[594] Bancroft, Seward. II, 298-99. Bancroft's account is based on the Tribune translation and on Seward's own comments to Weed and Bigelow. Ibid., 371-72.
[595] Newton. Lord Lyons, I, pp. 82-85, gives an account of the initiation of Mercier's trip and prints Lyons' private letter to Russell of April 25, describing the results, but does not bring out sufficiently Lyons' objections and misgivings. Newton thinks that Mercier "whether instructed from home or not ... after the manner of French diplomatists of the period ... was probably unable to resist the temptation of trying to effect a striking coup...."
[596] Stoeckl's report does not agree with Mercier's statement. He wrote that he had been asked to accompany Mercier but had refused and reported a conversation with Seward in which the latter declared the time had not yet come for mediation, that in any case France would not be accepted in that rôle, and that if ever mediation should become acceptable, Russia would be asked to act (Russian Archives, Stoeckl to F.O., April 23-May 5, 1862. No. 927).
[597] F.O., Am., Vol. 828. No. 250. Confidential. Lyons to Russell, April 14, 1862.
[598] Ibid.
[599] This suspicion was a natural one but that it was unfounded is indicated by Benjamin's report to Slidell of Mercier's visit, describing the language used in almost exactly the same terms that Lyons reported to Russell. That little importance was attached by Benjamin to Mercier's visit is also indicated by the fact that he did not write to Slidell about it until July. Richardson, II, 260. Benjamin to Slidell, July 19, 1862.
[600] F.O., Am., Vol. 828. No. 284. Confidential. Lyons to Russell, April 24, 1862.
[601] Documents Diplomatiques, 1862, pp. 122-124.
[602] F.O., Am., Vol. 828. No. 284. Confidential. Lyons to Russell, April 28, 1862.
[603] F.O., Am., Vol. 829. No. 315. Confidential. Lyons to Russell, May 9, 1862.