The earliest American reactions, the national rejoicing, became known to the British press some six days after its own spasm of anger, and three days after the Government had despatched its demand for release of the prisoners and begun its hurried military preparations.  On December 3 the Times contained the first summary of American press outpourings.  The first effect in England was astonishment, followed by renewed and more intense evidences of a belligerent disposition.  Soon, however, there began to appear a note of caution and more sane judgment of the situation, though with no lessening of the assertion that Britain had suffered an injury that must be redressed.  The American frenzy of delight seemingly indicated a deep-seated hostility to Britain that gave pause to British clamour for revenge.  On December 4 John Bright made a great speech at Rochdale, arguing a possible British precedent for Wilkes’ act, urging caution, lauding American leadership in democracy, and stating his positive conviction that the United States Government was as much astonished as was that of Great Britain by the attack on the Trent.[441] To this the Times gave a full column of report on December 5 and the day following printed five close-type columns of the speech itself.  Editorially it attacked Bright’s position, belittling the speech for having been made at the one “inconspicuous” place where the orator would be sure of a warm welcome, and asking why Manchester or Liverpool had not been chosen.  In fact, however, the Times was attempting to controvert “our ancient enemy” Bright as an apostle of democracy rather than to fan the flames of irritation over the Trent, and the prominence given to Bright’s speech indicates a greater readiness to consider as hopeful an escape from the existing crisis.

After December 3 and up to the ninth, the Times was more caustic about America than previously.  The impression of its editorials read to-day is that more hopeful of a peaceful solution it was more free to snarl.  But with the issue of December 10 there began a series of leaders and communications, though occasionally with a relapse to the former tone, distinctly less irritating to Americans, and indicating a real desire for peace[442].  Other newspapers either followed the Times, or were slightly in advance of it in a change to more considerate and peaceful expressions.  Adams could write to Seward on December 6 that he saw no change in the universality of the British demand for satisfaction of the “insult and injury thought to be endured,” but he recognized in the next few days that a slow shift was taking place in the British temper and regretted the violence of American utterances.  December 12, he wrote to his son in America:  “It has given us here an indescribably sad feeling to witness the exultation in America over an event which bids fair to be the final calamity in this contest....”  Great Britain “is right in principle and only wrong