It is well for us to turn aside from battle and siege at home, from the blazing lines of Vicksburg, Gettysburg, and Charleston, to glance for a moment at the perils from abroad: of course I mean from England and France; for these are the…

The subject to which I invite attention may want the attraction of waving standards or victorious marches; but, more than any conflict of arms, it concerns the civilization of the age.

If foreign powers can justly interfere against human freedom, this Republic will not be the only sufferer.

Where is national virtue, that such a surrender can be entertained?

The moral impossibility of foreign recognition, even if the pretended power be de facto independent, where it is composed of Rebel Slavemongers seeking to found a new power with Slavery for its declared “corner-stone.” Pardon the truthful…

Where is national honor, that the criminal pettifoggers are not indignantly rebuked?

I am to speak not merely of Slaveholders, but of people to whom Slavery is a passion and a business, therefore Slavemongers,--now in rebellion for the sake of Slavery, therefore Rebel Slavemongers.

Like individuals, nations influence each other; like the heavenly bodies, they are disturbed by each other in their appointed orbits.

Beginning between two nations, it gradually widens its circle, ingulfing other nations in its fiery maelström.

Foreign powers may for a while keep out of the conflict; but examples of history show how difficult this has been.

The United Provinces of Holland, in their struggle for independence, were the prototype of the United States of America, which I need not remind you drew into their contest the arms of France, Spain, and Holland.

Then came the struggle of Greece, which, after painful years darkened by massacre, but relieved by exalted self-sacrifice, shining with names, like Byron and Bozzaris, that cannot die, challenged the powerful interposition of England…

The independence of Greece was hardly acknowledged, when Belgium, renouncing the rule of the Netherlands, claimed hers also, and here again the great powers of Europe were drawn into the contest.

Then came the effort of Hungary, inspired by Kossuth, which, when about to prevail, aroused the armies of Russia.

The foreign trumpet has not sounded yet, but more than once the cry has come that we should soon hear it, while incidents too often occur, exhibiting abnormal watchfulness of our affairs and uncontrollable passion or purpose to intermeddle…

Fellow-citizens, you shall decide, on hearing the story, if we also have not complaints; but I, too, hope that all will end well.

But is there just equality between these two parties?

Can neutrality between such parties, especially at the very outset, be regarded as equity?

Even if the Proclamation could be otherwise than improper at any time in such a rebellion, it was worse than a blunder at that early date.

And yet, at once, after tidings of the Rebel assault on Fort Sumter, before the National Government had begun to put forth its strength, and even without waiting for the arrival of our newly appointed minister, who was known to be at…

The alacrity of this concession was unhappy, for it bore an air of defiance, or at least of heartlessness, towards an ally of kindred blood engaged in the maintenance of its traditional power against an infamous pretension.

More unhappy still was it that the good genius of England did not save this historic nation, linked with so many triumphs of Freedom, from a fatal step, which, under the guise of “neutrality,” was a betrayal of Civilization itself.

It seems superfluous to add, that such concession, thus potent in reach, must have been a direct encouragement and overture to the Rebellion.

It is vain to say that the concession was a “necessity.” There may have been strong temptation to it, constituting, perhaps, imagined necessity, as with many there is strong temptation to Slavery itself.

Let us at all hazards prevent the extension of Slavery and the increase of the Slave Power.