CHAPTER II. FIRST KNOWLEDGE OF IMPENDING CONFLICT, 1860-61.

     "When we read the speech of Mr. Lincoln on the subject of 
     Slavery and consider the extreme moderation of the sentiments 
     it expresses, the allowance that is made for the situation, 
     for the feelings, for the prejudices, of the South; when we 
     see how entirely he narrows his opposition to the single 
     point of the admission of Slavery into the Territories, we 
     cannot help being forcibly struck by the absurdity of 
     breaking up a vast and glorious confederacy like that of the 
     United States from the dread and anger inspired by the 
     election of such a man to the office of Chief Magistrate.... 
     We rejoice, on higher and surer grounds, that it [the 
     election] has ended in the return of Mr. Lincoln. We are glad 
     to think that the march of Slavery, and the domineering tone 
     which its advocates were beginning to assume over Freedom, 
     has been at length arrested and silenced. We rejoice that a 
     vast community of our own race has at length given an 
     authoritative expression to sentiments which are entertained 
     by everyone in this country. We trust to see the American 
     Government employed in tasks more worthy of a State founded 
     on the doctrines of liberty and equality than the invention 
     of shifts and devices to perpetuate servitude; and we hear in 
     this great protest of American freedom the tardy echo of 
     those humane doctrines to which England has so long become a 
     convert."

Other leading journals, though with less of patronizing self-complacency, struck the same note as the Times. The Economist attributed Lincoln's election to a shift in the sympathies of the "lower orders" in the electorate who had now deserted their former leaders, the slave-owning aristocracy of the South, and allied themselves with the refined and wise leaders of the North. Lincoln, it argued, was not an extremist in any sense. His plan of action lay within the limits of statesmanlike moderation[36]. The Saturday Review was less sure that England should rejoice with the North. British self-esteem had suffered some hard blows at the hands of the Democratic party in America, but at least England knew where Democrats stood, and could count on no more discourtesy or injustice than that inflicted in the past. The Republican party, however, had no policy, except that of its leader, Seward, and from him might be expected extreme insolence[37]. This was a very early judgment of Seward, and one upon which the Saturday Reviewpreened itself later, as wholly justified. The Spectator, the only one of the four journals thus far considered which ultimately remained constant in advocacy of the Northern cause, was at first lukewarm in comment, regarding the 1860 election, while fought on the slavery issue, as in reality a mere contest between parties for political power[38].