Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

The Trent Affair.

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> The Trent Affair. Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
The Trent Affair. - 11/8/2008 9:35:26 PM   
andym


Posts: 1117
Joined: 7/12/2006
From: Kings Lynn UK
Status: offline 		Oi,can we have our mates back please?


The Trent Affair, also known as the Mason and Slidell Affair, was an international diplomatic incident that occurred during the American Civil War. On November 8, 1861, the USS San Jacinto, commanded by Union Captain Charles Wilkes, intercepted the British mail packet Trent and removed two Confederate diplomats, James Mason and John Slidell. The envoys were bound for Great Britain and France to press the Confederacy’s case for diplomatic recognition by Europe.

The initial reaction in the United States was enthusiastically in support of the capture, but many American leaders had doubts as to the wisdom and the legality of the act. In the Confederate States, the hope was that the incident would lead to a permanent rupture in Union-British relations, diplomatic recognition by Britain of the Confederacy, and ultimately, Southern independence. In Great Britain, the public expressed outrage at this apparent insult to their national honor. The British government demanded an apology and the release of the prisoners while it took steps to strengthen its military forces in Canada and in the Atlantic.

After several weeks of tension during which the United States and the United Kingdom came dangerously close to war, the issue was resolved when the Lincoln administration released the envoys and disavowed Captain Wilkes’ actions. No formal apology was issued


_____________________________

Press to Test...............Release to Detonate!
Post #: 1
RE: The Trent Affair. - 11/8/2008 10:59:09 PM   
uncc


Posts: 448
Joined: 6/1/2002
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline 		Sure, just as soon as we get ours back...

http://www.mariner.org/usnavy/08/08a.htm

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once -- David Hume, Scottish philosopher (1711 - 1776)

(in reply to andym)
Post #: 2
RE: The Trent Affair. - 11/9/2008 12:33:55 AM   
Twotribes


Posts: 6929
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline 		You are aware of one of the reasons for the war of 1812? Britain was shangia highing American sailors right off American ships, they even attacked an American WAR ship.

(in reply to uncc)
Post #: 3
RE: The Trent Affair. - 11/9/2008 4:50:37 AM   
Greybriar


Posts: 1148
Joined: 2/9/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

You are aware of one of the reasons for the war of 1812? Britain was shangia highing American sailors right off American ships, they even attacked an American WAR ship.


That was called impressment.

_____________________________

This war is not about slavery. --Robert E. Lee

(in reply to Twotribes)
Post #: 4
RE: The Trent Affair. - 11/9/2008 7:58:14 AM   
Grell

 

Posts: 1064
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline 		That's very interesting Andy, never knew that.

Regards,

Grell

_____________________________


(in reply to andym)
Post #: 5
RE: The Trent Affair. - 11/9/2008 8:55:16 AM   
Arsan

 

Posts: 409
Joined: 7/1/2005
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline 		I first heard about this Trent affair on the set of historical events AGEOD's AACW has on the affair 
On some games you can learn more history that on school

(in reply to Grell)
Post #: 6
RE: The Trent Affair. - 11/9/2008 12:14:12 PM   
OrpBde


Posts: 16
Joined: 6/9/2006
Status: offline 		I first of the affair on Ken Burns The Civil War.If Lincoln hadnt let Mason and Sliddell go the British were going to send 8000 soldiers to Canada along with what they already had there.Lincoln gave in and said one war at a time.
JMW

(in reply to Arsan)
Post #: 7
RE: The Trent Affair. - 11/9/2008 12:20:33 PM   
Twotribes


Posts: 6929
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline 		Ya cause a few thousand British in Canada were a dire threat.

(in reply to OrpBde)
Post #: 8
RE: The Trent Affair. - 11/9/2008 1:14:29 PM   
Arsan

 

Posts: 409
Joined: 7/1/2005
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

Ya cause a few thousand British in Canada were a dire threat.


Maybe not, but if the thing scaled up it could suppose the Royal Navy messing up on the blockade of the CSA and the UK economy and industry (the first in the world back then) helping the south with money and guns and why not, maybe an expeditionary force or two.
That would be a dire threat... specially accounting that France was more pro CSA than the UK and only needed the British approval to help the south.
Bear in mind we are talking about 1861, when there was been no Emancipation declaration and slavery was not still so much of an issue on the European public opinion...

Big fires start with little sparks... if you don't stop them.
Regards



< Message edited by Arsan -- 11/9/2008 1:15:24 PM >

(in reply to Twotribes)
Post #: 9
RE: The Trent Affair. - 11/10/2008 12:46:33 AM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5358
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: andym

After several weeks of tension during which the United States and the United Kingdom came dangerously close to war, the issue was resolved when the Lincoln administration released the envoys and disavowed Captain Wilkes’ actions. No formal apology was issued



"Dangerously close to war", is, if anything, an understatement. It is the opinion of many historians that if the original note had been sent from London to Washington, the U.S. would not have backed down. By great good luck the trans-Atlantic cable was on the fritz, and Queen Victoria showed the first draft to Prince Albert. The Prince realized the note left no room for diplomatic manuever, so he literally climbed out of his deathbed and suggested some alterations. With the Queen's wishes behind the changes, they were made and gave Secretary of State Seward just enough wiggle room to find a way out that saved enough face for both sides. (Prince Albert succumbed to typhus a week later.)

Science fiction author Harry Harrison wrote a couple of novels on an alternate timeline where the Prince collapsed before he could make changes (plausible) and Great Britain decided to attack both North and South (not so much).


_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to andym)
Post #: 10
RE: The Trent Affair. - 11/10/2008 1:46:02 AM   
lordhoff


Posts: 288
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline 		In addition, the British Ambassador to Washington didn't mention the threat part of breaking diplomatic relations and told Sec't of State Seward that while the return of the envoys was inflexible, we'd be rather easy on the apology. The US admitted the act was illegal but basically said they'd do it again of need be. That part was ignored and the rest accepted as an apology. Napoleon III had already stated that should England go to war, France would also so it could've got interesting.

"Great Power Diplomacy 1814-1914, Norman Rich, McGraw-Hill, 1992, pgs 155-156. My latest read .

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 11
RE: The Trent Affair. - 11/10/2008 3:21:10 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline 		Above all Lincoln was pragmatic. I don't see a situation where he would have allowed it to get to war. He'd have caved regardless and done whatever the British requested.

(in reply to lordhoff)
Post #: 12
RE: The Trent Affair. - 11/10/2008 8:19:52 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5358
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

Above all Lincoln was pragmatic. I don't see a situation where he would have allowed it to get to war. He'd have caved regardless and done whatever the British requested.


I can't really agree with that -- there were some points on which Lincoln refused to give way. ("Hold firm, as with a chain of steel." is a quote from him.) He refused to accept the Crittenden Compromise (and a good thing too!) when it might have prevented the Civil War. And he refused to evacuate Fort Sumter, when he knew very well that was where the shooting could be expected to start. It's true that we don't have the Damoclean Sword of the vote of no confidence hanging over our President's head here on the left side of the pond. But you can't back down on everything and still govern effectively, and Lincoln knew it.

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to anarchyintheuk)
Post #: 13
RE: The Trent Affair. - 11/11/2008 4:12:59 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline 		Holding firm on principle is one thing, such as defending federal property (Ft. Sumter), standing up for your right to illegally seize people on foreign registered vessels is another. In any event it wasn't like there was a strong clamoring for war w/ the UK that he had to hold in check.

Can't remember the biography I was reading, but he came to his decision pretty quickly with words to the effect of "one war at a time". Lincoln basically let the Monroe Doctrine lapse during the Civil War under the same reasoning.

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 14
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> The Trent Affair. Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.031