A “Great Triumph” was how Steinway & Sons advertised in Harper’s Weekly for their Grand and Square pianos which had won first prize medals at the London International Exhibition of 1862 (Unfortunately, as most Americans are unaware, the ivory keys of these pianos were intertwined with an American trade in ivory which came at a cost of destroyed African elephant herds and eventually, the lives 2 million Africans, see “Plunder for Pianos” chapter in Complicity). Considering that Steinway & Sons was founded in 1853 in New York, winning these prizes over long established firms such as Chickering & Sons was a great triumph. United States participation in the 1862 World Expo can be seen in the same light.
Undoubtedly the President most associated with the World’s Fair is McKinley who was shot in the Temple of Music at the Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo, New York in 1901. However, Lincoln’s role in the 1862 World’s Fair in London has been underappreciated. The constant vilification of Lincoln from some corners of the press extended even to his handling the 1862 Expo. A descriptive line for a report on the London Exhibition in the New York Times for July 26, 1862, read: “A Handful of American Exhibitors Bear off Eighty Prizes—Great Triumph of the United States Department.” The Times’ correspondent in London reported that the United States had around 86 exhibitors present—quite more than a handful. It was also misleading for the correspondent to write “this handful of patriotic men have won for the country, in spite of Government discouragement and official (I mean American official) neglect. It is only right to state, as a preliminary, that if the English authorities had been as churlish as the American, the exhibitors would have had but cold cheer, for it was from the first expressly stated that where a country refused to appoint a Commissioner no awards would be made.”
It is sometimes easy to forget that while Lincoln’s entire presidency was consumed by Civil War (interestingly, the war or the recently strained relations with Britain is not mentioned at all in the Times’ piece), he was concurrently trying to put forth a good face to show to the country and the world about the state of the Union. Despite the best intentions of Queen Victoria’s husband (Prince Albert) who helped create the 1851 Great Exhibition, the World’s Fair did not entice nations to embrace a shared humanity and promote peace. In fact, the Empires which hosted the first two World’s Fairs were at war (Britain was fighting the 8th Xhosa War in Southern Africa in 1851; France was heavily engaged in the Crimean War in 1855). According to Arnold Donald Innes, the British were involved in a “small war” with Japan in 1862, but it is the potential war with the USA following the Trent affair that the British did not fight during the 1862 World’s Fair which is important.
It is easy enough to write off the glib criticism in the New York Times of US Government support for the London exhibitors in 1862. If the correspondent had bothered to consult the Rapport from the 1855 Exposition Universelle held in Paris, he would have found that the United States even while not fighting a Civil War had only 131 exhibitors in attendance. The Times’ correspondent was also unaware that Lincoln had written a message to Congress in July 1861, stating that “As citizens of the United States may justly pride themselves upon their proficiency in industrial arts, it is desirable that they should have proper facilities towards taking part in the Exhibition. With this view, I recommend such legislation by Congress at this session as may be necessary for that purpose.” Congress listened and appropriated $2,000 for the Exhibition and granted Lincoln a free hand in determining how best to represent the United States through the Exhibition. Lincoln then writes to William Seward and Caleb Smith on October 7, 1861, about granting a place at the Exhibition to John W. Hoyt, who was later not appointed Commissioner for the United States, but only for Wisconsin. Decisions concerning participation in the Expo were not made by Lincoln who apologized in his December 1861 Annual Message for being “unable to give personal attention to this subject.” He wrote a note to the Congress in early January 1862, on the subject of a ship to carry the exhibitors to London. He recommended that “authority be given to charter a suitable merchant vessel, in order that facilities similar to those afforded by the Government for the exhibition of 1851, may also be extended to those citizens of the United States who may desire to contribute to the exhibition of this year.” This recommendation was not followed: The Great Exhibition was much better attended by the United States than either the 1855 Exposition Universelle or the 1862 London Exhibition.
However, the real coup achieved by Lincoln’s support of participation in the World’s Fair lies in a simple fact that escaped the Times’ correspondent: the Confederate States of America sent no exhibitors and were unable to become recognized as a country. Last minute planning, the aforementioned notes for instance, for the London Exhibition took place while Lincoln was carefully settling the Trent affair. Even before the outrage and war fervor in Britain caused by US Navy Captain Charles Wilkes having a British mail packet, the Trent, boarded and two Confederate emissaries (James Mason and John Slidell) to Europe removed and taken captive, there was the issue of British “neutrality.” Queen Victoria had announced in May 1861 that Britain was to be neutral and would avoid getting involved in the hostile actions between the American North and South. Britain did recognize the Confederates as a “belligerent power.” In response, Lincoln’s Secretary of State William Seward penned a set of instructions for the US Ambassador to Britain, Charles Francis Adams which was quite belligerent in its own right. Lincoln, though inexperienced in foreign policy, knew it was best not to fight more than one war at a time and revised Seward’s letter to omit such lines as “British recognition [of the Confederacy] would be British intervention to create within our own territory a hostile State by overthrowing this Republic itself.” Seward had also warned that such intervention would make the US an enemy of Britain for the third time. On account of Lincoln’s scrupulous handling of the Trent affair and also his reining in of Seward, war with Britain/recognition of the CSA was averted and the London Expo of 1862 became a great triumph for Lincoln as it allowed the Times’ correspondent to note “an ample vindication, not only of national ingenuity and skill, but of English fair play” rather than some other outcome, namely, an entrance on the world’s stage for the Confederacy.
No comments:
Post a Comment