[Footnote 1091:  Hansard, 3rd.  Ser., CLXXI, pp. 1771-1842, for debate of June 30.  Roebuck’s egotism was later related by Lamar, then in London on his way to Russia as representative of the South.  A few days before the debate Lamar met Roebuck at Lindsay’s house and asked Roebuck whether he expected Bright to take part in the debate.  “No, sir,” said Roebuck sententiously, “Bright and I have met before.  It was the old story—­the story of the swordfish and the whale!  No, sir!  Mr. Bright will not cross swords with me again.”  Lamar attended the debate and saw Roebuck given by Bright the “most deliberate and tremendous pounding I ever witnessed.” (Education of Henry Adams, pp. 161-2.)]

[Footnote 1092:  Mason Papers.  To Slidell, July 1, 1863.]

[Footnote 1093:  July 1, 1863.]

[Footnote 1094:  July 4, 1863.]

[Footnote 1095:  Hansard, 3rd.  Ser., CLXXII, pp. 67-73.]

[Footnote 1096:  Mason Papers.  To Mason, July 4, 1863.  In fact Disraeli, throughout the Civil War, favoured strict neutrality, not agreeing with many of his Tory colleagues.  He at times expressed himself privately as believing the Union would not be restored but was wise enough to refrain from such comment publicly. (Monypenny, Disraeli, IV, p. 328.)]

[Footnote 1097:  Hansard, 3rd.  Ser., CLXXII, p. 252.]

[Footnote 1098:  The Index felt it necessary to combat this, and on July 9 published a “letter from Paris” stating such criticisms to be negligible as emanating wholly from minority and opposition papers.  “All the sympathies of the French Government have, from the outset, been with the South, and this, quite independently of other reasons, dictated the line which the opposition press has consistently followed; the Orleanist Debats, Republican Siecle, The Palais Royal Opinion, all join in the halloo against the South.”]

[Footnote 1099:  Palmerston MS. July 9, 1863.]

[Footnote 1100:  Hansard, 3rd Ser., CLXXII, 554 seq., July 10, 1863.]

[Footnote 1101:  In the same issue appeared a letter from the New York correspondent of the Times, containing a similar prediction but in much stronger terms.  For the last half of the war the Times was badly served by this correspondent who invariably reported the situation from an extreme anti-Northern point of view.  This was Charles Mackay who served the Times in New York from March, 1862, to December, 1865.  (Mackay, Forty Years’ Recollections, II, p. 412.) Possibly he had strict instructions.  During this same week Lyons, writing privately to Russell, minimized the “scare” about Lee’s advance.  He reported that Mercier had ordered up a war-ship to take him away if Washington should fall.  Lyons cannily decided such a step for himself inadvisable, since it would irritate Seward and in case the unexpected happened he could no doubt get passage on Mercier’s ship.  When news came