The Loyalists of Massachusetts and the Other Side of the American RevolutionStark, James Henry
History
The Loyalists of Massachusetts and the Other Side of the American Revolution
Stark, James Henry
American loyalists -- Massachusetts; Massachusetts -- Politics and government -- 1775-1783
A writer at that time says: "It is to the disgrace of our country that
some of the goods smuggled into the Confederacy via Nassau were from
Northern ports, as for example, shiploads of pistols brought from Boston
in barrels of lard." There was also a considerable trade between Boston
and Confederate ports via Halifax during the war, as well as an immense
amount of contraband trade along the border even by the United States
officials, as for example, the exploits of General Benjamin F. Butler
while in command at Norfolk, Va., in 1864. If citizens of the United
States, even those of Massachusetts, the home of the abolitionists,
entered into this traffic, what could be expected of Great Britain with
her mills closed and thousands of operatives obliged to resort to the
poor rates for subsistence, because she was prevented from buying cotton
with which the wharves of the Southern states were loaded down awaiting
shipment. It was claimed by Unionists that the British ministry and
aristocracy, from political and commercial considerations, openly and
heartily sympathized with the South, and that, under the friendly flag
of Great Britain, secessionists and blockade-runners were welcomed and
assisted in the nefarious traffic; that this unfriendliness of the
British government at that time furnished a solid foundation upon which
the rebellion rested their hopes, thereby protracting the war. It
should not be forgotten, however, that the Queen and the royal family
stood faithfully by the Union in the days of its sorest peril, and
refused to listen to the importunities of the French emperor, to
recognize the Southern Confederacy and open the southern ports.
France, having taken advantage of the Civil War, set the Monroe Doctrine
at defiance and conquered Mexico. Her remaining there depended on the
success of the Confederacy, as after events proved. Had Great Britain
listened to France and joined her in recognizing the Southern
Confederacy, the South would have surely succeeded. It is generally
admitted that the strict blockade of the Southern ports is what defeated
the Confederacy. It is due to Great Britain that the United States is
not dismembered. It should be remembered that during the Civil War the
great body of British workmen were on the side of the North. Even in the
cotton famine districts they preferred to starve rather than have the
Southern ports opened whereby they could obtain an abundance of cotton,
thereby relieving their sore necessities.
It is also true that the Confederacy had many friends in Great Britain;
that Gladstone, the great Liberal Chancellor of the Exchequer, so far
forgot what was due to his position as to make a speech in which he said
"he expected the liberation of the slaves by their own masters sooner
than from the North; that Jefferson Davis and the leaders of the South
have made an army; they are soon, I understand, to have a navy, but
greater than all this, they have made a nation."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account