[38] Treaty of 1794, Art. 21: United States Statutes at Large, Vol. VIII. p. 127.
[39] Speech on the Consolidated Fund Bill, July 23, 1863: Hansard’s Parliamentary Debates, 3d Ser., Vol. CLXXII. col. 1270.
[40] Earl Russell to Mr. Adams, April 16, 1863: Correspondence respecting Enlistment of British Subjects in the Federal Army, p. 2: Parliamentary Papers, 1863, Vol. LXXII.
[41] Treaty of 1794, Art. 7.
[42] Twee Gebroeders, 3 Robinson, R., 165.
[43] Burlamaqui, Principles of Natural and Politic Law, tr. Nugent (London, 1763): Politic Law, Part IV. ch. 3, §§ 21, 22, pp. 255, 256.
[44] Commentaries upon International Law (London, 1854), Vol. I. p. 231.
[45] Lord Lyons to Earl Russell, January 13, 1863: Correspondence relating to the Civil War in the United States, p. 53: Parliamentary Papers, 1863, Vol. LXXII.
[46] M. Prévost-Paradol, the eminent writer, and afterwards Minister of France at Washington, justifies this statement. “If the civil war,” says he, “had not broken out, or if the French Government had foreseen the final victory of the North and the reconstruction of the American power, never would the idea of founding a throne in Mexico by European arms have entered into its head.… The fall of the American Republic was, from the beginning of this great trouble, among the aspirations of the French Government, and its most accredited organs made no mystery of it.” Attributing to England the same desire and the same judgment on the probable issue of the war, the distinguished writer says the English Government simply waited events, “in a malevolent neutrality towards the North.”—Kératry, L’Elévation et la Chute de l’Empereur Maximilien: Préface de Prévost-Paradol.
[47] See, ante, p. 309.