William Howard Russell (1827--1907) was an Irish reporter for the Times
of London, and made a name for himself covering a variety of military
conflicts, beginning with the Crimean War (1853--56) and the Indian
Mutiny of 1857. With the election of Lincoln and the beginning of
secession, Russell decided to visit the United States, leaving Cork on
the evening of March 3, and arriving in New York City on March
16. The resulting publication from this trip, My Diary North and South,
covers only into the fall of 1862---Russell's Introduction is dated
December 8, 1862, and was written in London---but it is an important
perspective on the early parts of the war, especially the secession
winter and spring, which is why I have included these entries as part
of the Fort Sumter Chronology. This entry describes a visit that Russell made to the Smithsonian Institution, followed by a game of whist with Secretary of State Seward and his wife and son. |
|
April 8th.—How it does
rain! Last night there were torrents of
water in the streets literally a foot deep.
It still runs in muddy whirling streams through the channels and the
rain is falling incessantly from a dull leaden sky. The air is warm and clammy. There are all kind of rumours abroad, and the
barbers’ shops shook with “shaves” this morning. Sumter, of course, was the main topic. Some reported that the President had promised
the Southern Commissioners, through their friend Mr. Campbell, Judge of the
Supreme Court, not to use force in respect to Pickens or Sumter. I wrote to Mr. Seward, to ask him if he could
enable me to make any definite statement on these important matters. The Southerners are alarmed at the accounts
they have received of great activity and preparations in the Brooklyn and
Boston navy yards, and declare that “treachery” is meant. I find myself quite incapable of
comprehending their position. How can the
United States Government be guilty of “treachery” towards subjects of States
which are preparing to assert their independence, unless that Government has been
guilty of falsehood or admitted the justice of the decision to which the States
had arrived? As soon as I had finished my letters, I drove
over to the Smithsonian Institute, and was most kindly received by Professor
Henry, who took me through the library and museum, and introduced me to
Professor Baird, who is great in natural history, and more particularly in
ornithology. I promised the professors some
skins of Himalayan pheasants, as an addition to the collection. In the library we were presented to two very
fine and lively rock snakes, or pythons, I believe, some six feet long or more,
which moved about with much grace and agility, putting out their forked tongues
and hissing sharply when seized by the hand or menaced with a stick. I was told that some persons doubted if
serpents hissed; I can answer for it that rock snakes do most audibly. They are not venomous, but their teeth are
sharp and needle like. The eye is bright
and glistening; the red forked tongue, when protruded, has a rapid vibratory
motion, as if it were moved by the muscles which produce the quivering hissing
noise. I was much interested by Professor
Henry’s remarks on the large map of the continent of North America in his
study: he pointed out the climatic conditions which determined the use, profits,
and necessity of slave labour, and argued that the vast increase of population
anticipated in the valley of the Mississippi, and the prophecies of imperial greatness
attached to it, were fallacious. He
seems to be of opinion that most of the good land of America is already
cultivated, and that the crops which it produces tend to exhaust it, so as to
compel the cultivators eventually to let it go fallow or to use manure. The fact is, that the influence of the great
mountain-chain in the west, which intercepts all the rain on the Pacific side, causes
an immense extent of country between the eastern slope of the chain and the
Mississippi, as well as the district west of Minnesota, to be perfectly dry and
uninhabitable; and, as far as we know, it is as worthless as a moor, except for
the pasturage of wild cattle and the like. On returning to my hotel, I found a note from
Mr. Seward, asking me to visit him at nine o'clock. On going to his house, I was shown to the
drawing-room, and found there only the Secretary of State, his son, and Mrs. Seward.
I made a parti carré for a friendly rubber of whist, and Mr,
Seward, who was my partner, talked as he played, so that the score of the game
was not favourable. But his talk was
very interesting. “All the preparations
of which you hear mean this only. The
Government, finding the property of the State and Federal forts neglected and
left without protection, are determined to take steps to relieve them from that
neglect, and to protect them. But we are
determined in doing so to make no aggression.
The President’s inaugural clearly shadows out our policy. We will not go beyond it—we have no intention
of doing so—nor will we withdraw from it.” After a time Mr. Seward put down his cards,
and told his son to go for a portfolio which he would find in a drawer of his
table. Mrs. Seward lighted the drop light of the gas, and
on her husband’s return with the paper left the room. The Secretary then lit his cigar, gave one to
me, and proceeded to read slowly and with marked emphasis, a very long, strong,
and able dispatch, which he told me was to be read by Mr. Adams, the American
Minister in London, to Lord John Russell.
It struck me that the tone of the paper was hostile, that there was an
undercurrent of menace through it, and that it contained insinuations that
Great Britain would interfere to split up the Republic, if she could, and was
pleased at the prospect of the dangers which threatened it. At all the stronger passages Mr. Seward raised
his voice, and made a pause at their conclusion as if to challenge remark or
approval. At length I could not help
saying, that the despatch would, no doubt, have an excellent effect when it
came to light in Congress, and that the Americans would think highly of the writer;
but I ventured to express an opinion that it would not be quite so acceptable
to the Government and people of Great Britain.
This Mr. Seward, as an American statesman, had a right to make but a
secondary consideration. By affecting to
regard Secession as a mere political heresy which can be easily confuted, and
by forbidding foreign countries alluding to it, Mr. Seward thinks he can
establish the supremacy of his own Government, and at the same time gratify the
vanity of the people. Even war with us
may not be out of the list of those means which would be available for
re-fusing the broken union into a mass once more. However, the Secretary is quite confident in
what he calls “re-action.” “When the
Southern States,” he says, “see that we mean them no wrong—that we intend no
violence to persons, rights, or things—that the Federal Government seeks only
to fulfil obligations imposed on it in respect to the national property, they will
see their mistake, and one after another they will come back into the union.” Mr.
Seward anticipates this process will at once begin, and that Secession will all
be done and over in three months—at least, so he says. It was after midnight ere our conversation was
over, much of which of course I cannot mention in these pages. |
Back to Civil War Chronologies (Main page) Back to Chronology of the Fort Sumter Crisis Source: My Diary North and South, Vol. 1, by William Howard Russell, pp. 100--103. Date added to website: January 10, 2025. |