Arthur Entwhistle
Private
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2013
- Location
- Derbyshire, England
Sparked by a conversation on another thread, I hope you will allow a thread dedicated to this fascinating character.
For those who do not know him, Mr John Bright was the foremost British voice for the cause of the Union during the ACW, a pre-war admirer of the American system of government, and a radical liberal in terms of the ongoing British "rotten democracy". He was an outspoken critic of slavery and was an admirer, and was greatly admired by, Abraham Lincoln. It is said that Lincoln had but one portrait in the Oval Office - that of John Bright.
He lead a small, but vocal, faction in the British House of Commons who were vociferous on American issues who played a part, if not were wholly responsible for, continued British neutrality and ultimate rejection of diplomatic recognition of the Confederacy - despite a general sense (amongst the ruling class at least) of sympathy for the cause.
He had previously been much derided in the British press for his warm feelings towards the United States, and PUNCH was not alone in asking Bright what was going wrong in his oft-quoted "Promised Land".
John Bright had been a constant critic of British and European militarism and had campaigned at length against "preposterous" wars such as that in the Crimea, and the sabre-rattling against Napoleon III. As such it was somewhat of a surprise that he eventually leant his weight to the Union cause - not least because his personal wealth was based in the cotton-manufacturing mills of Lancashire. He had written in despair at the outbreak of war that the loss of cotton put "Lancashire in great peril - and if Lancashire, then all England".
Nevertheless, he hitherto refused to use Southern cotton at his mills, which cause both him and his workers great anxieties and many lost days until alternative supplies were found.
John Bright recognised immediately the dangers of European recognition for the South, and as such he became a vocal support of an Emancipation Declaration - the issue of which he saw keenly would make it impossible for the British Government to side with the South, and kept up a constant correspondence with Seward, Sumner and other prominent Northerners (Although, interestingly, never Lincoln himself) to achieve that end. He made very plain that the British aristocracy would, for their own reasons, prefer a two-state America. He argued effectively with Seward's instinct that a war with Britain might be a means of bring North and South together, and effectively lobbied for the limitation of British troops being sent to Canada in case it might be seen as an all too convenient provocation. His well-covered speech in December 1861, made in the light of the Trent affair, went a long way to soothing British Government tensions - he made valid interventions that the North couldn't possibly wish to start a war with Britain to add to it's burdens and judiciously pointed out that, in any case, it was a war that Britain couldn't hope to win considering the militarisation of the Northern states.
Bright's life now became dominated by the American crisis. He was a constant caller to the American embassy and was a point of contact to the many Northern visitors to Britain. He was regarded as the de facto British spokesman for the North and consistently espoused the view that their were two estates in Britain with very differing views - the governing class and the "toiling millions", the former supporting the South and the latter the North. Although admitting that the blockade caused suffering, he wrote tellingly that "Cotton is NOT king....the planter should know that England has no sympathy for Man Stealers and Woman Whippers" and said that he was willing to let "the mills stand idle for years rather than work slave grown cotton".
The English press, at that time still a powerful tool of the aristocracy, were full of condemnation for Bright and his views but he had become used to that over many years of fighting for liberal causes. He became depressed at news of Southern victories early in the war, but his delight at the Proclamation confirmed his view that a Northern victory was both morally and factually a certainty. He held mass meetings in cities throughout the country to celebrate the Emancipation edict, which proved very popular to the extent that n early 1863, he was able to write to Sumner that "In every town and city on the country, the support for the Union is now transformed".
John Bright continued to work endlessly for the Northern cause, and he reacted even more ferociously in parliament when further efforts were made late in the war (by fellow liberals) to recognise the Confederacy for reason that the North would become too powerful and threaten the world. He also attempted to limit the construction of blockade runners in British ports, and wrote dozens of soothing letters to statesmen in the North assuring them of the British people's support.
Prior to the war, Bright had been a by-word for lost causes in British political circles. He can be perhaps forgiven for exaggerating his impact on a cause that he had offered unerring support. Palmerston was probably not influenced by Bright's interventions, but from his own calculation of British interests, and Bright's power to influence is perhaps over-stated. Despite all the flattery that he received from Lincoln and Sumner, they were probably aware of that fact, yet the sheer weight of correspondence, kind words and presents was something more than an edifying form of self-congratulation. It was helpful for some Northern leaders to find an Englishman who was prepared to clothe their actions from the start in a cloak of righteousness - and convenient to have such an orator whose admiration for America and the Union cause was so powerful. Indeed, he became a kind of American hero - eulogised in poems and paintings and many times was offered to visit.
It is perhaps slightly strange, but maybe sensible, that he never once visited the land of his dreams.
For those who do not know him, Mr John Bright was the foremost British voice for the cause of the Union during the ACW, a pre-war admirer of the American system of government, and a radical liberal in terms of the ongoing British "rotten democracy". He was an outspoken critic of slavery and was an admirer, and was greatly admired by, Abraham Lincoln. It is said that Lincoln had but one portrait in the Oval Office - that of John Bright.
He lead a small, but vocal, faction in the British House of Commons who were vociferous on American issues who played a part, if not were wholly responsible for, continued British neutrality and ultimate rejection of diplomatic recognition of the Confederacy - despite a general sense (amongst the ruling class at least) of sympathy for the cause.
He had previously been much derided in the British press for his warm feelings towards the United States, and PUNCH was not alone in asking Bright what was going wrong in his oft-quoted "Promised Land".
John Bright had been a constant critic of British and European militarism and had campaigned at length against "preposterous" wars such as that in the Crimea, and the sabre-rattling against Napoleon III. As such it was somewhat of a surprise that he eventually leant his weight to the Union cause - not least because his personal wealth was based in the cotton-manufacturing mills of Lancashire. He had written in despair at the outbreak of war that the loss of cotton put "Lancashire in great peril - and if Lancashire, then all England".
Nevertheless, he hitherto refused to use Southern cotton at his mills, which cause both him and his workers great anxieties and many lost days until alternative supplies were found.
John Bright recognised immediately the dangers of European recognition for the South, and as such he became a vocal support of an Emancipation Declaration - the issue of which he saw keenly would make it impossible for the British Government to side with the South, and kept up a constant correspondence with Seward, Sumner and other prominent Northerners (Although, interestingly, never Lincoln himself) to achieve that end. He made very plain that the British aristocracy would, for their own reasons, prefer a two-state America. He argued effectively with Seward's instinct that a war with Britain might be a means of bring North and South together, and effectively lobbied for the limitation of British troops being sent to Canada in case it might be seen as an all too convenient provocation. His well-covered speech in December 1861, made in the light of the Trent affair, went a long way to soothing British Government tensions - he made valid interventions that the North couldn't possibly wish to start a war with Britain to add to it's burdens and judiciously pointed out that, in any case, it was a war that Britain couldn't hope to win considering the militarisation of the Northern states.
Bright's life now became dominated by the American crisis. He was a constant caller to the American embassy and was a point of contact to the many Northern visitors to Britain. He was regarded as the de facto British spokesman for the North and consistently espoused the view that their were two estates in Britain with very differing views - the governing class and the "toiling millions", the former supporting the South and the latter the North. Although admitting that the blockade caused suffering, he wrote tellingly that "Cotton is NOT king....the planter should know that England has no sympathy for Man Stealers and Woman Whippers" and said that he was willing to let "the mills stand idle for years rather than work slave grown cotton".
The English press, at that time still a powerful tool of the aristocracy, were full of condemnation for Bright and his views but he had become used to that over many years of fighting for liberal causes. He became depressed at news of Southern victories early in the war, but his delight at the Proclamation confirmed his view that a Northern victory was both morally and factually a certainty. He held mass meetings in cities throughout the country to celebrate the Emancipation edict, which proved very popular to the extent that n early 1863, he was able to write to Sumner that "In every town and city on the country, the support for the Union is now transformed".
John Bright continued to work endlessly for the Northern cause, and he reacted even more ferociously in parliament when further efforts were made late in the war (by fellow liberals) to recognise the Confederacy for reason that the North would become too powerful and threaten the world. He also attempted to limit the construction of blockade runners in British ports, and wrote dozens of soothing letters to statesmen in the North assuring them of the British people's support.
Prior to the war, Bright had been a by-word for lost causes in British political circles. He can be perhaps forgiven for exaggerating his impact on a cause that he had offered unerring support. Palmerston was probably not influenced by Bright's interventions, but from his own calculation of British interests, and Bright's power to influence is perhaps over-stated. Despite all the flattery that he received from Lincoln and Sumner, they were probably aware of that fact, yet the sheer weight of correspondence, kind words and presents was something more than an edifying form of self-congratulation. It was helpful for some Northern leaders to find an Englishman who was prepared to clothe their actions from the start in a cloak of righteousness - and convenient to have such an orator whose admiration for America and the Union cause was so powerful. Indeed, he became a kind of American hero - eulogised in poems and paintings and many times was offered to visit.
It is perhaps slightly strange, but maybe sensible, that he never once visited the land of his dreams.
Last edited:
Bringing the