To the writer hereof it seems that the story of all this excitement is worth careful consideration, not so much because it was incited by the capture of two enemies of the flag, but because it was an expression of feeling against the British. For the capture of Mason and Slidell could not harm the Confederates greatly. There were other statesmen in the South to take their place. But they had been taken from a British ship, and the people at the North then believed that the British government, while publicly professing friendship for their cause, was secretly doing everything possible to aid the South. The enthusiasm over Wilkes appears to have been in good part a protest against what was then called British hypocrisy and enmity for the North. So great was this enthusiasm, that for a man to openly express the opinion that a grave mistake had been made was to incur the most rabid denunciations--to be called a “copperhead” and a “traitor” and a “toady.” Meantime the British were, as said, but little less excited than the Americans, though for quite a different reason. A British packet ship had been assaulted on the high seas while making her usual voyage between neutral ports, and the people--especially the seafaring people--wanted to know what their government was going to do about it. As a matter of fact, they did not have to wait long to learn. “Richard Williams, Commander R.N., and Admiralty agent in charge of mails” on the _Trent_, made his report under date of November 9th, and this in due time reached Lord Russell, the British Prime Minister. A Cabinet meeting was called to consider the matter, and on November 30, 1861, Russell sent a despatch to Lord Lyons, the British Minister at Washington, of which the following are the important paragraphs: “It thus appears that certain individuals have been forcibly taken from on board a British vessel, the ship of a neutral Power, while such vessel was pursuing a lawful and innocent voyage, an act of violence which was an affront to the British flag, and a violation of international law. “Her Majesty’s Government, bearing in mind the friendly relations which have long subsisted between Great Britain and the United States, are willing to believe that the United States’ naval officer who committed this aggression was not acting in compliance with any authority from his Government, or that, if he conceived himself to be so authorized, he greatly misunderstood the instructions which he had received.