American Affairs in England.
[from the London times, December 29.]
On the whole, the events of the last month show that though the North is woefully short of men to occupy and hold down the South, the Confederates in some parts are scarcely able to oppose even the diminished levies. We shall hear of new expeditions and new marches through the Southern country, but whether these will have such permanent military consequences as to overcome the obstinacy of Southern resistance is a matter which time must show.What concerns us most nearly in the news just received is the tone which the Americans have assumed towards Canada, and the acts of their Government with respect to the late disorders on the frontier. With respect to these mischievous and fruitless expeditions there can be but one opinion in England. It is the duty of the Canadian Government to prevent any such outrage and to bring the offenders to justice; and we rejoice to learn that the Attorney-General had ordered the rearrest of the St. Albans "raiders" on the ground that the decision of the Montreal court was wrong. But a failure of justice on technical grounds does not authorize such military orders as those of General Dix, who commands his officers to violate the Canadian territory, nor such language as that used by the American press and, seemingly, by American society. The outrage at St. Albans was barbarous in the extreme, and we are sure there is not one person in a hundred in England or Canada who would not be glad to see the perpetrators dealt with according to their deserts. But the threats of the Americans will not aid in producing this result. Mere boasting we need not notice, but if the Federal Government is so ill-advised as to send its troops across the Canadian frontier, very serious misunderstandings between the two countries may be the consequence.
[from the London news, December 29.]
That these achievements should have altogether turned away the attention of the public from the result of the liberation of the "raiders" in Canada was, however, not to be expected. There is in the comments of the American papers on the subject some of that hasty generalization of which our own press has not been guiltless, in which the unauthorized and unapproved act of an individual is imputed to the nation and to the Government. General Dix, who is in command of the military defence, has re-issued a formal order, authorizing his troops to shoot any persons who may attempt to make again such an attempt; and if they should escape, to pursue and seize them in Canada. The former part of the order we are not concerned with, though we may observe that it is one fully justifiable if the "raiders" are regarded as belligerents, but quite contrary to law and custom if they are looked upon as mere robbers. The second part of the order we may hope will not be sanctioned by superior civil authority. That plea which could alone warrant it — the refusal of the Canadian Government to administer justice and observe the duties of allies — has, happily, no foundation in fact. The Ministry has, on the contrary, lost no time in disavowing the decision of Judge Coursol. The Attorney-General has issued fresh warrants, and the police are again endeavoring to arrest the discharged criminals. The Government is reported to have already appointed stipendiary magistrates on the frontier, expressly to take cognizance of the breaches of international law, and to have furnished them with sufficient police force to support their authority. The Legislature has also been summoned to meet on the 10th of January. These measures will probably, as soon as they are known to the American public, suffice to remove a natural irritation. But we must repeat that their vigorous execution is a duty we owe to ourselves even more than to our neighbors. We are bound to show the example of doing as we would be done by; and as we have in former items uttered keen remonstrances, and even resorted to actual force when an enemy used neutral soil to prepare machinations against us, it is imperative that we should now vindicate our fair dealing and maintain our friendly character by prohibiting absolutely the abuse of our protection for the purpose of directing treacherous violence against the inhabitants of a bordering and allied State. We should expect France to do thus much for us if we were unhappily at war with America, and Americans plotted and directed from Calais expeditions to sack Brighton or burn Hastings. And it is clear that what we should regard as the duty of France in such a case, would be still more her duty if the war were made upon our seaboard, not by a foreign nation, but by our own subjects in revolt. This is the American case at present, and there must be no hesitation in our doing to them the justice which we should look for from every friendly Power if the case were our own.
