PERIOD FROM 1836 TO 1854. 543 



eeessor, and myself, in Lord Malmesbury's letter to Mr. Crampton 

 of the 10th of August, than to revive a somewhat unpleasant discus- 

 sion. But there are some portions of Lord Malmesbury's remarks, 

 in reply to Lord Wharnclill'e on the 26th of November, as reported 

 in the London papers, which make it impossible for me to pursue this 

 course. 



I am aware of the irregularity of remarking on what is said within 

 the walls of the legislature of a friendly State; but Lord Malmes- 

 bury has commented on the debate in the Senate of the United 

 States in July last, and he will not, under the present circumstances, 

 deny me the right of following his example. 



I allude to the first portion of Lord Malmesbury's reply to Lord 

 Wharncliffe, in which he endeavors to throw upon the American 

 government, and. individually, upon my predecessor, the responsi- 

 bility of the alarm of last summer about the fisheries, and even ascribe 

 it (if he is correctly reported, which I am willing to believe is not 

 the case) to a very unworthy motive. Now, I must say more dis- 

 tinctly than I have done in the preceding letter, that Mr. Lawrence's 

 despatches of the 10th and 13th of August led us to suppose that her 

 Majesty's government felt that they had acted precipitately in di- 

 recting a naval movement towards the fishing-grounds, on a notice 

 to this government both too short and too general to be of any use. 

 We did not ask or expect that any admission to this effect should be 

 made, diplomatically or otherwise; but we certainly did not expect 

 to have the blame transferred to ourselves, with the imputation of 

 unbecoming motives. 



Alter stating that there was no just cause for the publication of 

 Mr. Webster's notice of the 20th of July, Lord Malmesbury is re- 

 ported to have said : " The noble lord who had just sat down, and who 

 had been for some time a resident in the United States, and who knew 

 the influences which periodical events exercised in those localities 

 might perhaps be able to account for the appearance at that time of 

 a correspondence, which at another period might never have seen the 

 light." And a little further on, Lord Malmesbury ascribes the prep- 

 aration of the notice to the excitement induced by the disease, whose 

 fatal termination he handsomely laments — a suggestion, by the way, 

 not in perfect harmony with flic imputed motive of political calcu- 

 lation. 



But Lord Malmesbury may be assured that the alarm felt by Mr. 

 Webster, and -hare. I by the President and all the members of the 



cabinet, was deep and unaffected. It was caused by information re- 

 ceived directly from the provinces. Although Mr. Webster's notice 

 wa^ published on the 20tn of July, and for the sake of official form 

 was dated at Washington. Mr. Crampton'a note of the .">th of July 



had never I" n by Mr. Webster, who left Washington that day; 



nor. if it had been 3een by him, was it of a nature to relieve the alarm 

 justlv caused by the information transmitted from the colonic-. Not 

 wishing to prolong this postscrip, I forbear to enlarge on the char 

 acter of this information, and to show, as I could easily do, that it 

 could not but have produced :i state of great alarm on the part of our 

 hing interest If Lord Malmesbury will reconsider for a moment 

 the necessary inferences from his imputation, (hitherto confined to 

 the party press, for winch, during ;i canvass, nothing is too absurd,) 

 he will feci its extravagance, not to >;. its cruelty to the living and 



