe? Harsh words, scant courtesy, loud-mouthed ill-will, She meets as rocks meet ocean’s fretful flow.

4.

All war she knows drags horrors in its train, Whate’er the foes, the cause for which they stand; But worst of all the war that leaves the stain, Of brother’s blood upon a brother’s hand.

5.

The war that brings two mighty powers in shock-- Powers ’tween whom fair commerce shared her crown By kinship knit, and interest’s golden lock, One blood, one speech, one past, of old renown.

6.

All this she feels, and therefore, sad of cheer, She waits an answer from across the sea: Yet hath her sadness no alloy of fear, No thought to count the cost what it may be.

7.

Dishonour has no equipoise in gold, No equipoise in blood, in loss, in pain; Till they whom force has ta’en from ’neath the fold Of her proud flag, stand ’neath its fold again.

8.

She waits in arms; and in her cause is safe. Not fearing war, yet hoping peace the end. Nor heeding those her mood who’d check or chafe: The Right she seeks, the Right God will defend.

THE PEABODY TRUST FORMED (1862).

=Source.=--_Annual Register_, vol. 104; _Chronicle_, p. 41.

This great merchant (Mr. George Peabody), mindful of his reception in this city of his long sojourn, has made to its citizens the splendid gift of £150,000, with the one only condition, the exclusion from its management of all sectarianism in regard to religion, and of all exclusion in regard to politics. The following is the letter which conveyed this noble gift:

LONDON, _March 12, 1862_.

GENTLEMEN,

In reference to the intention which it is the object of this letter to communicate, I am desirous to explain that, from a comparatively early period of my commercial life, I had resolved in my own mind that, should my labours be blessed with success, I would devote a portion of the property thus acquired to promote the intellectual, moral, and physical welfare and comfort of my fellow-men, wherever, from circumstances or location, their claims upon me would be the strongest.

... It is now twenty-five years since I commenced my residence and business in London as a stranger, but I did not long feel myself a “stranger” or in a “strange land,” for in all my commercial and social intercourse with my British friends during that long period, I have constantly received courtesy, kindness, and confidence.... My object being to ameliorate the condition of the poor and needy of this great metropolis, and to promote their comfort and happiness, I take pleasure in apprising you that I have determined to transfer to you the sum of £150,000 which now stands available for this purpose on the books of Messrs. George Peabody and Co.

... I have few instructions to give or conditions to impose, but there are some fundamental principles from which it is my solemn injunction that those entrusted with its application shall never, under any circumstances, depart.

First and foremost among them is the limitation of its uses absolutely and exclusively to such purposes as may be calculated directly to ameliorate the condition and augment the comforts of the poor, who, either by birth or established residence, form a recognised portion of the population of London.

Secondly, it is my intention that now and for all time there shall be a rigid exclusion from the management of this fund of any influences calculated to impart to it a character either sectarian as regards religion, or exclusive in relation to local or party politics.

Thirdly, in conformity with the foregoing conditions it is my wish and intention that the sole qualifications for a participation in the benefits of this fund shall be an ascertained and continued condition of life such as brings the individual within the description (in the ordinary sense of the word) of “the poor” of London, combined with moral character and good conduct as a member of society. It must therefore be held to be a violation of my intentions if any duly-qualified and deserving claimant were to be excluded either on the ground of religious belief or of political bias.

THE “ALABAMA” CRUISER (1862).

=Source.=--_The Illustrated London News_, November 15, 1862.

The Confederate screw-steamer _Alabama_, Captain Semmes, is the notorious vessel whose doings on the Newfoundland banks have frightened northern merchants out of their propriety, and occasioned a remonstrance from the New York Chamber of Commerce addressed to British merchants.

The _Alabama_, formerly the 290, was built in Mr. Laird’s yard at Birkenhead. She is a wooden vessel of 1,200 tons burden, copper-bottomed, 210 feet long, rather narrow, painted black outside, carries three long 32-pounders on a side, has a 100-pounder rifled pivot-gun forward of the bridge, and a 68-pounder on the main-deck. These are of the Blakely pattern, made by Wesley and Preston of Liverpool. She is barque-rigged, and is represented to go thirteen knots under sail and fifteen under steam. She sailed from the Mersey in August. Her officers are Americans, but her present crew are Englishmen. Captain Semmes was the dashing commander of the Confederate steamer _Sumter_. The _Alabama_ is, we believe, the only vessel which the Confederate States now have on the high seas....

The ship _Tonowanda_, which recently arrived at Liverpool from Philadelphia, reports that she was captured by the _Alabama_ (290) on the 9th of October at 4 p.m., in lat. 41, long. 55.

Captain Julius was taken on board, and found there Captain Harmon and crew of the late barque _Wave Crest_ from New York for Cardiff, and Captain Johnson and crew of the late brig _Dunkirk_ from New York to Lisbon, all prisoners and in irons on deck, their vessels having been burnt two days previous. The next day the prisoners were transferred to the _Tonowanda_, and Captain Julius alone remained on board the _Alabama_ as hostage. On the 11th of October they captured and burnt the ship _Manchester_ from New York for Liverpool. Her captain and crew were also put on board the _Tonowanda_. No more prizes were taken till the evening of the 13th, and, there being every appearance of thick weather, Captain Julius was put on board the _Tonowanda_ and allowed to proceed after having given a ransom bond. All the captains, officers and crews are “paroled” prisoners of war.

THE WAR BETWEEN NORTH AND SOUTH (1863).

=Source.=--_The Duke of Argyll’s Autobiography and Memoirs_, vol. ii., pp. 196, 197. (John Murray, 1906.)

SPEECH BY THE DUKE OF ARGYLL AT A BANQUET TO LORD PALMERSTON IN EDINBURGH, APRIL 1ST, 1863.

As my noble friend at the head of the Government told the meeting he addressed last night at Glasgow, we may all have our individual opinions as to the merits of the contest in America.

I, for one, have never concealed my own. As a Government and a people, we must be what we have already been--absolutely neutral. We must take no part whatever in that contest; only, let me remind you, the peace and good will we are all desirous should be maintained between these two great countries does not depend only--nay, does not depend principally--upon the conduct of the Government. My noble friend [Lord Palmerston] has spoken of the miseries of civil war, as well he may; but no word has ever fallen from his lips which implies that anyone was entitled to cast censure on the American Government for the contest in which they are engaged.

Who are we that we should speak of civil war as in no circumstance possible or permissible? Do we not remember that our own liberties have been secured through every form and variety of civil war? How much blood has been shed in the streets of this ancient capital of Edinburgh! How many gory heads have been nailed up in its streets! How many victims of civil war crowd our churchyards in every portion of the country! How many lie upon our mountains with nothing to mark them but the heath or the cairn! What do we say of these men? Do we consider their course to have been an evil one? Do we not rather turn back to those pages of history with the loving chisel of Old Mortality, to refresh in our minds the recollection of their immortal names? Yes, gentlemen, if it be true--and it is true--that the blood of the martyrs has been the seed of the Church, it is equally true that the blood of the patriots has been the foundation of the liberties of our country. Let us extend, then, to our brethren in America the liberal interpretation which we seek to be given to our own former annals. I, for one, have not learned to be ashamed of that ancient combination of the Bible and the sword. Let it be enough for us to pray and hope that the contest whenever it may be brought to an end, shall bring with it that great blessing to the white race which shall consist in the final freedom of the black.

THE BUDGET: EATING THE LEEK (1863).

=Source.=--_The Illustrated London News_, May 9, 1863.

SKETCHES IN PARLIAMENT.