In this same letter of May 21 Seward, writing of the rumour that the Southern envoys were to be received by Russell “unofficially,” instructed Adams that he must use efforts to stop this and that:  “You will, in any event, desist from all intercourse whatever, unofficial as well as official, with the British Government, so long as it shall continue intercourse of either kind with the domestic enemies of this country.”  Here was a positive instruction as to the American Minister’s conduct in a given situation, and a very serious instruction, nearly equivalent to “taking leave” after a rupture of diplomatic relations, but the method to be used in avoiding if possible the necessity of the serious step was left to Adams’ discretion.  Well might Adams’ comment, when reporting the outcome, that this was the “most delicate portion of my task[184].”  Adams again went over with Russell the suspicion as to British intentions aroused in America by the Queen’s Proclamation, but added that he had not been able to convince himself of the existence of an unfriendly design.  “But it was not to be disguised that the fact of the continued stay of the pseudo-commissioners in this city, and still more the knowledge that they had been admitted to more or less interviews with his lordship, was calculated to excite uneasiness.  Indeed, it had already given great dissatisfaction to my Government.  I added, as moderately as I could, that in all frankness any further protraction of this relation could scarcely fail to be viewed by us as hostile in spirit, and to require some corresponding action accordingly.”  Russell replied that both France and England had long been accustomed to receive such persons unofficially, as in the case of “Poles, Hungarians, Italians, etc.,” to hear what they had to say.  “But this did not imply recognition in their case any more than in ours.  He added that he had seen the gentlemen once some time ago, and once more some time since; he had no expectation of seeing them any more[185].”

For the moment, then, a matter which under Seward’s instructions might have brought on a serious crisis was averted by the tact of Adams and the acquiescence of Russell.  Yet no pledge had been given; Russell merely stated that he had “no expectation” of further interviews with the Southern commissioners; he was still ready to hear from them in writing.  This caused a division of opinion between the commissioners; Yancey argued that Russell’s concession to Adams was itself a violation of the neutrality the British Government had announced, and that it should be met by a formal protest.  But the other members insisted on a reference to Richmond for instructions[186].  On the same day that Adams reported the result to Seward he wrote privately to his son in Boston: