dignified if irritating terms[637].  In British opinion Butler’s order was an incitement to his soldiers to commit atrocities; Americans understood it as merely an authorization to return insult for insult.  In fact the order promptly put a stop to attacks on Northern soldiers, whether by act or word, and all disorder ceased.  Palmerston was quick to accept the British view, writing to Adams, “it is difficult if not impossible to express adequately the disgust which must be excited in the mind of every honourable man by the general order of General Butler....”  “If the Federal government chooses to be served by men capable of such revolting outrages, they must submit to abide by the deserved opinion which mankind will form of their conduct[638].”  This extraordinary letter was written on June 11.  Adams was both angry and perturbed, since he thought the letter might indicate an intention to change British policy and that Palmerston was but laying the ground for some “vigorous” utterance in Parliament, after his wont when striking out on a new line.  He was further confirmed in this view by an editorial in the Times on June 12, hinting at a coming mediation, and by news from France that Persigny was on his way to London to arrange such a step.  But however much personally aggrieved, Adams was cool as a diplomat.  His first step was to write a brief note to Palmerston enquiring whether he was to consider the letter as addressed to him “officially ... or purely as a private expression of sentiment between gentlemen[639].”

There is no evidence that Palmerston and Russell were contemplating a change of policy—­rather the reverse.  But it does appear that Palmerston wished to be able to state in Parliament that he had taken Adams to task for Butler’s order, so that he might meet an enquiry already placed on the question paper as to the Ministry’s intentions in the matter.  This question was due for the sitting of June 13, and on that day Russell wrote to Palmerston that he should call Butler’s order “brutal” and that Palmerston might use the term “infamous” if preferred, adding, “I do not see why we should not represent in a friendly way that the usages of war do not sanction such conduct[640].”  This was very different from the tone used by Palmerston.  His letter was certainly no “friendly way.”  Again on the same day Russell wrote to Palmerston: 

     “Adams has been here in a dreadful state about the letter you
     have written him about Butler.

     I declined to give him any opinion and asked him to do
     nothing more till I had seen or written to you.

     What you say of Butler is true enough, tho’ he denies your
     interpretation of the order.

But it is not clear that the President approves of the order, and I think if you could add something to the effect that you respect the Government of President Lincoln, and do not wish to impute to them the fault of Butler it might soothe him.

     If you could withdraw the letter altogether it would be the
     best.  But this you may not like to do[641].”