NF Our Man In Charleston: Britain's Secret Agent in the Civil War South

Non-Fiction

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
From the jacket of the book, Our Man In Charleston: Britain's Secret Agent in the Civil War South, by Christopher Dickey:

"Between the Confederacy and recognition by Great Britain stood one unlikely Englishman who hated the slave trade. His actions helped determine the fate of a nation."

When Robert Bunch arrived in Charleston to take up the post of British consul in 1853, he was young and full of ambition, but even he couldn't have imagined the incredible role he would play in the history-making events to unfold. In an age when diplomats often were spies, Bunch's job included sending intelligence back to the British government in London. Yet as the United States threatened to erupt into civil war, Bunch found himself plunged into a double life, settling into an amiable routine with his slavery-loving neighbors on the one hand, while on the other working furiously to thwart their plans to achieve a new Confederacy.

As secession and war approached, the Southern states found themselves in an impossible position. They knew that recognition from Great Britain would be essential to the survival of the Confederacy, and also such recognition was likely to be withheld if the South reopened the Atlantic slave trade. But as Bunch meticulously noted from his perch in Charleston, secession's red-hot epicenter, that trade was secretly growing. And as Southern leaders continued to dissemble publicly about their intentions, Bunch sent dispatch after secret dispatch back to the foreign office warning of the truth--that economic survival would force the South to import slaves from Africa in massive numbers. When the gears of war finally began to turn, and Bunch was pressed into service on an actual spy mission to make contact with the Confederate government, he found himself in the middle of a fight between the Union and Britain that threatened, in the boast of Secretary of State William Seward, to "wrap the world in flames."

In this masterfully told story, Christopher Dickey introduces Consul Bunch as a key figure in the pitched battle between those who wished to reopen the floodgates of bondage and misery, and those who wished to dam the tide forever. Featuring a remarkable cast of diploments, journalists, senators, and spies, Our Man in Charleston captures the intricate, intense relationship between great powers on the brink of war.

Unionblue
 
UB -

While the book sounds really interesting, I am a wee confused. Wasn't Bunch in Charleston in an official diplomatic capacity? As such, I don't understand how he can be a secret agent.

Raines
 
The Union diplomats in Europe were using the possibility of a victorious Confederacy reopening the international slave trade as a tool to keep Great Britain and France from recognizing the Confederacy. The threat of reopening of the international slave trade was one of the reasons that Great Britain was hesitant to recognize the Confederacy. I however, am not sure it was the main reason.
 
From the jacket of the book, Our Man In Charleston: Britain's Secret Agent in the Civil War South, by Christopher Dickey:

"Between the Confederacy and recognition by Great Britain stood one unlikely Englishman who hated the slave trade. His actions helped determine the fate of a nation."

When Robert Bunch arrived in Charleston to take up the post of British consul in 1853, he was young and full of ambition, but even he couldn't have imagined the incredible role he would play in the history-making events to unfold. In an age when diplomats often were spies, Bunch's job included sending intelligence back to the British government in London. Yet as the United States threatened to erupt into civil war, Bunch found himself plunged into a double life, settling into an amiable routine with his slavery-loving neighbors on the one hand, while on the other working furiously to thwart their plans to achieve a new Confederacy.

As secession and war approached, the Southern states found themselves in an impossible position. They knew that recognition from Great Britain would be essential to the survival of the Confederacy, and also such recognition was likely to be withheld if the South reopened the Atlantic slave trade. But as Bunch meticulously noted from his perch in Charleston, secession's red-hot epicenter, that trade was secretly growing. And as Southern leaders continued to dissemble publicly about their intentions, Bunch sent dispatch after secret dispatch back to the foreign office warning of the truth--that economic survival would force the South to import slaves from Africa in massive numbers. When the gears of war finally began to turn, and Bunch was pressed into service on an actual spy mission to make contact with the Confederate government, he found himself in the middle of a fight between the Union and Britain that threatened, in the boast of Secretary of State William Seward, to "wrap the world in flames."

In this masterfully told story, Christopher Dickey introduces Consul Bunch as a key figure in the pitched battle between those who wished to reopen the floodgates of bondage and misery, and those who wished to dam the tide forever. Featuring a remarkable cast of diploments, journalists, senators, and spies, Our Man in Charleston captures the intricate, intense relationship between great powers on the brink of war.

Unionblue
My brother gave this to me as a birthday present and I thought, "oh I 'll get to it between what I have on my Kindle and hanging out on this site". I started reading it and finished it in 3 days. It is an excellent reading about the mindset of the Southern states before the war and their rationale for seceding and also reads like a spy novel. Highly recommended.
 
UB -

While the book sounds really interesting, I am a wee confused. Wasn't Bunch in Charleston in an official diplomatic capacity? As such, I don't understand how he can be a secret agent.

Raines

The book is based on his confidential letters to the British government.

The book is well worth your while.

Sincerely,
Unionblue
 
Looks good. Added to my list. I really should try to clear my backlog before getting more.

I think he comes up from time to time in Amanda Foreman's book ('A World on Fire').
 
Bunch's link was via HMS Rinaldo, Station ship at Charleston for the purpose of conveying diplomatic bags and mail for the British and other consuls. Her Captain appears not to have been averse to taking an aggressive stance against the Union blockaders, but I wonder if and how much he was involved in the clandestine activities. Certainly Admiral Milne, to whom he reported directly would have had a keen interest in any information he could obtain.
 
This is a really good book. It reads like a spy novel. Bunch persuaded Lyons and Lyons had influence in London. Its the only book I have seen thus far that acknowledges the role of Lord Clarendon and of Baronet George Cornewall Lewis.
 
Earl Clarendon made one objection. When the US rejected mediation, the British would end up fighting a war no one wanted. p. 308.
 
Baronet Cornewall Lewis made the other objection, we are hypothesizing that the US is so bitterly angry at the Confederacy that they are seeking to incite a slave rebellion. But then we are thinking they will calmly agree to international mediation to settle the differences and concede Confederate independence. p. 309. Cornewall Lewis also noted that intervention would not be a one shot deal. If somehow the US conceded Confederate independence, the British end up being midwife to a slave republic. Ibid.
 
The British cabinet finally met on November 11, 1862, which itself was a sign of many reservations. The cabinet ministers picked apart the plans for intervention and lifting the blockade. PM Palmerston gave in and George Cornewall Lewis suggested the Palmerston's enthusiasm for intervention was not sincere. p.310 Both Palmerston and Russell were thinking that the Monarch's sentiments about the suffering in Lancalnshire had to addressed, even if the final decision was against intervention.
 
Back
Top