Military and naval successes, however, are in good time rewarding the careful and elaborate measures of the Government. Popular apprehension and distruct have already vanished before these triumphs so signally indicative of the complete restoration of the national authority, and we may therefore justly expect similar result in Europe. The toleration that could not be allowed there to a republic that seemed unfortunate will perhaps not be denied when it is seen that it can when it becomes necessary defend itself powers surpassing those of a limited monarchy or despotism.
Under no other form of constitution could any nations have ncountered with so much resolution and vigor a revolution so formidably instituted for the extension of human slavery. Perhaps just now in the light of our more cheering prospect this extraordinary feature of our cause may again be recognized in Europe.
I am, sir, your obedient servant,
WILLIAM H. SEWARD.
LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES.
Berlin, February 17, 1862.
Honorable WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State, Washington.
SIR: * * * Your reply* to the Prussian note on the Trent affair which the newspaper have published has been very well received everywhere, and the Union success in Kentucky is causing universal rejoicing as the harbinger of the speedy overthrow of the rebelion.
May the ardent hopes it has given rise to not again be disappointed.
I have the honor to be, your obedient servant,
N. B. JUDD.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, February 21, 1862.
Right Honorable Lord LYONS, &c.
MY LORD: I have submitted to the President the copy of the instruction from Earl Russell# which you left with me and which bears the date of January 23.
In this paper Earl Russell sets forth certain points upon which the British Government differs from some of the conclusions which I presented to you in my note ## upon the Trent affair of the 26th of December last. It is perceived that these differences do not distrub the conclustion contained in the paper upon which the case of the Trent was disposed of by this Government. The differences stated by Earl Russell involve questions of neutral rights in maritime warfare which though of confessed importance are not practically presented in any case of conflict now existing between the United States and Great Britain.
It is very desirable, however these questions shall be settled if possible by an early understanding between the two Governments. Nevertheless Earl Russell I think will agree with me that they relate only to a part of the international law of maritime war, while there are other and kindred questions equally important and equally likely to arise in the disturbed condition of affairs which exist on this continent and in any conflict which may happen in Europe. All such questions moreover affect not only these two nations but all the other maritime powers.
* Seward to Von Gerolt, January 14, p. 1177.
# Russell to Lyons, p. 1185.
## Seward to Lyons, p. 1145.