XxXxIv.] TO MR. SUMNER ON THE WAR. 8 55

here remark that I cannot understand how you should have 1861.
thought it worth your while at Washington to have re- Zr. 57.
opened this question of the right of search, by claiming to
exercise it in a doubtful case and a doubtful manner, under
circumstances which could be of. so little advantage, and to
have incurred the risk of greater disadvantages. The capture
 of Mason and Slidell can have little effect in dis.
couraging the South, compared with the indirect encouragement
 and hope it may hold out to them of embroiling your
Government with England. I am speaking with reference
to the policy, and leaving out of sight the law of the case.
But in the latter view we are rather unprepared to find you
exercising in a strained manner the right of search, inasmuch
 as you have been supposed to be always the opponents
of the practice. I was under the impression that our
Government was told pretty plainly at the outbreak of the
Crimean War that it would be risking the peace of this
country with yours if we claimed the right of search in the
open sea. Iam not in a position to know how far this was
the case. Can you tell me if there be any documents on
the subject? If it were so, we should, of course, all unite
in holding you to your own doctrine.
P.S.—Since writing the accompanying, we have the details
of the capture of Mason and Slidell in our packet vessel,
You may be right in point of law, though, perhaps, in tech.
nical strictness, the lawyers may pick a hole. Bui I am
satisfied you are wrong in point of policy. There is an impression,
 I know, in high quarters here, that Mr. Seward
wishes to quarrel with this country. This seems absurd
enough. I confess I have as little confidence in him as I
have in Lord Palmerston. Both will consult Bunkum for
the moment, withont much regard, I fear, for the future.
You must not lose sight of this view of the relations of the
wo countries. Formerly England feared a war with the