The Belligerent and Neutral article is also very good, and I expect that the temperate and sensible way in which the author recommends the abandonment of rights we can never again exercise will have some useful results.
The loyalty of Canada is far greater than I expected; but that the French and Irish there should come out so strong for the Crown against Democracy is indeed a surprise. That Captain Eugene O'Reilly was a tremendous patriot in '48; and if I had not put him in prison for a little time to cool, he would have made a greater donkey of himself than he did.
The next letter from Lord Clarendon relates to a point on which widely different opinions have been and will be held, till it is decided in the only practical way. It would be foreign to our present purpose to argue it here; but it is interesting to see the opinion of the man who, more distinctly than any other, was responsible for the great change theoretically introduced into our maritime code by the Declaration of Paris.
The Grove, January 28th.—With respect to alterations in our maritime law and usages, I don't know what Russell's opinion may be, but I know that Palmerston does, or did, think the time come for relinquishing rights that we can no longer exercise. He readily assented to the doctrines laid down at Paris in '56, and was so entirely of my opinion about going further that he tried it on at Liverpool some time afterwards; but that part of his speech was so ill received, and he received so many remonstrances against giving up the palladium, &c. &c., that he told me when he returned to London that the pear was not ripe, and that we must give public opinion a little more time to become reasonable.
On January 9th Charles Sumner had spoken at great length in the United States Senate, proving, very much to his own satisfaction and that of his fellow-citizens, that the surrender of Mason and Slidell was a great moral victory, confirming the principles of maritime law for which they had always contended, and which the English now admitted. A short telegraphic summary of this had caught the mail at Halifax, and been published in the 'Times' of the 20th; but it was not till the 27th that the United States papers, with the full report, reached England. Of this the 'Times'—on its own part—took no further notice; but on February 1st it published a long and most scathing criticism of it by 'Historicus' (Mr., now Sir, William Harcourt).
From Lord Clarendon
The Grove, January 30th.—When you can spare it, I shall be very glad to see Sumner's speech….
Russell was, of course, guided in his despatches by the law officers, and it is no wonder, therefore, that they should resemble the papers that had previously appeared—many of which were written by lawyers—or that they should be a reproduction of them; as a government could not, without risk of failure in its peaceful object, express itself with the vigour of Senex or the 'Edinburgh Review.' The most important despatch of all, however, and the one upon which everything hung—viz. the demand for reparation—was well conceived and executed, and did its work effectually.
From Lord Brougham
Cannes, February 16th.—I yesterday met Miss Courtenay, who gave me the very pleasing information that Mrs. Austin had excellent accounts of Lady Duff Gordon, and was quite easy about her. I trust you will confirm this account, and also add to it a general good account of Mrs. Austin herself.